#all protestors should know that there are limits

[beardedmrbean]

Two Barnard College students were expelled for disrupting a class at Columbia University on the history of modern Israel — in what appear to be the first expulsions for pro-Palestinian activism on the campus since the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023 attacks.

The protesters — who had been suspended since the disruption last month and barred from campus, including their dorm rooms and dining halls — were notified of their expulsion on Friday afternoon, according to Columbia University Apartheid Divest, the organizers of a pro-Palestinian encampment on campus last spring.

Barnard, the women’s college affiliated with Columbia, released a statement that under federal law, it could not comment on student disciplinary records.

“That said, as a matter of principle and policy, Barnard will always take decisive action to protect our community,” Barnard President Laura Rosenbury said in the statement.

“When rules are broken, when there is no remorse, no reflection, and no willingness to change, we must act. Expulsion is always an extraordinary measure, but so too is our commitment to respect, inclusion, and the integrity of the academic experience.”

The heightened discipline comes amid renewed pressure from the federal government to root out any protest activity that could be seen as antisemitic.

Columbia became the epicenter for campus protests last spring after former Columbia President Minouche Shafik’s decision to call the police launched a series of copycat encampments across the country. The demonstrations came to a head in April when protesters occupied an academic building, Hamilton Hall, spurring another call to the NYPD.

Within the first couple weeks of his presidency, Trump’s Education Department launched a civil rights probe into allegations of Jewish hatred at Columbia. His administration has also promised to deport campus demonstrators on student visas.

On Jan. 21, the first day of the spring semester, protesters disrupted a graduate program class — the History of Modern Israel — with flyers of a storm trooper boot crushing a Star of David and calls to “Burn Zionism to the Ground,” photos and videos on social media show.

The lecturer, Avi Shilon, invited protesters to join the session and learn about the conflict, but they continued the disruption, the student newspaper Columbia Spectator reported.

The backlash was swift. Columbia’s interim president Katrina Armstrong quickly condemned the disturbance and announced one Columbia participant had been suspended, while other disciplinary action was referred to Barnard. Faculty who had been vocal about the rights of students to protest penned an op-ed in the campus paper to denounce the episode.

One of the former students in a statement through Columbia University Apartheid Divest said they learned activism at Barnard — while likening Israel’s military response to the Holocaust, an analogy frequently condemned by Jewish groups.

“I was told countless times the value of voicing my opinions and standing up for what I know to be true and good,” said the expelled student, whose identity could not be independently verified by the Daily News.

“The fact that my removal has taken place so baselessly, simply because I believe that a Holocaust of the Palestinian people is unequivocally wrong has completely shattered the illusion of what I thought Barnard stood for.”

Columbia University Apartheid Divest said it was the first expulsion of any student affiliated with Columbia in connection with the protests and marked a “serious escalation in the crackdown against students advocating for divestment.” Dozens of Barnard students suspended last year were ultimately allowed back on campus.

The protest group — that while smaller in size this school year has grown more militant in its postures — appeared to be undeterred by the actions. On Sunday afternoon, Columbia University Apartheid Divest announced a “week of action,” including a university-wide “sick-out” on Thursday. It was quickly condemned in a statement by Columbia as unauthorized and an “unacceptable call to disrupt our academic mission.”

Brian Cohen, executive director of Columbia Hillel, threw his support behind Barnard’s “decisive action” and called on Columbia to follow suit in past and future demonstrations.

“When students have their right to get an education trampled on by masked protesters who burst into their classroom, those protestors need to be held accountable,” Cohen said. “This will send a clear message that the harassment of Jewish students and faculty will not be tolerated at Columbia.”

[mitskicain]

navi | m.list

. ⁺ . ✦ ‘sayang’ is a double-edged sword — kuroo x reader

© mitskicain all rights reserved. the modification, translation, and plagiarism of my work is strictly prohibited.

synopsis: based on the headcanon of a half-Indonesian kuroo. in which he learns that the language is full of contradictions.

content warnings: ANGST, mentions of bullying, homesickness

word count: 3.5k

· · ─────── ·{ ✐ᝰ.ᐟ}· ─────── · ·

Sayang. A two syllable word that was the unofficial translation of love in the Indonesian language. Technically love was ‘cinta’, but you didn’t like how it felt in your mouth—bulky and awkward—too big for anything. You liked the way ‘sayang’ sounded better, the way it rolled off the tongue so easily—fleeting, almost carelessly. Sayang.

Aku sayang kamu. I love you.

Your mother called you sayang. You recalled running up to her after school, her arms outstretched and wide open, waiting to wrap around you. The sweet scent of her skin that was like honeysuckle and summer, the warmth of her smile—beaming at you from the driver’s seat as you babbled about your day. She would call you that term of endearment whenever she had the chance.

Sayang, come down for dinner. Sayang, it’s time to wake up. Sayang, have fun at school!

Indonesian was your mother tongue. The first language you had learned how to speak. In a way, your entire childhood was defined by it. There were things in your everyday vocabulary that didn’t make sense, or were different when translated. In that way, you always felt like there was something missing when you spoke English or Japanese. When you left Jakarta during the 1998 riots, your mother, alongside a handful of other families, managed to escape from the fiery wrath of the protestors, sought asylum from any other country that was willing to take you. Some of your friends moved to Singapore, others, Malaysia, or Taiwan—for you it was Japan, a country that once had colonized yours but was now your saving grace. With only two suitcases to your name and your mother’s limited Japanese learnt during her high-school years, the two of you tried to make home in the foreign country. You were starting all over again. Language. School. Friends. It would prove to be difficult.

Japanese kids were mean. Not beating-you-up kind of mean, but snickering-behind-your-back mean. Back home, they would say things to your face, pick fights and shouting matches with you, but here, they talked about you in hushed whispers and lingering gazes. It was in the sharpie doodles on your school shoes and the scattered laughter that echoed whenever you slipped up when you read aloud for the class. You were still bad at Japanese—the language a tangle of syllables in your mouth. Your mother told you that it was because your tongue was just used to speaking Indonesian. You thought it was because Japan was foreign to you, in the bad way. In the way that your body silently rebelled against it by fixing your jaw in ways so you couldn’t say things right—so that years later, even after you became fluent, the trace of your mother tongue still lingered.

That was the first thing that Kuroo Tetsuro pointed out. You talk funny, were his first words to you—finger pointed straight between your eyes. A rage bubbled in your chest at the mention of it. It was something that you were insecure about, something you felt the need to hide. You didn’t even know you were muttering to yourself when you played in the playground’s sandbox until he pointed it out to you, and you hated that, and you made sure to let him know how much you did—through a mash of fists and bruises and a black eye (his, not yours).

Your mother made you apologize—the Japanese way—kneeling, on the floor. You were red hot and flushed, humiliated for having done so. Not for beating up the kid but rather for having been caught, and having to apologize. Why should you? He started it. He was making fun of you. “You talk funny,” psh, he looked funny. His sharp cat-like eyes and almost permanent bed head—how could his parents let him out of the house looking like that? Someone might mistake him for a stray.

That apology was how you found out Kuroo was a little bit like you—half-Indonesian, from his mothers side. The tiny Indonesian population in Japan meant that whoever was from the motherland clung together like thieves at sea. Maybe it was because of familiarity, maybe because of homesickness. In a way, all they had left of their home country was each other, speaking the same language, knowing the same songs, the same streets—sometimes even the same people. For them, this was the closest thing to coming home. This was how you eventually became friends with Kuroo, after years and years of living down the street and your mother inviting him over and attending the same school and making the two of you befriend the other.

It was rough at first. You refused to speak Japanese around him, fearing the same insult would come and jab at you when you would. Despite his mother’s nationality, he was never able to understand or speak the language that you did—part of himself almost denying that part of him after his mother left. Maybe that was his way of getting revenge, refusing to acknowledge his mother’s culture, her homeland.

The two of you would pass the time playing congklak, the Indonesian version of the mancala. You practiced counting this way, dropping the shells in each divot one by one—starting again if there were any remaining. He babbled on about TV shows he watched, or mangas he read, trying to make a point about how Japanese he was, how un-Indonesian, and by extension, how unlike his mother. Sometimes you would watch Ikkyu-san together. Sometimes he would flip through the comics you had brought over—Mahabhrata and Gundala and Bobo. You remember the look on his face as he traced over the pages, his nose scrunched in confusion.

“It’s too confusing, all these words look foreign to me,” he would say, putting them back on the shelf.

“So what?” You shot back, “I had to do the same thing when I came here. Kanji still looks like scribbles to me.”

There was no mashing of fists or sound of crying this time, just a mutual understanding of the others’ struggle. You watched him swallow the lump in his throat and pick up the book again, finger tracing the sentences, sounding out the words—like a child learning how to read for the first time. You sighed, defeated, and sat down next to him, trying to teach him. He was a persistent child, often needing to get his way regardless of whatever circumstances but here he was—docile, obedient. Something between the two of you shifted.

