#about rejection of christianity/in relation to christianity

[snekdood]

ppl are so scared of their inner animal side and its just so sad to me.

[tanadrin]

Revised version of "polytheism vs elaborateness" religion chart. I started with a list of around 150 religions, sects, denominations, philosophies, and spiritual tendencies, whittled down to 100 based on what I could find information on and what meaningful differences would actually show up in a chart like this. Dark blue is Christianity and Christian-derived tendencies; light blue is Judaism and Jewish-derived tendencies; green is Islam and Islam-influenced tendencies; purple is ancient Mediterranean polytheism and related schools of thought; red is Dharmic/Hindu-influenced schools of thought; tan is Chinese religion and philosophy; orange is new religious movements; black is other, unaffiliated religions and movements.

Obviously, "what is a religion" is a complicated topic. Some of the things on this chart might strike you more as philosophical schools (Carvaka, Stoicism), epistemological approaches (Unitarian Universalism), or different ways of slicing the same tradition. The scholarly definition of "religion" is sort of fundamentally circular, and that's not something I'm interested in trying to untangle for this entirely non-scientific exercise.

Religions etc. are scored on two axis: polytheism vs elaborateness of practice. Polytheism is a rank from zero to 11, thus:

0. Strict atheist and materialist, denying the possibility of both gods and the supernatural, e.g., Carvaka.

1. Atheist. Denies the existence of significant supernatural agents worthy of worship, but may not deny all supernatural (or psychic, paranormal, etc.) beings and phenomena (e.g., Mimamsa).

2. Agnostic. This religion makes no dogmatic claims about the existence of supernatural beings worthy of worship, and it may not matter for this religion if such beings exist (e.g., Unitarian Universalists). It does not preclude--and may actually incorporate--other supernatural, psychic, or paranormal phenomena (e.g., Scientology).

3. Deist. This religion acknowledges at least one god or Supreme Being, but rejects this being's active intervention in the world after its creation (e.g., Christian Deism). Deism is marked with a gray line on the chart, in case you want to distinguish religions that specifically care about all this God business from ones that don't.

4. Tawhid monotheist. This religion acknowledges only a single transcendent god above all other natural or supernatural beings, who is usually the creator of the universe and the ground of being, and is without parts, division, or internal distinction (e.g., Islam).

5. Formal monotheism. This religion acknowledges a single god, usually transcendent above all other natural or supernatural beings, but who may have aspects, hypostases, or distinct parts (e.g., Trinitarian Christianity). Pantheism may be considered a special case of formal monotheism that identifies the universe and its many discrete phenomena with a single god or divine force.

6. Dualism. This religion acknowledges a single god worthy of worship, alongside a second inferior, often malevolent being that nevertheless wields great power in or over the world (e.g., Zoroastrianism or Gnosticism).

7. Monolatrist. This religion or practice acknowledges the existence of many gods or divine beings worthy of worship, but focuses on, or happens to be devoted to only one of them (e.g., ancient mystery cults; pre-exilic Judaism).

8. Oligotheist. This religion worships a small group of divine beings, who may function for devotional or rhetorical purposes as a single entity (e.g., Mormonism, Smartism).

9. Monogenic polytheism/Henotheism. This religion worships many gods, which it sees as proceeding from or owing their existence to, a single underlying or overarching force or supreme god (e.g., many forms of Hinduism).

10. Heterogenic polytheism. This religion worships many gods, who have diverse origins and/or natures. Though the number of gods is in practical terms probably unlimited, gods are discrete entities or personalities, i.e., they are "countably infinite" (e.g., many polytheistic traditions).

11. Animism. This religion worships many gods which may or may not be discrete entities, and which may or may not be innumerable even in principle, i.e., they are "uncountably infinite" (e.g., many animist traditions).

What counts as a god is naturally a bit of a judgement call, as is exactly where a religion falls on this scale.

Elaborateness of practice is based on assigning one point per feature from the following list of features:

Uses vs forbids accompanied music in worship

Saints or intermediary beings accept prayers/devotion

Liturgical calendar with specific rituals or festivals

Practices monasticism

Venerates relics or holy objects

Clerics have special, elaborate clothing

Clerics have special qualificiations, e.g., must be celibate or must go through elaborate initiation/training

Elaborate sacred art or architecture used in places of worship

Sites of pilgrimage, or other form of cult centralization

Sophisticated religious hierarchy beyond the congregational level

Mandatory periods of fasting and/or complex dietary rules

Specific clothing requirements for laypeople

Specific body modifications either required or forbidden for laypeople

Liturgical language

Complex ritual purity rules

Performs sacrifice

Performs human sacrifice (or cannibalism)

Uses entheogens

Uses meditation or engages in mystical practice

Additionally, a point is taken away for austerity for each of the following features:

Forbids secular music outside worship

Claims sola scriptura tradition

Practices pacifism or ahimsa

Requires vegetarianism of all adherents

These scores are probably pretty inexact, since I am not a scholar of world religion.

This chart is not scientific, it's just a goof based on that @apricops post.

Other fun dimensions along which to chart religions might be:

Orthodoxy vs orthopraxy

Authoritarianism/control of members. This would add some much needed distinctions to Christian sects in particular, and to the new religious movements.

Elaborateness of cosmological claims. Some religions (looking at you, Buddhism) really go hog-wild here.

Social egalitarianism. Even within the same framework/tradition/philosophy, some practices differ radically on how egalitarian they are.

[flammeinfernale]

𝕾𝖆𝖓𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖚𝖊𝖗𝖙𝖊: 𝔖𝔞𝔦𝔫𝔱 𝔬𝔣 𝔱𝔥𝔢 𝔇𝔢𝔞𝔱𝔥 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔊𝔬𝔡𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔱𝔥𝔢 𝔇𝔢𝔞𝔡 

When it comes to death, there are many variations of gods that come to our mind from different cultures, since this process is an inevitable and crucial part of all our lives notwithstanding our ethnicity, race, social status, religious beliefs, etc.  

Most of us heard about one such deity: Santa Muerte, who is commonly known as a folk saint and is closely associated with Mexican el Día de Muertos or Day of the Dead. Usually she is depicted as a skeleton with traditional feminine features, long hair, flower wreath and in a bright dress. 

Despite her status among Spanish Catholics, the catholic church doesn’t accept her as an official saint since some other figures play this role in catholicism, as well as Santa Muerte’s eerie connections with witchcraft and narco cartels don’t quite fit Christian morals. 

But what do we know about the origin of the Mother of Death? 

Origin

Although Santa Muerte is an unofficial catholic saint, her roots are more complex than they seem and aren’t limited by her status among Spanish Catholics. 

There are a few main theories of where Santa Muerte comes from:

Aztec death deity Mictecacihuatl

Figure of Grim Reaper during Black Death

African death goddesses

And more others.

But there is no general agreement on which one is true. It can be confusing, but at the same time, it allows us to analyze and define the truth for ourselves.

Still there is one most popular theory which is related to Aztec beliefs.

Aztec death goddess

As we know, Santa Muerte has the most popularity in Mexico. From the history overview, the Valley of Mexico was earlier the Aztec home before the conquest of this land by the Spanish in the early 16th century.

Before Mexican el Día de Muertos, the Aztecs had their own celebration connected to several death gods: Mictecacihuatl and Mictlantecuhtli. Few principal gods were represented as female (Mictecacihuatl) and male (Mictlantecuhtli) embodiments of death and rulers of Mictlan (underworld).

!For the remark: they are not the only ones, there was goddess Tonantzin as well, but she is related to the other catholic figure. 

One of the theories is that Mictecacihuatl and Santa Muerte are the same deity because the Spanish had to accept some Aztec customs due to their cooperation. Also, Mictecacihuatl was a dominant death deity in the Aztec pantheon, so it was important to save her figure even under a different name.

Many faces of Mother of Death

Apart from Santa Muerte’s grim image and direct relation to death, she is patient with the newbies and her devotees and has a pleasant presence and nurturing nature. 

Like all deities, Lady of Death is versatile and can be both gentle and destructive. Don’t be surprised to learn that she has a strong connection with drug traffickers and many of them honour this goddess so she gives them protection and prosperity. 

Another feature is that Mother of Death accepts all people since death doesn’t care about your social status, sexual orientation, colour of skin, gender, and any other things. She is a protector of those who are rejected by society and helps them to stay safe and find their way in life. 

But you need to keep in mind that she should be respected as any other deity and she won’t forgive your ignorance or rudeness towards her. 

How to start working with Santa Muerte

As many of us know, it is important to understand which aspects have certain deities when we start working with them. It helps us to figure out for what purposes we can contact them. 

Santa Muerte is an universal goddess who has keys to the many doors on our paths. It is no wonder, because death is ever-present and has power over all. 

When you decide that you would like to ask Santa Muerte for something, you should define your request and reach out to one of her seven colours or aspects. 

!However, if you aren’t sure which colour is right, it is fine to reach out to Santa Muerte without referring to a certain aspect of her. 

The Seven Colors of Santa Muerte 

I will give a short guide of her seven colours, so it will be easier to define which aspect is most suitable for your problem or situation. 

Niña Blanca, White Santa Muerte

Protection, cleansing, renewal, starting new projects, healing, opening new paths, punishing enemies.

Niña Violeta, Purple Santa Muerte

Magic, secret knowledge, wisdom, spiritual growth, clairvoyance, divination.

Niña Azul, Blue Santa Muerte

Partnerships, social life, human interactions (she can both harmonize and destroy relationships).

Niña Dorada, Golden Santa Muerte

Money, wealth, prosperity, fate, luck (as well as lack of money, poverty and bad luck for enemies).

Niña Roja, Red or Pink Santa Muerte

Romantic relationships, love, lust, attracting a partner (it is possible to punish unfaithful partners with Red Santa Muerte’s help).

Niña Verde, Green Santa Muerte

Winning legal cases, justice, defining truth, protection from criminals, imprisoning someone, making someone commit illegal acts, endanger someone to be robbed or assaulted. 

Niña Negra, Black Santa Muerte

Neutralizing curses, malevolent spirits, ending bad luck or all kinds of problems, protection, spiritual transformations, harming enemies.

