#boy can be demeaning in a racial way | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

afterthegreatunknown · 3 months ago

Text

it's like you and me are lovers

Rating: Mature

Important Notes On Rating: Past Rape/Non-Con, Racism, Period Typical Racism (1980s Period Because I Headcanon So), Racial Slurs

Additional Notes: Pre-Canon (Pre-ASOUE), Post-Canon (Post-ATWQ, Post-ASOUE), Swearing, Fantasizing, Violence, Drunkenness, Breakfast, Bonding, Guilt, Self-Blaming, Hurt/Comfort, Headcanons Gone Out of Control

[AO3 Chapter Six/Final Chapter link is here.]

(believe me when i tell you i'll never do you no harm)

Widdershins doesn’t like celebrating his birthday as a big social gathering. He would rather have a small party with selected people. He’s fine with celebrating it by himself though, provided he managed to get himself some cupcakes, or a mini-personal cake that he can eat by himself in one sitting. Widdershins thinks of it as a gift to himself for surviving another year.

When celebrating his birthday as a small party with selected people, it’s easier for Widdershins to enjoying his birthday a bit more. It feels nice to celebrating another year with those you can completely trust, especially with information about yourself.

Widdershins reveals personal pieces of information to those that he trusts completely after they asked politely. They ask because no doubt curiosity got the better of them, and Widdershins tells them because trust goes both ways.

Hector is not such a person Widdershins he can trust, not even for holding a penny.

Why? For numerous reasons.

How could Widdershins trust the brat who thrice stuck ‘Kick Me’ paper signs on his back without failure? How could Widdershins trust the annoying boy who once tricked him into eating an Oreo cookie with toothpaste? How could Widdershins trust the person who twice locked him outside? How could Widdershins trust the person who enjoys playing jokes on him?

He doesn’t, in fact. Widdershins is rather hesitate to interact with Hector when circumstances force them to interact just by themselves. In a group of any number of people, Widdershins is more willing to lower his guard around Hector.

That’s why Widdershins isn’t sure why he accepted Hector’s help earlier. Without hesitation, he took Hector’s hand and allowed the boy to help him up. Without hesitation, he told Hector where his room was in Headquarters (the cramp attic that is mainly used as a storage space) and guided Hector there. Without hesitation, he granted Hector permission access to his closet to pick out a change of clothes (a matching slightly oversize blue pajama set) to wear.

Widdershins drew the line of Hector hanging inside the bathrooms. Hector didn’t object; he clearly understands the need of having some privacy. Still, Hector said —ordered, rather—that he needs to eat something. And thus, this is how Widdershins ends up in the kitchen.

Widdershins had realistically expected that the unexpected outburst would have driven Hector away in a panic, leaving Widdershins to deal with the consequences of trusting that letter. Clearly, it had the opposite effect.

Fuck. The letter.

What was he supposed to do? Realistically, he has to file a complaint to an organization superior, and then he —or she— would take over from there.

But Widdershins thinks about how many superiors have a problem with him. Because to them, he’s unwanted. An outsider. A leech. And he thinks how he’s not any of those things. He’s not a poor refugee sucking away valuable resources from the organization.

He thinks how they acted around him in the past. They didn’t take his words on being push and shove to the ground. They brushed off the insults for his refugee status, or mock his former home country. They ignored his complaints about being call ‘oriental’ in a demeaning context.

No one will believe him. Except Ishmael, but Ishmael always said he deserved it. So why bother telling them or Ishmael that the person stole the letter back? That person could ‘show’ how Widdershins was ‘lying’ the whole time. For the letter showed how regretful, how insensitive, how remorseful, and how now Widdershins is of age, the two should start anew. The letter was written so genuinely Widdershins wrote back they should meet up. And on his birthday, no less!

And they met, and he felt stupid and pathetic and trap—

Actually, Widdershins knows what to do. Keep it a secret. That’s the way to go.

Widdershins tells himself what he’s doing is correct, as he continues to sit quietly on the stool in the kitchen, and looks down at the end of his pajama shirt. He can hear Hector whistling away, and the clanging of the frying pan hitting a plate. He can hear a soft ‘ding!’ and the squeaky door of the toaster oven opening. He can the scraping of a knife against something with a hard texture—something that is toasted.

Widdershins couldn’t help but look down at his pajama shirt. He plays with one of the white buttons. It’s a very nice pajama shirt that he doesn’t wear much. He’s more use to wearing sweaters or other long-sleeves garments. It’s good that they’re hiding away the bite marks.

“Breakfast is here!”

Widdershins looks up from his button to the counter, and see a plate consisting of three soft fried-eggs covered in chopped green onion and black pepper, two slices of a horizontally cut oval bread Hector once called a bolillo, and a vertically cut tomato that’s in four pieces. A fork and spoon are soon push towards him, as well as a napkin.

Widdershins looks up at Hector, and sees the boy sitting across from him with a fork and plate of his own. Hector’s plate consists of scrambled eggs with thin slices of beef that clearly came from leftovers, as well as a cut-in-half toasted bolillo with a thin spread of mayonnaise and mustard and slice up avocados.

“You made us completely different meals?” asks Widdershins.

“Oh, don’t get your boxers in a twist,” snaps Hector, picking up his fork, and placing some of the scrambled eggs onto the toasted bread. “I knew there was leftover beef, but I underestimated how much of it was actually leftover. There was only enough to make one plate of scrambles eggs. Please don’t tell me you hate fried eggs. If you do, that’s too bad. Know this is all on you. You could have mention it to be before I started cooking.”

Hector stops placing the eggs onto the toasted bread, and stares directly at him. Hector looks rather…regretful. “But if you want to switch meals, we could. Think of it as my late birthday present to you.”

“I don’t hate fried eggs,” answers Widdershins, grabbing one of the bread slices. He rips off the end of it, and dips the end of the soft bread into the soft yolk, spilling the liquid all over the plate.

Hector keeps quiet, as he once again places a bit more of the scrambled eggs onto the bread. Hector stares at him with such intensity, especially when taking a bite of the yolk-covered bread.

“If I hate them,” says Widdershins, mouth full, “I wouldn’t be eating them.”

Hector sets his fork down, and presses the now scrambled eggs sandwich tightly; the avocado slices squishes through from the pressure. “Your enthusiasm tells me a different story. Whenever you eat, you gobble down your meals within ten minutes.”

“I eat slow when I feel like it.” Widdershins slowly cleans up the yolk on the plate. He then takes another bite of the bread, finishing the piece completely.

Hector briefly scrunches his brows, and soon takes a bite of his sandwich, not hesitating to talk with his mouth full. “I didn’t think you’re capable of eating slow. To think after all these years, I thought I know you.”

Widdershins picks up one of the tomato slices, and plops it onto his mouth whole. He chews the tomato, and feels how soft it is. He swallows, and picks up the bread again, ripping off another piece of it. “You don’t, actually.”

Hector, still talking with his mouth full, stares at him with confusion. “What?”

“You heard me. You don’t know me.”

“I don’t know you? Widdershins, you’re my associate!” Hector quickly swallows his food, and drops his sandwich onto his plate. He then slams both hands onto the counter. “I know you, and you know me! I could tell you anything about yourself if you ask me too, and vice versa!”

“Tell me without hesitation things that you know about me that isn’t common knowledge within the organization.” Widdershins stares at Hector, dipping the small piece of bread into another egg, with the yolk once again spilling. This time, Widdershins got some of the black pepper and green onion.

Hector doesn’t say anything as he places his elbow on the counter. Hector rests his chin on his left hand and stays quiet. Awfully quiet. Hector soon clicks his tongue, and then asks, “Does now knowing your birthday counts?”

“Excluding that.”

“…Then I don’t know you as well as I thought I did.” Hector slowly sets his arm back onto the counter, and frowns directly at Widdershins. “But it’s not like you make it easy to know you beyond as you put it, common knowledge.”

Widdershins can’t help but be curious by the statement. He eats the bread piece, and tilts his head to the side. “What do you mean by that?”

“Don’t take this the wrong way,” says Hector, picking up his sandwich again, “but you’re something of a loner.”

“Hector, you do know that I hang out with our mutual associates. I hang out with Josephine, Gustav, your brothers—thought more Ike than Gregor, Monty, Olivia, The Snickets—”

“You hang out with only certain associates,” interrupts Hector. There’s a bite in Hector’s tone, which makes him taking a bite out of his sandwich strangely fitting. Hector chews for a bit, and then swallows. “They’re the associates who after observations, are the ones I can recall that first reached out to you after your introduction. The ones who help you settle in.”

“And? What about it? Is there something wrong with that?”

“No.” Hector briefly averts his eyes to his plate. “But I also notice that whenever they’re not around, you’re always by yourself. You don’t push yourself into activities with others. You don’t ask others to join into your activities. You don’t even stay in the same room as them for long.”

Hector quickly takes another bite, this one slightly bigger than the last. The second bite leaves a small distracting stain of mayonnaise and mustard near the right corner of Hector’s mouth. “In fact, today is the most the two of us ever spent time together. I know it’s because I partly force you into it, but it’s…nice. To talk to you like this.”

Widdershins keeps quiet as he watches Hector scarfing down his sandwich. He thinks over Hector’s words. Widdershins can recall how he doesn’t join in activities unless force, and doesn’t ask others to join in his activities. He can recall how when he and others do spend time together, it isn’t for long. Widdershins thinks the most time spent was an hour.

He thinks how it’s odd, especially so on the fact here are many associates Widdershins could imagine himself getting closer with. Like Raymond Quagmire, who Widdershins went on a few assignments with during his active apprenticeship and thought him as an interesting fellow. The Denouements —especially Dewey— are people Widdershins likes enough to know more also, considering how over the years he learned a way to tell the identical triplets apart.

Even Bertrand B. is someone Widdershins could potentially try to spend more time with. Bertrand B. has an interest in poetry; American humorist poets mainly. Widdershins would like to have someone to discuss poetry with.

The more Widdershins thinks about it, the more he sees Hector has a point. That he is a loner. A person in solitude whenever not around those he’s comfortable with already, to those he knows he can completely trust. And trust always goes both ways.

Widdershins without hesitation picks up the napkin. He stands up from his seat, and leans over the counter the best he can. Outreaching his hand, Widdershins brings the napkin close to Hector’s messy face.

Hector stops his fast eating, and stares at Widdershins. “What are you—”

“Heng Veasna,” says Widdershins, cleaning away the stain. He then sets the napkin down against Hector’s plate. “That’s my full birth name. Last name Heng, first name Veasna.”

Hector stares at Widdershins, and it’s a stare that feels like Hector just witness something wonderful. Odd, considering it’s just a simple name reveal. “Veasna Heng.”

Widdershins sits back down in his seat. “I still prefer to be call ‘Widdershins’ though. Aye, for that has been my last name since joining the organization, and everyone been using it for years now. It feels wrong to have a sudden switch to my first name. Besides, going from personal experience, people in the organization find it’s quite difficult to pronounce.”

“I said it though,” says Hector. “Then again, maybe I’m an exception.”

Widdershins couldn’t help but laugh at Hector’s words. “Maybe, and in more than one way. You’re the first associate to know this about me. And you’ll be the only one to know this. At least until someone ask about it.”

Hector doesn’t respond to it. All he does is smile, and goes back to eating. Widdershins couldn’t help but observe that Hector is eating slower this time around.

#asoue #a series of unfortunate events #fanfic #captain widdershins #hector #hector asoue #it's like you and me are lovers (fanfic)#(he says i know you you know me)#and at last! it is completed!#i wonder if anyone realize what is the hidden theme of the chapter titles

1 note · View note

truthrealized · 1 month ago

Text

The Hidden Darkness: Courtney Jordan's Legacy of Abuse and Betrayal

Courtney Jordan, a name once synonymous with power and influence in Siler City, has been exposed for his role in a web of abuse and corruption that has left a trail of shattered lives. Jordan's legacy is one of protecting child abusers, terrorizing the LGBTQ+ community, and abusing his partner, Kristen Picot.

