#again...how are you such a racist asshole that you need to invent racism where it doesn't exist in canon?

[fromtheseventhhell]

This is the thousandth "let Arya be ugly" discourse from someone reblogging art where Arya is drawn significantly darker than she is in canon, at what point are we going to have a conversation about the racist trend of people associating non-conformity with ugliness and ugliness with darker skin? "Looks don't matter" but y'all are the only ones regularly discussing an 11-year-olds physical appearance and getting mad that people follow what's written in the books.

[bitteropinions]

My tony fans i'm ranting this isn't for you because I've said I'm not a die hard for him I will cover his character the same as others on this blog and this point needs to be made.

Say fuck tony stark and thor in the same breath they are literally the fucking same why do you guys suck thors balls for it but hate Tony???? MCU tony is far better then comic tony in my eyes and I enjoy him more but he's a shitty person(same with thor).

Both are problematic as shit and benefitted several wars in several different ways. Tony does not ptsd from inventing weapons (Howard excluded) and selling them doesn't have immediate guilt etheir which is shown mcu wise from changing it around after his torture and betrayal. They showed us that Tony was just going with the motions building as an after thought to his living life persona. Thats mcu canon Tony first movie come on guys he is introduced as an asshole, playboy war profiteer like Howard was he is shown to be a recreation of the man he hated thats the fucking point sets grounds for his arc and plot. So i don't know why I see fellow Tony fans acting like that wasn't what was happening.

Thor does not have PTSD from being in wars all his life they honor that shit and it got to the point where he was actively searching out wars and fueling a liking for them especially where his racism came into play. Even years later he is proud in war and experiences what the other avengers do when they all fall into depression and ptsd over infintywar. Plus he's based after an actual person. Vikings are not kind folk neither is Norse. He is introduced as arrogant, confident, racist, war hungry and naive. Again the fucking point sets grounds. I don't like thor that much I think he's a sucky charcter all around-I enjoy him in the moment- differently from Tony because they made him learn his lesson just to back track it??

They finally broke his courage for war but because he failed. I don't like how they managed his relationship to loki and I do enjoy fics where thor is featured caring for his brother but letting racist remarks and attitudes be thrown at loki because thats how he was in mcu to me. They made his character weird and used him to push their more "funny" disrespectful scenes and "looks" much like drax. So I'm saying I don't like thor because of his writers to sum it up.

And they both actively attack people who they are angry with. Bucky, Steve, loki, dark elves, jötunns, thanos etc. I made a list about mcu characters who have attacked people for family loses they aren't the only ones but they are often put against eachother like they aren't in the same fucking boat. They branch differently in many situations which is noticeable and gives people the opportunity to like/hate aspects of each where they differ but everything "antis" really hate them for are literally shared. So I'm confused on why everyone bashes on the other but loves one in the same breath for the same thing. Have they even watched the fucking movies, picked up a comic, opened their eyes maybe?

[tessatechaitea]

Black Canary: New Wings #2

"How about a photo-realistic view of Downtown Seattle and then I'll just scribble in some mountains up top?" -- Dick. "Please add some Black Canary Colorforms too." -- Editorial.

Even after giving Issue #1 an "A" rating, I still can't believe this issue is going to be anything but boring. Just look at this fucking cover! This is the kind of image a D-list publishing house puts on the cover of a biographical comic book about David Faustino. Did editors at DC think highlighting the city of Seattle in 1991 was going to move units? It's not even recognizable as Seattle! Okay, okay, you fucking Seattlites. Great, you recognized your city instantly! I guess this fucking comic book was for you then, you know-it-all twats. For the rest of us, we need the Space Needle front and center, not washed out in the pink morass over Black Canary's shoulder! You never see an artist for DC drawing an image of Paris without the Eiffel Tower. I mean, maybe not never, exactly. Sometimes they'll throw in the Arc de Triomphe or the Louvre or Notre Dame. But that's kind of the point! All Seattle has is the Space Needle! I'm not shitting on Seattle for that. I live in Portland and what the fuck do we have? A big pink corporate office building?! Oh, sure, we have some spectacular bridges! I forgot about those! Portland is better than Seattle when it comes to recognizable architecture. Although we don't have a troll sucking off a VW Bug under any of our bridges or a huge black cock jutting out of downtown (Big Pink is the best we can muster). I don't really care which city has better architecture! I can't stand people who feel pride for living in a specific city and then try to emulate the stereotypical person who lives in that city. If you're wondering who the fuck would do that, just watch any local newscaster in any city and watch how they try so fucking hard to be representative of the stereotypes of people who live there. Local news stations should stop airing promos that say shit like "First. Live. Local." Instead, they should just say, "We have no dignity. But we have the news! Although, to be fair, half of it is composed of viral videos everybody but our oldest of olds audience has seen." Another reason this cover sucks is that it declares the title of this chapter is "Home is Where Ya' Live." Is that some sage Midwestern non-wisdom that people spout in reply to some other person moaning about some problem? Like how when somebody in Lincoln, Nebraska is all, "I was shot in the leg on my way to Runza's!" And then somebody else is all, "It builds character." In California, we didn't have sayings like that. If somebody said, "I was shot in the leg on my way to Taco Bravo!", you would reply, "Dude! That's gnarly!" And they'd go, "I know, right?!" And then you'd be all, "Like, is this going to affect our, like, trip to the beach?" And they'd be all, "Nah brah! I'mma go, like, run some water on it! Good as new, dude!" And you'd say, "Tubular! Gonna go get my board! Catch ya later!" This is because nothing in California builds character. You just start off as a goofy, one-dimensional caricature of a human being and stick with it until you, like, die.

No white male has ever been called uppity and we all know why.

"Uppity" is a great word by which to judge somebody's character. I mean to say, if somebody actually calls somebody else "uppity," you now know way more than that person wanted you to know about what kind of person they are. Especially telling is if somebody doesn't understand why you're judging them for calling somebody "uppity." I stopped associating with way more people than I would have thought possible when they sided against Colin Kaepernick. Maybe they didn't use the word "uppity" exactly but they sure weren't hiding their feeling that some people should keep in a specific place and be grateful for what they've been allowed to have, so to speak. Unfortunately for them, my sister and my dad fell into that camp. Obviously they thought they claimed their dislike for Kaepernick was that he wasn't supporting the troops. But we all know how flimsy that bit of moral legerdemain really is. It takes an awful lot of mental contortion to simply disregard Kaepernick's stated protest of police violence against the black community and decide to believe right wing media that has a vested interest in a continued police state backed by corporate money. The whole "I'm a patriot so I find unpatriotic acts disgusting!" is the worst shell game every invented. All those fuckers who constantly thank members of the military for protecting their freedoms support Trump and Republicans who are fucking our freedoms in the ass (non-consensually! I support somebody fucking my freedom in the ass if my freedom feels like getting fucked in the ass tonight). I would thank a member of the military for protecting my freedom if they were ever fucking used to actually protect our freedoms. As a democracy (Don't you fucking representative republic me, you asshole), it's up to us to protect our freedoms and a good percentage of us are failing spectacularly at that job. Gan isn't just battling the small time crack dealers in his neighborhood. He's got his sights on Senator Garrenger as well.

