#and it’s definitely racially charged | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

alphajocklover · 4 months ago

Text

Commissions, Rules, Story Index and Other Information ————

Commissions Information

I only have 5 slots at a time, but that may expand even more one day. I charge 1 cent per word. Below is a link to my ‘commissions page’ (it’s a google doc) with all the details, including a list of what I won’t do, what I definitely will do, and how to contact me. If you’re interested, please DM me and let me know!

————

Firstly this is a Jockification blog. It’s mainly about turning nerds into alpha male jocks. That doesn’t mean I won’t do other transformations or go into other kinks. I’ve already done some slightly different things like the macro tf and the Muscle daddy tf stories, both of which I loved writing. But most of this stuff is going to be jock tfs. Just wanted to make that clear.

Now, onto what I absolutely will not do. These are off limits, and I’ll explain why too. I’m not here to kinkshame or anything but I write these stories for fun, and if I’m not into something then it’s so much harder to write about.

Anything that’s not 18+. I know this is a very controversial topic, and I want to be clear. I do not have issues with age play (although personally I don’t love to write about that stuff either). As long as there are no actual children involved in the making of an erotic piece of fiction, or you are encouraging people to actually do horrible things to kids, you can write whatever you want. But since it’s so controversial, and it is way too easy to write something that makes light of a traumatic experience, I would rather avoid that all together.

Rape. Once again I am not going to kink shame anyone. A lot of people have a rape kink, and that’s perfectly normal. As long as all parties are consenting and of age irl, you can do whatever you want in the bedroom. But once again it is incredibly easy to write something that offends and hurts people, and on a personal note I just don’t feel comfortable writing something like that. I’m not gonna claim that everything I write, with all the reality bending and changing identities, is perfectly consensual, but there’s a big difference between writing about impossible magic powers and writing about realistic rape, and I don’t feel comfortable crossing that line.

Beastiality and Animals. Once again not going to kink shame anyone. And I want to stress I’m not talking about furrys or pup play or whatever. I’m talking about actual beastiality. You can write and read whatever you want as long as it’s not hurting people, but as far as I’m concerned animals can’t consent, so I won’t be writing anything with them in it. I’m also not entirely comfortable with human to animals tfs. Those are just not my thing.

Bathroom stuff and Smegma. This one is less complicated. I just don’t write this kink because I don’t like it. Watersports and scat and smegma all do nothing for me. Just a personal preference.

Real person Fiction. Once again it’s nothing personal. Plenty of people love real person fiction. I just feel so awkward writing about real live people. So I avoid it. Fanfiction about characters is another story.

Inanimate and Body part TF. I don’t really understand why, but these types of transformations make me uncomfortable. Really it’s just my preference.

Entirely Female Focused TFs: I am a gay man, and have a harder time writing erotic stories about women. While I can write about straight sex and women, I prefer to keep men as the focus, or at least have them heavily involved.

Gender TFs: I know this will probably upset some people, but I’ve personally just never enjoyed gender change tfs. Perhaps I will experiment with it one day, but not now.

Racial Slurs: While I do like raceplay and racial changes, I will not include slurs I cannot reclaim in my work.

That’s all there is for my big limits. If theres anything else you’re unsure of and want to check, just DM me. I won’t judge, the worst I’ll do is say no. I hope all this serious talk didn’t upset anyone. More stories coming soon!

Will update as needed!

Just a reminder that I am up for story suggestions, questions, and DMs. I especially want story prompts because I’d love the opportunity to make more stories for you guys. I’m also open for trades if anyone is interested

————

Blogger Backup

My Blogger Blog, where I backup all of my stories, can be found here.

————

Story Index

Below is a list of my bigger stories and ongoing series. I'll be doing this chronologically, and adding to it periodically! I'll be listing some kinks that are controversial or unusual for my blog next to each story they are in. I won't be marked G2S because I use that a lot. I hope this helps you guys get around my page better!

SuperNova TFs | A person makes a wish on a SuperNova

Older Brothers (My first story!) (involves incest)

Unmoved (involves bisexual sex)

Stereotypical

Professor to Frat Bro

Supernova Comedian (Political Play)

End of the World (100th Story Special!)

Wake Up | The true self awakens, and spreads

Wake up Bro

Wake up Pops

Marvel TFs | TFs themed around Marvel Characters. Not all connected

No longer a Spider, finally a Man (Implied relationship between a student and teacher)

Possessed by the Power of Thor (Giantism)

Like the Hulk

Like Wolverine

InstaJock TFs | A mysterious app that jockifies users.

InstaJock Introduction

InstaJock: A Small Glitch

InstaJock: On The Go

InstaJock: Details and Settings (Race TF, Asian)

InstaJock: Payback

Revert Mind

InstaJock: Preview

InstaJock: Research and Frats

InstaJock: Tricking a Thief

InstaJock: Regional

InstaJock: Secondhand

InstaJock: Girls

AlphaJock?!

InstaJock: Boyfriends

InstaJock: Double Friend Request (Race TF, Asian)

InstaJock: Sexuality

InstaJock: The Master and Mysteries

Alpha with a Capital A | A look into literal Alphas

Alpha with a Capital A intro

Alpha with a Capital A: Sexuality

Alpha with a Capital A: Alphas and Gender (Transgender Character and physical gender transition)

Gay Couple to Straight Beta Bros

Greaser Alpha

Alpha with a Capital A: Big bro and Lil bro

Asian Alpha Bro

Jock Studies | Coaches and their brainwashed Jocks

Jock Studies: Swimming Coach

Straight to Gay

The role of Coaches

Assistant Coaches and Baseball

Eye of Beholder (EB) Jewelry | Jewelry Company with a secret

Engaged

Science Teacher to Football Coach

EB Jewelry: New CEO

EB Jewelry: The New COO

AirBFnBF

EB Jewelry: My Friend and Gauges

EB Jewelry: Dog Tags and Brothers

The Best Club in Town | Gay clubs and their members are turned straight

The Best Club in Town

The Douchebag Revolution | Time traveling fight over your right to be a straight douche

