#above racism

[aimfor-theheart]

Why is it that dc such as r@pe, sa, and incest is totally okay to write about and romanticize but y’all draw the line at racism, fat phobia, and homophobia *talking about the writings creators make, not personal beliefs*? Whats the difference between these things? All of them are hurtful and affect people in real life, so why is everybody on here choosing and picking one and not the other? Do writers on here think that they are not comparable or that one is okay to romanticize and the other is going way too far?

Im just genuinely curious as I have seen this topic be brought up again and again, which has made me realize this and Id like to see it from someone else's pov.

hi! there is a lot to answer and unpack here and i have every intention of doing so underneath the cut. forgive me if this gets long, but you’ve asked me 4 very massive questions that i think warrant detail, nuance, and thought. there is a lot i’d like to say here.

that being said, mind the content warnings and protect yourself.

cw: mentions of rape, incest, racism, homophobia, fat phobia, discourse in general

firstly, i am going to choose to give you the benefit of the doubt in assuming you are actually curious in hearing another side and you are not simply looking to stir a pot or pick a fight with beliefs you have no intention of changing or having an open discussion on. your accusatory tone in the first half indicates otherwise and kindly, i am not an idiot. but i want to earnestly talk to you about this and again, will think better of you than you perhaps have indicated you think of me.

secondly, you do not have to censor words like rape in my inbox. that sort of censorship has become wildly popular because of tik tok and other money-hungry social media that also desperately want to silence people. do you know why you have to censor words like that on tik tok? or words like genocide? suicide? racism? 1. so that they can make money and market and push their squeaky clean algorithms but 2. and perhaps worse, so they can silence victims. if social media platforms and capitalism and the systems of powers had it their way, you would never utter these words again—whether to call someone out for justice or to have an open discussion like this one. i encourage you greatly to think critically about this and how you choose to use censorship and why.

now, to your questions.

to preface, i am interpreting this ask as being anti-dark content in fiction as you state that ALL these subjects harm people in real life. or at least, you are being critical of all dark content in fiction and the way writers engage with them, effectively ‘picking and choosing’ which are deemed acceptable and which aren’t, when they are all hurtful. i apologize if that wasn’t your intention/what you believe, but regardless, i’ll endeavor to answer you.

i personally have drawn no lines about dark content nor spoken about any of these topics specifically really, which indicates to me you have a different narrative and/or are coming from more inflammatory arguments that are always circling fandom lately. in the post i most recently reblogged, i spoke mostly of violence. which, of course, all of those things can be. but i didn’t name one of those topics in particular.

regardless, i don’t believe in the censorship of any dark content in art, but rather advocate strongly for critical analysis on a case-by-case basis. in general, i encourage thinking critically about every aspect of the world around you.

i do not believe that rape, incest, and sa are okay to write about or create art about but racism, homophobia, and fat phobia are not. i believe all of those topics are ones that can, should, and will be explored in the safety of art. all to varying degrees of success, earnestness, impact, and intent. you’re right that these are real things, that can hurt people, and the fictional work about them can have impact on our society that is tangible but the actual art or fiction created is not real. and again, this is all to varying degrees on a case-by-case basis.

art and fiction also historically and massively do discuss these dark content topics and have actively swayed the public’s opinion on matters, whether for better or for worse. throwing away all dark content in art and fiction because it is ‘harmful’ is deeply, deeply dangerous and reductive. a lot of art that engages with dark content actually makes very succinct points about it—i think of vladimir nabokov’s lolita or octavia butler’s bloodchild or speak by laurie halse anderson.

this is where we must exorcise critical thinking. some pieces of work will handle dark content poorly—white saviors making art on racism. men making art about a woman’s experiences that (as you are so interested in) romanticize her pain. etc. etc. and some art will handle it’s dark content incredibly and be transformative, perhaps even revolutionary in how we talk, perceive, or acknowledge systems of oppression, violence, and dark content in this world. some dark content in fiction will have damaging beliefs and effects on society, some will not—we must also look at scope for this, at the writer perhaps, the historical moment, their audience etc.

