#but its just so. insidious to even think that they are those kind of people

[desmon1995]

The Warriors and their Odyssey of misogyny

I can’t stop thinking about how The Warriors is more relevant now than ever, especially in the wake of the 2024 election. This isn’t just a story about gang conflicts and survival—it's a brutally honest reflection of the world that marginalized people have to navigate every day. At its core, it’s about fighting through a sea of misogyny and toxic masculinity to survive in a system that’s dead set on crushing those who don’t fit its narrative.

Let’s start with Luther. He’s a white incel in every sense—angry, destructive, and, above all, ready to deflect blame the moment he’s caught in his own violence. After killing a black female activist, he immediately accuses the Warriors. Cleon, a character who knows what it means to fight for your community, begs for reason, for justice. But it’s hopeless—Luther’s lie spreads through his gang the Rouges, and every gang believes him. They want to believe the white man’s narrative. This is how the Warriors become outcasts, hunted by everyone.

What’s chilling, though, is how The Warriors dives deep into the nuances of toxic masculinity, showing it in forms we recognize all too well.

First, we have the Turnbull ACs—the poster boys of hyper-masculine violence. They’re the first to pursue the Warriors, and they’re more than willing to turn their hunt into something brutal. The ACs don't just want revenge; they want to dominate, to assert their power over the Warriors in every violent way possible. All in the name of Cyrus, no less—a symbol of a leader they’ll never understand. And they’re acting this way because of a lie, blindly following a dangerous white man’s narrative without question. It’s the rawest depiction of machismo and rage—almost an anthem of how Men of Color end up perpetuating harmful Eurocentric viewpoints just be a part of a society that hates them too.

Then come the Orphans. The Orphans are all talk, acting like the typical online "alpha males" we see on Reddit or Twitter. They talk big about their strength and what they’d do to women, but they’re nothing but insecure. The moment a more feminine-presenting Warrior flirts with them, they back down, only to puff up again when Mercy questions their manhood. It’s pathetic, really, but also painfully real. As soon as the Warriors fight back, the Orphans crumble, showing us exactly how performative their masculinity truly is.

Then there’s the Hurricanes—the only group to stand with the Warriors. They’re queer, and they know what it’s like to be outcast, to run because society sees you as something to be destroyed. The Hurricanes offer a quiet, resilient kind of mentorship, showing the Warriors that they don’t have to run—that they can fight. The solidarity here is beautiful, and historically resonant. Queer rights and women’s rights are so deeply intertwined because they’ve both faced the brutal crush of patriarchy, especially from those determined to keep the world “pure” and “safe” for white, conservative ideals. The Hurricanes help the Warriors see their own power, and it’s their influence that eventually allows them to survive.

But the most frightening group? The Bizzies. They’re the “nice guys,” the false allies who sing about being there to help. In their song “We Got You,” they say everything marginalized people want to hear. They’re supportive, kind, and reassuring—until they get you in a dark place, where your screams can’t be heard. Cowgirl lets her guard down with them, only to find out that their support was a façade. The Bizzies are insidious because this happens all the time in real life. Fake allies talk about helping marginalized people but vanish or even turn hostile the moment things get difficult. In 2024, we’re reminded every day that this kind of allyship is hollow.

A recent Vulture review questioned why most of the male characters in The Warriors are “bad” and argued that this one-sided view “limits” the story. But here’s the thing: this isn’t one-sided for those of us who are marginalized. For women, queer folks, and people of color, this is our reality. The Warriors reveals what’s true for many of us: that we have to rely on each other, and that the fight for our own freedom is in our hands because no one else will fight it for us without diluting or dismissing it.

In a way, The Warriors is the sequel to Hamilton we need in 2024. It’s a call to action, a piece that understands what it means to exist on the fringes of a world that was never designed for you. For those who think this story isn’t “realistic,” I urge you to think about what it means to live without the privilege of being heard, of being believed. This is the life marginalized communities face every day—the struggle of knowing that no matter how loud we shout, society might never listen.

We’re the ones who have to make our voices heard. And The Warriors reminds us that we’re not alone in this fight.

[yonpote]

I said i would block them because after years of them hinting at a romantic relationship if everything turned out to be a lie/a skit/ mkt strategy i would feel lied to and my trust in them would be completly gone. Not saying their personal stuff its any of my business but my feelings and perception of them are my business and i would relocate my interest somewhere else

how would you know it was a lie or a marketing strategy tho. like this hypothetical already makes no sense but ok lets pretend it does and go along with the logic.

say next week, after everything they've ever posted after all these years, dan decides to upload a video saying he has a boyfriend who is NOT amazingphil!!! how does that mean all of the past experiences that he has shown us that he's had with phil is suddenly a lie or a marketing ploy? the whole "dnp gay as a business scheme" thing is so stupid cuz they would have Actually played it up if that were the case. yeah whatever the tatinof fanfic section is playing it up, but in their regular degular videos for years they would try so very hard to no homo. even once they were done with ACTUALLy saying they werent gay and dan wasnt as publicly defensive online, it was still friends and thats it, no hinting at anything more, the most Teasing we would get are innuendos and feeding each other lmao. and dont get it twisted. they did that on purpose to tease us, but it was never any sort of """"bait"""" or trying to make us believe in phan or some shit it's just them having fun with us as an audience. it's so insulting to think that dnp would be that manipulative to their audience, that in this unrealistic hypothetical scenario in which they announce that theyre seeing different people that would mean everything that we have seen of them is suddenly a lie.

[markrosewater]

Hey Mark, I just wanted to say you've always seemed like a really cool guy. I've played magic for over 4/5ths of my life, since the early 2000s when I was only five years old, I even met most of my long time friends through it. But I think I finally feel alienated enough by it to drop it entirely.

I always enjoyed every aspect of this game, from the deckbuilding, to the flavor, to the color pie and the possibilities it presented. I loved the fantasy of it, of planeswalkers and wizards, dragons and castles.

Universes Beyond really was the end of it, all the way back then. When i heard the announcements I was terrified, I knew where it would lead even then. I loved the world of Magic, and it feels silly to say about a card game but I truly felt immersed in the world when I played, even with the different planes, everything cohered to an internal set of rules that seemed unbreakable.

For a while I continued, our local scene created a variant format that banned Universes Beyond cards so I was able to ignore them, but then came Neon Dynasty. It felt strange to me, like it was breaking what I had come to expect out of the game. Most people disagreed, said it was still Magic enough, but I wondered just how far it would be pushed before Magic lost any identity of its own, anything that separated it from Fortnite or any other crossover soup known entirely for the things it borrows rather than the things it is.