Welcome to the Revolution

Douche Rehab

1,000 Follower Special, The Douchebag Revolution Begins

The Hometown Hex | The town where everyone is a jock. Everyone

The Hometown Hex

Baxter Beach

500 Followers Special: Wally's Visit

Made for This Town

The Hometown Hex: Exports

BDE: Big Dick Energy | Literal BDE causes changes

An intro to BDE

BDE: How it Works

BDE: Extreme Buildup and Infection

Retsam Mirror | Swapped with your selection. By force

Retsam Mirror

Trapped

My Uncle | Lore on my character, and his journey to save his Uncle

My Uncle

My Uncle: A Follow Up

Nick the Devil | A friend (Boyfriend) of my characters Uncle, whose a literal Devil

Nick the Devil

The Church | Evil Church converts people into new member

The Church (Semi-religious themes)

Potions Set | I gave an Actor a bunch of potions. I hope it works out...

Getting the Role

Camous | Those who change to fit in

Camous

The Master | The Man behind InstaJock and my Uncles Transformation. The Big Bad.

InstaJock: Going Viral (@occamstfs Occams 2000 challenge entry)

The Drunken Chameleon | A TF Bar

The Perfect Bar for You

Halloween TFs | Halloween themed transformations! Returns every October!

Personal Transformations | Transformations my character performs | references other stories

Miscellaneous Stories | Stories without a series or common theme

————

I hope you guys like this! It took a lot of work putting this index together. If you have any questions or ideas, or just want to, dm me! Total stories: 102

#non story post #story index #massive post

238 notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 9 months ago

Text

The tax sharks are back and they’re coming for your home

I'm touring my new, nationally bestselling novel The Bezzle! Catch me TODAY (Apr 27) in MARIN COUNTY, then Winnipeg (May 2), Calgary (May 3), Vancouver (May 4), and beyond!

One of my weirder and more rewarding hobbies is collecting definitions of "conservativism," and one of the jewels of that collection comes from Corey Robin's must-read book The Reactionary Mind:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Reactionary_Mind

Robin's definition of conservativism has enormous explanatory power and I'm always finding fresh ways in which it clarifies my understand of events in the world: a conservative is someone who believes that a minority of people were born to rule, and that everyone else was born to follow their rules, and that the world is in harmony when the born rulers are in charge.

This definition unifies the otherwise very odd grab-bag of ideologies that we identify with conservativism: a Christian Dominionist believes in the rule of Christians over others; a "men's rights advocate" thinks men should rule over women; a US imperialist thinks America should rule over the world; a white nationalist thinks white people should rule over racialized people; a libertarian believes in bosses dominating workers and a Hindu nationalist believes in Hindu domination over Muslims.

These people all disagree about who should be in charge, but they all agree that some people are ordained to rule, and that any "artificial" attempt to overturn the "natural" order throws society into chaos. This is the entire basis of the panic over DEI, and the brainless reflex to blame the Francis Scott Key bridge disaster on the possibility that someone had been unjustly promoted to ship's captain due to their membership in a disfavored racial group or gender.

This definition is also useful because it cleanly cleaves progressives from conservatives. If conservatives think there's a natural order in which the few dominate the many, progressivism is a belief in pluralism and inclusion, the idea that disparate perspectives and experiences all have something to contribute to society. Progressives see a world in which only a small number of people rise to public life, rarified professions, and cultural prominence and assume that this is terrible waste of the talents and contributions of people whose accidents of birth keep them from participating in the same way.

This is why progressives are committed to class mobility, broad access to education, and active programs to bring traditionally underrepresented groups into arenas that once excluded them. The "some are born to rule, and most to be ruled over" conservative credo rejects this as not just wrong, but dangerous, the kind of thing that leads to bridges being demolished by cargo ships.

The progressive reforms from the New Deal until the Reagan revolution were a series of efforts to broaden participation in every part of society by successively broader groups of people. A movement that started with inclusive housing and education for white men and votes for white women grew to encompass universal suffrage, racial struggles for equality, workplace protections for a widening group of people, rights for people with disabilities, truth and reconciliation with indigenous people and so on.

The conservative project of the past 40 years has been to reverse this: to return the great majority of us to the status of desperate, forelock-tugging plebs who know our places. Hence the return of child labor, the tradwife movement, and of course the attacks on labor unions and voting rights:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/06/the-end-of-the-road-to-serfdom/

Arguably the most potent symbol of this struggle is the fight over homes. The New Deal offered (some) working people a twofold path to prosperity: subsidized home-ownership and strong labor protections. This insulated (mostly white) workers from the two most potent threats to working peoples' lives and wellbeing: the cruel boss and the greedy landlord.

But the neoliberal era dispensed with labor rights, leaving the descendants of those lucky workers with just one tool for securing their American dream: home-ownership. As wages stagnated, your home – so essential to your ability to simply live – became your most important asset first, and a home second. So long as property values rose – and property taxes didn't – your home could be the backstop for debt-fueled consumption that filled the gap left by stagnating wages. Liquidating your family home might someday provide for your retirement, your kids' college loans and your emergency medical bills.

For conservatives who want to restore Gilded Age class rule, this was a very canny move. It pitted lucky workers with homes against their unlucky brethren – the more housing supply there was, the less your house was worth. The more protections tenants had, the less your house was worth. The more equitably municipal services (like schools) were distributed, the less your house was worth:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/06/06/the-rents-too-damned-high/

And now that the long game is over, they're coming for your house. It started with the foreclosure epidemic after the 2008 financial crisis, first under GW Bush, but then in earnest under Obama, who accepted the advice of his Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who insisted that homeowners should be liquidated to "foam the runways" for the crashing banks:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/06/personnel-are-policy/#janice-eberly

Then there are scams like "We Buy Ugly Houses," a nationwide mass-fraud outfit that steals houses out from under elderly, vulnerable and desperate people:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/05/11/ugly-houses-ugly-truth/#homevestor

The more we lose our houses, the more single-family homes Wall Street gets to snap up and convert into slum properties, aslosh with a toxic stew of black mold, junk fees and eviction threats:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/08/wall-street-landlords/#the-new-slumlords

Now there's a new way for finance barons the steal our houses out from under us – or rather, a very old way that had lain dormant since the last time child labor was legal – "tax lien investing."