Associations

Planetary aspects: 

Moon and Saturn (but it can vary depending on the aspect)

Plants:

Rose, rosemary, syrian rye, tobacco, marigolds, aloe

Animals: 

Owl, raven, butterfly, snake, worm

Incense: 

Rose, vanilla, sage, copal, myrrh, rosemary, aloe, palo santo

Symbols:

Scythe, skull, flower wreath, golden jewelry, scale, cloak

Tarot:

Death, Queen of Swords, Judgement, the Empress, the High Priestess, the Hierophant (but it depends on your perception as well)

Offerings

Tequila, red wine, chocolate (or any other sweets), red apples, pomegranates, fruits (especially exotic ones such as pineapples, mangoes, dragon fruits), coffee and cacao, salt, bread, flowers (mostly red or white roses), red meat, chicken hearts, candles (the colour depends on the aspect or you can choose the black one as universal), incenses. 

𖤐

Let me know if you would like new posts about Santa Muerte. Mother and I will be happy to tell you a lot more.

[germiyahu]

There's such an intricate interplay between antisemitism and islamophobia from the slacktivist left. For every reason they can think of to delegitimize the Jewish People's connection to Eretz Yisrael, it's propped up by some Noble Savage presumptions about Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims.

Since Jews in America are seen as a model minority, seen as having accessed whiteness and privilege, and "antisemitism" is at worst having to explain what Hanukah is to clueless Christians, the Left is confused as to exactly why Jews care about Jerusalem and the Land of Israel so much. Shouldn't they be above such petty and barbaric and outdated concerns such as a dusty old book from 2,000 years ago?

They should be more enlightened than that. They're all rich suburban secular Democrats. They're the leftist religion, according to bloggers on this very platform. There is no room for Judaism to be a religion, there's no acknowledgment of ancient customs, rituals, and the deep mysticism that's still alive and well in the Jewish community. There's no attempt to understand Jewish history and culture and why a group of people you think shares your vaguely atheistic vaguely liberal (and not in the Tankie sense) vaguely smug detached Western worldview... is more complex and unique than that.

Jews should be happy living in Diaspora because clearly the problem of antisemitism is fixed now, and never really was a problem in America. There must be something sinister behind a desire to reestablish a country by and for Jews. There must be something colonial, oppressive, European and White about it. Because why else would they do it? They have it good here. And no we won't acknowledge where Israelis primarily descend from because that requires us to do research and have a shred of nuance and integrity when it comes to Jews. No thanks!

A lot of the modern left is nonconsensually dragging Jews kicking and screaming from their own unique demographic toward the banal Norm. To themselves. But not totally. See they think they relate to Jews and vice versa, but not enough that when they think Jews should "know better," or haven't "learned their lesson," from the Holocaust, it engenders a deep seeded disgust and mistrust and rage that's not felt for actually privileged mainstream dominant society.

Conversely, the slacktivist Left sees Arabs as savages. Silly desert people who eat sand and worship a big black cube and cover every inch of their bodies for some reason. How quaint! When the Palestinian/Arab/Muslim cause explains that Jerusalem is important to them, the White Western Leftist nods sagely and says "Your culture is so valid queen," because they don't care. They just accept that Muslim society would be willing to fight over an ancient city proscribed as holy in dusty old tomes. Because that fits the narrative already surrounding Muslims.

They're seen as backwards, but the Left, reacting to their conservative parents and the Bush era, see "Muslims are backwards," and says not "No actually they're modern groups of people with practical geopolitical goals," but instead "Yeah and that makes them better than us!" Especially with this new crop of baby Leftists who think Islamo-Fascist "Feudalism" or whatever the best term would be, is aspirational or at least harmless... because it's not capitalism :)

So Muslims are infantilized and condescended to because the Western Leftist is still just as racist as their parents, but they feel guilty about their parents without considering their contribution to White Supremacy and the Post Bush surveillance state. And all the while Jews are reprimanded and held to an impossible standard because the Western Leftist, again, rejects their conservative parents' philosemitism, and decides that Jews Must be Punished when they step off the pedestal that Suffering the Shoah placed them on.

Jews should be above nationalism, Jews should know that demurely suffering pogroms and ethnic cleansing and genocide and general inequity and humiliation will earn them their divine reward in the end. Muslims should not be above nationalism, because they're not capable of being above it, and can't we throw them a bone, after all Obama was the worst president in history because of the Drone War and let's not mention George W Bush at all :0

Hot take, but I believe this is an essential underpinning of where the average disaffected White millennial/zoomer Leftist's head is at with regard to Israel and Palestine. They won't acknowledge it of course, but I can generally see through things like this.

[calystarose]

Māori atheism is on the rise, but it's more than just disbelief—it’s tied to colonial resistance. A new study shows how Māori atheists frame rejecting Christianity as a political act. Atheism isn’t just Western—it’s global.

Register for our online lecture with Dr. Sara Rahmani: https://www.religiondepartment.com/offers/zsbQ2xsX/checkout

Thursday March 27, 2025 3-4:15pm Eastern

Atheism is on the rise among the Māori in New Zealand, but we know little about Māori nonreligion and the processes contributing to Māori deconversion from Christianity. In this lecture, Dr. Rahmani will describe the contours of Māori atheism and its intersections with colonisation, cultural revitalisation, and protest movements. She will discuss her upcoming co-authored book, which draws on in-depth interviews and explores how activist resistance to colonialism plays a decisive role in Māori atheists’ accounts of their identity and non-belief.

About lecturer: Dr. Masoumeh Sara Rahmani is a senior lecturer in the Study of Religion at Te Herenga Waka – Victoria University of Wellington. Her research focuses on atheism, nonreligion, and (de)conversion, explored in relation to Buddhist meditation movements and, more recently, within the Māori cultural context. Sara’s recent monograph, Drifting Through Samsara, examined patterns of conversion and deconversion from Goenka’s Vipassana movement in Aotearoa. She is currently co-authoring her second book, Māori Atheism as a Decolonising Project, with Prof. Peter Adds and Dr. Geoff Troughton. 

[blackstarlineage]

30 Ways Modern-Day Africans Still Exhibit a Colonial Mindset: A Garveyite Analysis

Marcus Garvey’s Pan-Africanist philosophy emphasized self-reliance, cultural pride, and the rejection of colonial influence. However, many Africans today still exhibit behaviours and attitudes rooted in a colonial mindset. Below are 30 examples, explained and analyzed in depth, from a Garveyite perspective:

1-10: Cultural Influence and Identity

1. Preference for European Standards of Beauty

Example: Many Africans prioritize lighter skin, straight hair, and European features over natural Black aesthetics.

Analysis: Skin-lightening creams and the global embrace of Eurocentric beauty ideals reflect internalized inferiority and rejection of African identity.

2. Disdain for African Languages

Example: African children are often discouraged from speaking native languages in favour of English, French, or Portuguese.

Analysis: Linguistic erasure ensures dependency on colonial languages for governance, education, and international relations.

3. Glorification of Western Education

Example: Degrees from European or North American universities are valued more than African ones.

Analysis: This reinforces the notion that African intellectual systems are inferior, perpetuating brain drain and dependency.

4. Adoption of Western Names

Example: Africans often give their children Western names instead of traditional African ones.

Analysis: This signifies a rejection of African heritage in favour of aligning with Western norms.

5. Colonial Religious Practices

Example: Christianity and Islam dominate African spiritual practices, while indigenous beliefs are demonized.

Analysis: Religion was used as a colonial tool to pacify and control, and its dominance reflects ongoing psychological colonization.

6. Rejection of African Fashion

Example: Western suits and dresses are deemed more "professional" than African attire in workplaces.

Analysis: Clothing reflects identity, and the preference for Western styles reinforces the idea that African traditions are primitive.

7. Accent Bias

Example: Africans with European or American accents are viewed as more intelligent or credible.

Analysis: This bias reflects internalized colonial superiority.

8. Neglect of African History

Example: African curricula prioritize European history over African empires like Mali, Songhai, or Great Zimbabwe.

Analysis: This erasure perpetuates ignorance about Africa’s rich heritage and contributions to civilization.

9. Worship of Western Entertainment

Example: Hollywood and European music dominate African media, sidelining local industries.

Analysis: This promotes cultural dependency and undervalues African creativity.

10. Desire to Migrate to the West

Example: Many Africans dream of emigrating to Europe or the U.S. for a "better life."

Analysis: This mindset undermines the potential of building strong nations on the continent.

11-20: Political and Economic Dependence

11. Reliance on Foreign Aid

Example: African governments often depend on Western aid for development projects.

Analysis: This fosters dependency and allows Western nations to control African policies.

12. Colonial Borders

Example: African nations still adhere to arbitrary colonial borders that divide ethnic groups.

Analysis: The refusal to renegotiate these borders reflects a lack of sovereignty and Pan-African unity.

13. Imitation of Western Governance

Example: African governments replicate Western political systems, often failing to adapt them to local contexts.

Analysis: Blind imitation undermines the development of systems rooted in African traditions and needs.

14. Dependence on Western Currencies

Example: The CFA franc, used by West and Central African nations, is controlled by France.

Analysis: This reflects continued economic colonization and inhibits financial independence.

15. Exploitation of Resources by Foreign Corporations

Example: Multinational companies exploit Africa's oil, minerals, and agriculture with little reinvestment.

Analysis: Africans prioritize Western partnerships over local ownership and control.

16. Outsourcing Security to Foreign Powers

Example: French troops stationed in Africa under the guise of fighting terrorism.

Analysis: This reinforces the narrative that Africans can not secure their own nations.

17. Preference for Imported Goods

Example: Imported clothing, food, and technology are seen as superior to local products.

Analysis: This devalues African production and stifles economic growth.

18. Neocolonial Debt Traps

Example: African nations take loans from institutions like the IMF, leading to perpetual debt.

Analysis: These loans come with conditions that undermine sovereignty.

19. Overdependence on Western Technologies

Example: Africa imports most of its technology rather than building local industries.

Analysis: This dependency stifles innovation and economic independence.