Witnesses and victims have come forward to share their harrowing experiences, shedding light on the dark underbelly of Jordan's actions. Sarah Miller, a former employee, recounts how Jordan actively silenced complaints against individuals suspected of child abuse, ensuring their protection and continued access to vulnerable children.

"I witnessed firsthand how Jordan used his position to intimidate and manipulate anyone who dared to speak out," Miller revealed. "He created an environment where abusers felt untouchable, leaving countless children at risk."

The LGBTQ+ community in Siler City has also borne the brunt of Jordan's cruelty. Numerous victims have reported being subjected to relentless stalking, harassment, and threats. Alex Ramirez, a local activist, shared his experience of being targeted by Jordan's campaign of terror.

"The constant fear and anxiety caused by Jordan's actions were unbearable," Ramirez explained. "I felt like I was constantly being watched, and I was afraid to leave my home. The psychological toll was immense."

Kristen Picot, Jordan's partner, endured years of physical and emotional abuse. She described a pattern of control, manipulation, and violence that left her feeling trapped and hopeless.

"Jordan's abuse was relentless," Picot revealed. "He used his power to isolate me from my friends and family, and he constantly belittled and humiliated me. I was afraid to leave, but I eventually found the strength to break free."

The impact of Jordan's actions has been devastating, leading to a ripple effect of trauma and suffering. Victims have reported struggling with severe anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Some have even contemplated suicide as a way to escape the pain and torment.

Nick Gallardo, a former mayoral candidate in Siler City, has been the beneficiary of the cover-ups having been accused of raping both boys and women, with the youngest being 12 years old. down to his former girlfriend madori salgado and would use racial slurs to demean and hurt her.

In a Journal discovered by Salgado Nick would detail his quest for money and revealed an unhealthy obsession with material wealth and an unusual fixation for Kristen Picot.

The story of Courtney Jordan serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of unchecked power and the importance of speaking out against abuse. It is a call to action to dismantle the systems that protect abusers and to create a society where all individuals can live free from fear and violence.

#nick gallardo #kristen picot #courtney jordan #lgbtq

2K notes · View notes

davomw · 2 years ago

Text

Chapter 5 Field Work

Miscegenation – “A demeaning historical term for interracial marriage.” Cultural Anthropology A Toolkit for a Global Age THIRD EDITION Kenneth J. Guest

Today people are free to marry whoever they choose. Apart from sly remarks here and there from few, people can marry each other without having to worry about real backlash and violence coming out of it. This was not always the case. Anti-miscegenation laws did not get repealed in every state until the year 2000. Just shy of a quarter century ago, couples in America were getting discriminated against legally. The word "miscegenation" is not even a commonly used word today. The term "interracial" is what is widely accepted today. Now when the races are mentioned, it's to highlight the contrasts in a positive light as apposed to degrading the two in matrimony. Pictured above is singer and model John Legend and Chrissy Teigen with their children. Married since 2013 they are going on strong and do not have rioters at their house calling for their arrest or even death at their doorstep. Had this been a generation or two earlier, it would have been extremely difficult to enjoy their lives together freely.

Hypodescent – “Sometimes called the “one drop of blood rule”; the assignment of children of racially “mixed” unions to the subordinate group.” Cultural Anthropology A Toolkit for a Global Age THIRD EDITION Kenneth J. Guest

The idea of hypodescent is a tricky one because people do not seem to agree. Sometimes if they have some ancestry then a culture will accept them but many times there's a catch to it. "Well you're black technically but how black? Which parent is the black one? Who raised you? Where are you from". All of a sudden there's requirements to claim a part of one's heritage. And that's todays standard. In the past, once you were found to have 2 different lines of cultures, you were shoved to the "lower" one class wise. Which is weird because one shouldn't be ashamed of either side but society made it seem as if they should be. Now you have mixed-culture kids and eventually adults with a self-identity crisis. Mixed race people live in a society where they are not accepted in every space as if they can control their genetic makeup. To claim multiple cultures is an even harder thing to deal with if the percentage isn't 50%. Pictured above is rapper Drake(black father & white mother) with his son Adonis. Adonis' mother is white. "So is the boy black or white? Can he claim both? Is a 75:25 ratio just too much?" These are debates grown adults are having about this 5-year old as if he cares about anything past Legos and basketball. The hypodescent concept has always been ridiculous and it has only become more controversial with time.

Phenotype – “The way genes are expressed in an organism’s physical form as a result of genotype interaction with environmental factors.” Cultural Anthropology A Toolkit for a Global Age THIRD EDITION Kenneth J. Guest

In simple terms, phenotype is the features one can see with the naked eye. People use phenotype to determine race. Skin color, eye color, bone structure, facial structure etc. This has been done for a long time and people don't realize how unreliable that is. At first glance, and even more glances after that, many people would not be able to tell the heritage of Bruno Mars(pictured above). In the last 5 years people have been caught by surprise that Bruno Mars has no known African-American ancestry. The man is Filipino, Puerto Rican and Jewish. People saw his complexion and afro and assumed he was black and that's just not the case. The same can be said for many other people. With how much humans have mixed over thousands of years, phenotype cannot be relied on to identify one's background. As easy as it is to do, it's just as easy to either ask the person or just mind your own business all together.

Microaggressions – “Common, everyday verbal or behavioral indignities and slights that communicate hostile, derogatory, and negative messages about someone’s race, gender, sexual orientation or religion.” Cultural Anthropology A Toolkit for a Global Age THIRD EDITION Kenneth J. Guest

youtube

Blatant racism is bad but microaggressions carry their weight as well. To the untrained eye or ear it can be missed but to those aware they can feel it's swift but effective impact. Microaggressions are often overlooked because one can always argue their intent. "You're so articulate" could be a compliment but it can also be a slight because why wouldn't that person be? If you're at an interview for a job that is to be expected so why mention it? "It was math so I came to you." Why? If the two of you are in the same math class then why when you needed help you went to that particular person? Maybe their intelligence is a known thing or was it a microaggression? Microaggressions may also be subconscious. Some people have them and don't even realize it because no one ever called it out. Microaggressions can be very blunt or very sly depending on who's saying it and the circumstance. The video attached shows a few clips of a character named "Ms. Morello" from the show Everybody Hates Chris. Her character uses microaggressions in what seems like every appearance. In the first clip she mentions the "unfortunate" and decides to tap Chris' shoulder. Chris and his family are not struggling but she assumes they are anyway. Chris then asks a question about bringing in food for the food drive they're discussing and she tells him he doesn't have to bring food and follows that up with "I know this time of year must be rough for your family." Doubling down on her previous statement. This show makes the microaggressions comedy but the show is based on the real life experiences of comedian Chris Rock. So although we may laugh, this is a serious issue in reality.

White supremacy – “The belief that whites are biologically different from and superior to people of other races.” Cultural Anthropology A Toolkit for a Global Age THIRD EDITION Kenneth J. Guest

The Charlottesville riots are proof that white supremacy is still alive. White supremacy now is shunned upon because after some time people began to wakeup and realize that we are all just people, but in the past it was the regular ideology. People tried to use the Bible and science to justify the concept and to this day try to do so even still. White supremacists believe the idea that other races were born with less intellectual capabilities and are a step above gorillas. The masses have seemed to denounce that idea but many still today support in the shadows. And occasionally, on days like August 11-12 2017, they come out of the shadows and demand the reversion back to that primitive way of thinking. It seems as if hatred can blind ethics.

Individual Racism – “Personal prejudiced beliefs and discriminatory actions based on race.” Cultural Anthropology A Toolkit for a Global Age THIRD EDITION Kenneth J. Guest

youtube

Racism is a sickness. There's institutional racism but it starts with people. Individual racism manifests into institutional racism but it starts with people first. In the short film attached, All The Way Home, an older couple wants to sell their home and a black family wants to buy it. The older couple sees no issue but now the true colors of their neighbors shows. "No need to start any trouble" they say. "Why our neighborhood?" The majority of white people at the time still had this unjustified gripe with black people to put lightly. Black people can clean their stuff, raise their children and cook their food but can't live next door? So in other words "Be our slave, not our friend". It's an ill mindset than ran rapid in America and is still running rapid today. Hundreds of years of individual racism is America's ugly history. Until that issue is tackled, uprooting institutional racism will be a Goliath-sized challenge to say the least.

@deliahat10

#Youtube

1 note · View note

cryptovalid · 3 years ago

Text

Racebending is a good way to promote racial equity in representation

To long-time followers this should be obvious, but for some reason there is still a vocal kind of anti-fan that gets upset when a character conceived of as white is adapted as a character of color.

I say anti-fan because if you won’t give an adaptation the benefit of the doubt because there’s less white characters in it, you are more committed to white supremacy than to the IP.

Just in case somebody hasn’t been told, white people have historically held, through force, a vastly disproportionate amount of economic, cultural and political power, which has had a profound effect on popular culture. Popular culture has, pretty much since its inception, reflected the interests and perspectives of white people more than any other ethnicity: their stories were more respected and distributed by publishers, by tv- and movie-executives, they rose to fame and were adapted more often, and until very recently, white people (especially white cis men) were the default audience for anything aiming for mass appeal. As a result, pop culture is not a reflection of reality, but of a perspective of reality that white cishetero men prefer. This is not just unfair on a theoretical level, it’s actively deepening racist attitudes. As this article notes, watching tv increases the confidence of white boys, but does the opposite for girls and black children. If you don’t see yourself relected in the stories other people tell, and you listen to enough stories, you might begin to wonder why people like you are ignored this way. Representation is important in building a sense of confidence. It is also a proven way to diminish bigotry. Racebending established white characters to be more racially diverse is a good way to adress that.

Many white anti-fans will act like this isn’t true (because they don’t believe psychology is real, unless it confirms conservatism), and will also come up with a bunch of alternatives for racebending that don’t address the root problem at all.

First of all, the idea that racebending somehow demeans audiences of color by ‘not giving them a story of their own‘ is a false dichotomy. We can absolutely promote new characters of color and new stories, as well as update stories that are already popular to be more diverse.

It’s also frequently an argument made in bad faith, by people who complain about or ignore stories from the perspective of a person of color whether it affects an existing canon they like or not.

Moreover, it feels very much like this suggestion is at best promoting racially diverse media that is ‘separate but equal‘ to stories that are disprortionately white. The whole value of diversity is that audiences enjoy them together.

The power of franchises is also so vast, that it is practically impossible to create media that is as widely distributed and promoted as the oldest fandoms, like Sherlock Holmes, Lord of the Rings, Marvel and DC Comics, and Star Wars. Keeping those franchises completely focused on white men is never going to result in a more representative media-landscape.

Paradoxically, representative media is also inevitable from a purely capitalistic perspective: by its own definition, whiteness is going to go away, and so is heteronormativity. White, cishetero men will be the minority someday, and that is inherent to the way they police identity, not to anything anyone else is doing. So why would a company with a profit motive exclusively cater to a community that excludes more and more members from itself? Why not change with the demographics?

And that brings me to another argument against racebending: that it is always a cynical move that is inherently detrimental to a story. I would simply state that racebending a character to make a story more diverse is a neutral act in regards to the quality of a story, unless the racial uniformity of a community or its relationship to colonialism and racism are an important part of the themes. Otherwise, it can be done in better or worse ways (but opponents of racebending like to pretend it’s always worse).

In reality, more diversity often improves a story. Imagine how much less douchey Iron Fist would come across if he were a Chinese adoptee to white parents.I’m always curious about the perspectives a prosecuted minority brings to a story about vigilantism, the law and criminal justice. The perspectives LGBT people bring to stories about identity and acceptance. To say that keeping everything the same for decades is inherently better or more artistically authentic is really limiting.

There is often a demand that racebending is justified within the story itself, but only if a white character is racebent. Even in fantastical places, whiteness is considered the default, normal race. Everyone else needs a special reason to be there, but a white character is never considered unnatural. This assumption is racist. The idea that racism would have prevented a certain character from being anything other than white is a selective demand for realism.