Kuroo began to grow out of his shell in middle school; making new friends on the volleyball team and tagging along during their after-practice escapades, oftentimes raiding the local convenience store for all the goodies. Sometimes you would come with, slipping into the background of conversations and keeping to yourself. You still didn’t like talking in front of anyone—so you kept your lips pressed together and our gaze downcast, a faraway look in your eyes. Of course, this caught the attention of some of his teammates.

“Is she mute?” One of them had asked, hands shoved in his pockets, walking a few steps ahead of you. Despite you hanging back, you could still hear him, but then again, it wasn’t like he made any attempt to speak quietly either. Or maybe he thought that you were also deaf.

“Dude,” he sounds, offended for you, “she’s right here.”

“So? It’s not like she ever says anything. It’s like she’s deaf, or mute—or both.”

Kuroo frowns at this statement. At home, he sits across from you, pencil tapping against the pages of his ignored math homework. You look up at him with your eyebrow cocked, as if, beckoning for him to spit it out already.

“Would it kill you to make some friends?” He asks, words sharp and unforgiving. Your shoulders slump at the question, and you give him a deadpan look before returning your attention to your assignment, already miles ahead of him.

“I don’t need them,” you mumble, “too much of a hassle.”

“How do you survive without them? Like seriously, nobody to lean on?”

“That’s how I like it.”

He grumbles inaudibly under his breath at your response, a mixture of frustration and annoyance echoing through his voice. He chews on his bottom lip before speaking up again, this time, rather boldly.

“You’re not alone.” You look up at him, eyebrows scrunched in confusion. He thumps his chest with his right hand almost solemnly, like making an oath. “You have me. I’m your friend. I’m here for you.”

Your eyes widen in shock, a blush creeping up to your cheeks. You press your lips into a thin line, not knowing what else to say. Instead, you nod your head in acknowledgement, and return your attention back to your homework. When you are done with the practice questions, you flip over your notebook so that he can copy your answers.

The first time he called you ‘sayang’ was in the spring of your freshman year. He said it after having heard your mother say that as she bid you goodbye for school. He had let it slip, almost by accident, as he repeated the word over and over in his mind as the two of you walked—sounding it out, feeling the weight of it in his mouth. He liked the way it rolled across his tongue, and something about it—the curve of the letters when spelled out, the softness of it seemed so you. When you had heard it, you stopped, the hair on the back of your neck raising as you looked back at him, almost incredulously. He stares back, puzzled at your reaction. This was the first time he had ever seen your reserved demeanor crack.

“What? What did I do?” He asked, genuine concern evident in his voice.

“What did you say?”

“What, ‘sayang’?” His hands move up to straighten his tie, suddenly nervous. “I’m sorry, was that a bad word?”

“No, it’s..” your voice trails off, cheeks reddening. You turn around and stomp forward, hands tight around the straps of your backpack. “Forget it. Don’t call me that.”

He stays at his place on the street, feet glued to the pavement, wondering what he had done wrong. The guilt creeps in, and in an attempt to absolve it, he hands you a steaming hot pork bun in between classes, even though the heat burns his skin and his fingertips are still red at the end of the school day. It’s something he’s willing to do for your forgiveness. Over the years he will find that he’s willing to do a lot for it, actually. Later, over dinner, he finds out through your mother that it's actually a term of endearment, something close to ‘my love’. The two of you exchanged awkward, embarrassed glances across the table.

The second time he called you ‘sayang’, it was by accident again—spoken absentmindedly as he thanked you for explaining the assignment. Thank you sayang, he said, before realizing and slapping his mouth with his hand. You looked at him with an equal amount of shock and horror. You excused yourself to the bathroom to compose yourself, and when you returned, the two of you acted like it had never happened. He wanted to apologize, but apologizing would mean having to explain himself, and that explanation would mean having to tell you that he had tried learning Indonesian and thought of calling you ‘sayang’ the same way they did in your mother’s sinetrons (Indonesian soap operas).

And you weren’t sure the exact moment that things had changed for the two of you. Before, it was a co-existence, the understanding that you existed in each other's worlds and just that. Now, it had warped into an odd and unfamiliar shape. He was running up to you in the hall, babbling on and on about every single thing—he was more Kuroo than he ever was before around you. And you couldn’t help but notice how much bolder and brighter he seemed. In the mornings on the walk to school, next to you, smiling through his stories of his strange dreams—you couldn’t help but notice that his eyes were actually hazel and not brown, and for a moment, before your consciousness kicked in, you thought he looked beautiful.

The third time he called you ‘sayang’, it was on purpose. No longer a freudian slip or accident, but deliberately—with intention.

The two of you were in the infirmary—you, pressing an ice pack to his swollen cheek, and him, wincing at the sharp sensation. A fight had broken out. It was his friend, that same friend, calling you mute again, but this time Kuroo wasn’t as forgiving. There was the mashing of fists and bruises and a black eye again. His, not yours. Just like when you were kids the first time you met on the playground.

“You didn’t have to do that for me,” you speak up, finding some strength in the words. A rage bubbled in your stomach. You couldn’t make up whether you were upset at him or for him. He reaches out to touch the skin of your wrist, the first time he had ever done anything of the sort, and tries his best to keep his swollen eye open. The red will turn ugly and purple within a matter of hours.

“I wanted to,” he says softly, almost like a whisper, voice hoarse from yelling. “They don’t get to do that. Not to you.”

Your expression is almost pained, torn between screaming at him for his showmanship or kissing him for it. You couldn’t decide.

“Still,” you sound, “you didn’t have to.”

“I wanted to,” he repeats, this time, even softer. His other hand plucks out the second button from his uniform, his chest peeking through. He removes the ice pack and slips the button in between where your hand and his cheek meet. It’s still tender and aching, but the skin of his neck, where your pinkie finger grazed over, was so warm and inviting—so soft it seemed like a shame not to touch. You run your thumb over his jaw, tracing over the shape of it, and he winces. Still, he grabs your wrist and presses your hand against his cheek even harder, turning his head to plant a kiss on the skin of your palm.

You didn’t know your hands could ever feel like that. It was as if there were a hundred million nerves that you didn’t know previously existed, and now, suddenly all firing. It was almost too much.

“Sayang,” he mumbles into your hand, lips tracing on your skin—you don’t pull away. You are mesmerized, struck. How you went so long without having reached out for him you wouldn’t know. Again he calls you sayang, whispering it with his eyes closed, almost like a prayer. You bite your lip.

“Yes?” You answer.

His eyes flutter open, a small look of shock painted that is immediately replaced with relief, and then—a grin splitting his face, lips stretched as far as they could with the swelling. His hands wound tightly around yours, and again, that feeling of electricity, soaring right through you.

“You answered,” he says, almost breathlessly.

“You called,” you reply.

It would take 2 weeks for the black eye to heal completely, but even less time for him to slowly integrate ‘sayang’ into his everyday vocabulary. The word that once seemed awkward and bulky now slid off smoothly from his mouth every chance he got. He liked it. Liked the way it felt rolling off his tongue, liked the way you looked every time he did, but most importantly—he liked how nobody else (apart from your mother) called you that. Like an exclusive nickname, but thousand-fold. He tried learning Indonesian again, as an easy way to impress you. Selamat pagi (good morning). Terima kasih (thank you). Cantik (beautiful). On your birthday, he had prepared and memorized a little speech in your mother tongue. You laughed when he said ‘aku cinta kamu’. You tell him nobody says ‘I love you’ like that.

“They only use ‘aku sayang kamu’”, you explain.

“Why not ‘cinta’?” He pouts, flustered at his mistake. “Cinta also means love, right?”

“Cinta and sayang are different,” you explain, cutting into the cake your mother had baked: pandan with coconut and brown sugar frosting. She searched for the ingredients for weeks.

“Cinta is a declaration. Sayang is a promise,” you place the slice of cake on his plate, pushing it towards him, “sayang is the promise of loving someone no matter what—whether that love is reciprocated, whether it is burdensome.”

He shoves his mouth full in an attempt to soothe his embarrassment. The cake is fragrant and light, a foreign medley of flavors on his tongue. He looks over in your direction, happily digging into the treat, and worries that no matter how much he tries to learn about your culture, there will always be a divide—some unabridged gap he will never be able to cross. When the two of you join a cultural exchange trip to Indonesia in the summer before your senior year, he witnesses firsthand how you spring back to life—like a wilting plant finally being watered.

The two of you ravage through the city, attending bustling night markets and festivals. He watches in shock as you devour heaps of sambal with your food. You bargain with a lady for a fair price on batik, a souvenir and reminder of Indonesia that you wanted him to have. You wear these in weddings, you tell him. His mind wanders to you wearing white, walking down the aisle. You run up and down beaches, drink out of coconuts, plumeria flower tucked behind your ear, and chat with the locals—relieved to finally be surrounded by people who looked and talked like you. He watches you throw your head back laughing, and feels his heart ache. You had been homesick all this time. Trapped in a foreign country and forced to abandon your culture for his, living in a society that merely tolerated her identity, never embracing it. His home was not yours, this he now understood.