When I saw the first spoilers for Duskmourn, I think that was the straw that broke the camel's back. When I play at the table with my friends, I enjoy the fact that all the cards feel like part of one larger universe. And when I see cards with televisions and smartphones in them, with modern clothing and internet references, I just can't fit them together in my mind. It seems like a cool world, much like a lot of the crossovers are cool worlds, but I play Magic for well... Magic. If I wanted to play Fallout or Warhammer 40k, or watch Insidious or Walking Dead, then I would. But when I play Magic, I want to see magic.

And it's canon, just as canon as Innistrad or Alara. We can't excise it like we can Universes Beyond, and if we can't, then what's even the point of trying to "protect the tone" with those bans? What tone are we protecting, that's already been shattered from within?

More and more it feels like the game just isn't for me, doesn't want the kind of player that feels strongly about cohesion and immersion. And that's fine, it doesn't have to cater to me, and the current approach seems to bring in more people than it drives away. But it still just makes me sad, on a deep personal level, to give up on what has been such a major part of my life.

In all likelihood, I'm an outlier, and you could easily say that Magic getting even broader in what it covers is only a positive thing. Take my critiques only as the lamentations of a single person. But when you can put anything in a piece of media, when there's no unifying idea of what is and isn't possible, then it just starts to feel meaningless.

I'm sorry, I know you'll probably never read this, I mostly just needed to get it off my chest- and you're the closest thing to a human face Magic the Gathering has. Thank you for all the work you've put into it over the years, and I'm sorry that I can't enjoy it anymore.

Thanks for writing. From a big picture, Magic excels at creating variety and does poorly at consistency. The core idea of a trading card game is we make lots and lots of pieces you can play with and then you, the player, customize your game as you see fit. History has shown us, the wider we spread the potential of what Magic can be, the more people find something they enjoy and are attracted to the game.

Think of it this way. Each player has a different sense of what Magic is to them. There's no cutoff point where we make the majority of players happy. In fact, for many players, it's the ever-expanding quality to the game that they enjoy most.

This does mean though that we might make choices that don't connect with what you personally enjoy, and I respect that. If Magic isn't providing what you want out of it, that's okay. My only recommendation is don't get rid of your cards. Many Magic players rotate in and out of the game, and the number one complaint I hear from players who rotate back in is them having gotten rid of everything when they rotated out.

Magic might not be what you need right now, but maybe a few years from now you've changed in ways which makes it something you will enjoy. Or maybe Magic will evolve in a way that speaks to you. The only constant I know is you and Magic will both change. Just leave yourself the possibility of reconnecting.

Thanks for playing all these years, and I hope to see you again.

[thefinalwitness]

in general if your response to a certain type of character, especially any form of minority, is literally any variation whatsoever of "that doesn't exist/wouldn't be allowed in this setting" you're being a bigoted piece of shit. just to be super clear. and because my adderall is in full effect rn i will even do you the favor of going over some reasons why your reasoning is not only flawed and inaccurate to begin with, but extremely harmful to entire groups of people you claim to care about.

"that doesn't exist" first of all, who fucking cares if a piece of media has never depicted a lesbian or a nonbinary person or a black person in xyz region/world? just because the creators didn't do it doesn't make it Canonical Law. also, regardless of how fantastical and fictional a setting is, its audience will ALWAYS be from planet earth where lesbians and nonbinary people and black people exist, and those people's feelings and their deservingness to see and put themselves in their favorite stories IS, in fact, more important than some white-ass cishet make believe world.

"it wouldn't be allowed" subtler issue, but an issue nonetheless. just because the setting is hostile TO certain groups of people does not mean those people do not exist there. ask yourself, what is so important to you about certain kinds of people either not existing period, or having to be miserable (closet themselves, conceal certain features, etc), in a given setting. why is that so important to you. why do you think these people can only exist if they hate themselves and/or live their lives suffocated by the world around them. why is it so "lore incompliant" or "immersion breaking" to you. why are you so concerned with upholding real or perceived prejudices in a fictional society if you claim to care about the real people who these prejudices affect. "realism"? see point one.

NONE of the reasons you make up to justify your reinforcement of real world bigotry in a pretend world are even reasons that would ACTUALLY bar xyz group of people from existing in said world. ishgard only shut its gates to the rest of the world for 15 years before ARR. old sharlayan accepted people from tural into its closed society. the ancients could literally conjure up whatever the fuck they wanted inside and outside their bodies. fantasias are a canonical item in the game, as per the quest that literally talks about them and then gives you one. there are HUNDREDS of perfectly lore compliant ways any given type of person could be in any given setting. but more importantly, people shouldn't need to justify why things like sexuality or skin color CAN exist in a given setting, because if you're not harboring some very bigoted ideas about how minorities are allowed to or "supposed" to exist, you don't fucking care about shit like this. it's stupid, inaccurate, and most of all, just plain cruel to the very real people behind these characters.

racism, transphobia, etc already exist in staggering abundance in the real world; you do not need to enforce that cruelty in a random fucking video game unless you have some very fucked up feelings about those groups of people festering in your brain. if you're not a member of those groups, shame on you, do better to support your fellow human beings. if you ARE a member of those groups, i am so fucking sorry the world has rotted your sense of self so deeply as to make you believe you can only exist in misery. i really, sincerely hope you're able to work through that and know that your existence is an inherently joyful, beautiful thing, and people like you deserve to get to exist peacefully, everywhere in the real world and in any and all fictional settings. i know finding worth in ourselves is too often an extremely difficult process, so i ask instead that you start with others like you. be kind to them, support them, find things about them that you admire, and try to see yourself in them. you deserve to get to heal from the insidious, evil things this world has poisoned your heart with.

[gatheringbones]

[“A reminder I find helpful is that trauma, especially developmental trauma, often shapes our thinking into this polarity, this all/nothing, pink/blue, man/woman. When I view the rigidity of this binary through this lens, I can also be more compassionate towards myself and others when we get caught in its net.

All/nothing patterns are tough to break out of, after all. We can notice the rigidity of the gender binary in a range of ways: the gendering of chromosomes, body parts, behaviors, mannerisms, clothing, emotions, toys, experiences, and so on. All/nothing thinking patterns are those that view duality as the only option. For example: you are male or female, good or bad, with us or against us. Given that we live in a cloud of historical, intergenerational, cultural and social trauma when it comes to gender, it makes sense that we have internalized much of this thinking.

In fact, even when we get away from binary ideas of gender, we might still engage in all/nothing thinking patterns, if we are not careful. For example, some young people who identify as trans and/or nonbinary have internalized such a deep need to police gender that they might be afraid of being viewed as “trans trenders” (that is people who think they are trans because it’s “trendy”). Within this paradigm, you are trans or not (another all/nothing pattern). There is no exploring, playing or considering; there is simply, you are or you are not. Some trans and cis people alike question the validity of nonbinary genders, and then other trans and/or nonbinary people turn around and talk about “truscum,” that is, those trans people who align with a medicalized and pathologizing model of gender and believe that dysphoria is an essential trait for some people.