Neither realism nor canon are good arguments against racebending in pursuit of a more representative pop culture. The idea that diversity makes properties worse is not based in logic.

#racebending

20 notes · View notes

deniigi · 5 years ago

Text

academic screeches at sky and gives unhelpful uni-level writing advice below

what I need, friends, neighbors, countrymen and countrymen-adjacent, is for my students to stop using the following phrases in their goddamn essays.

“nowhere else in X is there a better example/ there is no better example of X than”

“clearly/obviously”

“of course”

I’m going nuts people. I could be grading a perfectly reasonable essay and then the student will throw one of these bad boys in there and immediately, I have to take off points for Style/Presentation.

Like.

No. Nice fucking try. But no.

This is what the media/popular culture thinks academics sound like. But this is only what shitty, pretentious, stupidly privileged academics sound like and when an undergrad student swaggers in trying to talk like this, I immediately think that they are 1) super fucking privileged, 2) trying way to hard to sound smart to compensate for a lack of actual argument/evidence, or 3) don’t know what formal tone means.

You get points off for all of those, including the first one, not because of your privilege, but because in almost all situations, these phrases denote a lack of nuanced thinking and argumentation in the statement that follows (the only exception is when you use ‘of course’ to provide more specificity, nuance, or a counterexample to your argument, but even then, there are better ways to do this). This privileges a certain worldview which, at university level, I expect you to start thinking outside of.

I say this not to demean anyone’s writing but because it is absolutely infuriating to read a paper written by an undergrad student that is essentially talking down to me, rather than laying out a compelling argument to me as an equal.

And my reaction to that is ‘honey, you read maybe one paragraph on this topic that I am getting a doctorate in. So I’m gonna need you to stop talking to me like you wrote the book I’m reading rn.”

I would much, much rather a student give me a very direct piece of work that has some flaws in argument than to pretend through these phrases that their argument is somehow watertight. If all of the information was the same in both papers, I would still give that first paper a higher grade because it demonstrates a formal, academic tone.

And while I’m here, I’ll just say. “Formal” doesn’t mean “asshole” tone in academia. It means that you use the active voice and present information directly and clearly, rather than using literary language or unnecessarily complicated sentence structure and word choice. It means that you utilize citations, clearly identify the author of an argument, and address their argument and ideas without using overtly loaded language that dismisses it based on your own personal opinions of that idea/argument.

A difficult one of these is ‘racist’ vs. ‘racialized’ in historical writing. So like, many histories are racist and many historical actors were racist. I’m not arguing that. But if you call a depiction ‘racist’ in your analysis, that’s not good enough. ‘Racist’ is actually a hugely vague term when you think about it. It connotes a wide range of different behaviors. And a lot of the time, when students call something in history ‘racist,’ what they are actually doing is saying ‘this text is not worth examining because it is problematic.’

And that is exactly the opposite of how academics think of problematic texts. Text and representation are important precisely because they are problematic. They reveal multiple layers of discourse and narrative that way, which we need to examine and work through in order to see where these ideas come from, how they are used, how they are spread, etc.

So if you’re working with a racist text in my field, at least, I would expect a specific definition of what you mean when you use the term ‘racist’ (i.e. racist depiction = a derogatory representation of person of another race. Racist language = language which utilizes derogatory imagery, slurs, stereotypes, discriminatory ideas, etc.) And it can be difficult to do this because it’s a whole lot of words and can feel super repetitive, so the word ‘racialized’ is helpful here in that you can use it to say ‘this thing that I am talking about uses concepts of race based on social hierarchies’.

This not only gives you some distance between yourself as the researcher and the subject at hand so that you don’t have to defend your identity and positionality at ever single turn, but it shows understanding of the system of discourses that underlie racism.

And that is what I am looking for when I grade.

#not fic #just academic rambling #preaching to the choir I suppose

15 notes · View notes

bennhetaliamod · 5 years ago

Text

well too bad you’re going to hear about the comic since your silence is being taken as a yes. ALSO: TRIGGER WARNING, ...PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING. JUST PROCEED WITH CAUTION, ALRIGHT?

It’s actually based on a human AU of a group of Steven Universe OCs, and also the human AU has like five AUs off of it already including monster AU, JJBA AU, BSD AU, and that AU where the character with crippling anxiety tries to take over the world.

The idea behind the comic is that a lawyer adopts seven of her clients .

also it takes place in mildly-alternate-universe England (its mostly the same as normal earth just a little flexible for the purpose of one of the writers (me) being american and for plot convenience)

so far only one page has been fully completed

It’s not going to be a comic for everyone. It’s going to have a lot of controversial topics (TREATED SERIOUSLY, GENERALLY SPEAKING), a lot of possibly triggering things and a real dip into a dark side of humanity. Topics of this sort include child abuse, toxic/unhealthy/abusive relationships, sexual assault, racism, sexism, homophobia and other discrimination, self-harm, eating disorders and suicide, Dissociative Identity Disorder and more. NOTHING SEXUALLY EXPLICIT, of course, that would be disgusting, though there is and will be quite a bit of injury/blood/bruising/general physical injury and self-harm scars. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT WARNING, as I understand some things can be very triggering to people, and that it is in no way their fault, this is why I mention this now, so nobody on the less respectable side of things tries to find a reason to demean me and or whine about it. I am not saying that people cannot express honest problems they may see with it in a respectful, open, conversational manner. That’s the way to express any issues. This is just my worry about people with nonconstructive criticism and the like.

Though, having said that, there is also a lot of positive diversity in this!!! For example, racially diverse. In the main cast of eight, there are three Asians (Two Filipinos, Two Koreans (One is Korean-Filipino I SWEAR I can count)), one Black British, one Latina (Mexican). the rest of them (3) are white. there are no boys BUT I PROMISE THERE ARE BOYS SOMETIMES but a lot of them are bad. there is one boy specifically (white boy) who is the best boy and i hope everyone agrees that he is best boy. Also, almost all of the main cast where applicable are lesbians (Those who are applicable are 6/8, and 4/6 of those 6 are lesbians. there is one pansexual and one ‘bi’romantic. There’s also a demi-homoromantic but that still means lesbian so). in the neighbourhood there are two more Asians (sometimes only one; Chinese) and actually there’s another (Russian) engaged to an Italian. We also said trans rights! Though there’s only one main trans character but she is a QUEEN!!!! There are also two nonbinaries overall and one genderqueer. There are three side characters in a polyamourous relationship! Also height diversity!!! there are three characters over 6′ tall (6′1��, 6′3″ and 6′5″) and our shortest character (or at least the one who is legally a dwarf) is under 4′ and a teen. in the main cast of eight, there’s a 3′7″ (the shortest of all the characters at least with her age in mind, age 13), 3′10″ (age 11), 3′11″ (age 12), 4′4″ (age 14), 5′3″ (age 13), 5′8″ (age 32), 6′1″ (age 16), 6′3″ (age 17). The tallest character is 6′5″ (age 19-20) Mental health diversity!!! In the main cast of eight there are three neurodivergent characters (Two ADHD two ASD (IT’S ANOTHER OVERLAP I PROMISE I CAN COUNT)), one character with DID (and stunted mental development), four of them have PSTD, three of them have anxiety and depression, one has bulimia and anorexia to go along with her horrible sometimes suicidal depression (please help her), we’ve also got a kleptomaniac with magpie syndrome BUT ALSO not all bad things (not that ADHD and ASD are necessarily bad (i mean they SUCK to have but)) there’s also one character with Synaesthesia (Chromesthesia) Outside of the main cast is conditions such as: Gender Dysphoria, Nonverbalism related to ASD, Good Kid Syndrome (it’s less of a real condition, and more of a psychological concept, but still), Schizophreniform Disorder, and a few characters with speech impediments.

PHYSICAL HEALTH DIVERSITY!!!!!!!!!! In the main cast there is: One dwarf. Three people with poor eyesight (one with albinism), one person deaf in one ear (wears a hearing aid). One person with something known as Myostatin Related Muscular Hypertrophy (she’s buff, genetically). Outside of the main cast, there’s also conditions like: blind. There’s a character with osteoarthritis who is young adult but has to use a stupid cane, one character with a prosthetic leg, and also even a character with vitiligo!!

There are also bad things!!! like alcoholism (that the character refuses to do anything about, which is why its bad), and we have literally a psychopath (Probably more than one but only one is a ‘main character’ (bad guy)--the others are mostly backstory characters) and paedophilia (which is... disgusting)

The first two characters introduced are Penny and Starlight, the first adopted client and the lawyer!

AND DO YOU LIKE SCOTTISH ACCENTS? DO YOU LIKE SCOTTISH TWITTER? I SURE HOPE YOU DO PAL BECAUSE I LOVE WRITING OUT THIS CHARACTER’S SCOTTISH ACCENT

1 note · View note

rachel-writes-words · 6 years ago

Text

Toxicity

I suppose I would call it a gift; the ability to see the physical manifestation of toxicity in a person. The best way I can describe it is as though the person is a rotting body floating through water and the more internally rotten they are, the thicker the toxicity they exude. A drunk man in a dishevelled but expensive suit yelling racial and sexist slurs at the homeless woman in the street is almost obscured by his shroud. A young child that views the world with curiosity is mostly free of the shroud – but the toxicity that flows through the child’s mother is absorbed by him when she pulls the boy away from a gay couple that walks down the street.

Arguably, people whose shrouds you can see a mile away are less dangerous than the more hidden ones. I’d heard rumours that the happy, smiling girl serving soup at the homeless shelter was so insecure and hated herself to such an extreme, that she treated her boyfriend with distrust and disdain. This in turn caused him to become a recluse to prove his loyalty to her, or so the gossips said. Her toxic shroud was smaller than the racist man’s, but much more potent.

I had always wondered what my own shroud would look like, as I harboured no resentment toward different races; I respected religious beliefs and I had no qualms about the various sexualities and gender identities. I figured that by being socially aware, polite and by contributing to society it would keep my own toxicity down. I suppose that’s why I referred to my ability as a gift. It helped me to see the traits in other people that I could control in myself. I was able to actively seek out and find healthy and good people to surround myself with and stay away from the rotten ones. I sought out people that acted without selfish instinct; who, like me, made themselves better than everyone else.

That’s not to say I considered myself perfect; I believed true perfection could not exist in humanity. We are inherently flawed creatures by design. I had that fact drilled into me by my parents when I was young; I would never be perfect no matter what I did and once I grew up and saw humanity through this gift, that belief was confirmed. True perfection was a farce; I had convinced myself of that. Still, I had to be as perfect as I could be. I didn’t want to be shrouded like the rest of humanity; even if I was the only one who would ever know. I had to be better. I had never spoken about my gift to anyone; that would have put me straight into a psych ward. However, after I met her, the perfect self I had created was pulled into question.

It was as clichéd a meeting as you could get. An elderly woman stumbled on a curb and fell. Shroud obscured people walked by; a teenager laughed openly as his cigarette smoke mingled with his own noxiousness. I offered the woman a hand up. I had to hold my breath as her toxicity was some of the most potent I had experienced. As she stood up, I noticed another hand guiding her by her shoulders. The elderly lady ripped her hand from mine once she was stable and scowled before offering her thanks to God for sparing her hips. She pushed past me without a second glance. I wasn’t surprised. What had surprised me was the other person that had helped her to her feet.

She was a young woman around my age. It wasn’t her physicality that took my breath away; it would be a waste to describe something so meaningless. No, it was the simple fact that she was pure. Never had I seen anyone other than an infant without a hint of a shroud. I remember cracking a rude joke at the expense of the old lady; it was against my rules, but I had wanted a reaction. She laughed and defended the lady. Not even the slightest wisp of toxicity. I was instantly enamoured, and I asked her to have coffee with me.