(for example, there is a significant difference in a main stream male writer, writing of a woman’s experience with rape in a published book in a way that makes it sound romanticized, sold to thousands and thousands of general public vs. a woman using fanfic to explore rape, take control of it, or whatever in a fanfic for a small online community where there are warnings on it. indicating she is aware of its potential damage in a way her male counterpart is not…)

but i still believe in dark contents’ existence in art. of course there is differences between all of these topics you brought up, but i don’t think their differences matter in this answer. i believe in their right to be explored in art. i am talking broadly of media/art here, which i think is the more relevant conversation, but i think you are actually more interested in a much smaller scale of people. ie. fandom. ie. mostly marginalized people in small communities online writing and creating dark content.

people will choose and pick which ones they’d like to create art over and which ones they don’t, which ones they read and which ones they don’t. there’s no ‘hard line’ drawn anywhere. and i can’t control it and neither can you. perhaps you think violence is okay to be explored in fanfic, but racism isn’t. someone else will have different preferences. i do not believe in its censorship.

now, let’s move onto your interest in romanticization and what i think you are more pointing to, which is fandom. you are specifically referring to people in fandom who write about rape, incest, etc. and ‘romanticize’ it—ie. they write about it in a way that is a fantasy. it is perhaps supposed to be horny or sexy. so let’s talk about it.

i must remind you that these topics you’ve brought up (rape, incest, sa) being written are fiction and it is (most often) done by someone marginalized who has either experienced this or is in threat of experiencing this under a patriarchy. i assure you, they are aware of its harm. hence the copious warnings in fandom spaces.

if i can be candid, sometimes i think that people forget how systems of oppression work when discussing fandom and whether dark content being created should be allowed or not.

for example, i sometimes think people who are anti-dark content in fandom believe that a woman or afab person writing a fictional fanfic about rape or sexual violence then influences people to go out and rape people or that women actually like it. when the reality, in fandom spaces, is that rape and sexual violence happen frequently under the patriarchy and then these women in fandom write fictional fanfic in response to cope, explore, take control of, etc. etc.

to insinuate that women or afab people (which fandom mostly is) exploring dark content safely in fiction then causes their own oppression and harm or trauma is rather victim-blame-y to me. fandom exploring dark content does not cause these things to happen in our society….these actions (rape, incest, sa) happen in our society or systems of power and fandom reacts to them in their art by exploring it in dark content. do you understand what i’m trying to say?

it’s not a matter of what is ‘okay’ to romanticize and what isn’t. i do not think the romanticization that fandom does with dark content (ie. my kidnapper actually loves me! or this sexual act that i did not consent to…maybe feels good) is not actually romanticizing but coping because of the systems of power that i described above. and this can be coping with anything���shame of sexuality, shame of fantasies, trauma, fear, etc. etc.

as i said in my tags in that post i reblogged and as plato said, dark content in art is a safe place to explore what would otherwise be harmful and dangerous in real life. it is cathartic. potentially even, a purging.

and even if it isn’t all that—maybe it just is trashy fantasy. it is still playing pretend. it is still fiction and in fandom spaces, it is still most likely being created by a marginalized person. and again, even if it isn’t, we don’t get to censor it. we can be critical of it or wary or whatever, but to censor it, is a slippery, slippery slope. do deem some topics as “acceptable” and others as “unacceptable” is dangerous.

just like kids play pretend where they ‘fight’ or ‘kill’ or ‘kidnap’ or ‘shoot’ each other in games of cops and robbers or heroes and villains, they are safely exploring adventure, dark content, fantasy, tragedy, and higher emotions. adults can do the same in fiction and with adult topics like sex.

and at the end of the day, we don’t get to demand the credentials to do so either. we don’t get to censor them or control them and nor should we be allowed to. i cannot stress enough that i encourage you to be critical of censorship or the absolute disgust in dark content and at those (again—often marginalized people) who engage with it in fandom. i believe it is deeply puritanical, conservative, and dangerous.

