#censored because fetuses

[dancingastralwitch]

A Palestinian man is asked in an interview by a white woman if he condemns Hamas while his people are being slaughtered in the open, and HE is the one condemned when he yells that it's injustice to insulate that his people deserve to be murdered, because "Hamas chose this."

A black woman is attacked first in a fight and SHE is the bad guy when she strikes back, she is the one whose face is plastered all over social media to be condemned and shamed for "aggression."

Two sisters are appropriately reacting to their oppressors by ripping off posters promoting their propaganda, and THEY are shamed and attacked for their lack of politeness when their people are being killed for existing.

An American democrat watches her colleagues cheer on genocide and ethical cleansing, the murder of children and the rape of women and the slaughter of families, and SHE is the one censored for speaking out in defense of them, despite her grief of losing family members.

Zionists are not condemned for enjoying the thought of children being killed, for calling Palestinians "animals" or saying Gaza should be "turned into a parking lot", Israeli doctors can get away with demanding that Palestinians, HUMAN BEINGS, should be murdered, that their only remaining hospital should be crushed.

They are not condemned for saying they wanted nuclear weapons unleashed on Gaza, they are not condemned for the imprisonment and torture of children, for desecrating dead Palestinians' corpses and mauling their bodies, for mocking Muslim Palestinians by rubbing their bullets against pig's skin before shooting them, for bombing Palestinian churches, for bombing universities, for shutting electricity from Gaza, cutting Palestinians from food and water, not letting them access to aid, for bombing CANCER hospitals and CHILDRENS HOSPITALS, for turning the sky of Gaza RED from explosions, for killing enough students that the entire school year was canceled, for annihilating families, for attacking Jewish people in Jerusalem, for cutting dead fetuses off dead mothers, for STEALING THEIR SKIN AND ORGANS and using them for their benefit, for forcing CHILDREN to hold a press conference to say that hey, they want to live.

Insinuating that this is about religion is the basis of Zionism. 60 members of Hamas were killed, and 10,500 civilians killed, 4000 of which are children. Over 800 bloodlines erased. Israel says they aim for "damage, not accuracy." Implying this is about Hamas is lies.

When white people in power tell you from their air-conditioned studios this is Israel defending itself, refuse to let Palestinian journalists explain things happening from their point of view, watch those journalists lose their entire families for speaking about what's happening to them, demonize Arabs who rage about injustice, ask Palestinians grieving if they condemn Hamas, know this is propaganda.

You shouldn't need them to tell you they're parroting lies to you. Their lies kill people. Their lies destroy people. Their apologies are insincere and their "sympathy" is limited only to those who look like them. It is unjust. It is cruel.

If I was were to narrate to you every atrocity Israel commited that I am aware of, I would never stop typing.

[madnessfetish]

[Annoucement after year LMAO] If you've been wondering where I've been all this time, I'll tell you that some time ago I moved to DA and posted all my silly stuff there, so if you want to see my recent art you can check it out, although a lot of it is just relative to roblox and only if you are 17+ because most of my stuff now is for a slightly for more mature audience, they don't have anything related to nsfw explicitly, but I'm just saying that to make sure I don't want any fetuses walking around and also you're not saved because this even has a moderate warning censor if you don't have an account, so you have been warned lmao. Here's my silly acc: https://www.deviantart.com/poppingsodafood

I can still be active here but only for chats or RP's, tho probably someday I could disappear again, so this is all I come to say and goodbye everybody, it been fun till it lasted lol

[alex-the-hot-mess]

considering everything hes already done in the past week that sadly doesnt surprise me. in a week he has

1. repealed bidens act to make prescription medication more affordable

2. imposed a 25% tariff on imports from canada, mexico, and china

3. called into question birthright citizenship and has ICE raids happening all over the country causing businesses that rely on that labor such as farms and manufacturers to see up to a 75% drop in attendance

4. repealed federal funding from dozens of organizations that support "woke gays" (which is illegal because anything to do with the federal budget is congress's jurisdiction)

5. banned trans people from serving in the military

6. declared that everyone is the gender they were assigned at birth and said that gender is determined at conception (the kicker with this one is that all fetuses are female and develop male parts after 6 weeks so according to trump he himself is trans bc apparently hes never read a biology book)

and so much more shit that we havent heard about because of how much social media and the news is being censored

one of the craziest things about this to me is that Trump wants to bring back the Alien Enemies Act of 1798??? Like the Act that allows ANY man over fourteen who wasn’t born in America to be deported (yes including citizens)??? The Act that was edited and used during WW2 to intern Japanese, Italian and German-American citizens??? That act???

