#and I know for many religions it’s not about whether the beliefs are true but the community formed around the rituals

[neechees]

https://www.tumblr.com/baconvonmoose/762184790376136704/thank-you-look-i-know-people-mean-well-i-do-im?source=share

Reading all this and that's the first time ever I've seen someone say this about W*nd***.

Thought to bring this to your attention

I've always said that you'll get differing opinions about the Ice Cannibal because different groups might have differing opinions & protocol on the spirit on who can or can't say it or when, and like I've always specified I prefer it when people dont say it around ME.

But I'm kind of suspicious about this random user coming and saying "well I'm Native American" because of the way they're speaking. They say they're "a subdivision of the Algonquin" like there's no "subdivision" of the Algonquin UNLESS they're claiming to be of the Algonquin TRIBE and trying to talk about their specific community, but they don't specify it, and they seem to be equating Algonquin with Algonquian (a Language FAMILY), which is something a lot of Moniyawak & pretendians do.

Also, there's no "my tribe told the first version of the wend!g0 myth" like they claim they are, because again, multiple tribes believe in this spirit, and it'd be stupid & unfair to try claim authority on it for "the first" because we don't know who was "the first".

This user also claims that "it's a spirit that can possess people so it can look like anyone you know", I've talked with other ndns about this and there's even some debate over whether this "possession" thing is even true, at least for some tribes, because settlers were using this excuse to go and execute multiple Native people under the premise that they were "possessed" by a cannibal spirit (and how often do you think White people back then gave a shit about our spiritualities?). In many tribes, including mine, I know the ice cannibal is a spirit that exists in its own right but that also humans can turn into one.

This person is just acting like a jackass and doesn't seem to hang around other actual Native Americans who believe in our religions, because of the way they're talking, but want to act like an authority on our spiritualites. They don't even want to acknowledge that maybe they heard the "we don't say it" variation because of different beliefs in different tribes. Them calling everything I just mentioned fucking "misinformation" is itself misinformation, and completely fucking unfair of them. And the ice cannibal spirit isn't even the only spirit we do this with. We don't just avoid saying its name out of fear, it's also out of respect and protocol.

I've also never seen this person on ndn tumblr, & they don't seem to have an "ndn" tag. This might be a case of a White person suddenly claiming Native heritage to get in on a conversation that isn't theirs to have. With the way they're acting, talking about Native spirituality, etc, this sounds more like a White person with maybe some Native ancestry who doesn't actually hang around other ndns just trying to be an authority on something they have no fucking clue on & that they got all their information from white websites, because virtually everything they said was wrong.

[starryoak]

I know I describe myself as this a lot, but I feel like my autism and non-religious upbringing combined to make me the most edgy Reddit atheist possible in terms of my beliefs, just because it’s always been mildly confusing to me that the proposition of not believing in anything that cannot be reliably physically proven to exist is the radical and controversial one instead of the obviously correct position to take and people get mad at you when you don’t automatically treat believing in unfalsifiable things as equally valid.

I intellectually understand why that’s not the case due to the long and storied history of religion spanning far longer periods of history than science ever has, but it still feels emotionally to me like the scientific method should have replaced religion as it became obvious that most religious texts make objectively false statements about how the world works and that science could explain things about the world in a more accurate manner.

I obviously understand why that’s not the case, but it still feels like it should be true that now that we understand more objectively how the world works that not believing in things that science can’t prove should be the standard way of thinking about things and not the radical position of the ostracized from society.

[schizopositivity]

Hearing people throw around the words "delusional" and "delulu" so often when they clearly don't know what it means is so silly to me at this point, but also a little frustrating.

Like I heard someone in a video say "she's the worst type of delulu, where she actually is in a different reality" while describing someone being cocky and overconfident.

As a reminder, delusional means someone is holding a belief or altered reality that is persistently held despite evidence or agreement to the contrary, generally in reference to a mental disorder. Delusions are typically beliefs that exist outside of objective or common reality (so not something subjective like "this art is good"). It is often unshakeable, people can't be talked out of their strongly held belief even if it is completely nonsensical. They typically cause a disturbance to your life, unlike a spirituality or religion that you enjoy.

So someone saying "I'm the most attractive and most talented person in this room" might be annoying, but it is that person's subjective belief. It's your subjective belief that they are not, but neither is right or wrong because it is subjective.

Having a crush on a celebrity and wanting to marry them and imagining that happening is a conscious choice, it's a daydream. Meanwhile delusions are not conscious choices, it is a symptom a person has whether they want it or not.

It's important to uphold the true meaning of this word, because it describes a mental condition that impacts many people. Having the words definition change by making it mean other things does harm us. If we want to open up to a friend about a serious mental problem in our lives by saying "I have delusions", that person should know the gravity of that, and not think it's some fun quirky personality trait that everyone has.

Also the way people misuse the word tends to be in a negative or insulting way, aimed at the delusional person. But delusions dont indicate anything about the delusional persons personality and morals. The delusions are caused by a mental health problem and not chosen by the person. This is important to remember when people have strange, mean, self centered, taboo, or scary delusions, it doesn't mean that a person wants to believe that, they can't control it.

So please try and use the words "delusion" and "delusional" correctly, don't give it a cute trendy nickname like "delulu". And try and educate the people around you about the actual meaning of these words, and the impact of misusing them.

[broomsick]

Hi,

I was wondering if you have any advice for learning to believe that the gods care about us as individuals?

When I see people saying that the gods really don’t care about us in the grand scheme of things, I find that easier to believe than to believe they care about us, which kinda feels .. shit. Although maybe it’s true, I’m not sure.

I honour Loki, but because I find it hard to believe that they care about me at all (especially given I can’t communicate with him – so he can’t tell me if he does or not, and I don’t want to assume), I feel like it puts distance between us on my end.

I apologise if this is a bit heavy or difficult to answer, don’t stress if you can’t, you’re fine to delete it! But if you have any advice, I’d greatly appreciate it.

Hi there! I definitely understand the way you feel, and from time to time, I experience this very same sentiment as well. I think asking oneself this sort of question comes naturally to many of us, because pragmatic thinking could have us believe the divine is somehow too great to care about us measly earthlings.

But let’s break down this idea that’s being spread around pagan social media platforms, according to which the Gods are too busy, too grand, or too powerful to care about their followers. I’ve never been a fan of this sort of over-the-top cynical rhetoric. Still, I think there’s no better way to tackle pragmatic thinking than in a pragmatic way. The way I see it, this perception of the divine stems from a will to fully detach oneself from common monotheistic concepts. The fact is that a lot of neo-pagans, including popular pagan content creators, come from a Christian background. Some of these creators, whether polytheistic, animistic, both, or else, seem very keen on rejecting any spiritual concept or practice deemed monotheistic in nature, such as the idea that the divine can love us. Neo-paganism entails new ideas, and therefore, any perception of the divine that’s akin to that of the big monotheistic religions is either naive, or shows remnants of monotheistic thinking. However, there’s nothing naive about believing that the divine can care about us. I can believe this, just like I can believe that this or that deity presides over this or that matter in life. Belief systems work in a way that allow for specific ideas of the divine to form, and to vary from person to person. And after all,—just as an aside—, if an entity is powerful enough to be considered divine, then they are powerful enough to know about each of their followers, regardless of how many there are. Now, I don’t think there’s any need to specify that polytheism is inherently spiritual. This means that its very foundations are built upon personal gnosis, and belief in concepts that cannot be proven. No such thing as logic regulates matters of spirituality. So why should we, as theists whose beliefs aren’t commanded by any sort of authority or rule set, be so rigidly pragmatic in this case?