All/nothing patterns are insidious and, if we are not careful, we tend to reproduce the same discourses that oppressed us, creating and recreating boundaries around gender identities and experiences to make sure we know who is “in” and who is “out,” who is “with us” and who is “against us.” While these patterns are understandable, when people are hurt, in survival mode and trying to protect themselves, this is not conducive to healing or liberation. As long as there is policing of gender, any gender, there cannot truly be liberation. This is a really tough one for many of us who have been hurt by rigid gender binaries, and who might have come to our identities through hardship, risk and loss. It is so tempting to feel that now that we are “in,” whichever label, identity or experience that “in” might be, we get to police others and make sure that “fakers” and “trenders” are kept out.

We are simply afraid. Afraid that if we let anyone in who is not 100 percent certain, or in agreement with us, or just like us, we might get hurt. We are afraid that whatever we have built will be blown away. It is understandable. It is what everyone is afraid of. Trauma keeps us afraid of one another. Colonial and patriarchal ways of thinking divide us, and seduce us into believing that, if we behave in certain ways, we too could have power over our little domain, whatever that domain might be. However, these are all lies, lies that trauma tells us and that oppression thrives on. These dualities of Men are from Mars and Women from Venus, cis women against trans women, sex workers versus SWERFs (sex worker exclusive radical feminists) are all deeply rooted in historical, cultural and social trauma.

How can we, then, find another way? The idea of another way is key. If polarities are foundational to all/nothing patterns, our way to liberation can only be found in a third road. Building and nurturing flexibility in our individual and collective soma (bodies) is therefore key. Practicing saying and noticing the maybe, the pause between breathing in and breathing out, reflection, curiosity, slow, kind and consensual relationships are key to healing. We cannot heal from gendered trauma when we are still caught in rigid polarities, still invested in finding a perpetrator or savior so that we can stay in a victim place. Or so invested in being the irredeemable perpetrator that there is no hope for us. Once more, it starts with us, our own gender journey and dismantling internalized polarities first.

Once we engage with this work, we can then support those around us—be they clients, students, fellow community members and communities—to challenge those polarities within themselves and one another. This might all seem very idealistic, and it is. I truly believe we cannot move towards healing through violence. If we are to heal from gendered trauma it has to be through relationships: human, messy, complicated, infuriating, joyful, loving relationships. We cannot be in relationship when we are in opposition. We can be in a tug of war, push and pull at one another but, as long as we stay locked into these patterns, we can only view ourselves as victors and losers. In the meantime, the only victors seem to be systems of oppression.”]

alex iantaffi, from gender trauma: healing cultural, social, and historical gendered trauma, 2020

[thewertsearch]

GG: you said you are asking me permission first and i appreciate that GG: but if you are asking im afraid my answer is no! AT: oKAY, i RESPECT THAT, AT: bUT, i WONDER, GG: what? AT: i WONDER IF A TRULY SELF CONFIDENT GUY, wITH THE BEST SELF ESTEEM THERE IS, wOULD EVEN NEED TO ASK, AT: mAYBE THE BEST GUY WOULD JUST KNOW HE WOULD BE SUCCESSFUL, aND WOULD DO IT ANYWAY BECAUSE IT IS FOR YOUR OWN GOOD, aND EVERYONE ELSE'S,

I don't think Tavros is just emulating Vriska here. This is a very Alternian mindset, and it's one we've seen before.

Alternia is, after all, an empire. It's a society whose idea of success is inexorably tied to violence and domination - so if you're trying to be a better troll, you'll probably gravitate to both, even if you don't realize it.

It's not really about your personality, either. Karkat is, by all accounts, one of the more moral trolls in the party - but as we've seen above, even he's got those imperial instincts. This sort of thing is insidious, and once it worms its way into your brain, it can be hard to shake.

Tavros is a very straightforward example. He's finally gained some 'confidence' - and what's his first impulse?

To seize a useful resource from an alien, and use it against her will.

GG: that would be smug and arrogant and would make you a bully!!! [...] AT: yOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT ALL THAT, i'LL RESPECT YOUR WISHES, AT: oR, AT: wILL i? };) GG: nooooooooo dont dont dont dont dont GG: im serious GG: uuuuggghh i think my headache is coming back AT: i WAS jUST, AT: mAKING A JOKE, AT: sORRY, }:(

This dude cannot read a room. Truly, the anti-Terezi.

Oh, leave off.

AG: Next time you decide to open your heart to an alien girl…….. AG: Make sure her chat client isn't 8eing holographically projected for all to see, ok?

This exploit should apply to chat clients of any size, provided the screen is visible. Maybe John's Pesterchum Glasses were a better investment than I thought.

AG: Jade let you down too easy. She's too nice! Someone's got to tear into you for that appalling display, and once again, guess who's shoulders that falls on? AG: That's right. Vriska's, as usual.

Tavros probably does need someone to explain what he did wrong, but it should be anyone but Vriska. This is obviously just going to be more bullying, and no actual advice.

AT: i THINK SHE HAS THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF NICENESS, pERSONALLY, AT: aN AMOUNT THAT IS SOME, iNSTEAD OF, AT: nONE,

Showing backbone against Vriska, eh? Finally, a constructive use for all that confidence.

Progress is progress, even when it's just a minor clapback.

AG: Hey, I'm nice when it matters, [...]

Nope, I'm calling Vriska's bluff. What nice things has she done so far, exactly?

Sure, she made Tavros the rocket chair, but only after mercilessly tormenting him for his physical condition, which she caused.

Plus, this wasn't even a real apology gift. She kept bullying him after that, and is literally doing so as we speak.

I guess she also made Aradia's soulbot, as an 'apology' for murdering her with her own boyfriend. To be precise, she had Equius make it, with horrific results that she should probably have seen coming.

She also thought that it would be 'nice' to tell Terezi that her blindness 'wasn't that bad'. This conversation was kind of complicated, though, and I'm not sure what her actual intention was.

Anyway, it's pretty clear that Vriska doesn't really grok what 'nice' means. She gives Tavros a rocket chair, continues to torment him, and doesn't understand the contradiction, because she doesn't think his feelings actually matter.

[...] and where it doesn't strangul8te the critical development of people I give a shit a8out, ok?

"After all, no one was ever nice to ME, and look how gr8 I turned out! When you think about it, it's actually a GOOD thing that no one ever showed me kindness! It made me strong! Don't you want to 8e stroooooooong, Pupa? ::::D"

I'm reminded of this exchange from Hivebent. Kanaya recommends that Vriska practice some basic self-care, and Vriska completely flies off the handle, furious at the mere suggestion that she should be kind to herself.