So when you told him that you were going to move back for college he wasn’t surprised. The country had recovered from the bloodbath of ‘98 and was now brimming with potential for growth. Even Forbes had called it the tiger of Southeast Asia. Some of your friends were also returning. It was a land of undiscovered opportunity.

“I have to go back,” you explained to him. “In Indonesia, I can be somebody; here, I am always second-class.”

And it stung, because he knew you were right, and he knew that it was cruel to make you stay—like keeping a butterfly in a jar. When he sends you off, he can’t help but think of his mother. That was one of the things the two of you had in common: the both of you leaving him. However, this time he doesn’t cry or scream or beg the way he did. He lets you go, maybe even with a little bit of grace, and he does so because cinta and sayang meant different things and he meant the latter.

“Aku sayang kamu,” he tells you as he waves you off. I love you. I love you enough to let you go.

When the two of you meet again, it will be years later and you will be older. You will be dressed in white and he will be in his batik that you had gotten for him all those years ago. He will stand, awestruck, as you walk down the aisle—not towards him, but towards somebody else, and his heart will ache in the way that it did only for you.

Sayang, he will think, but not in the affectionate way. In the way that implies unbelievable loss.

Sayang. A two-syllable word that’s used to convey both love and loss in the Indonesian language. It was strange, the way something could mean the exact opposite of itself, but Indonesian was strange like that. A language that was filled with metaphors and contradictions. One that is hard to forget, and even harder to unlearn. Each word carried a weight, a duality that made almost every conversation a dance between clarity and ambiguity. It was as if the language itself knew that life was never just one thing; it was a series of paradoxes, constantly contradicting itself, where joy and sorrow often walked hand in hand.

Its counterpart definition implied grief. You used it when talking about missed opportunities, or something that goes wrong when you wish it hadn’t. It almost means: what a shame. It was just one of those things that can’t be translated just as is, because the definition was so much deeper. The same way its first definition meant to love someone unconditionally, the second meant to describe the heartache that lingers in the face of loss, a longing that never quite fades. A word that blended affection and regret all in one and could only be understood by someone who felt both at once.

He felt it then, watching you get married to somebody else.

Sayang sekali, he says.

I love you, and also, what a waste.

· · ─────── ·{ ✐ᝰ.ᐟ}· ─────── · ·

author’s note: my debut entry in the haikyuu fandom and its angst 😭😭 aNYWAYS WHERE ARE THE KUROO FANS MAKE SOME NOISE 🫵🫵🗣️🗣️‼️‼️ huge shoutout to @zumicho for having to hear me ramble on and on abt the fic and take forever to write it but it’s finally here !!!! and I’m so excited to share more w u guys aaaa I hope you guys like it 🥰🥰💥💥💥💥

[generalluxun]

Hey. Asking about how Chloe was abused. My knowldge of abuse is fairly limited to general pop knowledge so I'm curious as to what abuse was done to her.

Okay caveats first:

I am not a medical professional, I am simply someone with a vested interest in the topic who has done more research than the average person.

There are many definitions of abuse. Legal definitions are rarely useful, as they are limited to concrete, provable, gross violations. Just as you can inflict a lot of pain on someone without leaving the marks to prove assault, you can do a lot of damage to a child without it being legally 'provable'. Medical definitions are much more helpful for discussions.

Lastly some level of extrapolation is required as it is a show. We take what we are shown. For example:We actually only have Felix's word that he was ever abused, and his first character traits sre being deceitful and manipulative. We still take his word though, because it's a show. (And also we should give weight to victim accounts!)

So both parents are guilty in different ways. We will start with Audrey, the simpler one. There's clear verbal and emotional abuse demonstrated on screen. Mis-naming your child is a form of abuse:please ask the trans community about the impact of deadnaming even in full grown adults.

Beyond that she is constantly dismissive and belittling of her child- to the exclusion of all else. Style Queen/Queen Wasp is rife with examples. There is also the clear behavior shift in Chloé. The wheeling, approval seeking, hunched posture expecting rejection. This is a *pattern* not a one off. Audrey may live in NY, but no fashion movil would be away from Paris for 13yrs straight. We are simply seeing the most recent interaction. This culminates im a child having to ask 'Why don't you love me mother?' and the response is telling

Audrey barely chokes out the strange word when trying to contradict the question. It takes Marinette literally making them both mad at her to get a bare minimum of interaction on Audrey's part. It doesn't last though. Audrey falls back into her negation behaviors and is now present to inflict them more regularly on Chloé, while also being a constant target for/model of behavior for Chloé. (Seriously it was such a misstep to write Marinette reuniting a victim with an abuser) We know the show itself considers Audrey'ss care as a bad thing because the original script had André divorcing her and takin Zoé because Zoé 'doesn't deserve you' so Chloé being in an abusive parenting situation in Representation is supposed to be 'punishment'(ewww)

André is not off the hook either. People look at him 'spoiling' her and leave it at that. Well, 'spoiling' can in fact be abusive too. Let's look at what we see:

André has been her primary caregiver for 14 years now, so he has had the most responsibility in molding what we see for good or bad(mostly bad). She does learn from him too. Darkblade she proudly announces she learned everything about winning elections from watching her father. He's also excessively arrogant (I'm the symbol of Paris!) and quite willing to abuse his power for his own ends(having Roger round up protestors etc) which explains where Chloé learned where power is to be abused.

André is also extremely neglectful as a parent, extreeeeemely. Let's hit a bunch of points in the order they come to me.

Chloé lives *alone* in a hotel suite. There's no shared space, no family area. It's not even really her room. It's commercial, sterile. Where sre her hobbies? Posters? Even her *colors*? She is so used to being ignored at home that the girl who is loud as heck everywhere else doesn't make a single mark on her living space.

A hotel employee seems to think he needs to step in to raise Chloé. Let that sink in. An employee can see how bad it is and tried to make some kind of change, (he's working against a lifetime of ingrained behavior and is not very good at it himself). He doesn't even think to you know... Get Andre in to do this.

André was unaware or didn't care his daughter hasn't done schoolwork since Sabrina *learned to write*(5/6 yrs old) that is a shocking level of disinterest in your child. 6yr olds aren't criminal masterminds.

Andre supplants actual attention and affection with *stuff* he gives material possessions in *place* of parenting. This is somewhat similar to spoiling but not the same. André's method denies the child something vital. You see- things aren't a substitute for affection/attention, developmentally. And so while they may delight they never satisfy the need. They never validate the emotional attachment. So after the shine wears off, the hole is still there. So, like someone with an addiction, the child needs more, and more, and more. Since the needs are never met, it is never enough. And this is what the child views as *normal* this is simply *how it is*. They rarely know they are being given inadequate care because it's just life to them. Seeing something different in a one off doesn't make a dent vs a whole life.

This sort of thing makes a potent cocktail when mixed with the abandonment issues from her mother too. See- if her mother left, and daddy doesn't pay attention, anyone can leave. This leads to a cycle of pushing/demanding/hurting. The child expects to be left and let down, so they both try to reassure themselves it won't happen, and *make* it happen on their own terms (because they believe deep down it will) so more outrageous demands, because when those demands are met, it shows that you are still 'loved' and when they are not met, then there you go, you are not loved and they will leave you. It's a self-destructive spiral.

You see it play out with her interactions with her classmates and Sabrina specifically. How does she express affection? Gifts. What does she do? Push. Push and push and find the breaking point because if she can make Sabrina actually leave then it shows that she herself is worthless and her mother was right to leave her and her father is right to ignore her. Pretty messed up right? Yeah. Child abuse does horrible things to kids.

We're not done with André yet. Some people might say 'he expresses love for Chloé!' and to that I say- performatively.

André likes the idea of being a father. It's what respectable people do. It looks good on camera. It's someone to love him unconditionally. It's an ally against his wife.(broken home dynamics are horrible too) André just doesn't like having to parent for more than a snapshot.

We can see his interactions with Zoé highlight this too. He's delighted she's here!(a potential person on his side vs his wife and daughter) what's his first parenting advice? 'lock your dreams away and get on with life' A+ André.

What's he do in Queen Banana? He uses his power to let Chloé manipulate the movie *kicking Zoé out of it* This is the guy who is supposed to be supporting her? He only draws the line when it comes to sending Zoé away... Why? He doesn't want to lose an 'ally'. It's power dynamics. Not parenting. Where was he when Zoé was stuck in boarding school? He was going to keep Zoé in the divorce so clearly Mr Lee isn't in the picture, Audrey probably forgot Zoé existed, why didn't André bring Zoé to France and let the sisters grow up together? Oh, right, that might be work.

André likes Zoé because she comes pre-raised(boarding school was probably better than either parent) he doesn't have to put in work and he gets a free good kid to make him look like a father. She's his 'do over' as he throws the one he raised in the trash.

