#You don't have to tell a white person racist beliefs to make them more racist. We'll pick those up from our segregated environments.

[giantkillerjack]

Today, I am learning about Malcolm X, and the way he talks about white liberals really struck a chord with me.

I also found this quote from him about John Brown, a white abolitionist who went to war for his beliefs and helped push America towards civil war. I only learned about John Brown from my very racist AP US History teacher, Mr. Green, of Hampton Township, at Hampton High School, in D Hall, who lied to us and said the Civil War wasn't about slavery. And so this'll shock you, but I never learned about Malcolm X in school! Anyway, Malcolm X says:

“We need allies who are going to help us achieve a victory, not allies who are going to tell us to be nonviolent. If a white man wants to be your ally, what does he think of John Brown? You know what John Brown did? He went to war. He was a white man who went to war against white people to help free slaves. He wasn’t nonviolent. White people call John Brown a nut. Go read the history, go read what all of them say about John Brown. They’re trying to make it look like he was a nut, a fanatic. They made a movie on it, I saw a movie on the screen one night. Why, I would be afraid to get near John Brown if I go by what other white folks say about him. But they depict him in this image because he was willing to shed blood to free the slaves. And any white man who is ready and willing to shed blood for your freedom—in the sight of other whites, he’s nuts. As long as he wants to come up with some nonviolent action, they go for that, if he’s liberal, a nonviolent liberal, a love-everybody liberal. But when it comes time for making the same kind of contribution for your and my freedom that was necessary for them to make for their own freedom, they back out of the situation. So, when you want to know good white folks in history where black people are concerned, go read the history of John Brown. That was what I call a white liberal. But those other kind, they are questionable. So if we need white allies in this country, we don’t need those kind who compromise. We don’t need those kind who encourage us to be polite, responsible, you know. We don’t need those kind who give us that kind of advice. We don’t need those kind who tell us how to be patient. No, if we want some white allies, we need the kind that John Brown was, or we don’t need you. And the only way to get those kind is to turn in a new direction.”

[hoosbandewan]

No matter who someone votes for does not make them a bad person. If someone votes differently than you and you find that as a reason to not support them then you are part of the problem. I'm thankfully open-minded and glad I can have Democrat and Republican friends and we can all still be friends even with different beliefs and opinions. I don't understand how anyone can have that mindset.... You want Peace and love but are the first ones to throw someone under the bus if they think differently than you do.

And using Ewan to push your thoughts is shameful

Having friends on both sides of the aisle is fine. Having a difference in opinions is fine. I think it can be incredibly damaging for people to get caught in an echo chamber and be surrounded only by people who share their same viewpoint. And the fact that we can all have our own thoughts and opinions is what makes a free country like the U.S. so wonderful.

I even know a good number of Republicans and conservative-leaning people who didn't and wouldn't vote for Trump. And, you see, that's the difference.

Voting for Trump.

You cannot, in good conscience, look me in the eye and tell me that casting a vote for Donald Trump makes you a good person. I could have forgiven a Trump vote in 2016, but not in 2020 and certainly not in 2024.

Trump attempted to overturn a democratic election and was indicted for it. And on that day, he voiced support for the Capitol rioters who wanted to hang his vice president for failing to reject the electoral votes that proved Biden's win.

Trump nominated Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade, a move that has already killed women and will continue killing people. In Texas alone, the maternal death rate rose by 56% between 2019 and 2022, the year that Roe was overturned. Since the reversal, the infant mortality rate has risen by 7% nationally - and by 13% in Texas alone.

Trump is unapologetically and unabashedly racist, displaying repeated and disturbing rhetoric aimed at immigrants, Mexicans, black Americans, Haitians, Muslims, and more. In his first term, he instituted new procedural barriers to prevent immigrants from seeking asylum in America. He put migrant children in cages. He has unjustly called for the death penalty for numerous people of color - remember the Central Park 5?

Trump has threatened to deploy the military and law enforcement to target his political opponents and left-leaning Americans.

Trump rolled back almost 100 policies focused on clean air, water, wildlife, and toxic chemicals in an era when mitigating climate change is more important than ever. And he plans on gutting even more.

Trump is a convicted felon with 34 felony counts under his belt.

Trump has shown time and time again that his views and policies align with fascist ideals. He wants very, very badly to turn the U.S. democracy into an authoritarian regime.

And if this isn't enough, Trump has been endorsed by the KKK since his 2016 campaign. He's the golden child of white supremacists and white nationalists everywhere.

So, yeah. If this is your guy, I don't want fucking anything to do with you.

I am so sick and tired of Trump supporters crying about peace and love and civility and "oh, but where are the tolerant left?" when they turn right around and vote for Donald Trump.

You don’t get to hold abhorrent views and beliefs and then be friends with us. You don’t get to be friendly to our faces all while supporting a man who wants us dead or oppressed. You can't profess to love your fellow Americans if you are condemning them.

I don't want to hang out with racists and fascists. Because if you choose to support and vote for a racist, fascist, misogynistic, dangerous person, then that makes you one, too.

[starleska]

can we talk about the brilliant execution of Dot and Bubble's big reveal!!!

i am still absolutely gobsmacked by what a well-written episode Dot and Bubble is. startling, disarming, confrontational, and tremendously impactful. and holy shit i really really want to talk about how excellent the 'twist' (which really should've been obvious in retrospect 😭 was done):

as a white person it took me about ten minutes to clock that Lindy's friend group were a nightmare Aryan Tupperware Party collective: all white, all blue-eyed, and even Gothic Paul was dressed in blues and whites, with no black at all. but you know how i responded to that? mentally i went 'oh i'm sure it's nothing!' and shoved it aside. and i think it is exactly that insidious tendency to ignore, normalise, and validate overt and covert racism that the episode does such a tremendous job of tackling! everything in the episode gives us the lore we need to understand Lindy and the people of Finetime are white supremacists. Lindy's disgusted face and immediate blocking of The Doctor versus the amount of time she spends with Ruby. Lindy's shock at the Doctor and Ruby occupying the same room implying segregation on the Homeworld. Lindy calling the Doctor and Ruby 'criminals' not for being in the Bubble, but for breaking segregation. Lindy using Ricky September, a white influencer, to calm herself down not just from the monsters, but from interacting with a Black person. the tradwife aesthetic of the Finetime residents making a comeback in real-life right-wing racist circles. ugh, there's so much and it was all right in our faces!! yet many of us who aren't POC had the privilege of going through the episode baffled and uncomfortable, without being able to put a finger on why until the final bit of the episode. doesn't that tell us how quickly and easily we've all taken to ignoring both micro and macroaggressions? that we needed talk of being 'contaminated', improper use of the word 'voodoo', and Lindy straight up telling the Doctor that face-to-face contact was unacceptable, to understand they're white supremacists? oh my God 😭😭 what a genius play, to make Lindy so detestable from the start. she's an arrogant, vain, self-absorbed, moronic, uncompromising, traitorous bitch...and by layering that abhorrent personality and then giving us the reveal of her white supremacy, there is no argument even the most wishy-washy of people could have re: their awful views. Lindy and her friends are revolting racists who are so wrapped up in their own echo-chamber 'bubble' that they would genuinely rather be devoured alive than challenge their own narrow, bigoted views. i'm still blown away by the power of Ncuti's final scene. the disbelief, the frustration, the sadness and the fury...and yet the Doctor still tries to save them against all odds. i think the most common response to this episode was 'The Doctor should have gone all Time Lord Victorious on them', and you're right - he should have! but doing that would've affirmed the beliefs of the real-life racists viewers. the Doctor responding not with violence or righteous vengeance is a very deliberate writing choice: we are supposed to come away feeling revolted that he needed to behave that way, to almost be supplicant to the white supremacists. because that is the real-life view of so many people who don't even view themselves as racist: Black people need to 'perform' to a higher standard, than white people just to be considered worthy of respect. the more i watch it, the more i'm convinced this is the best episode of the whole season, and one of the best Doctor Who episodes we've ever had. we were taken off-guard by having an episode overtly about racism set in the future rather than the past, because our tendency is to assume equality is a natural consequence of becoming technologically advanced. this clearly isn't the case, and Dot and Bubble is a masterclass in confronting racism head-on rather than dancing around it for the comfort of white viewers. just. aaargh!!!! absolutely amazing 🔥🔥🔥

[damnfandomproblems]

respond to a reply on this post: https://www.tumblr.com/damnfandomproblems/758279107941466112/fandom-problem-5461-cishet-being-used-to?source=share

"are you seriously equating making fun of a marginalized group to making fun of like, idk gender reveal parties or whatever people in your fandom make fun of cishets for doing? Like I don't mock people based on their sexuality but tell me that you do understand the difference between someone making fun of a marginalized group with a high suicide rate and someone poking fun at straight people.(Also, for the folks making racism comparisons: I'm white and when people make white people jokes about like, white people love avocado toast! White people love yoga and saying buddy! or whatever, 1) I don't mind 2) that's much different than a white person making fun of say, Black people.)"