[lesbiansandgayssupporttheminers]

hello, idk if you care but that disability post you reblogged was made by an anti-ch*icer, clearly with fetuses in mind (see op's tags). just fyi because i see a lot of leftists and pro-choicers reblog it

Ugh, that's annoying.

Also, why are you censoring "anti-choice"? We're all grown ups here, no need to censor yourself.

(If you're not a grown-up please unfollow and dni).

[arcticdementor]

When I was in grad school at Purdue these anti-abortion protesters would show up about once a semester. They had these giant signs (and I must admit the graphic design skills were on point) that showed mutilated fetuses, analogized abortion to the Holocaust, and said “Black Lives Matter?” with dubious statistics about the number of Black women who had abortions in a given year. As a pro-choice guy myself I found them offensive. I also recognized them as a part of life, like telemarketers or dandruff.

Some of my peers did not. Grad students from various departments circulated emails calling for a response. Not much ever came of it. (Shocking, I know.) But I remember talking to someone I didn’t know about it, someone from another department. At one point he said “we’re going to no-platform them,” as casually as he might have informed me that he was stopping at Jimmy John’s on the way home. I thought, but did not say, what seemed like the obvious response: that we attended a university run by a pro-life president in a pro-life state with a pro-life governor and a pro-life legislature and a pro-life citizenry and that we were a bunch of powerless disorganized outsider academics who the local population didn’t much like and that if anyone was going to be “no-platformed” it was going to be us. But the thought had apparently not occurred to him, marinated in academia and I’m guessing very online. He was a progressive living in 21st century America and he assumed that those he chose to censor were those he could. This confidence is shared by many left-leaning people today, and it is typical of contemporary liberalism in its combination of arrogance and folly.

One of the themes I’ve come back to many times in my writing is the idea that people mistake empirical claims (this is true about the world) with normative claims (this should be true about the world). Nowhere is this more clear than with “hate speech”1 and censorship. I think hate speech laws are politically and morally wrong, a normative claim, but more importantly they don’t work, an empirical claim - one which if true renders normative claims that hate speech laws are good irrelevant.

The debate about whether we should censor unpopular views such as hate speech is an important one, but also a strange one. In my experience, it operates wholly independent from any consideration of the restraints of reality. People debate only on the level of the highest principle; everything is a referendum on the mores of democracy. They are all should questions - should we erode the right to free expression in the name of protecting minority groups from psychic harms? Should we prohibit the use of certain offensive terms? Should we declare some political positions out of bounds in public society? But all of these normative questions depend on the answers to empirical questions that preempt them, “cans” that come before “shoulds.” Can we actually protect minority groups from psychic harms through laws intended to limit speech? Can we actually prevent people from using offensive terms in any practical and meaningful sense? Can we actually limit political positions, given that they have a tendency to be reworded or rebranded and that trying to restrict them tends to feed them as they bubble under the surface?

…

France has gone back to the online hate speech well, only this time rebranded - as a combo with some Islamophobic provisions. It appears that the hate speech game can be played by the bad guys too. Some people think we should restrict racial slurs, some other people think that’s a good idea plus let’s use that law to restrict all those radical Muslim teachings. You see it turns out that when you insist on promulgating a nebulous, easily-manipulated term like “hate speech,” you are giving free rein to bad people to exploit it for their own ends. France has also recently attempted to pass a law severely restricting the ability of citizens to share photos and videos of police violence. You see, when you government gets in the censorship game, they don’t stop just where you want them to. This may come as a shock but consistent principles like “don’t censor people” are easier to defend than sentiments like “censor people because they’re bad but make sure you ask me who’s bad first because I’m the one who decides who’s bad, OK?”