20. Election Interference by Western Powers

Example: Western nations influence African elections through funding or propaganda.

Analysis: This undermines democratic processes and reinforces external control.

21-30: Social and Psychological Patterns

21. Black Elitism

Example: Africans educated in the West often look down on those educated locally.

Analysis: This creates divisions within African societies and perpetuates classism.

22. Hostility Toward Pan-Africanism

Example: Resistance to efforts to unify Africa economically or politically.

Analysis: Colonial powers instilled fear of unity to prevent collective strength.

23. Undervaluing African Labour

Example: African workers are underpaid while foreign workers are overpaid for similar roles.

Analysis: This reflects an internalized belief in the superiority of non-African expertise.

24. Neglect of Local Agriculture

Example: African nations import staple foods like rice despite fertile lands.

Analysis: This prioritizes foreign economies over local food sovereignty.

25. Demonization of Traditional Medicine

Example: Preference for Western pharmaceuticals over indigenous remedies.

Analysis: This reflects distrust in African innovation and healing systems.

26. Preference for Colonial Languages in Art and Literature

Example: Writers and artists creating works in English or French to gain Western recognition.

Analysis: This marginalizes African languages and creativity.

27. Inferiority Complex Toward Western Nations

Example: Africans praise Western infrastructure while criticizing their own.

Analysis: This self-perception hinders the belief in African potential.

28. Overlooking the African Diaspora

Example: Africans often ignore the struggles and contributions of African Americans, Caribbeans, etc.

Analysis: Colonial divisions still separate the global African community.

29. Dependence on Colonial Education Systems

Example: African nations still use colonial curricula with minimal African content.

Analysis: Education is a tool of control, and this reflects ongoing intellectual colonization.

30. Hostility Toward Repatriation

Example: Africans discouraging descendants of the enslaved from returning to Africa.

Analysis: This reflects colonial teachings that Africa is undesirable or unworthy.

Garveyite Call to Action:

Marcus Garvey warned against mental colonization and called for:

Reclaiming African identity: Embrace African languages, cultures, and traditions.

Economic independence: Build industries, control resources, and support local economies.

Pan-African unity: Foster solidarity among Africans worldwide.

Rejection of Western validation: Recognize that Africa’s greatness does not depend on foreign approval.

“Liberate the minds of men, and ultimately, you will liberate the bodies of men.” – Marcus Garvey

[maybe-boys-do-love]

Spare Me Your Mercy from the outset has tied the acceptance of death with the acceptance of queerness. Many of the critiques of the show have missed this connection or its significance, which goes a long way to explain their complaints about the series. Dr. Kan, the character most accepting of death is also the most overtly gay and unashamed to act on it. The director prioritized life even if the patient was suffering, and in line with that, he, himself in the closet, experiences life as constant suffering.

The rural setting heightens these stakes and commentary. We can see it most in Detective Thiu, who returns to his small hometown with trepidation after escaping to the city. He followed the typical gay narrative from the supposedly backwards country to the ‘enlightened’ city, what Jack Halberstam coined as "metronormativity," where he could realize the true expression of himself. Now, forced to return to the rural space, we see Thiu in all his interactions internally contending with the true extent of his city-born self-acceptance. Some reviewers on here fail to appreciate the weight of his struggle. One reviewer in particular, whose work in the fandom I greatly appreciate, nevertheless has a history of reviewing actors' performances and "chemistry" poorly when the characters are wrestling against their internalized homophobia. I, however, find Thiu's immensely compelling and relatable as a queer person with strong rural ties.

With Thiu, SMYM seems to lead us toward a similiar perspective to Halberstam and others (Imma provide a reading list below), who criticize the dangerous individualism of the metronormative narrative. In the third episode, the show depicts an indigenous perspective toward death, practices with roots preceding commercially-bred urbanization. These roots, more so in Thailand than perhaps any other nation in the world but also in a multitude of indigenous cultures across the globe, draw forth indigenous traditions of queerness and gender variation.

An exchange evoking the parallels of accepting death and queerness occurs between Kan and Thiu in response to the rituals. "Their belief up here is that death is like moving from an old home to a new home." The detective replies, "That's a nice way to think about it. When you die, you don't have to end up in hell like the rest of us." This line, whether in the context of a Thai Buddhist hell or the Christian one (inviting any Thai language folks or people more familiar with the culture to add their expertise here!), reveals Thiu's pervasive sense of shame, inflecting his view of himself and distrust of others, contrasting with Kan and the beliefs indigenous to the place where he grew up.

While the indigenous rituals suggest how Thiu might have avoided shame if he had remained more connected to his rural upbringing, SMYM depicts myriad reasons the town's culture, specifically the practices of those men in authority positions, condemned that possibility. The director of the hospital and the police enforce de jure expectations for heterosexuality alongside their de facto enforcement of regulations against euthanasia. As this post about the show's theme from @respectthepetty points out, "life should not be a punishment for the living," but life as a punishment was the set condition Thiu must've been raised within.

While the plot might be asking about who's the murderer and how will they be caught and punished, for me, the question beating under it all like a heart that can't let go is where Thiu's mother sat on this scale regarding acceptance. She's the key that could open the door for Thiu to find queer peace in his hometown. His ability to process how she felt about him and how he felt about her will determine his ability to be himself in relation to where he came from rather than as a rejection of it.

For me, this show's music, cinematography, editing tempo, plotting, and performances all lend it a familiarity with the western crime-thriller genre that make it a great recommendation for BL first-timers in the Anglo sphere . It's easily comparable to Mare of Easttown, Broadchurch, True Detective, or Silence of the Lambs, (Asian thrillers, too, I assume, but others could write better about that than I) while delivering queer love and acceptance in rural spaces at the forefront of its story and philosophical musings. I personally recommend ignoring the misrepresentative criticism. SMYM constantly reiterates the ways relenting to someone else's authority might keep one from the types of agency and connection that make the experiences of life and death, no matter where you are, gay and fulfilling.

Queer Rural Reading List for those interested

Short Digital Reads:

Metronormativity by Maxwell Cloe

Metronormativity Is Dangerous for LGBTQIA+ People's Health and Well-Being by Alexander Martin

Rural Queer History: Hidden in Plain Sight by Anya Petrone Slepyan for The Daily Yonder (a great resource for progressive rural news in the US)

LGBTI Families in Rural Thailand by Bruce Bonta

Thailand LGBT Outside of Bangkok reddit thread (grain of salt and all, but still interesting)

Books:

In a Queer Time and Place: Transgender Bodies, Subcultural Lives by Jack Halberstam

Reclaiming Two-Spirits: Sexuality, Spiritual Renewal & Sovereignty in Native America by Gregory D. Smithers

Visibility Interrupted: Rural Queer Life and the Politics of Unbecoming by Carly Thompsen

Another Country: Queer Anti-Urbanism by Scott Herring

Farm Boys: Lives of Gay Men from the Rural Midwest by Will Fellows

Men Like That: A Southern Queer History by John Howard

Lonely Hunters: An Oral History of Lesbian and Gay Southern Life, 1948-1968 by Jamie T. Sears

Queering the Countryside: New Frontiers in Rural Queer Studies, ed. Gray, Johnson, Gilley

Out in the Countryside: Youth, Media, and Queer Visibility in Rural America by Mary L. Gray

Real Queer America: LGBT Stories from Red States by Samantha Allen

Gay Faulkner: Uncovering a Homosexual Presence in Yoknapatawpha and Beyond by Phillip Gordon

[hagoftheholler]

Been thinking about closed practices today, and why many (white) people reject the concept. Aside from general entitlement and never being told "no" before, it's evident to me that many white people (especially white Americans, but still white people in general) never really grew up in an environment where they were taught there are rules and standards to religion/spirituality/magic. Or, they grew up in an Evangelical upbringing and were taught to reject everything that wasn't "Christian"... so they want something else (that they can't/shouldn't have).

The idea of there being rules, a social or spiritual hierarchy in anything related to magic/religion/spirituality is foreign. It scares people. So they attempt to find loopholes. Why go find a genuine priest(ess), rabbi, elder, granny or any other person in the position to give them answers and teach them when there are books written by white "shamans" "gurus" "voodoo priests" etc? It's not like those books are ever going to tell them lies, right? /sarcasm

Committing to a closed practice requires too much... well... commitment, for these people. The idea of reaching out to a person that can actually teach them, initiate them (if required), etc... The process of it all... Too much for them, somehow. And even if it's something that requires a little more than teaching and initiations, they still don't wanna hear it.

[moonsceptre]

Alchemy & Dreams in Beetlejuice Part 2

As mentioned in the last post, red represents Lydia: the material realm & sulphur. The item which falls next to Astrid's cracked photograph is a molecular structure with a red atom and a green atom. It's already common knowledge that Betelgeuse is green-coded, but I have further proof to support the atom theory.

Alchemists viewed the human body (microcosm) as a reflection of the universe (macrocosm). This suggested that atoms could give insights about human nature. Within this context, consider Rosenkreutz illustration of the Chymical Wedding, where the married couple are holding onto the structure. They're supposed to represent two atoms of the same trigonal planar molecule, because they are of the same element, thus sharing a chemical bond.

Alchemy consists of a mix of chemistry, philosophy, semiotics, and metaphysics, with much of the symbolism used to convey alchemical themes in Beetlejuice.

Before I come back to this, let's talk about...

Otho

Throughout the first movie, Otho is typically associated with black and red. He's often wearing black with either a red tie, red buttons, or red shoes (which mysteriously disappear in a couple scenes only to be replaced by different colour shoes).

Red shoes have long been used in media to represent a metaphorical journey (The Red Shoes (1948), Kiki's Delivery Service (1989), and Hans Christian Andersen's The Red Shoes are a few examples). Need I remind you of one of Tim Burton's favourite movies, The Wizard of Oz?

Otho is the only character other than Lydia who piques interest in the dead. Despite his willingness to exploit them, he is ready to believe in their existence and study the handbook. These visual cues are conveying the character's motives.