Gan doesn't realize the opposite is also true.

Senator Garrenger is a white supremacist working with white supremacists to do white supremacy. Some of us have been fighting this shit for a long time. The problem is far more of us have been pretending it wasn't a real thing for even longer. "White supremacist Neo-Nazis infiltrating our police forces? Get out of here! You sound ridiculous!" was probably a thing said a lot in the last forty years. And yet even now that conservatives have found that they don't need to resort to dog whistles because saying the thing out loud that used to cause political backlash doesn't even cause a ripple of concern now. We have learned that a large percentage of our country doesn't give a shit if you're a racist, misogynist asshole as long as you say three things over and over again: "God Bless America," "Owning a gun is a God-given right," and "Abortions are evil." Tick off those boxes and you can dispense with all the dog whistling and just say the racist shit on national television. Dinah begins to dig up dirt on Senator Garrenger so that Black Canary has an iron clad excuse to punch him in the face. Her and Gan decide to work together to stop him and clean up the California drugs in their neighborhood. Not that they believe the two problems are actually the same problem! Not yet anyway! Dinah suspects it but Gan thinks she's seeing conspiracy where there isn't any. Dinah has more experience with how comic books work which is why she sees the entire forest already and it's only the beginning of Issue #2. Gan takes his show to the streets in front of a crack house to shame them out of the neighborhood. He doesn't realize it's run by the Senator's son who murders three of his "coworkers" to make his escape when the cops show. Gan is shot in the shoulder by the white supremacist assassin while Black Canary rushes in to help. A crack addict is blamed for the murders but Black Canary listens to his chaotic rambling, leading her to discover a shell left by the Neo-Nazi assassin. Black Canary: New Wings #2 Rating: B+. All the action is basically the last half of the comic book as a seasoned reader of comic books might expect. If a writer front loads the story with people discussing actual issues, the reader is going to get antsy for some mindless violence! Too bad for some readers the violence in this was't mindless but caused by truly awful people. People think the attitude of Comicsgate is a new thing but if you read the letters pages from the past, you'll see they existed back then as well. A lot of readers didn't want to be reminded that maybe the way they think and the things they believe put them in the realm of the "bad guy." So a comic book where the villain robs the bank or attacks Batman for the hell of it is okay because that reader would never rob a bank or attack Batman. But if you make the bad guy a senator who believes foreigners are stealing the jobs of good white Americans and maybe flooding their neighborhoods with drugs as a good way to fight against their "intrusion" into "white America," some of your readers are going to look up from the comic book and say aloud to nobody, "Hey!" And since most of them aren't in touch with their feelings or have ever really done a good, close examination of their self, they don't know how to deal with hurt feelings in any way but to be angry. It's easier to be angry at the person calling some white people racist than to have a good long think about why you might be upset about somebody pointing out racism.

[science-fiction-is-real]

In which i talk about joseph stalin for a long time and also about intersectionality

You know who i’ve been reading a lot about recently?

Joseph Stalin.

And I’ve been reading, and while i’m at work all day, working mostly alone, no music or distractions, i’ve been thinking about everything i’ve been reading.

and this fucker who died before my parents were even born has been on my mind, because i just don’t fucking get it.

This idiot was a revolutionary.  a god damn REVOLUTIONARY.  Did hard time in siberia as a political prisoner.  (I mean, probably also a prisoner for all the organized crime he was doing---to fund the REVOLUTION)  That’s not the sort of thing a grifter, who is only interested in power, gets into.  It’s an absolutely terrible grift.  It’s a lot of risk to take if you aren’t a true believer.

And in between all the bank robberies and what not, he edited a newspaper and did a lot of writing.  There’s a database online where you can read pretty much everything Stalin ever wrote (Along with pretty much every thing pretty much every other famous Marxist ever wrote).  I can’t really bring myself to read too much of his stuff.  Eww.  Why would I want to.  Gross.  But also I feel like i should in the name of fact checking, and understanding what I’m talking about before I talk about it.

But the stuff i did read, was...... not terrible....? Some of it was replying to other socialist writing (because what do lefties enjoy more than arguing with other lefties, amiright???), a lot of it was old fashioned marxist stuff talking about working class vs capitalists, and a lot of it was describing legitimate complaints about the Czarist government.  Expressing anger at the pogroms and the suppression of ethnic minorities and hunger and poverty.  Sounds like a good reason to have a revolution to me.

Of course, those were all the same sorts of atrocities he himself would go on to do.  again.  eww.

But, after all of this, it’s pretty clear to me that pre-revolutionary Stalin was a true fuckin believer.

And that kept me up at night.  Because how come that would change when he himself came into power?

Is it because once you’re handed power, the temptation to abuse it is just far too great?  Is it because when the revolution is over, and the complexities of the ‘’Real World,’’ are obvious, and it’s all to easy to abandon idealism in order to get things done?  Are all post-revolutionary periods destined to be violent and oppressive, because the new government wants to assert its power?  How much blame does he get personally, and how much goes to the other founders of the revolutionary movement--Lenin and Trotsky and the like-- who laid the groundwork for how things would function?  IS socialism itself just cursed to fail like my republican grandma told me?

Or is this just a classical example of the other thing our republican grandmas warned us about, radical idealists turning cranky and cruel and conservative in old age just like they did? I mean what sort of things did stalin do while in power?  A lot of pretty republican things.  LMAO.  Banning the gays and abortion, enforcing strict gender norms, getting TOUGH ON CRIME!  Beefing up the military on money that should be used to provide for people’s basic needs....

If the right gets to try and pass off Hitler as a socialist, the left gets to say that Stalin was a moderate republican.  (Not full republican.  I mean, he did actually react appropriately when he found out there were Nazis in his country.  Just moderate republican.)  LMAO!

But then i thought about it a little more.

No.  He was not a right winger.  No one who spends the first half of his adult life trying to overthrow a government that had been ruling for 300 years is a god damn fucking right winger.  He was left wing.  But.....  Old timy left wing.

