#but I. Is it okay to do this to ethnic groups or isn't it?

[menlove]

hey can you please explain it to us? like how are we supposed to just understand? why would a large ethnic minority vote for an open racist who hates them? this is not intuitive

wasn't trying to imply you're just supposed to understand- sorry, it's just always a lil bit of a uh bitter inducing moment when this topic comes up bc it makes it really obvious that a lot of people just don't engage w the latine community

but basically, most latines are conservative christian. usually catholic (my family isn't catholic, though my grandmother was raised that way). a solid majority of them are one issue voters, usually on the issue of abortion because many catholics & conservative christians are one issue abortion voters.

there's also the immigration issue. a lot of these conservative latines do in fact care about better immigration reform, but a lot of them also have this attitude of "I did it legally, so why can't you?" so they don't even see themselves as a PART of the group being targeted. and if they do and they take issue with it, they tend to go "okay, but the republicans agree with me on everything else and I can't in good moral conscience vote for the other party who disagrees with everything I stand for as a moral christian"

and while many latines have voted blue over immigration in the past, harris leaned pretty heavily right on the immigration issue so it's like. to them. are you choosing the guy who agrees with you on everything but immigration, or the woman who disagrees with you on everything Including immigration?

and then you also have to get into the race of it all because race is beyond complicated in this case. non-black latines sit in a weird in between space with whiteness. to the right, we're white when we're Good. to the left, we're white when it's a Problem. whiteness is conditional. and this is the case for many demographics, but it's especially relevant here. when people sit on that edge of whiteness, they WILL throw each other and other minorities under the bus to earn the protection of whiteness. so you know. behave, vote red, show yourselves to be moral, legal citizens, and MAYBE you'll be granted the protection of being considered white in america. and we aren't. but that doesn't stop people from trying. even taking my dad as an example, I grew up with him talking about how much he hated white people. today, he's out here calling himself a proud white man who voted for trump. it's conditional. and people know whiteness is a protection. naturally, this leads to a lot of antiblackness in the community as well as just racism in general.

it just boils down to latines by and large being conservative christian/catholic and voting based on that rather than viewing themselves a minority race. and being way way more split on the immigration issue than people might imagine, because I've absolutely heard it parroted time and time again that "I got here legally, so can they"

[melancholic-pigeon]

I have now three times seen someone on my dash reblog a statement to the tune of "oh of course this terrible person did something terrible; they're the Bad Ethnicity that's inherently backwards and evil" after having previously asserted that judging entire ethnicities based on the shitty actions of shitty individuals is wrong no matter what, no exceptions, period, because doing that is inherently a shitty thing to do to an entire ethnic group.

Unless if they're Irish, apparently. Then the thing that's never okay because it's inherently shitty and cruel is suddenly okay. Because Irish.

[crowleystolemyshoes]

I never have and never will write a callout post or send anon hate but I AM going to talk myself up and make myself feel like such a good person for not doing these things

[xclowniex]

why do you only criticize the left on your blog. Aren't nazis and white supremists also bad.

The reason why I criticize the left so much is for two reasons.

1. I am a leftists

2. The left is being very hypocritical about jews

To elaborate on those points, you should always call out those within your own political side. You can't just go "right wing people don't care about minorities" whilst not saying anything about the people on the left don't care about a minority.

It's hypocritical to criticize others when your group does the same thing.

All that does is say one of 3 things about you. That you either think that being bad towards a minority is excused because of your political opinion, the minority at hand and the discrimination they face is not as important as other minorities or isn't bad or that you just don't care about the minority at hand.

Going into how the left is hypocritical about jews, the left frequently is against civilians being held accountable for the actions of their government. Yet Israelis are being held accountable by them for their governments actions. Diaspora jews aka jews outside of Israel also get frequently held responsible for a government which isn't even theirs.

Leftists are against the collective punishment of Gazan citizens yet collectively punish Israeli and Jewish folk socially.

Then you have people talking about how a minority doing a bad thing doesn't take away from the need to respect their identity. Such as how you shouldn't misgender a trans person if they do a bad thing as that's transphobic but as soon as they find out that a Jewish person is a zionist, antisemitism is now okay.

You've got jews currently who have seen the lefts ideas and agreed with them. We agree that collective punishment is bad. We agree that a minority doing something bad doesn't take away from the respect they deserve for their identity. We have supported land back movements for the native folk of whatever country we live in.

Yet none of those actions are happening for us. Instead antisemitic tropes are used to blame us for everything.

I could go on about how the lefts actions in the West further fuel the right wing parties in Israel. How they view it as "see no jews are safe outside of Israel. We need to be more violent to secure Israel's safety for jews internationally.

I could go on about how the lefts actions are forcing jews out of the left and are making jews more likely than before to become right wing.

But none of that matters because what should be in the forefront, is a leftist ideal of discrimination based on religious, ethnicity/race, sexual orientation or gender, is bad.

Yet that completely escapes people when it comes to jews and antisemitsm.

[leidensygdom]

Okay, I will try to explain this topic as well as I can. I will preface this with the fact this comes from personal experiences, and that they may not apply for everyone who has ties to this culture, but let's get to it:

What's the issue with Fortune tellers / "Exotic" circus performers, sexualized belly dancers and other forms of orientalism/Romani depictions?

So, as someone in the TTRPG world (specifically, the DnD community), this sort of trope is seen quite a lot. From the portrayal of Vistani (which has been tried to be fixed, but not... too well), to player characters in home games, as well as popular canon characters and podcasts, it's got quite normalized. Most of these tropes are based on Romani, which is a widespread ethnicity present all across the globe. Now, it feels almost strange to call it orientalism, given how Romani have been in Europe since the Middle Ages, even though they do have roots outside of Europe.

Romani face one of the biggest diaspora in the world: You will find Roma people under many names in very different countries, with cultures and traditions that can clash heavily. Their numbers can range from few hundred in some countries, to over a million in those they have a biggest presence. My own experience is tied to Spanish Roma, known as Gitanos, which is where my mother's side family comes from.

Gitanos are a widespread group, although they're most numerous in the southern part of Spain, Andalusia, where their presence has shaped the culture. Flamenco is thought to have been born from Gitano culture, and it has been adopted as a staple of the Andalusian identity, and the whole of Spain. Gitanos are hard to understand as their own ethnicity in Spain: There's been centuries of Gitanos and Spanish people mixing, and the average Andalusian is quite tan to start with (given Muslim presence there has also been pretty firm). It means it can be hard to "clock" a Spanish Romani person from a non-Romani one. It means you can find Romani people most would consider white, at least by Spanish standards. Most of the discrimination Gitanos face is cultural (and the whole ordeal can be a bit harder to explain from a more US-centric view).

Now, even when Gitanos have influenced Spanish culture a lot, they still face plenty of discrimination. They are one of the most marginalized groups out there. Laws have discriminated against them for centuries, on and off, which have put them in poverty. And poverty often develops into criminality, which has only seeded the idea that Gitanos are criminals, "lowlies", the bottom of society, "uncivilized", etc. Now, here comes a bit of my own experience with this.