In the end, it all comes down to what we personally believe, and what we’ve personally experienced. Who’s to prove that the Gods don’t love us? And if I saw some stranger on social media tell me “hey um, your God doesn’t care about you by the way”, I would think that 1. Me and this person probably don’t even perceive the divine in the same manner at all; 2. Nothing and nobody dictates belief but the believer themselves; and 3. My experience has proven to me that the Gods care for us, and it’s proof enough. But let me elaborate on that matter further.

In most pagan paths, deities embody different natural phenomena and elements of human life. That’s the way the very first forms of polytheism developed. And to me at least, that’s also the way we as pagans experience their presence firsthand. The Gods are all around us: we can see them because we can see forests, seas, storms, fire, rain… And when you see it that way, they are infinitely closer to us than some cynical social media accounts would have us believe. They don’t sit on golden thrones above the clouds, far away from the human condition. Their presence is tightly intertwined with the earth. So why should “the forest, seas, storms” etc etc care for us? Well my friend, have you ever spent time by a river, and felt that it had a soul of its own? Have you ever felt a bond with a specific tree, or got the sense that the storm was alive somehow? That is something I worship as a pagan. And in my personal experience, the God’s burning, all encompassing love can be felt in these sorts of moments. I don’t need for them to tell me directly. It’s like looking into a loved one’s eyes and feeling that they love you, even though not a single word was spoken. I know how difficult it can be to put one’s faith in such a thing, when it’s already hard for us to even communicate with the Gods. That’s why we keep an eye out for signs from them. And even so, we might never truly grasp their thoughts. If anything, that’s something we know for sure about the divine. If you want my opinion, believing that the Gods love us is a perfectly sound choice to make. They send us their blessings in too many ways to count, sometimes in the form of well-needed change, reassurance, comfort… And if you believe that a certain blessing was sent by the Gods, doesn’t that already showcase a certain care? Even for those who see deity worship as purely transactional (an offering for a blessing and vice-versa), the very idea that a deity would send a blessing implies care for the followers who make the offering. And since me, along with innumerable other pagans, have received blessings without necessarily having to ask or perform some sort of huge offering ritual, I’ve naturally decided that the Gods love their followers. Everybody else can feel free to believe what they will, but my faith, intuition and experience have told me so.

Don’t let your mood be undermined by what people say on the internet, but more importantly, don’t let other people dictate what’s true and what’s false about your experience of spirituality. Let yourself believe what you want to believe, there’s nothing wrong with that at all. You don’t owe anybody proof of what you have faith in.

[maristelina]

Amane Voice Drama Really Bad Translation

Please take my really bad translation with a truckload of salt. It's super incomplete. I was having troubles understanding what's going on because of my current anemia and uh episode. I wanted to share this because I want to see how close I got later when more competent people translates the Voice Drama.

Amane: We were disappointed in MILGRAM's judgement. We thought it could be a new world. You're quite something, always looking down on others from above. I'm pretty sure I told you not to be conceited. On top of that, you say something incomprehensible like not forgiving us.

How dare you say that. But we are magnanimous. Let's set aside time for dialogue with the warden once again. After all, our history is one that has been made through dialogue.

Es: Get to the point quickly. What's wrong, Amane? Don't think I can just overlook your drastically changed attitude and move on. It's the result of my judgment that you've become like this. The way you talk. You're like a completely different person at the moment. Everyone who is unforgiven is under the mental stress of hearing voices blaming their own sins. Is your change also due to that influence?

Amane: The ridiculous voices? Ah, we did indeed hear it. But, that's not a big deal because we have steadfast teachings. We have clear and sublime faith. No matter what is said from the outside, we won't be shaken.

Es: Faith. You're talking about the religion you believe in.

Amane: The power that Milgram possesses seems to be true. Have you also taken a peek at our faith?

Es: It was quite an abstract expression(??), but I judged that your killing of people was due to religious beliefs.

Amane: It's not murder; I simply administered punishment according to the doctrine.

Es: So you're saying it's not a sin.

Amane: Is faith a sin?

Es: Faith itself is free, and while many are non-religious, I understand that there are those who are saved by religion.

Amane: Is that so? Are the unforgiven prisoners lost? They might also need our faith.

Es: I'd rather you refrain from proselytizing within Milgram

Amane: Faith is free. Faith exists for the sake of those who are lost.

Es: We've gotten off-topic. So, what exactly are you now? You keep saying 'we,' does that mean you're not Amane Momose?

Amane: I am Momose Amane and yet not Momose Amane. I am a spokesperson for our faith. You said you won't forgive us. I think there's a need for dialogue and warning because you made a wrong judgment, so I am speaking as 'we.'

Es: So, in essence, I am speaking with the concept of your religion itself right now. Is that what you're saying?

Amane: You can think of it that way if you like. So, let's issue the warning again. Warden. Milgram made the decision not to forgive us.

Es: Ah, yes, that's correct.

Amane: As I said earlier, our actions are actions of faith???, and they don't amount to sin. Therefore, Milgram is wrong. People are getting killed in the prison. I understand that I'm breaking the law.

Es: As I said before, there are things more important than the law. This is Milgram. Such arbitrary rules cannot be accepted as a standard. Therefore, I won't forgive. That's all. Faith in religion is also free. However, your so-called doctrine cannot become the standard for overall sin.

Amane: Isn't Milgram trying to establish new standards precisely because foolish laws can't properly guide this world? Are you still bound by the law?

As a mere warden I have no way of knowing Milgram's philosophy. It's not because love is against the law. Your killing of people is not forgiven by Milgram. I simply made that judgment. The orders are to deny your doctrine.

Amane: If you don't change your mind, we can never forgive you either.

Es: What do you mean "we"? You make me laugh. What you're doing is simply murder. Whether you talk about it as a whole or sing it like a noble ideal, it's murder. Momose Amane. The one who killed was not "you all," it was you. Don't divert your eyes from your own actions by playing games.

Amane: I have a duty for God!

Es: So? What are you gonna do about it? / What would you do if that's the case?

Amane: I will never forgive you! I will definitely never forgive you!

Es: I'm saying that attacking me is pointless.

Amane: I will never forgive you!

Es: Weren't you taught that those scissors you got from the supply should not be directed at people?

Amane: According to the doctrine, the guards' insults towards us are fully subject to penalties. We won't forgive.

Es: It's poitnless, you might as well give up.

Amane: I won't forgive you! I won't forgive you!

Es: Attacks from prisoners to guards are not possible. It's Milgram's principle, but a certain multiple personality individual slipped through this rule. In other words, Milgram's prisoner classification focuses on the mind rather than the body, so if the mind is separate, the rule doesn't apply. It seems like they're struggling with a flawed rule.

Amane: I'll kill you! I will fucking kill you!