André shows his true colors when he's lamenting to Gabe about his corruption and abuse and blames ot on his 'heartless daughter' you know... The child he raised. The grown man is actually shoving his own corruption and misdeeds onto his child. You really don't need much more than that.

So, via neglect, verbal abuse, and emotional abuse the Bourgeois parents raised an incredibly messed up child. Chloé is not a 'good victim' like Adrien, she doesn't sulk quietly under abuse. She lashes out. She is hurt and angry and she passes the pain on. This is why they call it the cycle of abuse.

The end of Revolution illustrates this perfectly. Audrey throws verbal abuse at her on the plane. Angry that Chloé embarrassed her(not that she did wrong, Audrey loved the power grab) and calls her a loser by implication. You *see* it hit, the physical cringe. Then Chloé immedietely goes to try and pass on the pain. She is hurt and making someone else hurt is the only way to lessen it. She calls Marinette. Marinette breaks the cycle though, and good for her. But the show seems to have forgotten there's still one hurt child in this scene, and it doesn't seem to care.

I'm going to stop here for now. I probably left a bunch out, but I do have other things I need to do. Feel free to ask more questions. Thanks for taking the time to seek answers.

[susansontag]

I know that calls for de-platforming are generally cringeworthy and against the ethos of free speech, but that doesn’t excuse ‘anti-idpol’ types, and even journalists, of trying to reframe any form of protest outside a venue or institution as inherently a call for censorship. And I have seen people who I otherwise respect fall into this type of thinking.

For one thing, it completely attempts to reverse the power differentials between institutions and the general public, who often find that protest is the only viable method through which they can express their viewpoints and have a chance of them being heard e.g. through media reporting on their demonstrations. The public need to go to these places because news reporters aren’t going to randomly appear at their homes begging for interviews! The only option is to be loud and visible.

It also tries to suggest that any protest of an event, talk, vote, meeting, or whatever it is, is necessarily protestors trying to have the event called off. And quite frankly, even if some of them expressed their viewpoint in that clumsy/shortsighted way—“I wish this weren’t happening”/“not in our institution/university!” etc—that still doesn’t justify attempts to label all organised public displays of displeasure as the workings of overly sensitive babies who can’t handle opposition. The irony of these criticisms, of course, is that they usually themselves are calling for censorship: they want the protestors to be forced or encouraged to disperse.

Protest encapsulates much more than trying to stamp out opposing views. They are means by which alternative viewpoints can be highlighted and potentially brought to public consciousness, in the hopes of transforming the scope public discussion. They are important, they are always worth defending, even if you disagree with them, because as shortsighted as some of them may be, it’s far more shortsighted to side with those who are resorting to mockery and shaming with the aim of what must be—in my eyes—introducing policy to crackdown on the right of the public to organise themselves (first they tempt you with honey into limiting your rights, etc). You can criticise the content of what they say, but their right to be there saying something should be absolute.

[thoughtaddictand]

Queer rights are a legit reason to support Israel

With the advent of Pride Month, social media has been full of reports of pro-Palestinian protestors conflating "solidarity for Palestine" with LGBT rights. The reports go something like this: "Don't use queer rights as a weapon of 'colonization'". And it has many brothers and sisters.

Today I am doing the opposite. I tell you: As a gay man, the fact that Israel is gay friendly is part of the reason I support it. Both your country's existence and in its war against Hamas. And "Part of the reason" is the operative part of the previous statement. They're not the only reason I support them. However, my full reasons would go beyond the scope of a single post, so I'm just going to argue from the perspective of queer rights today.

First of all: I do understand the pro-Palestine arguement that them not being gay friendly is no reason for them to die or to not have self-determination. However, the important fact that is often being left out in pro-Palestinian advocacy is that they don't actually want self-determination, or at least don't want to stop there. They want Israel gone. Either by outright destroying it, or by undoing its Jewish majority through a "right-of-return", which would at the very least make your country in its current form cease to exist. Both would mean the only place in the Middle East that supports LGBT rights would be gone. And it's a very legit reason as a LGBT person to want the only country in the region that supports us to continue existing.

I do support Palestinian statehood if they agree to be peaceful neighbors, but not at the expense of another, functioning, country.

It's also a legit reason to support them in the war against Hamas. For the unlikely possibility that Hamas (and Islamism in general) should be victorious: They'd try to spread their hateful ideology in Europe next. So I see LGBT rights (and human rights in general) as part of what's at stake in the current fighting.

I also call bullshit on the pink washing accusations. I've made a full post on why I think the "pinkwashing" accusation is slander, so just a short re-hash: Israel supports LGBT rights, independently of the Israel-Palestine conflict. It's evident by the fact that human rights in general are respected, including the rights of women, of ethnic minorities.... Heck, even their own Palestinian minority enjoys equal rights. However, the narrative of an Israel that supports human rights doesn't fit the pro-Palestinian narrative. Because then their enemies might have to admit that Palestinians are themselves to blame for their pleight. That they're under occupation because they're dangerous, and not because Israel is a human rights abuser.

There are also two frequent arguements that people bring up as to why "Israel is not as gay friendly as it presents itself". 1) That there's homophobia in the country, and 2) That same-sex marriage isn't legal. And I'll defend them against both, because the first is completely dishonest, and the second is a half-fact.

The first one is a strawman arguement, because there's homophobia in every country. In my country, France, you could have a normal life as an LGBT person if you live in the big, secular cities, like Paris, but would face homophobia if you went to more rural and/or religious communities. And the same holds true for every country in the world: There are accepting places (mostly big cities), and less accepting places. Same in Israel. That doesn't lessen the fact that it respects queer rights.

And the second is a half-fact, because I know same-sex marriage might not be performed, but I know that it's recognized. I also know that civil marriage can generally only be recognized in Israel, and not performed. That performing marriage is limited to religious authorities, and that this also causes problems for opposite sex couples. Meaning this is barely an LGBT issue, but rather a problem of a lack of seperation between church and state. It doesn't change the fact that gay marriage both is legal and exists within their borders.

And at the end of the day I can admit that there's room for improvement. It's never wrong to fight homophobia within your own borders, and I'd love to celebrate that Israel performs same-sex marriage some day. But this doesn't change the fact that your reputation as gay friendly is legit, and not just propaganda as your enemies will claim.

So yes, these are my reasons, from an LGBT perspective, why I support Israel. I hope this can be a drop in the ocean of queer people and orginizations who publically oppose you.

[thenexusofsouls]

Zhaan, is there anyone that you would consider romantic feelings for? Is there anything that would draw you to a person in that way?

"What I desire in a mate has changed over the course of my life. I suppose I have always valued strength, however, how I define strength has changed drastically. With regard to love, of course I am open to it, but I choose not to search for it. I believe love should and will occur naturally, organically, if the Goddess wills it so. If it is meant to be, then it shall be. And who am I to say that I know better than my own instinctive heart or my Goddess who is right for me? I can place requirements and exceptions on who I would accept as a mate all I wish, but each person is different. Each heart, each relationship is unique. Sometimes love approaches us from unexpected angles. I choose not to limit its avenues to me by placing restrictions on who might carry it."

- - - - -

{i am the caretaker of souls} Alright, lemme break this down because Zhaan is... sometimes existential with things, haha. Yes, she's open to romantic relationships, and on the show we saw her have two of them. They both ended in tragedy, but for totally different reasons, but who she fell in love with and what became of those relationships is definitely indicative of her growth over time.

The short answer is that, when she was younger and in touch with her dark side, she respected power above all. Part of that was the dark side and part was her Delvian upbringing, but she fell in love with a tyrant. After she became a Pa'u, she more respected and was attracted to the kind of strength that comes from having the courage to face a cruel world with a soft heart. Emotional strength, empathy, kindness, compassion, selflessness... those are the things she valued toward the end of her life after leaving behind her dark side.

And now, the long answer. Allow me to rant below the cut for a bit, heh.

Zhaan used to be married to another Delvian named Bitaal (pronounced bee-TALL). I can't find any good quality images of them, so have a crappy quality one lol:

This was... not a good relationship, heh, and this was back when Zhaan was not a Pa'u. By her own definition, she was "a bit of an anarchist... actually, I was the leading anarchist." Basically... Delvians as a race are mostly known for their violence and rather devious morality. Bitaal and Zhaan were part of a particularly violent political faction that was considered by most to be terroristic in nature.

Bitaal was the head of the faction and he was a cruel, authoritarian person. The sort of person Zhaan was at the time had valued strength in the form of power and influence, because that was what she was raised to value. I'm not apologizing for her here, I'm just pointing out that Delvian culture largely praises "strength" in the form of power, whether it be legal, political, or physical in nature. So at one time, Bitaal had been what she thought she was looking for, but she ended up learning that wasn't the case.

If Zhaan's relationship with him was good for anything, it was teaching her the kind of person she did not want to be with, and what she did not want to be herself. When Bitaal resisted a peaceful transfer of power after his term in office was up and hired Peacekeepers to stamp out political protestors to his position of power, Zhaan began to question him and her own position in the government. When he imprisoned her own father in a forced labor camp, that was crossing a line for Zhaan. She decided to kill him while they were joined in Unity in order to stop him and his regime and to stop the killing and imprisonment of innocent people.