My entire family is Andalusian, but both sides moved from there (the south) to Catalonia (north-east) in order to find a job during the Francoist (fascist) dictatorship. I won't get much into the specifics of the Catalan vs Andalusian beef because that's a bit of a massive topic too, but the important thing here is: My mother's side is Romani. My grandma faced some horrifying forms of discrimination, including the theft of her first child during the fascist dictatorship, which was taken from her by nuns (who ran hospitals at the time) to be placed into a "proper" family. (This is something that happened repeatedly at some hospitals during these times).

Now, she had two other children: My mother and my aunt. My aunt remained closely knit to Romani culture, and took part in it, which included marrying a Romani guy. She always did her best efforts to be part of it. I know she was into some culturally-related dances, which included some forms of bellydancing (which is also partially tied to Roma culture). But my mother decided she'd rather cut ties with her culture and become "civilised", by abandoning said culture.

This isn't too uncommon for Gitanos, to be honest. I've met a few people who come from similar backgrounds through my life. One of them was in university, where a fellow classmate gave an oral exposition about how his family had done a great job at "becoming civilised" by cutting ties with their own Roma roots. My university was a fairly progressive space, but no one batted an eye at that: The sheer hatred of Roma culture runs so deep even people who normally abhor racism and xenophobia consider Gitanos to be worth the hate.

There's a social pressure to do that, too. Everyone "knows" Gitano are criminals. I can't really even begin to explain how deeply does this sort of discrimination run. Roma are amongst the most hated minority groups in all of Europe (as well as most of the world). You will find that even in very leftist circles. People will try to erase the fact Roma have their own culture, and just make the world equal to "criminal", call them gy***** (which is a slur, btw), and detach them from being an actual culturally (and often racially) distinct group.

Now, this is only empowered by how media has taken our culture (it is almost hard for me to call it "our", given how much my mother ensured to take that away) and made it into a bad trope. Growing up, I was told my aunt was a sexual deviant who partook in indecent dances. Bellydancing is often seen as something very sexual (Wasn't, in origin), very unfitting. In media, bellydancers veer on the side of being a f*tish, and the common trope is the "bellydancer who seduces people in power for their own benefit". There's also the whole idea of shady fortune tellers and other magical tropes, that sort of weird mysticism that falls rapidly into orientalism. The idea that Roma will hex you, curse you, place an "Evil Eye" on you. And also the idea of travelling circus, people who perform in them being again full of that alluring exoticism, but beware! For they will enchant you, steal from you and run some massive criminal schemes on the way.

Now, when every tie a culture has on media is portrayed in a negative light, it's much harder for that culture to recover any sort of respect from the general populace. And that includes even people who are part of said culture, or people who have been removed from it. It has taken me so many years to unlearn a lot of these biases and realize where it has come from, and now I'm far too distant and far away from my grandmother to actually ever significantly connect to my heritage.

I've had the opportunity to witness what Romani culture is actually about, as I used to live with my grandmother during summers. A lot of the "mysticism" she took part of was actually about wards and protection. A lot of them were actually medicinal in nature, even if others were more superstitious. Red thread in the forehead for sickness and protection to curses, parfums (which contained alcohol or other antiseptics) on wounds, that stuff. My aunt was never a "sexual" deviant, she was keen on recovering and partaking on traditions from a culture that is slowly disappearing. The entire "promiscuous" idea is bullshit, Gitanos place a massive amount of power to marriage and loyalty. I had the luck to witness my cousin's marriage, which was a festivity like none other I had seen in my life, a colorful spectacle full of the most delightful attires, and my mother was whining the entire time over about how it was all an "uncivilised circus".

Now, this is why representation in media is key. Roma culture is broken into a thousand pieces and lost with every passing day. When someone decides to write an ambulant circus performer/fortune teller clad in exotic clothes full of golden jewellery, writes them as a criminal and makes the entire thing extremely sexual, they are feeding into the negative stereotypes about Roma.

Now, there's a lot of people who aren't even aware what culture does that trope even actually come from. I've seen people draw characters clad in Romani attires (often in, uh, rather pin-up or sexual contexts) and claim they're inspired by "x piece of media", where the trope is portrayed in the first place. I literally saw someone make a drawing in that way and call it "inspired by x (non-Roma) artist" instead of acknowledging where does all that come from.

I'm not asking people to not portray Roma people in media. Far from that. I just wish representation was better. Good representation is key towards making a culture seen in a more positive light, and teaching other peoples about it, and making people from said culture resonate with it. The very few times I've seen positive representations of Roma I've felt a bit of that connection with something that was taken from me. I want people to do a bit of research before giving a try to a Roma-coded character. Make an effort to not make Roma always the morally dubious fortune teller, the exotic alluring circus traveller, the bellydancer seductress. It's hard for Romani to produce widespread mainstream media because of how impoverished most communities are (because of the systematic discrimination Roma face all around the world), so the least non-Roma people can do is to be kind when they use their voice to talk or represent us.

I know this is a massive post, and I'm tagging it as "long post" for that reason, but I hope it is helpful for people. Feel free to ask or add your own experience if this is something that resonates with you too. Ask away if you want. I've been wanting to tell a bit my own personal experience, as this has always been a hard spot for me, and even if just a handful of people read this and understand what is this all about, I think it will have been worth it.

[matan4il]

I heard many allegations from my friends that Israel is explicitly founded as an "ethnostate", and claimed that "having a secular state instead of an apartheid state" would solve many issues of the ongoing conflict. What's some advice to give when discussing with people using such strong terms to describe Israel?

Hi lovely!

I honestly hope that your friends are even willing to listen to the answer. One of the big problems we have, is that it's easy to make up a lie demonizing Israel to people willing to automatically believe the worst about the Jewish state. It takes time, effort and a lot of words (which is taxing for both sides) to explain the truth. So there has to be willingness to listen and learn. I hope your friends prove worthy of your efforts. *hugs*

Okay, so here's the thing about the term "ethnostate." It means a state with a specific ethnic majority (unlike an immigrant society), but most people using this term to vilify Israel do it as if it means "pure ethnostate," which is a state with only one ethnic group having citizenship and rights. In other words, while Israel is a Jewish state in the sense that it is a Jewish-majority state, they use the term as if it means that Israel is a Jew-only state. But Israel isn't a pure ethnostate, and in fact, that doesn't exist anywhere in the world. In Israel, 26% of the population is not Jewish (21% of Israelis are Arabs, 5% belong to other non-Jewish groups).

More than that, Israel has never been interested in being a Jew-only state. I know the narrative of these people is that Israel intentionally committed an ethnic cleansing, expelling Arabs, but that's not the case. The Arabs started a war against the Jews (which they referred to as a "war of extermination") and at a certain point, the leadership called upon the Arab population to leave, so they can make way for the Arab armies which would invade Israel once it would declare independence. One historian in a documentary I watched about this, said that about 80% of the Arabs fled of their own accord, about 10-15% fled because, once the war started, there was also violence between the Arabs themselves (settling scores under the cover of the fighting), and the rest, which means 5-10% of the Arabs, were expelled by lower ranking Israeli army commanders, due to those locals' hostility, violence, and unwillingness to accept the new sovereign Israeli state. Meanwhile, Arabs who were willing to accept Israel, who did not take arms against the Jews, were allowed to stay and become citizens. Those 120,000 Arabs became the foundation of the 2 million Israeli Arabs today. More than that, Israel actually promoted a plan to allow about tens of thousands of Arabs back and give them land, so long as they were willing to accept the new Israeli state, and not take arms again against its Jewish citizens. Only a really small number seized that opportunity (in part because they were still at the stage where they thought any day now, the Jewish state would be dismantled by the Arabs anyway), but those who did are, once again, proof that Israel wasn't into ethnic cleansing.