As a poc, and specifically a queer (cisbi) native american (tlingit) who grew up around cishet white people, when it comes to online and fannish spaces I have noticed that people tend to cross the line from making harmless fun to just straight up expressing and encouraging hatred

While this is definitely a minority of people who believe and act out on these beliefs, there is a problem of people truly believing that cishet white people are all genuinely evil and inherently evil at that, and that the only way to "fix" (cleanse) the world of all problems would to be committed genocide in fandom spaces. They immediately assume the worse and dehumanize and rejected similarities they may share with cishet white people. It's absolutely prejudice and need to not only be called out, but utterly tossed in the bin

I get feeling uncomfortable or even wary of people who appart of the same kind of people who have oppressed you because you are not sure if they too have been indoctrinated into the bigotry, but we live in the modern era, more often then not you'll find that most cishet white people just don't care about poc and queer stuff

Cishet whites aren't responsible for crimes they weren't even alive for, that their ancestors committed. They are far more often ignorant because the education system is shit and has a lot racism/ableism/etc baked into foundation ontop of not really being how to do own research, then they are intentionally malicious and bigoted, and the best way to prevent them from being indoctrinated into bigotry is to just, expose them queers and poc who are chill with them and are willing to educate. Insulting them and assuming they want to hurt minorities just because they're cishet whites is the best way to push them into radical hands that will instead pain queers and poc as the ones who just want to hurt others for being cishet whites, because "obviously" why else would they immediately assume you want hurt them unless they want to hurt you?

Hating anyone for things they cannot control (race, gender, sexuality, etcetera) only breeds more hate. Yeah, don't tolerating bigots, but if genuinely can't stand a certain demographic of people ignore them rather then going out of your way to hate them. Educate if you can, or shut up when talking to people who haven't don't anything to you beyond offend your sensibly for committing the crime of being born a certain way, because otherwise you're just feeding into the genuinely malicious and bigoted peoples hands and making it easier for them to take the ignorant and make them malicious too

Hatred at the end of the day is hatred, sure, it might not be the racist or homophobic flavor of hatred, but it's still hatered. And no one should hate anyone, at least not for the things they can't control (because fuck pedos/rape-philies in general and murders and genuine racists of course, they can all go get shot, don't get me wrong and twist my words like I know some of y'all are just dying to do)

Posting as a response to a previous problem.

[jewreallythinkthat]

You know I actually don't think we talk enough about the notions of irredeemability and mortification of the flesh which is so intrinsic to a lot of the left wing, especially (and I know people won't like this but it's true), ex-christian atheists, generally younger Millennials and Gen Z.

I first noticed it in fandom spaces, and it's become even more apparent since October 7th.

In fandom spaces, there is a belief that a character is either fully justified in their actions or completely irredeemable. Murder, assault, abuse is OK if it is directed at the deserving character. I've watched people justify characters being assaulted into heir own home and then accuse those calling out the abuse of being racist because the perpetrators was not white. The victim was not allowed any sympathy (objectively, also this person literally followed a request from their sister to not tell people where the sister was. That was the crime...) and the assault was justified by progressive members of the left because their personally had decided the crime was punishable by violence.

More recently, they have turned against queer characters, belittled the queer experience because nothing could ever make up for the behaviour of people decades ago in a much more homophobic world. It really is so very recent that people could be openly queer safely - laws protecting people's rights do not mean the people are safe and I think a lot of leftists seem to forget this. I, a queer man, made plenty of "gay jokes" at school to avoid being outed (like a lot of people who have come out since we left school) as an act of self preservation. I'm not proud of it but it was something that happened when I was a young teenager and I acknowledge that. According to a huge swathe of the left, I can never be forgiven for this, and I must spend the rest of my life repenting.

The revertion to these puritanical, medieval beliefs on sin - that we are never able to atone for mistakes of the past is a very, very, Christian notion which has permeated the left and is actively spread by a lot of people will push it in one breath and then decry everything Christianity has ever done in the next.

Since October 7ths, the Jews (they often say "Israelis" but it's so clear that they mean "Jews" - as shown by the number of times people accidentally say "Jew" and then try and correct themselves to "Zionists" or "Israelis") have become the ones who embody irredeemability. Nothing we do will be enough to make up for the sin of being Jewish. The left has become a whirlwind of conspiracy and (((they))) are at the centre of every single one.

I mentioned the mortification of the flesh before. There is an obsession in the left of self-flagellation. That because there is suffering in part of the world, then those in others parts must suffer as penitence. Israeli peace activists are only peaceful if they die in the pursuit of the destruction of Israel; peace activists fighting in Israel for Palestinian rights and the establishment of Palestine alongside Israel are not doing enough because committed the crime of being born in Israel and they must suffer to make up for it; people in "The West" are not allowed to have any enjoyment of anything until the suffering deemed most important by the Left has ceased.

Physical suffering, self-immolation, death in pursuit of The Cause has become the most pure one can be. This is identical to early Christians, it's just that The Cause is no longer Jesus but is Palestine (at the moment). Forgoing your own needs will not help end the war but people will do it to demonstrate their commitment rather than putting in the effort to push for sustainable and feesable solutions.

The strands of puritan Christianity that are twisted into the social justice of The Left are many, and people do not like to think or acknowledge them because that would imply Christianity has affected them, but heres the thing. If you live in any country which has been around a significant time and was, literally at ANY point a theocracy, then the beliefs of the religion that ruled the country will be infused into the culture there. That's not necessarily a bad thing, it's just how society evolves. Turning a blind eye to the influence of Christianity on countries like the US, UK, Canada, lot of Europe is willful ignorance and historical revisionism. The Left should be better than this but instead, it has decided that we are born into the sin of the crimes of the country we were born in and must atone for them for the rest of time, but anything other than physical suffering and death will never be enough.

[mywitchyblog]

@shiftmaxxer

masterlist

In response to your post:

Thank you for your thoughtful contribution. It’s refreshing to engage in a counter-argument and have meaningful discussions that don’t devolve into insults or death threats. This kind of respectful dialogue is what allows for growth and understanding, even when we don’t see eye to eye.

Part 1: Clarifying Intent and Addressing Misrepresentation

First and foremost, it seems there may have been some misunderstandings regarding the purpose of my original post and the intentions behind it. I understand that you’re critiquing my previous rant, which I admit was written in a heated moment. In hindsight, I recognize that I should have taken the time to calm down before writing, as it might have conveyed my thoughts more clearly and without the emotional charge.

You mentioned, and I quote: "Calling other people of color 'pathetic' for what I believe to be perfectly understandable reactions to race-changing is reductive." I want to clarify that this was not my intention at all. The individuals I labeled as "pathetic" were those who, unlike you, resort to insults and threats, using logical fallacies as their only arguments—arguments that aren’t even valid to begin with.

The only other instance where I used the word "pathetic" in that post was in reference to certain white individuals who oppose race-changing without providing proper arguments. Here’s the passage in question: "As a person of color, this issue is especially relevant to me, yet the opposition I see frequently comes from individuals who don’t share my lived experiences—often white people who have no stake in the matter, telling me what I should or shouldn’t do. They’ll throw around terms like 'DNI,' 'I don't wanna argue with you,' 'if you support race-changing, block me,' or brand me as a bad person without engaging in any meaningful dialogue. It proves that they are cowards, pathetic, and that their claims hold no weight and reek of insecurity."

This quote is crucial because it explains why I referred to these individuals as insecure and pathetic: they immediately resort to name-calling without providing proper explanations. The "bad person" I referenced is someone who attacks me with labels like "racist" or even "pedophile"—terms that have nothing to do with the actual debate at hand. This is an example of a Strawman Fallacy because it misrepresents my argument by suggesting I called all POC "pathetic," which wasn’t the case. My criticism was aimed specifically at those who rely on insults and threats rather than valid arguments.

Part 2: Addressing Claims of Hostility and Spite

You also pointed out that I "completely dismiss any opposing arguments, calling it 'close-minded.'" Yes, I agree—logical fallacies and insults are indeed close-minded arguments. The only counter-argument I had is the one I mentioned earlier; feel free to check it out. So yes, I called it close-minded because that’s exactly what it is. Furthermore, accusing me of writing with ChatGPT is an Ad Hominem Fallacy, which targets my character rather than engaging with the substance of my arguments.