Of all the pretense and hubris that regularly spools forth from the social justice crowd, probably the most deluded is their dogged belief that if some new laws restricting speech were to be passed, they would inevitably be the ones to choose who gets silenced and what they don’t get to say. This is from a group that constantly self-identifies as marginalized and othered, and yet they are certain that they will be the ones left on the throne to decide who gets to say what. Why? I have no idea. The cops like you as little as you like them, lefties. You really think they’re gonna enforce the hate speech law the way you want them to? You want to defund the police, you think they’re irredeemably racist, you think they’re all fascists at heart, but you also want to give them sweeping new powers to limit what people say? That’s… strange.

[theladygazingatemptiness]

when openly bigoted conservatives, people who riot against the "murder" of unborn fetuses while excusing the systemic murder of people of color, say that they advocate for the unborn because "fetuses/babies are innocent", what they really mean is "fetuses and babies physically can't talk back to me, they physically can't protest or argue or go against my views or actions, they physically can't do or even think about anything that I've deemed deviant/sinful, etc". it's not compassion, it's an illusion of compassion. that's exactly why, as soon as said fetuses are actually born and babies start to develop actual autonomy, and that illusion is eventually broken, the conservatives that rallied so loudly for "innocent babies" go radio silent. that's also the reason why "pro-life" conservatives vocally support forced abortions on "illegals"; the fetuses of undocumented immigrants are the product of something they don't approve of, associated with something they've deemed immoral, thus is no longer "innocent", and thus no longer qualifies. if it was possible to know if an embryo is gay, something else reactionaries deem immoral, from inside the womb, they'd turn a blind eye to mass abortions of those embryos, because none of the fetuses would be "innocent".

as many people have said, the conservative-brand 'Protect Our Innocent Children' narrative exists because, in the eyes of reactionaries, children are blank slates to be controlled; little more than soft, shapeless pieces of molding clay to be converted into whatever their parents want, and they don't want anyone else contributing to that molding. that's why they don't classify beating children as abuse, because roughing up the clay is part of the molding process (and it's not like the clay can fight back, right?). but, when molding clay is allowed to remain out of its package and is exposed to outside elements for a prolonged amount of time - when children are taught (or, as conservatives like to put it, "groomed") about the world around them from a source outside of the heavily altered, heavily censored reality they were born into - the clay starts to harden into a single shape until it can no longer be molded; or, the children start forming their own worldviews and opinions, including those that don't fit in with their parent's original vision of them. and when the children can no longer be fully controlled like puppets, they get disowned by the people who claimed to advocate for them, because what happens to molding clay that becomes too hard to use? it gets thrown away.

now, on a similar note, right-leaning and self-proclaimed animal rights activists tend to loudly prioritize the rights of animals while devaluing the rights of the marginalized because, unlike the marginalized, animals can't talk back, animals can't protest, animals can't knowingly do things we classify as immoral, and etc; in fact, the #1 argument used by these types of people for not caring about human injustices is "humans sin, animals don't". whether consciously or unconsciously, this kind of mentality, alongside the conservative "killing fetuses is bad but killing black people is ok" mentality, is Very often laced with bigotry (especially racism), what with people advocating for (the good, innocent, sinless, moral) animals while displaying far less compassion towards (the evil, sinful, morally bankrupt) people of color; some have even used "humans are naturally evil" as a justification for openly not caring about brown children (people who haven't even learned how to count to fifty, let alone "sin") being put in cages or being snuffed out in a genocidal war.

and similarly to Protect The Children rhetoric, this mentality more often than not results in the abuse of the very beings they claim to care about (and it's made even worse by the fact that animals don't have the same capability of autonomy that humans have, even at adulthood); when someone feeds their dog "vegan dog food", the dog physically Can't go "hey uh this is literally killing me, I literally need meat, please stop and feed me correctly?" and so the person can continue calling themselves ethical even after the dog dies of malnutrition, because the dog couldn't provide any vocal evidence of mistreatment or take pictures of its own malnourished body.