Bottom line is that the partial ethnic cleansing of Arabs wasn't a result of the Jewish refusal to live alongside Arabs, it was a result of the Arab refusal to live as citizens of a Jewish state, or in an Arab state which would coexist with a Jewish one, it was a result of the Arab refusal to accept the Jews as equals.

Sometimes, I feel really bad for Arabs who did not want the war, who could have lived at peace with the Jews, but their leadership and society forced the war on them. Other times, I remember they could have stayed there, remained peaceful towards Jews, like the 120,000 Arabs who were immediately a part of Israel once it was established. I also remember that they could have spoken up against the war before it broke out, at that stage when everyone was sure the Arabs would exterminate the Jews in a matter of months at most. If they would have spoken up then, it would have been them speaking up against the ethnic cleansing and intended genocide of Jews. Where were they then? Where were their voices when the Arabs were considered the strong side?

And I remember Petach Tikva, a Jewish moshava established in 1878, and how the Jews founded a new water well, that the Arabs benefitted from as well, after they had polluted the existing water well with cattle carcasses. I remember that when the Jews started working in agriculture there, they allowed Arabs to come and live with them in this small Jewish community (22 Muslims and 2 Christians), I remember the Arabs said, "Al-bracha ind al-yahud," the blessing is with the Jews, meaning they recognized the Jews were doing something right, and the Arabs themselves were benefitting from this. I remember the Arabs complimented the Jews on how hard working they were in the fields. And I remember that none of it mattered, and that by 1886 (just 8 years after its founding), Petach Tikva was targeted in an organized Arab attack, where one woman was murdered, beaten to death (Rachel Haddad Ha'Levi), and 5 people were injured, including Rabbi Aryeh Leib Frumkin (the great grandfather of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks), who the Arabs thought they had beaten to death. There was no State of Israel yet, there was no "theft" of land, Petach Tikva was founded on land bought and paid for, there was no occupation, there was no ethnic cleansing, no discrimination of Arabs, and yet seeing the Jews start to build themselves up as equals, in a community of their own, not just as second class citizens in cities where they were always a vulnerable, undefended minority, was enough to launch this violence.

To drive this point home, you can ask your friends about the ethnic cleansing of Jews by Arabs, which occurred in the Land of Israel, and are they opposed to that? Hebron and Gaza City in 1929. East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria (re-named by the Jordanains during that year the West Bank) and the Gaza Strip in 1948. There are currently ZERO Jews in what is supposed to become the Palestinian State, and Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, promised it would stay that way. I wouldn't call the Palestinian-ruled territories a pure ethnostate, because they do have small non-Muslim, non-Arab minorities (although those minorities have been shrinking in size due to persecution since Israel gave over control of these areas to the Palestinians in the 1990's), but in terms of my specific minority group, I can't ignore that these territories are Jew-free, and that the future Palestinian state is meant to remain ethnnically cleansed of Jews. So, if your friends truly mind ethnically cleansing, will they call out the Palestinians on that? Would they vilify and demonize the future Palestinian state, the way they do Israel?

Back to Israel today, and the other allegation. According to the law, ALL Israeli citizens are to be treated the same, regardless of faith or ancestry. The apartheid in South Africa was a system where racism didn't just exist in society, it was coded into law. That means by law, government officials could only ever be white. It means the citizen rights of non-whites were by law limited, either reduced or revoked completely. That's not the case in Israel. Here, Jews and non-Jews enjoy the exact same citizen rights. For example, non-Jews were members of the Israeli parliament since our very first elections (mad respect for Seif el-Din el-Zoubi, who saved the 6 Arab villages that his family inhabits in Israel, by insisting that they don't join the fighting against the Jews, and was elected a member of the Knesset in 1949, and was even appointed at one point as its Deputy Chief). And here's a former Israeli Arab minister and member of Knesset, Isawwi Frej, refuting the apartheid allegation himself:

Also, for the record, Israel IS a secular state. The law here is secular, not the laws of Halacha (which is actually why some ultra orthodox Jews are anti-Zionists. Not because they're against a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, but because the State of Israel isn't Jewish enough in terms of its rule and laws for their liking). Israel IS Jewish, but in the same way that the US is Christian. There are certain cultural influences and indications, but religion doesn't rule the state, and there is more than enough room for people of religious minorities to practice their faith, and have all of their rights and freedoms.

I hope this helps! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[pigeons-conversion-sideblog]

Like I expect this kind of thing from the Hamasniks.

It hurts way more when it's coming from someone who explained why the exact thing they're doing is wrong three posts ago.

I've been seeing a nonzero amount of Jews saying...really sickeningly hibernophobic things in response to Irish individuals being viciously antisemitic.

I've posted about this on my main blog, but it's getting really tiring. Now isn't the time, the potato famine wasn't that bad, the IRA is exactly the same as Hamas, Irish Catholics and Palestinians are the same so Irish Catholics are Scandinavian settler colonists somehow???

It's really making me scared and upset to see people being willing to use collective judgment on Irish people as a whole, to rewrite history to demonize us, to rescind all their viewpoints on how to be decent to marginalized ethnicities as long the ethnicity is Irish Catholic, who rightly point out how fucked up it is that people make exceptions for Jews having human rights...

...and then turn around and make those exact exceptions for Irish people.

This isn't something that needs to be dragged out on posts with people using Irish tragedies to illustrate leftist hipocrisy against Jews, although I do think that rhetorical method is itself hypocritical and it bothers me that anyone anywhere is EVER willing to make exceptions to their principles for ANY ethnicity that exists.

I think that's wrong.

I don't want to take away from anyone's pain. We don't disagree overall. We really don't. I'm infuriated by the "uwu ireland standa with palestine uwu" nonsense too!

I just...I really really hate that the answer seems to be "so we take everything we've been begging people not to do to us and we do it to those filthy micks instead" for an alarming number of people.

I say this here because I think the hamasniks fetishizing Irish history cannot be reached at this point. They need to be fully, formally deradicalized. I'm saying this here because I trust you guys to take me in good faith and actually be open to thinking it through.

I'd like to read some works by Irish Jews, if anyone has any recommendations. I really hope it doesn't need to be said that I would prefer if those works did not also demonize Irish Catholics while uplifting Irish Jews.

[ck2k18]

Whitewashing in the ml fandom and why you shouldnt do (or support) it

Disclaimer: Because I am a Black person and the characters I am talking about are Black, this post will specifically address the white washing of Black people and characters.

What is white washing? White washing in the context of fanart is when you take a character of color, usually one with brown/black skin, and either make their skin lighter, give them more Eurocentric features, or both.

Why is it harmful? To explain why this is harmful, I will use one of the first examples of fanart; renaissance paintings of ancient Greek myths. Specifically, artwork featuring Princess Andromeda. Go to your search engine and type in "princess Andromeda". Based on those images, you would never have known that in the original Greek legends, Andromeda was black. So why is she most often depicted as a white woman?