Regarding your statement: "You've stated yourself that you argue in a way to 'spite' people who oppose your opinion." Let me clarify—spite plays a dual role in my approach. On one hand, I genuinely want to uplift and educate people, sharing knowledge and perspectives that can help others grow and expand their understanding. On the other hand, there’s a part of me that’s driven by a desire to challenge and provoke—to make people think harder and question the status quo. Sometimes, that means making people uncomfortable or challenging their deeply held beliefs, especially when those beliefs are rooted in ignorance or prejudice. It’s about making them confront their biases to the point where their limited thinking is forced to evolve—or at the very least, be exposed.

And yes, I will not budge on the point that ad hominem attacks, threats, and insults are not acceptable forms of argumentation. They don’t contribute to meaningful discourse, and they certainly don’t challenge or strengthen any position.

You mentioned that my tone "is hostile and full of what I see as 'conversation enders' (you argue in a way that shuts down discourse rather than encourages it)." I apologize if my tone came across that way; it was not intended to be hostile. In the future, I’ll make an effort to use better disclaimers and perhaps even include tone tags to ensure that my intent is clear. My aim was never to shut down conversation but to challenge the status quo and encourage intelligent debate, free of ad hominem attacks—much like the approach you’ve taken in your response.

Part 3: Hypocrisy and Nuance in Race-Changing Discussions

You also raised the point that I’m "hypocritical for disregarding the value of people's hurt and frustrations and calling it a desire to be 'empathetic.'" This is not the case. In my essay, I acknowledged that there’s a fine line between empathy and the potential for fetishization, romanticization, and even racism if not handled carefully. For example, I specifically stated that "race-changing in reality shifting can serve as a unique and valuable tool for promoting intercultural understanding, challenging racial prejudices, and fostering a more empathetic and inclusive society" when done thoughtfully and ethically (Essay, Part I). If I were truly disregarding these concerns, I wouldn’t have included the parts of my essay where I emphasized the importance of treading lightly and being considerate.

Initially, I planned to argue that race-changing was entirely okay and not disrespectful at all. However, as I continued writing, I recognized the need to include those critical nuances—because nothing in this world is black and white. Consequently, I changed the direction of my essay to reflect this, and I quote myself: "By maintaining this careful balance, race-changing in reality shifting can serve as a unique and valuable tool for promoting intercultural understanding, challenging racial prejudices, and fostering a more empathetic and inclusive society. As with any powerful tool, its value lies not in the practice itself, but in how we choose to use it."

Originally, I might have said something like "Race-changing is okay and a good thing," but instead, I concluded, "Race-changing can be a good thing, but we need to be careful not to be disrespectful, as we have a duty and responsibility."

Part 4: Loaded Questions and Hasty Generalizations

You asked: "You would rather shift to be another race to 'understand' a race than engage with their media, their lived, documented experiences, or talk to others about their experiences? Are others' experiences meaningless to you unless you physically ARE them? If you lack that amount of empathy that you have to become another race, I don't think empathy was ever in the cards for you." I’m not sure if you’re addressing me directly here, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

As for me, I never stated or implied that in my previous posts. Moreover, asserting that race-changers shift to another race because the experiences of POC are meaningless to them, ergo they never had any empathy to begin with, is a Hasty Generalization Fallacy. Additionally, the framing of the question is a Loaded Question Fallacy because it presumes a lot about my intentions without evidence, and frames the question in a way that makes any answer seem incriminating. It's an unfair setup.

In my essay, I made it clear that "shifting allows for experiencing life through different perspectives which can be enlightening as fuck" (Essay, Part I). The goal is not to dismiss or undermine anyone’s experiences but to gain a deeper understanding through direct experience in another reality, which is a legitimate and complex method of exploring identity and empathy.

Part 5: The Complexity of Reality Shifting and Allegory in Fiction

You also wrote: "For people from the racial identities being appropriated, witnessing individuals casually adopt and discard their race can be distressing. It can feel as though their experiences and struggles are being reduced to mere fantasy elements rather than being respected and understood. This disregard can contribute to feelings of marginalization and invalidate the real-life challenges faced by those of different races."

I completely agree with you that this can be distressing, and I cannot invalidate your feelings—you are entitled to them. However, I must disagree with the notion that race-changing "invalidates the real-life challenges" faced by those of different races, simply because in the context of reality shifting, the line between "real" and "fake" life blurs. If you meant "OR," then I retract my disagreement.

However, to suggest that some race-changers do this with the intention of causing this effect on POC is reductive. As a POC myself, if someone were to tell me they shifted to a reality where they are the same race as I am and then shared their experiences of discrimination, I would feel a sense of joy that they finally understand my pain—rather than dismissing it in this reality with statements like "Oh, come on, you’re exaggerating," or "It’s not so bad after all." Like, why don’t you walk in my shoes before saying that? Oh wait, they did, and now they get it.

You stated: "Being black and being a 'werewolf' aren't comparable in any version of reality. To trivialize a lived experience of an inconceivable number of people (because remember, this is the multiverse) is extremely bold." I have never trivialized or reduced the pain of other POC or marginalized communities. I merely pointed out that they share some similarities in that they are perceived as monstrous, discriminated against, and persecuted. The difference, of course, is that one is considered fictional in this reality, and the other is not.

It is you who is being bold by claiming they have nothing in common. Consider that some writers create fictional races as allegories for what marginalized communities face in our world. A prime example is the Na’vi from Avatar. James Cameron, the director of Avatar, explicitly stated: "Avatar very pointedly made reference to the colonial period in the Americas, with all its conflict and bloodshed between the military aggressors from Europe and the indigenous peoples. Europe equals Earth. The Native Americans are the Na'vi. It's not meant to be subtle."

In this context, someone shifting to be a Na’vi could be seen as analogous to race-changing to be a Native American, only with a superficial, fantastical layer added on top—a "pink bow" if you will. While the Na’vi might be fictional, their creation is deeply rooted in the real experiences and histories of Native Americans, particularly their suffering at the hands of colonial forces. The narratives of exploitation, resistance, and survival embodied by the Na’vi are direct reflections of those faced by Indigenous peoples.

Thus, shifting to become a Na’vi in a desired reality is not just adopting a fictional identity but engaging with the complex and painful history that the Na’vi represent. Whether or not the person shifting acknowledges this connection, the allegory remains. The act of shifting to a race that is explicitly crafted as a stand-in for a real marginalized group comes with inherent implications, making it far more than a mere fantasy element.

Therefore, equating the Na'vi with werewolves, and dismissing the deeper connections between these fictional and real marginalized groups, misses the point entirely. The comparison trivializes the intent behind these allegories, reducing complex social and historical narratives to mere fantasy. It's not bold to recognize these connections—it's simply understanding the truth of how fiction often reflects reality.

Part 6: Logical Fallacies and the Nature of Empathy

Regarding your statement: "Discrediting one's lived experiences (ergo, attacking their credibility) is not just questioning the validity of their personal story; it's denying the nuanced realities that intertwine us as people. If you can do that so easily, how can you become better and more understanding from rcta alone?" If I were discrediting my fellow POC’s experiences, I wouldn’t have brought a nuanced perspective to the subject. I acknowledged that it’s a topic that requires careful handling and that it’s not black and white, even though I tried to simplify it but couldn’t.

However, your assertion that "It won’t fix or better your empathy because you already lack it from the way you react to those who don’t agree with the practice" is an Ad Hominem Fallacy. You’re attacking my character without providing evidence to support your claim that I lack empathy.

In my essay, I discussed how "morals and ethics are not universal constants but are shaped by cultural, temporal, and situational factors" (Essay, Part I). This underscores the importance of understanding that empathy and moral considerations can vary greatly depending on the context and the reality in which they are applied.

Part 7: Nuanced Perspectives and False Dichotomy

Finally, I want to emphasize that it’s okay to feel offended by those who race-change. I won’t dictate your feelings—you are entitled to them. But you also need to acknowledge that not everything is black and white; not everyone who engages in race-changing does so to invalidate or trivialize the lives and experiences of other people of color.

You said: "But refusing to be accountable for the real reasons you race change (and why at least 50% of us shift) is disingenuous." If I were truly being disingenuous, as you claim, why would I have written in my essay that the issue is nuanced? By acknowledging the fact that we must tread lightly and be careful, I’ve already implicitly stated that those people exist. If I didn’t acknowledge that fact, I wouldn’t have discussed it at all.

You also mentioned: "There is no morality play. People don’t shift races to 'grow' or just because they're 'curious'. You make such an (understandably) loaded and controversial topic more innocent and sweet than it is." Let me stop you right there. I do not make a controversial topic more innocent and sweet than it is—I made it more nuanced.