The decision to commit such an act of violence, to do it during Unity, and to do it to someone she loved caused her to slip into an insanity that took her eight years to eradicate from her mind. When she did recover and had become a Pa'u, what she wanted in a partner had changed. She no longer was attracted to "strength" in the form of power. Now... she was attracted to the "strength" that comes from living through tragedy and trauma, knowing pain, and experiencing grief, and coming out the other side intact.

Her definition of strength had changed. Truly strong people have been through hell and back and survived it. They have been through hell, been terrified of it, had it hurt them, but would walk back through it to save, help, or comfort someone they love. True strength is being in touch with one's vulnerable side, even when it is frightening and painful. It's having made terrible mistakes that rack one with guilt and regret, but still getting up every day and carrying on. It's seeing the worse of life, the worse that can hide in the hearts of people, yet still having faith in oneself and others, and still having the courage to reach out. Having gone through these things herself, Zhaan found herself now attracted to others who had found such strength within themselves, even at great cost to them.

This led to her brief but heartbreakingly sweet, gentle, loving, caring, and selfless relationship with Stark:

Guys, listen... I ship these two soft babies so unbelievably hard, it's not even funny. Stark has the ability (which was a racial thing, if I remember correctly, like I think all or a good number of his people could do this?) to... "keep secret the thoughts people wish to hide," to paraphrase something he said to Crichton. In other words, he can see into people's minds and kindof share their thoughts, but specifically the really bad or difficult ones, and it's like it stays locked inside his mind, like... I'm explaining this terribly because it's kindof an existential thing, lemme try again, heh...

So... similar to the way that Zhaan can share someone's physical pain and help to lessen the severity of it for the being she's helping, Stark can do the same thing but mentally, with thoughts or spiritual pain. So Zhaan can, for example, choose to share the physical pain of someone's broken arm, causing them to be able to hold still while it's treated without anesthesia. The portion of pain she feels is taken from the person and they no longer feel it. However, it's usually an incomplete process, so she can't take all the pain, she can only share some of the burden, but nevertheless, it does help. Stark can do the same thing, but with people's minds.

Stark can share and thereby reduce mental and spiritual distress and anguish in a someone. It's like sitting down to watch a sad or frightening or disturbing movie with someone in private, and it's just shared between the two of you, and through that process, you emerge feeling so much better about it. So for a simple example, if someone was psychically attacked and their actual mind was damaged, Stark can look into their mind, sort things out, and return their sanity to them, but then he also experiences what made them go insane. His race is extremely mentally strong, like this guy's mental fortitude is incredible. So he doesn't go insane himself, but he still has to experience what that person did in order to walk that painful road alongside them and cleanse them.

A more complicated example might be if someone lost a loved one and was in a state of deep grief. He can look into their minds and start feeling their grief along with them as if it were his own. In a kind of sped-up flash, he knows the person that was lost, he sees how they died, he feels what this person meant to the person he's helping... it's like he experiences this person through the one he's helping and therefore also begins to grief and to understand the person's pain. This helps the person feel less alone, feel understood, and although it can't take away the loss, the person emerges more mentally stable than before. Maybe calmer, maybe less in distress. But Stark remembers everything he shares with people, so he's going through all this suffering and has to carry that with him for the rest of his life. This leads to a tremendous mental toll taken on him.

At the point at which Zhaan and Stark meet, it's not long before she begins dying after giving much of her life energy to bring Aeryn's soul back after death. And Stark before that was kindof fed up with who and what he was, with sharing others' pain, with performing kindof a sin eater sort of function for people. He'd all but sworn off of it and had kindof wanted to be free of it and to be a bit more guarded with people in an attempt to take care of himself instead. But Zhaan got to him in a way no one else had, mainly because she understood what he went through, and he understood what she had gone through. Although their powers aren't exactly the same, they're similar enough that they understand the burdens of such gifts/curses in a manner that those without such abilities can never begin to fathom. So they bonded over that immensely and very quickly. She thought he was brave and beautiful, and he thought she was inspirational and basically mental goals for him, heh.

Stark ended up opening himself up to Zhaan despite kindof saying he didn't want to do that with anyone anymore, and he comforted her through her fatal illness even though it really pained him to do so. He would have preferred to wall himself off and not feel the slow building grief of the inevitable and knowing he would lose her, but for her sake, he left himself open. Zhaan respected him a lot for that, though she didn't want to cause him pain. When she was just moments from dying, though, she knew he was spiraling and already grieving hard for her, and she called to him with her spirit to ask him to guide her into death, into the next realm of being, as it were. She knew that would help him to focus and to have their last moments together be something positive instead of something painful. I always cry so hard during that scene because... *sigh* MY HEART. T^T

So that's how Zhaan's romantic interests have changed and why. And what she's basically saying up there is that she can say she would prefer this or that person, or not, but until she actually meets someone and experiences them as a person, she won't know how compatible they are in their hearts. So she'd rather not narrow down her options when really each person she meets is different and she should take everyone on a unique, case-by-case basis. Basically, she's open to anyone, heh, but during the years that I would write her most of the time, she is looking for that deep emotional connection, and she most definitely respects someone who is willing to be vulnerable when that's not easy for them or when it might be painful or cost the person something. She needs that kind of deep honesty and transparency of emotion with a potential partner.

[hero-israel]

What’s the situation like, with the protests? I’ve seen images of streets filled with protestors.

I don't live in Israel, but the situation got pretty extreme yesterday. After the Defense Minister said the judicial reform plan should be halted, Netanyahu fired him. It was already the middle of the night and yet people streamed into the streets and redoubled the already huge protests. The next morning the Histadrut - Israel's largest and most important union - called a general strike, the first in decades and by far the largest in the country's history. Pretty much EVERYTHING SHUT DOWN IMMEDIATELY. Schools, universities, businesses, embassies, Ben-Gurion airport (the only previous time I had ever heard of it closing was after a Hamas lucky shot in 2014, and this was seen as a death-level shock), the hotel and tourism industry (UNTHINKABLE, they kept Eurovision running even during a big blow-up with Gaza). Netanyahu backed down somewhat, said the plan would be postponed until summer and Lapid/Gantz/Herzog said it was time for real negotiation, the general strike ended and everything reopened and by my understanding the protests have calmed and shrunken. Now, maybe Netanyahu thought he could do a pretend postponement, wait for everyone's attention to lapse and energy to fade, then ram the same thing through anyway in the summer, but the threat of a general strike has really changed the equation. If he repeats, they'll repeat.

Here is a good article summarizing how things got here and what the political impact has been.

To give simpler background, as best I can as a long-term observer:

The Israeli Supreme Court acts without the checks and balances that most Westerners (and certainly Americans) would recognize. There is no input from voters or legislators. No Presidential nominees, no Congressional hearings. Israeli lawyers and judges appoint new judges, that's that. Because Israel has no Constitution, there's no real boundary on what the ISC can do. They can intervene on pretty much any issue as long as they say they are being "reasonable." Now it just so happens that the ISC has been a reliable protector of minority rights, women's rights, Arab rights, LGBT rights, etc. So it's "doing the right thing, the wrong way," because it could decide tomorrow to strip away minority rights just because, and nobody could say boo. It is not inherently unreasonable for people to want judicial reform, to want there to be some level of election-related involvement in who sits on the court. But that cause is now discredited because a gang of indicted criminals and terrorist sympathizers tried to ram it through while also ending all investigations into their own crimes, stealing the power for the Knesset to overturn court decisions, limiting the Law of Return, etc.

This began because Netanyahu has compulsively betrayed and backstabbed so many of his natural allies in right-wing parties (Gantz, Liberman, Sa'ar, Bennett, etc.) that he literally cannot form a governing coalition with people who know how to govern. His only chance to get a majority was to elevate a Halloween parade of ultra-ultra-fringe lunatics (Ben-Gvir, Smotrich, Maoz), and that's who is in charge now. It's ironic because the whole point of Benjamin Netanyahu - the "value proposition" as it were - is that he was good at preventing major change while also growing the economy and diplomatic partnerships. And he has now shit on all that. If a new election were held today, Lapid or Gantz would be PM tomorrow. Inshallah.

There is A LOT in Israel that is clunky and unfair. The rabbinate, the marriage laws, school system, Temple Mount status quo, Haredi draft, ISC jurisdiction, and that's just in Israel, not even getting to the Palestinian Territories. In all such cases, it is better for people to try to cope with a clumsy work-around than to charge right at the gate with a big fast change. People have been fighting over literally every grain of sand there for 2,000 years and they are lucky it works even as well as it does.

[grandhotelabyss]

Thoughts on Pasolini's writing or films?