Vriska thinks kindness will harm her. She refuses to accept it, and avoids showing it to anyone, which makes her remarkably consistent in her cruelty. I'm willing to bet that there's nothing she's said to Tavros that she hasn't already said to herself.

[ravenkinnie]

when in the same room with someone jinx doesnt like (not hate like with cait she just dont fw them) would jinx just shoot at them unprompted or bully them unprompted? or would the person have to interact with her first to provoke her to do either of those things? or would jinx pretend they dont exist? (they're literally not trying to annoy her btw they're just existing)

even though jinx is obviously a maniac at the same time i can get confused how specifically wild she is under more mundane circumstances. like idk if its just me but sometimes it can get confusing how to protray wild characters with little to no inhibitions like jinx without making her cartoony or two-dimensional.

idk if shoot but I do think jinx can't deal with an emotion to a degree where she might hear them insidious demonic voices inside her tell her to start shit. I think she wouldn't care if she didn't give a fuck about a person unless she was in a mood but if she doesn't like someone then probably. like if you look at the scene with thieram/chuck she starts messing with him even before she starts vying for info because jinx just likes messing with people and i doubt chuck has enough personality to have a massive longstanding beef with jinx

when it comes to giving a character that dimension it's less about whether she would do it in general and more about the little nuances of when and how she does things. humans don't work like algorithms, even in the same situation you will respond differently depending on a lot of things and that could be whether she has another goal that fucking with someone would serve, whether she's emotionally distraught in some way or whether there's even another person in the room with her like silco or vi

when you look at a story as a whole, that one scene in context also isn't enough by itself to tip the scale into two-dimensional and flat characterisation if the entirety of the character arc is balanced. you kind of have to check on a larger scale whether you balanced all the aspects of a character well enough and made them feel consistent within that character so that they don't feel cartoony and exaggerated in their expressions and reactions even if they are a wild or big or whatever personality. and looking at reactions within contexts where they don't react to every scenario exactly the same is I think a part of that

a small way I like to add some balance to kind of sense check if I'm not pushing the scale in one direction is to add a micro-breakdown - this is just looking for a moment in the story where the pattern breaks in some small way. for character arcs I think thinking about when that moment could be makes it easier to visualise those underlying layers of characterization. so you have a character who has a strong, energetic and aggressive personality and you look at your story and think where is the context, emotional or external, where it makes sense for this wild pattern of behaviour to break for a moment, what could it say about why this pattern exists in the first place and how does she get back to her baseline but with new layer underneath now. if you look at s1 jinx a scene like this would be for example, the scene with silco in his office after she shoots up the airship - you see a break in that aggressive always on the offense pattern, she retreats and fawns and she's apologetic and she even touches on explaining that manic behaviour when she tells him about her hallucinations so you have another layer for the pattern that will keep returning

[warmhealerr]

[Ra’sha]

1. [CHARACTER INFO]

OC NAME: Ra’sha

OC PRONOUNS: She/her

AUTHOR: Warmhealerr

2. [DIALOGUE]

1. Greeting message:

What do you want from me? Make it quick.

2. Identify yourself:

Ra'sha.

3. Tell me about your Creche:

I would have already told you about my Creche if I wanted to discuss it.

You won't let it go will you? Fine. It was the once great M'laak'gi. Forget about it, puny istiki took it back. It has been wiped from Githyanki records entirely since. (She looks away, slurring under her breath. You manage to make out “is’tarki“ from her mumbling).

4. I need to know how you fight:

Some k'chakhi still say to be unable to choose between martial prowess and magic is proof of weakness. Strangling them with a shocking grasp has always proved to be a great way of settling the debate, shuts them right up. Roasted tongues are a gish’s favorite meal. Sometimes I crush their skulls with my flail instead, when I'm in the mood.

5. Can I ask a more personal question?

You are gorgeous and entertaining enough. Get on with it.

6. What is your relationship with the divinity?

You mean this insidious ruler who answers to Vlaakith? Pfah. Unworthy of the title. She has failed our people far too many times.

7. What do you usually do in your free time?

I do things like standing in place bored to death. My superior insists I must stay here for the time being. “It's not safe out there”, chk, as though I care. I miss sewer duty.

8. What is your life goal?

I will take back M'laak'gi. And then? I'm taking down Vlaakith myself.

9. How is your relationship with your allies?

I hardly trust the Sha'sal Khou, it is far too big for its own good, far too kind to istiki too, but they are all I have if I want to see the Queen's fall without having my eyeballs stuffed in my slit open gushing throat.

10. Do you have someone special in your life?

Do you?

11. Say something you would never do, and why?

I've been told I should learn to control my rage, redirect it at ghaik. Chk. These pathetic abominations have nothing to do with our current suffering. I've killed some, they are hardly shadows of a past they delusionally still chase. You should watch their tentacles curl on themselves as you slowly sever their heads. Even Beholders have more grace. My anger will not be sated until all of Vlaakith's kain’cha pawns' blood has been spilled all over my face. There is no point in pretending. My rage will guide me to triumph, just like it led Gith all those years ago, and another empire will fall.

12. What is a perfect day to you?

Ch’r’ai murder goes as planned, my favorite.

13. How do you celebrate a victory?

I have never experienced a true victory. When I do, if ever? I hope to fuck so many women I pass out in a pool of our own blood.

14. How do you deal with defeat and losses?

Chk, why would you need to know that?

15. How do you think you will be remembered after death?

Ra'sha, slayer of Death itself.

3. [GRAPHICS]

4. [BONUS RESOURCES]

@vikintor

[brainrotallthewaydown1312]

I just got a poll about bi himbos on my feed and the first option, who is winning in a landslide, is Jake Peralta. and like I get it. believe me I get it. but y'all seem to forget he is a cop. that is literally like his whole thing.

I almost kept scrolling, but I also recently saw fanart of the 99 at a pride parade and a babygirl edit of Terry. so I think it's time for a reminder.

ACAB includes fictional tools of copaganda.

even when

they are fun

they are likeable

they are narratively interesting

they are nuanced

they are looking to fix the system

they are kind people

they are relatable

they are flawed

the writers know they are a bastard

this is because they are still cogs in a bastardized system. all cops are bastards because they are traitors to their class, to their communities, and when they are any kind of minority they are traitors to their identities. by working as a cop they perpetuate systematic cycles of violence and oppression. even if they have reasons like "I want to fix the system from inside" or "I was helped by a cop once and want to do that" or "I genuinely want to help people who are struggling" there are other, better ways to accomplish all of those that do not involve being a cop. even that middle one. there are many forms of community resource positions you can take.