Es: Thanks to that flawed rule, it has been proven this way. The fact that you're wielding scissors now doesn't make you a god or a concept. You're just Amane, plain and simple. Quite literally, what you're doing is just a pretend game. It's trivial. This is what you wanted with Milgram, isn't it? A direct showdown.

Amane: SILENCE!

Es: What's wrong? Have you indeed desired to be treated like a child? In my opinion, the fact that you are a child is closely related to this matter. No matter what you assert, no matter how much you try to act mature, you are a child. It's an unchangeable fact.

Amane: You're also a child!

Es: I'm 15 years old, so in Puerto Rico and Haiti, I'm considered an adult. You're 12 years old, so you're a child in any country. You look frustrated.

Amane: I'M NOT A CHILD

Es: Either way is fine. Why? In the first place, there are two main reasons why children are given reduced sentences by law: the potential for rehabilitation and the influence of their environment, I believe. In this case, it's mainly the latter. As I mentioned before, early childhood is heavily impacted by parental upbringing, and the effects of the rearing environment are substantial. Children born into households that practice religion, for instance, grow up recognizing it as a rule of the world.

Amane: What are you trying to say?

Es: It's about how they feel that the doctrines of what is commonly known as a religion are everything in the world.

Amane: You are arguing against the idea that being underdeveloped due to being of a young age.

Es: Certainly, the ego was fully developed. However, because this ego was nurtured in a specialized environment isolated from society, the argument remains among us whether this is your sin or rather the sin of your parents' environment. Here, we assess the potential for rehabilitation, as I mentioned earlier.

Amane: W-well, what do you mean by "among us"? Isn't it me? Aren't we from the same country? The warden and I understand five years' worth. As for me being special, it's just that my environment is unique, and everyone else's is ordinary. There are people who have actually gone there. I've been told things like you're being deceived, it's not too late even now, or you're mentally unstable. They still treat me like a child after all. It's because I'm a child that they think I've been brainwashed. But that's not the case. Even I, as a child, understand everything. Please don't label people as unhappy. I'm fortunate to have been born to my parents. It's challenging, and sometimes it gets tight, but I'm happy to live under pure teachings. That's the path I want to take. I see, you all think it's brainwashing, don't you?

From my perspective, you all are also being brainwashed by the religion of mainstream values. Why do you blindly believe in it just because there are many people following it?

Es: I understand

Amane: It's only natural that those of us who haven't been acknowledged by society due to our small numbers would see the potential for a new world in Milgram.

Es: Yes, I understand well. That's why your doctrines aren't acknowledged. Teachings that affirm life are not permitted by my standards. Huh.

Amane: That is correct.

Es: Our judgement, huh? I'll take another look at your feelings. Next time, if you feel something even deeper there, I intend to accept it properly. It's like a direct showdown, isn't it? That's right.

Amane: If, in the end, you deny and don't forgive me or us, then at that time, I won't forgive you. No, that's not it. I won't forgive you. Evading responsibility for your actions through pretend play is the next line. Thanks, it's not just you. It's all of you. I said I won't forgive you. It's a direct showdown. You're not allowed to keep your hands clean.

Es: What are you talking about?

Amane: I suppose so. The warden refers to themselves as "you all." If it's you, then it's you.

Are you experiencing a headache? Are you alright, warden? Please stand up on your own. That's a trial given by God. It's a trial of pain/sickness. Escaping from it is the greatest evil according to our teachings. One of the Eight Principles, isn't it? It's not allowed for anyone, no matter who they are. People do tend to act that way. Like a devil among prisoners, trying to steal trials from others.

Kirisaki Shidou, his actions who is cutting and tearing, violating our taboos. I issued a warning. If they continue, I might have to intervene. Is it perhaps already too late?

Es: Shut up.

Amane: Resorting to violence, how childish

Es: Silence. I am the one who makes the rules here.

Amane: What sets us apart from you?

Es: I told you to shut up didn't I? Listen to what I say.

Amane: If the world you create is attractive to me, or perhaps.

Es: Prisoner #8, Sing your sins!

[gemsofgreece]

Taking a course on Greek myths and I'm just curious on how atheism worked in the Greek world considering how entrenched the belief in the gods was. Like would a person not participate in festivals and such? Were they punished for it?

A belief close to what atheism is nowadays existed but it was usually pretty different from how atheism is perceived nowadays. We should keep in mind that atheism is largely founded on scientific progress, therefore it must have been a much rarer phenomenon when science was still in extremely early stages, let alone that the feats of early scientific knowledge were not accessible to 99% members of the ancient societies. This is why when we study ancients who might have in some way or another doubted the established religion of their time (i.e Democritus, Anaxagoras, Epicurus) they are almost always esteemed scientists, philosophers, sophists and so on. I don't think many of the average, everyday people had the scientific backrgound and critical thinking needed to even entertain this ideology.

And what was similar to atheism in antiquity was in fact closer to agnosticism. Rarely, if ever, did the ancient "atheists" reject the existence of the divine completely. What they doubted mostly was whether those gods were indeed the true ones or whether the deities truly interferred with human matters as much as it was usually believed.

There is not much knowledge about how "atheists" or better areligious people were treated, except for Athens, which is known to occasionally banish or even execute such people. A very famous example is the execution of Socrates under the fabricated charge that he rejected the gods of Athens (which was a total lie, Socrates was devout). We don't know much about what happened in other city-states regarding such matters but Athens might as well have been one of the strictest places regarding religion. Athens was also one of the last places in Greece to completely abandon the ancient religion for the sake of Christianity, well into the Byzantine period, which makes me think they were really the most absolute against other religious beliefs or different approaches towards the divine.

The Homeric epics reflect a society in which religion plays the absolute most pivotal role. Mortals could hardly even think without the direct interference of a god who guided them what to say and how to act. I think very slowly Greeks were loosening up about it, with Archaic, Classical and then Hellenistic periods being gradually less and less religiously uptight and strict. This could have to do with their interaction with other nations and cultures. Seeing so many different faiths and beliefs could eventually make them start questiong what the ultimate truth is.

I don't think however everyday people would think much of this or intentionally oppose to rituals and festivals to express their opposite ideology. There certainly were several different approaches towards religion and countless variations in the intensity of the faith, however too few would oppose so strongly. As a result, I don't think punishing someone for atheism / areligiousness was a common phenomenon, especially in later stages of Ancient Greek history.

I have a feeling that by the Roman period, the Romans were more devout than the Greeks. They start getting involved with the gods and their myths more earnestly than the Greeks. Then Christianity spread like wildfire amongst the Greeks or, rather, the Greeks spread it like wildfire so this makes me conclude that the Greeks deep inside had long been in a process of seeking a different worldview, unlike the Romans at the time. But of course this is not atheism, this is lurking agnosticism and then promptly embracing a new, very different religion. I believe the vast majority were spiritual, true atheism must have been extremely rare and even more rarely openly expressed.