when so-called animal rights activists (or, people who otherwise claim to advocate for animals in one way or another) willingly buy an undomesticated animal from an abusive breeder from an exotic animal mill and holds them in captivity in an un-accommodated house, the baby animal physically Can't and will Never be able to say "I hate it here, I miss my parents, please take me back home" nor can they escape by themselves (at least, not without potentially being gunned down on sight for "running wild"), and so the owner can artificially assign human morals and feelings onto the animal and easily continue touting themselves as anti-cruelty, even as the animal becomes increasingly unhealthy and neurotic behind locked doors. yet, if the animal outwardly displays their stress even just a little Too much (aggressive behavior, self-harming, etc), the owner begins to see them as a burden and starts mistreating them (either physically punishing them or by using methods that make them even more unhealthy), up until the animal can no longer be controlled; then, if the animal doesn't just get put down, they instead get dumped off somewhere (somewhere other than their natural habitat) and abandoned, with the owner probably buying another one right after and hoping This one will actually behave. because the suffering animal came the closest it possibly could to protesting the righteous, and to protest the righteous is to sin, and sinners aren't to be mourned.

basically: it's easy to care and advocate for "the innocent", "the sinless", because limiting your empathy to beings that are fundamentally unable to go against your views and morals (or, beings that can swiftly be beaten into silence if they ever attempt to go against your views and morals) removes all of the trouble and complexity of understanding nuance and gray morality, of having to think critically about your own actions, of questioning your own approach to the world and working to improve, because "the innocent" can't demand it of you even if they wanted to. the concept of "innocence vs sinful" isn't about "good vs bad", it's about controllably vs lack of controllability. it's about comfort and convenience over change and self-analysis. it's about the fact that it's easy to disguise moral apathy as moral righteousness.

tl;dr: there's speaking for someone or something because they can't speak for themselves, and there's speaking for someone/something because they can't talk, hear, or understand anything you're saying and thus can't correct you; one can benefit millions, the other can only ever benefit yourself.

only caring about/having empathy for "the innocent" really, Really isn't the flex you think it is

[benevolentwanderer]

i've had bad experience with antis and even some pro-shippers more sympathetic to certain ones making any pro-ship posts critical of anti/fandom police culture out to be "anti-antifa" or "anti-anti child abuse" because they equate antis with being true crusaders against abuse of kids, and also zero in on how a bunch of them are antifa bloggers. never mind that you can be against fascism but also pro-"let people explore themselves in fiction"! it isn't being pro-fascism to be critical of this!

PREWARNING: you can’t tag submissions for some godawful reason and I’m including a screenshot of a potentially triggering submit I just got in my response here... (This is really a double-response but I’m not going to publish the triggering one on its own.)

Oh shit, didn’t even consider the interaction between fanfic sphere terms and anti-as-in-antifa... I was talking about the former and not the latter.

It’s odd that someone who opposes facism (the hierarchy imposing arbitrary standards of decency on its people) could also oppose the freedom to create and share fiction describing morally questionable actions (...the masses, i.e. majority of a hierarchy, imposing an arbitrary standard of decency on its people.)

Dare to point out the dichotomy between the pro-censorship movement’s party line (pedophiles bad) and its actions (ignore the group of people openly known to talk about how they want to abuse teens and preteens (incels, That Kind of anime fan)) and you get submits like fucking THIS!!!

(LAST TW CHANCE! NASTY SHIT DISCUSSED!)

Which is E X A C T L Y what I was talking about when I said:

The important thing is keeping appropriate boundaries: between imagination and action, and between troubling works and people who need protection from their content. That is what pro-shippers are concerned about, and antis are attempting to stomp all over that by targeting people who label works appropriately. 

You know what? I don’t consume any media that includes teacher on student abuse of any kind, because this content triggers me. That’s before we get into the constellation of other reasons fic like anon alludes to is triggering (to me specifically, and to others generally). And this person has come into my inbox, that of someone who is a proponent of labeling things appropriately, to drop this shit unlabeled.

Do I think those works are disgusting, in a very raw and emotional way? Hell yeah. Do I want to be able to prescreen out anything with even a whiff of that content from my life? Hell yeah. Do I think everyone else should also have that ability? Hell yeah.