Part of the alchemical process are the stages "Rubedo" and "Nigredo". Rubedo is Latin for "redness", the stage of understanding where two opposites have joined and created harmony. Nigredo is Latin for "blackness", the stage of putrefaction or decomposition, thus symbolising the dead. In layman's terms, red and black represent the character's willingness to connect with the dead. The only other character really associated with black and red is Lydia, and that speaks for itself.

Otho is a character who inspired the creation of Rory in the second movie. Within Lydia's psyche, Rory has been manifested from guilt. In the first film, Lydia is almost complicit in helping Otho to exorcise the Maitlands after he makes it clear that he wants to capitalise on the dead. In the second film, Lydia is under Rory's management to capitalise on the dead, and she is trying to make peace with that guilt by trying to help people through exorcisms.

Guilt in dreams is often seen as a manifestation of the unconscious mind's attempt to communicate unresolved internal conflicts. This is where the shadow becomes a central concept in Jungian psychology, referring to the parts of the Self that the conscious mind rejects or ignores. Lydia rejects the traits that Otho and Rory embody, and that is why her reconciliation with Astrid is a manifestation of her own forgiveness.

More on The Chemical Wedding

We talked about the purpose of the Chemical Wedding before, but why is it so relevant to the plot of Beetlejuice? Other than the fact Betelgeuse has fallen in love with Lydia, there is an allegorical reason for why the wedding must take place between these two, and no one else but these two.

A Chemical Wedding is the marriage between the sun and the moon. In alchemical texts they are often depicted as the white queen and the red king, though this has nothing to do with literal gender roles, for we see Lydia herself portrayed as the red king in her parallel with Astrid. It is related to the Anima (the female self) and the Animus (the male self). This is also the marriage between mercury and sulfur, spirit and matter, the dead and the living.

One of the most famous works on the subject of a Chemical Wedding is a Rosicrucian allegory published in 1616 by Christian Rosenkreutz. It describes a mystical journey where the main character must attend a wedding at a mysterious castle. The journey is a symbol of the alchemical process, while the wedding itself represents the final transformative stage.

The story is filled with strange and dreamlike imagery, with many claiming it as a source of German dark romanticism.

Rosenkreuz's allegory actually represents inner transformation of the individual, with marriage being used as a metaphor, insofar as the masculine and feminine halves must be merged together in matrimony to achieve completion within oneself.

"Death and the Maiden" trope is a motif that depicts a woman being taken by Death, as he desires to marry her. It is dire for death to marry his living bride, for he wishes to venture the living world and the underworld with her.

Betelgeuse is the perfect complementary opposite to Lydia, each crafted to embody the other's symbolic missing half. Betelgeuse is the animus; he's loud, provocative, and dead; Lydia is the anima; she's quiet, thoughtful, and alive. The contrast is straightforward and uncomplicated. You could easily spend hours analysing their differences, and you'd still be right—because they are deliberately written as foils to one another.

Looking back at how Otho/Rory represents the shadow of Lydia, we should take into account who guided her through this dream sequence. Our psyche creates these thought-images in our unconscious minds as a means to roleplay scenarios where we have internal conflict. It gives us a chance to psychoanalyse ourselves and try to understand the core of our trauma.

Betelgeuse, within Lydia's dream, is acting as a guide (remember his guide outfit in the first film?). He's constantly appearing to her, influencing her and urging her to face her fears. While he's causing chaos in the way he knows best, he's also showing Lydia the bare truth, and this is especially apparent when it comes to Rory: he tells Lydia she's an enabling codependent and forces Rory to tell the truth about his intentions. Betelgeuse is what Jung would refer to as the Trickster archetype. The Trickster is often seen as a figure that disrupts the status quo and challenges the Ego through chaotic and karmic actions, serving as a profound guide in the process of one's personal development. Think of "Jester's privilege", or The Fool in tarot.

In mythological symbolism, there comes the legend of a scorpion that stung Orion to death (the giant red star "Betelgeuse" sits on Orion's belt). The scorpion was delivered as to snub Orion's pride and teach him a lesson by way of death, because the scorpion is a symbol of death and rebirth. This is the Trickster archetype again, teaching a lesson in a very karmic way. Betelgeuse does the same throughout both movies. Otho, the Deetz, and the Deans are all punished by him in the first film for acting as antagonists against the ghosts of Winter River. Despite this, he also acts as an antagonist himself by punishing the Maitlands, two loving parental figures for Lydia, for getting in the way of his plan to marry her.

"They therefore represent a supreme pair of opposites, not hopelessly divided by logical contradiction but, because of the mutual attraction between them, giving promise of union and actually making it possible. The coniunctio oppositorum engaged the speculations of the alchemists in the form of the ‘Chymical Wedding," — Carl Jung, Psychology & Alchemy

In alchemical tradition, Saturn is associated with the metal lead, which symbolises the starting point of the alchemical work—the Nigredo phase. Alchemy is mostly known as the quest to turn lead into gold, but the allegorical meaning is to refine the Self. Saturn is equated with Cronos in mythology, the father of time, who was portrayed as an old man with a scythe/sickle, similar to the grim reaper, who is associated with the end of one's time. Betelgeuse has time-warping powers and wears time-keeping devices on his wrist, all a microcosm for how we measure eternity.

The whole Alchemical Opus works through THREE stages:

Nigredo (Black Stage): Betelgeuse represents lead and Saturn. Putrefaction.

Albedo (White Stage): Before Lydia summons Betelgeuse and agrees to the marriage, he is wearing a black and white suit. White is added to the mix. Purification.

Rubedo (Red Stage): Lydia is manifested a red wedding dress to finish the ceremony. They completed the alchemical process. Lead is turned into Gold.

In the movie's original wedding scene, found here, at 9:11 on the clock the afterlife creature who marries Lydia and Betelgeuse dissipates into fire, and then the scene ends. 911 in numerology is the number of completion, and is used in occultism to symbolise new beginnings and rebirth.

For this reason, it has been theorised that the wedding vows went through, and the Chemical Wedding was completed.

[dragoneyes618]

"Islam was the second religion to emanate from Judaism, but as its founder was not a Jew and as it was not originally a Jewish sect, Islam's encounter with Judaism was significantly less bitter than Christianity's. As Salo Baron notes: "It was, therefore, from the beginning, a struggle between strangers, rather than an internecine strife among brethren." Largely because of this factor, Jews in the Islamic world were rarely persecuted as violently as their brethren in the Christian world. S. D. Goitein, perhaps the twentieth century's leading historian of Jewish life in the Arab world, concludes: "when the known facts are weighed, I believe it correct to say that as a whole the position of the non-Muslims [Christians and Jews under medieval Islamic rule] was far better than that of the Jews in medieval Christian Europe."

Goitein's assessment is valid, but it tells us much more about the Jews' condition under Christians than about their treatment by Muslims. For while the Jews of the Muslim world may have rarely experienced the tortures, pogroms, and expulsions that typified Jewish life under medieval Christian rule, their life under Islam was usually a life of degradation and insecurity. At the whim of a Muslim leader, a synagogue would be destroyed, Jewish orphans would be forcibly converted to Islam, or Jews would be forced to pay even more excessive taxes than usual.

Like Christianity's, Islam's anti-Judaism is deeply rooted. Islam too was born from the womb of Judaism; it too was rejected by the Jews whose validation was sought; and it too suffered an identity crisis vis-a-vis Judaism.

When Islam was born in the seventh century, there was a substantial Jewish population in Medina, where the first Muslim community arose. The Jews of pre-Islamic Arabia were active advocates of their religion, to such an extent that several kings of Himyar, now Yemen, converted to Judaism. Contemporary inscriptions described Dhu Nuwas As'ar, the last Jewish king of Himyar, as a believer in one deity whom the king called Rahman, the Merciful One, as called in Judaism and later in Islam.

During his early years, Muhammad related well to the Jews of Arabia, and their religious practices and ideas deeply influenced him. As Goitein noted: "The intrinsic values of the belief in one God, the creator of the world, the God of Justice and mercy, before whom everyone high and low bears responsibility came to Muhammad, as he never ceased to emphasized, from Israel."

The profound influence of the Jews, their Bible, and their laws on Muhammad is clearly expressed in the Koran, the Muslim bible, and in Muhammad's early religious legislation. Indeed, Muhammad saw himself as another Moses. In the Koran, he writes of his message (Sura 46, verse 12), "Before it the book of Moses was revealed....This Book confirms it. It is revealed in the Arabic tongue." Moses is a dominant figure on the Koran, in which he is mentioned over one hundred times.The Jewish doctrine that most deeply influenced Muhammad was monotheism: "There is no God but God." Muhammad's monotheism was so attuned to the uncompromising nature of Judaism's monotheism that though he had also been influenced by Christian teachers, he rejected the Christian trinity and the divinity of Jesus as not monotheistic: "Unbelievers are those that say, 'Allah is one of three.' There is but one God. If they do not desist from so saying, those of them that disbelieve shall be sternly punished" (5:71-73).

Jewish law also deeply influenced Muhammad. In the early days of Islam, Muslims prayed in the direction of the Jews' holy city, Jerusalem, and observed the most solemn Jewish holiday, Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. Only later, when Muhammad reluctantly concluded that the Jews would not embrace him as their prophet and convert to Islam, did he substitute Mecca for Jerusalem, and the fast of Ramadan for Yom Kippur. Similarly, Muhammad based Muslim dietary laws upon Judaism's laws of Kashrut: "You are forbidden carrion, blood, and the flesh of swine; also any flesh...of animals sacrificed to idols." The five daily prayers of Islam are likewise modeled on the three daily services of the Jews.

Second in importance only to his adoption of the Jews' God was Muhammad's adoption of the Jews' founding father, Abraham, as Islam's founder. In Sura 2, verse 125, Muhammad writes how Abraham and his son Ishmael converted the Kaaba, the holy rock of Arabian paganism, into the holy shrine of Islam.