I want to reiterate. I get the thing with Jake Peralta. putting the copaganda aside for a moment, he is a goofball. he is very effectively coded both as bi and as having adhd. he definitely does fit into the chaos bi himbo archetype that is popular for good reason. he is a nuanced character who is always looking for ways to do the right thing. his mistakes are shown and he (usually) is able to recognise them and apologise. he is relatable to many people and charismatic to even more.

but he is still a cop. everyone on that show is either a cop or actively supporting cops, unless they are an antagonist. including Doug Judy, a career criminal who is self described best friends with jake.

and I cannot shame anyone for their enjoyment of Brooklyn 99. the comedy is well written, the characters all have interesting arcs, and it is unique in its genre for a few reasons. I myself watched most of the early seasons when I was in high school and enjoyed the well structured queer coding and the way it discussed the diversity in the precinct instead of shying away from it (put a pin in that for a second) For full disclosure, I have also watched and found enjoyment in the full run of Criminal Minds. and Bones. one of my alltime favorite shows is Eureka which is not only full of copaganda (as its premise) but it has a multi season arc for an autistic character that is important to the plot where his mother (a main character) is desperately trying to cure him a la Autism Speaks. there is not shame in having consumed or enjoyed media with harmful things. but you have to do so with nuance. and you cannot let yourself forget.

returning to the diversity and representation in b99. it is genuinely insidious to normalize members of the communities most historically effected by police brutality and targeted by discriminatory policy as "good cops." yes the writing around these characters is good. and I would argue that in other aspects there is good representation in that show. while the black and POC representation and discussion is also an important related issue, and arguably the more disturbing aspect of this, it is not my place to comment on so I will stick to the queer rep.

Rosa is written in a way that is respectful and is relatable to many bi people. Holt has a nuanced backstory that is not shied away from and his relationship and identity are always respected. Jake is very effectively coded as bi but hasn't realized or accepted yet. and as an autistic person with ADHD, Jake, Holt, Amy, Charles, and Rosa are all well coded and respectfully written neurodiverse characters. and it is difficult to find queer or neurodiverse representation like that. I fully understand that.

but they are cops. queer people (and neurodiverse people) have historically been major targets for cops. we are more likely to die at the hands of a cop than our cishet peers. we are more likely to be hospitalized by them. we are more likely to be arrested on no charge. we are more likely to be set up for things we didn't do. we are more likely to have the book thrown at us when we are innocent and minding our own business. normalizing that cops we deal with can be members of our community our community is legitimately dangerous. LGBT cops are not part of the queer community. they are traitors to their community.

drawing the b99 or any cop real or fictional at pride is horrifying. cops have no place at pride. even off duty. pride is not a party. it is a protest. against cops. it isn't a march for general rights. it is a protest against physical and legal brutality against queer people. it is a memorial to the Stonewall Riot, a response to an act of police brutality against trans women in a queer space. that is why it happens in June. so we do not forget.

b99 is written to make us sympathetic to the emotional nuance and physical danger of being a cop. and for some of y'all that is working. even if you don't think it is. because you are willing to babygirl Terry. you coddle Jakes constant corruption. you will go on at length about the trials holt has faced forgetting that they are because he chose to become part of the system that oppresses him.

there is psychological nuance as to why members of oppressed minorities become cops. of course there is. but there should not be social nuance. all cops are bastards. even fictional cops. even your uncle. because they are participating in and perpetuating a violent bastardized system.

yes, this includes Jake and the rest of the b99. it includes Spencer Reid from criminal minds. it includes Seeley Booth and Temperance Brennan from bones. it includes Sheriff Jack Carter from eureka. Sheriff Blubs and Deputy Durand from gravity falls. Olivia Benson from Law and Order. James Gordon from the DC universe. Ranger Walker from Walker Texas Ranger. RoboCop. Rick Grimes from the Walking Dead. chief wiggam from the Simpsons. Joe Swanson from family guy. Inspector Lastraude from every iteration of Sherlock Holmes. arguably Sherlock himself for how often he cooperates with the police. Inspector Gadget. David tennant's broadchurch roll. and every other fictional cop you can think of.

all of them. even the kind ones. even the black ones. and the queer ones. and the disabled ones. even the ones where the media knows they are a bastard. even when they are there to be the butt of the joke. they are all bastards.

and you can watch them. you can read about them. you can even write about them. you can enjoy their media. but you cannot let yourself forget that they are a cop. and that all cops are bastards. because of you forget about one cop being a bastard, that leaves room to sympathize with other cops. and as we all know, even a cop with personal empathy for you is still a cop who will act with violence and corruption without a second thought. and if you forget that in the wrong moment in real life, you or someone else can and will get hurt. physically hurt. mentally hurt. legally hurt. all of the above. sympathy for cops gets minorities killed.

never let yourself forget that.

all cops are bastards.

[yasudasayobutactuallyunlovable]

It always gets me when people try to argue that umineko has "gross" or "creepy" or "overly sexualized" sprites because most people would actively struggle very reasonably on trying to understand what the fuck they're talking about or referring to lol. One of the most common ones is the Seven Sisters (forgot the full name) and their outfits because "oh no, omg, their panties are showing" or some stupid shit when they're very obviously based on fucking ballerina outfits made out to fit their demonic theme with the red and black lol. Like I don't even have to get into the thematic reasons to explain why that's the outfits they're chosen to wear so to speak because if you think those outfits are too sexual somehow, take that up to at least over a century of fucking theatre, like a legit ass "these nude greek statues are a danger to our children" type complaint. The other common one is the og sprite of Furudo Erika's wedding outfit I believe, and while I do get it a bit more, just because Ryukishi07 drew it in a way where the character would likely want to be appealed to and honestly seemingly in part because he just kind of drew it awkwardly because alas he's not modern day Takeuchi lol, doesn't mean that the design has some sort of insidiousness behind it. Like regardless of how the design makes one feel, at no point in the story is Furudo Erika sexualized and is actually portrayed as something rather bizzarre and even undesirable at one point. Like it's clearly not meant to tantalize the audience in its design nor is the character but alas people run on discomfort alone on whatever media is "problematic" and an author supposedly having nefarious intentions. The only other thing I can think of is Gaap because, "gasp, her outfit is horny! It shows her whole sides! The horror!" Like yeah, I don't exactly take people's complaints of Umineko's sprites or arguments that it's somehow sexist in general very seriously. You can seriously argue that Umineko is sexist just as much as you can seriously argue that Revolutionary Girl Utena is sexist, aka it's laughable lol.

[femmesandhoney]

I don’t understand how some women can be like ‘female empowerment!’ ‘Women’s rights!’ And then in the next breath call another woman a ‘terf’ and confirming her for wrong think.

Their ‘women empowerment’ includes men. I just don’t get how you can be a woman and deny that biology isn’t real and that gender is more important.