Across the country, counties and cities have programs that allow investment funds to buy up overdue tax-bills from homeowners in financial hardship. These "investors" are entitled to be paid the missing property taxes, and if the homeowner can't afford to make that payment, the "investor" gets to kick them out of their homes and take possession of them, for a tiny fraction of their value.

As Andrew Kahrl writes for The American Prospect, tax lien investing was common in the 19th century, until the fundamental ugliness of the business made it unattractive even to the robber barons of the day:

https://prospect.org/economy/2024-04-26-investing-in-distress-tax-liens/

The "tax sharks" of Chicago and New York were deemed "too merciless" by their peers. One exec who got out of the business compared it to "picking pennies off a dead man’s eyes." The very idea of outsourcing municipal tax collection to merciless debt-hounds fell aroused public ire.

Today – as the conservative project to restore the "natural" order of the ruled and the ruled-over builds momentum – tax lien investing is attracting some of America's most rapacious investors – and they're making a killing. In Chicago, Alden Capital just spent a measly $1.75m to acquire the tax liens on 600 family homes in Cook County. They now get to charge escalating fees and penalties and usurious interest to those unlucky homeowners. Any homeowner that can't pay loses their home.

The first targets for tax-lien investing are the people who were the last people to benefit from the New Deal and its successors: Black and Latino families, elderly and disabled people and others who got the smallest share of America's experiment in shared prosperity are the first to lose the small slice of the American dream that they were grudgingly given.

This is the very definition of "structural racism." Redlining meant that families of color were shut out of the federal loan guarantees that benefited white workers. Rather than building intergenerational wealth, these families were forced to rent (building some other family's intergenerational wealth), and had a harder time saving for downpayments. That meant that they went into homeownership with "nontraditional" or "nonconforming" mortgages with higher interest rates and penalties, which made them more vulnerable to economic volatility, and thus more likely to fall behind on their taxes. Now that they're delinquent on their property taxes, they're in hock to a private equity fund that's charging them even more to live in their family home, and the second they fail to pay, they'll be evicted, rendered homeless and dispossessed of all the equity they built in their (former) home.

It's very on-brand for Alden Capital to be destroying the lives of Chicagoans. Alden is most notorious for buying up and destroying America's most beloved newspapers. It was Alden who bought up the Chicago Tribune, gutted its workforce, sold off its iconic downtown tower, and moved its few remaining reporters to an outer suburban, windowless brick building "the size of a Chipotle":

https://pluralistic.net/2021/10/16/sociopathic-monsters/#all-the-news-thats-fit-to-print

Before the ghastly hotel baroness Leona Helmsley went to prison for tax evasion, she famously said, "We don't pay taxes; only the little people pay taxes." Helmsley wasn't wrong – she was just a little ahead of schedule. As Propublica's IRS Files taught us, America's 400 richest people pay less tax than you do:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/04/13/for-the-little-people/#leona-helmsley-2022

When billionaires don't pay their taxes, they get to buy sports franchises. When poor people don't pay their taxes, billionaires get to steal their houses after paying the local government an insultingly small amount of money.

It's all going according to plan. We weren't meant to have houses, or job security, or retirement funds. We weren't meant to go to university, or even high school, and our kids were always supposed to be in harness at a local meat-packer or fast food kitchen, not wasting time with their high school chess club or sports team. They don't need high school: that's for the people who were born to rule. They – we – were meant to be ruled over.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/26/taxes-are-for-the-little-people/#alden-capital

#pluralistic #chicago #illinois #alden capital #the rents too damned high #debt #immiseration #chicago tribune #private equity #vulture capital #cook county #liens #tax evasion #taxes are for the little people #tax lien certificates #tax sharks #race #racial capitalism #predatory lending

382 notes · View notes

whyse7vn · 4 months ago

Text

WHAT ARE WE? -

[ot7 x reader]

YOONGI -

y/n: hi

yoongi: i bet you are

y/n: what are we?

yoongi: go away

y/n: WOAH?????????????????????????????

I BET YOU ARE IS INSANE??????????????

yoongi: are you?

y/n: NO????????

yoongi: ur no is a question

do you not remember getting high

that probably means you are

high that is

y/n: I’M NOT

yoongi: if you say so

y/n: stop pushing ur druggy agenda onto me

it’s not right OR real

yoongi: deny the truth all you want

y/n: ur not funny you know that?

yoongi: i’m laughing so i think ur wrong

y/n: you are?😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍

proof? 😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘😘

video proof btw 😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋😋

yoongi: be normal challenge failed yet again btw

y/n: omg yoongi’s that was funny

ur like levelling up ur communication skills

yoongi: you say that like i’m a sim from ur stupid game

and i’ve always been funny this is not a level up this is just me

y/n: when he’s just as delusional as you>>

yoongi: i am funny

we’ve talked about this

y/n: ur funny to me definitely!!!!

yoongi: i’m funny to everyone

y/n: no !

but i love ur confidence it’s so sexy yoongi >\\<

yoongi: it’s fact not confidence

stop calling me by my name

y/n: babe

yoongi: whatever

y/n: so when i asked you what we are

yoongi: girlfriend

y/n: boyfriend

yoongi: yeah so shut up

y/n: why can’t we have fun like other couples do

yoongi: we are not other couples

y/n: essentially what you said is they not like us

kendrick lemar reference

didn’t know you was down with the culture like that

yoongi: yeah

whatever you just said to me

y/n: beat ur ass and hide the bible if god watching

yoongi: didn’t know u were religious

y/n: trying to strike a cord and it’s probably A MINORRRRRRR

yoongi: now ur suddenly musically inclined

y/n: they not like us

they not like us

yoongi: ok

y/n: yoongi i’m rapping the song for you

yoongi: oh

what song is it

y/n: THEY NOT LIKE US

you said you knew what it was

yoongi: i don’t even speak english fr

y/n: so you speak it for fake?