Because he did make good on a lot of the socialist ideas while in office.  I’m pretty sure he set up a fairly solid welfare state, free housing and education and healthcare and whatnot.  That was pretty new and revolutionary for the time.

But... Old timy left wing.

and if you think about old timy left-wingers.  most of them are only left wing in SOME areas.  The right absolutely LOVES to point this out.  ‘’Sure Margaret Sanger was a radical feminist, but she was also a racist!’’  ‘’This person was a racist, this person was homophobic!  All your icons are fake frauds!’’  I mean, they probably were all racist and homophobic and whatnot, but that doesn’t actually deminish the radicality of the stuff they were ‘’woke’’ on.

And that’s true for the pre-marxist left too.  We can hate on Thomas Jefferson all day long for being a creepy rapy slave owner and rich asshole who should have been tarred and feathered and  (sorry, i brought up thomas jefferson, i have to go take 5 and cool down before i punch something)  But he still was..... left.  To say ‘’all men are created equal,’’ even if you just mean straight white men, was still kind of radical in the 18th century, when the world was still divided up between the gentry and the common men, and people were presumed to have class status that was bred into them and was part of their very inner nature.  The idea that you could just throw out the idea of a nobility ruling class, or the monarchy, and initiate some sort of meritocracy based system, was out of this fucking world at that point.

And you can say the say the same thing about the russian revolutionaries.  You can criticize them up and down and left and right for being undemocratic, but the idea that wealth should be something everyone has guaranteed access to, that no one should hold economic power over you, that working people deserve some sort of dignified recognition for what they do, that was--AND STILL IS--radical.

Lenin, who lived in monarchical empire, saw the western countries move away from monarchies and embrace our versions of Western Capitalist Democracy (TM).  He decided his revolution would go in a different direction, one of economic instead of political democracy.  The western style of revolution had been tried, and now it was time to try out an eastern style of revolution.

I think he would have said something like ‘’look, ya’ll in france and england can vote, and i’ve been to france and england.  Those places suck ass.  You’re poor and hungry and miserable and working 10 hours a day for shit pay and going home to your crammed tenement apartments before dying of cholera at the age of 12.  Hell of a lot a good DeMoCrAcY does.  We need ECONOMIC democracy instead.’’  

I do remember a quote from lenin, that said something along the lines of ‘’Yes, my system isn’t ‘democratic’ but if you think about it, it’s a hell of a lot more democratic than anything they’re doing in capitalist countries.’’

Of course, we modern folk who fancy ourselves so enlightened by hindsight will point out that you need BOTH economic and political democracy.  A democratic government being run alongside an undemocratic economy is oppression. Anyone who lives in the United States and has read more than three books in their life can see this.  It SUCKS.  Likewise.  An egalitarian economy being run by an undemocratic government is also oppression, because the government can do whatever it wants to the economy, like, say.... sell all the country’s food on the international market to fund various different 5-year-plan projects.  Had Stalin been subjected to democratic processes, he never would have been allowed to do that.

In the early 20th century, there wasn’t really much of a concept of INTERSECTIONALITY.  in the modern left, we pretty much agree that if you want to have freedom and equality in one sphere of life, you also need to pursue freedom and equality in other spheres.  Oppression is contagious.  If you allow discrimination against Gays for example, this leads to discrimination against the sexes because people are going to be forced into stricter and stricter gender norms.  And of course, if you want political equality under the law, you also need racial equality so that one group of people isn’t disenfranchised from voting or fair treatment by the courts.

Just like how political democracy has to happen alongside economic democracy.

So yeah, I guess after the end of all this long ranting and shit.  I think it makes sense why a serious revolutionary true believer like Stalin can grow into a tyrant.  Because Old timy left-wing politics was underdeveloped and had lots of blind spots.  People didn’t realize that it was important for movements to be led by people who were seriously committed to intersectional emancipation.  Young Stalin when he would go hang out with all of his socialist dude-bro friends, planning their bank heists, wearing their newsboys hats, trying not to die of cholera,  he probably wasn’t being called out on sexism or racism.  They were just an economic-left movement that didn’t care much about the other stuff.

But there isn’t really a whole lot to gain by doing a character analysis on some ass wipe who kicked the bucket before color television was even invented.  All the terrible things he did and all the good intentions, sincere or not, that he had, that is between him and whatever God is governing this bitch of a universe. We on the left know better than to look at individuals to answer important questions, we know to look at systems.  And gather lessons so that we can build better movements in the future.

Yeah, whatever, intersectionality.

Sorry this was so long and poorly written.  I shall cite no sources and do no editing.  Fuck you.  Thanks for reading.

[eeveelutionsforequality]

actingnt said: "@[redacted] a tulpa is a a purposeful creation within a tulpamancer’s mind. It can mean anything from a single-purpose drone to a whole person. Traumascum is truscum for multiplicity: People who accuse others of faking on the basis that they haven’t suffered enough to earn their multiplicity."

I found this while in the actuallytraumagenic tag. This person has us blocked apparently, hence why I'm responding to a screenshot. Here's the original post: https://actingnt.tumblr.com/post/184864792553/tulpa-systems-and-spiritual-systems-are-just

Firstly, how is that at all racist? Claiming to have alters without having the necessary causal factor isn't a race, it's a claim, and disagreeing with that claim isn't singling any race out or discriminating against any race, it's disagreeing with a claim. If you're claiming that disagreeing with somebody's spirituality is racism, then you're wrong - spiritual beliefs are not a race, they can have cultural significance but disagreeing with somebody's beliefs does not make you racist. You, by definition, must disagree with the vast majority of spiritual beliefs because most of them contradict each other massively - racism would be to disagree because the belief is held by a particular race, and not to disagree based on contradictory evidence or contradictory beliefs. Spiritual claims can be as factually incorrect as any other, and when you're claiming to have a medical condition that you couldn't possibly have then you don't get to hide behind "it's magic" to avoid criticism. I couldn't say "I have appendicitis" and when all the tests come back negative respond with "actually I believe that I have appendicitis for spiritual reasons" - if you don't have something then you don't have it, no matter how hard you believe.