McGrath’s article was definitive in addressing three things: that all the Greek mythographers placed Andromeda as a princess of Ethiopia, that Ovid specifically refers to her dark skin and that artists throughout Western art history frequently omitted to depict her blackness because Andromeda was supposed to be beautiful, and blackness and beauty – for many of them – was dichotomous.

That quote is from this article, and I highly recommend you give it a read. When you whitewash a character, you are perpetuating the idea in the quote above. That this character you like, whether you like them because they're funny or smart or beautiful, cannot be those things and also have black features.

White washing in miraculous ladybug

The show itself is guilty of whitewashing it's own characters. For example, look at these side by sides of Alya and Max alongside their hero alter egos.

Was this done with malicious intent? Hopefully not. But intentional or not, what it says to the people watching is, "These characters cannot have darker skin and also be heroes." And if you think it's not that deep, it is. The show's inconsistencies can't be used as an excuse for whitewashed fanart, because this shit isn't okay either.

Colorism and whitewashing

I'm going to bring up colorism, because even though Max's skin is lighter in that image, he still looks black. However, that doesn't make it okay.

colorism: prejudice or discrimination against individuals with a dark skin tone, typically among people of the same ethnic or racial group:

Lighter skinned Black people, while still targets of racism, are closer to whiteness than darker skinned Black people, and in some cases face less discrimination. When Black people first started to appear on TV, it was generally lighter skinned ones because that was more acceptable. This article goes more in depth about colorism.

Misogynoir and whitewashing.

Misogynoir is a word coined to describe the unique hatred that black women face. It is the intersection of racism and misogyny.

People may whitewash a female presenting character but not a male presenting character. In this fandom, you see it with DJWIFI fanart. People will make alyas skin color significantly lighter than Ninos. One trait of misogyny is tying a womans worth to their beauty. When you realize that beauty and blackness were (and still are) seen as antonyms, the issue with this type of whitewashing is made clear.

Texturism and whitewashing

texturism: a form of social injustice, where afro-textured hair or coarse hair types are viewed negatively, often perceived as "unprofessional", "unattractive", or "unclean".

When Black characters were first introduced to media, aspects of them would be changed to heighten their proximity to whiteness and make them more palatable to white audiences. Black women would get perms or silk presses, and Black men would keep their hair cut short and "tidy."

Note: This does not mean that all Black women with silk presses or perms or all Black men with short hair are trying to heighten their proximity to whiteness, or do not love themselves and their hair.

Animation has a history of not representing Black hair. Nowadays, Black hair is more represented, and beautifully so. Just look at movies like Encanto and Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse or TV shows like Moon girl and Devil Dinosaur.

In Miraculous Ladybug, Max is the only character with blatantly afro hair. Nino's hair is always covered and is cut short, and Alya's hair has a looser texture. Therefore, I give fanartists a pass on that one. However, this is a good thing to be aware of anyway.

How can you help?

Don't create, support, or reblog whitewashed art.

(P.S. if anyone wants to come on this post bripnging up blackwashing, read this post of mine)

[thelunarsystemwrites]

Age regression, a useful coping mechanism.

Long post about agere!

So, it's possible you've seen these things on my blog:

Agere. Petre. Agedre. Petdre. Age regression. Regressor. SFW. All that stuff, but, what does it mean? Well, I'm here to tell you!

So firstly, questions are ALWAYS welcome! Rather in reblogs, comments, or in my ask box, I'm always willing to answer questions about age regression!

Second, if you want JUST the terminology explained, you can find it here!

With that out the way: Age Regression. It's basically mentally reverting back to an eariler age! It's a completely SFW (Safe for work) coping mechanism! Though not all regressors use it as a coping mechanism, some just do it for fun! (Also it's technically a form of dissociation!

Same idea with pet regression, but it's reverting to the mindset of an animal! Kinda like shifts for a therian! (Coming from a therian!)

It's a wonderful thing, though it may not always feel like it. Just like how toddlers for example, might have tantrums, not know how to comprehend big emotions, or feel confused. That can happen in regression too! It can be voluntary or Involuntary. But there's ways to manage that!

Oh, and regression is for EVERYONE! (Any ethnic group, any gender, any identity, nobody is allowed to gatekeep it!)

When you're regressed, it really does feel like you're younger, like things are simple, and such. The levels of how extreme it feels varies from person to person!

But yeah, you mentally become a younger age, can be anything from a baby to a teen!

I do HIGHLY recommend doing it! I highly recommend watching shows you loved as a kid, or kids shows you think you'd enjoy now. I recommend getting in cozy clothes, maybe drinking from a sippy cup/water bottle to feel younger? Colouring, playing games (like minecraft!) Listening to soft music, these things really help me!

I'll admit, it can be scary the first time. But you have to trust your mind, trust that youll be able to become big again (your current mental age) when you need to.

Agere (short for age regression) and petre (short for pet regression) can help you have a childhood you never had, help you process difficult emotions, help heal your inner self and inner child, destress, and lots of other benefits!

And hey, some regressors PREFER to watch shows like Hazbin hotel, like playing games like call of duty, like drawing detailed artwork, like swearing. That's all okay too! You don't even have to use baby/kid stuff or talk/act like a baby/kid to regress! But, I do recommend starting off with that first, as it can help you know what regression feels like! ^^

Another thing, you might be a regressor without even knowing it! Like, have you ever laid in bed, grasping to cuddle anything soft near you—Just wishing you were a kid again, that someone would care for you? Maybe you felt like you were having unreasonable fears, like afraid of growing up, or afraid of the dark. Did the world feel bigger, did you maybe want to have a pacifier, or a stuffy?

That could be Involuntary regression! It's a defense mechanism of the brain, basically trying to process the world by becoming mentally younger to help.

You can learn to help control this, not always, but there's ways to help! Pushing away your regression isn't always a good thing, as often, it comes back stronger.

Instead, I recommend trying to find what makes you feel good or safe while regressed, and finding time to do it once or twice a week! (As long as regression isn't taking over your life/interfering with you as a teen/adult, you can do it a lot more than that! Every day if you want!)

You can watch videos online on how to regress, how to do it in secret if you're not ready/don't want to tell others! (I recommend looking up "Agere" or "How to age regress" or "What's agere?")

Same for pet regression! And another thing, there's something called Agedre (Age dreaming) and Petdre (Pet dreaming)

Again, it's always safe for work! It's basically acting, and wanting to be treated as a certain age/animal. It can help to have someone coddle you, and treat yourself younger, even if you'd rather not regress/can't! It's just as valid as Agere/Petre!

And, the community is huge! Slowly, we're working to normalize this, help spread awareness about mental health, and that regression ISN'T a disorder, it doesn't need to be cured! It's a tool that even some therapist recommended!

And hey, even if it's not for you—Please, don't hurt us who rely on it, or use it for fun. If it makes you uncomfortable? That's fine, even if it's 200% SFW, you're allowed your own safe space and boundaries. But try to understand that, we're not hurting anyone, and we can respect each other without taking away each other's safe spaces.

Thank you for listening, questions are always welcome and encouraged! And I hope this helped! (If you have a question you're afraid to ask, you can ask in my ask box with anon! This is a judgement free space!)