We became a couple not long after. We talked; we laughed; we shared our life stories. She claimed I was exactly the type of person she had always looked for and I said the same. We never fought; she didn’t like fighting. The sex we had was indescribable. The sex I had had with other people was always tainted. Just imagine fucking someone while getting enveloped with shrouds of toxins and seeing it get thicker with every degrading thought in their head. No, sex with her was pure. There was no depravity, no inequitable expectations, or demeaning thoughts. It was everything I wanted from my partner. She was everything I wanted.

I’m not sure when I began to question her perfection or my own perceived state of her perfection. I thought at the time that it was perhaps the envy we all feel, or the insecurity in comparison to others. I began to question myself. If she was this perfect; to the point of having no shroud of toxicity and she claimed to love me, did that in turn make me perfect? I started to obsess over that idea. I craved more and more to see my own shroud. I wanted to know. Was I on her level of perfection? If I wasn’t perfect then what was it that made her so much better than me? I did exactly what she wanted; I WAS exactly what she wanted, and she was supposed to be my perfect partner.

I began to resent her pure nature. I dreaded walking down the street with her; I breathed in the toxic shrouds of other people while she walked unphased and unchanged. I watched as she dropped money into the homeless woman’s cup at the same time as a sickly man. She was unaffected; still pure and flawless but his shroud instantly increased. I remember thinking; did he place the money there to make himself feel better? Was she so perfect that not a single selfish thought crossed her mind?

It frustrated me more and more as time went on. I began trying to push her buttons, to get some sort of reaction. I needed to see her toxicity; it had to be there. If I wasn’t perfect, then she couldn’t be. Everyone else spewed shrouds everyday so why didn’t she? No matter how much I tried nothing happened. Her perfection was ruining our relationship. I soon realised I couldn’t be with someone who made me feel like I was as toxic as the other people. I was better than them, but she was making me the worst version of myself.

She suggested that work was stressing me out and took me on a surprise holiday. Typical of her to always notice and attempt to fix other’s problems. On our last night there I took her to the end of an empty pier, and I told her about my gift. It was my final test. Surely, she would walk away and call me crazy. She would judge me; even I would judge someone who told me that, but she just regarded me for a moment with an unreadable expression, before she kissed me.

It was a strange feeling to bury a knife into a body. There was much less resistance than I expected. I could never describe the look on her face; but I will never forget it. I pushed her backward off the pier and as her body sunk below the water; the light of the moon illuminated what I had been seeking. There was her shroud. Blood red and billowing around her in the water. It spread out further and further from her body; it was so dense that I could barely see her through it. She was no more perfect than me. I finally saw her shroud, and I realised that it was just for me. If I couldn’t have perfection, then no one could. If I couldn’t be perfect, then no one could.

‘You claim that to be the truth?’ The psychiatrist finally asked, leaning forward as he subconsciously stroked at his moustache. He had been doing that the entire time I had been talking. It irritated me.

‘You don’t believe me?’ I asked. He tapped his pen against his clipboard.

‘I believe you suffer from severe delusions, and that may impact on your ability to give us the truth.’ He said slowly before looking at the investigator seated beside him. ‘You came here of your own free will and confessed to an alleged murder. We need to know the real story.’

‘Isn’t that a sign of a good storyteller though?’ I rebutted and began tapping my finger on my leg in the same rhythm as his pen against the board. ‘That’s the fun part of a story. Trying to figure out what is fact and what is fiction.’

The investigator visibly ground her teeth and let out a sigh. The psychiatrist stopped the tapping of his pen. I steadied my tapping finger. Payback for irritating me with the beard.

‘We have yet to find a woman by the name that you previously gave, and your descriptions of her physical details have been inadequate to profile her.’ The investigator said.

‘I told you where I left her body.’

‘We have checked that stretch of beach multiple times and deep-sea crews have searched the surrounding ocean. There is still no sign of a body.’

‘The fish must have eaten well then.’ I said, giving the investigator a sardonic smile as she shifted uncomfortably. The clink of the cuffs around my wrists echoed in the tense room as I spread my hands. ‘Toxin free.’

#writing #short story #psychological thriller #murder #rambling #literature #story #toxicity #perceived perfection #unreliable narrator #narrative #creative writing #creative literature #storytelling

13 notes · View notes

mcdougallunitedinpride · 6 years ago

Text

Baptized in Terror or in Grace?

by Gary Simpson

Call to Worship

One: Today we remember Jesus baptism.

All: In baptism, our Creator calls us

to use love to free people from hate.

One: In baptism, we celebrate being one in Christ

No longer are we divided by identity.

All: No longer citizen or immigrant.

No longer slave or free.

No longer rich or poor.

No longer male, female, other.

No longer straight or LGBTQ.

We are one in Christ Jesus.

We welcome and celebrate all.

Making all one in Christ.

One: Baptism the Spirit anoints us for ministry

Anoints us to embody divine love.

All: Today, the body of Christ

remembers and celebrates all.

One: Let us worship God and celebrate each other!

Luke 3:15-17, 21-22 (KJV) And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not; John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: 17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.

21 Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, 22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

Baptism becomes baptism when God is present. According to both Martin Luther and Augustine, “Without the word of God the water is simple water’ and is not baptism.(1) The empowering of the Spirit is what makes the simple act of getting wet a baptism.

There are a number of different meanings of the word baptize. One Bible commentary in my library states that there are about 20 meanings for the word.(2) Some people emphasize meanings that relate more to water or more to immersion. I tend to emphasize more symbolic and more spiritual meanings. In baptism, we identify with Christ, with Christ’s death, with Christ’s resurrection. The most important meaning of baptize has almost no connection with water.(3) There is a sense in 1 Corinthians that the children of Israel were baptized into Moses.(4) In the Exodus narrative, the children of Israel did not get wet. They crossed the red sea on dry ground. The Egyptians were the ones who got wet that day.(5) James Dale wrote a book about John’s baptism. He describes baptism as taking place when the “character, state or condition” of an object is changed.(6)

A case can be made that Jesus’ baptism was unique. John the baptist baptized people in a ‘baptism of repentance’.(7) Jesus’ baptism was not like the baptisms normally conducted by John the baptizer, because Jesus was not repenting. Baptism signifies submission to God, allegiance to God’s will and inclusion with the restored people of God.(8) Through baptism, Jesus shows that He is in alliance with God, with the will of God and with humanity. Perhaps, in some way, Jesus’ baptism was an example for us and was a marker showing a change in Jesus from being a Jewish carpenter to being a powerful Jewish teacher.

Jesus was probably about 30 years old when He was baptized. Verse 23 is not part of the lectionary reading. In verse 23, we learn that Jesus was roughly 30 years old when He started his ministry. Priests were supposed to be at least 30 years of age to be installed in ministry.(9) Because Jesus is the high priest for humanity, it makes sense for Jesus to start His ministry at about 30 years of age.

John the baptist’s ministry is not one that I find particularly attractive. A description of his ministry makes me think of some of the street preachers in Edmonton, who stand on a box and yell into a public address system that everyone needs to repent or they will be doomed to hell. I try to scurry past them, in an effort to protect my ears from the loud preaching. In fact, I am not sure that I would want to be seen to have any association with John the baptizer's ministry. Depending on the translation, John the baptist called people a generation of vipers(10) or a children of vipers.(11) In fairness to John, he might have been calling the scribes and pharisees the children of vipers. We get that sense from Matthew’s Gospel. The religious leaders might have been present only to witness the baptism,(12) not to gain spiritual blessing from John the baptist. I wonder if they were there to see if John was preaching heresy. I am still left feeling that no matter how you slice it, either being told that your parents are poisonous snakes or that you are a poisonous snake is not a compliment. To John the baptizer, the people he was calling a generation of vipers were the descendants of the snake that deceived Eve in the Garden of Eden.(13)

John's comments indirectly challenge racism and challenge ultra nationalism. And I am not sure if John won any friends among the Jewish nationalists of his day. In verses 7 and 8 of this chapter, he reminds the people that being children of Abraham is nothing to brag about. He essentially says that God can create good Jewish people from stones. I am wondering how well his message would be received by a room full of people wearing Make America Great Again hats. Nationalists might find John’s message that God does not care about your national identity or your skin color a bit unsettling, possibly even a little jarring. In John’s personal theology, being Jewish did not place you in a special position above other people. He saw a need for Jewish and non-Jewish people to repent. John’s message to Jewish people was that being Jewish did not exempt people from judgment and that “racial privilege meant nothing” to God.(14)

John the baptizer seemed to have good ethics. He told tax collectors to only collect the taxes that they were supposed to collect.(15) He informed Roman soldiers that they were to be content with their wages, do not blackmail people and do not be violent.(16) While his ministry impresses me as being harsh and insensitive, he was popular. Crowds appeared to follow John.(17) And for some reason, Jesus came to John to be baptized. Perhaps, Jesus wanted to be baptized by John, because they appear to have been relatives. According to Luke Chapter 1, Mary, Jesus’ mother, was related to John’s mother.(18)

One of my favorite Bible commentators is William Barclay, a Biblical linguist and scholar. He translated the New Testament and wrote the popular Daily Study Bible commentary, which covers the entire New Testament. His commentaries are so good that they can be used as a devotional book. William Barclay comments, “Nowhere does the difference between John and Jesus stand out so clearly because, whatever the message of John was, it was not a gospel. It was not good news; it was news of terror.”(19) At Jesus baptism, a dove descended upon Jesus. The dove symbolized purity and harmlessness.(20) In the presence of a ministry of terror, the dove, a symbol of peace, comes down from the heavenly. A harmless, life-giving, hope-filled ministry that touched hundreds of millions of people in the last two thousand years took flight on the wings of the dove.

There is a reason why I am giving this background. Jesus baptism is in no way diminished by the fact that He was baptized by John. Some people who attend progressive churches and many LGBTQ people have suffered a lot at the hands of blunt ministers, harsh churches, demeaning church doctrine. If you were baptized, confirmed, ordained or served in a church system that hurt you or that hurt others, your call to be a person of faith or your call to ministry is not diminished by that church. You are more than your past. Like Jesus, you can have a powerful ministry and you can be a powerful force of good news, despite the frightening messages of churches.

The Gospel of Luke portrays Jesus as the one who fulfills John’s prophecy that there is a better, a greater, a more significant spiritual leader coming. John indicates that this person who comes after him is so much better than John is that John is not even worthy of untying his sandals. Slaves typically untied sandals.(21) The early followers of Jesus would have understood that John the baptizer was saying that he is not good enough to be Jesus’ slave. A spirituality of terror is not worthy, is not fit to be the slave of a spirituality of hope and peace. The bad news gospel that condemns people based on their identity is not worthy of tying the sandals of the Gospel.

Jesus submitted to being baptized by a person who was a bad news minister, so that we would not have to submit to bad news belief systems, so that we could hear good news, the Gospel.

There is tremendous power in stories, so I am going to share a story, as I conclude. Ken Wilson, author of A Letter to My Congregation, tells the story of his daughter, Grace. His daughter was in a science class, which was taught by a devout Catholic teacher. A student asked the teacher what he thought of homosexuality. The teacher replied that homosexuality is morally disordered. Grace looked over and saw a boy, who identified as gay, starting to cry. To Grace’s credit, she stood up and said, “Well, both of my parents are pastors, and I don’t know what they think about this, but I know that Jesus accepted all people!” Through tears, the teen said, “Grace, you’re my hero!”(22) And I believe that day a gay teen was baptized in God’s love. That day Grace lived up to her name.

My prayer is that many people in the city will be baptized in God’s love through people who are part of this church. And that they will say, “Your church, is my hero!”

God is a lot like Grace and God calls us to be like Grace!

Today, you are declared grace incarnate, grace wrapped in flesh, grace that baptizes many with love. Amen.

Notes

(1) Cited W.H.T. Dau. “Baptism (Lutheran doctrine),” ISBE, I, 395 in “What Is the Primary Meaning of Baptism? Some Translational Difficulties.” Bible.org. 04 March 2006, 20 Dec 2018. <https://bible.org/article/what-primary-meaning-baptism-some-translational-difficulties#P14_2475>.