Secondly, dissociative identity disorder is a medical condition, it has a necessary causal factor - being the victim of abuse or other prolonged/repeated trauma at a very young age. You can't have PTSD without trauma, and you can't have other disorders that are caused by trauma without trauma, that's what causes them, that's how they work. It's not whether you've "suffered enough to earn" it - it's whether you've experienced the thing that causes the disorder (plus "earn", really? it's a disorder not a trophy). When your doctor refuses to give you stitches for a wound that you don't have, they're not saying that you "haven't suffered enough to earn" stitches, they're saying that you don't have a wound and thus don't need stitches. Nobody's saying this because of some suffering elitism, they're saying it because if you don't have the causal factor then you don't have the medical condition that it causes. They're saying it because the people who are claiming to have our disorder without actually having it are spreading masses of harmful misinformation, misrepresenting the disorder, and actually hurting people (see the legions of assholes who faked having DID, invented "system-hopping" and other lies, and used those things to abuse others). People don't want to be misrepresented, lied about, and abused by people who are pretending to have a medical condition that they couldn't possibly have. It's ableism to go around pretending to have a condition that you don't have and negatively affecting sufferers of the condition and the reputation of the condition in the process.

Tulpas are the claim that one can create alters consciously and of your own volition - there is no evidence of this, and even people with DID can't create alters consciously, you can't design and build a custom alter. Alters are created subconsciously and come as they come, it's not build-a-bear. If you're claiming the ability to create alters without trauma, that's a claim of being endogenic (which simply means, in this context, a claim of having alters without trauma... in other contexts it means formed or occurring beneath the surface of the earth, fun fact), and it's misrepresenting what the condition is and how it works to the detriment of sufferers (imagine getting asked "Why don't you just make an alter who can do that?" when you're facing a struggle, because people genuinely think you could just magically craft an alter for the occasion... that shit happens because of the lies of "tulpamancers"). If you claim to have alters for "spiritual reasons" and not as a result of trauma then you're again making a claim of being endogenic (whether or not you actually have alters depends - some people claim to be endogenic but actually have trauma and alters caused by that trauma, they simply deny the causal link, some mistake another symptom or condition for DID, while others are total frauds who are well aware that they're conning people for their own gain or amusement), and again misrepresenting the disorder (implying it's a casual belief system that entails belief in souls and other things, and not a medical condition that causes difficulty for masses of people). That's just factually what you're claiming when you say those things, you're claiming an endogenic cause, and there is no evidence to support any of that, and there is evidence to the contrary - trauma has been isolated to be necessary to cause DID, OSDD-1a, and OSDD-1b (the conditions that can cause alters), and some of the mechanisms and neurological reasons for that have been and are being isolated too.

Calling people "traumascum" is fucked up. You're literally mocking people for having experienced horrible, prolonged, repeated childhood trauma that scarred them for life. Like, I cannot understand how you woke up one morning and thought that calling people who'd suffered severe abuse as children "traumascum" was a good idea. I literally cannot fathom the levels of either stupidity or maliciousness that are present within your skull. Additionally, you put this post in the "actuallytraumagenic" tag/search, the place that people go into to talk about their trauma and their experiences with this medical condition - that's how I found it. You're a shimmering example of why the ideology that DID isn't a medical condition, that anybody who wishes hard enough can create alters, is harmful - it's literally gotten you to a point where you think that it's okay to go into a safe space for survivors and call us "traumascum". I don't know if you've dehumanized them in your mind, if you simply don't care about their feelings, or if you've another reason to want to hurt and trigger people you don't even know, based solely on the fact that they don't want people to misrepresent the medical condition that they have - whatever it is, mocking people's trauma is way out of line.

"Truscum" (transmedicalists) believe that having gender dysphoria is necessary to be trans. They believe that it's a medical condition with medical treatment that needs to remain medical, not cosmetic, in order to allow people with this medical condition to access that medical treatment. Gender dysphoria doesn't mean "hating yourself", it isn't a quantifiable amount of suffering (because suffering isn't quantifiable - your whole "they think you haven't suffered enough" spiel doesn't make any sense when you put that into context, because I've never heard transmedicalists or traumagenic folks claim that suffering is quantifiable, in fact I've heard them state the exact opposite, that it's a very subjective experience), it means dysphoria pertaining to one's sex and sex characteristics - a persistent, ongoing sense of discomfort or wrongness pertaining to those things. Nobody is saying that you have to reach a suffering quota to be trans - they're saying that in order to be trans you have to have the necessary symptoms. Being trans is a neurological condition - the brain develops differently in key gendered areas to how the body develops, and this difference causes gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is a sense of wrongness and misalignment pertaining to one's sex and one's sex characteristics - you feel like they don't match, you feel uncomfortable with them, they feel out of place, and often you feel like you should have specific different sex characteristics. If you don't have any dysphoria then you don't have the causal factor (the differing areas of the brain), and so if you then alter your body through transition you will end up with a body that doesn't align with those areas of the brain - this will cause dysphoria. Transmedicalists spread this information with the goal of preventing people from spreading misinformation, with the goal of keeping the recognition of the condition as a medical one so that people can access treatment, and with the goal of preventing people from causing themselves dysphoria by undergoing a medical procedure that is unnecessary for them. As with those against endogenics, it's not "suffering elitism", it's an attempt to represent the situation and the condition accurately.

~ Vape

[moonmothmama]

ok. so. The Princess Bride. i read it yesterday.

and right up front, before even a review, i’m gonna go ahead and list everything objectionable in the book that i can recall. please don’t take the length of the bullet pointed items to follow as an indication that the book was wildly problematic and offended me at every turn; it wasn’t and it didn’t. but there were some things that made me go: 😑 or 😒, and here it all is, presented with context, before anything else, because to be honest, i didn’t expect any of it. the film is relatively spotless, which is pretty rare for that era, and if any of you are thinking of reading it, you could do with being more prepared for this than i was.

first off, racism. two passing remarks. one isn’t even in the story proper; it’s in the first whole long intro bit from the author/narrator. that takes some explanation, i suppose: like in the film, the story is presented as a book having been written by “S. Morganstern,” except instead of a grandfather reading to his sick grandson, the narrator is interjecting with notes on the original text that he has abridged. the beginning is a whole long shpiel that, in my opinion, could have been significantly pared down with absolutely zero loss to the story (which! hey! the film did perfectly! go figure!). anyway, the first racist remark is an absolutely tasteless line in which the narrator pisses and moans about his fat son, making a crack about “painting him yellow” and making him a sumo wrestler. y i k e. the other passing remark is from Miracle Max (really, truly, the film version of this scene is miles better than the book version, but contains an important plot detail, so you should prob still read it, but i’ll give you the lowdown if you wanna skip). he refers to Iñigo as a sp*ck (rather bafflingly, i might add, bc Iñigo is a Spanish man... from Spain... not a Hispanic or Latino man from Latin America. so. i mean i’m certainly not an expert on slurs but... i have never in my life heard that term in reference to a person from Spain, and am virtually certain it was invented to refer to ppl from the americas) and in the same breath uses an objectionable term for a Polish person. sooo... again: y i k e. what gets me is that... these could’ve just been edited out? why weren’t they? i mean i know why but

fat shaming! see above. though to be honest, any true negativity about fatness is restricted to the author/narrator’s interjections; there are a few minor fat characters in the story and those depictions, without being too long-winded or spoilery, didn’t offend me (fyi: i’m fat). if you want the details, please feel free to message me about it.