you don’t have to like dark content or consume it at all and fandom makes it easy not to with all the warnings and tags, but you cannot control others or police them. nor should you want to.

and at the end of the day, i have some questions for you. you don’t have to respond to this, perhaps they’re just things to think about. what is the end goal here? what is the point in harassing, shaming, attacking, criticizing, or interrogating people in fandom spaces who create or support dark content? do you believe that if it is purged from fandom, it will be purged from our society? if you want it purged from society—shouldn’t you start there rather than in the inbox of marginalized writers in fandom? people in fandom did not create rape, incest, and sa nor do they in their exploration of fiction…they are merely reacting to a world that did create it.

i hope at no point i came off as rude to you, as was not my intention. i intended to stand up for myself and respectfully state my opinions and thoughts on this matter. i’m sorry it got long, but also i don’t believe in being brief on such complex matters. i am a writer who engages critically with the world around me and sometimes, things cannot be made into short, snappy answers. sometimes, we must unpack.

genuinely wishing you well.

[blackjacktheboss]

Blonde Percy pisses me off so much, but it’s not just bc of the canon of it all, but rather because Rick will make any change to his characters EXCEPT make Percy a person of color which is so fucking funny you simply have to laugh

[rainybraindays]

I don't like making posts like this, I don't like opening my blog up for people to come and harrass me but oh my god, why does the fandom allow posts like this to get away unscathed?

You don’t have to like Marina. I'll never claim that. You can like or dislike whoever you want.

But I do wonder, if Marina was played by a white woman would we get nearly as many posts like this? Would everyone be as okay with it? Would we have been so quiet about the fact that Ruby Barker was harrassed for this role? Or would there be way more people defending her? Would she suddenly be sympathetic when now shes not?

Why are we all so okay with taking this character with a nuanced story, put in a horrible situation with almost no options and turning her into a villian?

Like did we watch the same show? Did you miss the bit where she doesn't want to find a husband at all and only starts when she thinks shes been abandoned, which she only believes because she gets a forged letter saying she was? Did you not see Portia slap her? Did you not also watch a man old enough to be her grandfather being forced on her?

Lying to Colin wasn't okay, I'm not defending that, but literally tell me what her options were?

The man she loves is dead, but she doesn't even know that she thinks he abandoned her, so she can't reasonably assume Phillip will take responsibility when his brother won't. The only people Portias interested in introducing to her are those she wouldn't introduce to her own daughters. She can't reasonably think Colin will be open to her as a wife since shes pregnant becausethats not the norm. But Colin is, he says he would have married her even knowing. And Colin also doesn't view Marina as a villian, in season two hes sad yeah, but he’s also guilty because he doesn't think she deserved what happened.

This is a nuanced messy situation but no one wants to look at that.

Like you all make it very clear you view her as a whore, because she did a very normal thing and had sex. You all view her as a manipulative snake of a person, when if she was even the Whistledown article wouldn't have been a stop for her because she would have tried to get out of it. You conveniently forget that she almost killed herself in an attempt to abort her children because of her mistreatment post Whistledown article because that takes away from the idea you've concocted that shes some villainous bitch.

But then you turn around and want Penelope to have sexual knowledge that she realistically wouldn't and canonically doesn’t. You praise her for her Whistledown work even though it keeps hurting people she loves and shes lying about doing it.

This is weird, posting about how you can't wait for a character to die, and how you hope the death is - lets be honest here- humiliating, is a bizarre thing to do.

Its even more bizarre to do that, tag the character, and then also tag two ships that really the post really isn't about.

Like why is Polin tagged? Because they're both mentioned? This isn't a polin moment. You don’t talk about them at all in the meat of the post. Why is Philoise tagged? Because she's an 'obstacle' for them? They haven't even met, they aren't mentioned at all, they have nothing to do with this.

And on top of tagging these things you say "don't try and defend her to me" which why would we you clearly wouldn't listen. You follow that with saying "If you like her you probably suck" and claim to have tagged this as anti marina when you didn't. You put this in her main tag and then added "death to marina".