(2) J. Vernon McGee. Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. (Pasadena, California: Thru the Bible Radio, 1998) ebook.

(3) McGee. (1998) ebook.

(4) 1 Corinthians 10:2-5.

(5) McGee. (1998) ebook.

(6) James W. Dale. Johannic Baptism. (Waucona, IL: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 1993, vi), cited in “What Is the Primary Meaning of Baptism? Some Translational Difficulties.” Bible.org. 04 March 2006, 20 Dec 2018. <https://bible.org/article/what-primary-meaning-baptism-some-translational-difficulties#P14_2475>.

(7) William Barclay. “Daily StudyBible.” Study Light. n.d., 18 Dec 2018. <https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dsb/luke-3.html>.

(8) Walter J. Harrelson, et. al, eds. The New Interpreter’s Study Bible. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003), 1858.

(9) See Numbers 4:3. “Adam Clarke Commentary.” Study Light. n.d., 17 Dec 2018. <https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/luke-3.html>. This point is also made in the Barnes Bible Commentary. “Albert Barnes Notes on the Entire Bible.” Study Light. n.d., 17 Dec 2018. <https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/luke-3.html>.

(10) Luke 3:7 King James Version.

(11) Luke 3:7 William Barclay’s New Testament.

(12) Good News Study Bible. (New York: American Bible Society, 1993), 1297.

(13) Lane T. Dennis, et. al., eds. ESV Study Bible. (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2011), 1953.

(14) William Barclay. “Daily StudyBible.” Study Light. n.d., 18 Dec 2018. <https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dsb/luke-3.html>.

(15) Luke 3:12-13.

(16) Luke 3:14.

(17) Luke 3:10 indicate crowds were asking John the baptist questions.

(18) Luke 1:36.

(19) William Barclay. “Daily StudyBible.” Study Light. n.d., 18 Dec 2018. <https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dsb/luke-3.html>.

(20) “Albert Barnes Notes on the Entire Bible.” Study Light. n.d., 17 Dec 2018. <https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/luke-3.html>.

(21) Good News Study Bible. (New York: American Bible Society, 1993), 1379.

(22) Ken Wilson. A Letter to My Congregation: An Evangelical Pastor’s Path to Embracing People who are Gay, Lesbian and Transgender in the Company of Jesus. (Canton, Michigan: Read the Spirit Books, 2014), 41.

#gay Christian #lesbian Christian #bisexual Christian #asexual Christian #queer Christian #pansexual Christian #trans Christian #LGBTQ #LGBT #faithfully lgbt #sermon #devotion #baptism

10 notes · View notes

lastsonlost · 6 years ago

Link

In the 1990s, the late Stanford neuroscientist Ben Barres transitioned from female to male. He was in his 40s, mid-career, and afterward he marveled at the stark changes in his professional life. Now that society saw him as male, his ideas were taken more seriously. He was able to complete a whole sentence without being interrupted by a man.

A colleague who didn’t know he was transgender even praised his work as “much better than his sister’s.”Clinics have reported an increase in people seeking medical gender transitions in recent years, and research suggests the number of people identifying as transgender has risen in the past decade.

Touchstones such as Caitlyn Jenner’s transition, the bathroom controversy, and the Amazon series “Transparent” have also made the topic a bigger part of the political and cultural conversation.But it is not always evident when someone has undergone a transition — especially if they have gone from female to male.

“The transgender guys have a relatively straightforward process — we just simply add testosterone and watch their bodies shift,” said Joshua Safer, executive director at the Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery at Mount Sinai Health System and Icahn School of Medicine in New York. “Within six months to a year they start to virilize — getting facial hair, a ruddier complexion, a change in body odor and a deepening of the voice.”

Transgender women have more difficulty “passing”; they tend to be bigger-boned and more masculine-looking, and these things are hard to reverse with hormone treatments, Safer said. “But the transgender men will go get jobs and the new boss doesn’t even know they’re trans.”

We spoke with four men who transitioned as adults to the bodies in which they feel more comfortable. Their experiences reveal that the gulf between how society treats women and men is in many ways as wide now as it was when Barres transitioned. But their diverse backgrounds provide further insight into how race and ethnicity inform the gender divide in subtle and sometimes surprising ways.

‘I’ll never call the police again’

Trystan Cotten, 50, Berkeley, Calif.

Professor of gender studies at California State University Stanislaus and editor of Transgress Press, which publishes books related to the transgender experience. Transitioned in 2008.

Life doesn’t get easier as an African American male. The way that police officers deal with me, the way that racism undermines my ability to feel safe in the world, affects my mobility, affects where I go. Other African American and Latino Americans grew up as boys and were taught to deal with that at an earlier age. I had to learn from my black and brown brothers about how to stay alive in my new body and retain some dignity while being demeaned by the cops.

One night somebody crashed a car into my neighbor’s house, and I called 911. I walk out to talk to the police officer, and he pulls a gun on me and says, “Stop! Stop! Get on the ground!” I turn around to see if there’s someone behind me, and he goes, “You! You! Get on the ground!” I’m in pajamas and barefoot. I get on the ground and he checks me, and afterward I said, “What was that all about?” He said, “You were moving kind of funny.” Later, people told me, “Man, you’re crazy. You never call the police.”

I get pulled over a lot more now. I got pulled over more in the first two years after my transition than I did the entire 20 years I was driving before that. Before, when I’d been stopped, even for real violations like driving 100 miles an hour, I got off. In fact, when it happened in Atlanta the officer and I got into a great conversation about the Braves. Now the first two questions they ask are: Do I have any weapons in the car, and am I on parole or probation?

Race influences how people choose to transition. I did an ethnographic study of trans men and found that 96 percent of African American and Latino men want to have surgery, while only 45 percent of white respondents do. That’s because a trans history can exacerbate racial profiling. When they pat you down, if you don’t have a penis it’s going to be obvious (or if you’re a trans woman and you have a penis, that becomes obvious). If they picked you up for popping a wheelie or smoking weed, if they find out you’re trans it can be worse for you.

There are also ways in which men deal with sexism and gender oppression that I was not aware of when I was walking around in a female body. A couple of years after my transition, I had a grad student I’d been mentoring. She started coming on to me, stalking me, sending me emails and texts. My adviser and the dean — both women — laughed it off. It went on for the better part of a year, and that was the year that I was going up for tenure. It was a very scary time. I felt very worried that if the student felt I was not returning her attentions she would claim that I had assaulted her. I felt like as a guy, I was not taken seriously. I had experienced harassment as a female person at another university and they had reacted immediately, sending a police escort with me to and from campus. I felt like if I had still been in my old body I would have gotten a lot more support.

Being a black man has changed the way I move in the world. I used to walk quickly or run to catch a bus. Now I walk at a slower pace, and if I’m late I don’t dare rush. I am hyper-aware of making sudden or abrupt movements, especially in airports, train stations and other public places. I avoid engaging with unfamiliar white folks, especially white women. If they catch my eye, white women usually clutch their purses and cross the street. While I love urban aesthetics, I stopped wearing hoodies and traded my baggy jeans, oversized jerseys and colorful skullcaps for closefitting jeans, khakis and sweaters. These changes blunt assumptions that I’m going to snatch purses or merchandise, or jump the subway turnstile. The less visible I am, the better my chances of surviving.

But it’s not foolproof. I’m an academic sitting at a desk so I exercise where I can. I walked to the post office to mail some books and I put on this 40-pound weight vest that I walk around in. It was about 3 or 4 in the afternoon and I’m walking back and all of a sudden police officers drove up, got out of their car, and stopped. I had my earphones on so I didn’t know they were talking to me. I looked up and there’s a helicopter above. And now I can kind of see why people run, because you might live if you run, even if you haven’t done anything. This was in Emeryville, one of the wealthiest enclaves in Northern California, where there’s security galore. Someone had seen me walking to the post office and called in and said they saw a Muslim with an explosives vest. One cop, a white guy, picked it up and laughed and said, “Oh, I think I know what this is. This is a weight belt.”

It’s not only humiliating, but it creates anxiety on a daily basis. Before, I used to feel safe going up to a police officer if I was lost or needed directions. But I don’t do that anymore. I hike a lot, and if I’m out hiking and I see a dead body, I’ll keep on walking. I’ll never call the police again.

‘It now feels as though I am on my own’

Zander Keig, 52, San Diego

Coast Guard veteran. Works at Naval Medical Center San Diego as a clinical social work case manager. Editor of anthologies about transgender men. Started transition in 2005.

Prior to my transition, I was an outspoken radical feminist. I spoke up often, loudly and with confidence. I was encouraged to speak up. I was given awards for my efforts, literally — it was like, “Oh, yeah, speak up, speak out.” When I speak up now, I am often given the direct or indirect message that I am “mansplaining,” “taking up too much space” or “asserting my white male heterosexual privilege.” Never mind that I am a first-generation Mexican American, a transsexual man, and married to the same woman I was with prior to my transition.

I find the assertion that I am now unable to speak out on issues I find important offensive and I refuse to allow anyone to silence me. My ability to empathize has grown exponentially, because I now factor men into my thinking and feeling about situations. Prior to my transition, I rarely considered how men experienced life or what they thought, wanted or liked about their lives. I have learned so much about the lives of men through my friendships with men, reading books and articles by and for men and through the men I serve as a licensed clinical social worker.

Social work is generally considered to be “female dominated,” with women making up about 80 percent of the profession in the United States. Currently I work exclusively with clinical nurse case managers, but in my previous position, as a medical social worker working with chronically homeless military veterans — mostly male — who were grappling with substance use disorder and severe mental illness, I was one of a few men among dozens of women.

Plenty of research shows that life events, medical conditions and family circumstances impact men and women differently. But when I would suggest that patient behavioral issues like anger or violence may be a symptom of trauma or depression, it would often get dismissed or outright challenged. The overarching theme was “men are violent” and there was “no excuse” for their actions.

I do notice that some women do expect me to acquiesce or concede to them more now: Let them speak first, let them board the bus first, let them sit down first, and so on. I also notice that in public spaces men are more collegial with me, which they express through verbal and nonverbal messages: head lifting when passing me on the sidewalk and using terms like “brother” and “boss man” to acknowledge me. As a former lesbian feminist, I was put off by the way that some women want to be treated by me, now that I am a man, because it violates a foundational belief I carry, which is that women are fully capable human beings who do not need men to acquiesce or concede to them.

What continues to strike me is the significant reduction in friendliness and kindness now extended to me in public spaces. It now feels as though I am on my own: No one, outside of family and close friends, is paying any attention to my well-being.

I can recall a moment where this difference hit home. A couple of years into my medical gender transition, I was traveling on a public bus early one weekend morning. There were six people on the bus, including me. One was a woman. She was talking on a mobile phone very loudly and remarked that “men are such a–holes.” I immediately looked up at her and then around at the other men. Not one had lifted his head to look at the woman or anyone else. The woman saw me look at her and then commented to the person she was speaking with about “some a–hole on the bus right now looking at me.” I was stunned, because I recall being in similar situations, but in the reverse, many times: A man would say or do something deemed obnoxious or offensive, and I would find solidarity with the women around me as we made eye contact, rolled our eyes and maybe even commented out loud on the situation. I’m not sure I understand why the men did not respond, but it made a lasting impression on me.

I took control of my career’

Chris Edwards, 49, Boston

Advertising creative director, public speaker and author of the memoir “Balls: It Takes Some to Get Some.” Transitioned in his mid-20s.

When I began my transition at age 26, a lot of my socialization came from the guys at work. For example, as a woman, I’d walk down the hall and bump into some of my female co-workers, and they’d say, “Hey, what’s up?” and I’d say, “Oh, I just got out of this client meeting. They killed all my scripts and now I have to go back and rewrite everything, blah blah blah. What’s up with you?” and then they’d tell me their stories. As a guy, I bump into a guy in the hall and he says, “What’s up?” and I launch into a story about my day and he’s already down the hall. And I’m thinking, well, that’s rude. So, I think, okay, well, I guess guys don’t really share, so next time I’ll keep it brief. By the third time, I realized you just nod.