[transmutationisms]

given that the scientific institution is so flawed, how would you go about refuting the argument often used by religion and conspiracy theorists that, well, you believe in gravity/atoms/the universe etc. because scientists have told you it is so (hence it's no different than believing in god or other such unfalsifiable beliefs). it makes me so angry but i never know how to respond :/

going to be provocative here and say that it's never going to be useful or feasible to try sorting all facts / theories into two opposing buckets labelled 'religious' and 'scientific' so, let's go ahead and toss that fantasy. i also think that it's actually pretty common for people to interact with and accept scientific claims largely the same way they do spiritual / religious / conspiratorial / occult ones, such as by appeals to common sense (think of, like, intelligent design, which is a classic example of both a religious and scientific claim) or by testimony of trusted figures. the result is that for a lot of people, there legitimately is not a particularly well-defined distinction between their spiritual or religious beliefs and their scientific ones, certainly not in how they came to believe in these things; you can say the same about many political beliefs too.

however, the state of this epistemological crisis doesn't justify the fideist claim that scientific 'revelation' is genuinely interchangeable with religious revelation / faith, or the following implied 'ought' claim ("you can't justify xyz scientific claims, so therefore you actually should consider them as having the same philosophical status as xyz conspiracy theory or theological claim"). instead i would say what we're dealing with here is an urgent need to make scientific claims and knowledge-making more transparent to lay people. this of course doesn't mean i'm asking for a world in which there is no difference between the claims made by people with varying levels of knowledge and expertise. but you shouldn't need to be a career scientist, or a person who can afford university tuition, in order to be able to engage with scientific ideas and debates, or to see how working scientists develop their theories and on what evidentiary basis. (hint: this is part of what's at stake when i talk about university abolition.)

obviously, the fact that a scientist claimed something doesn't make it beyond questioning; indeed, many scientific theories and claims are later refuted, revised, nuanced, or otherwise altered. but, when people use the fact that scientific claims can and should be challenged as a reason to throw their hands up and decide that anything and everything might be true, they're not actually engaging with any sort of challenge to the process of knowledge-making, whether in the scientific domain or the religious one. instead what they're trying to do is use the (real and genuinely troubling) problems with scientific community norms (gatekept knowledge, heavy reliance on consensus mechanisms, enforced and widening gap between experts and lay persons in order to protect professional and pecuniary interests) as the basis for a claim that therefore, knowledge simply can't be challenged or verified, their own claims included. this isn't a means of democratising knowledge or reforming scientific practice, it's a shortcut to pushing whatever their ideological or epistemological agenda is. and it will continue to be difficult to refute with any degree of seriousness so long as scientific claims continue to be propagated as top-down expert knowledge that lay people are actively discouraged from engaging with, because doing so would threaten the financial interests of institutions like universities and professional guilds.

[stupot]

I think something a lot of gentile folk don’t consider is how antisemitism is a particularly weird kind of bigotry; it’s just sort of implicitly accepted by just about everyone, from all walks of life, as fact. Not out of malice, necessarily, but because the stereotypes are so pervasive and they don't know any Jews, nor do they know anything about Judaism as a whole.

Obviously, other forms of bigotry do take root in the hearts of many without being questioned, but with antisemitism it's just...universal. Universal in a way that can’t really be articulated. Whether the person is rich, middle class, or working class, no matter their religion or political beliefs or cultural background, they’ll inevitably throw statements like 'well, the Jews own Hollywood/own the banks/control [insert powerful institution]' out there with the nonchalance of someone discussing the weather.

It's really hard to articulate the nature of this phenomenon. At some point, every one of your coworkers and friends, provided they have not been explicitly informed of your Jewishness, will say something like that when it simply isn't true. They don't see it as controversial at all and it will rarely be challenged by anyone in their life.

For example, at my old job I had a coworker who had feelings for me and tried to bond with me over video games. Only after learning of my Jewishness did he reveal himself to be a genuine neo-nazi and begin taunting me every single shift. He’d rub his fingers together at me (you know, the ‘money’ gesture), make fun of mine and my mother’s nose, tell me about globalists controlling the world, etc.

But what’s genuinely more upsetting is that my other coworkers would join in. Nice people that I would joke around with and liked working with. My store manager once casually referred to the Jews ‘controlling the banks’ during a conversation with me. And they could have been willful antisemites like my coworker, sure, but it's more likely that they'd incorporated these stereotypes and conspiracies into their objective worldviews and didn't feel nervous to express them because there are very few repercussions for antisemitism in day-to-day life. They become surprised and uncomfortable when they learn that you’re Jewish, when you don’t look like the happy merchant rubbing his hands together counting his shekels. You can literally see in their faces how your presence disturbs their preconceptions and how they cease to relate to you at all. I’d just like goyim to keep this in mind. Maybe challenge the people in your life when they express these opinions, even if you know they’re not being malicious.

[mauriceclivealec]

ok- so i just finished the novel and i had a thought. some people, typically religious traditionalists, would view clive as the true hero. what do you think of this? in all honesty, i think the novel was unbiased; in which (to me) maurice still reigns as the hero. in the film, it’s clear the bias was for maurice… i mean the score “clive and anne” was heart wrenching, presenting the tragic fate of clive. i mean- of course the novel was biased to some extent (the name of the book lol) but it’s difficult to say whether or not clive truly regrets his decisions in the novel. if clive had no regrets, would a traditionalist say he was able to surpass his sinful desires and frame clive as a hero? strange thoughts :/

You say you have read the novel in full – so I hope you have also read the author E.M. Forster’s ‘Notes on Maurice’ at the end (written in 1960 when Forster was 81 years old). If not, I urge you to do so.

If you understood the novel, my feeling is that you already know that the answer to your question is ‘No’. Clive is emphatically NOT the hero. Forster’s novel was NOT written to promote an anti-sex/purity or anti-gay agenda. Unambiguously, Forster’s purpose was the complete opposite.

Regarding Clive, in the novel teenage Clive rejects his devout Christianity (i.e. the Church of England: Edwardian England’s religious establishment, the church of the state) and replaces that faith with Hellenistic beliefs drawn from the Ancient Greeks. Forster does not write, or suggest, that Clive reverts to Christian faith later on (in Parts 3–4). Clive’s marriage to Anne – who is active in the Church of England – signals his social conformity: it’s a social convenience, not a return to Christian faith, reflecting social/class expectations on Clive.

In Maurice’s very last paragraph, Forster tells us that, the older Clive becomes, the more he dreams of the Maurice of ‘the May term’. The Maurice of Cambridge on their perfect day out in the Fens becomes physically present for the older Clive when, in reality, Maurice has gone from him for ever. This is not the dream of someone who has overcome their ‘sinful’ [sic] desires. This ending is Forster’s punishment to Clive, who chooses social conformity as a convenience (as an upper-class landowner, he is about to become a Conservative MP in a safe/uncontested Parliamentary seat) while living a lie. (‘He never saw her [Anne] naked, nor she him. ... Secrecy suited him, at least he adopted it without regret.’ – Maurice, Chapter 33)

Perhaps you need to re-read Maurice for a fuller understanding. I would also suggest you read around and about the novel and its history. There’s a very good academic paper, ‘Maurice and religion’ by Krzysztof Fordonski (2012), which you might find interesting.

You don’t clarify who/what you mean by ‘religious traditionalists’. There are many religions, many ‘traditions’, and a spectrum of Christian positions on same-sex attraction and sex. (From your Ask I infer that you might be an American fundamentalist anti-sex Christian.) As you might be aware, same-sex couples have had marriage rights in the UK since 2013, with church marriages conducted by some Christian denominations (including the Anglican Church in Scotland but not England). Self-evidently, LGBTQ+ Christians exist, around the world. Most want acceptance – not to have to live chaste or secretive lives.