Believing himself to be the final and greatest prophet of Mosaic monotheism, and having adopted so much of Jewish thought and practice, Muhammad appealed to the Jews of Arabia to recognize his role and to adopt Islam as the culmination of Judaism. "Even Luther," the late renowned philosopher Walter Kaufmann wrote, "expected the Jews to be converted by his version of Christianity, although he placed faith in Christ at the center of his teaching and firmly believed in the trinity. If even Luther...could expect that, how much more Muhammad, whose early revelations were so much closer to Judaism?" Muhammad's deep desire for Jewish recognition reflected the similar needs of Jesus and his followers. No group could validate Muhammad's religious claims as could the Jews, nor could any so seriously threaten to undermine them.

The Jews rejected Muhammad's claims as they had Jesus', holding in both cases that what was true in their messages was not new, and that what was new was not true. Islam may have served as a religious advance for Arabian pagans, but for the Jews it was merely another offshoot of Judaism.

One major factor that rendered Muhammad's prophetic claims untenable to Jews was his ignorance of the Bible. In large part because Muhammad never read the Bible, but only heard Bible stories, his references to the Jews' holy text were often erroneous. In Sura 28:38, for instance, he had Pharaoh (from Exodus) ask Haman (of the Book of Esther) to erect the Tower of Babel (which appears at the beginning of Genesis).

Another obstacle to Jewish acceptance of Muhammad was the moral quality of some of his teachings. They did not strike the Jews, or the Arabian Christians, as equaling, let alone superceding, the prophetic teachings of Judaism or Christianity. In 33:50, for example, Muhammad exempts himself from his own law limiting a man to four wives, and in 4:34 he instructs men to beat disobedient wives. Walter Kaufmann notes that "there is much more like this, especially in the 33rd Sura," and that "it must have struck the Jews as being a far cry from Amos and Jeremiah, and the Christians as rendering absurd the prophet's claim that he was superseding Jesus."

Finally, Muhammad's suspension of many Torah Laws invalidated him in the Jews' eyes.

For these and other reasons, the Jews rejected Muhammad's prophetic claims and refused to become Muslims. This alone infuriated Muhammad. But it was even more infuriating that the Jews publicly noted the errors in Muhammad's biblical teachings and may have even ridiculed his claims to prophecy. Goitein concludes, "it is only natural that Muhammad could not tolerate as a neighbor a large monotheistic community which categorically denied his claim as a prophet, and probably also ridiculed his inevitable blunders."

As a result Muhammad turned against the Jews and their religion, and never forgave them for not becoming his followers. And just as early Christian hostility to the Jews was canonized in the New Testament, so Muhammad's angry reactions to the Jews were recorded in the Koran. these writings gave Muslims throughout history a seemingly divinely-sanctioned antipathy to the Jews.

In the Koran, Muhammad attacked the Jews and attempted to invalidate Judaism in several ways. First, and most significantly, he changed Abraham from a Jew to a Muslim: "Abraham was neither Jew nor Christian. [He] surrendered himself to Allah....Surely the men who are nearest to Abraham are those who follow him, this Prophet" (3:67-68).

Second, he condemned the Jews and delegitimized their law by advancing a thesis similar to Paul's, that the many Torah laws had been given to the Jews as punishment for their sins: "Because of their iniquity we forbade the Jews good things which were formerly allowed them" (4:160).

Third, Muhammad charged the Jews with falsifying their Bible by deliberately omitting prophecies of his coming. For example, in the Koran (2:129), Muhammad has Abraham mouth a prophecy of his (Muhammad's) coming. Muhammad charged that the Jews "extinguish the light of Allah" (9:32) by having removed such prophecies from their Bible.

Fourth, Muhammad asserted that Jews, like Christians, were not true monotheists, a charge he substantiated by claiming that the Jews believed the prophet Ezra to be the Son of God. "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah...Allah fights against them. How perverse are they." (9:30).

These anti-Jewish fabrications, articulated by Muhammad as reactions to the Jews' rejection of him, have ever since been regarded by Muslims as God's word. Though originally directed against specific Jews of a specific time, these statements often have been understood by succeeding generations as referring to all Jews at all times, and thus form the basis of Islamic antisemitism.

One common example is 2:61: "And humiliation and wretchedness were stamped upon them and they were visited with wrath from Allah. That was because they disbelieved in Allah's revelations and slew the prophets wrongfully.j That was for their disobedience and transgression." This Koranic description of the Jews of seventh-century Arabia has often been cited by Muslims to describe Jews to this day. *

(* In a speech before his army officers on April 25, 1972, the late Egyptian President Anwar as-Sadat cited this Koranic verse, and then added: "The most splendid thing our prophet Muhammad, God's peace and blessing on him, did was to evict them [the Jews] from the entire Arabian peninsula...I pledge to you that we will celebrate on the next anniversary, God willing and on this place with God's help, not only the liberation of our land but also the defeat of the Israeli conceit and arrogance so that they must once again return to the condition decreed in our holy book: 'humiliation and wretchedness were stamped upon them'...We will not renounce this.")

Muhammad and the Koran thus laid the basis for subsequent antisemitism just as the early Christians had - and for basically the same reason: Jews remaining Jewish constituted a living refutation of Islamic beliefs. Thus, under Islam, just as under Christianity, Jew-hatred was ultimately Judaism-hatred. Any Jew who converted to Islam was accepted as an equal.

Christians under Muslim rule fared little better. Muslims and their laws generally dealt harshly with both Christians and Jews.

As long as Christian communities survived in the Muslim world, discriminatory legislation also applied to them as well. However, whereas Jewish communities often flourished as vibrant Jewish communities, Christian communities for the most part did not survive the intense Muslim hostility. Under the yoke of MUslim laws against Jews and Christians, hundreds of thousands of people in some of the oldest and strongest Christian communities in the world converted to Islam.

No fact better underscores the intensity of Muslim persecution of dhimmis (non-Muslim monotheists) than this disappearance of so many Christian communities under Islam. The fact that under similar conditions many Jewish communities flourished bears witness to the Jews' tenacious commitment to Judaism, not to Muslim benevolence toward them. This is often lost sight of when favorably comparing Muslim antisemitism with Christian antisemitism. Yet the conversion to Islam of nearly every pre-Islamic Christian community in the Muslim world (the Copts of Egypt constituting the most notable exception) eloquently testifies to what Jews had to endure in their long sojourn through the Muslim world.

The two guiding principles of Islam's treatment of Jews and Christians are that Islam dominates and is not dominated, and that Jews and Christians are to be subservient and degraded. Nonmonotheists were usually given the choice of conversion to Islam or death.

The Muslim legal code that prescribed the treatment of Jews and Christians, or dhimmis as they are both referred to in Islam, was the Pact of Umar, attributed to Muhammad's second successor, but assumed to date from about 720. Its key characteristic was the requirement that dhimmis always acknowledge their subservient position to Muslims. Jews and Christians had to pledge, for example, "We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it." The subservience that dhimmis were required to show publicly to Muslims is analogous to the behavior once expected of Blacks in the Jim Crow American South: "We shall show respect...and we shall rise from our seats when they [Muslims] wish to sit." They also had to pledge "not to mount saddles," since riding a horse, or, according to some Muslims, any animal, was considered incompatible with the low status of a dhimmi. The dhimmis also had to vow "We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims nor shall we raise our voices when following our dead."

Anti-dhimmi legislation did not end with the Pact of Umar. In the Koran, Muhammad had urged Muslims, "Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture...and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low" (9:29). Accordingly, Muslim officials often insisted that when paying tribute, dhimmis must be "brought low," that is, humiliated.

An early Muslim regulation precisely prescribed how to humiliate Jews and Christians when they pay tribute: "The dhimmi, Christian or Jew, goes on a fixed day in person to the emir, appointed to receive the poll tax, who occupies a high throne-like seat. The dhimmi stands before him, offering the poll tax on his open palm. The emir takes it so that his hand is on top and the dhimmi's underneath. Then the emir gives him a blow on the neck, and a guard, standing upright before the emir, drives him roughly away The same procedure is followed with the second, third, and the following taxpayers. The public is admitted to enjoy this show." The public was not merely "admitted" to this humiliating spectacle, but as Baron observes, "Public participation was, indeed, essential for the purpose of demonstrating, according to the Shafi'ite school, the political superiority of Islam."

In the course of time Muslim rulers developed additional ways to humiliate dhimmis. Baron describes one of them: "Equally vexatious was the tax receipt, which in accordance with an old Babylonian custom, was sometimes stamped upon the neck of the 'unbelieving' taxpayer. This ancient mark of slavery...expressly prohibited in the Talmud under the sanction of the slave's forcible emancipation, occasionally reappeared here as a degrading stamp of 'infidelity.'"

These humiliating and painful procedures had a terrible effect on the Jews: "An Arab poet rightly spoke of entering the door with bent heads 'as if we were Jews.'"

Another law designed to humiliate dhimmis required them to wear different clothing. The purposes of this law were to enable Muslims to recognize Jews and Christians at all times, and to make them appear foolish. In 807, the Abbasid Caliph Haroun al-Raschid, legislated that Jews must wear a yellow belt and a tall conical cap. This Muslim decree provided the model for the yellow badge associated with the degradation of Jews in Christian Europe and most recently imposed by the Nazis.

A Jew living in Baghdad in the days of Al-Muqtadir (1075-96) described additional measures passed by the vizier, Abu Shuja, to humiliate Jews: "each Jew had to have a stamp of lead...hang from his neck, on which the word dhimmi was inscribed. On women he likewise imposed two distinguishing marks: the shoes worn by each woman had to be one red and one black. She also had to carry on her neck or attached to her shoe a small brass bell...And the Gentiles used to ridicule Jews, the mob and children often assaulting Jews in all the streets of Baghdad.

During the same century in Egypt, the Fatimid Caliph Hakim ordered Christians to wear a cross with arms two feet long, while Jews were ordered to wear around their necks balls weighing five pounds, to commemorate the calf's head that their ancestors had once worshiped.

These clothing regulations were not only enforced in the Middle Ages. Until their departure from Yemen in 1948, all Jews, men and women alike, were compelled to dress like beggars.

 In fact, Yemen offers us a unique opportunity to understand Muslim attitudes toward the Jews. For it was the one Muslim country with a non-Muslim minority (Jews) that was never ruled by a European power. It was therefore able to treat its Jews in the "purest" Muslim manner, uninfluenced by non-Muslim domination.