The creative department is largely male, and the guys accepted me into the club. I learned by example and modeled my professional behavior accordingly. For example, I kept noticing that if guys wanted an assignment they’d just ask for it. If they wanted a raise or a promotion they’d ask for it. This was a foreign concept to me. As a woman, I never felt that it was polite to do that or that I had the power to do that. But after seeing it happen all around me I decided that if I felt I deserved something I was going to ask for it too. By doing that, I took control of my career. It was very empowering.

Apparently, people were only holding the door for me because I was a woman rather than out of common courtesy as I had assumed. Not just men, women too. I learned this the first time I left the house presenting as male, when a woman entered a department store in front of me and just let the door swing shut behind her. I was so caught off guard I walked into it face first.

When you’re socially transitioning, you want to blend in, not stand out, so it’s uncomfortable when little reminders pop up that you’re not like everybody else. I’m expected to know everything about sports. I like sports but I’m not in deep like a lot of guys. For example, I love watching football, but I never played the sport (wasn’t an option for girls back in my day) so there is a lot I don’t know. I remember the first time I was in a wedding as a groomsman. I was maybe three years into my transition and I was lined up for photos with all the other guys. And one of them shouted, “High school football pose!” and on cue everybody dropped down and squatted like the offensive line, and I was like, what the hell is going on? It was not instinctive to me since I never played. I tried to mirror what everyone was doing, but when you see the picture I’m kind of “offsides,” so to speak.

The hormones made me more impatient. I had lots of female friends and one of the qualities they loved about me was that I was a great listener. After being on testosterone, they informed me that my listening skills weren’t what they used to be. Here’s an example: I’m driving with one of my best friends, Beth, and I ask her “Is your sister meeting us for dinner?” Ten minutes later she’s still talking and I still have no idea if her sister is coming. So finally, I couldn’t take it anymore, and I snapped and said, “IS SHE COMING OR NOT?” And Beth was like, “You know, you used to like hearing all the backstory and how I’d get around to the answer. A lot of us have noticed you’ve become very impatient lately and we think it’s that damn testosterone!” It’s definitely true that some male behavior is governed by hormones. Instead of listening to a woman’s problem and being empathetic and nodding along, I would do the stereotypical guy thing — interrupt and provide a solution to cut the conversation short and move on. I’m trying to be better about this.

People ask if being a man made me more successful in my career. My answer is yes — but not for the reason you might think. As a man, I was finally comfortable in my own skin and that made me more confident. At work I noticed I was more direct: getting to the point, not apologizing before I said anything or tiptoeing around and trying to be delicate like I used to do. In meetings, I was more outspoken. I stopped posing my thoughts as questions. I’d say what I meant and what I wanted to happen instead of dropping hints and hoping people would read between the lines and pick up on what I really wanted. I was no longer shy about stating my opinions or defending my work. When I gave presentations I was brighter, funnier, more engaging. Not because I was a man. Because I was happy.

‘People assume I know the answer’

Alex Poon, 26, Boston

Project manager for Wayfair, an online home goods company. Alex is in the process of his physical transition; he did the chest surgery after college and started taking testosterone this spring.

Traditional Chinese culture is about conforming to your elders’ wishes and staying within gender boundaries. However, I grew up in the U.S., where I could explore my individuality and my own gender identity. When I was 15 I was attending an all-girls high school where we had to wear skirts, but I felt different from my peers. Around that point we began living with my Chinese grandfather towards the end of his life. He was so traditional and deeply set in his ways. I felt like I couldn’t cut my hair or dress how I wanted because I was afraid to upset him and have our last memories of each other be ruined.

Genetics are not in my favor for growing a lumberjack-style beard. Sometimes, Chinese faces are seen as “soft” with less defined jaw lines and a lack of facial fair. I worry that some of my feminine features like my “soft face” will make it hard to present as a masculine man, which is how I see myself. Instead, when people meet me for the first time, I’m often read as an effeminate man.

My voice has started cracking and becoming lower. Recently, I’ve been noticing the difference between being perceived as a woman versus being perceived as a man. I’ve been wondering how I can strike the right balance between remembering how it feels to be silenced and talked over with the privileges that come along with being perceived as a man. Now, when I lead meetings, I purposefully create pauses and moments where I try to draw others into the conversation and make space for everyone to contribute and ask questions.

People now assume I have logic, advice and seniority. They look at me and assume I know the answer, even when I don’t. I’ve been in meetings where everyone else in the room was a woman and more senior, yet I still got asked, “Alex, what do you think? We thought you would know.” I was at an all-team meeting with 40 people, and I was recognized by name for my team’s accomplishments. Whereas next to me, there was another successful team led by a woman, but she was never mentioned by name. I went up to her afterward and said, “Wow, that was not cool; your team actually did more than my team.” The stark difference made me feel uncomfortable and brought back feelings of when I had been in the same boat and not been given credit for my work.

When people thought I was a woman, they often gave me vague or roundabout answers when I asked a question. I’ve even had someone tell me, “If you just Googled it, you would know.” But now that I’m read as a man, I’ve found people give me direct and clear answers, even if it means they have to do some research on their own before getting back to me.

A part of me regrets not sharing with my grandfather who I truly am before he passed away. I wonder how our relationship might have been different if he had known this one piece about me and had still accepted me as his grandson. Traditionally, Chinese culture sees men as more valuable than women. Before, I was the youngest granddaughter, so the least important. Now, I’m the oldest grandson. I think about how he might have had different expectations or tried to instill certain traditional Chinese principles upon me more deeply, such as caring more about my grades or taking care of my siblings and elders. Though he never viewed me as a man, I ended up doing these things anyway.

Zander Keig contributed to this article in his personal capacity. The opinions expressed in this are the author’s own and do not reflect the view of the Department of Defense.

28 notes · View notes

jeudi-riverdale · 7 years ago

Text

riverdale ships

since riverdale season 2 is just about over (only 1 more episode !!), I thought that I’d discuss some ships that I’ve seen in both season 1 and 2 that I like/dislike:

ships I like :

1. barchie - betty x archie

obviously I’m a fan of barchie...I’m running a barchie account so it’s self-explanatory. these two have the history, the feelings, and the connection. even though betty is with jughead now and archie is with veronica, there are still lingering feelings or feelings buried deep down. and barchie is endgame, what can I say. I shipped these two in the comic books and I ship them now. there’s nothing like childhood novels coming to life in the form of a movie (or in this case, a tv show).

2. falice - fp x alice

boy oh boy I shipped these guys from the beginning. these two are one of the main reasons why I think betty and jughead shouldn’t be together. I mean, their freaking parents are in love... fp cares so much about alice, even after all this time. and it’s canon now because they were lovers in high school, alice got pregnant, and then had fb’s baby without telling him. I never though hal and alice were good for each other. and now that I’ve seen the most recent episodes of season 2, I KNOW hal and alice are wrong for each other and fp is the one for alice.

3. choni - cheryl x toni

before toni’s character even showed up on riverdale, there were rumors about this ship going canon. and, what do you know, this ship is sailing. one thing I love about riverdale is its inclusion of equality and representation, not only for the lgbtq community, but for racial minorities as well. well done, riverdale, well done. cheryl and toni are adorable and the scene at the sisters of quiet mercy was so powerful. these two are gifted actors and they portrayed the emotions of toni and cheryl so well.

4. moovin (??) - kevin x moose

these two need a better ship name because ‘moovin’ is just a little too weird. but, regardless, these guys were cute in the first few episodes and the aftermath of the prom scenes were what I stuck around for. it’s clear that moose may be bi or gay, but he’s so far back in the closet that it would take over a week to find him. not to mention he’s technically dating midge (who by the way, knew about moose and kevin hooking up and was cool with it ?? maybe that’s because she was also cheating on moose with fangs fogarty.) I still think these guys would be cute together because moose obviously has feelings for kevin. just look back at their scenes together...you can cut the sexual tension with a knife.

5. joavin - joaquin x kevin

I guess this is kind of conflicting with the previous ship I just mentioned (though I didn’t think it would be until I saw the most recent episodes - I think joaquin was in episode 20). I loved loved LOVED these two together. honestly, it’s one of the main reasons why I watched riverdale in the first season... joaquin and kevin were adorable in season 1, but after joaquin left, I shifted back over to shipping kevin and moose together. but NOW joaquin may be back for season 3 so I’m all kinds of conflicted rn.

6. jeronica - jughead x veronica

now I wouldn’t say I’m a full-fledged fan of these two together. there hasn’t really been enough buildup for that. HOWEVER I don’t think that I would mind if they were to get together in a future season of riverdale. that hot tub scene was just a mild taste of what could become...

7. chosie (is it ‘chosie’?? idk) - chuck x josie

I didn’t actually mind when chuck and josie went on a ‘date.’ hopefully chuck is actually going to keep improving his image instead of demeaning women. this relationship can just remain that one cute date and I would be totally okay with it. I think it shows how much chuck is trying to be a better person. I also think that chuck brings out a different side of josie because she was so much more playful and lighthearted with chuck than she was with anyone else in the show.

8. fremione - fred x hermione

even after all the shit that hermione pulled after hiram came home, I am certainly not opposed to these two eventually being together. I mean, it seems like mary and fred were separated for a reason and fred was planning on divorcing mary anyway so idk. fred still has lingering feelings for hermione (though I’m not sure if that’s changed since they’re opposing mayoral campaigns) and there was also that pesky kiss between the two in the andrews construction trailer...who knows what will happen in season 3.

ships I don’t like :

1. bughead - betty x jughead

I’ll admit. this ship was cute in the beginning when it was just jughead crushing on betty and they were a mystery-solving duo. but, the relationship became too rocky too quick and the crazy bughead fans just ruined the ship for me...and not to mention I always shipped archie and betty together in the comic books because jughead was a canon asexual...

2. varchie - veronica x archie

this was another couple that was cute at first, but then they became ‘that couple’ (you know, the one that lacked substance and all they do is have sex). and they also broke up for a reason...not to mention archie has feelings for betty buried deep down and the fact that veronica was a bit of a bitch for a while when she was using archie for her own personal gain. I feel like this is one of those couples that is passionate for a while (hello, lust) but ends up breaking up because feelings lie elsewhere (hello, love for betty).

3. the lodge duo - hiram x hermione

where to start...ah yes, how about with how hiram mentally abuses hermione ? how about when hiram forcefully persuades her to go along with his immoral plans ? how about when he is willing to put hermione’s life on the line after the black hood ‘plays target practice’ at the mayoral debate ? hiram is a terrible person and was certainly the wrong choice for hermione in high school. she should’ve chosen fred tbh. hiram has too many under-the-table plans and I honestly don’t think he cares about anything more than using people as a means-to-an-end.

4. cherosie - cheryl x josie

I was a fan of these two as friends, but when cheryl started creeping I just had to take a step back. season 1 cherosie was a cute best friend situation. however, cheryl’s mental demons came along and caused a rift in that friendship. I don’t think they would’ve worked out as a couple anyway. cheryl wasn’t really in a stable state-of-mind and I don’t think they’re that compatible tbh.

5. ms grundy x archie

this relationship gave me the creeps. I never liked this ship and thank god she’s dead. that’s all I have to say.

23 notes · View notes

alohamarsblog · 5 years ago

Photo

The sea turtles don’t get violently enraged if someone has the audacity to suggest that we should care about all ocean life and animals

Hmm gonna need a citation on that one!

. The people who are trying to save sea turtles don’t get violently angry when someone suggests that all ocean life matters. Nor do they become indiscriminately destructive of other people’s property and public property to force their will on others.

You seem to be more upset about smashed windows than black people getting killed by police.