if we can go back to the whole long beginning shpiel from the author/narrator, it’s just... eh. he comes off as kind of a jackass, tbh. not even halfway through it i found myself more than a little impatient for the story to begin, and that could be at least partly because the film spoiled me with a lovely, not annoying, not problematic scene of Granddad Columbo reading to Baby Fred Savage where no one made any racist remarks or ragged on fat kids. the basic gist, if you want to skip it, is that the author, as a kid, had this book read to HIM by his father, who was a Florinese immigrant, and nearly illiterate in English, but still labored over reading the English translation to his American-born son, who adored the book and requested it read to him dozens and dozens of times over the years, refusing to read it himself (though he read plenty of other books). as an adult, he buys his son the book, and is crushed when the son doesn’t like it. he then reads it for the first time, and realizes his father skipped over huge, boring blocks of text. he read his son only The Good Parts. so he decides to edit that shit out himself and release the abridged version he loves so much. add into that some complaining about his wife and some extra blah blah, and that’s pretty much it.

you remember the scene in the movie where The Man In Black/Westley almost slaps Buttercup for what he believes is lying? in the book he actually slaps her. not that his actions seem supported or endorsed by the text, but still, there you are. Buttercup does push him off a cliff soon after, though, so. i wouldn’t call that ‘even’ exactly but, shrug

Vizzini, in the book, has a fucky leg and his back isn’t quite straight, and he’s referred to repeatedly as a “humpback” or “hunchback” which needless to say is Not Kosher

that, as i recall, is it. i hope i’m not forgetting anything. now onto content/trigger warnings:

alcoholism. this shouldn’t be a surprise if you’ve seen the movie: Iñigo has some, shall we say, issues

Fezzik’s parents were... terrible. CPS would be all over them. spoiler: basically they emotionally blackmailed their son into fighting professionally, which they knew he hated, by telling him they’d abandon him if he didn’t

Buttercup has some kinda messed up (read: unsettling but in no way graphic) nightmares after leaving Westley when they’re found by Prince Humperdinck at the Fire Swamp, mostly involving bearing children to the Prince who she once again is set to marry

the slurs and whatnot i mentioned above

violence, obviously. nothing worse than the film as i recall.

that’s it i think. 

okay. all that said. did i enjoy the book? yes i did. a lot.

now, you might be thinking: jesus, Kathleen, after all the shit you just listed? and to this i reply: listen. there is no Unproblematic Media, so you either enjoy some things that are flawed, or you enjoy nothing at all. there is plenty of objectionable shit in Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit! fucking plenty! and i love those books! and so do plenty of other people! in my own humble opinion, the good story is worth the shitty bits, because the shitty bits aren’t like, fundamental to the plotline. the story isn’t built on offensive humor or nasty, bigoted attitudes. and they’re also not the most egregious examples of Objectionable Content i’ve come across- not by a longshot. there are levels to offense. there are tiers of bullshit. this is on a far lower tier than a whole host of other things i could mention. but if any of this stuff i’ve listed crosses a line for you, i totally understand and respect that. that’s why i’ve bothered to list it at all. imo, how you respond to objectionable content is important: you don’t ignore it or excuse it, you acknowledge and criticize it. and if you still enjoy whatever the thing is, you allow yourself to enjoy it, without getting hissy or defensive with people for whom the objectionable content ruined the book/movie/whatever. 

there you go, there’s my disclaimer for having enjoyed the book. your mileage may vary.

okay. so. review time.

Buttercup is a far more interesting character in the book than the movie, for which the movie can’t be faulted all that much, because you can’t easily translate a character’s inner monologue/unspoken thoughts to the screen, especially not with the time limit that comes with the medium of film. but watching her struggle with her feelings and life choices (and... lack thereof, since her choice is between marrying the prince and being put to death, which isn’t much of a choice, even if she tries to reason it out later by telling herself she COULD have said no... and initially did) creates far more of a bond between her and the reader in the book than, personally, i felt watching the movie. also she has a great line after Westley calls her beautiful at their reunion- she says something like, ‘everyone’s always calling me beautiful, i have a mind too, why don’t you talk about that’

Both Westley and Buttercup are immature, naive, and foolish in the beginning, and if Westley strikes you as Extra Dickish, a) rewatch the film! he did act like a bit of a dick, there, didn’t he? b) remember that in the story he’s a young man between the ages of eighteen and twenty five, which in my considerable experience is the age at which young men are generally at their peak of Asshole. sorry dudes

and not that Buttercup herself is a complete peach! she deals very poorly with her emotions in general and acts kinda shitty herself once or twice. i won’t say too much lest i spoil everything that’s different between the film and the book.

Prince Humperdinck is also a more three dimensional character; still a rat bastard tho.

onto Fezzik and Iñigo.

as i have said in other blog posts, these boys are... pretty much the whole reason i sought out the book. and... jesus. 

you get all the way into the tragic backstories that were only hinted at in the film. okay, Iñigo’s backstory was more than hinted- but of course you go so much deeper in the book- and Fezzik’s was less than hinted, reduced mostly to a peek at the insecurity that Vizzini exploits and preys upon to keep him in line. not that you’d have to expend a great effort to him to keep him in line; his personality is docile and non-confrontational. truly not the slightest bit aggressive by nature. he’s also kinda clingy and needy, which is a thousand percent understandable given his childhood, and tbqh doesn’t need to be browbeaten for Vizzini to keep him on his short, cruel leash. which makes it all the more painful! hurrah! 😭

also you actually get to meet Iñigo’s father, Domingo Montoya, in a flashback, aaaand... i kinda love him. probably predictable if you know me.

anyway. tragic backstories. which further illuminate the emotional and psychological issues that make them so dependent on Vizzini, and turn them to lives of crime in his employ. poor boys! oy gevalt. sympathy abounds; i honestly don’t know how you could go through the book and not fall at least a little bit in love with this duo, whose friendship is precious and adorable and a balm to the soul that is aching from their painful life stories and unhealthy coping mechanisms. they’re each, very plainly, the only friend the other has in the world, and are constantly helping and bolstering one another. it’s heartbreakingly sweet. i think those boys will be alright as long as they stick together.

and now, the repeated theme of the book, that is presented with far less intensity in the film: life isn’t fair. which, one supposes, is true. but while the narrator’s framing of that assertion may give you the same misgivings they gave me- bitching about his fat son and his less than ideal relationship with his wife- you can also step back and appreciate it as a wee pearl of wisdom. life is often unfair, but that doesn’t mean it’s altogether bad or that you can’t enjoy it. idk, that’s my attitude, man. 

i could talk about the ending here, but i won’t. at least not too much. not to spoiler-ish-ly. if you don’t want to know anything about the book’s ending at all, feel free to not read the last bit here, except for the very last lines which are bolded.

ready? yes? no?