In 1679, Jews in most of Yemen were expelled from their cities and villages. When allowed to come back a year later, they were not allowed to return to their homes, but were forced to settle in Jewish settlements outside of the cities. During their expulsion the synagogue of San'a, the capital, was converted into a mosque, which still exists under the name Masjid al-Jala (the Mosque of the Expulsion).

Among the many indignities to which the Jews of Yemen were constantly subjected was the throwing of stones at them by Muslim children, a practice that was religiously sanctioned. When Turkish officials (the Turks occupied Yemen in 1872) asked an assembly of Muslim leaders to see that this practice be stopped, an elderly Muslim scholar responded that throwing rocks at Jews was an Ada, an old religious custom, and thus it was unlawful to forbid it.

The greatest recurrent suffering that Yemenite Jews experienced was th e forced conversion to Islam of Jewish children whose fathers had died. This was practiced until the Jews fled Yemen in 1948, and was also based upon Islamic doctrine. Muhammad was believed to have said, "Everyone is born in a state of natural religion [Islam]. It is only his parents who make a Jew or Christian out of him." Accordingly, a person should grow up in the "natural religion" of Islam.

When a Jewish father died, there was often a "race" between Jewish communal leaders who sought to place the man's children with Jewish parents and the Muslim authorities who wanted to convert the children to Islam and place them in Muslim homes (in the Yemenite Islamic culture it would appear that the surviving mother was regarded as irrelevant). The Jews often lost. Goitein reports that "many families arrived in Israel with one or more of their children lost to them, and I have heard of some widows who have been bereaved in this way of all their offspring."

Yet as persecuted as the Yemenite Jews were, they were also denied the right to leave the country.

By the nineteenth century, the Jews' situation under Islam went from degradation to being recurrent victims of violence - as these examples from Jewish life in Egypt, Syria, and Palestine illustrate.

Egypt

In his authoritative book, An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyyptisns, Edward Lane wrote that, at the time of his study (1833-35), the Jews were living "under a less oppressive government in Egypt than in any other country of the Turkish Empire." He added, however, that the Jews "are held in the utmost contempt and abhorrence by the Muslims in general." Lane explained: "Not long ago, they used often to be jostled in the streets of Cairo, and sometimes beaten merely for passing on the right hand of a Muslim. At present, they are less oppressed; but still they scarcely ever dare to utter a word of abuse when reviled or beaten unjustly by the meanest Arab or Turk; for many a Jew has been put to death upon a false and malicious accusation of uttering idsrespectful words against the Kuran (sic] or the Prophet. It is common to hear an Arab abuse his jaded ass, and after applying to him various opprobrious epithets, end by calling the beast a Jew.

That this was the Jewish situation in Egypt, "a less oppressive government" than elsewhere in the Muslim Arab world, tells us a great deal about Muslim antisemitism in the nineteenth century - prior to the Zionist movement.

Syria

In 1840, some French Catholics introduced the blood libel into the Arab world. After a Capuchin monk in Damascus vanished, Ratti-Mention, the local French consul, told police authorities that the Jews probably had murdered him to procure his blood for a religious ritual. Several Damascus Jews were then arrested, and under torture, oneo f them "confessed" that leaders of the Jewish community had planned the monk's murder. Many other Jews were then arrested, and under torture more such confessions were obtained. French officials pressured Syria'sruler, Muhammad Ali, to try the arrested men, and it was only after an international protest organized by Jewish communities throughout the world that the Jews who survived their tortures were released.

The blood libel immediately became popular among Muslims, who attacked Jews as drinkers of Muslim blood in Aleppo, Syria, in 1853, Damascus again, in 1848 and 1890, Cairo in 1844 and 1901-2, and Alexandria in 1870 and 1881.

The blood libel played a decisive role in unsettling the lives of nineteenth-century Syrian Jews, and since then it has been repeatedly utilized in Arab anti-Jewish writings.

Palestine

Jews have lived continuously as a community in Palestine since approximately 1200 BCE. The only independent states ever to exist in Palestine have been Jewish. After the destruction of the second Jewish state in 70 CE and the suppression of the Bar Kochba revolt in 135 CE, Jews always maintained a presence in Palestine, awaiting the reestablishment of the Jewish state. But these Jews often had to live under degrading conditions.

In nineteenth-century Palestine, which was under Ottoman Muslim rule, Jews had to walk past Muslims on their left, as the left is identified with Satan, and they always had to yield the right of way to a Muslim, by "stepping into the street and letting him pass." Failure to abide by these degrading customs often provoked a violent response.

In Palestine as elsewhere, Jews had to avoid anything that could remind Arabs of Judaism; therefore, synagogues could be located only in hidden, remote areas, and Jews could pray only in muted voices. In addition, despite the widespread poverty among Palestinian Jews, they had to pay a host of special protection taxes (in actuality, a form of extortion). For example, Jews paid one hundred pounds a year to the Muslim villagers of Siloam (just outside Jerusalem) not to disturb the graves at the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, and fifty pounds a year to the Ta'amra Arabs not to deface the Tomb of Rachel on the road to Bethlehem. They also had to pay ten pounds annually to Sheik Abu Gosh to to molest Jewish travelers on the road to Jerusalem, even though the Turkish authorities were already paying him to maintain order on that road.

These anti-Jewish laws, taxes, and practices had a rather intimidating effect on the Jews. The British consul James Finn, who lived in Jerusalem in the 1850s, described in his book Stirring Times how "Arab merchants would dump their unsold wares on their Jewish neighbors and bill them, safe in the knowledge that the Jews so feared them that they would not dare return the items or deny their purchase."

Muslim antisemitism continued to be brutally expressed through the twentieth century. Albert Memmi, the noted French-Jewish novelist, who grew up in North Africa, cites a few examples:

"In Morocco in 1907, a huge massacre of Jews took place in Casablanca, along with the usual embellishments - rape, women carried away into the mountains, hundreds of homes and shops burned, etc....In 1912 a big massacre in Fez...In Algeria in 1934, massacre in Constantine, twenty-four people killed, dozens and dozens of others seriously wounded....In Aden in 1946...over one hundred people dead and seventy-six wounded, and two-thirds of the stores sacked and burned....In June, 1941, in Iraq, six hundred people killed, one thousand seriously wounded, looting, rapes, arson, one thousand houses destroyed, six hundred stores looted....[In Libya]: November 4th and 5th, 1945, massacre in Tripoli; November 6th and 7th in Zanzour, Zaouia, Foussaber, Ziltain, etc: girls and women raped in front of their families, the stomachs of pregnant women slashed open, the infants ripped out of them, children smashed with crowbars....All this can be found in the newspapers of the time, including the local Arab papers."

Memmi summarizes the Jewish status under Islam in the twentieth century: "Roughly speaking and in the best of cases, the Jew is protected like a dog which is part of man's property, but if he raises his head or acts like a man, then he must be beaten so that he will always remember his status."

It is the Jews' refusal to accept an unequal, inferior status that lies at the heart of the Arab-Muslim hatred for Israel. (It is this, not the Palestinian refugee issue, that has been the basis of Muslim antisemitism. Without minimizing the personal difficulties of the Palestinians, as Memmi notes [on page 35 of his book Jews and Arabs]: "The Palestinian Arabs' misfortune is having been moved about thirty miles within one vast Arab nation.") As Yehoshafat Harkabi, a leading scholar of the Arab world's attitude toward Israel, put it: "The existence of the Jews was not a provocation to Islam...as long as Jews were subordinate or degraded. But a Jewish state is incompatible with the view of Jews as humiliated or wretched." The call for a Palestinian Arab state in place of Israel is for a state in which once again 'Islam dominates and is not dominated."

This hatred of Jewish nationalism was so intense that during World War II, most Arab leaders were pro-Nazi. Among them was the head of the Muslims in Palestine, the mufti Haj Amin el-Husseini (who in 1929 had helped organize the large-scale murders of the ultra-Orthodox, non-Zionist Jews of Hebron).

An ardent supporter of Hitler, the mufti spent much of the war in Nazi Germany; on November 2, 1943, at a time when the Nazis were murdering thousands of Jews daily, the mufti declared in a speech: "The overwhelming egoism which lies in the character of Jews, their unworthy belief that they are God's chosen nation and their assertion that all was created for them and that other peoples are animals...[makes them] in capable of being trusted. They cannot mix with any other nation but live as parasites among the nations, suck out their blood, embezzle their property, corrupt their morals....The divine anger and curse that the Holy Koran mentions with reference to the Jews is because of this unique character of the Jews."

Though many Arab nations formally declared war against Germany in 1945, when German defeat was imminent, in order to be eligible for entry into the United Nations, extensive Arab sympathy with the Nazis continued even after Germany's surrender. The Egyptians and Syrians long welcomed Nazis to their countries, offering them the opportunity to further implement the "Final Solution," by assisting in their efforts to destroy Israel and wipe out the Jewish community living there.

Among many Arabs the Holocaust has come to be regarded with nostalgia. On August 17, 1956, the French newspaper Le Mongde quoted the government-controlled Damascus daily Al-Manar as observing, "One should not forget that, in contrast to Europe, Hitler occupied an honored place in the Arab world....[Journalists} are mistaken if they think that by calling Nasser Hitler, they are hurting us. On the contrary, his name makes us proud. Long live Hitler, the Nazi who struck at the heart of our enemies. Long live the Hitler [i.e., Nasser] of the Arab world."

On June 9, 1960, after Israeli agents captured Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi official who had supervised the murder of six million Jews, the Beirut daily Al-Anwar carried a cartoon depicting Eichmann speaking with Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. Said Ben-Gurion: "You deserve the death penalty because you killed six million Jews." Responded Eichmann: "There are many who say I deserve the death penalty because I didn't manage to kill the rest."

On April 24, 1961, the Jordanian English-language daily Jerusalem Times published an "Open Letter to Eichmann," which concluded, "But be brave, Eichmann, find solace in the fact that this trial will one day culminate in the liquidation of the remaining six million to avenge your blood." At the UN sponsored "Conference Against Racism" in September 2001, an Arab pamphlet displayed at the Durban Exhibition Center featured a picture of Adolf Hitler with the caption, "If I had won the war there would be no...Palestinian blood lost."