yoongi: how was i supposed to know you were doing that song

y/n: you know what we are

yoongi: what

y/n: divorced

yoongi: ok 👍🏼

they not like us

HOSEOK -

y/n: bro

hoseok: dude

y/n: why is it jhope on the street????

why isn’t it it jhope in his 476 billion won mansion

why

hoseok: maybe cuz i don’t own a 476 billion won mansion idk?

y/n: LAME

hoseok: my fault

y/n: i’m glad you get it

hoseok: what do you want

y/n: what are we

hoseok: i would say we gang

we tight fr

y/n: ??????

what are we ^^DOING TODAY

hoseok: oh

y/n: should i slap you

hoseok: 😼

y/n: bye

hoseok: come back gang

ily gang

i fwu bro

come back homie

y/n: is this racially charged?

hoseok: don’t say that 😟

y/n: said it

so is it?

hoseok: what if it was

y/n: oh so ur a racist is what ur saying

hoseok: i said what IF

geez woman read 🙄

y/n: and a sexist ok

hoseok: what if i killed myslfe

y/n: what if you could spell

hoseok: *myself

what if i killed myself

y/n: you would die a racist and a sexist

hoseok: 😔

y/n: i’m bored

hoseok: ok

i would say let’s go out

but who wants to hang won’t with a racist and sexist loser who can’t even spell 😔

y/n: no u right

hoseok: you know you lack the motherly instincts to care and nurture

y/n: you lack the attractiveness of jungkook

hoseok: ok wow

y/n: don’t fight when you know you can’t win

hoseok: you told me my face card go crazy tho 😟

y/n: crazy in debt

hoseok: act like an angel dress like crazy

y/n: all the girls are girling

hoseok: do ever sit back and think omg hoseok the loml might be depressed let me be nice to him and cook him a meal out of love

y/n: no

hoseok: you were right in asking me what we are

cuz you can’t be my girlfriend

you just can’t

y/n: ok so i actually asked what we’re doing today

not

what are we

hoseok: ily

y/n: ???

hoseok: i love you

y/n: i love you too 😘💞😜🔥

hoseok: ok stop

y/n: 😔

JIMIN -

y/n: what are we?

jimin: if we were jin we would be hungry

y/n: you can’t keep saying shit like that

jimin: who’s gonna stop me

ooo maybe jin

he could like eat me or smth LMAO

y/n: bet you taste like shit

jimin: you should know

y/n: ok woah

jimin: who said that whatttt

y/n: pls don’t spread my private information like that

jimin: but

y/n: DON’T say anything gross rn

jimin: ok i don’t even like you fr

y/n: yeah

so what are we?

jimin: not jin

y/n: i’m aware

jimin: ok so stop asking

y/n: i’m asking what are WE are

not if we’re jin

jimin: ok but WE aren’t jin

so i think that’s ur question answered

y/n: be fr

jimin: you scratch my back i scratch yours

y/n: that sounds shady as hell??

jimin: shady under the sheets

y/n: …

jimin: mmmmmm yeah

y/n: ??

jimin: sorry

y/n: you should be

jimin: horny

y/n: couldn’t tell

jimin: i’m subtle like that

y/n: sure

jimin: come over 😜

y/n: 🖕🏽

TAEHYUNG -

tae: ur the only one in this life that matches my freak

y/n: no i don’t

tae: yes you do babe don’t be so hard on yourself 🙄💞

y/n: no i’m telling you i don’t match your freak

nor do i want to

like on purpose

tae: ok so what am i to you

what are WE?

y/n: i was supposed to ask you that question

tae: see i knew

cuz our freaks are matched

so i knew you were gonna ask me that

y/n: that’s not how matching freaks works

tae: don’t deny our match

it hurts my heart babe

it hurts me

❤️

see that?

it’s my heart

but it’s hurt

so it looks like this

💔

sometimes a perfect exterior doesn’t mean a perfect interior

y/n: shut up

tae: will you match my freak?

y/n: will you stop talking

tae: only if can we cuddle

y/n: whatever

tae: so are you gonna match my freak 😆

y/n: yes

tae: 🦶

y/n: nvm

NAMJOON -

y/n: btw what are we?

namjoon: humans

y/n: ok

namjoon: are you mad at me???

y/n: no

namjoon: was that a trick question?

y/n: no

namjoon: i’m sorry

y/n: ok

namjoon: you are mad at me

y/n: am i?

namjoon: yes

but i’m not sure why

work with me here pretty

y/n: no

namjoon: you said what are we

so i’m guessing what i said wasn’t the right answer

y/n: idk

namjoon: hmmmm

like as in us?

you and me

our relationship??

y/n: SO YOU KNEW WHAT I WAS ASKING BUT STILL GAVE ME THAT STUPID FUCKING ANSWER

hUmAnS 🤓☝🏽

namjoon: oh wow

i didn’t know honestly babe

swear on it

y/n: ok DON’T care

namjoon: we are in love

you are the love of my life

my person

my everything

y/n: heh rrly 😼?

namjoon: i’m kinda hurt that you had to ask pretty

we’ve been together for 4 years now?? you should know what we are

y/n: I’M SORRY

IT WAS A JOKE A FIRST BUT THEN UR ANSWER PISSED ME OFF

my fault og 😔💔

my fault my heart 😔💔

m-my fault 😔💔 *tears up*

namjoon: it’s okay my love

did you just stutter though text?

y/n: yeah

you fw it?

namjoon: sure

y/n: sure isn’t yes

namjoon: yes

y/n: ok now ur yes feels fake

like i forced it out of you

namjoon: you didn’t

i said yes because i liked it

y/n: ok it still sounds like i forced you to say that with a gun to ur head

namjoon: but you didn’t

y/n: feels like i did

namjoon: but you didn’t

you know that and i know that so it’s fine my love

y/n: is it

namjoon: is

y/n: what if our messages get leaked and they say i’m like keeping you against ur will

namjoon: i’ll tell them you’re not

y/n: they won’t believe you

namjoon: they will

y/n: if you say so

namjoon: i do

y/n: hot 😼

SOEKJIN -

y/n: what are are we?