The end! ^^

[tagthescullion]

I like how you write Maria di Angelo. I don't like it when people portray her as some modern-day at-odds-with-society feminist. Sure, she might've been liberal (probably unlikely though) but liberal *for her time*, which people always seem to forget. Maria could've been the most liberal-minded openminded person in the world and she would still be considered conservative by today's standards. This was the 40s after all, but too many people don't really seem to know what it was actually like then.

thanks anon, I do love talking about maria :D

TLDR: I assume she was liberal in a few aspects of her life, but considering the time and social context she lived. also, at least while she lived in italy, being openly nice to the people being persecuted meant dying, and she wouldn't have wanted to get nico and bianca into trouble

not only does maria belong to a different time but people have a very black-and-white view of liberalism

1- liberalism in the US isn't liberal by any standard outside of the US, US liberalism is as conservative as liberalism can get, so whenever the US half of the fandom speaks about it, pinch of salt and whatnot

2- having an open mind in some aspects of your life doesn't mean having them in every aspect of your life. I can be super okay with gay people and then get scared about the homeless; I can be supportive of socialism but think some people of colour aren't welcome in certain social circles; I can call my mother a snob and yet be the most christian conservative in the world.. hell, I can be racist to some PoC and supportive of others!

in maria's case, I think she was liberal enough when it came to:

women, I mean, she managed having two illegitimate children (regardless of how covered by her family that might or not have been)

she clearly didn't agree with italy's fascist regime (otherwise she wouldn't have moved to the US), so she would've been against the extermination of the ethnic/religious groups mussolini targeted

and in general, about her we know:

she was a good mother, she cared about nico and bianca, and was patient enough to have got to know hades' good side

she was also an aristocrat or rich enough to belong to the elite

that's virtually all we know. not more, not less

being against genocide isn't always a direct link to being okay with those groups, and so we can't know for sure if she was okay with gay people. since she's a good mum and loves nico, we can guess she'd have extended some support, but support at the time wasn't the same as now, it always came with a "but don't show it" side-message

being rich, it's likely she'd have been accidentally rude to middle/lower class people.. (nico should also be, but that's for another day) not openly targeting them, but comments here and there that make for awkward pauses

she would've been okay with PoC she knew, but not necessarily have a good idea of ethnicities as a collective group

as for openly showing that "liberal" side of her, we're talking proper fascism, gente, say you don't mind gay people, or black people, romani, jews, be too loud about how a woman should have a choice as to whether to be a housewife or have a paying job and not getting married.. you got shot or made to disappear

admittedly this is a headcanon of mine, but the way I see maria, she would've prioritised her kids over everything and everyone else. she'd have been kind and tried to help out as much as possible, unless nico and bianca were put in direct danger

[lokigodofaces]

Since I've been seeing more and more anti-Wanda stuff lately, I thought I'd write something out and express my thoughts in a low-key venty manner.

I really don't trust the vast majority of Wanda criticizers*.

There is so much misogyny, victim blaming, dismissal of trauma, etc. I cannot believe it. And most of this started during WandaVision.

Okay I saw criticisms before mostly for Age of Ultron but it was your classic "poorly written" criticisms which I disagree with I think that in the majority of movies she was in they did a decent enough job of writing her. The only major ones I saw were because they wrote her and Pietro as part of Hydra initially. A) That definitely was not the most well thought out decision of Marvel's, given that they are Jewish and Roma in the comics but of course they've been whitewashed so Feige didn't see it as a concern. B) If it weren't for their ethnicities, it would be kind of genius if it had been fleshed out more. Real life Nazi organizations prey on young people who have been mistreated (or perceive themselves to be mistreated) by the government or other authority figures and groom them to be fascists. Don't get me wrong, definitely insensitive to have that happen with these two given ethnicity, but unfortunately that is kind of accurate still. Unfortunately, this fascist groups manage to get POC, LGBTQ+, and other minority groups to join them. TL;DR: the way AoU handled it was not written well, but it definitely could have been something note worthy if the time had been taken to analyze this. Never claimed that Wanda was written perfectly, will be the first to admit that there are problems as well. But I will say that I used to see lots of people claiming she was "boring" pre-Infinity War. Idk, maybe I wasn't seeing what everyone else was, that's 100% a possibility. Like I said, this is more of a vent post than an academic paper.

Infinity War and Endgame I didn't see that much criticism, but those are the movies where they let Wanda be awesome and powerful so yeah guess no one had too much to say. Other than the occasional dudebro being mad that women can be powerful characters, there wasn't much I saw.

Then we get to WandaVision. Now y'all no by now that I am not a fan of the majority of newer MCU stuff. WandaVision is definitely one of those exceptions. Brilliant series. I was going wild as it was being released. I was so unbelievably hyped for Multiverse of Madness after this (Stephen and Wanda! Two of my favs! Together!). And the majority of it was really good, loved the other characters (or loved to hate them, in the case of Hayward lol), loved the sitcom references, it was a very enjoyable series. And as it came out, I didn't see much criticisms other than the reasonable ones (it isn't a flawless series). But we started to run into some things I hated, and it would just get worse and worse as time would go on.

People have no ability to understand morally grey characters these days. Any Wanda, Bucky, or Loki fan will tell you this because Marvel's been doing them dirty and the fandom hasn't been much better.

What was WandaVision about? Grief and trauma and how difficult it is to overcome these. And I think they did a pretty dang good job at that. But then what does everyone do? Freak the heck out because Wanda took over Westview. Well, first off the series suggests that Wanda wasn't even aware of it for the first couple episodes. Then at the end it implies that Wanda was not aware that she was causing pain the citizens were feeling and she tried to get them all to leave once she found that one out. And you've got Agatha who was messing around, killing dogs, manipulating Wanda, and mind controlling Ralph. And let's not forget the pressure from S.W.O.R.D and Hayward being irrational about it (he literally shot his gun at kids and his employee who tried to protect them and people try to defend him). All Wanda wanted was to be happy and have her family (no one gets mad when other MCU characters do that, such as Tony in Endgame). By no means does this justify her actions, but she is villainized so much over something when clearly her motivations are not out of ill intent but out of trauma, grief, desperation, and also being provoked by Hayward right before she got to Westview. She is feeling all of these emotions, and clearly her powers somehow got stronger/she unlocked or leveled up/something idk that's never explained as she is feeling all of this. I mean, if I had powers as ridiculously strong as Wanda's, it'd be hard for me to control them on rough days.

WandaVision introduced us to this very complex narrative of Wanda doing something wrong but not because she had ill intent yet not wanting to give up the little happiness she is feeling while she is also being manipulated by Agatha and Hayward. It isn't black or white. She isn't a villain, but she isn't Westview's hero. She's a grieving woman that needs therapy and also help to learn about her growing magic (ie what Multiverse of Madness should have been).

But half the time you see anything about Wanda in WV it's just saying that she was evil, that she was purposely hurting the citizens, that it was for nothing but fake kids, etc. Dismissal of trauma. Victim blaming. Misogyny. Let me tell you, if Wanda was a man everyone would claim that he was a good father and that he only wanted to build a family. But noOoOoO, she's a woman so she can't be complicated.