Stating that race-changing is inherently bad is a False Dichotomy Fallacy; it reduces the topic to two simplistic notions when there are other perspectives. I acknowledge that some POC may be offended by it. But they must also acknowledge that not everyone who engages in race-changing does so to trivialize their experiences—quite the opposite.

How many POC (myself included) have been so sick and tired of having people dismiss our pain, wanting them to understand instead of diminishing it? I can’t recall the number of times I wanted those people to walk a mile in my shoes just to see what it feels like. And with shifting, they can.

Part 8: Conclusion and Invitation for Further Discussion

You concluded with: "It makes you someone who can't and won't make room for those who feel invalidated by those who race-change frivolously." So, what do you propose we should do? I specifically said in my post that we shouldn’t be frivolous about it—that we have a responsibility and a duty when engaging in such practices. And yes, I admit that saying "DNI," or "block me if you support race-changing," may have been too much, but when those same people are the ones who insult and threaten me, I cannot be blamed for making such assumptions about them.

To conclude, I really enjoyed your respectful perspective on the subject. However, stating that people who race-change immediately do it for disrespectful reasons is simply wrong. You should understand that nothing in Reality Shifting is purely good or bad, black or white; it is a spectrum of gray.

I’m also quite curious to hear your stance on bi/multiracial shifters who choose to change or "suppress" one of their races.

Ergo i have to refute those arguments, it was delightful to debate with you.

I wish you good luck and success in your shifting journey

Kind regards,

Luno

[jaythelay]

Ya know the funny thing is, their poor messaging against Khamala for a dude would be funny, but for a woman, you can Feel the Hate seething through it.

tl;dr: With Biden, they had to make up reasons to hate him, they didn't have legitimate reasons to hate him as much as they wanted to propogate hate and give positive messaging to Dump.

With Kamala, that's gone. Now they can only show their true opinions and beliefs, that she's a woman and not white Will Be Their Focus because they legitimately fucking hate Kamala for those reasons.

They didn't hate Biden for being a pedo or his son doing prostitutes and coke, they know Dump does that and don't care, but Kamala represents Everything that Triggers them. So they will resort to Schoolyard Bullying.

Mock them for it, point it out.

I don't think R's hated Biden as much as Kamala. Solely because...wow.

First off, their main bit is she laughs...and like....okay? I get R's don't understand Joy but you lost the normal people at that point. Doesn't help they're making blatant racist comparisons to animals either. Dumbshits.

Secondly...this?

Is so overtly blatant in it's schoolyard bullying I can believe a Republican would try it publically.

They're trying to play up a "she had sex to get here!" angle and like, ya'll got MTG over there and she's far more likely to have done that than Khamala. Even if, I don't care? I really, really don't. I think ya gotta have some deep seeded hatred for women on some level to understand the angle enough to "believe it could happen" whether it did or not.

Regardless, the idea of going after her like this is overwhelmingly telling. They got nothing but Hate and it's abundantly clear they have nothing to really go after her with. All they got is what works for the openly bigotted R's that agree with them, they believe bigotry is the norm thanks to Twitter, but there's nothing good for swing voters, none of dem leaners. It's just racism and sexism, not even covert, it's blatant.

Sure, when Dump was being sexist and racist, it was against a White Guy, now it's Directed Towards Their Targets, the fuck is Dump gonna do?

Of course he backed out of debates, his only choice is to be honest!

It's rather pathetic, and Twitter being pro-nazi essentially makes these voices the only voices of the republican voter to the public. Hilarious that making a concentrated place for Republicans would mean the average person sees their insanity more commonly and blatantly.

Turns out "left leaning" just meant "Reduces bigotry"

[tomahawthorne]

Gotta love the energy around rw//by fans. "What do you mean?! Valid criticism is totally allowed!" and then another comes and drops ad hominems like fucking atom bombs at the most mild fucking opinions. The irony of seeing a username and IMMEDIATELY jumping to conclusions about that person's opinions and calling them media illiterate... that's the cherry on top. Actually, scratch that. The real irony is going "Ironwood's arc was one of the best in the series!" as if that contradicts the ableism, and then talking about media literacy. Ignoring the fact that the quality of his arc is subjective (I liked most of it and still think they absolutely fumbled several parts, and I'm talking before he went all Saturday morning cartoon villain), in-universe reasoning or internal consistency doesn't automatically make something not fucking bigoted. Half the time I don't think the writers even think through the implications of their work—I doubt they intended to make Qrow sound ableist for calling him the Tin Man as an insult—but unintentional bigotry is still fucking bigotry and it doesn't matter that it's playing into the lore or allusions or whatever. (As an aside, maybe it's a hot take that I find the use of Tin Man as an insult at least a little ableist, but I feel justified in that belief considering the rest of the show's awfulness about disability.)

The whipped cream under the cherry is ignoring all the black voices that spoke about the Faunus/Adam's arc to make the most obtuse reading of both, and as a black man who's gotten shouted down whenever I bring up the many ways the writers and their biases ruined it, I'm fucking tired. Because too many of these piss-poor attempts at """"exploring"""" the "harm racist attitudes do" boil down to surface level white comfort bullshit, and rw//by is a prime example. The heroes are more preoccupied fighting the villainized minorities struggling for their rights than they are with the actual structure of racism. The so-called cautionary tale of "don't be racist or terrorism will happen!" is fucking insidious because 1) it implies that you should only care about racism when it could bite you in the ass personally, 2) the primary focus of the arc is almost always the terrorism and not the structure of racism that fucking drove them to it, and 3), my biggest issue, it pushes the blame onto the minority, for having the audacity to protest too loudly, for being hurt and reflecting the fact that you were hurt.

The harm of the so-called cautionary tale is two-fold, because while it's telling majority viewers the oh-so thought-provoking message of "don't do a racism," it's quietly reinforcing to its minority viewers that the only "good" way to protest for your rights is by playing nice, not threatening the structure, carrying yourself like a damn saint just so your abuser might treat you with a shred of humanity. I could write a damn essay on this, and how much this show and its fandom plays into white fragility, but that would require going back and rewatching for research and this show as it is doesn't deserve that level of effort. To put it simply, the Faunus arc (and yes, its handling of Adam) are both pretty damn racist because in its middle school furry fanfic-tier retelling of the Civil Rights movement, it perpetuates ideas that harm real fucking people (friendly reminder many of the sentiments the fndm shares about the White Fang "taking it too far" parrot white moderate/outright racist opinions about BLM and the Civil Rights movement :D) while convincing its viewers that "no, you totally don't need to examine racism as an institution and the ways you contribute to it. Look! Ex-heiress and totally-reformed racist Weiss threw a guy in the dumpster because the actual civil rights activist was suddenly incapable of defending herself".

This shit isn't a uniquely rw//by problem, but the difference is that I don't get 16-year-olds calling me some kind of slur or -phobe when I criticize the writing/fan opinions of the Flag Smashers or Killmonger. Imagine having a more insufferable fandom than the MCU.

[simplepotatofarmer]

Hi! Sorry if this is a bit deep and ramble-y but it’s just something that’s been on my mind. Have you ever doubted defending dream?

Sometimes I feel like I’m wrong for feeling bad for him. I feel like I get where some ppl are coming from when they say why they hate him but then am horrified by what they do with that hatred.

I keep telling myself that it’s normal to feel empathy for someone that you could see was facing a lot of shit. I felt bad for him in April, but also felt bad for feeling bad because everyone was saying how he was a horrible person who deserved horrible things. Looking back, and reading some ppls reflections on it, it’s much more obvious how April specifically was just an obscene hate campaign, but even then I have moments of doubt just because of how universal the idea of dream always being in the wrong seems to be, especially in this community.

Even with the most recent incident, where I did step away for a while, I felt bad for him and his friends for the things their fans were doing. But then I also felt bad for feeling bad because so many ppl on here say that the extreme means are necessary.