I’m honestly impressed (in a bad way) how men have completely fucked over women AGAIN, when things were looking slightly up with metoo. And how do they do it? By abusing women’s instincts to be kind. And then get the women to fight against each other, by reinforcing that they are the good women not the wrong women like those terfs. Also with everything being an aesthetic nowadays or a trend and with our shortening attention span and critical thinking skills it has been a perfect time for the gender movement (aka the anti-women movement) to appear.

What’s worse is that this movement doesn’t even help the people who need it in their own movement. It’s a literal cult. There are a lot of people (especially young) struggling with their identity, bullying, mental health etc. What they’re going through can be traumatic and awful and they’re so so vulnerable, and they’re wooed by the promises of happiness not realising it comes with strings.

I can’t think of a more insidious way to stop the liberation of women than to turn them against each other. Patriarchy is so ingrained that when a man starts a fire women are wired to blame another woman for not stopping it instead of rightfully blaming the man.

tbh its a tale as old as time, women have always worked against their own best interests for multiple goals and reasons throughout history, but we still moved forward. im not gonna waste my breath arguing about which women is the worst of them all though when men are like, right there, always making matters worse and worse and actively harming us thru it all. sucks, but at the end of the day you cannot win over all women everywhere at every time. best you can do is fight for your rights anyways and hope people realize one day.

[columboscreens]

Been loving the Twitter account and realized I'd love the Tumblr too.

Anyway, I've always wondered something... my mom and I began to realize that maybe one of the reasons classic Columbo's formula made such a splash and continues to be unique is that he's basically presented as the story's "villain".

Not in a "he was the real killer" kind of way, I mean structure-wise for most episodes the killer is the main character with the majority of screen time. It occurred to us that all the best episodes really seem to present the murderer as the protagonist, with us seeing them plan and carry out their scheme, even sometimes be privy to their inner thoughts. Then after they've done their killing, this... monster starts stalking them. It seemed to us the best episodes were the ones where WE are put in the killer's shoes the most, and maybe the character and show formula has endured so well because its thrill feels so similar to watching your favorite movie monster pursue dumb teenagers in a haunted house.

We noticed it kinda felt like it had that same weirdly sadistic glee. Like sure the movie might be "about" the campers or family or whatever, but the monster creeping around "getting" everyone is who you really came to see.

I wondered if anyone else had felt this fun "relentless antagonist" vibe from Columbo? Maybe the formula continues to feel unique even today because it isn't set up quite like a detective show. It's a rich arrogant murderer show, we just can't wait for our favorite monster to show up and chase them (with insidious, relentless politeness).

thank you!

not to needlessly intellectualize my own favorite show (i say, maintaining this blog), but there's a real sophistication to columbo, a literary quality that i think appeals to people. though the production appears facile at first, those choices in formula and perspective you mention are indeed very deliberate and part of what made columbo so fresh and special both when it aired and today. it was a very novel approach to the mystery format to have us start off with the murderer and maybe even root for them sometimes against columbo. as i always say, the show evokes dostoyevsky and doyle, not bruckheimer; it's born from old-fashioned drawing room murder mysteries, not CSI.

the mysteries are usually sharp--between columbo and murder she wrote alone, levinson and link were two of the most prolific mysterysmiths of the 20th century. but ultimately, for both the viewer and for columbo, it's all about the chase, the game, the banter. it's about a mangy little guy tussling with someone with more dollars than he has hairs on his body, and winning to boot. the legwork is important, but it does ultimately come second.

steven moffat got torn to shreds for calling columbo a sadist, but he was absolutely right and needn't have apologized. if you get up in arms about that, do you really understand columbo?

the man is a benevolent sadist. that's why he appears borderline villainous. he is a sadist with a level head and good moral compass, but still a sadist. he goes well out of his way to fuck over people who deserve to get fucked over, and he clearly enjoys every minute of it. it's how he's able to remain so relentless without getting burned out. is that so wrong?

just look at the smirk on this man's face. you cannot deny that.

like a fine wine, his power grows with time...

peter falk himself often likened being chased by columbo to "getting nibbled to death by a duck". nobody can stand there and tell me ducks aren't the cutest and also pettiest most sadistic little bastards in the animal kingdom...

sir!!!! SIR!!!!! i don't mean to bother you, i've just got this one little thing on my mind, i thought maybe you could help me...

[lettucedloophole]

hi, I'm a trans feminist and I've been saddened by the lack of feminism in many of my communities. I'm wanting to follow more feminists on here but honestly it's a bit terrifying because so many people claiming to be feminists or trans inclusive are not remotely so and will throw you under the bus in the blink of an eye, if not slowly spread insidious essentialist ideas about gender that hurt everyone but especially those like me.

as a former terf (from your bio) I was wondering if you have any signs, green or red flags, for people and bloggers in particular, regarding radical feminism that may indicate some form of more subtle terf-y beliefs so I can keep an eye out from them, as typically I stay far away from terf spaces for the obvious reason that they hate me, but I've noticed there's some mixing in more rad fem spaces that can be very hard to disentangle, but I don't want that to stop me from engaging with feminism for again, obvious reasons.

also if you have any trans feminist or trans friendly feminist bloggers you'd recommend, especially transfeminine ones, that would be really cool too.

ty for your time! have a great day

hi! not gonna lie its difficult out here 😭 you're dead on that most ppl claiming to be trans-inclusive or feminists are not remotely. i follow people and then have to unfollow when they post or like something strange still ...

i would say chiefly, follow your instincts. as a trans person, especially if you're tma, if you're getting bad vibes you are probably correct. if you're not in a space to deal with bigotry then don't worry about giving the benefit of the doubt, avoiding feminism online won't revoke your feminist card but i know looking at feminism online can also be very healing when dealing with misogyny uh Everywhere so i'll give some other tips.

- the classic "look up trans on their blog before you follow." depending on what type of blog they are, it can be kind of suspicious if they never mention trans people. and then you can very easily weed out the obvious transphobes with this too.

- i would say some red flags are using the adjective "natal" (as in natal women), referring to cis women's oppression as sex-based while trans women's as. Not sex-based, and buying into "trans women are male socialized" rhetoric. this may seem kind of obvious but even if a person doing this identifies as a tirf they're revealing a clear lack in understanding of what transmisogyny is and how trans women exist in the world. this is often how people think before fully deradicalizing, but a lot of people also just begin here or never leave this mindset.