Arab Jew-hatred also has brought about the resurrection of the blood libel. In 1962, the Egyptian Ministry of Education reissued Talmudic Sacrifices by Habib Faris, a book originally published in Cairo in 1890. The editor notes in his introduction that the book constitutes "an explicit documentation of indictment, based upon clear-cut evidence that the Jewish people permitted the shedding of blood as a religious duty enjoined in the Talmud."

On April 24, 1970, Fatah radio, under the leadership of Yasir Arafat, broadcast, "Reports from the captured homeland tell that the Zionist enemy has begun to kidnap small children from the streets. Afterwards the occupying forces take the blood of the children and throw away their empty bodies. The inhabitants of Gaza have seen this with their own eyes."

Even more disturbing, the blood libel accusations have been made by the most prominent figures within the Arab world. In November 1973, the late King Faisal of Saudi Arabia said that it was necessary to understand the Jewish religious obligation to obtain non-Jewish blood in order to comprehend the crimes of Zionism. A decade later, in 1984, the Saudi Arabian delegate to the UN Human Rights Commission Conference on religious tolerance, Marouf al-Dawalibi, told the commission, "The Talmud says that if a Jew does not drink every year the blood of a non-Jewish man, he will be damned for eternity." In The Matzah of Zion, a book that has remained in print since its publication in 1983, Mustafa Tlas, the Syrian Defense Minister since 1972, wrote, "The Jew can kill you and take your blood in order to make his Zionist bread." A 2000 article about Tlas's book in Al-Ahram, Egypt's largest, and government-controlled, newspaper, reported, "The Bestial drive to knead Passover matzahs with the blood of non-Jews is [confirmed] in the records of the Palestinian police where there are many recorded cases of the bodies of Arab children who had disappeared without being found, torn to pieces, without a single drop of blood. The most reasonable explanation is that the blood was taken to be used in matzahs to be devoured during Passover." As one American journalist commented: "If this is 'the most reasonable explanation," can you imagine an unreasonable one?" The Al-Ahram article went on to report that an Egyptian movie company is planning to shoot a multimillion dollar film version of The Matzah of Zion, which will retell, as truth, the story of the Damascus blood libel.

And still the blood libel goes on. A 2001 cartoon in the Jordanian newspaper Al-Dustour depicts an Israeli soldier presenting his mother with a Mother's Day gift of a bottle containing the blood of a Palestinian child. At about the same time (November 2001), Abu Dhabi Television depicted a caricature of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon preparing to drink a cup of blood taken from a Palestinian. A March 10, 2002, article in Saudi Arabia's Al-Riyadh, the government-controlled newspaper, by Dr. Umayma Ahmad Al-Jalahma of King Faisal University, creates a new twist to this ancient libel, claiming that Jews use blood for Purim pastry and not just for Passover matzo: "Let us now examine how the victims' blood is spilled. For this, a needle-studded barrel is used; this is a kind of barrel, about the size of the human body, with extremely sharp needles set in it on all sides. [These needles] pierce the victim's body, from the moment he is placed in the barrel. These needles do the job, and the victim's blood drips from him very slowly. Thus, the victim suffers dreadful torment - torment that affords the Jewish vampires great delight as they carefully monitor every detail of the blood-shedding with pleasure and love that are difficult to comprehend."

Arab Muslims have also reached back to classical themes of Islamic antisemitism to attack the Jews and Israel. Many Arab speakers and publications echo Muhammad's charge in the Koran (5:82) that the Jews are the greatest enemies of humankind. For example, an Egyptian textbook, published in 1966 for use in teachers' seminars, taught that Jews (not only Israelis) are the "monsters of mankind [and] a nation of beasts."

Perhaps the favorite antisemitic publication in the Arab world for over fifty years has been The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.. In an interview with the editor of the Indian magazine Blitz, on October 4, 1958, President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt praised the Protocols: "I wonder if you have read a book called 'Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.' It is very important that you should read it. I will give you an English copy. It proves clearly, to quote from the Protocols, that 'three hundred Zionists, each of whom knows all the others, govern the fate of the European continents and they elect their successors from their entourage."

The late King Faisal of Saudi Arabia gave copies of the Protocols to the guests of his regime. When he presented the Protocols, along with an anthology of antisemitic writings, to French journalists who accompanied French Foreign Minister Michel Jobert on his visit to Saudi Arabia in January 1974, "Saudi officials noted that these were the king's favorite books."

Article 32 of the 1988 Palestinian Hamas (the Islamic Resistance Movement) Covenant claims that the Zionist "scheme" foe takeover of the Arab world "has been laid out in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and their present [conduct] is the best proof of what is said there." Hamas literature repeatedly accuses Jews of controlling the world's wealth and its most important media, and using them to promote Jewish and Zionist interests, even of having established the League of Nations in the 1920s "in order to rule the world."

Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, the official newspaper of the Palestinian Authority (and therefore supposedly less extreme than Hamas), regularly contains references to the Protocols. Thus, even during the height of the Oslo peace process the paper published the following: "It is important to conduct the conflict according to the foundations which both are leaning on...particularly the Jews...such as the Torah, the Talmud, and the Protocols...This conflict resembles the conflict between men and Satan." At about the same time in Egypt, Al-Ahram, the country's largest newspaper, reported, "A compilation of the investigative' work of four reporters on Jewish control of the world states that Jews have become the political decision-makers and control the media in most capitals of the world (Washington, Paris, London, Berlin, Athens, Ankara)." As the journalist Andrew Sullivan comments, "It is worth noting that every word Al Ahram prints is vetted and approved by the Egyptian government, a regime to which the United States - i.e., you and I - contributed $2 billion a year."

It is perhaps no surprise that, as of 2002, over sixty editions of the Protocols are being sold throughout the Arab world, and this libelous "warrant for genocide" is probably more widely distributed today than at any other time in its history. In 2002, the New York Times, in a front-page story, reported that a major Egyptian television station was about  to launch a forty-one-episode TV series based on the Protocols (complete with Jewish villains dressed in black hats, side curls, and beards) to run before and during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

The Islamic world today has combined antisemitic motifs from Nazism and medieval Christendom, as well as from its own tradition. This potent combination has made the Arabs the major source of antisemitic publications in the world today. And as in other forms of antisemitism, in the words of Yehoshafat Harkabi, "the evil in the Jews is ascribed not to race or blood, but to their spiritual character and religion." Thus, when Pakistani Islamic terrorists kidnapped Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in January 2002, they forced Pearl to say, "I am a Jew," (and videotaped him doing so) before slitting his throat.

Only through an understanding of the deep theological roots of Muslim antisemitism and an awareness of its continuous history can present-day Muslim hatred of Israel be understood. Only then does one recognize how false are the claims of Israel's enemies that prior to Zionism, Jews and Muslims lived in harmony and that neither Islam nor Muslims have ever harbored Jew-hatred. The creation of the Jewish state in no way created Muslim Jew-hatred; it merely intensified it and gave it a new focus.

So long as the Jews acknowledged their inferior status among Muslims, they were humiliated but allowed to exist. But once the Jews decided to reject their inferior status, to become sovereign after centuries of servitude, and worst of all, to now govern some Muslims in a land where the Jews had so long been governed, their existence was no longer tolerable. Hence the passionate Arab Muslim hatred of Israel and Zionism, a hatred that entirely transcends political antagonisms. Hence the widespread Muslim call not merely for a military defeat of Israel, but for its annihilation.

As so often in Jewish history, it is the Jewish nation's existence that arouses hatred and needs to be ended. Despite peace treaties between Israel and Egypt (1979) and Jordan (1994), for most Muslims the source of their hatred remains the Jewish sate's existence, not its policies, nor even its borders.

The Muslim and Arab claim that the issue is anti-Zionism rather than antisemitism really means that so long as the Jews adhere to their dhimmi status in Arab Muslim nations, their existence as individuals is acceptable. But for a Jew to aspire to equality among Muslims, for a Jew to aspire to a status higher than "humiliation and wretchedness," is to aspire too high."

- Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism, Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin, chapter nine

[pissmoon]

3 types of tumblr christians:

- picrew icon with 20 ships listed in their bio talking about how jesus was a relatable queer bean in some youth pastor manner

- qanon traddie/libertarian instagram reels comment section reject from bumfucksville ohio who converted to orthodox christianity/catholicism because wojacks told him to

- dasha wannabe lana stan pro ana girlies whose entire identity is 'problematic tumblrna' and are like 'christianity is so countercultural' (possibly pickmes for type no 2 but wont admit it)

[skaldish]

People who say Loki isn't real because there's no evidence he was worshiped are really annoying. How do I rebuttal?

By understanding this is not a proper argument to begin with.

This argument in its entirety typically goes something like this:

Loki isn't a god because he wasn't worshipped in ancient times. If he was, he would have had locations named after him (place-names), people carrying his namesake, and the presence of a cult following. Since Loki wasn't a god in pre-Christian Norse society, it would be inappropriate to consider him one now.

The origins of this argument are Asatru Folk Assembly. The full argument made by Stephen McNallen goes like this:

There was no devotion given to Loki in ancient times. No place-names marked ritual sites for him; no human bore names related to him; there were no priests or priestesses of Loki. Some modern practitioners of Asatru have apparently considered this an oversight, and one occasionally hears toasts to Loki at Asatru gatherings today. However, I strongly discourage this in the Asatru Folk assembly, and I do not permit horns to be raised to him in my presence. My experience is that Loki-toasts are followed by discord all-around bad luck.

Believe it or not, this is not a valid argument.

Logical argumentation is a kind of math, and an argument will always be invalid if it follows an invalid formula, no matter how true its predicates are.

Here's an example:

Some people are pagans, and some pagans are white nationalists. Therefore, some people are white nationalists.

This is an invalid argument because it follows an invalid formula. We can see this by reframing it:

Some people are herbivores, and some herbivores are deer. Therefore, some people are deer.