Even though I am more of a causal fan, I don’t want to live in an echo chamber and I think the ppl in the fandom who I do follow (like you) are pretty rational about everything. I’ve tried following other ppl but there’s just this everpresent hatred of him that I don’t like seeing everyday on my dash. But I again feel wrong for feeling that way. It’s all just frustrating.

i was going to sleep but this is actually a really important ask, in my humble opinion.

the short answer is no.

the long answer is absolutely not, i've never regretted defending him over the things i have defended him over because even if he was a terrible person and not like, a dude none of us know personally who is not perfect and makes mistakes and is sometimes a fucking idiot, those would still be things i would defend him for.

defending someone against absolutely vile queerphobia is never something i'd regret because it's quite simply just the right thing to do. erasing someone's identity because you don't like them is wrong, point blank. blair white or caitlynn jenner are no less deserving of respect as trans women than any other woman.

defending dream against ableism is always gonna be the right thing because you don't have to be a good person to deserve not to be treated awfully due to your neurodivergence.

and like, there's been things i've defended dream on where i don't completely agree with him. i think he's been a little baby sometimes when it comes to mcc but when people were saying shit like he was '''manipulating''' us and noxcrew because he said he didn't want to play in mcc if he had to play buildmart, yeah i'm going to point out that's a batshit take. someone venting and being frustrated isn't manipulation, he was just throwing a tantrum. touch grass yada yada.

and when it comes to my belief that people can be racist in the past and change, that still applies! i still think dream actively tried to be better! he grew up in a bigoted environment, is open about his racist past (and fucking uses the word racist/bigoted, thank god) and is actively working to be better.

that's always going to be true and frankly, i think it's not only weird but extremely telling that a LOT of white people who had formerly defended him suddenly switched up. it just shows that it was never about the harm done and poc but whether or not you liked some white boy.

but i digress.

the thing is, anon, i get why you feel this way. this fandom and online culture as a whole lately is wrought with the belief that consumption of media is a reflection of your morals. that consuming the right media and being a fan of the right sort of person is akin to activism.

it's not. it doesn't fucking matter. there's no righteousness in hating dream. you can certainly be valid in hating him! there's a lot of reasons to dislike him or hate him or feel he shouldn't have a platform. i might not agree with it all but i can see it.

the problem is.... i see why you feel like this and that is genuinely so sad and messed up because how did we get to the point where queerphobia or ableism or body shaming is totally okay as long as it's a certain group and to where people doubt themselves when they think it's wrong! it is wrong but i completely understand why anyone would second guess themselves.

as it stands right now, i don't regret it because i feel it's right. i'm always going to feel it's right.

if something comes out tomorrow and it turns out that it really is more than some instagram dms and the questionable choice of giving out his private snapchat, then i won't be defending him.

but i still wouldn't regret any of my past defense because my defense isn't conditional, my belief that people can grow isn't conditional, and my opinion on things like fandom's queerphobia and misuse of terms like 'grooming' would still stand.

[neechees]

Should non-Native people avoid using the words "folklore" and "mythology" when talking about stories from the histories of the communities of Native American cultures?

This kind of depends, because do you mean "folklore" & "mythology" as in oral history (which may, or more often, not be treated as trustable by White people), or do you mean those things as in Native spiritual beliefs like for spirits? If its for historical events, yes, you should definitely avoid using those words in regards to precolonial history & oral history not talked about in White schools or books, because they are not accurate to describe Native oral history & it'd be racist to assume that our history in our own words about ourselves is less accurate or real (which those words would imply). Many Native tribes valued accurate, oral information & history to an extreme degree to the point that (& we did this for legends too) our historians could track down who told them, who told that person, & so on all the way to the original teller so that if there was any inaccurate information, they'd be able to track down who started it. We didn't fuck around when it came to oral information, but colonizers assume that because we didn't have writing, & that many Europeans lied for their own histories (written or oral), then WE must have been the same.

As for the spiritual part, if you meant "folklore" & "mythology" to refer to spiritual things: You might get different opinions within the Native community, but personally yes, I think so. I think people use those terms in a way to delegitimize Native beliefs. Like, most people would think it would be weird if people called Christianity "folklore" or "mythology". Sometimes the two (history & spirituality) go hand in hand, however, & that doesn't make it wrong or incorrect. But Native religions/spirituality is not seen as "real" or as "valid" as organized religion like Christianity, which I further use as an example.

A lot of people straight up do not believe or understand that Native people do in fact, follow a set of beliefs based on the spiritual & religious stories of our peoples & behave in different ways & have a different worldview & way of navigating the world because of that belief system. I've gotten asked (both online and offline in my personal life) by White people if I REALLY or ACTUALLY believe in the spirits present in our stories, like it's silly or strange that I would. Like uhhh yes? That's my religion? Would you ask a Christian if they REALLY think angels exist? & then find it weird that they say "yes" even though it's clearly present in their belief system & the Bible? It doesn't help that a lot of our spirits got bastardized into "cryptids" to the point that I'm now seeing White people call literally any Native spirit or deity they hear about a "cryptid" regardless of whether or not it even has/had a history of said bastardization by White people (like "sasquatch").

Our spirits are seen as "cryptids" that we tell for fun (but don't REALLY believe in, apparently), our ceremonies are seen as fun little activities or get togethers that we do just for shits and giggles (but they don't REALLY mean or do anything, according to racists), & our sacred artifacts or objects, according to racists, aren't things akin to the bodies of Catholic saints or historical religious items, but apparently must be just really cool stuff we like to hang onto like a charm bracelet. Native beliefs are routinely mocked and deemed as silly, and have been for a long time.

So personally for me, I don't like using those words to describe Native spirituality, no, & don't think they should be used because of the above reasons. It seems to reinforce the ideas that our beliefs aren't on the same level of importance or as worthy of respect as something like Christianity. I'm a little less turned off by "mythology", but I still don't use it that much.

[tododeku-or-bust]

i know the poll is presumably gone (i just checked tumblr 30min ago) but to the people who use their black friends/relatives/etc. as accessories to deflect from being called racist: fuck you. this is exactly why you're not safe to be around.

i am white. i have mixed (black/white) relatives. the rest of my family, aside from them, are white. and preach about reverse racism bullshit to the point where my mixed aunt does not bother discussing it (racism and other heavy topics) anymore with them. one of her daughters expressed a racist remark while i was staying with them over the summer a couple years ago, saying that her older brother wasn't black because he wasn't as dark as she (the daughter) was. then she proceeded to say, quietly, that yeah. white people scare her. she also said i scare her just because i'm white. that broke my fucking heart.

like... those relatives are soooo important to me in a whole bunch of ways. i trust them so much, when i was with them and whenever i came to visit afterwards they were all so excited to be around me because i don't make this shit about them. or downplaying their shit. i try to help them through it. there's been a few times when a few other white kids picked on them and i was just like uhhh. nuh uh! (tells them to fuck off. [in a more PG way.]) it's so bare minimum but we all treat each other like human beings unlike our other relatives.

this isn't me trying to toot my own horn. i'm white. i have privilege. i acknowledge it. i am not immune to being misinterpreted or racist even while saying this shit. it can come off as underhanded. i know this. i am mostly just saying something more along the lines of, white people won't fucking get it until it reaches a whole different level of personal to them, because no they won't understand the racism and shit like black people experience. until they decide to open their stupid eyes and just observe their interactions and the shit going on around them too.

this is long as hell, sorry about that. i really like your posts, i love seeing Phi art on my dash. your creative sideblog is very informative to me and i have started reading the resources you've offered and looking for more on my own after encountering all this. whether you stop trying to educate others or not, i hope you still have as much fun as you can with your posting and i wish all the racist fucks bothering you a very "read the fucking white fragility books and get over yourselves." tldr i'm with you 1000000% because why the fuck wouldn't i be, basically. thanks for your epic content and the time you make to share resources. have a good day/night. :-)

I hate that that little girl has internalized that racism and colorism like that. Because it means the people around her are saying things like that. She's not the only one either. I remember years ago that "you're beautiful" video, where one of the Black women in the video was genuinely angry and hurt at being told she was beautiful, likely bc she was used to being mistreated. She thought she was being mocked, and people were "oh why's she such a bitch" well you don't realize how much Black women are treated like we really aren't worth shit (unless we sacrifice ourselves and "be strong") from a young age.

But yeah, I mean... White people are scary 😅 unfortunately, she right 🤣 I'm a grown ass adult, and witnessing just how cruel many white people are willing to be to maintain their own comfort, beliefs, and the status quo... It's terrifying fr. Look at the state of American politics rn.

I appreciate you reaching out and trying to make me feel better ☺️ I also appreciate that you like my Phi content! She's my darling girl, that I want to give all the love that every Black girl deserves to have ❤️

[ofagathachristies]

Everything in Twilight Saga that doesn't make sense to me

Stephanie Meyers' world just doesn't make sense to me.

Like at all.

So these are things that I think would make more sense about the lore of Twilight Saga.

The Wolf Pack - They're not werewolves or wolves. They're just not. Why Stephanie Meyer calls them that is stupid to me. And the thing is, its not just her. So many fanfictions I read call them werewolves. But they are shapeshifters. SHAPESHIFTERS.