Theres no respect to your peers in the fandom, and clear disrespect to people who do like this character and are actually willing to engage with the character beyond fanon portrayal. Because thats what this is its not even taking her at face value anymore.

You wonder why people dislike this fandom, specifically the polin side of it, and do things like this. We as a community need to improve because stuff like this isn't uncommon, this is just one of the most blatant I've seen.

I'm going to be entirely honest if you follow quotegirl19, or don't see the issues with Marinas portrayal and treatment by the fandom this is not the blog for you.

[dorianwolfforest]

grandpa here to tell you that you care too much about other peoples opinions of you. one person online saying one thing about one of your traits should not be a big deal to you. fandom is not this important. block a guy more often maybe. shape your online experience instead trying to convince everyone to convert to your side.

[every-sanji]

[pinkomcranger]

About the white asshole line: it's not as left field as people think tbh There's a similar line in the first AW game from Alice (in the DLC, Wake's version of her since it's all in his head). She uses the term 'while male melodrama'. This is literally Wake's own mind so he knows a lot of stuff he put her through was from a perspective of a person who has a lot of advantages. Back to Saga, that line aligns with the racism we are hinted she dealt with in her field and STILL deals with in present day. Mulligan and Thornton are racist af (haven't seen anyone discuss this yet) to her even if they seem pleasant at the start of the game. Not entirely either, when Saga and Casey meet Mulligan he automatically assumed Casey is the lead agent. He apologizes about it but there's an air that neither him or Thorton take Saga seriously. They barely speak directly to her and instead more to Casey unless she directly speaks to either. It's that seemingly benign, passive racism that is more toxic sometimes, especially in a work environment. In her face they show some surface level, thinly veiled respect but behind her back they called her a 'stuck up FBI bitch'. Part of the horror story adds she let her daughter drown so they doubt her work entirely. And concerning the Bookers, there's this passive aggressive comment where Thorton says the case of the murder of Nightingale would've been solved if the FBI wasn't involved. Thorton says something like "they stick with their own". Now, this could be seen as city folk stick with their own but the Bookers are black, this was purposeful imo. I honestly liked how Remedy incorporated this in such a realistic way. Some could dispute this and say "that's circumstantial/reaching" but lets not forget both Mulligan and Thorton are literally the bastard law enforcement type that kills are the drop of a pin. They killed that woman while enthralled with this feeling of power (referencing the page about it) and threw her body in the well to hide it, blaming the death on each other at first before they decide it's neither of their faults and hide the evidence. They become taken being so twisted in their dark ways. They are bad guys, I'd argue misogynistic too. And lets add a layer of actual parallels to rl racism to the mix here now. If she dealt with that in Bright Falls on her first day I can only imagine the assholes she had to deal with climbing her way up in the FBI, in life in general. This is why her mother is a strong foundation, they are not only close because they loved each other but she made sure she'd be strong. Parents who have mixed kids (black kids especially) know what they will deal with. Maybe even a meta thing like Spiderverse, adding the backlash into the story. Which she did and still does get from gamerz (tm). People STILL bring up that "race swap" from the Quantum Break trailer which is honestly just early concept stuff. Saga is written so well and carefully that even her problems outside the pace of the story seems to have been considered. So while it does seem random and may make people uncomfortable it's purposeful. Remedy really captured this aspect with Saga without making it her personality or the core part of her (like she just there for black trauma, so glad they did not do that and made her a character with experiences). Let's not forget Saga's field of work. We know it's predominantly white. Her saying 'another white asshole' says more about her experiences than anything else. And being at her lowest where her insecurities, doubts, fears thrive it says something about her agency and how sometimes it can feel taken from her based on her skin tone, gender, so forth. Sorry for the long ask! It's just, this line definitely does not feel like it's random to me. I was just shocked I heard it but the game lays down the ground work for it to be said. It's as subtle as the worst kind of racism though imo

I'm VERY interested by imagined!Alice's line because while we don't know if she actually feels that way, we see Alan can acknowledge that he KNOWS how lucky he is by virtue of being a white man, it might not be something he thinks about daily, but he's admitting he's aware of it.