Not really. I thought The Gospel of St. Matthew was powerful in its way, evocative of the tense, nervous, and apocalyptic tone of that book. That's the only one of his films I've seen. I should watch Teorema, since everyone loves it so much. I don't have any interest in Salò. His writings? The professor in this anecdote handed out the outline for Petrolio as an example of "novelistic discourse," but I didn't see what he was getting at and never read the whole book. The same professor also insisted to us, as if we'd objected or said otherwise, that Pasolini's death was an assassination. I know he said he cheered for the cops against the student protestors in 1968 because the cops were the sons of the poor and the protestors were "anthropologically middle-class" and advocates of "left-wing fascism," basically the same analysis as Adorno's and Lacan's—not, as I understand it, an apology for the system or the government of the time, but an analysis of the way that bourgeois revolution is a way of perpetuating the system through "familial" dissension. Well and good, but I'm not a communist, and there have always been limits to what I can absorb from European communist and fascist writers in their enemy-double struggles with one another. That's all I know about Pasolini.

[doctor-who-binge]

Elizabeth X is a horrific human being

Here is a list of things shes done:

Trapped a star whale that was offering itself..... because shes dense as fuck. Thats the only way she could have not figured out that it was offering itself

Decides that opening up the cranium to expose the brain and then shoot a laser at it for 300 years was a good idea

Creates a dictatorship with her as the "highest authority"

Creates a surveillance state

Creates robots (smilers) that her citizens are afraid of in order to keep them in line

Creates half human half smiler secret police

Holds pretend elections where there is only one correct option and then pretends that its the will of the people to keep the voyage going

Kills all political dissidents, the "protestors"

Kills, and I am quoting directly from the episode, "citizens of limited value" ... which includes children since children cannot be protestors

Sets up a system where SHE does not have to live with the fact that SHE did all this. She literally built into the system the ability to keep her conscience clean while simultaneously being the disgusting dictator in charge of it all.

Masquerades (quite literally, the mask and cloak) as a brave queen investigating her government because they are plotting behind her back and "feeding my citizens" to the beast.

Forced some people to NOT forget what is happening. Like Hawthorn who knows exactly whats going on. They have to live with the guilt while she doesn't.

Apparently made herself near immortal considering shes 300 and looks 30

Lets take this point by point

1 and 2 have no precedent since well no star whales IRL but I can't imagine her being anything but fucking stupid for not figuring it out.

3 The British Royal Family has no genuine power, so either between the 21st century and Elizabeth X they manage to regain power OR Elizabeth X took back power during the horrendous chaos they were trying to escape from. There is no prime minister or parliament or court system. She rules solo. She even says "I rule" and "I am the highest authority"

4 Every part of the ship is being watched, its why the Doctor was seen by Hawthorn doing the water check and why they knew that Amy was doing Bad Things™. Its also why all the adults were ignoring a little girl crying, they know they are being watched. Its got some East Germany Stasi level surveillance vibes.

5 & 6 Secret police are horrific organizations that have committed some of the worst acts in history. Gestapo a vital tool of Hitler or the NKVD responsible for Stalin's Great Purge etc the writers were also probably taking a page out of 1984's thought police & surveillance. Which 1984 itself is based on criticism of Stalinism

7 Every dictatior's favorite public tool! Elections where the outcome is 97+% in the dictator's favor. There should be no fucking elections it's ridiculous. Its not like the citizens even know what they voted for so why pretend to have elections. My only guess is because the beast needs food.

8 ..... bitch really decided "oh, you disagree with the decisions I've made?... well down a tube you go to your death immediately"

9 Say it with me people: E U G E N I C S. That is what that sentence is. As a permanently disabled person living on disability benefits and public insurance, ya know a "burden to society", this single line gave me a sick stomach. What the fuck. How can anyone like this fucked up character???? Remember SHE decided on these rules. SHE MADE THEM. Which also means SHE set the perimeters for "limited value." Limited value includes a child who got bad grades, is punished by the government (not his parents) for bad grades, the punishment is not being able to use the elevator. When he does use the elevator he is killed. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say people who use wheelchairs are definitely just outright killed. Which again remember the Queen decided who counts as limited value. Also if the whale won't eat children, do all the children that are sentenced to death and then work in the dungeon end up getting eaten when they turn 18? How fucking horrific to work in dungeon for years knowing you are literally on death row.

10 & 11 This has got to he THE WORST fucking thing. The character acts so goddamn righteous in her outraged, pissed that her citizens are being hurt, determined to uncover her evil government. When its all her. She gets to be a badass good queen for 10 years, figure out the mystery and how gross she is, erase her memory, and go back to being the badass masquerading righteous queen. She literally made it so she can live with an actual clear conscience. Not knowing any of this is all her fault and being outraged that it all exists. Also the video to herself doesn't mention anything but 1 & 2 by the way. She doesn't tell herself that she created a disgusting surveillance secret police regime run on crushing political dissidents and perpetuating eugenics in the video. She only mentions how bad conditions on Earth were and therefore they were assholes to a star whale, no mention of how shes evil to her own citizens. Hawthorn tells her that all of it is her but SHE doesn't in her own video to herself. She CAN remember, there is no reason she HAS TO forget. Maybe the public does, to live a semi peaceful life not feeling crushing guilt every moment. But the Queen? If anything she has a duty to know. A duty to carry the burden of knowing what she did to the star whale. And a duty to carry the guilt of knowing what she does to her people.

12 She SHOULD feel guilty every moment of every day, since it seems that "forgetting" is how they all manage to live with themselves. So if this whole system is set up to take the burden of guilt away from her citizens then she should be forced to live with it on their behalf but INSTEAD she forces Hawthorn and the secret police to know the truth. If they can know the truth so can she and she just chooses not to.

13 This surveillance police state built on crushing political dissent and rampant eugenics is 300 years old run by a single dictator. 300 years of this dictatorship and Elizabeth X has made herself believe its been only 10 years so that she doesn't have to feel guilty. She consented to having her body clock stopped/slowed by the way, so she knew she'd be a dictator for a very long time.

AND YET we, the audience, are supposed to like her. Shes portrayed as righteous to start—shooting down smilers and chasing after the Doctor to help her figure out her evil government. Then shes horrified at her own deeds with very good acting showing a horrified expression. Then the video we are shown is suppose to make us sympathize with her decision showing that if she abdicated everyone will die so OF COURSE she did all these horrible things. Then after Amy gives the Doctor the mask she says "Her majesty says no more secrets on starship UK" implying that this fucking disgusting dictator should be left in power after the absolute fucking hell and murder she sanctioned for 300 years against her own citizens. And I know we are supposed to like her because her supposed badassness returns in The Pandorica Opens with "This is the royal collection and I'm the bloody queen" while pointing a gun at River.

We are supposed to like a disgusting dictator because.... ??? Guess the idea of the monarchy lasting that long was supposed to be cool or whatever.

Elizabeth X is a disgusting oppressive eugenicist dictator

that should have been thrown off the ship. Or fed to the beast. Whichever the people she wronged choose.

Also how is the beast fed now? If no more secrets then no more elections, no more forget buttons, and thus no more protestors. But "citizens of limited value" (again I cannot believe that is an actual fucking quote) still exist. Do they become the sole diet? Do they figure out what star whales naturally eat?

[anniekoh]

elsewhere on the internet: stop cop city

Atlanta’s “Stop Cop City” Movement Is Youth-Led Democracy in Action (Nov 2023, The Nation)

In July, the Georgia State University Student Government Association passed a resolution opposing Atlanta’s proposed “Public Safety Training Center”—also known as Cop City—to be constructed on 85-acres of land outside of city limits.

According to Ramirez, the ties between the university and the Atlanta Police Foundation further pushed students to act. “Approximately 20 faculty members and GSUPD personnel were identified as APF donors. Notably, GSU’s non-profit entity, The Georgia State Foundation, was also listed as a donor,” said Ramirez, citing documents obtained under the Georgia Open Records Act. “As an institution that prides itself on high Black student graduation rates and one of the most diverse student bodies in the country,” reads a statement from the GSU Student Coalition Against Policing & Militarism, “GSU’s participation in prison industrial complex expansion raises concerns.”

Mutual Aid and the movement to Stop Cop City  (Oct 2023, Shareable)

On August 29, 2023, Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr filed an indictment against 61 members of the movement to Defend the Atlanta Forest and Stop Cop City. The indictment alleges a vast criminal conspiracy on the part of the activists, weaving them together in a legal scheme so fantastical that one of the accused is cited for being reimbursed for Elmer’s Glue.

It’s a patchwork case with Carr — the announced 2026 Georgia gubernatorial candidate — creating a veritable Charlotte’s Web; scrawling words in the web in a desperate ploy for attention. Unfortunately, it also represents a brazen assault on social justice organizers reminiscent of the FBI’s surveillance and attacks on the Civil Rights and Black Power movements in the 1960s and 70s.

In order to justify the harsh charges, each carrying up to 25 years in prison, Carr attempts to link the protestors together based on their shared commitments to collective welfare and mutual aid. In other words, the State of Georgia is currently arguing that participation in mutual aid projects and practicing solidarity constitutes furthering a criminal conspiracy. If Carr is going to try to make a twisted image of mutual aid tantamount to terrorism, we should all get clear on what mutual aid really is.