Then we get to Multiverse of Madness. Pretty sure Waldron never watched WandaVision (a literal masterpiece) before writing the flaming pile of trash he calls a script. There's so much to unpack about how Waldron didn't write her well, how she became a villain out of literally nowhere, how while Agents of SHIELD definitely supports the idea of a Darkhold twisted villain even still Radcliffe never was pure evil he was simply misguided by a sudden overflow of information that didn't happen all at once, etc. There's a lot. But, hey, it basically sums up what antis have to say about Wanda. Because Waldron seems to hate every single character he has written other than some select people in the TVA!

Now, even more motivated by the awful writing of DSMOM, antis say that Wanda was crazy for a desire to have kids (again, would they have said the same thing if she was a man?) and that she was actually this villainous the whole time (show me your receipts because even the beginnings of Age of Ultron showed her not being completely evil). And I could go on, they say so much. But, as I have said, all of it is dismissal of trauma, victim blaming, and/or misogyny.

But it's caused me to be very suspicious of people who claim to hate Wanda. Which obviously no one has to like her. Totally understand that she might not appeal to some people that like different tropes and whatnot, that is definitely understandable. But whenever anyone starts to lean into anti territory, I just have to wonder why. Why do you hate Wanda so much? Tell me why? Because generally when I find out why, it's because she's evil and insane and tortures whole towns without remorse (canonically not even true).

*Disclaimer: I am not referring to anyone criticizing the MCU and it's whitewashing of Wanda. That is a reasonable concern. I am talking about everything else listed in the post.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

Found an Self-Insert Cyberpunk fanfic.

Except it's not the usual type. It's the type where it's told entirely from the perspective of people other than the SI, which makes it more interesting.

Problem 1: Current events.

Almost all the references people make are ones you'd expect from someone today, like Batman or other pieces of pop culture.

Cyberpunk 2077 often references fictional in-universe media. Like the dead rock star stuck in V's head. In a world where everything and everyone is disposable and temporary, why would people usually reference 80 year old media?

At one point, a character explicitly compares another character's clothing to Danny DeVito in Matilda.

Okay, the CP timeline divergences mainly started in the 90s. So it's possible that the movie was still made, but it's still odd. Especially when the same characters don't recognize that the story's lead is heavily based on Walter White. Shaved head and everything.

Except he's using his chemistry potential for good, not evil.

And it's not just media. It's also Current Year memes, like V describing certain people as a "corpo bros who watched too much American Psycho", or himself as a "disaster bisexual".

Oh look, a segue.

Problem 2: Rainbow connection.

The story puts a lot of emphasis on LGBT characters.

There's Judy Alvarez, obviously. But also, V's in with Meredith Stout is Stout's explicitly non-binary ex who, you guessed it, is they/them.

Adds nothing to the story. The SI provides that info, and Meredith tries to trip V up, but he sees through it.

Since Meredith is a Militech Corpo, and V is an Arasaka ex-Corpo (who still isn't over it), why doesn't V…just use that connection, somehow? Militech and Arasaka are rivals. There could be some friction there. Or V could sympathize with how Stout would do anything to keep her job.

Why are non-binary characters always just they/them? Why not he/she/they? He/She? Xi/xir? or Lunagender? Or using regular He or She interchangably while IDing as enby? Why is it always the basic, simple, "normal" version? Got a Rochester's Wife situation going on?*

Also, in fanfics, things like this often suggest even more awkward left-wing political insertions, down the line.

Problem 3: even more awkward left-wing political insertions.

Well, just one.

Panam Palmer just didn't fit. This wasn't rare in Night City. Lots of people who didn't fit in, were awkward, had no social groups, didn't choose to be loners. She expected to be alone in the city and no one cared. But it was personal hate. Her skin color, nomad markings, speech, just being a woman. The list went on and every day there was some new jerk who needed to find out, because they messed around.

Panam is canonically native American, according to the devs, but she looks like a random white biker lady wth a tan. Wouldn't be the first white-passing Native woman I've seen.

Also, she lives and works around Night City. Which is extremely diverse.

Judy Alvarez and Jackie (both Hispanic) were both POV characters, and race wasn't really mentioned. You'd think ex-Arasaka V or someone would mention Arasaka's racism, but nope. River Ward was a viewpoint character, and he's much more visibly non-white, down to his necklace and dreamcatcher (if romanced).

He only brings it up in the fic when Misty asks him if he ever had his fortune told. Apparently his granny did a "spirit walk" when him and his sister were born.**

I've seen playthroughs of the game, and I don't remember sexism really being a thing. Why would skin color matter much when anyone can change that and other ethnic features at will?

Why did race only come up as a significant thing now?

I'd expect Panam to get the most stick for being a Nomad, not brown, or a woman. Especially in a city where any woman could sprout mantis blades and go Cyberpsycho at the drop of a hat.

This feels…reductive. Like the writer wanted to give Panam challeges to overcome so she could be a Tough Woman™, and just…piled too much on, like a Chicago hot dog.

I would've gone with something more subtle. "Her back itches without her Nomad tribe behind her, and she's uncomfortable in a city instead of a desert, or a road. Even the echoes sound wrong."

So, yeah, this was the last straw.

Also, I checked the writer's profile, and, very stereotypically, she's from Portland.

*Also, you might recall that there was a nontroversy over an soda ad in the game featuring a lady with, ahem, a rather substantial bulge. Based on an actual trans woman. Somehow, portraying a (possible) trans woman in the same sexually objectified way as ads featuring non-trans people is transphobic.

I never worked out that logic.

My best guess is that some people were uncomfy with it, and it's about a trans person, so it's must be *phobic somehow.

Wouldn't it be ironic if the ad was just Photoshop in universe? Or the in-universe model was a non-trans woman who strapped on the junk just for the ad?

(Though depending on who you ask, that still counts as being a trans woman, somehow.)

**Come to think, that kind of feels like it's stereotyping. I can't find evidence Pomo Native Americans do spirit walks, but maybe my Google-fu is just weak.

[lucienne-thee-librarian]

Okay but also because I'm a pedantic bitch...in relation to that post I just reblogged explaining part of gay-on-gay bigotry...what if some people are just assholes who happen to be gay, or bi or trans? And they're all for oppression or just plain cruelty as long as it's aimed at other people? Like that's also something to consider.

I don't actually think, any longer, that "internalized self-hate projected outward and also suppressed envy for someone who's doing and being all the things you were convinced into not allowing yourself" is...all there is to this phenonemon. And I wish we'd stop fixating on that quite so much just because we want to be frankly, nicer than some of these people have ever deserved. It's always more satisfying on some level, to imagine your enemies as Tortured deep inside (whether it's because you feel a bit malicious or you just want to believe that there's a way to reach out and heal them with kindness.) than to admit that Sometimes They're Just a Shithead.

Now, do I think that complex can be a big part of it? Oh yeah. And of COURSE, different people have different motivations in different amounts and yadda yadda yadda. No group of people, ethnic, gender, political or otherwise is a Monolith. (For one thing, when it comes to these Pick-Me Gay/Trans pundits and Influencers, money and clout should never be left out as an explanation. Just saying.) But that's the point, isn't it? Any ONE explanation can't explain them all completely.