You're right in regards to what Saga deals with in her work environment and most likely her daily life. It sucked for me that Mulligan and Thorton ended up being racist, misogynistic assholes because they truly just seemed like the goofy, slightly dimwitted small-town cops. I think maybe because I haven't actually played the game yet (shame on me, I know! I just managed to get it last month and haven't had the time to dedicate to it like I want) that I kind of brushed Mulligan and Thorton's behavior towards Saga off until we learned their true nature.

But we see how they're more comfortable deferring to Casey over Saga, and we can even see that Casey is NOT the least bit pleased with it. Saga clearly picks up on it, and it's one of the reasons she chooses to leave them with Casey. She can handle the Bookers easier, because yes, they ARE black, she KNOWS they're going to open up to her far easier than if it had been Casey. Do we get reflections of their shared experiences? Not really, but the Bookers weren't going to trust the FBI regardless, Saga being a black woman lowered their defenses a little.

You can argue that she was better suited for talking to the witnesses because it's just her personality, Casey was dry and sarcastic from jump while Saga was the opposite. But did the Bookers know that? Absolutely not. They were less cautious with Saga, Ed especially. They weren't hiding anything to be malicious, they just wanted their own things to be successful.

Hearing Mulligan and Thorton's true thoughts about Saga really tore me up. Not even so much at the fact they felt that way, but because they didn't have the guts to say it to her face. You don't hear that venom directed towards Casey at all, even though he's the EXACT same stuck-up government agent who's worse to them than Saga.

But it's what black people tend to see when dealing with the police force. Condescending, impatient, better-than, bitter, power-hungry and drunk on their self-importance and position of authority. There's a REASON they were made Taken when the Koskela brothers couldn't, but that's really neither here nor there.

Seeing what she had to deal with in Bright Falls from two guys that were SUPPOSED to be on her side and help her is very telling and it made me even more interested in her backstory. How many people actually believed in her when she joined the FBI? Who dismissed her out of pocket simply because of the color of her skin and her gender? You can even get a hint of her past simply by her questioning Casey on why he wants her to be the lead on the case instead of jumping in straight away.

And that's to her PARTNER, a man she’s known and trusted for years, who clearly never had a problem with her being a black woman, or there's no way in hell they'd have the kind of relationship that they do.

Freya being such a strong influence for Saga was evident in her card to her daughter. She knew the struggles Saga was going to face by going after what she wanted to do and never discouraged her. I'll always be bummed over Freya lying to Saga about her being a Seer though. I know it was to try and protect her from even more shit she didn't deserve to go through over something she had no control over. But it almost felt like a vote of no-confidence. And there's no feeling in the world like thinking your mother might not believe in you.

I'm still VERY annoyed at ANYBODY bringing up the "Return" concept from Quantum Break JUST to say Saga was race-swaped when almost NOTHING from that teaser made it to the main game proper. Sam and the team took all of that and flipped it on its head. That was clear the second FBI Alex Casey stepped into the background instead of being in the lead.

I love the fact we don't get the "another white asshole telling me what to do" until the end of the game, and it's when Saga is at her lowest point, when the Dark Presence is trying to do its best to break her down. But like I tend to bring up, Alan says it can't create something out of nothing. Meaning those doubts and resentment were there for a LONG time, and it VERY easily could have been her entire personality.

The fact that it wasn't showed how much thought Remedy put into creating Saga and I appreciate it so much. She wasn't her trauma, she wasn't her anger, she was the exact OPPOSITE of that. She faced her problems with determination and PUNS! Even when shitty things were going on, her mind wandered to humor "More like "Underwatery" I'll have to tell Casey that one later." Speaks volumes about her character.