How We’ll Know if Stop Cop City Won (Summer 2023, Hammer & Hope)

After the Atlanta City Council coldly rejected 15 hours of public comment against Cop City on June 6, a coalition of electoral groups and abolitionist mainstays announced a referendum campaign to bring the question of Cop City to the ballot citywide. Theoretically, if we are able to collect 58,203 verified signatures from Atlanta residents (representing 15 percent of registered voters), the people of Atlanta will get to decide whether or not the Atlanta Police Foundation can keep its lease for the South River Forest. On August 21, the coalition announced that it had collected 104,000 signatures — for scale, current Mayor Andre Dickens garnered only a little over 50,000 votes in the last election — but would continue the signature drive through September to ensure that the city’s onerous signature verification process does not invalidate so many that the threshold isn’t met. Still, it’s a risky strategy: the city could stall the vote long enough to build the facility. We could make it on the ballot and lose. And if we lose in these ways, what will endure?

A Weapon by the State to Silence Our Voices (Apr 2023, Bolts Mag)

The Cop City arrests near Atlanta show how a buildup of "critical infrastructure" laws across the country threatens to quell protests for environmental justice and police accountability.

[zoruathesilly]

Biden calling the Gaza protestors "MAGA Republicans" truly showcases how "us vs them" American politics is. Theres more below the cut if you want to read an unemployed 21 year old rant about how they'd change the american government.

But can we elect an independent? No, bc people don't know about them or their policies, and those that do are greatly urged to vote red or blue anyway bc "it's basically throwing away your vote to go with an independent," (last election I saw a tiktok telling people to vote for Biden bc "in 2016 Hillary lost bc too many people were voting for independents") when what we really need is to either change the main political parties of this country or lower the age at which you can get into politics (it's currently 25 for the house, 30 for the senate, and 35 for president not to mention the required amount of years being an official resident of the country, i personally think it should be, at most, 21 for all of them and maybe like, 5 years of residency idrk how id rule on that) and get all the old fucks out. (and by this I mean put an age limit on how old you can be to like 50 or 60 or put a term limit on the house and the senate bc old ideas need to be recycled out to get fresh ones in) Like seriously, Biden is 81 and is allowed to hold power but the oldest of gen z only started to be able to get into the house of representatives 2 years ago, that doesn't sound very representative to me. I had another sentence but I got curious about the average age of congress and like

SERIOUSLY, FIFTY-FUCKING-EIGHT, 58 IS THE AVERAGE AGE OF THE PEOPLE MAKING THE BIG DECISIONS IN OUR GOVERNMENT, AND OUT OF 435 MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE 64 OF THEM WERE BORN IN THE 80'S. OUT OF 435 PEOPLE 64 OF THEM ARE 35-44 AND THATS PART OF THE DOUBLED 40-49 YEAR OLDS. Times change but our government doesn't reflect that fact it seems.

Like look at this shit, the senate is comprised almost entirely of peoples grandparents, and let's be real, who would trust their grandparents to lead the country.

Anyway, sorry I just went off like that on this post, just kinda had rage that needed out.

Yesterday, Palestinian and solidarity organizers disrupted a Biden campaign event 14 times during his speech on the protection of women's rights. These activists called out hypocrisy because Biden and his administration are actively causing a reproductive care catastrophe in Gaza.

50,000 pregnant women do not have access to healthcare in Gaza, and C-sections are being performed without anesthesia. Women and children in Gaza are being killed by U.S.-made and supplied bombs.

described by @winged-wolf-s-collection-of-arts

[ID: Transcription of what the protesters are saying, while security personnel try to get them out:

Israel kills two mothers every hour in Gaza. Ceasefire now! End the genocide! Ceasefire!

Women in Gaza are being murdered. Killing people in Gaza is a war crime. You are a war criminal.

Stop funding genocide! Ceasefire now!

50,000 pregnant women don't have healthcare. Their blood is on your hands. Ceasefire!

Ceasefire now! Stop funding genocide! Gaza is a reproductive issue.

Free, free Palestine!

The end of the video shows article headlines with photos of the protesters or of Joe Biden, from various news organizations:

POLITICO: Biden's abortion rights rally repeatedly interrupted by protesters

ALJAZEERA: Biden speech interrupted by pro-Palestinian protesters

CNN politics: Biden's abortion rights rally in Virginia beset by repeated protests over his handling of Gaza

abcNEWS: Biden campaign speech on abortion rights disrupted 14 times by protesters

yahoo!news: Biden abortion rally in Virginia interrupted by multiple protesters: 'Genocide Joe'

NEW YORK POST: Biden claims Gaza heckler is 'MAGA Republican' as he's interrupted at least 10 times at rally

Forbes: Protesters Interrupt Biden's Abortion Rights Speech More Than A Dozen Times

NBC NEWS: Biden interrupted by protesters more than a dozen times at campaign rally

USA TODAY: President Biden's abortion rally disrupted by repeated protests over Gaza

Reuters: Biden's abortion rights rally in Virginia interrupted by Gaza protests

/End ID]

[readingsquotes]

"The point here is not just to reiterate the easy gotcha that police treat White partiers or sports fans differently than they treat protest movements led by people of color. We already know that’s true, if not from a lifetime of anecdotes then from the way we all internalize the logic of the system in which we live.

The larger point, though, is to notice when we are surprised to see state violence, when it is news worthy, when it attracts our attention.

It would have been a surprise if riot cops had descended on Mifflin this year and started busting heads. It would have been even more of a surprise had they opened live rounds on the crowd. We don’t expect that punishment for White college kids “looking to blow off some steam.”

But it goes deeper than that.

We don’t expect state violence on or around college campuses in general, actually. Or at least we don’t until the college kids gather in order to challenge the logic of the system rather than reinforcing it. College kids are supposed to be dumb and drunk. They aren’t supposed to ask why imperial wars are being fought in our name, why some people are bombed or shot in order to protect other people’s ostensible safety.

And so, we are slightly more surprised when we see students and faculty being assaulted by cops, but only a little bit. Again, we have seen this before. It’s been the same story since 1968. Students can do anything they want, except ask the questions they’re not supposed to ask.

There’s an invitation in that noticing, one that we might miss if the only lesson is a quick-fire eye roll at how the frat boys got to party and the protestors got roughed up.

We know that cops with guns assault people, that cops with guns kill people. Last year, American cops killed more civilians than any year previously.

We expect cops to be violent. We just don’t expect it to happen on college campuses.

So there’s the first invitation. To notice. To ask yourself: Where are we shocked to see police violence and where are we numb to it? What communities are allowed to live with the story that armed cops keep us safe and what communities are forced to bear the brunt of that myth’s limits?

If we don’t think college kids should be assaulted by government forces, either for protesting or for being dumb and drunk, then who do we believe should be? And why do we believe that?

That’s the first layer of noticing.

The second layer, of course, is the one at the heart of this protest movement, the one whose core logic is that we, as Americans, will pay more attention to headlines from Columbia University than we will to headlines from Rafah.

Where is violence such a tragedy that we know all the victims’ names and stories, and where do we accept that it will be measured only in statistics?

Whose deaths are treated as lamentable and whose deaths are treated as inevitable?

Whose dreams are cut short so that the rest of us are allowed to live in our own dreamworld of innocence and disconnection?

The immediate invitation, the one echoing on U.S. college campuses, is for a permanent ceasefire to the war on Gaza. It’s a profound and necessary invitation, but like all moments where we are reminded of the violence and irrationality of this entire system, it is only the first step.

It should be shocking to see state violence on a college campus, not because campuses are magical bubbles where the world’s sins disappear, but because it should be shocking to see state violence anywhere. We all deserve to be safe."

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

Nashville shooting: Information still limited about shooter. Manifesto still MIA after being withheld for a lengthy period of time. Denial of reasoning being political. Democrats fundraised off the shooting by saying that trans people are in danger, as if the people shot that day were trans and not children and adults at a christian school.

Waukesha Massacre: An SUV who lacked a driver decided all on it's own to go run over protestors. Race and political affiliation of the SUV is unknown. The SUV was supposedly running from cops despite slow-rolling up to and past a cop into the crowd. SUV had a history of hitting others for fun.

Uvalde Shooting: We don't actually know anything. We should just ignore it. Nothing to see here. Must have been a sentient gun.

Texas Shooting: Life story, political affiliation, tattoos, family history, journals, social media posts, manifesto, youtubers they supposedly watched, type of ice cream they liked.

So for context let me put this in perspective. The Shooter in Nashville was a Trans person. The lunatic who drove the SUV was black. The Uvalde Shooter? He was mexican.

What did we find out from 98% of mainstream media? Fuck all. 2 of them got memory holed after their usefulness in pushing the stripping of rights in the US was basically done. Waukesha was STRAIT IGNORED. We got minimal coverage on it after the dozens of articles blaming potential white supremacists.....then his race came out and it quickly got removed and left to vanish into nothing.