But... do I recognize that, by coming from a place of instinctive fear, my feelings about those works ignores the possibility that there is redeeming context to their existence? Yes.

For a while, I did group therapy for (adult) sexual abuse recovery. Some of the other people in the group had experienced CSA. Some of them read and wrote fanfic just like the anon described - because it was a way for them to recontextualise their memories and emotions through the fantasy of being abused again.

Just like pro-lifers ignore the health of those “saved” fetuses after they become living, breathing children, so pro-censors ignore the health and happiness of those who don’t escape experiencing CSA, who are even more vulnerable than children (or, later, adults) who never had those experiences.

In fact? Pro-censors specifically LOVE to attack adult CSA survivors. They call them all kinds of horrifying, horrifying shit... because they can be made out to be monsters by careful tweaking of criteria, and because a lot of them don’t have the energy to fight back against smear campaigns effectively.

Can’t call yourself an antifa when you use the same tactics as the facists.

[skautism]

There is in fact, a line, between pro-choice and eugenics.

Pro-choice- someone was r*ped into pregnancy, someone just didn't want a child, they have hookups and use that as their birth control, their own/their partner's mental health issues, not having the resources or money to take care of a disabled kid

Eugenics- the rising rate of fetuses with down syndrome being aborted even though they have the resources and down syndrome has a very low mortality rate now, aborting a fetus when you have the ability, time, and resources to take care of them and are only terminating it because they're going to be disabled

If you're the second, I don't trust you to not kick your children out for being gay or trans, and don't trust you to not force your toddlers to drink bleach for being autistic. I don't trust you to not be the type of person who won't let your kid near their autistic classmate because you think they'll "catch" it. I don't trust you to not disown your kid for becoming disabled later in life. I don't trust you to not disown your child for anything you say "goes against God's way", or try to censor the school library. And, you can suck my ass.

[tessatechaitea]

Scarab #4

Is this child porn? I hope this isn't child porn. I bet it's not child porn because this is a fetus.

Apparently this is why Marty was so bloody. He beat an old woman to death. Or to miscarriage.

Marty claims the old woman wouldn't stop screaming so he had to beat her. But why wouldn't she stop screaming? Was Marty raping her? Probably. As I mentioned before, Marty believes the women of this town deserve physical violence. Although he ended last issue screaming, "Look what it did to me," which doesn't make any sense in this context. Maybe he just means Pan drove him crazy by not allowing him to kill himself? So this violence is Pan's fault and not part of Marty's toxic masculinity? Marty goes on to explain the entire story to Scarab so that the reader isn't confused anymore. All the men in town were castrated by Pan who then pissed in their mouths. And afterward, either due to visions of heavenly glory or the ripest of all embarrassments, they marched into the sea and killed themselves. Except Marty had a broken leg so he didn't get to experience the beauty and wonder of castration followed by ritual suicide. But earlier this evening, he glimpsed Pan and came in his pants. I think the "Look what it did to me" while opening his pants before Scarab was to demonstrate he'd lost his balls. Then he beat the old woman to death because she couldn't stop screaming after seeing his mutilated manhood. So now Scarab feels like he needs to put things to right although it seems like the women of Whitehaven are happy with how things are going. And the men are dead so what do they care if somebody destroys Pan? I guess this is why I'm not a superhero because my first reaction to seeing dozens of naked women engaged in a passionate orgy is to think, "Things look good here! I guess I'll be off! After staring an inordinately long time. You know, to just top off the wank bank."

Meanwhile, this pornographer happens upon the scene and decides to join in. Little does he realize, it's Pan's fetuses who are in control. He's fucking the fetuses!

Scarab seeps into the ground to confront Pan and to nobody's surprise, Pan threatens to fuck his arse off when they finally meet. This is another reason why I'm not a superhero or Jesus Christ. Because I can't resist temptation. If I were Jesus Christ, Kazantzakis's The Last Temptation of Christ could probably still have been called that. But, just to clarify, it would also have been The First Temptation of Christ. Satan would have been, "Look. Knock this shit off for a handful of Fizz candy and a Snickers bar?" And I would have been all, "Ooh! Fizz!" Scarab punches Pan and Pan responds by saying, "Hey man! Why so violent?! Sheesh. Let's be civil. Come inside my lair and let's talk. Watch out for the puddles of semen. Don't touch those socks. I apologize for the stench."