jin: she’s just left you can come over now 😮‍💨

y/n: omgggg ok jimin yk who just fell asleep i’m on my way

jin: that’s not even funny and i’m not even sleeping

y/n: wdym jimin??

jin: NOT FUNNY

y/n: that’s what i thought

jin: whatever

y/n: also never use that emoji ever again

it feels like a youthful emoji and ur not that

basically agephishing

jin: fishing??

y/n: SIGHSSSS anyways

what are we?

jin: ??

y/n: what are we?

jin: ???????????????

y/n: what are we?

jin: ??????????????????????

y/n: clearly YOU’RE illiterate

jin: when i want to be

y/n: wowwwww

jin: yeah

y/n: but you were bugging out at the jimin thing

jin: if you mention the enemy’s name again what YOU’RE gonna be is blocked

y/n: u love me deeply

jin: whatever helps to sleep at night

y/n: you

jin: ok that was cute

y/n: you love me be honest

jin: just a bit

y/n: winnnnnnn

JUNGKOOK -

y/n: what are we?

jk: sometimes i like to pretend that we are ants i’m a worker ant

and ur the queen

and my biggest concerns in life are bringing you food and avoiding being stepped on

y/n: ok so like that’s a little bit insane kook!

jk: 😕

y/n: and you said pretend? not think

jk: yeah 😕

y/n: oh!

ok so

how do you do that exactly?

jk: i bring you food

like little snacks all the time

i thought you liked it

we are just like ants

🐜❤️🐜

worker ant x queen ant

y/n: ok

yeah

so cute kook soososo cute!!!

jk: omh wait isn’t it lowkey inscest cuz the queen gives birth to the workers

y/n: ok stop taking

jk: maybe i’m like a worker that already existed

like you didn’t give birth to me

i was just there

y/n: please stop talking.

—

was a scrap that’s why joons is so bad I CANT WRITE HIM AS A FREAK NO MATTER HOW HARD I TRY IM SORRY 😭😭

i love writing hobi can you tell part 1229302 or smth

tags: @piw6n @92jinnies @birdie-vhs @earth2ela @hob3loveofmylife @jujubiism @bloopkook @ratchetpizza1 @myntalks @arloo00 @watamotee33 @y2kcy3brz @taiwan0618 @freyadanvers @gguksbeloved @raetf @bbsantc @winuvs @medicinemybish @bxnnyhime @seokmyballs @baetukki @zyaaaszn @thelilbutifulthings @jazminethecreator @meowgiz @jmnscutie @threeopossumsinacoat @cynicalyoongs @lightningpussy54 @eunthv @gigiiiiislife @lowkeykin @iammeandmeisiam @socksfirstalways @knjlvr06 @lailaisarmy @thvkives @xstfudaisyx @xxxanimangxxx @solstice34 @ml8dy @hoeforseoks @futuristicenemychaos @featjunranghae @jksgirlfrl @yeetedandoboi @stellamalonesolaria @joonsprettygf

266 notes · View notes

jacensolodjo · 10 months ago

Text

Kyiv Independent has published the video In Whole or In Part, a documentary on the Invasion of Ukraine and whether to place it under the heading of 'genocide'.

The opening slide reads:

It comes from the paragraph of the speech 'Soviet Genocide in Ukraine' about the Holodomor reading:

"But there is more to it than that. This is not simply a case of mass murder. It is a case of genocide, of destruction, not of individuals only, but of a culture and a nation. Were it possible to do this even without suffering we would still be driven to condemn it, for the family of minds, the unity of ideas, of language and of customs that forms what we call a nation constitutes one of the most important of all our means of civilization and of progress."

Rafał (Romanized Raphael) Lemkin, of blessed memory, is the creator of the word 'genocide' (we did not have the word until he gave birth to it in 1943/44). He survived the Shoah, he grew up in Poland. He saw both the Holodomor and the Shoah. He fought until his dying breath in 1959 to charge the Holodomor as genocide internationally.

The title of the documentary 'In Whole or In Part' refers to the definition of genocide as laid out by the Genocide Convention:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

#invasion of ukraine #war in ukraine #as a side note it drives EVERYONE crazy to try to read the word 'ethnical' pls change the definition #to something without the word 'ethnical'#genocide mention

162 notes · View notes

chaifootsteps · 7 months ago

Note

I'm gonna be that guy about it, but I decided to look up the definition for supremacist (I was already sure but wanted to make certain for the purposes of pedantry) and basically it's someone who believes a particular group or race should be in charge

So like - did Striker ever actually say he thinks imps should rule? Should be in charge of Hell?

From what I remember he definitely didn't. What he did say was that the royalty of Hell sucks eggs and imps are betraying their own interests by fraternizing with them. And while Ozzie sucks a whole lot less than Stolas, Striker's right about that. The hierarchy is unjust, imps are written consistently to be an underclass and no one should have to let themselves be fucked over by the rich (literally in Blitz's case) just to get a better lot in life

What he did say was that he wanted to kill the most powerful beings of Hell specifically because they oppressed imps. And we were just supposed to infer that meant he was doing a reverse racism where imps would be in charge instead…?

But sure, guys. Slap a highly politically charged term in there just to paint all of Stolas' detractors and Striker's defenders as racist (racist to who, the rich? lol. lmao even.)

(Side note, between this and the whole 'selling Blitzo as a child playmate to Stolas being framed as cute and sweet', can the writers please stop and think for more than five seconds before they put this stuff with seriously reactionary, squicky racial undertones in their work? Is that too much to ask??)