I think that's one of the reasons she fought SO hard against the horror story. OBVIOUSLY her main motivation was saving Logan, and then Casey. But she wasn't about to let her agency be taken from her like she's been fighting against it for years. She was the one that was going to be in control, she was going to tell this story, and Alan himself (some of that as him being the face of the Dark Presence for her) "no, fuck you. Another white asshole is NOT going to tell me how to live MY life. You're not using my doubts and fears against me to take my family from me"

And she did it, she did what the white man couldn't do on his own in 13 years. How am I NOT supposed to root for her? How could I NOT want to know more about her history? There's no way I can look at Saga Anderson and go, well her story is done, there's nothing else to be written for her. As I said, I do love FBI Casey, but he's practically a blank slate compared to Saga, I could live without him because, for me, outside of his personality (I'm also grumpy and sarcastic), I cannot relate to him.

Despite not being a wife and mother in the FBI, I CAN relate to Saga. I can understand her struggles and pain. I feel her love for her family, I can relate to her love and disappointment towards her mother. The struggle of being a black woman in a world that still caters to white men and the pushback she gets just from existing. I understand her in a way I never could with Alan Wake. I understood and related to his issues as a writer struggling with inspiration. But the thing with that is Alan didn't HAVE to struggle like that, he could have chosen, at any time, to stop being a writer and do something else.

Saga couldn't choose to change the color of her skin. Her challenges would be with her simply because of how she's perceived at first glance. She'll never have the advantages of Alan and Casey in that regard.

I'm sorry for the long answer! But I LOVED your ask, and that's why it took me a hot minute to answer it. I had to get my thoughts in order and give this the response I felt like it deserved. So thank you for letting me see your thoughts towards Saga! ❤️

[priafey]

things the US needs to address:

the collective psychosis that leads people to make posts like these

[missallblues]

In all honesty fishman island should have been Nami’s second arc much how Whole Cake Island was Sanji’s, if anything the themes of prejudice and hatred covered in that arc could have been done well with Nami i.e how not even the people we love are susceptible to prejudices (nobody is above racism and even how easily people can fall to propaganda* etc), yeah she gets her whole talk with Jinbei and Hachi by extent but those are two men who both had a hand in her abuse/imprisonment, IDK we should have just gotten a lot more of Nami interacting on with the fishman society and how her past experiences does in fact colour and effect how she navigates a society that suffers from intense prejudices even with her trauma.

*yes I know that Oda does show the propaganda with the celestial dragons and the marines if I rmbr correctly (whilst also showing it is a negative) but I don’t think he showcases it enough with regular people (which are victims of propaganda more then rich folks)

[brick-van-dyke]

I'm still pretty sick with the flu and I'm still figuring out how to move past being frozen with hyperempathy so I'll try to be brief with this. But I want to touch on a thing I've been thinking about pretty much this entire past year.

In the last decade, or my whole upbringing and childhood as well to be honest, I saw a horrific amount of dehumanisation of Arab culture, language and idenity. All of it was associated with the Taliban, ISIS, war and terrorism to the point most young people would assume that and be suspicious when they'd see a mosque, hijab, brown skin, arabic written somewhere or any display of Arab culture. Like, no, the west has always been violently racist and you all aren't immune to that upbringing of assuming anything written in arabic to be ISIS propaganda, anything to do with Muslim holidays being seen as oppressive and bad or homophobic; a reason for suspicion. We've all been brought up with that shit.

I now want us to think about that upbringing with Jews today and how the antisemetism ingrained in the west actually defines Israel in ways much like how Islamophobia defines the Taliban or ISIS. We KNOW they aren't the same as being Muslim or being Jewish, but that doesn't stop us making associations and assumptions. It doesn't suddenly make demonizing Jews in the same way Arabs have been dehumanised okay. Both are people that deserve love, respect and protection from hate. Political Zionism, Mossad and Modern Israel are western inventions that aren't Jewish at all, just as much as ISIS and the Taliban are western inventions that aren't Arab or Muslim. They were created by western powers for western interests (and hell, even if they weren't that wouldn't justify shit) and should never be used as a reason to automatically suspect our Muslim, Jewish and Arab siblings. These are groups that's exist irrespective of this and require our respect all the same.