Pan reveals his real name and exposes himself for the vanilla sex monster he really is.

Why would Pan joyfully claim he's the missionary position?! At least be "The Beast Whose Penis Looks Like a Backwards Woman So I Can Stare Straight Up Her Butthole as We Fuck!" It turns out Pan is dying. Probably because he only fucks in one the worst position. Scarab can't convince Pan not to die so Pan dies. Some hero. After Pan dies, the women of the town begin realizing they don't want to be pregnant with a smell goat god's disgusting progeny so they begin to perform abortions on themselves or scream until they miscarry or simply go insane. Pan told Scarab that Eleanor will be taking care of his children. I don't know if he meant because they're all going to be killed now or because they'll be born into the Net or any number of other stupid reasons I can come up with through my terrible ability to speculate. The pornographer turns out to be Sidney Sometimes, the Fortean publisher, who I completely forgot about because I read that section of this comic book yesterday. Maybe he'll become the Scarab's lead on weird things to investigate. The issue ends with one more revelation: the "it" in Marty's "Look what it did to me" was indeed impregnation. I'm not going to rule out the castration as well but that wasn't ever explicit. So Marty wanders off to ignore what's going to happen when he gives birth because it certainly won't be a lot of fun finding out. Scarab #4 Rating: C. I think Pan fucked up this entire town just to get a few more months of life. I can respect that. People act horrified at the thought of bathing in baby's blood to stay eternally young but, I mean, seriously, if that were an actual option, we'd find out a whole lot of people were way less concerned about the welfare of infants.

[humanityneedssanity-blog]

Why Abortion Is Wrong

Here I shall explain why abortion is wrong. Life begins at conception, as proven by science, and from that moment forth the new human being earns the inalienable right to live. If you abort the unborn baby, you have infringed upon its right to live, which means you ended the life of a human being. That’s known as murder. Murder is evil. Now, some might say ‘my body, my choice’ and ‘no uterus, no say’ but the unborn baby is not part of the mother. It is an individual person with its own DNA, heartbeat, and organs, so you cannot do whatever you please with it. Also, you cannot censor someone’s freedom of speech because of gender or because they can’t experience the thing they’re talking about. I don’t have to play basketball to talk about basketball. I don’t have to be ill to talk about illness. I don’t have to be a dentist to talk about dentistry. You know what I mean. Other arguments are ‘it’s just a clump of cells’ ‘it’s a parasite’ ‘the adoption system is terrible’ ‘what if has an awful life?’ ‘But you’re not vegan. Hypocrite!’ and ‘What if the mother was raped?’ Let me address all of them. We’re all a clump of cells, only bigger. Therefore, that argument is fallacious. Parasites are members of a different species who born, live, and die in another host. Fetuses are human and leave the womb in nine months to live the rest of its life. They also don’t use all of the mother’s resources, while parasite take whatever they can from their host. Plus, parasites are often life-threatening since they do considerable damage to the body of the host. Fetuses make bodily adjustments, sure, but they’re usually harmless or inconvenient and after the unborn baby leaves the womb things return to normal. The adoption system may have its flaws, but the solution is not to kill the unborn baby and instead try to fix the adoption system. Claiming you’re doing a favor to the unborn baby by killing it before it can experience life outside the womb because ‘it might have a terrible life’ is evil. Hardship is a fact of life, and it is not an excuse for murder. Heck, there’s absolutely no excuse for murder. Animal lives are worth less than human lives unless they’re useful or beloved. That’s a fact of nature all animals respect. Animals like wolves for example hunt other animals to survive and care more about their own species’ survival than other species, just like humans. Rapes only account for about 1% of abortions, and exceptions can be granted for rape victims since the ordeal can be severely traumatic. Most people, however, abort their unborn children because of lifestyle convenience. That’s not a legitimate reason to end the life of your unborn son or daughter. There, I have debunked the common arguments of the pro choice movement. I will continue to fight for the rights of the unborn and give them a voice, for they cannot speak.