Forster was from a family who were important members of the Clapham Sect (Christian social reformers and prominent anti-slavery abolitionists in the UK) but was himself a secular humanist. His 1939 essay ‘What I Believe’ – written against rising totalitarianism at the start of WW2 – is his best-known piece of non-fiction writing.

I’m guessing from your wording, however, that your motive for this Ask is that you yourself are (i) a ‘religious traditionalist’ (American? anti-sex?) and (ii) (for reasons which aren’t clear) very keen to appropriate – or twist – Clive and Maurice to serve a ‘traditionalist’ Christian anti-sex, anti-gay agenda. If that’s correct – why?

There’s no shortage of Christian literature and anti-sex puritanical literature in the world. So I do wonder what your motive is for wanting to impose this reading on a pro-gay, pro-happiness novel by a gay author (and one of the 20th century’s greatest novelists), filmed in 1987 by gay filmmakers. If you don’t approve of Forster’s purposes and beliefs as expressed in his novels, why not just stay away?

(Endnote: Some Forster fics have also recently appeared on ff.net which seek to ‘Christianise’ several of Forster’s novels in ways which miss and disrespect the point of the originals. Again, I wonder why.)

[trickybonmot]

cw: mention of childhood sexual abuse. This post isn't about that but it mentions a specific case of csa in the second paragraph.

So, my dad is a boomer and a pro-Trump Republican. Like a lot of people in that situation, I've been very puzzled, confused, and betrayed at how the person who taught me many of my progressive values, like belief in science, being kind to others, etc. can support what Republicans support.

I read something the other day that made it much clearer to me. Actually, it was in this post by Brandon Taylor about the sexual abuse suffered by Andrea Skinner, daughter of celebrated writer Alice Munroe, at the hands of her stepfather. The author, Brandon, draws a parallel to their own experience of disclosing their sexual abuse and having their family ignore it, minimize it, and even make jokes about it. Why did the family act that way? Why didn't they empathize with the victim and seek justice?

Here's a quote from the article:

Among my people, the rural and working poor, to make a history out of the past is taboo. To speak of a thing done is to make too much of it. To be fishing for sympathy, and for what, when there’s nothing to be done about it anyway.

Here is something that I remember about my dad. We used to watch David Attenborough's nature documentaries together, the old ones, Life on Earth and The Living Planet. In those days David Attenborough himself was in the shows; he would go to the locations and walk along and talk in his nice calm accent and point out the plants and animals. My dad, like me, was an atheist, so we didn't share any mythos of the workings of the world except the one that David Attenborough gave us: the cold, hard, fascinating, miraculous truth of evolution. To me, this was religion.

The last episode of each series was about Man on earth. Even back then, the closing message was a cautionary one: Man was changing the earth, Man was destroying nature with pollution and unchecked urbanization. My dad? Wouldn't watch that. He would turn it off and tell me that he hated that stuff. He didn't tell me that it wasn't true! But I came to understand that he felt there was a kind of wallowing, finger-wagging quality to it that simply made him cringe. Still to this day, when I see this kind of media my first thought is my dad would hate this.

To speak of a thing done is to make too much of it.

This quote hit me like a ton of bricks because I think this is exactly my dad's attitude toward everything bad in the world. This is why all talk of environmentalism, racial justice, reparations--any issue where people are seeking redress or repair of something awful that happened in the past. To make a history out of the past is taboo. To speak of a thing done is to make too much of it. To be fishing for sympathy, and for what, when there’s nothing to be done about it anyway. THAT IS MY DAD. And if you're wondering whether it also came up in the context of being raised by him, IT SURE FUCKING DID but that's a story for another time.

I think he knows that climate change is bad. I think he knows that racism is bad, and that what this nation has done to Black people is bad, and all the rest of it. But when people talk about it? When people beg for something to be done about it? Man, he just doesn't want to hear it. It makes him cringe inside. It's just unbearably awkward. In fact, I think the very hugeness of these issues, the very awfulness of what has been done and it still being done, is exactly why it's so out of line to bring them up.

So he's supporting the party that doesn't put that stuff up in his face all the time, is all. That's what I think. His reaction to the progressive agenda is just a knee jerk, gut-level negativity that has nothing to do with whether what we're asking for is good or right. He just can't stand for that asking to happen, because the MAIN value he was raised with was exactly this: you put your shoulder to the wheel and get on with things. I was talking to him about Putin or something and he said, "well, like my old ma would say, the trash still has to get taken out."

Now, for sure he has also been brainwashed by Fox News and he believes a lot of things that aren't true. But I think what initially opened the door for it was this feeling that it's just unseemly to make a fuss, to make a history out of the past.

I don't know if there's any hope, here--if being aware of this attitude can change anything. But it was comforting to me to find this clue, and maybe it can open the door to a way of talking about politics that doesn't activate his fight-or-flight response!

[satanachia666]

Hail Thyself: Satan is Not a Jealous God

I don’t know who needs to hear this right now, but here it goes: Satan is not a jealous god.

Based on my experiences, Satan is fine with people honoring and working with other deities, demons, spirits, and entities. Satan does not demand worship, praise, or offerings from people, including those of us who believe in him. In fact, if you’re the kind of person who connects with deities through offerings, Satan would prefer you give offerings when it suits you and when you feel moved to do so, regardless of whether that’s in a ritual or in the moment. Working with demons will familiarize you with Satan’s many aspects. It’s true that demons are capable of good and bad, creation and destruction, positivity and negativity, etc. Nonetheless, anyone can easily say that about MANY other deities, including and especially Yahweh himself.

The Bible describes Yahweh as jealous and vengeful when his demands aren’t fulfilled. In The Bible, Yahweh repeatedly gets jealous and angry when people worship other gods. So, it makes sense to me that many people who come from a Christian religious background feel hesitant to work with other spirits, practice witchcraft, engage in the occult, and otherwise pursue their spirituality in the way they feel drawn to beyond a biblical paradigm.

Thus, I want to encourage you to honor and commune with the deities, demons, and spirits you feel like reaching out to. So long as you treat them with love and respect, they will most likely do the same for you. Love and respect are also what you should expect in return from the beings you work with.

Keep in mind: I am a Theistic Satanist and Demonolatress. I believe that Satan is the demonic creator of the universe who inspirits the whole of creation, and all demons are aspects of this demonic divinity. I also believe that all deities are manifestations of Satan. I know for a fact I’m not the only one who holds these beliefs. To us, Satan is the whole, so it only makes sense to me that Satan wants humanity to be whole as well. Contrary to popular belief, many of us feel more whole when we maintain connections with multiple spiritual beings as opposed to just one. To me, telling someone they should only work with one god is like telling them they should only have one lover or one friend: While that might work for some of us, many people (myself included) prefer to have more than one partner and friend. That kind of cookie-cutter approach to spirituality is bound to go wrong when we live in a world full of individuals with complex, varying needs, ideas, and beliefs.