Tbh, I think we need to consider some people are just bullies who happened to be born not cis or straight. And even if they were bullied at one point for their identity, they learned absolutely nothing from the experience except Don't Be On the Social Reject Side. So they moved their thinking just enough that "woman who likes women" "man who likes men" "I just happened o want to be a woman instead, or a man instead despite how I was born" could be put in the Safe category and they fight for that. Everyone else though, is still fair game and even a fair target. Some people don't just want power to escape oppression and live their lives in peace, they WANT to BE the ones oppressing. Like, do we ACTUALLY understand that LGBT people are humans too and that that includes the bad side?

It tracks a lot better too, when you consider that a lot of people like the masc4masc gays are openly racist and fatphobic. "No fems" Yes but also "No fats. No Asians." Christ, I could think of countless examples of white thin (and sometimes but not necessary cis) queer people doing that sort of thing. I'm sure y'all can too. This idea of some poor lost soul Tormented by Self Hate and Envy of the Freedom of Others doesn't do shit to explain that. Like, even if the two things coexist and they can, it doesn't explain that part.

I honestly just think the uglier but more accurate truth is that lot of queer people aren't all Hashtag Gay or Trans Rights or aren't Liberal out of any sense of justice AT ALL but only self-interest. Being an activist because you're a member of an oppressed group is like, entirely normal and fine of course BUT it becomes real clear when someone's framework of ethics and politics is PURELY "I think me (and people I personally like and approve of) being oppressed is bad" and literally not one inch deeper.

You can tell because if it was deeper, why would they find it so easy to turn around to a fellow queer/trans person to jeer at and humiliate and throw them under the bus if they think they're a Deadweight to the group by being a Weirdo I Don't Want to Stand Next to, Eww...or if they just don't personally like them? Why have you clearly spent absolutely no time unpacking any of the prejudice and biases around gender sexuality (or GOD FORBID race) that society throws at you.. at least no more time than it takes to rationalize yourself out of the category of Should Be Destroyed and Oppressed?

We are not immune from this sort of terminally self-interested activism. I just feel like we'd get a lot further as a society, as a community, if sometimes our analysis of bullies and assholes didn't fixate on finding some deep pain and trauma inside them, to explain their actions in a way that makes them look more tortured and less malicious (even if we say, even mean, that it's not supposed to be an excuse). Sometimes people are just racist, or fatphobic. Sometimes lesbians or gay men or bi or trans people just want to be judgmental bullies too.

Sometimes the reality isn't Tragic Villain Backstory. Sometimes, its just a selfish, deeply pathetic person refusing to become any less, because it's easier not to; even if you had a unique chance to see how the other side lives, a chance your straight cis bully peers didn't get by virtue of their identities.

[aelinfireheartgalathynius]

The discourse about Sarah J Maas being called a Zionist is giving witch hunt vibes at this point. Nothing I've seen has been conclusive at all. Just because she's a Jewish woman who went on birthright doesn't mean you should loudly denounce her as supporting genocide.

I am a Jewish woman who is pro-Palestine — so, not a Zionist — but who loves her Jewish diaspora culture. I have anti-zionist and non-zionist Jewish friends who went on Birthright because it's a free trip abroad. I know Jewish people who are staunch Israel supporters and I have Jewish friends going to pro-Palestine protests. Jews are not all one thing, and in fact it's ingrained in our culture that we have NEVER been one thing. There are Jews of all races, of all levels of religious belief, across the political and socioeconomic spectrum, scattered across the world.

If I were a semi-public figure (I say semi because Sarah has been clear that she is not the one posting on her public accounts and she doesn't have much interaction with fans outside of tours) people would probably have loud assumptions about me being a Zionist because I am publicly Jewish, I was a Jewish Studies minor in college, and I used to work at a synagogue. Guess what? I'm not a Zionist. I donate to UNWRA monthly, I do my clicks for Palestine, and I do my best to support with what I have. As a multi-disabled person that's all I can handle right now. If I were a semi-public figure I don't know if I would feel comfortable posting anything publicly either, because people are vicious and terrifying creatures. Sarah has a husband and child. She had gotten threats about fucking ship wars. This is so much more intense than ship wars.

Making these loud assumptions and calling for boycotting SJM, commenting on her social posts even though she isn't the one reading those comments — this is what antisemitism looks like. I know those of you who are angry at Sarah won't want to hear that, or will say that 'everything is antisemitic now' — which is a refrain that should raise red flags since it's the same argument other people use about transphobia, homophobia, racism, etc. You're the good guys, you support Palestine and you're anti-genocide and so on. But using stereotypes about an ethnic group to make assumptions and harass an individual of that ethnic group is not a good look even if you're convinced you're doing it for a good reason. Take that energy and put it toward spreading awareness, contacting politicians, attending protests, maybe even sharing messages from public figures who have posted publicly.

I understand that a lot of non-Jews (and a small number of Jews) are saying that it "has nothing to do" with Sarah being Jewish, it's just that she hasn't "used her platform." I implore you to consider why you are seeing and sharing such anger toward this one (fairly private) Jewish woman and not toward other prominent authors, especially those who are more active online, who have also not spoken out. Do some soul-searching and many of you may find that because Sarah is Jewish, you feel that she owes you a public stance more than other people. Because she is Jewish you feel confident enough to make an assumption about her views and post publicly about these assumptions. That is antisemitism at work. That is why this feels like a witch hunt to me, and why it is upsetting to watch.

As a reminder, I am pro-Palestine. I am not posting this to defend anyone. I am posting this to remind everyone that Jews are not all Zionists. Jews are not all one thing, ever. And deciding you get to hand down judgement on a Jewish person who has not shared their views publicly is antisemitism. It is deciding that you can assume negative things about Jewish people from afar. It is deciding that some antisemitism is actually okay — good, even, if you think it's warranted. I understand that people have other qualms with her writing, but those are not tied to her Jewishness, they're tied to her doing things like using the name Illyria and Illyrians for her ACOTAR series, etc, which is the kind of thing other fantasy authors have done over the years. Doesn't make it good or right but it certainly doesn't have anything to do with Palestine or Zionism.

If you disagree with me, please do not send hatred into my inbox. I am asking you to interact with this post thoughtfully. If your disagreement is going to be an explanation of how Jewish people owe the world every ounce of our energy, health, safety and lives, please step away and take a breath. I do not share your opinion. I have great admiration for those risking life and limb, risking jobs, risking arrest, to support Palestine. However, not everyone should be *required* to do all of those things, especially if you're disproportionately expecting those larger actions from Jews, thinking we "owe" it to the world.

Also, I want to be clear: This is not really about whether Sarah is a Zionist. It's about the fact that we don't know, and you cannot pretend to know. Most of the arguments I'm seeing are making a lot of assumptions, and that is the part that makes me uncomfortable.

If Sarah ends up being a Zionist, I still stand by this post, because it isn't about defending Sarah, it's about my hurt and disappointment in seeing people make assumptions rooted in antisemitism, assuming someone's views based on Jewishness and little else.

[drinkyourvillainjuice]

Character Q&A - Mallory & Wil - June '24

Hey peoples!

Over on Patreon, members can submit questions for poll-winning characters to answer in-character. The current hotseat belongs to Mal and Wil simultaneously. Since the answers are public, I figured why not post them here too. Enjoy!