Yeah, Striker's never said that or implied that and Viv was gross as hell to use such a charged term like that to mean "racist against rich people. :("

#Anonymous #helluva boss critical #viv stuff #actual blog post

62 notes · View notes

maybe-boys-do-love · 2 months ago

Text

So I shared, the Spanish-language horror visual references in this week’s Peaceful Property episode (which are great ghost story films for comparison in thematic elements, as well). The death this week, though, is yet another ghost story reference, this time in an English-language series with lots of commentary on class and the racial and gender politics of domestic work, The Haunting of Bly Manor.

🚨spoilers for both series from here on🚨

In Bly Manor, Hannah Grose, the estate’s maid is revealed late in the series to be a ghost, who had fallen into a well on the grounds. Although the series is based off Henry James’s Turn of the Screw and its celebrated film adaptation The Innocents from the 1960s and its celebrated 2000s remake The Others* with Nicole Kidman (in which the twist from the previous is that the governess main character is revealed to be dead), Hannah Grose’s death is a new addition in the Netflix series. It compounds the complex themes about class and domestic servitude in the original British story and adds issues of race to the proceedings.

Peaceful Property uses Baanchuen’s story for similar purposes. Migrant domestic work is an important issue in Southeast Asia. The International Labor Organization put out a report last year stating, “29 per cent of surveyed migrant domestic workers in Malaysia were in conditions meeting the ILO’s statistical definition of forced labour; as were 7 per cent of surveyed workers in Singapore and 4 per cent in Thailand. Indicators of involuntariness include not being able to quit your job, having to stay in the job longer than agreed, and being made to work without overtime pay, among others.” Shackles, like those on Baanchuen’s ghost, are an easily recognizable symbol of enslavement, indicating the extent of Aunt Phom’s cruelty.

But even under legal circumstances, domestic workers are one of the least protected group of laborers in Thailand and abroad. Taiwanese-American labor organizer, MacArthur “genius” grant recipient, and mentor/friend to BLM cofounder Alicia Garza, Ai-Jen Poo has a fantastic interview on On Being, in which she discusses the racialized, gendered, international, and cross-class dynamics that define domestic care work, which impacts the strategies to organizing for workers rights in the field.

“The average annual income for a home care worker [presumably in the US at the time of recording in 2020] is $15,000 per year. And I can’t think of any community that I’ve ever lived in where you can survive on $15,000 a year. It’s really quite extraordinary. And they’re there and see employers come home with a pair of shoes that are maybe more than they make in a week, and yet, their job is to care and support and love, and they do so. You can’t actually do your job as a caregiver if you dehumanize the person that is in your charge. And I think that that is so much of what’s needed in this moment. All of us need to understand that we have a profound set of challenges and inequities that we have to deal with and transform, but we have to do it with a boundless sense of compassion and humanity.”

I’d encourage some of my fellow watchers of Peaceful Property to heed Poo’s perspective on disrupting class distinctions and what the advocacy for equitable practices has looked like in her work. I’m a caseworker myself and have worked alongside people who had less privilege than me for caring wealthy people who never the less didn’t always recognize the value of those whose work they depended on and didn’t have the labor laws that might provide that guidance. There are a few pieces of work that explore this meaningfully (better than The Help, although Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer absolutely carved out depths in their characters stories that weren’t there on the page). Glad to see Peaceful Property making its attempt to explore these depths. It actually made me reflect on how many of the jobs after the first episode really focused on gendered aspects of labor—a wig-maker, assistants, food-making…

And for my Homepeach truthers out there, that gender conversation is not just about labor. Bly Manor is also notable for its queer romance storyline with a wealthier character running from her internalized homophobia/guilt after a car accident…

*Incidentally, The Others is also heavily influenced by the same Spanish film, The Spirit of the Beehive, as both referenced Spanish-language horror films in these weeks episode.

#peaceful property #peaceful property the series #on sale the series #peachhome #thai bl #gmmtv #the haunting of bly manor #bly manor #meta

30 notes · View notes

whateverisbeautiful · 2 months ago

Note

I feel like Rick went through the most physically in TOWL and TWD. While Michonne went through the most mentally. So many people would say Maggie is the strongest female character, but I firmly believe it's Michonne. Michonne lost 2 sons, killed a bunch of kids, saved Judith, lost her female best friend, lost her boyfriend, then her soul mate, and still have the courage to rebuild civilization and have another baby. Maggie doesn't have half of what Michonne has been through. So my question is, who do u think is stronger and what makes the other stand out more.

Hi @theoneswholive32 ! It was definitely interesting to watch the ways in which Michonne and Rick's internal and external hardships paralleled each other in TOWL. And I wrote out the rest of my response to your question below: ⬇️ 💗

I do believe Michonne’s strength is unparalleled. And in choosing who stands out the most, I’m choosing Michonne every time. To be as multifaceted and well-rounded as she is, to be both one of the world’s toughest and one of the world’s tenderest, it makes her an incredibly admirable character who embodies that quote Deanna shared - “Someday this pain will be useful to you.”

Over the course of her journey, Michonne learned to turn her grief and pain into something productive and motivating rather than destructive and devastating all while still being in tune with her hurt and emotions rather than neglecting or supressing them.

I think it’s hard to compare traumas, in that apocalyptic world especially, so I can't say I agree with the statement that Maggie hasn’t been through half as much tho.

I do agree that Michonne has been through so much and more than people tend to acknowledge. Just because one of her most painful experiences happened offscreen and before she joined the group doesn’t mean it should be dismissed. To experience losing a child at any age is absolutely tragic, and especially as a toddler when they are so defenseless and dependent on others to keep them alive. It makes sense that Michonne shut down the way she did after the horrors she endured. And the fact that she went on to grow the way she did, not by being a strong warrior robot but by reopening her heart and letting love and family in again is one of the greatest signs of her strength and character.

Maggie was put through the wringer too and one of the unique things about her losses is that the three closest people to her (husband, father, sister) didn’t just 💀 but were unalived by human hands. Two of which she had to watch lose their life painfully, slowly, and all just so their murderer could make a point. And that’s on top of the rest of her family being taken out by walkers on the farm. So, even with me being overall neutral on her character, I can’t deny that Maggie has been through a lot of hell and that she’s a strong woman.