Each demon represents a different aspect of Satan that will teach us about ourselves, the world we live in, and perhaps even the universe at large if they feel inclined to do so. I believe that the relationship someone has with a specific demon is unique, yet that connection still ultimately comes from Satan. Demons know that they are greatly feared by many people (especially religious people), but they have repeatedly shown me that they are willing to help and empower those of us who approach them in good faith. I’ve also found that demons also appreciate any effort you expend on unlearning any toxic behaviors, beliefs, or notions rooted in religion that you might’ve picked up along the way in life. These efforts especially benefit those of us who strive to practice Theistic Satanism and Demonolatry.

Sometimes, you might not have the right chemistry or connection with certain beings, such as a particular demon, and that’s okay. A demon/spirit/deity rejecting you isn’t all that bad when there are plenty of others who’d love to be involved with you and your practice. Just remember that any spirit who works against your best interest isn’t your ally. If a spirit is actively creating any problems in your life, you should banish it immediately. I’ve seen a lot of newcomers get caught up in the drama of getting vivid manifestations from malicious/evil spirits, all while those spirits continue to wreak total havoc in their lives. There is no need to put up with that! You can experience the same intense synchronicities, manifestations, and results from working with spiritual beings that respect you and your well-being.

I realize that many people, including myself, come to Theistic Satanism and Demonolatry with a background that contains some degree of involvement with at least one of the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). As for myself, before I began practicing witchcraft and paganism in my preteen years, I held the same general Christian beliefs that my parents had. And still, after about 20 years of practicing, I sometimes find my worldly and spiritual behavior being impacted by the toxic elements of Christianity I internalized before I became cognizant enough to resist it. Even though I began moving away from Christianity early on in my life, I definitely see how being socialized into a certain religion during childhood can have long-lasting effects on how you interact with spirituality and religion in the future.

So, I wanted to remind whoever needs to hear it: You are not a bad practitioner for dealing with the toxicity handed to you by the Christianity you internalized early on in life. You are not a bad practitioner if you’re still dealing with the internalized religious toxicity you learned so long ago, after all of these years. There is a reason why sociologists consider religion to be an entire agent of socialization: Its effects are very real and influential in our development. It only makes sense that the beliefs you were socialized to hold early on would have some kind of impact on you later on. Fortunately, now that we are more aware of who we are, what we want out of life, and our spirituality, we can finally heal and grow from the ashes of the flames that burned us.

Good luck with exploring and expanding upon your spirituality! After celebrating the Rite of Belial, it only makes sense that we take the time to appreciate new beginnings, initiation, and deeper meanings. It makes even more sense to embrace new beginnings as a new year begins. I hope you get to enjoy this special time of the year as much as I do!

In case this reaches you late: Happy New Year’s Eve and Happy New Year! Hail Satan!🤘

- Pearl Satanachia 🌕

[vaporwavedoggie]

Hello yes, I'm going to rant on tumblr dot com about my religion and what true Christianity is and should be

I promise you this is just me getting my message out there and trying to get through to more.. hateful Christians hopefully

Alright so. I understand there are many interpretations of The Bible. Let's start off with the whole "Lgbt+ folks are evil and ungodly" shit.

Do yourself a favor and look up the original Latin translation of the Bible. You know, the one that has all those books removed?

Yes yes, so the original translation didn't originally talk about homosexuality, it talked about men... sleeping with boys. That's right babey, the Bible originally said being a pedo is a sin, not two guys fuckin.

And nowhere in the Bible does it say being trans is a sin ahahhahah

And here's a little thought experiment for you: even if it WAS a sin, you know what else is considered a sin in The Bible? Eating pork and wearing mixed fabrics. I'm not Google, look this shit up yourself.

So are yall REALLY going to pick and choose what sins people are allowed to do?? And ignore the MAIN MESSAGES OF THE BIBLE?? You know, "love thy neighbor", how only God can judge you and you shouldn't just anyone else bc you know, you're not God...

So imo what I've realized being a Christian is. A lot of Christians aren't focused on spreading the teachings of Jesus. They're focused on pushing a political agenda and personal beliefs in the name of God

They're focused on having a power trip and putting other people down. If they were TRULY focused on the teachings of the Bible, they'd accept EVERYONE REGARDLESS OF WHO THEY ARE. Hell, Jesus was friends with prostitutes and the homeless. He didn't judge anyone

He just spread his word and his word was a message of kindness. Interpret The Bible how you will, but do you really think Jesus or God would want you to hate your fellow brother in his name? To wish harm or death upon anyone else just because you don't agree with their lifestyle?

True Christianity focuses on spreading love. I'm so out of touch with many Christians because I don't believe in hate. I don't believe in judging, because the Bible literally says not to judge anyone when you have sinned yourself. And everyone ever has sinned.

And when I tell people I'm Christian, I have to go into my beliefs because many are afraid that like most, I don't accept anyone and I'll spread blind hate. Which isn't how it should be. Hell I'm LGBT+ myself. It's pretty fucking sad that there are so many Christians that spread hateful rhetoric that nowadays, when you tell people you're Christian, they have to question whether or not you'll harm/judge them. Which isn't how it should be at all. This isn't the message Jesus wanted to spread.

So tl;dr: regardless of if you're LGBT, a sex worker, a drug addict, homeless, whatever the hell you are, God loves you and accepts you, as he does all his children. I understand if you have religious trauma and I won't push my religion down your throat

But in MY version of Christianity, my God is a loving God. I don't talk about my religion much but I'm tired of seeing hateful Christians. I promise you not all of us are like that, and regardless of your lifestyle I fucking love and accept you and won't judge you no matter what

My tumblr is a safe space for yall. All walks of life are welcome here. You are loved. And not just because it's what The Bible taught me, but it's because this is the message I believe with all my heart and will continue to spread.

I love you!! Rant over

[theshoesofatiredman]

“Why worship a God that says that?”

Yeah, I do think that is a very core of the matter. Going off-topic for a bit; that somewhat reminds me of several denominations (ahem, cults) that preach, 'give the church money, and you will be richly rewarded.'

And, at least in my own answer, it's because of an entirely materialistic reason. For the above sect, it's simple human greed. For your own question, it is another entirely human reasoning. But still ─ human.

Your question doesn't really have a universal answer, does it? Because the question I answer is, “why follow a God that says that?”

When you know the answer is materialism and human desire ─ it becomes incredibly simple to replace the word God with human teachings/cults/sect/lies, among others.

The answer for worship is entirely different. And, since you are an atheist, I do assume this is a question for every religion, right?

Why did people worship Baal and sacrificed babies to him? Why do satanists worship the Devil? The Aztecs, whose worship also consisted of human sacrifices?

Did they truly believe in what they did for their Gods?

I think they were crazy and that those sacrifices were an offering to the Devil. But that's kind of a silly thing to say to an atheist.

To be frank ─ the Truth matters. And it's not that women shouldn't wear pants to church, or that you shouldn't kiss before marriage ─ or that my denomination is correct, and everyone else's is wrong.

 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” ─ John 14:6.

Peel back every layer, of every Christian denomination, and that should be its core; it is what I believe, and it is why I worship.

The Truth, I find, is a very simple thing. And… though you don't believe that is what it is ─ it is not in my power to change you; nor is it my purpose.