The sea turtle supporters just want to ensure a nearly extinct natural population is not driven to extinction, and takes positive, affirmative steps to ensure it does not. But that certainly cannot be fairly said about the BLM movement.

All lives matter, but BLM is violently opposed to anybody saying so.

Because it is a whit supremacist dog-whistle.

And in doing that, it appears racist. When that movement only shows concern for black lives lost to white police, but not for all black lives, it appears even more so, and that action belies their chosen label. Emphasizing to everybody else that black lives matter when many, many more black lives are lost through the actions of other black people is preachy and, it seems, would be better directed toward to the black community, rather than the white community–if stopping the senseless killing of black people was truly the problem BLM wished to address. Sermons should be addressed to the audience where they can do the most good. So, when the attacks and sermons are directed primarily at white people, it seems disingenuous and racially motivated.

‘BuT wHaT aBoUt BlAcK oN bLaCk CrImE!!!!!!’

Please. You don’t give a shit about black lives so please stop pretending you do.

The concept that black lives matter is not controversial to anybody who believes all lives matter–nor should the reality of black lives mattering as much as anybody else’s be controversial. But the reality of the BLM movement exposes an ugliness on its part, and shows much more concerns for politics than concern for all black lives. So much of the rhetoric employed displays an apparent general hatred for white people. Demanding or encouraging white people to kneel and confess crimes and acts they took no part in is ridiculous, but it feeds the racial angst, anger, and hate.

Way to make a movement dedicated to stopping the brutalizing of black people all about white people asshole.

Hating or demeaning someone simply on the basis of their race and an overgeneralized perception of the character and quality and actions and attitudes of the people of that race is what racism is–and it doesn’t matter what race you are, or what race you are attacking, it’s still racism. BLM takes a negative, often hateful approach, pointing to the smallest fraction of causes for the deaths of black people to address through a group called “Black Lives Matter.” They could learn from sea turtle advocates.

I’m still not seeing any citations.

Encouraging or allowing other human beings to kneel to BLM’s aggressive marchers shows a lot of that negative sentiment: “you are only acceptable to us if you bow and scrape.” If you truly wish to treat all men and women as your equals and your brothers and sisters, and if you truly believe that is how it should be, you’d find the concept of kneeling, bowing, and scraping about as offensive as racism. But BLM has encouraged it.

Nobody wants you to kneel, you oversensitive crybaby. Just don’t expect anyone to pat you on the back for it either.

Racism ends when nobody is focused on race, and nobody has to bow and scrape to a person of another race, nor feels the need to–when people of all races can look at people of other races as brothers and sisters and not as inferiors or figurative “whipping boys” and scapegoats. It will never end as long as race is a primary factor in almost all things.

Don’t bring up race in an issue that’s all about race? The fuck sense does that make?

BLM simply continues a vicious cycle of racism with its current approach. And that is sad and generally counter-productive despite what the media and select government officials try to portray. Virtue signaling is not progress. Real change begins with brotherhood, not offensive, in-your-face militant rhetoric–particularly when it often castigates and demonizes another race, resulting in resistance, rather than joining hands.

Gotta love that sanctimonious tone policing!

As with all things, most of the foregoing probably doesn’t apply to everyone who gets involved with BLM or supports the movement, but the general projection of that organization’s ugliness, unconcern for all black lives, and appearance of being more concerned about the politics than the stated cause that is displayed by its most prominent people is counterproductive–and it makes it controversial.

Again, you don’t care about black lives unless you think you can use them to attack BLM so yeah..fuck off.

Sea turtles aren’t controversial. Sea turtles don’t approach surviving and flourishing by trying to make the whole world stop and focus on sea turtles. As far as I know, sea turtles aren’t consuming their own at a greater rate than other causes.

Citation needed.

Do black lives matter? Of course they do, and it’s sad that anybody feels the need to ask the question. Do interactions with police need a much closer scrutiny– regardless of race? Absolutely. Have there been questionable deaths–and outright indefensible killings of citizens by police? Yes! Does that merit close scrutiny? Of course it does. Does a policeman have a greater right to kill a citizen than another citizen might have? No! Does a too-broadly -based, indiscriminate, racially focused attack help to solve this problem or race relations? No, it doesn’t.

So it’s OK to protest police brutality, as long as it is done in a way that does not offend your delicate sensibilities?

Black lives matter as much as anybody else’s lives. True lasting progress and the end of racism won’t happen until we stop focusing on race. BLM doesn’t want that. They want race-focus to play a much larger role in our society.

And that is why they are controversial.

Only to myopic white tone policers like you.

#blm #blacklivesmatter #response

44K notes · View notes

teafortwo29 · 7 years ago

Text

Gloria Steinem says black women have always been more feminist than white women

WRITTEN BY Leah Fessler @LeahFessler December 08, 2017

Gloria Steinem sets the record straight on black women's leadership. (Marla Aufmuth/Getty Images)

Gloria Steinem has been at the forefront of American feminism for a half century. But she’s never seen activism quite like today’s #MeToo movement.

“Clearly, at this moment in time we are gaining our voices in a way that has never happened before,” said Steinem, the co-founder of Ms.magazine and Women’s Media Center, at the Massachusetts Women’s Conference in Boston on Dec. 8.

Many women have found a sense of unity and purpose in #MeToo—a movement launched ten years ago by Tarana Burke, a black activist, and energized this year in the aftermath of sexual harassment and assault allegations against Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein. But while Steinem is heartened by this moment, she believes the quest for gender equality will not succeed if the mainstream movement ignores an essential reality: Black women have always been at the heart of feminist activism.

Speaking with American comedian and writer Phoebe Robinson, Steinem outlined the #MeToo movement’s blindspots, the importance of intersectional feminism, and how to continue dismantling sexual harassment and misogyny in the months and years to come.

Remember black women’s legacy

“We are kind of at a tidal wave point right now. But we need to remember that this all started over 40 years ago with defining the word sexual harassment,” Steinem told Robinson. In 1975, the term “sexual harassment” was coined by feminists at Cornell University. A few years later, feminist activist and lawyer Catharine MacKinnon developed the legal framework arguing that sexual harassment was a form of sex discrimination.

Then, Steinem continued, three black women filed successful sexual harassment lawsuits: two against the US government, filed by Paulette Barnes and Diane Williams, and one against a bank, filed by Mechelle Vinson. Vinson’s case, accusing her former supervisor of repeated harassment and rape, eventually led to the Supreme Court’s unanimous 1986 decision that sexual harassment was a violation of the Civil Rights Act.

“All three of these women were black. And these black women now symbolize the fact that [sexual harassment] is certainly is more likely to happen to people with less power in society than to people with more power,” said Steinem. She went on to note that law professor Anita Hill, also a black woman, brought sexual harassment to the forefront of public discourse with her 1991 testimony against then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas.

Yet more often than not, white feminism and mainstream American culture have overlooked the invaluable contributions of women of color. This injustice has led many, including Quartz’s Corinne Purtill, to rightfully charge that #MeToo hijacked black women’s work on race and gender equality.

Foreground intersectionality

“Women of color fought the battles that brought society to this point, where even the faint hope of change seems possible,” writes Purtill in Quartz. “To use that work without ensuring that this broken system is replaced with one inclusive of race, in addition to gender, is not partial victory. It’s complete failure.”

Steinem echoed the same message when Robinson asked whether today’s feminists fail to uphold the importance of intersectionality—a feminist theory introduced by civil rights advocate and law professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, also a black woman. Intersectional feminism examines the overlapping systems of oppression and discrimination that women face, based not just on gender, but on race, sexuality, socioeconomic status, physical ability, and other marginalized identities.

“The problem and what [many feminists today] are not saying,” said Steinem, “is that women of color in general—and especially black women—have always been more likely to be feminist than white women. And the problem I have with the idea that the women’s movement or the feminist movement is somehow a white thing is that it renders invisible the people who have always been there.”

If you don’t believe her, consult statistics, says Steinem: In the early 1970s, when Ms. Magazine published its first national poll, over 60% of black women said they supported the women’s movement and feminist issues. Just 30% of white women voiced support, says Steinem.

Things aren’t so different today, Steinem explained, pointing out that black women voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election, while a majority of white women voted for Trump. Steinem attributed part of the split to the way that married white women vote “in the interests of their husbands’ income and identity because that’s what they’re dependent on.”

Women of color, by contrast, are necessarily aware of systemic biases in their everyday lives; they are far more likely to actively oppose oppression. Said simply: We are not born sexist or racist. Rather, systemic racism and misogyny socializes us, in Steinem’s words, “to believe that we are ranked, when in fact we are linked.”

Raise our girls to be more like cats

Given the pervasiveness of sexism, sexual harassment, and misogyny, Steinem says we must actively shift the way we socialize young girls and women. Her solution: Raise them to be more like cats.

“Have you ever tried to touch a cat,” Steinem asked me, when I inquired how we should raise the next generation of feminists. I nodded, and she made a swatting motion with her hands. “Cats don’t let you touch them. Cats tell you what they’re going to do, and that’s that.”

What’s phenomenal, says Steinem, is that before children are fully socialized to fulfill traditional gender roles, they instinctively act like cats. “Babies are not born as ‘girls’ or ‘boys.’ Babies are born human, period,” Steinem explained. “And little kids say it so wonderfully when they say things like, ‘It’s not fair,’ and ‘You are not the boss of me.’ Those statements are the basis of every social justice movement. We need to hang on to that.”

Such cat-like instincts were quite literal for Steinem, who did not attend school much until she was 12 years old because her father moved frequently. Subsequently, she says, when someone attempted to kiss her on the cheek as a young girl, she literally bit him, breaking his skin and making him bleed.

But sustaining this attitude is nearly impossible when we constantly teach little girls to be pleasing. “We dress girls in dresses that button up the back, in clothes they can’t even dress themselves in. There’s so much training to be passive, and to wait for somebody else,” Steinem explained. “So we need to look for and demand internal changes in the way we act, and the way we treat our family and friends, in addition to demanding external changes.”

Fight for bodily integrity

The patriarchy will not tumble overnight. Steinem believes that many people still misunderstand what drives sexual harassment. “I think we still have not quite got it out there that sexual harassment and assault are about power, not sex,” she said. Understanding that sexual harassment is about the drive to dominate, humiliate, and demean other people can help provide clarity about what constitutes inappropriate behavior, especially for men who ask questions like, “Can we not hug women anymore?“

“The fact that our bodies belong to us, that’s the beginning of democracy in my view,” said Steinem. “Women have a harder time with democracy because we happen to have wombs, and patriarchy wants to control reproduction. And racial cast systems only make democracy harder for women of color. But the fact is for both men and women, our right to govern our own bodies, and use our own voices is fundamental to democracy. So if we can carry it forward in that way it’s very helpful.”

One of the most important ways to carry forward this bodily integrity, says Steinem, is to acknowledge that not everything is sexual harassment, and that we all are responsible for calling out behavior that feels inappropriate so to ensure lines do not blur.

“If a guy is commenting on our appearance in a flattering but uncomfortable way, if we comment back, they’re shocked, because we’ve taken the ability to define our boundaries and our desires,” said Steinem. “So we need to keep talking to each other—we can’t have men take this moment and say, ‘now I can never interact with women,’ or vice-versa.”

Activism doesn’t stop with social media

Among the many lessons to learn from black women’s leadership in the fight against sexual harassment, says Steinem, is that activism requires real-life, consequence-ridden work. Social media posts followed by complacency does not count.

“Obviously it’s a great gift to be able to communicate [on social media] and know you’re not alone. This is huge. But we also have to remember that pressing send isn’t actually doing anything,” said Steinem. “So we need to focus on the practical steps we take in the world. The obvious ones are how we spend our money, who we reward and who we don’t, and who we vote for.”