I think one of the notable differences between Maggie and Michonne’s strengths is in how they address their issues. After Rick spared Negan, it made sense that Maggie would feel extremely hurt by that executive decision but rather than talk to Rick about it as family she concocted plans behind his back which had tragic ramifications. Whereas when Michonne has an issue with someone she’s been shown to go directly to the source and address things which is another sign of her maturity and strength.

Now I do think when it comes to physical violence, Michonne is the woman they put through the most physical harm and that is upsetting for several reasons. There is certainly an aspect of it that feels racially charged, even if subconscious because take 9.14 for example, I genuinely can’t see them being comfortable having Maggie or Carol be beat with a pipe while 7 months pregnant the way Michonne was.

One of the millions of reasons I’m grateful to Danai for what she wrote in ep 4 of TOWL is that she actually gave Michonne the space to acknowledge what she’s been through and voice her hurt. And Michonne also got to have someone who cared to acknowledge her scars and hurt as well through Rick. That was important because all too often Black women are portrayed as having to carry so much on their own and just keep it pushing without anyone caring to see their pain or vulnerability.

And to add one more reason that I feel Michonne is exceptionally strong and a standout character is because when she found someone she could trust and be held by in Rick, she opened herself up to that too. It could have been so easy for someone as competent as her to stay the independent lone wolf but she found a partner who she can be her most human and vulnerable self with and that vulnerability shows a whole lot of strength.

So that's my little essay response. Thanks for asking! 😊

#richonne #reflecting on richonne #asks & answers

32 notes · View notes

anemicjellyfish · 6 months ago

Text

I'm wondering something...

We all remember that Blitzø busied himself finding his sister while Stolas was recovering in the hospital after the events of Western Energy.

And I'm wondering if Blitzø maybe... did try to visit?

It wouldn't be the first time that the show has Blitzø kept out of a hospital to visit someone he cared about:

Blitzø's father Cash was implied to be the main one keeping Blitzø away from Fizz. And the reunion with his sister leads us to believe that it was Barbie who intentionally prevented visitation from Blitzø.

But something else stands out when we revisit Western Energy

An extremely casual tossing-around of "fire toad," a word which we can assume is the Hellaverse version of a derogatory term for imp (possibly even a racially charged term).

Blitzø handles it with his perfectly-in-character rage, but it does feel like he's been through this before. He doesn't repeat "fire toad" back when he criticizes the woman's parenting; instead, he refers to the term as "THAT".

Imps rank low in Hell society. Low enough that I'm wondering if anyone would even consider letting one visit a Goetia, a Prince, who has just been badly wounded.

Blitzø has possibly tried communicating with Stolas' staff before, as per this line in The Circus.

While it's impossible to say for sure, it has left me curious on whether or not Blitzø tried to visit. The writers knew we'd be thinking about it, which is almost definitely why the opening scene in Unhappy Campers was Blitzø sneaking into a medical building.

#just another day in my silly theorizing about this hyperfixation #also does anyone else LOVE the color/aestetic of the Sloth ring? the pinks are such a nice pallette #helluva boss

37 notes · View notes

raychleadele · 3 months ago

Text

I watched The Last Voyage of the Demeter last night. I’ve been a long time fan of Dracula, long before Dracula Daily began (and lemme say, I LOVE that DD brought in so many new fans of the novel, I’m so glad there’s more of us now!) and when I first saw this movie was being made I was immediately intrigued - what a cool idea to make a movie out of this specific chapter that usually gets overlooked entirely in adaptations! - but also cautious. As we were turning the movie on I said to my husband “I hope this doesn’t suck.”

And it didn’t! Most of my complaints about Dracula adaptations is that Dracula isn’t scary enough, but this movie definitely leaned into the horrifying nature of Dracula, and I’m so glad they did! Dracula should be horrifying! And the movie took some liberties with how the story played out, but the book’s version of events is so bare bones that it leaves a lot of room to play, and for the most part I was pleased with the liberties taken.

(I would’ve ended it differently - the ending of the movie is just slightly less true to the events of the novel in a way that I didn’t love, but I’m willing to forgive. Movie adaptations of books always make changes to the source material, so I know to expect it, and while I personally would’ve liked to see the ending play out differently than it did, the majority of the movie felt very true to the novel, so I don’t mind too much.)

Basically, it’s one of the most enjoyable Dracula adaptations I’ve seen, and I think more Dracula Daily fans should watch it!

(Spoilers below, but I feel I should add some trigger warnings.)

This is a horror movie. The deaths of the crew are graphic, there’s lots of blood and open wounds and even a few instances of people burning alive (alive? eh). Animals die and you see their mutilated bodies, including a dog. A child also dies violently on screen. There’s multiple instances of racially charged language. And obviously Dracula himself is spooky as hell. This isn’t the movie for you if you don’t want to see those things.

#personal #Dracula #dracula daily #the last voyage of the demeter

22 notes · View notes

evidence-based-activism · 17 days ago

Text

US Election 2024

I was going to answer each of the asks I received about this topic individually, but they rapidly multiplied. As such, I will simply address the main points of the asks in this post.

Why did Trump win the election?

The answer to this is multi-factorial and complicated. I have seen many posts suggest that Harris "had just done/not done X" then she would have won. It's very appealing to many of us, to think that this loss was the result of some specific misstep, that it will be simple and easy to correct this mistake in the future. It's comforting and easy and wrong.

There is no single factor we can point to that will explain Trump's win or Harris' loss. Many people have tried to enumerate the many contributing issues that contributed to this result, although, frankly, I find even these more complex discussions to be overly simplistic. These factors include anti-immigration sentiments, economic dissatisfaction, and a widespread desire for disruptive change to political processes [1]. Sexism and racism also played a significant role [2].

Importantly, these factors diverted support from swing voters and some people who were expected to vote democrat, which was crucial – particularly in the vital swing states. The fact that a republican administration will not truly benefit many of these individuals is irrelevant to this analysis. When people are dissatisfied with political, social, or economic conditions they blame the people who are currently "in charge" whether or not they are truly responsible for the conditions or not.