...

the ending to the book is different than the movie. there is a more philosophical, open ended conclusion than you could really get away with in a movie. at least this movie.

just throwing it out there: i believe in happy endings. ones in real life. but i kind of disagree with the author a little bit, in that i don’t think happy endings necessarily have to be perfect and unblemished to qualify as happy endings. that may be the way “happily ever after” is generally presented, but to me, “happily ever after” means, maybe some shit happened, but none of it was completely devastating, and in the final analysis, life was satisfying. that’s the kind of real life happy ending i’m aiming (and hoping) for. this might sound vague but i hope it’ll make sense if you read the book.

if you wanna do that, btw, i read it for free online at allnovel dot net.

[thesharondefenseleague]

I think fandom homophobia isn't talked about enough. I swear people in fandom love acting like its a non issue because gay ships seem so popular on tumblr. But we are in a bubble here. Fandom has more gay ships because fandom explored what canon doesn't pretty often. And even then often gay ships are specifically more popular on tumblr and not necessarily in fandom at large.

We are here getting salty at fans for shipping the two "white male favs" instead of a ship with a woman and act as if m/m is somehow commonplace everywhere now and the real minority is people who ship m/f. And you know they don't give a shit about racism. I have almost never seen this argument used in cases where there is a large poc cast like BP. Only ever in stories when the majority of the cast is white and even then half the time they aren't even defending a minority ship. They say oh you just like your white male favs when defending a white m/f ship like the fucking audacity. The attempt to score fake woke points here is nauseating. Just say you want your ship to be popular and go. That is literally the only issue here. Don't pretend you care about racism in fandom.

Like honestly the entitlement . And I say entitlement because whenever I see the salt online it's because there's a m/f ship thats less popular than the m/m one. There were articles about how impressive it is Reylo was popular on tumblr. Like the complete ridiculousness of this. M/F is more popular everywhere and everything except for certain websites like tumblr and Ao3. And people here acting like its revolutionary when there is a popular M/F ship on those sites because heaves forbid M/F ships be less popular anywhere. And I emphasize M/M and not F/F because there are so few popular fandoms with a large and fleshed out enough cast of women that F/F has less opportunity to get as popular. But if that ever became true I bet you the argument would be F/F is only popular with straight guys who wanna jerk off and the argument would ignore that a huge chunk of fanfic writers especially on Ao3 are LGBT women.

[[Before I answer, can I just say I’m baffled but impressed at how this was delivered as one who ask and not, like, seven separate parts with a weird delivered order. I hope this is a new feature and not a fluke.]]

I think it’s a problem with tumblr users in general that they invent their own realities and accept it as commonplace everywhere. I might believe no one ships Reylo, but that’s far from true. I just don’t follow blogs that ship it (sort of - my friend ships them, so I only see it if she posts it).

There’s definitely a strong level of misogyny and racism in fandom. I’m not putting myself above it - I’ve written stories and found myself asking if it’s racist or misogynistic, then looked into how I could fix it. It’s 2021, we know how to check ourselves for this.

I will say, again, that straight women are just as straight as straight men. A good example is the QaF fans being straight women who loved there being a show with gay men having explicit/graphic sex in every episode, to the point where as the show continued, there was less and less lesbian sex, even with a consistent lesbian couple in the show from start to finish. Yes, there’s a sizeable queer and trans female group of fanfiction writers, but we know who’s writing the fetishy graphic stuff most of the time, and who’s very defensive about how they come off (because they can’t be homophobic if they have gay ships!).

It’s this same kind of straight audience who were pushing that bi Steve narrative back in 2016/2017, but didn’t like it when you told them that a bi Steve could still be with a woman, because that exposed that they really just wanted Steve to kiss a man, but not Sam, and then they were mad that they were called out for being racist on top of being biphobic and fetishistic of gay men.

I mean, I ship popular, non-canon (and never will be canon) M/M ships. I don’t think the movies ever pushed this ship to having potential to exist in canon. (I ship one specifically because a cosplay couple I followed cosplayed about them, and I’ve never seen their potential in canon. I was only introduced through this way. Hence why I never openly post them here, just read and write a couple fics.)

M/F ships aren’t revolutionary either. They’re just so uncommon in this one setting where gay is more common than straight (and both more common than lesbian and proper bi/pan and trans representation that isn’t used for fetish shit).

TBH, the politics of shipping culture are so wild now that it makes me tired. Almost wanna say fuck it, I ship nothing. No one gets love or sex. But the solution that suits me best is stepping back from shipping culture, because it’s gonna be crazy on here. The only benefit of tumblr over Twitter is that here, no one can harass creators for ships. I fucking hate when people attack creators/actors on Twitter for ships. I hate that producers and showrunners won’t protect the actors/actresses who are harassed for this shit and leave them to fend for themselves (I won’t forget how Emily VanCamp was left to defend herself and tried to keep it lighthearted as if certain demons weren’t being true assholes over her kiss). Just ship your shit, stop pretending you have a justified narrative, and move on. No need for harassment in shipping culture.

~Mod R

[kunkutarpulla]

Rant: 18 things white people seem not to understand (because white privilege)

Hello, everyone! Since “white privilege” is a famous topic in this century, let’s talk about it. I took the text from Macy Sto. Domingo.

  Remember guys: I’m not mocking her or hating her because of her skin color. Racism isn’t accepted. I despise her as a person.

  I was originally going to post this on deviantART, but I post it in Tumblr instead, because these people need to listen the voice of reason.

  Let’s start.

  “I don’t wake up every morning with the intention of pissing you off, I swear, and whether or not you believe it, I’m here to help you. “

  No, you’re here to show how stupid and ignorant you are, since you’re talking about something non-existent like white privilege.