[ranteaterwitch]

Another Fate related rant. Why are people so upset over Emiya Alter’s change. Like, the guy was designed as “what if the man who has dark skin was sent to a Detroit prison”, like, the design was racist from the start and the Japanese people at TM need to get their heads out of their asses and do actual research on norms that aren’t Asian. It’d be one thing if they like, censored Musashi’s boobs or something, but the design was racist from the start!! He honestly needed an entire redo but lightening the skin and making him look less like an African American guy (when he’s Japanese) is probably the best the NA can pull off (because the NA version only has like four people and is managed by JP version). All the people getting upset over it need to shut up because the main localizer is doing you morons a favor if you play this game in public. BUT ABBY WON’T BE IN SEXUALLY REVEALING CLOTHING!!! Abigail is twelve years old and from Puritan Salem, she shouldn’t be dressed in revealing clothes!!! Hell, JACK shouldn’t be in those clothes, either, she is a fusion of aborted fetuses and is a literal baby, just admit you fuckers are racist lolicons so everybody can exile you.

[maticide666]

don't mind me just ranting about voting for a bit (may or may not make any sense as i have a nasty headache that ibuprofen won't completely fix)

first of all, obligatory i voted sticker

[ID: photo of a white sticker with blue text reading "I Voted In ... County", with the county censored. underneath text is a USA flag. below the sticker is a paper stylus with " I Voted" printed several times. End ID]

anyway

kinda pissed off that texas no longer does the "click one button to vote for this party" thing.

also pissed off at the two party system in general. that's yet another election where i wanted to vote for the green party candidate but decided to vote Democrat instead in order to prevent all the Republicans from winning. fuck greg abbott. fuck dan patrick. fuck ken paxton.

one of the green party candidates advocated for ranked choice voting. nice.

sick and tired of having to constantly defend my right to exist. my right to abortion. my right to just exist as a trans guy. as a queer guy. to survive. and for other people's rights. of constantly having to push back against republikkkan fearmongering.

sick and tired of having to vote for democrats that do jack shit about american imperialism. they won't stop fucking the global south over. we're still fighting for $15 an hour. no longer a livable wage. this is why we have proper grassroots movements.

anyway the polling place was completely empty except for me and my brother. it happens if you go to the right place at the right time apparently. idk if that's a good sign or not tbh.

gotta love the lack of voting by mail here /s

i know people still voted republican because they bought the fearmongering about trans people, black people, and fetuses instead of focusing on actually fixing our power grid so we don't freeze in the winter and expanding medicaid. i hope they all suffer.

too fucked up to actually rage or worry tbh i should rest

[automatismoateo]

If you're on the fence between your religion (Jewish, Islam, or Christianity) and becoming an atheist, here is a list of points I made to persuade you to let go of the fear that the church has installed into you; those fears are not real. via /r/atheism

Submitted May 23, 2021 at 05:42AM by Alehti (Via reddit https://ift.tt/3yvN5eE) If you're on the fence between your religion (Jewish, Islam, or Christianity) and becoming an atheist, here is a list of points I made to persuade you to let go of the fear that the church has installed into you; those fears are not real.

we only have people who believe in religion because we were indoctrinated as kids. In sermons, they literally say "our doctrine today" which is just bizarre.

we only have people who believe in religion because they were told as kids that they would burn in hell never to see their families again in eternal darkness. the church gave us all Stockholm syndrome. The definition: "It occurs when physically and/or mentally abused victims—in a state of fear—bond with their abusers and become controlled by their abusers."

heaven is a manmade idea; roads paved with gold and you'll have houses of gold and you'll wear crowns with the most precious gems and diamonds? Dude. If god were real, he wouldn't care about that stuff in the slightest. Not to mention that diamonds are not rare at all. If everyone had gold houses and gold roads, it would be WORTHLESS. The only reason gold has value is because there is so little of it. What is value to a god that can make anything?