I guess I'll ask you the same question about John 14:6. Why worship a god that says that? When we know that the best indicator for what religious beliefs you hold is where you're born and what religion your parents are, doesn't it seem tremendously unfair that the offer of salvation is limited to whether or not a person is able to believe in Jesus as the only way?

As someone who was indoctrinated into Christianity, I know how hard it is to deconvert when it's the way you understand the whole world, when it's the tie that binds your most important community together. I am lucky enough to live in a place where I don't face death for my unbelief, but that's not true for everyone. There are people around the world being indoctrinated into the "wrong religion" and not only will that severely damage their ability to sincerely believe anything else, but they are going to face tremendous consequences if they dare to change what they believe.

It seems wrong that those people, with so much stacked against them, are required to do the same thing as the person born into an American Evangelical Christian family, where belief in Jesus is easy and 'risk free'. This choice to follow Jesus is so highly valued within Christianity, the determiner of eternal salvation, but it's barely even a choice at all. It's practically an outcome of a person's birth circumstances.

Why worship a god who distributes salvation like that?

I do specifically use worship as opposed to 'follow' or 'believe in' because I think it cuts to the heart of the matter more quickly. Plus there are many other things people would say they follow or believe in besides God. But I truly want to know why they think their God is worthy of worship, of reverence, of adoration, of ceaseless praise, when held up next to what I view at least as the problems with their god's words and deeds. Does a god whose offer of salvation is so demonstrably unfair deserve to be forever exalted?

I don't need myself or others to believe in the ' capital T' Truth anymore, because I don't interface with that idea the same way. I still think there are things that are true or untrue obviously, but I don't think there's only one good way to live your life anymore. I don't think religions and religious beliefs are without their purpose and I think that they evolved with humanity to meet real human needs. How do we deal with grief and loss? How do we treat our fellow man? How do we cope with suffering? If I want religious belief to end because I find it to be untrue, I want it to die a slow death, one that allows time for society to transition its members to other ways of finding meaning and dealing with the tough questions every person has to wrestle with as a part of the human experience. I don't need you or anyone else to be an atheist.

I am now focused much more on harm reduction when it comes to religious beliefs. If a person's theological practice means they want to pass laws that harm LGBTQ+ people, then i think they need to be stopped and the harm from their beliefs called out. The average American Christian is barely aware of the way their scripture was used to support and enforce chattel slavery in their country. I hope someday people get to live in a world where it's the same for queer people. Not because I want people to be ignorant of the past, but because I want the harm being done to people to end. And theological change so powerful it seems like it always was that way would probably go a long way in sparing queer people the pain I went through as a gay man in a fundamentalist community.

That's obviously a big one and one we might not even be aligned on idk. But there are smaller ones and ones that overlap with some religious practices. For example, I would say that most Christians think it's fine to kiss before marriage. I told my friend that it was a more extremist and fundamentalist position, not as a moral judgment, but as a way of saying that most Christians don't share that belief. My friend can do whatever he wants to do with his body and so long as he finds a partner who shares that same belief and is okay with not kissing I think it's fine. I think his life is worse off for it, but if people are allowed to do whatever they want with their own bodies that includes things that make them worse off. But I don't want my friend to tell other people that this is the only righteous way to date. Because that is going to harm people and contribute to the culture of sexual shame that I would say is pervasive inside Christianity. And idk how to harm reduction that without trying to change his belief, since the way he interfaces with his religious beliefs is that the one right way for him is the one right way for everyone. It's the way of thinking about the capital T truth that we were both taught. Jesus said I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the father except through me. And bundled up in that was "there is one way to live a righteous life and anything outside that is sinful and wrong."

[salvatwh0re]

Did you have an religious trauma or are toj religious like I know were god and stuff I’ve always believed there’s something beyond traditional religion at play but at the same time sometimes i think god is making fun of me or punishing me until I repent or something that’s why the law isn’t working but I know that’s not true it’s just my anxiety but still do u have any experience with that or advice. Sometimes I’ll for to church (by force) and the sermon is abt something I’m doubting like god is trying to speak with me or something and make me give up and repent

Omg yes! I grew up in a very religious christian/catholic hispanic family on my mom’s side. My dad’s side was a lot more open minded and spiritual, so i was a bit torn throughout my childhood. My mom would also force me to go to church because she didn’t want me to end up like my dad (with no true religion) and so that was always in the back of my mind because i didn’t want to disappoint my mom. Then i started questioning myself like do i really believe in god or do i just want to not disappoint my mom. Then i found out that god doesn’t like gay people and he sends them to hell or whatever and that made me really sad because at that time one of my favorite cousins had just came out and she’s such a good person always helping out the homeless and going in mission trips so i didn’t understand how someone who did such good things would end up in hell simply because they loved someone.

In the end I realized it wasn’t that I don’t believe in God, but that I didn’t like the way the religion worshipped him. It was very culty and contradictory. And although I still went to church with my mom (which i felt very guilty about), I could seem to be frustrated with myself I would always ask myself why i couldn’t just be normal and be religious. Then I found out about manifestation in 2019. And i had a grand realization that I’m in control of my destiny and it’s not already decided for me by some big angry man in the sky. And that the higher power is a part of me and not as demanding and vindictive as they make it seem in the bible. So i’m not an atheist lol, but I just don’t believe in the way christians perceive god/ the higher power.

When I started realizing that “I am god” I did have a moment where just felt lost like I was doing something wrong and I should be ashamed. It was difficult especially when i always had my mom in my ear preaching the gospel. I would definitely say it made it harder for me with the law of assumption/ the void state and shifting because I always had that doubt in my mind. Like what if my mom is right and i’m just going down the wrong path. But then I had way too many success stories of my own for it to be a coincidence. I felt a lot happier than I did when i was practicing christianity.

To answer you question, yes I do feel like that was holding me back, it was definitely a HUGE limiting belief that i didn’t even think about getting rid of. But i think the best way for you to get over that is to trust that there is a higher power and there is a god, but that instead of punishing you for discovering your own path, it will allow you to find your way with a little bit of guidance. So really i’m not saying that you need to completely abandon your religion to be able to manifest or tap into the void state, because that’s not it at all. There are so many people in very strict religions that have been able to manifest their dream life while still sticking to their religion. Manifestation and the void is not against any religion. It’s a natural human right and ability, we do it every day whether we’re conscious of it or not. For the problem wasn’t whether manifesting was against my religion or not, it was the fact that I was straying away from my religion and that the LOA community helped me realize how much my religion was holding me back.

If your concern is that it’s against your religion, trust god would not have given you the ability to do it if it were a sin. The void state is not some outside force, in fact if anything the void state would help you rid you of your sin because in that state you’re free of all intrusive, negative, and limiting thoughts. Creating your own path is nothing to repent for.

[elisabethbabarci]

UNITY CONSCIOUSNESS

We come together as a powerful community.

No matter the colour of your skin, your religion, your age, shape or size, what position you are in society or what gender you identify as, always know within your heart that we are all one, accepted, whole, respected and loved.

Through our collective experience universally it is love that unites us and our trust in one another.

We all have different traditions, backgrounds, beliefs, core values, heritages from many life times as we have evolved.

Understand this, love knows no boundaries. Consider for a minute if you could mute out what has been taught through society or family or friends or even strangers. What if you could start fresh to build new stronger foundations that evoke trust, love, and unity?