The Texas shooter? Oh well see, he had a NAZI tattoo. What did they leave out? The fact he had gang affiliated tattoos as well potentially ties to Mexican Cartels. The fact that he WAS IN FACT a Mexican man and not even a light skinned Mexican man. BUT he had the right tattoos to push a narrative.

What's more, aside from not being white at all. He seems to have checked every potential (Right wing nazi fascist) box that could potentially be checked. And the fact we got all the information as fast as we did. People were asking *as cited above* questions.

This would be like if a person were to assassinate Biden, then a big ass gift box showed up on the DOJ's door with the name, entire family line, dental records, current location of, and he'd not just be the biggest trump supporter but he'd have a hitler mustache, his room would be a shrine to nazi fascism, he's be the biggest racist on the known earth, and he'd listen to all the wrong youtubers as cited by a printout of all the people the assassin was subscribed to.

The info dump on this guy is insane and was SUPER fast. So either some of the information is planted. OR they knew about this guy for years and just let him do what he was going to do. And worst yet if he was not fully associated with a Cartel as is implicated in a few instances including with his tattoos, the FBI was likely responsible for facilitation of this. More so considering Primary season is approaching and they need more people to believe the lie that the only violent people in this country are right wing.

So. Dear News Outlets, Fuck you and your race baiting bullshit. Fuck you and your need to villainize people who are on the right. And fuck you for always putting when a violent person is white in the headline, but more or less no one else, unless they are apart the WRONG political ideals.

When civil war does happen, the side you are placating to? They will not spare you.

[metalheadsagainstfascism]

I have a secret for everyone.

It's okay to admit that you can't do anything for the people. I know it sucks, people are hurting, and you want to fix it. But there's going to come a point where you have to say "that's all I can do today. I'll check back tomorrow". And that's okay.

Ukraine is an Ocean away for a lot of people. You're severely limited in how you can help.

By all means, donate to organizations that'll help the people of Ukraine if you can afford to.

Obviously you should lift the voices of the people of Ukraine and the Russian protestors when you see them. Share their stories. Boost their content.

But you NEED to realize that you've done all you can at some point.

Why? Because you're wasting time and effort that can be spent on people at home. Trans kids in Texas have to go back into the closet to protect their parents. Gay kids in Florida have having to go back in the closet to protect their teachers.

I'm not saying forget about Ukraine. By all means I think you need to check in every day or every few days to see if there's more you can do there. But doomscrolling social media and staring at the Ukraine crisis just reveling in the doom and gloom isn't going to help anyone there. All that's going to do is numb you to the pain you feel when you see it and make you apathetic to the issue. All that is going to do is use up all of your physical and emotional energy on a cause you can't help anymore.

I'm not saying one cause is more important than the other. I'm saying there's a cause you can do more for than the others. Because it's closer to home. Because you're physically THERE.

So do what you can for Ukraine, but realize it's okay to say, "Alright. I've done all I can do for the day. Now I'm going to see if there's anything I can do for the Don't Say Gay law in Florida, and I'll check back in with Ukraine same time next week."

-fae

[thatonebirdwrites]

Not only that, the fucking jackasses, who don't know ANYTHING about the systems they're tampering with, are COMMITTING LIVE CODE WITHOUT TESTING IT to the Treasury Payment Systems. See here (Wired reporting) and here (an expert weighting in). This "move fast and break things" mentality will KILL people.

You CANNOT do that with government systems without months if not a year or so of thorough testing. And yet, they have failed to do even the a day of testing. None of them are federal workers, it's unknown whether they even had background checks, and they refuse to give their real names to actual federal employees.. (Honestly, that mentality shouldn't exist PERIOD. Techbros use it to try to get around laws and regulations, and end up harming folks more than helping.) I'm not even joking about this. Disabled people rely on the payment system working for our healthcare and survival needs. Please Care About Other People. Disabled people like myself deserve to live too, and what's happening can and likely will kill us. There should be people lining up to block them from entering. Make the fuckers fight to get through. Senators should be blockading entrance. Make the fuckers drag the Senators off in handcuffs, which will only prove all our points. Again, this is a fucking coup by entitled neo-Nazi pricks who want us to live in an Musky-rat-company, where Musk controls everything. That's their ultimate goal. But they can't do that unless they can leverage the Treasury to force the rest of the government to capitulate to their demands. MUSK HAS NO REAL AUTHORITY unless we cede it to him. He pretends he does because he's Trump's friend, but he was not elected, he was not confirmed, his "DOGE" office was never endorsed or confirmed by the Senate, and thus everything he does is illegal and/or unconstitutional.

Call Congress to DO something.

Protest what is happening, but be SMART about it. Do NOT invite police to a protest. You Cannot Trust Police. Many of them are in bed with the far-right.

Protest Tips:

Wear a mask with and safety glasses. (Harder to identity you and it protects you from smoke, tear gas, and diseases.

Do Not Bring Your Phone. Or at the very least Do NOT turn it on as it can be used to identify you or obtain your location.

Do NOT advertise the details of the protest and who is coming to the protest all over social media. Share about the protest's start locations as needed in your groups, but don't advertise it's march pattern or its end goal location or who is attending. These conversations about the march route, goal location, assigned roles, and etc need to happen either in-person with all phones off OR use Signal, an encrypted chat. You want to limit what the surveillance state can pull from posts.

Have designated medics who can help in case of injury or if Police try to shoot people or throw tear gas.

Have designated frontline people. These are the people at the front of the protest, the ones that are most likely to deal with police and/or fascists first. Use make-shift shields to help protect frontline people.

Have designated people who assist those with disabilities to make sure they care able to stay safe and escape if things turn sour. Stay with your assigned peeps!

Have a designated protest partner to help watch your back. Stay with your assigned peeps!

Have designated suppliers, who carry supplies for medics and/or frontline and/or other roles.

Have a plan in case the police try to kettle protesters. A kettle is when police block off routes to escape, thus trapping protestors in a smaller area. This is done to shut down protestors, demoralize, frighten, and mass arrest. Make sure everyone knows the plan and abides by it.

Write on your arm the numbers of lawyers and/or people you can contact in case of arrest.

I'll leave this handbook here in case you all find use out of it. If others have tips, feel free to add them.

I already shared/wrote a post on community care and safety plans here (that was kindly expanded on by censoredsecret).

These men just stole the personal information of everyone in America AND control the Treasury. Link to article.

Akash Bobba

Edward Coristine

Luke Farritor

Gautier Cole Killian

Gavin Kliger

Ethan Shaotran

Spread their names!

[aronarchy]

The Goals of Police and Why We Avoid Cop-Jacketing, a thread:

The Role of Police: Police exist to violently enforce the State’s sovereignty in all communities.

Every law is a police order. The State can only exist so long as it has means to make people obey its laws by force.

The Reality of Police: Police forces are relatively small in comparisons the communities they occupy and operate within. To fill their role, they have to project their power over large areas that they are inherently unable to be physically present in at all time.

Ex: if you have no moral aversions to stealing a candy bar, what stops you from stealing a candy bar isn’t that a cop is always watching, but that at any time a cop could be watching.

Police Projection of Power: To project their power, police create the impression (through patrols, surveillance, neighborhood watch programs, etc.) that they are able to see and control more than their actual capacity allows.

This power, however, DOES have a very limited capacity. This capacity is quickly expended the more resistance to their operations their are. There are simply far more people in communities than there are police.

Some Myths About Police Goals and Tactics:

“Engaging in (vandalism, violent resistance, looting, etc.) is what the police want us to do so they can attack us!”

“Most looters/vandals are actually cop infiltrators trying to delegitimize movements.”

Myths Debunked:

Because of their limited capacity to project their power and their desire to keep a situation controlled within that capacity, police DO NOT want people to actively resist them/engage in militant activity because that ruptures their ability to project their power.

Police infiltrators within protests are more likely to:

try to keep protestors in an easily controlled area

attempt to pull protestors away from a contested area

attempt to control the otg narrative about the protest/sow paranoia

attempt to disband the protest

gather intel

Cop-Jacketing: Cop-jacketing is when we make unsubstantiated claims that certain actions are actually the work of the police/that specific individuals are police infiltrators.

The Dangers of Cop-Jacketing: When we cop-jacket without 100% certainty and proof, we lend ourselves towards the actual goals of police, which is to deny the autonomy of our movements, sow paranoia, and further project the power of police.

How to Avoid Cop-Jacketing While Remaining Attuned to the Threat of Infiltration: Police/Fed infiltration is certainly a threat we should be very attentive to, but the best tools in our arsenal is to resist spreading paranoia and to practice good security culture.

It makes sense to want to find absolute rules that will allow us to know who is and isn’t a cop/fed, but the truth is that those rules do not exist, and the process of trying to find them does so much more harm than good. Security culture is far better self and community defense.

Check out this Crimethinc article “What is Security Culture?” to build your understanding on where/how to start building your security culture practices!