I'm staunchly antifascist, pro/ part of the Intifada and for a one state solution with a free Palestine that includes all and respects all equally. Doing that means, fundamentally, that we can't use the weapons and tactics of the western colonial entities; of hate, of demonising an entire culture, language and people. We have to be better.

Just as we have to be against the Bush administration's dehumanisation of Arabs and Muslims, and their targetting of the entire race, various cultures, religion and language, we have to actually put in work to not let ourselves be taken in by western antisemetism that is deeply ingrained within our society as well. There are many stigmas in western society around Jews, and we cannot let it be suddenly exempt from scrutiny because we decide one is okay while the other is not. Both are equally bad, if not good indicators that these same people likely have anti Arab and anti Muslim beliefs internalised as well. They often go hand on hand from what I've seen of liberal racists who have said "I'm not racist" then proceeded to say they think Muslims are all homophobic and that all religions are bad because "Muslims created ISIS" without realising the horrific racism in that. It's these same people who often say "all Jews are responsible and must stand up against Israel or they're actually Zionists". It's the same logic and it always comes back to a general internalisation of racism. That is something we, as leftists, must fight against.

Like, the same people who now say "I have to check and make sure the Jews I know aren't Zionists" are also the same people who have said "I think Arab Americans deserve to see Gaza get flattened because they didn't vote blue". Like it's the same old racist shit and the same post Bush suspicion based on "all Muslims and Arabs are ISIS right?" It's the same shit, like modern Israel, ISIS, (and I'd also include Iran, Egypt, Afghanistan, etc.) and the Taliban are all entities created/ taken control of by the west and then used by the west to expand their own access to resources. It's the US just expanded so if anything y'all should be way more inherently suspicious of white Americans being the CIA in disguise than Jews all being Mossad and Muslims all being ISIS members. Like they are different things, Zionists aren't Jews and vice versa. Basically, just don't assume shit and listen to antizionist Jews when they call you out on antisemetism. The west has deeply ingrained anrisemetic roots and you all still have to unlearn that shit if you really want a free Palestine and a successful Intifada (both in Palestine and, I hope, for successful land back movements in other western colonised nations).

If you see a Jew celebrating their holidays without mentioning Palestine or condemning Israel? Shut up and let them celebrate. If you see a Muslim celebrating their holidays without condemning ISIS or Afghanistan and Iran's treatment of women? Shut up and let them celebrate. Entire groups of people shouldn't be expected to be held to account and put in all the work of unraveling western colonialism, all because you're already suspicious of anyone who isn't white, atheist or just live differently to you. Respect people and their culture, unlearn western racist imperialist propaganda.

Unlearn that shit and learn to unite under one banner of antifascist resistance that sees all as equal.

[canichangemyblogname]

Your National Anthem in Above Ground by Clint Smith

[bohemian-nights]

What do you make of the people who say it’s racist to claim Nettles is non-Valyrian because I’m seeing a rise in that sort of opinion. 😬

Most of the people saying this are Dumbnyra/Missy Anne stans who don’t want Nettles to be non-Valyrian because they are convinced Daemon is her father and not her daddy so…

[sydmarch]

tired of these "hot takes" on picky or selective eating from people who clearly have no idea how arfid works

[dykeogenes]

Hmm I believe I remember learning a few years ago that when one is asked to acknowledge that they’re impacted subconsciously by systemic racism/sexism/homophobia etc, or is told that they’re behaving in a way that’s bigoted/harmful, “no I’m not” is the wrong answer. So I think some of you should get less excited about saying that when Jewish people tell you you’re being antisemitic.

[artemx746]

Why do so many people care about Percy and Annabeth’s hair colours. It’s hair. It doesn’t matter.

[third-world-punks]

Accusing immigrants of poisoning Americans’ blood is one of the most recent attacks by far-right politicians on populations of color in the United States. The disturbing accusation draws on historical processes of “monstrifying” immigrant groups from the global South.

- Gabriel Eljaiek-Rodríguez , August 1, 2024

[bijoumikhawal]

Mission?????