  “I want you to recognize that on a daily basis, you hold a set of advantages and immunities that are a direct result of the oppression of people of colour. “

  No one in civilized countries like the USA isn’t advantaged or immune because of their skin color. Stop disgracing Albert Fish’ black child victims or Native Americans who were slaughtered by pioneers.

  “That doesn’t sound nice, does it? Makes you squirm in your chair a bit and maybe feel a little uncomfortable, right?”

  More like annoyed.

  “But here’s the thing – I’m not here to make you feel comfortable, that’s not my job. I’m here to erase the invisibility of the privileges you have that continue to help maintain white supremacy.“

  African slavery and apartheid already ended in the USA. Racism doesn’t equal white privilege. Using single racism cases to “prove” white privilege exists in the USA is like using single child abuse cases to “prove” oppression on children exists in the USA.

  “I’m here to show you what your White Privilege is.”

  I can show you what white privilege is.

  “White privilege (or white skin privilege) is a term for societal privileges that benefit people identified as white in some countries, beyond what is commonly experienced by non-white people under the same social, political, or economic circumstances.”

  Is anyone tolerating discrimination? No. There are no discrimination laws in your society, everyone are treated equally, no matter with the skin color. Do you have non-white politicians? Yes. You even had one as a president. Can black folks be rich? Yes. There are for example 29 black rich celebrities in US we all love and know. And do you know what’s funny? Asian people are getting richer and richer in America, they have highest study rankings and they have the best possibilities to get a job. Yes, even whites are losers compared to them. Why don’t you invent a new word and call it “Asian privilege?”

  “1. White Privilege is being able to move into a new neighborhood and being fairly sure that your neighbors will be pleasant to you and treat you with respect.”

  That’s called been able to move where ever you want and get good treatment, and it has nothing to do with white privilege. Except in some  African countries, where white-only cities and discrimination laws are still common. Why don’t you go there to complain about white privilege? Oh, I forgot. You’re an SJW. Their lives don’t matter, because they don’t concern around you and your first world problems. My mistake! ;P

  “2. White Privilege is being able to watch a movie, read a book and open the front page of a newspaper and see yourself and your race widely represented and spoken for.”

  Show me one recent movie or book where white race is praised, and other races are mocked. And praising a one single person doesn’t equal praising a whole race. Donald Trump gets lots of negative criticizing for being an asshole and he’s white.

  “3. White Privilege is being able to seek legal, financial and medical help without having your race work against you.”

  That’s corruption, not white privilege. Just like money, corruption knows no skin color. There are still places where gays aren’t allowed to donate blood, because people still believe in that ridiculous AIDS myth. And in the “Bible belt”, Atheists aren’t allowed to hold the office. In Oklahoma, they can’t even get married. And there are much more Atheists can’t do, because they’re Atheists. Majority of gays and Atheists are, surprise surprise, white. Where’s that white privilege you’re talking about now?

  “4. White Privilege is living in a world where you are taught that people with your skin tone hold the standard for beauty.”

  No. They. Don’t. Every country has their own beauty standards and they change according to the culture, and they have nothing to do with skin color.

  - In Ehtiopia’s Karo tribe, women create scars to their bodies, because body scars are considered beautiful, and they help you to get a husband.

- In Kenia’s Masai tribe, long eardrops and shaved heads are attractive.

- In Burma and Thaiwan, long, giraffe-like necks are an ultimate sign of beauty.

- In China, Thailand and Japan, being pale as a porcelain doll is considered beautiful. In Japan, women avoid the sun, while in China and Thailand; women are whitening their skin with skin-care products. Whitening skin was a thing before whites even came there.

- Maoris in New Zealand, take face tattoos.

- In Mauritania, being overweight is beautiful. That what SJWs like you love. My God, that’s cultural appropriation! Majority of overweight SJWs are white, so they have to go lose weight quickly!

- In Iran, surgical bandages are the most beautiful thing ever.  It’s a sign of their social status and their path on the route to beauty.

- In India, women decorate their skins with beautiful paintings for festivals and celebrations.

- In Japan, stick straight hair has always been a norm and a sign of beauty. Again, noting to do with white people.

  If white skin tone holds the standard for beauty, these beauty standards I mentioned wouldn’t exist.

  “5. White Privilege is never being told to, “get over slavery”.”

  Because white slavery is never talked about in school. Believe me, if it was, we would get a comment like “Our enslavement was worse than yours, get over it.” White Brittish sailors were kidnapped and sold as slaves in Africa. White women have been sold to Arab sultans. Germanians and Gallians were enslaved by Romans. Europeans ran serfdom. And the term “slave” originated from Slavic language, because majority of the slaves were white. Read history.

  “6. White Privilege is having the prevalence and importance of the English language and finding amusement in ridiculing people of colour/immigrants for their accents and their difficulty in speaking a language that is not their native tongue.”

  English is important language, because it’s an international communication language. Whenever you’re white or not, you must to study it. And if you move to country where people speak different language (France, Turkey, China), of course you study their native tongue. I’m a Finn, which means my native tongue is Finnish. But I still have to study both English and Swedish, which aren’t my native tongues, because English is important and Swedish is compulsory.

  “7. White Privilege is arrogantly believing that reverse racism actually exists.”

  Reverse racism isn’t a real term. It’s just racism. And yes, racism on white people actually exists.

  Are you denying how Brits referenced Irish as “white niggers” or how they can’t go to heaven because of their hair color? Or that how Finns were savages in pioneers’ eyes just like Native Americans? Are you saying white Romanians aren’t Romanians? Or Albert Einstein and Anne Frank weren’t Jews, because they’re white? Or Sami are less important, because they’re white? History has lots of examples of anti-white racism. In American universities, white people’s rights are limited because of their skin color. How that’s not racist? And what about BLM? They hold lots of anti-white ideals, shout anti-white slogans like “Hunting season on whitey” and have even committed crimes for them. Just go to YouTube or any other sites you know and see what bad things they have done. And Asia has the most racist people; they don’t allow non-Asian immigration at all.

  You are racist for denying existence of racism on white people and saying only whites can be racist.

  “8. White Privilege is being able to stay ignorant to the fact that racial slurs are part of a systematic dehumanization of entire groups of people who are and have historically been subjugated and hated just for being alive.”

  More like vice versa: You can say “cracker” without being labeled as a racist. But if we say “nigger”, we are racist, even though we wouldn’t be.

  8 mile, albino, blue-eyed devil, cracker, dog-fucker, egg, flour bag, gringo, haole, ivory, Johnny Red, lobster, maggot, nigger magnet, ofay, pig-fucker, redneck, serial killer, tornado bate, umlungu, vamp, white trash, yogurt and zeeb.