This is not to say that tweets and Facebook posts are meaningless. When it comes to real-life and social media activism, Steinem says it’s not an “either-or” situation, because activism is “an arc.” “Consciousness always comes first, before action,” she said. “And consciousness can come from typing #MeToo, and knowing that you’re not alone—knowing that the system is crazy, not you. It’s not about making a value judgment, it’s about seeing a full circle of consciousness, to activism, to change.”

Remember the simple rules of democracy

If you’re not exhausted by today’s political climate, Godspeed. For the rest of us, it’s okay to acknowledge that we’re overwhelmed, and probably craving hibernation, says Steinem. Waves of exhaustion and even hopelessness are inevitable in the fight for social justice, she assures.

However, to prevent ourselves from normalizing sexual harassment, we need to ground our activism in two fundamental values: intersectionality and democracy. Steinem explains:

“If you have more power, remember to listen as much as you talk. And if you have less power remember, to talk as much as you listen. That can be hard when you’re used to hiding. Keep yourself in the present, and don’t obsess over what you should be doing, or could have done differently. Talk to people, don’t get isolated, and remember to empathize, because almost everybody can be changed and transformed.”

https://qz.com/1150028

190 notes · View notes

plunder-heaven-and-devour-god · 7 years ago

Text

Tropes!

My brother and I are discussing how to put out tropey indulgent media out there while still making original content that is aware of its environment.

We were looking at tropes and stupidities that we never get tired of in movies/books/games and why we still kind of want them in our content. For example, I can’t get enough of Enemies to Lovers and the bro loves the Jerk with a Heart of Gold Trope. How do you incorporate that into new original ways to stories that still feature a socially conscious voice?

You cannot slap on traits of that trope and expect it to work. You cannot frame the shortcomings of the trope as ideal and you cannot gloss over the ramifications of the trope. Discard what is harmful, take what you love, and run with it.

EDUCATE YOURSELF, really though, figure out the shortcomings of this trope. Where does it fail? Where does it succeed? I know that my Enemies to Lovers falls through A LOT! How many times do you find they’re battling each other and clearly the writers weren’t aware of the rules of said trope and they end up being ultimately flat and abusive? The Byronic Hero being the other one people get wrong A LOT. How do you tread that line with elements that can easily run into abusive and violent (or fucking stupid for that matter)? Same for the Jerk with a Heart of Gold trope, which done properly is great. How many of us have fallen prey to any character who cracks wise and makes bad decisions but ultimately loves and cares? If done badly it treads into dismissive/belittling/abusive

To give examples of two shortcomings and two successes with these tropes I’ll offer up:

Byronic Hero:

Good: Mr Rochester

Bad: Literally any bad YA love interest

“Byronic heroes are charismatic characters with strong passions and ideals, but who are nonetheless deeply flawed individuals who may act in ways which are socially reprehensible because he's definitely contrary to his mainstream society. A Byronic hero is on his own side and has his own set of beliefs which he will not bow nor change for anyone. A Byronic hero is a character whose internal conflicts are heavily romanticized and who himself ponders and wrestles with his struggles and beliefs. Some are portrayed with a suggestion of dark crimes or tragedies in their past.” THE LITERAL BYRONIC HERO TROPE PAGE

I feel like that biblical paragraph sums up the Byronic Hero. Where lets say Rochester and Frankenstein or their modern equivalents never have their behaviour or actions framed as good, we still find ourselves engaging with them. It’s indulgent in its admission. It has to be your bag, and it’s that you have to be here for. You have to like engaging with a character that has done bad things but still has enough emotional relatability that instills fascination.

What is not fascinating/enjoying/attractive is watching bad YA that frames these bad qualities as ideal or go as far as to fetishize them. For instance, the possessive boyfriend angle ‘cause it’s hot is one of my PET PEEVES. YOU WILL ALWAYS GET MORE TRACTION WITH FRAMING THEM AS BAD THAN HAVING THEM DO CREEPY SHIT AND BANKING ON US EMOTIONALLY ENGAGING WITH THEM POSITIVELY. (Looking at you Tiger’s Curse)

You have to be aware where the trope works and where it doesn’t. The authors of bad YA have the intent to make them conflicted/tragic/flawed but don’t really want to examine what made those byronic heroes enjoyable. Instead they take surface attributes and slap them on. Byronic Hero is hiding a wife in the attic (BAD and framed as such)! Bad YA Love Interest is demeaning and patronizing to flirt (BAD and framed as good!) Challenges God and Nature and is NOW A FATHER (Not So Great Frankenstein and not framed as such) . Bad YA Love Interest is physically possessive because that is what this demographic finds sexy (BAd and framed as Good)

Here is an alternative! YA Love interest does bad shit and its not framed as anything good! The protag can react with more autonomy than :Oh that’s hot and my reader’s will think so too! The protag can be dismissive, angry, or shitty right back! No one is absolved! But you can still engage with them on a more nuanced level. You can suddenly make connections with the Byronic Hero because you understand their fear or their conflict, rather have it be a lazy flashback to explain why your bad YA Love Interest is being shitty.

How to be indulgent: Make your awful characters awful and frame them as such! IF you’re able to create a subtle character that warrants the trope then clearly they have what it takes to be engaging!

The Jerk with a Heart of Gold trope:

Good: Iron Man (I know people with debate this but we like him in this house so go with it)

Bad: Any sitcom husband ever

“A person you would expect to be a big Jerkass has some redeeming qualities behind their tough demeanor. Occasionally, they'll try to make it a Hidden Heart of Gold.” - The Jerk with a Heart of Gold TV Tropes Page.

Awareness is a big factor in incorporating this trope into new ideas and new content because I don’t think this one is ever going away. It obviously manifests in different capacities and genres. But I chose the above examples because they’re familiar, and can be played for drama and laughs.

Tony Stark is a good iteration Jerk with a Heart of Gold because his actions aren’t framed as harmless or irrelevant. He is a hot mess, he says it himself. He makes bad decision after bad decision and endangers himself and others in the process. Why does he still have a heart of gold? He still gets the “save the cat moment” and he is given time to show his conflict and reasoning as relatable. He creates Ultron, sides with the UN in Civil War (I still see a lot of his motivation as valid which to each their own when it comes to that movie). He does so out of guilt and the desperate need to hold himself accountable. Being the only person on the avengers who fights by ways of inventions he has understood the consequences of bringing this technology in the world and stepping up an arms race. And yet he continues to fight. To an audience we see his shortcomings as an individual. And yet we feel for him. He is framed with a more subtle dialogue, he is flawed, he tries to be heroic, but he has no clue what he’s doing, and continues anyways.

I bring Sitcom Husband up because so often show writers will create Sitcom Husband with harmful and toxic male coded traits in mind. They are:

Callous, lazy, clueless, domineering, stupid, always wrong, uglier than their partner, enforce toxic gendered norms, homophobic, transphobic, and/or racist?

You are not framing your Sitcom Husband’s actions as shitty and bad and worthy of changing. They are being framed as commonplace, expected, and normal. These are not just “jerk” things to do, they are emblematic of larger social issues that many sitcom writers shouldn’t be allowed to tackle. There is the opportunity to have characters that evolve and change but they aren’t allowed because they represent you, the male viewer, and you are shitty and unable of changing. And to all the other genders out there: this is your lot and life, this is how people will treat you.

Flawed Superhero sides with the UN (Not Ideal but Framed with Good intentions). Sitcom Husband cant remember anything relevant about children’s lives (NOT GREAT but framed as commonplace instead emblematic of a larger issue).

To give an example of Sitcom dads who don’t hit this bad note: Bob from Bob’s Burgers is great, he’s tired of his family’s Shenanigans, but loves them and would do anything for them. An example of Jerk with a Heart of Gold that doesn’t have his shitty actions framed as okay but is still likeable (sounds a bit Byronic Heroish but he’s not trust me).

The Lens:

Gender

The Byronic Hero and the Jerkass with a Heart of Gold are very gender laden tropes as well. The moment you apply these tropes to people who are not cis men, they transform in meaning, and not to mention, there are BARELY ANY OF THEM. Just trying to find villains who are just cis women with proper writing is a task in 2018. These terms get applied to men and their definitions are validated by their interaction with heroines or other men.

The failed Byronic Hero is aimed at “female audiences”. It’s a tangled snare of a male content creators guessing at what “women” want and women who have fetishized and internalized the failures of this trope. All come to the conclusion that “chicks dig bad boys”. Not to be that person, but it also vastly misunderstands the appeal that Byronic Heroes have for all genders. It is extremely difficult to create new content that pays homage to this trope without hitting the pitfalls of most media.

The failed Jerk with a Heart of Goal is aimed at a gender dichotomous audience. It’s a snub of content creators of what they think, you, man or woman, are. The faults are framed as inevitable manifestations of gender and yet still excusable because these jerk related tendencies are just part of being man or a woman, and not a vast social system that favours few and marginalizes many. This extends to race and sexuality as well. Your jerkishness is thanks to your identity, and therefore, unchangeable.

Race

From a race perspective? They’re all white. We are at a point in Western Media, at the very least, where diversity is becoming an increasing demand. But with media content creators still being part of an out of touch racial group, it’s difficult to see any character, let alone anyone with the discussed tropes represented. We are at the point where your diversity, if a larger role, is going to be portrayed as perfect. This is a major issue I take with creating poc, and woc characters, not to mention characters of different gender and sexual identities. There aren’t enough diverse content creators to get us past this block of creators making them perfect because they don’t know how to make a human character who is also of color.

This makes the Jerkass with a Heart of Gold impossible to tackle. We are starting to see more fleshed out characters nowadays. It is still a fairly recent sensation to HAVE A SELECTION to chose from.

I would love it if Byronic Heroes and Jerks With A Heart of Gold came in color. We are meant to watch white guys do bad shit and engage with the conflict of their character. And as a mixed race women it is definitely a weird place to sit when one does enjoy tropes like that. IT’s even more unsettling when we can’t extend that empathetic engagement to men of color, or woc, or god forbid, trans people. (let everyone have a byronic hero honestly)

And in a world of hate crimes and deplorable race relations, what is the relevancy of this trope? What is the relevancy of this trope in a visual mass media already saturated with badly written YA Love Interest or Not So Deep Byronic Heroes?

I’m not an expert, but as a consumer of books/tv/movies/etc I don’t think fiction is the root of all mankind’s evil and I don’t think fading this trope out of visual mass media is going to get rid of it. I, personally, think we need more content creators of color, of different gender identities, and different sexualities reinterpreting Jerk Ass with a Heart of Gold and the Byronic Hero.

Gender Binary and Sexuality

I chose these two tropes because they’re traditionally VERY gender related. And I mention this to clarify that the market is aimed at a gender binary: straight girl or straight boy. Gays, Bis, Non Binary, Gender fluid, or trans folk, for example, are left out of the equation of: what do they want to see in media?

I do know that for as long as evil has existed there has always been a very clear coding as to what the villain’s sexuality might be. It’s clearly deplorable how literally the only representation a huge marginalized community get will be in the form of a morally or sexually debauched villain. Which is why I will never forgive LeFou being made gay (you couldn’t have picked any other character from your 600000 other features Disney?).

Also as a Cis woman, I don’t feel like I can do an accurate run down of how indulgent tropes fail or succeed with a LGBT lens. I have a base idea of WHAT NOT TO DO but I would rather see other people talk about it!

So PLEASE! Add to this discussion! I would love to hear about which tropes you love but where media fails you and in what capacity! Or where they’ve gone right!

But as someone who loves their tropey enemies-to-lovers and villains I will keep returning to them in my media consumption and I be subject to paying them homage when the time is appropriate!

That being said! I had no clue this would get so long.

#whoops #this #really #wasnt supposed to take so long this evening #its been something I've been thinking about for a long time #what makes an orginal project and what makes one pastiche #or even worse derivative and completely missing the point #where do we fall into those pitfalls and how #tropes #media critique?#freestyle media critique?#MY EYES #ARE BURRRRNING #why did i do this #do i miss writing essays?#apprently so?#i woke up in a cold sweat #thinking oh god i forgot the read more

3 notes · View notes