For Mal:

Q: Mal, is there a look you feel the most comfortable in?

A: Sorta? It's more like, there's a range I prefer staying inside. I don't like being too tall or too short, I like keeping the toned bod. I'd have glasses a lot more if they weren't a pain in the ass with a mask. Usually prefer not being too masc or fem, but that depends. It's a comfort thing. Oh, and I don't like changing ethnicity. I dunno how to explain it but it feels, like... yeah I dunno. Lying isn't usually a problem for me but that kinda deceit makes me feel not okay.

Q: When did you first discover you could do what you do?

A: I was like nine or ten and I was screwing around in the kitchen. I think I was trying to microwave dirt or something? I was a little shit when I was a kid. Anyway I picked up my toasty dirt and my hand kind of just melted and I'm freaking out and thinking I invented acid dirt. Luckily mom was there and ran in and she kinda knew what to do, so I put my hand back together and started changing skin colours. Red, blue, orange, all kinds. Then I got grounded for microwaving dirt.

Q: What's your idea of a good date?

A: Hm, good question. I like to switch things up, but I'd rather be doing like, an activity. I get kinda restless with sitdown stuff like dinner or going to the movies. Would rather curl up at home if we're gonna watch something. But yeah, like, going to the club, dancing, just doing things in each other's company, and if we can go home and cuddle or uh, more, afterward, then even better. I mean that's not essential, touch is just a thing for me.

Q: What do you think of the new members?

A: Teddie needs to lighten up. I know his power is a shitty hand, but the grouchy act gets kinda old when you're trying to work as a team. Kay's fun, though if she sticks with this career she's either gonna wise up or she's gonna get burned hard. Still, it's nice having someone around who gets gender stuff. I like Wil but I don't think he's cut out for this line of work. Just a feeling. Guilty conscious, you know?

[MC] is interesting. 'lil bit of a wildcard. Definitely holding a lot back, but who isn't? There are deep wounds there, and I mean deep. I dunno. People with nothing to lose are dangerous, and I doubt [MC] has much.

Q: What kind of movies / TV shows do you like?

A: I'm an unrepentant lover of trash. Give me shitty reality TV and direct to DVD movies. Musicals, too. Just, uh, hope you don't mind hearing all the songs over and over the next few days cause I'll be singing them nonstop.

Q: Did you ever think of being an actor?

A: Nah, not for me. Only two things I ever wanted to be. Still working on those.

For Wil:

Q: Wil, what's your idea of a good date?

A: A good date's one where everyone enjoyed themselves. The actual activity could be almost anything. I love taking people to concerts, though. Not big ones, I'm talking the kind that you get at a bar or maybe a smallish performance centre. There's just something special about it.

Q: What do you think of the group?

A: I don't like that Dion kept things quiet until we'd already committed ourselves. I'm all for giving the government a big fuck you, but Dion held it back on purpose. Makes it harder to trust him. The group as a whole is alright, I guess. Get along okay with everyone. Little surreal to have coworkers and friends as a villain. Hanging out with buddies in downtime isn't something I ever pictured villains doing, you know?

[MC] worries me a bit. There's this... haunted air, and that doesn't happen out of nowhere. I kind of hope there's something I can do to help.

Q: What music do you listen to?

A: K-pop and country.

*cracks up*

Okay, that was a lie. Yeah, I'm absolutely predictable. I like punk and metal, bit of alt rock. I have a pipe organ album, too.

...what?

Q: How did you meet Teddie and Kay?

A: We were all younger. Their powers were both already a thing, mine weren't. They used to hang out a lot in this one neighourhood next to the Parks which is basically the Parks minus one percent, and I happened to work at a coffee place there. They came in now and then, got the impression they couldn't really afford it very often. Exchanged a few words here and there, hadn't really met them until they staggered in one day all bloody and bruised. I guess I was the nearest person they vaguely thought they could trust?

Anyway that's how I wound up getting introductions while fixing Teddie's broken nose.

[apollos-olives]

Hi sorry Israeli Canadian anon from earlier. White gays are saying that Palestinians are homophobic??

(Admittedly, i am a white gay. I say that in the sense of "didn't realize ppl were doing this" and not in a distancing way to exempt myself from the shitty things us white gays do. I'm not perfect.)

Okay, putting aside how bullshit it is to label an entire ethnic group as being homophobic - do ppl think that Israel *isn't* homophobic?? Or transphobic for that matter? I actually happen to be trans and when I was changing my name and gender marker on my legal documents, I learned that I can't change my Israeli birth certificate bc to do so requires bottom surgery. Which I personally don't want or plan to get. To put that into perspective, canada (with all its bullshit facade of being such an ~accepting~ place) doesn't require that. Requiring bottom surgery to change gender marker is so fucking antiquated and transphobic.

Also, to be honest, even though I was born in Israel, I'm not super educated on all of the history. Part of that being because for so long I saw the discussion surrounding it being portrayed as oh so complicated. And then I realized that it really isn't. At its very core what it boils down to is: do you support genocide? If your answer is yes, then you support Israel. If your answer is no, then you support Palestine.

(Very much want to learn more about Palestinian history and Israeli occupation/apartheid. Do you have recommendations for articles/documentaries/etc on it?)

hi anon. and yeah. white gays, especially libs, constantly use the belief that all palestinians are homophobic (which also leads to islamophobic sentiments) and that people should not support palestine because of that. unfortunately that is a very overly used belief in arguments, especially in north america. the belief that palestine is homophobic and that israel is very open and supportive is due to pinkwashing, which can be explained very thoroughly on the website decolonizepalestine. this website also has TONS of information all about palestine, the occupation, and the various forms of questions people often ask, while also debunking a lot of myths and falsehoods that are produced from israeli propaganda. very good site to scroll through, and i'm sure many of your questions will be answered just by taking a read through it.

i'm not going to waste time and repeat what thousands of others have already said about pinkwashing, but i do want to mention that pinkwashing does play a huge role in the dehumanization of palestinians and also plays a role in how western propaganda continues to split oppressed minorities constantly, making them against each other rather than uplifting each other.

the belief that all palestinians are homophobic is. honestly. well. it's islamophobic. i'm queer, trans, muslim, and palestinian. i exist. queer palestinians exist everywhere. western and zionist propaganda makes people think that all palestinians are muslim, and therefore against queer people. this is simply not true, since palestinians are very VERY diverse. palestinians are christian, jewish, muslim, atheist, and whatever else as well. it's not a religious thing, it's an ethnic and racial thing. palestine simply has not had the time to unlearn homophobia or had the time to try to advocate for queer and women's rights because we are too busy trying not to die. we don't have time to fight for queer liberation because we're too busy fighting for our HUMAN liberation. we are trying to exist first, then we can worry about the discrimination against queers.

israel also claims to be a safe space for queers, but it is literally the opposite. it's just as discriminatory as other countries, and hurts queer jews, as well as blackmails queer palestinians into submission. like you said, israel does have transphobic regulations, like the whole "need bottom surgery in order to legally get a sex change" and other things like that.

i've been recommending this masterlist of palestinian resources for everyone, but please look through this if you want to learn more about the occupation in palestine. the website i mentioned earlier is very helpful as well.

inshallah we will see a free palestine in our lifetimes.