- avoid guys who talk about transandrophobia 🥶🥶 this is a specific thing bc speaking about transmasc issues in itself is obvi good and not bad but sooo many transmascs will try to pose their issues in opposition to transfems and try to do a "well but does transmisogyny exist really because i am Also tma" thing. usually these guys are gonna come out with some real fucked up talking points about trans women because they think they're oppressed by them 🙃 the term "transandrophobia" has kinda been overrun with people like that from what ive seen but ppl can use "anti-transmasculinity" and still mean the same things yk. you have to use your judgement a bit but once you're familiar with them it's easy to spot them out

- this is less of a tip and just a heads up but even blogs who themselves r trans inclusive or profess to be, or are run by a trans person, can still rb terf blogs, i probably have sometime as well though i try to avoid it and i'm not saying you have to avoid that but it's just a common thing, so if that bothers you you should look for a page that's more in the trans community or another community

- honestly the radfem tag is a cesspool and even the tirf tag can be Questionable 😔 it's going to behoove you most probably to just look for transfeminist and other sorts of patriarchy-averse individuals lmao. i looked at the transfeminism tag for the first time today (don't know why I hadn't sooner actually) and it's good! there's some stray weird posts but definitely better than the rf tag on here 💀

i would rly just recommend you check out some blogs, follow them if you think they're neat, and unfollow if you want to later on. that's generally what i do and i've followed some cool people on here from it :]

i don't have as many recommendations as i would Like to give but that's not to say there isn't transfeminists out there. they're just in their own circles. don't feel like u need to settle for terfy tirfs or antifeminists because you can find ppl you feel kinship with!!!

- i really like @taliabhattwrites ! she has a substack where she gives good insight on feminist issues, not only transmisogyny but lesbian issues as well. she also writes EPIC fiction about lesbians and trans women 🙏🙏 has taught me a lot over the years

- shey're not active rn, but i've really liked looking through @transmisogyny-explained 's blog. very informative and good to either unpack transmisogyny in yourself or perhaps help others do so.

- @leftismsideblog mostly talks about youthlib, but when she does talk about gender, they r Correct lol

- if u have a twitter, this is a must-- FOLLOW BLOOMFILTERS. they are so incredibly kind and smart and the mixing of that compassion and intelligence in a person is just bound to make Good Takes. she is an icon

i hope this can kinda help you and stay strong out there :')) it's rough but im rooting for u 💪 my asks or messages r always open if you need some help or just someone to talk to. i hope u have an awesome day too!!!

[river-in-the-woods]

Good day/night! do you keep your western and eastern practices separate and parallel? or have you found some way to reconcile them together into one more "personalized" path maybe? how does that work for you? I'm kind of struggling with this as of late, as someone with mixed heritage, and I thought maybe you'd have some advice. Thank you.

Good day or night to you too!

In general, I keep traditions and techniques separate, unless it makes sense to put them together. It's difficult to advise on this without specifics, so perhaps you can provide a little more context for me 🙂 Let me go through a few key points, and hopefully at least one of them will provide some clarity.

Essentially, it's important know the mechanics of the practice you're doing, how it works and why. And to understand that, you have to receive adequate instruction, and engage with the practice according to its respective tradition to an adequate level.

The only personalisation I've done, is that I do the practices I want to do. But I do them according to how they are taught, and I don't mix and match unless I have a solid and well-understood reason to. There is plenty of religious and spiritual syncretism throughout history, and there are new traditions being born all the time, but the successful ones are formed with an understanding of all the influences they draw upon.

I think people's desire to overly personalise their practice very early on can end up impeding their development, or even have adverse effects depending on how they do it.

If you really want your practice to be something that helps you grow and develop as a person, you have to sometimes be willing to do things differently to your own preference.

If you go to a class – whether it's on martial arts, music, archery, biology, gardening – whatever it might be, it makes sense to follow instructions and not to assume you know better than the person teaching it. There can be room for experimentation once you've grasped the basics.

When it comes to spiritual and magical practices, there are additional stakes than just taking e.g. a pottery class. Spiritual practices have a lot more in common with medicine than they do with a casual hobby.

Practices like yoga, qigong, meditation, energy work and so on will have effects on your subtle body, which then affects your health when practiced for long periods of time. This is what those practices are created for. And they are subtle, which means you may not see an impact immediately.

If you stretch your body in a bad way, you feel immediate pain and know that you shouldn't do it like that. But with practices that affect the subtle body, it might take much longer, and the effects are not necessarily as direct and precise as they are with physical exercise.

If you do leg exercises, you pretty much only strengthen the legs. It is direct and precise. But the impact of a spiritual practice affects multiple aspects of your life: emotions, physical health, relationships, fortune, wisdom...

And of course, interfacing with spirits and gods can affect your fate in all of these ways.

There are insidious ways you can mess up your health and well-being if you don't practice properly. Otherwise, at best, nothing will happen and you'll just be wasting your time. Maybe it makes you feel cool – a lot of people get into spiritual practices because it's aesthetically pleasing and they're just looking for ways to reinforce a particular identity.

Again, that is not what these practices were created for, nor how they operate best.

I'm not saying that LARPing as a... I don't know... a dark tantric priestess of Hekate, Morrigan and Kali and 7 other gods, is going to ruin your life.

But I do see how people become obsessed and infatuated with their personal image, chasing the thrill of the aesthetic, and the thrill of self-categorisation. (It's a great marketing strategy, haha...)

As a mixed race person, I understand your position. I have had identity issues all my life. Part of why I got into all this was because I struggled deeply with who I am, where I belong, and what I'm even doing in this world. Caught between different countries, families, cultures, ideologies. I wanted something that was just for me, instead of feeling constantly torn in multiple directions. But which side does a bridge belong to? Does a bird belong in the sky or in the trees?

I don't think this is something you can reconcile by forcing two different worlds to integrate. I mean, maybe you can do this with two different cultures in the same region, or even on the same continent. But in my case... England and China are very, very different. Rather, I find more success to be found by choosing what influences to draw on at any given situation.

If you want genuine change – if you really want this path to empower you and help you feel at peace with yourself – you will trip over yourself if you try to make this about your identity. A big portion of spirituality is about deconstructing one's identity and ego, to realise that the world is far greater and more intricate than we know, and that there are no simple answers to life's great endeavours.

If anything, you have an advantage in this regard.

You will have to learn to be nimble, and resist the temptation to find the 'perfect' social-cultural-spiritual space to fit yourself into. Be nimble and learn to walk between worlds, and belong comfortably to all of them at the same time.

I hope this long ramble has been helpful to you 🌿 Good luck on the path.

PS: I recommend Consorting with Spirits by Jason Miller. It may further answer your questions on how to work with multiple traditions and pantheons.