This trend has been seen worldwide this year, with incumbents everywhere losing elections or suffering setbacks [3]. Notably, this was not isolated to either side of the political spectrum; both left-wing and right-wing incumbents lost to challenging parties. This all takes place against a background of widespread distrust and dissatisfaction in democratic institutions, substantial economic difficulties, and widening political polarization.

Biden took control of the White House in the middle of a pandemic, during a time of rapid and significant inflation. I personally believe his office has handled these crises reasonably well. (I also think the lack of publicity on the positive policy changes made by his administration played into this year's result. I mention this in my post urging people to vote democrat.) But for many voters, all that concerns them is the fact they personally are worse off than they were before. (Never mind the fact that they would likely be similarly or even more worse off had Trump won in 2020.)

They want change and believe that Trump will deliver that to them. Simultaneously, many republican voters want to resist change in the institutions that benefit them (e.g., racial and gender hierarchies, organized religion, etc.). This is also underlied by a desire to maintain or improve their personal circumstances.

To be very clear though, this is still only a surface analysis of the factors that culminated in this result. I could write a book on how this came about; I would not be surprised if someone out there is writing a book on how this came about.

So, no, I don't believe that if Harris "had just done/not done X" she would have won. I also don't think this means that she personally was a bad choice for the democratic candidate.

Are young men more conservative?

The other topic I've been asked a lot about is the data showing young men are swinging right and if/how women have played role in this shift.

First, there is definitely a political gap between men and women, with men voting more right wing than left wing [4]. However, this gap is not limited to young men and women; there was an approximately 10 percentage point gap between the proportion of men and women who voted for Trump or Harris for each age groups.

This is based on data from AP Vote Cast, which extends the limited exit poll methodology (e.g., lack of coverage for early/mail in voters, limited state coverage, etc.). That being said, these results are also generally true for the widely referenced exit polls [5]. There was one difference that was larger – 13% – for votes for Harris in the youngest age. Notably, this was not accompanied by larger difference in support for Trump in this age group; instead more men in this age group voted for another candidate. That being said, it's possible – even likely – that this difference is an artifact of the methodological limitations of exit polls.

All of this is to indicate that young men are not uniquely more conservative than young women in America. Instead, men are consistently more conservative than women, across age groups. And this is by no means a new phenomenon; sex differences in political affiliation has been fairly consistent since at least 1994 [6].

There has been a rightward shift in men's – and not women's – political affiliation if we look back to the 1950s [7]. This data demonstrates that women have maintained a fairly consistent split between democrats/republicans over time. In contrast, men's affiliation with the republican party has risen and their affiliation with the democrat part has fallen since between 10 to 20 percentage points over the past 70 years.

However, we should note here that these differences do not account for rightward/leftward shifts in party policy. And there is evidence that – at least the politicians representing – the parties have become more liberal and more conservative over time [8]. But this is, again, a shift that has been taking place over decades.

All of this is to indicate that the current popular belief that young men in America are "suddenly" becoming more conservative or being radicalized is not substantiated by representative data. There is evidence of a gradual rightward policy shift in the republican party and in men's political affiliation, but this has been occurring gradually over many decades. In particular, the gender gap in party affiliation has been stable now for several decades.

Women are not responsible for men's (voting) choices.

And here I should make note of the fact that, even if men had suddenly started voting conservative, it would still not be women's responsibility.

The most common talking point I see is that men are somehow "being radicalized" as a result of "the male loneliness epidemic", so allow me to reiterate that there is no uniquely male loneliness crisis. There is a general loneliness epidemic; that is, one that affects women and men equally.

Somehow, despite this, women have managed to avoid "being radicalized" en masse to conservative ideology.

Somehow, women have avoided "being radicalized" en masse despite millennia of often violent oppression, isolation, and rejection.

If women have managed this, without any great social movement oriented towards coddling their sense of isolation or devoted to "loving femaleness", then men can, should, and must do the same. This over-emphasis on men's feelings, the infantilizing suggestion that they "just can't help" their beliefs and actions, is not doing them any favors. Instead it is contributing to very culture of entitlement and privilege that instigated and underlie these beliefs in the first place.

And finally, even if men truly were being radicalized out of a sense of loneliness or social rejection, women should no more be held responsible for "de-radicalizing" them than black people should be held responsible for "de-radicalizing" white supremacists.

Conclusion

To sum up:

The 2024 US election results were borne of many factors.

Men have been more conservative than women for decades. The gender gap in politics is not a new phenomenon.

Women are still not responsible for men's choices, including their voting choices.

I hope this answers everyone who's sent me an ask about these topics!

References below the cut:

Potts, M. (2024, November 14). Why voters chose Trump. ABC News; ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/538/voters-chose-trump/story?id=115827243

Geiger, J. R., & Reny, T. T. (2024). Embracing the Status Hierarchy: How Immigration Attitudes, Prejudice, and Sexism Shaped Non-White Support for Trump. Perspectives on Politics, 1-16.

Clancy, R. W., Moira Fagan and Laura. (2024, December 11). Global elections in 2024: What we learned in a year of political disruption. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/12/11/global-elections-in-2024-what-we-learned-in-a-year-of-political-disruption/

Interactive: How key groups of Americans voted in 2024. (2024, November 7). PBS News. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/interactive-how-key-groups-of-americans-voted-in-2024-according-to-ap-votecast

National exit polls: Election 2024 results. (2024, December 4). https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/exit-polls

Nadeem, R. (2024, April 9). 3. Partisanship by gender, sexual orientation, marital and parental status. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-gender-sexual-orientation-marital-and-parental-status/

Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP). 2024. “Gender Differences in Partisan Identification and Presidential Performance Ratings.” New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University-New Brunswick. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/gender-differences-partisan-identification-and-presidential-performance-ratings

DeSilver, D. (2022, March 10). The polarization in today’s Congress has roots that go back decades. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/03/10/the-polarization-in-todays-congress-has-roots-that-go-back-decades/

#feminism #patriarchal culture #american politics

15 notes · View notes