We are not divided, we all understand that we are part of a greater community that is evolving but we need to respect one another as we are more powerful together than we can ever be apart.

Embrace you and what makes you unique and stay true to who you are while always respecting others and embracing their life experiences to build a stronger future. Learn from others, see from their perspective, and listen to their lessons as they will do the same for you.

You are the future , no matter what age you are. You do not need to look to the new generation as you are still here and it is your responsibility to always be the light for others along their path.

Start with speaking to a stranger, dropping all anger, sadness, negative emotions that have been embedded into your foundation. Start new to carve out a more united healthy approach to life.

We are all different, we are all magnificent beings in our own ways. Learn to see past the veils and see each individual as a part of you beyond what we have been told that makes us different.

We all bring wonderful elements to life. Learn that we are always one , stronger than ever, and fear does not exist where love is. Love uplifts, embrace that part of you to see beyond and to see the good instead of the bad.

The change begins and remains in your hands. We can not change the past but we can improve the future to be more inclusive, healthier, and without boundaries that divide us.

How to build community?

What does it mean to be a community?

How does internal change impact external change?

As a united community whether it be globally or nationally we all come together to stand united. No matter what our race, colour, gender, we are all important and full of unlimited potential.

As we grow as a society we will experience many different setbacks that will make us feel like we have lost our path when really it leads us to new destinations.

Enhanced empowerment for yourself and loved ones is vital during these times.

Always listen to your inner instinct for what is for the highest and best for yourself and those you care about.

As we get bombarded with the noise of our daily lives, you must take the time to reset.

We as a society deserve peace, happiness, and above all the right to freely express who we are and to be accepted for who we are.

Embrace who you are and what makes you different and unique.

During this period of time allow your creative faculties to flow with ideas and new methods that might seem abstract to you.

Center yourself, align yourself, be one with nature and explore different parts of your communities to see other aspects from a new perspective.

We only learn through experience.

Allow yourself the time to be who you truly are and to experience life.

You have one life, one body, and unlimited opportunities to turn any situation around.

Believe in yourself and the power of change.

Ask yourself, what is it at your core that you want to change?

Remove any element that makes you feel like you cannot freely express who you truly are. As I mentioned in many of my posts, any relationship that is healthy will allow you to be the best version of yourself and will allow you to be free and creative to reach your goals.

You are a pioneer of change and an essence of creative expression.

Do not allow limiting beliefs make you feel otherwise. Remember, those that impose these limiting beliefs do not believe in themselves and deserve our compassion and forgiveness as they are learning as well.

Your potential is unlimited and your ability to be the change that is needed.

Transmute the fear, guilt, sadness and grief, and any limiting belief that is preventing you from being the best version of who you can be. End the patterns that are causing you to doubt yourself.

Do not seek change externally for what you can change internally within yourself. Only you can change your habits, beliefs, and know what is not for your highest good.

Empower yourself everyday to get healthier , stronger, and to see life in many multifaceted ways. Never narrow your perspective. See things for yourself. Never give your power away, always stand strong and believe in yourself and your abilities to create, invent and contribute to society. You are a vital part to this earth. You were born for greatness.

[nyovette]

The Mask of Mirrors by M. A. Carrick

Synopsis: This is your past, the good and the ill of it, and that which is neither . . .

Arenza Lenskaya is a liar and a thief, a pattern-reader and a daughter of no clan. Raised in the slums of Nadezra, she fled that world to save her sister.

This is your present, the good and the ill of it, and that which is neither . . .

Renata Viraudax is a con artist recently arrived in Nadezra. She has one goal: to trick her way into a noble house and secure her fortune.

This is your future, the good and the ill of it, and that which is neither . . .

As corrupt nightmare magic begins to weave its way through the city of dreams, the poisonous feuds of its aristocrats and the shadowy dangers of its impoverished underbelly become tangled—with Ren at their heart. And if she cannot sort the truth from the lies, it will mean the destruction of all her worlds.

Rating: ★★★★★

⚠️ SPOILERS ⚠️

The world building is incredibly intricate. Incredibly. Nadezra has its own hierarchy, religions, magic, history, neighbouring countries, and so on. It even has its own form of tarot cards (which I absolutely could not keep up with). It's so intricate that I couldn't tell you 90% of Nadezra's history and the roles of the many families in the Cinquerat because it's so BIG. But that's what true history is. It's big and it's messy and confusing. It's war and division and exploration and victory. It's cultures and peoples blending together, either willingly or unwillingly, with biases, overlapping beliefs, and racial injustices. Real history is confusing, and so I actually appreciate that this fictional one is too.

I saw some reviews saying it was rather slow to get to the climax. And it's true, it is a lengthy book, and it takes a good amount of time to get to the conflict that it'd been building up to. But I don't think that's a bad thing. In fact, it completely made sense. The story is about Ren conning her way into a noble family, pretending to be one of their own. That kind of a con takes time. Ren had to not only earn the trust of the Traementis family, but also sell it to people that she was incredibly wealthy and well educated. She had to integrate into high society to help the House of Traementis, therefore extending that illusion of wealth and connection to Letilia to people in power. Having to earn their trust so she could use them to her advantage too. And none of it felt boring, or like it was insignificant. I think it was fantastic and only pulled me further into the story.

I think this book is one made with such love and care. M. A. Carrick really thought about every detail to flesh out this story, and I love that. Towards the end, I was contemplating whether this would be a 4 star or 5 star read. The reasons I gave it 5 stars are because it is a genuinely captivating story for me, the final reveals were unexpected (like,, Grey?? Hello??? And Vargo being even more conniving than we could've expected??), and I could tell that this book had a deeper beauty than I couldn't truly appreciate through a single read. The prospect of rereading my favourite books is a bit scary because I worry that I won't find it as enjoyable as the first time. Like how I often overplay my favourite songs and they lose their magic. But this is a book I know will only get more beautiful with each read. More foreshadowing will become apparent, pieces of Nedezra's history will slot into place where it hasn't for me already, and characters and their connections will make more sense. I actually look forward to reading this again, which is exciting.

I'd say the only ick I had with The Mask of Mirrors was some of the Leato-Renata dynamic. I really loved their relationship as friends and cousins. Renata was there to use Leato and his family, but his good nature and sweet disposition led to her clearly becoming attached to him. It started to get a little weird when the bits of flirtation and romance slipped in, and some of the people around them showed support for if they were to become an item. Which,, they're cousins. For Ren, any unwilling attraction to Leato would make sense because she knows they aren't related. But Leato thinks Renata is his blood-related cousin.. everyone else thinks Renata is his cousin.. and yet the prospect of them getting together is fine. Even more confusing: when Vargo thinks that Sedge has a thing for Tess - his sister, but not blood-related (as far as I can tell) (and Vargo doesn't know this), Ren acknowledges how it'd be incestuous. Perhaps marriages between cousins are normal in Nadezra, but I don't remember reading that anywhere. It didn't matter anyway since Leato died, but still,, bit icky.

Overall, though, I thought The Mask of Mirrors was just excellent. I really really admire what M. A. Carrick was able to do here. Their ability to build a world like finely woven silk is a talent I could only dream of having. I think it was fantastic.