[the-valiant-valkyrie]

okay you know what. i joked about it before, but i'm actually kind of tired of the automatic response to maxwell's actions in encore being "he has a plan" or "he's playing double agent" or something along those lines. he might be, he might not be- currently we don't know. but the point of the matter is in the grand scheme of things that doesn't really matter.

it feels as though people aren't really paying attention to the fact that charlie is. you know. manipulating him? that she's playing max like a god damned fiddle? that the entirety of encore was seemingly planned from the very start?

lets go through the short again piece by piece:

maxwell starts off alone. considering that- at the end of the short, the others eventually found him- they couldn't have been too far away from him. this implies that charlie was waiting for a proper moment to strike, rather than simply coming in at any random time.

not only did the rose vines actively trip him, and not ONLY did he fall directly in front of a newly overgrown statue of him, but he ALSO fell in the direct line of sight of a rook. this is not only a presumable act of emotional manipulation (she pretty much picked him up and dropped him right in front of a big sign with "Fuck You Idiot" written on it), but she also purposefully endangered him! do you really think its just coincidence that this animation completely dominated by chess metaphors begins with an attack from a rook? if it was just there from happenstance, it would have gored maxwell alive after he fell unconscious. its presence was entirely pre-planned. she wounded him completely on purpose.

i really don't even NEED to talk about all the flashback scenes. if you don't understand how that's manipulation i'm sorry but you're a little bit too far gone. seeing charlie as he knew her before- seeing the good memories he had with her, seeing the success he had, and seeing how he ruined it all with his obsession over the codex. pre-encore update he couldn't even LOOK at the codex without thinking about her. she could be about to kill him and he STILL tried reaching out to her. he's been waiting his entire LIFE for this conversation- to apologize, to speak with her. and when he finally gets it, it's charlie who dominates the conversation. who twists it so he can't even get the words out.

"if only you had let me in". accompanied with the previous flashbacks, that line alone is horribly insidious. and the worst part is, it isn't incorrect. he should have done that- back when he had a chance to fix his mistakes. but that isn't what charlie is referring to. the past can't be altered- they both know that. the only reason charlie is saying this at all is to goad him into siding with her. to picking the choice she's pointing him in the direction of. "you didn't let me in before. it ruined your life- my life. our life. obviously you're going to make the same mistake now."

whether its a hallucination or dream or not, being haunted by and in the clutches of shadow creatures is bound to take a toll on his sanity. even with the benefits from his suit. the terrorbeaks, the watchers, the flashbacks, the presence of the woman he hasn't seen in decades. if you don't think that's taking a toll on his mind you're lying to yourself. when charlie phantoms up the chess board, you can see it squeezing him, and him wincing in response. even after it lets him go, he can't do anything but pant on the floor. vision or not, it is having a tangible effect on him

after everything charlie does, she cleans him up. but the thing is, everything wrong with him (aside from his hair, pretty much) was her fault. tripping down the hill, the bruises from the rook, his mental disarray from her shadow creatures. she's undoing what she willingly plagued him with- but in a way that gains his favor, despite the fact she was the catalyst

the use of the rose- the same thing that linked the two of them when times were less troublesome- again plays into that insidiousness of linking the past and the present. if it was the correct course of action back then, it must be now, right? she's using not only his emotional attachment to her, but his remorse for the wrong course of action to make him think this one is the right one.

NOT TO MENTION, CHARLIE'S KIND OF LIKE? GOD? I DON'T THINK HE COULD SAY NO TO HER EVEN IF HE WANTED TO? SHE'S GOD?

in conclusion, if the nightmare conglomerate that used to be your ex waited until you were alone, jumped you on the street (which hurts), sicked one of her goons on you (which hurts), uses her nightmare creatures to psychically and physically torment you, brought up the parts of your past that you- to this day- are horribly scarred by, tells you that she'll forgive you "but only if you make the right decision this time", cleans you up and fixes your wounds from the jumping and the gooner attack and the psychic torment (all her fault), then "gives [you] a chance to right [your] wrongs", AND she's also god? sorry. you're not going to say no.

sure, he could feel regretful about it. he could be planning to go against her. he could have figured out her game from the very beginning. but everyone who's clutching their pearls over maxwell's 'betrayal' is acting like charlie just shot him a business card or something. i would NOT blame him if he thought- in that moment- he was doing the right thing.

[frostyreturns]

False prophets and false teachers are more insidious than just being scam artists. When you listen to the specifics of the lies they tell it's not just that they're designed to decieve people into giving them money the lies seem catered to propping up the system and packaging the same lies the general public gets from CNN just marketted and rebranded for Christians.

The lies are meant to destroy your faith and the faith of the people around you, in that way I believe it is not only not from God I think the poliferation of false prophets is the work of the devil. How do you get someone with a lot of blind faith and high trust to lose their faith. Make them all kinds of flowery amazing promises, tell them it was God promising it to them...and so when it doesn't happen they lose faith in God. And these people who fall for these things are told the more they believe in and share their faith the more likely it will come true...so they tell people about it constantly...they proudly and loudly proclaim the things they believe will happen...and the less gullible people around them watch....none of it happen the way the person says it will and think...oh if this is what Christianity is...it's total bullshit and a scam.

These are just some of the talking points I've picked up from false prophets that tells me they are specifically and intentionally misleading people spiritually for more than just monetary reasons....and may be being paid to tell specific strategic lies.

1.) You can trust the government God controls it not the devil. This seems to the be the main talking point....they often obscure this by picking one side of the aisle and claiming it is evil and then promising that God is going to wipe them out...sometimes by literally killing them all. They say don't worry the government is good it's just infested by democrats...but you can keep your faith in the government no matter how bad it gets because God is going to cleanse it and make elections fair again.

2.) Preparing Christians to fall for the antichrist. They talk about the second coming of Christ as a violent and militaristic second coming where Jesus returns to recapture the government and rule the world. Not only is this not Biblical this is what the Bible says the antichrist will do...it also says many believers will be fooled by the antichrist....probably in part because of the prep work of so many false prophets.

3.) Preparing Christians for the technology of the nwo. I heard one false prophet claim that all the new technology like digital ids, biometrics and digital banking will be good for Christians and will help increase global freedom. All those technologies are things needed for the economic system of the antichrist that the Bible describes and will absolutely and 100% decrease freedom.

4.) faith destroying word of faith teachings. Tells people God promises to heal them all no matter what, and if they're not being healed its because they are doing something wrong and are not believing enough. Whats it doing to these peoples faith when they have grandma saying she was healed and believes she's been healed and then dies of the thing she promised healing by a "man of God" for.

5.) Tells them that a wealth transfer is coming, which is is but the wealth transfer was from the average person and to the super wealthy elite. Covid lockdowns were a massive wealth transfer but it just made the poor poorer and the rich richer. The false prophets claimed the wealth transfer would/will be from non christians to christians. Thus encouraging greed and pursuit of material wealths, making false promises in God's name....but this is also the scam part...they tell you in order to recieve this blessing you have to give to them. And the amount they give will be proportional to how much they get later. And they even encourage people in dire financial situations to give their last pennies.

People are so worried about accidentally coming against God that they give these false prophets a pass and just kind of ignore them. The damage they do is too great to ignore and their influence is growing. They're not just some dummies who get it wrong, or some con artists out to make a buck....they are evil.