Imprinting - It seems so ridiculous to me that Meyer creates imprinting. Especially given the fact that this generation of shifters are CHILDREN. They are literal children! Sam imprints on his girlfriend's cousin. Quil imprints on that cousin's 3-year-old niece! Jacob imprints of the hybrid child of the girl he claims he loves!! Imprinting has caused nothing but issues and ruined at least one relationship that we know of.

The Cullens and the Wolf Pack - The treaty between the 'werewolves' and the 'cold ones' is logical, yes. Especially when you considered the fact that the appearance of vampires is what causes the 'werewolf' gene to turn on. So, it would make sense that they have the treaty. However, I feel that it has not worked very well, given the fact that Jacob not only unknowingly breaks the treaty when he tells Bella the tribe stories (because he has a massive crush on her), but also, once he does become of the 'pack', he continuously pursues Bella, thus angering Edward (because who wouldn't be pissed off when someone continuously disrespects their relationship). And Jacob can do that. Because there's nothing in the treaty which prevents the shifters from deliberately antagonizing the vampires. Maybe I just have issues but if someone kept knowingly disrespecting my relationship, I'd be pissed. And if I were a vampire? I'd probably want to attack them and drain their blood. I imagine Edward thought about it but never actually did it.

The Cullens Sparkly Problem - They can't go out in sunlight. Because they sparkle. Sunlight is always present. Even at night. So, having to follow the rule of not exposing the secret to humans, surely it is a stupid vampiric evolutionary trait to SPARKLE in sunlight?!?!?!!

The Cullens and Human Food - This is one of many things about my issues with Stephanie Meyer's vampires. They are vampires. They have venom. Yet they have to essentially regurgitate human food back up? Logically thinking, would the venom in their saliva not act like an acid and literally dissolve any human food they consume - therefore eliminating the need to regurgitate food.

Edward's Attitude - His attitude. All of it. His misogyny. His gaslighting. His blatant dismissal of Bella's feelings, thoughts and opinions. It's very obvious that SMeyer puts in her own personal beliefs about relationships however it's also very obvious that SMeyer's personal beliefs about relationships are quite traditional, and give off the vibe of 'women should be seen but never heard'. I just don't fuck with that. At all.

Jasper's Background - Jasper Hale is a confederate soldier who joined the army during the Civil War, fighting on the side of those in favor of enslaving black people. But it's not just that. Jasper wasn't just a solider. He was a Major. According to the modern US army, it would take a minimum of 10 years service for Jasper to be considered for the rank of Major. Jasper Hale was 19. How good was he in the confederate army that he was given the rank of major after 2 years???

The Blatant Racism - Twilight Saga, as a whole, is incredibly racist (and misogynistic). It does not create a safe space for people of colour, or even anyone that doesn't fit a certain profile. Namely, the skinny, white people. Anyone who doesn't fit that profile does not have a safe space in the fandom. The representation for people of colour is severely lacking.

Humans - There seems to be an extreme lack of regard for humans. And to some degree, I do understand. Because it is a film series about vampires, they (usually) eat humans. When it comes to humans, Edward only seems to have any regard and basic respect for Bella, and Angela. And Bella appears to drop her new friends as soon as she starts dating Edward, only returning to them when Edward leaves. And for good reason, when she starts showing suicidal tendencies and a total lack of regard for not just her safety, but Jessica's too, Jessica totally freaks out. Any person would in those circumstances.

The Misogyny - Further on from Edward's misogyny and SMeyer's beliefs. Bella's 'I'm not like other girls' vibe and the stereotypes of the likes of Jessica, Rosalie, Lauren etc. Putting them in boxes. A box that states these girls are vapid, feminine, empty mean girls with no real contribution to conservation or friendship. When in truth, yes, Jessica may have been friends with Bella because she was new and shiny but at least she tried. She tried to be friends with Bella, the feelings obviously soured when Bella clearly didn't want to be friends with her, and dropped her like a hot potato when Edward reciprocated her feelings. Not to mention, when Jessica and Lauren's crushes seem to have all their attention on Bella. And it's not Bella's fault, but they don't see that. Because Jessica and Lauren are essentially still children. They are developing their brains, and they admittedly are unkind or rude sometimes, but at the end of the day, they are children. Children who make stupid mistakes, and notice how at no point, does anyone think to say anything. No one pulls them up? Why? Because they are in the box. And they are not allowed growth or development. They stay the mean girls because they aren't important.

The Misogyny Part 2 - Rosalie needs a whole other point. Because Rosalie Hale's story is crushing. It is crushing and heartbreaking, and Nikki Reed played the role with so much realness. Rosalie Hale is a New York socialite during the 1930s, who's family is not wrecked by the Great Depression. She is ignorant, she is unaware, and like most women of that time period and in that social standing, she does not have a lot of opportunities. Her opportunities are housewife and mother. She thinks this man loves her, she loves him, she wants nothing more than the perfect life with this man she loves and these perfect children she believes they will have. And it is ruined in one awful, traumatic evening. And the cherry on top of the cake, Carlisle finds Rosalie and changes her with the intent to make the perfect little mate for Edward. So, Rosalie, three days later, wakes up with an immortal life, a head full of traumatic memories of that night three days ago, and she is only there because Carlisle had the intent to give Edward a mate. And while Carlisle may have the best of intentions, Rosalie's story fills me with anger. And what makes it worse? Fast forward to Bella entering the picture, Rosalie has the love of her life, and she has endless beauty and she's jealous. And I truly believe her anger is so valid because it's not just about Bella being able to have children and Rosalie can't. No. It's Rosalie has to come to terms with the fact that this human girl gets to have more choice than Rosalie did. She gets to have the family vote. And Rosalie desperately wants Bella to have the option not to become a vampire. Because for Rosalie, becoming a vampire was both the best and worst thing she ever did. But all Bella sees, is Rosalie is angry, vain and jealous. Misogyny.

In conclusion, thank you for coming to my TedTalk. I will probably make a Part 2 when I think of more things I hate about Twilight and why they just don't make sense.

Thanksss :))) xx

[moonsb1996]

How to write convincingly, part 3 TW long post

Okay, now I've compiled some and come to "How to write convincingly" part 3 after we've been complaining since the story. Creating an imaginary world and limits of the characters We come to the big issue after we have ideas and other characters and information that doesn't even go deep into their ancestry. Now comes a matter that is a big problem for every writer.

Who is on the opposite side of who?

What comes after What is the “origin of super hero power” of every living thing in your world? How do governments handle when their power is curtailed by so-called "Superhuman Power" They went to deal with the problem by saying if it was an illness (X-men?) and then pushed until a group of criminals, the "Villains", emerged to demand their rights back. Or not? And then there are groups of vigilantes or "heroes" who come and want to live together with everyone. and cannot accept that there will be a war. From the example above, it can be divided into

1) Old government group who oppose peaceful coexistence Because of the wound People with superhuman powers (villains) harm their own people. and they will be powerless If it weren't for the law Now it's chaotic because Special powers appear that give people more privileges than others because Is it my body or the nature of its expression?

2) Villain: a person who feels dissatisfied with the law or group rule, or a person who feels that If they themselves don't stand up and oppose the injustice of this new breed of human beings like themselves. Their descendants will be the ones to be exterminated. But chose to use the method Respond with violence Because they feel that it is an effective method. Because everyone can turn and look.

3) Hero: A person who wants both people to have special powers. and people without special powers living together which joins hands with those who agree and fight against the two groups above Because to change the world is to "rebuild" it for the better. They, as heroes, cannot create a new government. Must hold hands together Help push for laws for heroes.

okay ! When there are 3 groups above, if followed in MHA, the hero and the new government win the war, the old government disappears, and the villain loses the war. And hide in the shadows blah blah blah (And some people choose to ignore it. Social matters are just black and white.) Okay, let's continue. When the world returns to peace Are there any additional problems?

example

Mutants that do not look like humans. Or have the shape of other living things, thus making the general public, including the beliefs of some groups of people, not liking them. Leading to problems Racist? (I use this word because I think it's more descriptive.) or the concept of superhuman society Does a child not have superpowers = failure? Then they lived together until they became Minority society Then some went to join groups with beliefs. /Weird cult or not? So are there any additional problems that arise from having special powers? For example, do special powers have an effect on The mental image of that person (like a 17 year old girl who is crazy about blood Until you can't tell the difference between desire and love. You know who I'm talking about.) How is the government handling the problem? Or will we let each other go as things happen?

different concepts

War and conflict would not originate without something called I'm not talking about MHA's famous idea of a hero: “To make the words of a beautiful world come true. That's what it takes to be a hero.” (Something like this? I can't remember) and Villain's "I'll destroy everything I don't like" (which didn't help either). What different concepts will there be? If we don't take the big approach Resources of opposing areas According to the principles of war that we often see (such as competing for arable land Compete for opposing territories Until genocide) from the above example can be divided into

1) Hero Government Organization who do not want their own social status and power to be shaken, leading to corruption, cleaning up threats to power Until they are no different from previous government groups that do not want superhumans to have power over them. People who don't have special powers that last longer.