  Guess what these are? Racial slurs against white people. And that’s not even all of them. You can view the whole list in rsbd.com.

  “9. White Privilege is not having your name turned into an easier-to-say Anglo-Saxon name.”

  My name isn’t Anglo-Saxon, it’s Finnish. Nordics also had to adopt Anglo-Saxon names to use when they were baptized to Christianity, which originates from THE MIDDLE EAST, not Europe. You’re not that special.

  “10. White Privilege is being able to fight racism one day, then ignore it the next.”

  If you oppose racism, you always oppose racism. If you support racism, you always support racism. Political side isn’t a piece of cloth you change every day. It’s on your side for the rest of your life.

  “11. White privilege is having your words and actions attributed to you as an individual, rather than have them reflect members of your race.”

  Actually yes. People can referenced for saying “that white person” or “that black person”, and there’s nothing wrong with that. People do that, because they want everyone to know who they are talking about.

  12. White Privilege is being able to talk about racism without appearing self-serving.

  I don’t understand. How is a black girl who’s taking about her misery self-serving? That doesn’t make any sense.

  “13. White Privilege is being able to be articulate and well-spoken without people being surprised.”

  Show me one case where non-white person surprised everyone for being intelligent, because I have never seen a reaction like that in my whole life.

  “14. White Privilege is being pulled over or taken aside and knowing that you are not being singled out because of your race/colour.”

  Morgan Freeman is known as his own person, and he’s black. People love him, because he’s wise and knows what he’s talking about. They don’t give a shit about his skin color.

  “15. White Privilege is not having to teach your children to be aware of systematic racism for their own protection.”

  My God, don’t make me laugh! Everyone can be racist towards everyone, that’s how human race works. Learn the definition of racism and stop being so biased. And if you’re afraid to go out, study self-defense or move to safer place.

  “16. White Privilege is not having to acknowledge the fact that we live in a system that treat people of colour unfairly politically, socially and economically and choosing, instead, to believe that people of colour are inherently less capable.”

  We acknowledge that as well. How do you think there are white people in anti-racist organizations, if they deny the existence of racism?

  “17. White Privilege is not having your people and their culture appropriated, romanticized or eroticized for the gain and pleasure of other white people.”

  Firstly, we’re not claiming we own dream catchers, sombreros or kimonos. It’s not cultural appropriation. It’s cultural appreciation. You’re confusing us with Hitler.

Secondly, Kim Jong-un claims he invented hamburgers and sauna to spread the propaganda about that how great he is. These two are from white cultures.

  Thirdly,

  - Medieval Age is romanticized all the time.

- There are overly sexualized Viking and Scottish outfits.

- German Oktoberfest leads tourists all around the world.

- Sylvanian Families toys romanticize 50s’ England.

- Italian pizza has become majority’s favorite food.

- Greek cheese, olives and wines have lost of popularity everywhere.

- Finnish “Ievan Polkka” and Swedish “Carameldansen” are hits in Japan.

  All these examples are from white cultures. This should also be cultural appropriation, according to your logic. Over 90 % of everyday stuff we do is cultural appreciation. Don’t oppose cultural appreciation if you support multiculturalism, hypocrite.

  “18. White Privilege is being able to ignore the consequences of race.”

  That’s simply called being racist, not having white privilege.

  I know what white people have done in the past, and as a white person, I’m sorry about it. But every race in the world history has done exactly the same thing, even to people of their own color. This doesn’t give you any privilege to be racist today’s generation because of that what their ancestors did.

  As a Finn, I understand what your ancestors have faced. Finns have been oppressed by Swedes and Russians in their history. And also kidnapped elsewhere to slavery.

  I don’t hate modern generation of Swedes and Russians, or descendants of other oppressors, because it’s not their fault what happened. Without them, Finland wouldn’t be what it’s today. I have forgiven that, because it’s in the past. You should do the same.

  Sorry hun. With your claims you just proved me white privilege doesn’t exist. That text was illogical, ignorant, arrogant and annoying, and it was difficult to take seriously. My final rank is 0/5.

  Poverty rate (change percents into numbers): https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/?dataView=undefined&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Other%22,%22sort%22:%22desc%22%7D

History of Ireland: http://www.libraryireland.com/HistoryIreland/Title.php

History of Finland: http://motherearthtravel.com/history/finland/index.htm

History of Poland: http://www.intopoland.com/poland-info/history-of-poland.html

Finndians: https://brucemineincident.wordpress.com/related-places-of-interest-2/finndians/

Sami people: https://intercontinentalcry.org/new-finnish-forestry-act-could-mean-the-end-of-sami-reindeer-herding/

Barbary slave trade: https://face2faceafrica.com/article/the-shocking-history-of-enslavement-of-1-5-million-white-europeans-in-north-africa-in-the-16th-century

Ottoman Empire: https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/ottomanempire_1.shtml

Mongol Empire: https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-13e0517e00721e2bcff06236f46edc75

Armenian Genocide: https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-i/armenian-genocide

Political oppression in Iran (as far as I know some Iranians have white skin): https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/iran

Nazis and Jewish Holocaust: https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10008193

Anti-Semitism: https://www.britannica.com/topic/anti-Semitism

German culture: https://www.livescience.com/44007-german-culture.html

French culture: https://www.livescience.com/39149-french-culture.html

Russian culture: https://www.livescience.com/44154-russian-culture.html

Commercial of Japanese toys: https://image.rakuten.co.jp/ribbon-m/cabinet/epoch/sylvanian/dh-05_01.jpg

Sign which says “No Spanish or Mexicans allowed”, and as far as I know, Spanish people are white. http://www.texasstandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/03.Photo_No_Mexicans_Allowed1.jpg

Video about enslaving Slavics (Note: It’s a two-parter): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IILgM74iYZQ

Yes, racism against white people exists in South Africa. I don’t play favorites here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq0GReiZyKc

McDonald’s in the Middle East: https://delhi4cats.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/saudi-queu.jpg

Asian little girl eating pizza: https://d3jkudlc7u70kh.cloudfront.net/children-eating-pizza.jpg

Black kids celebrating St. Patrick’s Day: http://annandamy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/St.PatsParade_kids.jpeg

POC woman in Viking outfit: https://images.halloweencostumes.com/products/22657/1-1/womens-forest-princess-costume.jpg

Ievan Polka from 1937: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myzO3eZh22E

Ievan Polka from 1952: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8fW2n_ma9Y

Original Caramelldansen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBOWWbCf-KU

  That’s all, folks.