The "Loki wasn't worshipped" argument is riddled with these kinds of flaws, and not just ones that follow this particular formula. There's also issues of rocky facts, unfair standards, and general argumentative fallacies:

Heimdallr also doesn't have place-names, and is considered a god.

The absence of developed, structured cultus is not the litmus test of "worship" within the context of Old Norse religions.

The argument is predicated on the idea that the Old Norse people conceptualized "gods" the same way that the Greeks and the Romans did, in that this term applies only to high beings with widespread followings.

Same applies to how the Old Norse people conceptualized "worship." We have no idea how they defined it.

The argument's evidence does not consider all possible data, i.e. attestations found in extant Scandinavian oral traditions.

I can go on, but basically the argument is predicated on assuming the Old Norse people did polytheism according to what we think polytheism should look like.

But honestly? All of this actually doesn't matter, because the ultimate goal of this argument isn't to win the debate of whether Loki's a god or not.

It's to get people to associate "Loki's followers" with "degenerate behavior."

By painting Loki-worship as both factually incorrect AND superstitiously unlucky, it implies that anyone worshipping Loki is not right in the head somehow; that the can't think or reason correctly.

Many of Loki's followers correlate with the political and social Left. They're often queer/gnc and/or neurodivergent, and support socialist policies and rejection tradition. If worshiping Loki is deemed irrational and dangerous, then it stands to reason that these things are also irrational and dangerous, and therefore all of this must be a sign of degeneracy. Or so the argument would suggest.

The fallacies in the argument are there by design, because that is how cryptofascist writers radicalize reasonable people.

The best way you refute these arguments is to deny them a platform. Delete them from your inbox. That doesn't mean you have to ignore them though. You can always speak up about them on your own time. Personally, I try to make sure that whatever it is I bring up about them will be useful to the community at large, as opposed to being an angry hate-letter to those provoking conflict. (It's a philosophy I use regardless of what the motivations of an issue are, simply because devoting my attention to the community makes for a better online experience and is ultimately more effective in the long-run.)

[sky-scribbles]

I did Taash’s second personal quest today. And every single gender-related aspect felt right. I cried in real time as Taash talked about feeling how their mother had limited their ideas of what they could be. But then when Taash needed advice on handling their gender journey, the dialogue option came up to tell them to ‘embrace Qunari culture’ or ‘embrace Rivaini culture,’ and… what the hell?

It's not just the obvious. Taash clearly should not have to choose between two aspects of their heritage and identity. That is ridiculous. But what really, really gets to me is that to ask Taash what they want when it comes to their gender, I had to encourage them to ‘choose’ being Rivaini over being Qunari.

Here’s the thing. I’m a queer author who’s spent the last year and a half talking to queer people about their experiences (specifically in the aspec community, but these issues are by no means limited to ace and aro folks). And so many queer people of colour, and those from non-Christian religions, have told me the message they keep getting from white, culturally Christian queers is 'If you're not being accepted, just leave your religion/country/community/etc so you can be yourself!' As if their heritage is something that stops them from being themself, rather than being a part of them.

And I see the shadow of this in that dialogue wheel. This suggestion that Taash embracing their nonbinary identity means that they have to reject their Qunari identity. If they want to be out and proud and queer, they have to pull away from a part of the heritage that made them. It's especially uncomfortable to me considering that Bioware have explicitly referred to the Qunari as being Muslim-coded.

Portraying a character with mixed heritage as needing to choose or favour one or the other is bad enough. But that 'choice' should definitely not be conflated with them being able to embrace their queerness. Because that is fucked. Up.

[wateroflifefrommountains]

Cassandra Cain: Character Thought Experiment

What if the mandate by Dan D never happened? What if writers were allowed to keep writing stories about Cassandra? What if her run was not cut short? Evidently, there would be a broader exploration of the character and her relevance would not have waned due to absence and editorial mandate. There is an argument that a heel turn would still have happened as Cass is shown to have "limits" to her code. (I.e: There was a chapter in her original run where she mentally killed the Joker after being presented with a scenario where the Joker killed Batman.) Moreover, Cass, has also shown disdain for societal oppression but was ill-equipped to handle or solve said problems aside from the usual fisticuff heroics. At the very least, stories about her struggling with the decision would have been interesting. It can even raise the dilemma in the no-killing rule by raising the "Not killing does not mean not evil" argument. On the other hand, there is also the risk of Flanderization. Despite their best efforts, a well-intentioned writer may still over-simplify the character by focusing on her most prominent traits or by focusing on traits they gravitate to. It is possible for the iteration of the character in this scenario to be similar to the overly cutesy sanitized version held by notable groups in the fandom. Another possibility is evolution. The growth of the character may have become permanent. If Simone's plan to explore her relation to religion became a reality, there could have been an overtly Christian version of the character or even one that gave up crime-fighting all together. In this scenario, it could have been a natural progression or a shocking but earned decision. On the flip side, there could also be grave mischaracterization in the same way Robin: OYL turned her into a villain. It would have still been jarring and it would have still been rejected by the fandom. In all these cases, it would not have been because someone made a decision that character was not sustainable with complete disregard for the fans and the sales. For something to happen by the whims of fate or the faults of those who acted in good faith is simply life, but for it to happen due to the machinations of a puppeteer... is a tragedy (or a crime).

[aliusfrater]

it's kind of crazy insane that supernatural's narrative kind of plays off of their audience's own belief in judeo-christian lore when it comes to the rejection of sam's actions in (early) season four. because at this point, we don't know that the angels are constantly manipulating both their own as well as and more importantly sam and dean. as far as sam knows, killing lilith is the perfect play of revenge (and becomes what he perceives to be the ultimate card when it comes to preventing the apocalypse). the only issue dean has with that is the fact that sam didn't tell dean that he was doing this (he doesn't know about the demon blood but later, it becomes the focus of why he has an issue with the way that sam's doing it and the only risk in relation to that is sam destroying his body and mind with addiction). but when dean wants sam to stop, he pulls on sam's own belief in god and angels and, by proxy, pulls of the strings of the audience's own belief in their (god and angels) inherent goodness. you kind of already have to believe in their inherent goodness for dean's jab in 4.04 to make any sense; he himself doesn't even believe in god and he thinks of angels as just as much of a monster as everything else he's hunted (the only difference being he's not entirely sure how to kill them yet). what he says has no personal substance but he knows sam prays and he knows sam will feel hurt hearing that

[transmutationisms]

In what way are phrenological principles still foundational to research psychology & neurology, and science in general? Asking out of ignorance and wanting to know more.

so, phrenology throughout the 19th century was a broad program of research principles, self-help advice, and social-hygienic prognostication. we tend to think of it now as being reducible to a craniometric chart and a crank trying to divine personality traits from a person's skull shape—this did happen, but phrenology encompassed much more than that. it was a driving force in the increasing acceptance of ideas like brain localisation (that the brain did not act as one, but had distinct parts that could behave differently and independently to one another), the related position that human psychology and personalities could be classified / taxonomised / measured (like, 'attention' as being a faculty distinct from 'judgment' or 'reason' or so forth), and the belief that organic derangements of the brain accounted for a person's individual social / economic / intellectual success, as well as social phenomena like crime, delinquency, or addiction.

by about the 1890s, the word "phrenology" had become more or less dismissed in mainstream french and british scientific circles, and it was portrayed as a pseudoscientific perversion of respectable craniometry / anthropometry. this happened for many reasons, including that british and french medicine were professionalising over the course of the 19th century and that phrenological practitioners were often unlicensed and operating more in a marginal self-help space (akin to many of today's astrologers) than in institutionally sanctioned scientific circles. additionally, after world war ii, phrenology's association with eugenics made it even more unpalatable; it was now seen to be politically dangerous even to those who had previously endorsed eugenics. the same happened to many other theories and disciplines of social-hygienic or degeneration-theory ideas.

however, the rejection of phrenology that began in the late 19th century and intensified in the late 20th has been largely superficial, and 'modern' science has never really grappled with the phrenological roots of so much neuro-deterministic and anthropomentric thinking, from psychiatry to a great deal of moralistic public health to the incredibly deeply entrenched, yet blatantly prejudicial in every way, idea that a person's appearance is indicative of their character or morality. fundamentally phrenology was a major driver in the acceptance (in many different fields) of scientific 'naturalism', a general rejection of prior christian teleological thinking and search for universally deterministic scientific laws instead. rendering mental action into the category of 'natural thing governed by natural laws' was foundational, for example, to darwin's conception of evolution and his effort to distinguish his own theory from the teleological evolutionary theory of robert chambers.

none of this is to say that scientific naturalism ought to be inherently rejected, or replaced with christian metaphysics; however, failing to grapple with the fuller legacy of phrenology, and eugenics more generally, because we don't want to upset what philosophical boundaries we think we've erected between religion and 'modern' science allows such eugenic thinking to retain its centrality in current scientific practice.

it is also always worth emphasising that phrenology, like a lot of scientific theories of self-improvement, has frequently been employed as a vehicle of liberal ideology, particularly in britain. although phrenological practitioners have at various times tried to ally themselves with a superficially radical sort of 'common man's' rejection of the élite scientific institutions, phrenology has at the same time followed a general trajectory whereby it emphasises more and more an idea of personal responsibility for one's own neuro-biological traits and associated character flaws. this is often seen as more palatable than outright hereditarian thinking because, rather than tacitly endorsing the expurgation of the biologically 'unfit', the liberal phrenologist affirms that people simply need to overcome, tame, or temper their own neurobiological defects in order to live productive, socially desirable lives. cf. 'negative' versus 'positive' eugenics.

if you're interested in this i would recommend roger cooter's 'the cultural meaning of popular science: phrenology and the organisation of consent in 19th-century britain' (1984) and philip rehbock's 'the philosophical naturalists: themes in early 19th-century british biology' (1983). cooter was an avowed marxist and his account of phrenology, science, and their relationships to industrial capitalism—while not flawless—is markedly different from any other prior literature on the topic. rehbock's book is less politically daring and less focussed on phrenology specifically, but clarifies some aspects of scientific naturalism and what is meant by distinguishing a 'modern' scientific episteme from earlier practices and principles.