2) Villain who doesn't like the above person. that sees excessive cheating, corruption, and assassination and want to expose it to the people's eyes which includes groups that choose to use violent methods until the state considered it a terrorist organization with another group that is called a terrorist group but emphasizing peaceful methods

2.1) Group A: We're going to plant the bomb here. Or go rob here. cause chaos Or kill the corrupt hero. and expand power Create troops to prepare for war, etc.

2.2) Group B: We love peace, but what should we do? Let people see our actions No matter how corrupt, they can find a way to cover up their own traces. Oh, that's right! We took out their secret information and let trusted journalists announce it. Or release it on online media. Let the people help us.

3) New generation heroes, who are a group of people who really want to be heroes to help people, including helping villains (really good ones) and people in distress so that the dream world becomes TRUE (And finally we know Someone chose their beloved son, Gary Stu, because my beloved had to outshine the MC I created to get people to read my story.)

I want Villain to be saved. I have to find a way down.

When you become a villain When you don't want them to die because your heart grows sad and you like them. When writing for bad people What will you do to make bad people repent? must show their "humanity" with the role of redemption, which together must show that They truly want to atone for their sins (unlike the 17-year-old girl who killed people to become fish and vegetables). And as long as she has the cutest smile in the world, that's enough. P.S. She has to take off her clothes too. With Gary Stu, who has the catchphrase "Die" every time with every character. And someone said that he has "changed", believe mecries ugly ps. Sorry, I have open eyes and still can't see anywhere) Examples that can be thought of

1) Feelings after killing someone The way he acted was so happy that he laughed from his mouth to his ears. Or feeling so guilty that he keeps it in nightmares and sees images of his family. The victim who had killed himself cried over his death.

2) Expression of the opponent's idea of being a good person. What do they (villains) think of their opponent? (Really good hero/Good cop) For example: Me (Villain): I admire you all. But if I don't act now It won't change society right now, or if you (Hero/Good Police) have a problem, I'll help as much as I can.

3) Action goals Which groups are they? For example, corrupt people with clear evidence. or your villains Do you think that killing homeless people and prostitutes = really helping to keep society clean?

4) How do they express themselves to their co-workers/people? For example, people in the group use drugs because they have to. The villain shows that he understands his friend. and help each other find solutions to long-term problems (Chronic drug addiction?) Or friends take drugs because they just want to take it and are not satisfied, even if we are in the same gang. But some actions should have limits.

5) How do they present themselves to outsiders who are also villains but have different ideas? For example, your villain wants to use peaceful methods. And I can't accept the fact that I don't love the other group's friends, or indeed they would be if they weren't my friends. Well, it's not me. Even if the other person doesn't have any bad thoughts towards them (LOV seems to be like this most of the time). Because I don't see how they act except me, me, me)

Because if you can't make a way for the Villains, It would be like slapping one in the face of the reader. And people can die and bring this phrase in my country. “Don't think of becoming a monk. And it will wash away your sins” or Dabi's famous phrase "The past doesn't go away" and I think you know that it includes His father alone oh ! But yes, we didn't see the body. We don't know if he actually killed someone or not. Ps. People deserve to die already! I say this sarcastically because someone actually said this

Let's take an example with my OC character, who is also a villain. A is a twin sister who has a case of serial murder. and imprisoned the boy She was thrown into prison without investigating the case because evidence included a blood-stained knife with fingerprints on it. and the blood of the deceased And there is a picture of her at the latest crime scene. There is no way to escape. But when she went to prison There are people who don't like killing people and use their blood to do evil things, such as stealing IDs and buying illegal things. Intentional murder even if the victim's home contains a baby. But because children are cute I had to suck the blood of a baby to show my love. But! She turned out to be nothing like the information they had heard. For example, "A "would only drink 100 ml. of blood because of the Ministry of Public Health system. Announced to let the people know that People who have special powers from drinking blood must get blood (pig, duck, chicken, cow, etc.) not exceeding 100 ml. because the blood is too salty and will not be good for the digestive system or they will become cannibals. (I can't remember what it's called.) Moreover, it didn't have a blood-crazed state that sucked it to the point of death. Or say I love this person

With B, a twin sister who has the same blood-drinking special power, she likes to walk at night. Secretly stalking boys and girls that you feel attracted to/"like" until you fantasize about a deep relationship without ever having even talked to those girls or boys until you see them with other people. Love/Girlfriend or show love to anyone close to you Instead, I felt that The person you "like" has already cheated on you. I must do whatever it takes. That is, since I can't have him, no one else can. And no one loves him as much as I do. So she took a knife and stabbed him. and sucked his blood until he died. I myself just went to find someone new. If anyone saw her, she would stab the witness to death, splattering blood because the color of blood was very beautiful to her. I use it to bathe with because it's more beautiful than bath salt. And the police are about to arrest her. You have to go kill other people and leave as much evidence as possible. It already has a face that's the same as A. All that's left is just a fingerprint. I erased my fingerprints from the weapon. Then let A be the one to carry it. When A and B have an argument, that's enough. Now she's going to jail for me. And I continued to find people I “liked” to drink blood from.

From the above example, who do you think A and B have a greater chance of redeeming themselves? The answer has to be A, right? But someone/most people will choose B anyway. Why? Because she's a naked girl! yes ! Some people really just choose that, like a psychotic murderer is very handsome/beautiful. I want them to survive. The victims or their families have nothing to do with it, they don't care! He's a psycho but he's cute! I want to vomit Okay, it's starting to get a lot. If I think of anything more, I'll post it in the next episode. Thank you for reading until the end.

Am I able to write this long? Some words will seem strange. English is not my native language.

[morningstar-chronicles]

okay i can't believe i didn't share this dream with y'all today?? it's lowkey the only thing happening in my brain right now.

okay. so, as some of you may know, i'm a very spiritual, witchcraft-y, paganism/wiccanism person, right? all of that stuff is super super interesting to me, and i'm not totally sure how to label my religious belief system, but my spiritual and religious beliefs are really special to me!

read more bc the context for the dream is LONG and also a lot of it gets like... DEEPLY personal so if you're not chill with knowing me like that, feel free to skip over.

okay, so, for context, there was this boy i grew up with, and i was absolutely WHIPPED for this man. why? i don't really know. he's kind of mediocre, actually, but something about him is absolutely fucking entracing to me. like, i would dare say i'm in love with him. i've never had a crush this bad before or since. we'll call this guy jayden (my DR s/o is based off this man).

my actual relationship to jayden was always very complicated. we totally hated each others guts in middle school. this was for a lot of different, complicated reasons, but the main one was that my (ex-)best friend told me a lot of stuff about him that was wildly unflattering to say the least, and also blatantly untrue. so i was um. really mean to jayden. mostly because i was under the impression that he was a bully and a racist. now was he a bully? kind of. but he was also a fourteen year old boy. and also he totally wasn't racist, which i found out many years later.

anyway, i dropped the best friend and fate put jayden right next to me in tenth grade history. i realized he was actually quite funny and sweet, and kind of good-looking, and now my life is ruined. i was too much of a coward to ever reach out and talk to him, or explain my middle school self's actions. i did end up apologizing for being a massive dick to him, and he kind of apologized for being mean to me as well (even though i literally don't think he was ever mean to me??? like i cannot recall a single instance of him being mean to me specifically), and then we never spoke again. but i kinda fumbled my shot with him, even though legit everyone was like "hale don't be stupid he's fully in love with you". i left him a stupid anonymous note confessing my crush like some kind of child, and then started flirting with another guy who i didn't really care about to mask the fact that i liked jayden. jayden blocked me soon after. which. fair.

my ex-best friend uhhh. kind of sucked really bad. we'll call her lorelai. i ended up dropping a lot of friends because lorelai just told me shit about them that was blatantly untrue, including one of my other childhood best friends. we'll call him joel.

so, joel and i were never all that close actually. i think we were just close in my head. either way, i ended up having a lot of regret surrounding both jayden and joel, because looking back i think we could have had really good connections, and because of how things happened with lorelai, i never really learned how to make friends. like, i still don't really know? i think i'm kind of undersocialized. not the point. i think i'm oversharing.

so, finally getting to the dream!!! jayden and i were in some kind of class together. i think it was like a gym class outside of school? and he and i were talking, but only because we didn't really know anyone else, and we were the only two people our age there. everything was really awkward.

suddenly the dream fully stops. the scene around me fades, and i'm in this strange, white-light, liminal space. some kind of spirit appears wearing joel's face, and he tells me that i screwed things up with jayden because i was afraid, and that i was so unhappy with my current life because i never acted upon my desires, and any actions i did take didn't have my whole heart behind them. then i woke up.

let me tell you... i have NEVER, in my life, had a dream that vivid or that blunt. so, of course, i wake up shaken. i immediately text all my spiritual friends, and they all think it's super weird. i start examining some of my decisions and why i'm so unhappy in life, and it kind of hits me- yeah. i do lack follow-through. i'm too scared to actually do the things i know will be best for me, because i always worry about affecting other people in a negative way. i don't go after what i want, and i never have. today i blocked a few people in my life who've been continuously causing me stress, and who i was previously too scared to block, and i was instantly a million times happier. it was like ten pounds was just fully lifted off my shoulders.

and then ANOTHER funny thing happened- i turned on this song, which i've been playing on loop for like a full week. inertia, by ajr. can you guess what that song is about? correct! being to scared/unmotivated to follow through on what's best for you, even though you're unhappy with where you are.

and now i'm imagining my spirit guides watching me and being like "this dumb bitch-" and then sending me that dream. honestly, i thank them. i would NEVER have gotten the message otherwise.

i don't really know what the moral here is but today has just been. so crazy. and now i'm genuinely going to rethink my life.

[smallswingshoes]

I love learning about other cultures so much, but like the little stuff that doesn't occur to you to share, yknow?

Like, I'm born and raised American, but my mom is from Sweden and only came here as an adult. Something she told me was that they didn't have air conditioning in Sweden cuz it hadn't been warm enough there to really need it, so she had no idea what a/c was when she came here. That's so fascinating to me! Like, it never occurred to me she wouldn't know!

A coworker of mine, Hazem, was born in America and grew up for a little bit here, then grew up for a while in Egypt and became a pharmacist there. (He's now doing his tests to be a pharmacist here.) He's a practicing Muslim and we talk about interesting cultural differences and I said something about how the Christian trinity looks polytheistic to Jews so Christiniaty looks polytheistic to Jews. He was confused because Christinity doesn't always believe in the trinity and I was like !!!! What??? I'd never heard that here, but to him it was super obvious and must be more commonplace in Egypt. I'm sure there are Christians in America who don't believe in the trinity, but I had literally never heard of that and he thought it was the most obvious thing. Clearly it seems much more common of a belief in Egypt than here. That's so fascinating!! The way the culture must be different because of that is just so interesting to me!!

I had a coworker briefly named Narak who I think was from.... oh fuck this was years ago so my memory is hazy, but I think from Cambodia? And we had an interesting discussion one time where he actually asked me if I was white! Because I look white but I'm also Jewish, so I consider myself conditionally white. Because of this, I sometimes talk about myself in a way other white people usually don't to him, I think. And it was an interesting moment because it was clear that the way Americans imagine race is so clearly not the default in other cultures! Before him, I've literally never been asked before in person if I was white. Cuz most people just assume I am white. For him, there was obviously a different understanding of race than the typical white American perception of it. It was so interesting!!

Narak and I also talked about how Americans are weird about food from animals that still have their head! Something that I had also learned from my mom! I told him I'm a bit more used to it than other Americans cuz of my mom, but I'm also a little freaked out by animal heads sometimes. He told me about how he'd like kill his own chicken and pluck it and cook it and that was pretty normal. I thought it was pretty cool! He also mentioned that he had actually had dog as food and I was curious what it was like and he told me the meat was pretty tough so you had to like boil it for a long time or something similar to make it more edible. That's so interesting to me!!! Like, I've heard (usually white) Americans be racist about dog as food, ofc, and heard others rebut that, but I'd never really heard that the meat is actually really tough and doesn't taste all that great on its own, at least according to Narak. That's interesting to me!!

Or like how my Russian immigrant customers/patients were some of my favorites! (I'm a pharmacy technician.) The women in particular actually scared my coworkers a bit because they could be very demanding of good work. If you were new, they would tell you to get them an employee who knew what they were doing. 🤣 But we had one regular who, if she liked you, would give you a chocolate. I actually loved these customers because, even tho they seemed harsh to a Midwest American culture, to me they were very no-nonsense and always knew what they were picking up and what they needed and what it was supposed to cost. It was such a different attitude from my other customers!

Or like another coworker I had, I think her name was... Victoria? Vivian? It started with a V, I swear. Anyway she was Hmong and I was Jewish, so neither of us were super tapped into Christian practices. On Ash Wednesday, she had to ask me why people had like black stuff on their foreheads. I told her it's Ash Wednesday and it's some Christian thing every year. She asks me why they do that and I'm like, "I'm Jewish, I don't know!!" 🤣 I also asked her what the dumbest like white person question she'd ever gotten was and she told me someone asked her once "are you Asian or are you Chinese?" That was the funniest fucking thing to me. There are so many problems with the structure of that question.

I just love these neat little differences in cultures from across the world that you just wouldn't know about unless you spoke to someone, yknow? They're not stuff that would normally be, like, in textbooks or travelogs or something because they're things you wouldn't think to point out to others unless it came up, usually. I love hearing about these little cultural differences that pop up and make some conversations so interesting. The lack of a/c in Sweden, how commonplace it is/isn't to believe in the trinity in Egypt, how race can be conceived so differently, that dog meat is really tough, how Russuan women can be delightfully demanding customers, how a Jewish woman and a Hmong woman can be equally confused by Christianity. I honestly love little cultural moments like this; I think it's a great argument against homogenization or assimilation. I get to learn so many interesting little tidbits about other places that I never would have even thought to have thought about!! It's honestly so sad to me how Americans like me can easily go our whole lives without ever learning this type of stuff or even recognizing that other cultures can be so different! Other cultures tend to be much more aware of this sort of thing than we are and it sucks. Not only because it's a form of oppression for Americans to be so America-centric, but also because you're missing out on so much by forgetting there's anything outside of America.

[sakebytheriver]

Your tags on that zodiac post reminded me that while yeah, my experience is that astrology girlies are usually white women, I have absolutely run into white women and WOC alike who argued that criticizing astrology being used for serious things like job interviews and as physiognomy is racism bc the ancestors of non-white nations practiced astrology 😭

Oh god no 😭😭😭😭

The queers are not surviving the cult boom this generation's going through 😪

Girlies, is it progressive to defend a pseudoscience that's used to discriminate against people for being born in the wrong month just because it's been in the cultures of brown people?

Like the only time I've ever taken a step back and looked at zodiacs in a progressive political lense was when I was in the talking stages with an Indian guy and he asked the cliche what's your sign kind of opener and when I gave my response of like "this is my sign but I don't believe in this stuff" he responded like "yeah i dont really buy into it either but it's a big thing in my country and the Hindu religion" and I kinda took a step back for a second and had a moment of 'is he gonna get offended if i argue against this' before I said something like "even still that doesn't make it real" and he was like "yeah i completely agree" and we moved on to a different topic

And like I do think sometimes there is a white liberal "afraid to tell the poc they're wrong for fear of looking racist" kind of energy towards astrology and especially the American liberal attitude towards it, but ultimately there will be things fully entrenched within a culture of color that is harmful, because even if they've been colonized and subjugated they're still human beings who will make mistakes and missteps along the way and in the case of India in particular they actually teach astrology in universities and treats it as if it's a real science on a national level, which I hope you can all obviously see as extremely harmful to the people living there

Just because astrology has been adopted by people of color and has become entrenched within those cultures does not make it any more valid than the Christianity American queers love to denounce so much

It's just so funny to me when people who claim to want to go against the idea that you have to live your life a certain way and have a certain set of beliefs and have to be born a certain way to be "right" would fully let themselves be suckered into something that is exactly what they say they're against, placing people into boxes and assigning them attributes based solely on the position of the stars on the day they were born, like how is that any different than looking at a person of color and assigning them a personality based solely on the color of their skin?

Astrology is a pseudoscience that has been debunked over and over and over and over and over again, we have more proof that astrology is fake than we have ever had proof that astrology does anything at all except offer another way to discriminate against people, it is no different from phrenology and if you rightfully denounce phrenology as the racist pseudosciene it is then you should also have no issue denouncing astrology, neither are based in scientific fact and are instead weapons used to hurt people, if you think that being into astrology is somehow for queers and poc you're a dumbass that needs to read some actual scientific articles