if god were real, he's weak. Think about it. He can't make a female unless he has a rib, which would make sense because you can't create or destroy energy; except for god who made the entire universe out of literally nothing. But at the same time, needs a rib to make a girl. He can't control Satan or even get rid of him. If he was all powerful, and all knowing, he would know how to get rid of Satan, or at the very least, know how to contain him. In Job, Satan is up in heaven gambling with god.

god says he'll rape you himself if you question him. seriously. bible's censor this passage all of the time, but the true translation reads well: "Hear and give ear; do not be haughty, for the Lord has spoken. . . . And if you say in your heart, 'Why have these things come upon me?' it is for the greatness of your iniquity that your skirts are lifted up, and you are violated . . . because you have forgotten me and trusted in lies. I myself will lift up your skirts over your face, and your shame will be seen." (Jeremiah 13:15–26 NRSV) - if you don't agree that it says that, then you're choosing a completely manmade bible over the original translation from Judaism.

What about all of the contradictions in the bible?

god says to do good to those who hate you - Luke 6:27&& god says to love your enemies - Matthew 5:44

so god tortures and burns his enemies without forgiveness

...smites entire cities - Genesis 18-19

...floods the earth - Genesis 6-8

...kills the first born of every Egyptian - Exodus 11-12

...unleashes plague upon plague - Exodus 11-12

...gangs up with Satan to mess with Job - Job: 1:6-12

...sent bears to murder children - 4 Kings 2:23-24

...destroys the fetuses of those who do not worship him - Hosea 13:4, 9, 16

...forces sacrifice of little girl to appease him - Judges 11:30-39

...hates ugly people - Leviticus 21:17-24

...helped the Israelites kill 500,000 other Israelites

...killed people for complaining about god killing them - Numbers 16:1-49

...killed 1 million Ethiopians - 2 Chronicles 14:9,12-13

...forces people to eat the flesh of their sons - Leviticus 26:27-29

...threatens rape for inquiring about the validity of god - Jeremiah 13:15–26

...forces people to crush the heads of babies against rocks - Psalm 137:8–9

god says none shall be forgiven that speaks blasphemeth against the holy ghost - Luke 12:10

god says for whoever shall call upon the name of the lord shall be forgiven and saved - Romans 10:13

god says thou shall not kill - Exodus 20:13

god says put every man his sword by his side and slay every man, his brother, his companion and neighbor. - Exodus 32:27

the bible says "and the flood was forty days upon the earth" - 40 days Genesis 7:17

the bible says "and the waters prevailed upon the earth a hundred and fifty days" - 150 days Genesis 7:24the bible says "by the twenty seventh day of the second month, the Earth was completely dry" or 362 days - Genesis 8:14

the bible says "the angels rained down fire mingled with blood onto the earth and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up" - Revelation 8:7

god says you should not hurt the grass of the earth, nor any green thing. - Revelation 9:4

no man has ever seen the face of god - John 1:18

Jacob saw god face to face - Genesis 32:30

god said "For every man shall bear his own burden" - Galatians 6:5

god said "Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." - Galatians 6:2

the bible says "submit yourself to every ordinance of man…to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors." - I Peter 2:13

the bible says "We ought to obey God rather than men" - Acts 5:29

god says all have sinned and all people will die - Romans 5:12

god says whoever obeys my word will never see death - John 8:51

________________________________________

Say it out loud: "GOD IS NOT REAL AND THE CHURCH NOR HE CONTROL ME ANYMORE."

[petropascal]

Wow, I came on here to say thank you for your addition to that gross kylo-did-nothing-wrong post and see you've been getting harassed by r*ylos over it. Why am I not fucking surprised. I hate this fandom sometimes. That thread kept showing up on my dash with new ways to excuse Kylo for being a murderer and Im so fucking sick of it and stans from both r*ylo and k*lux fandoms (censoring so this doesn't show up in searches)

Thank you for your support! Yes the frontin is coming from like 95% relyos and the rest klyuxes (I almost want to spell those right because they keep making me see their opinions that really squick me but I’m not looking to get reported because of this mess). What they don’t realize that if you put Kylo Ren into a real world situation, say, if he was an actual war lord, an actual murderer, an actual victimizer–he would still go to jail, even if he grew up thinking murder is good. (Even tho it showed him in the movie talking to Vader’s helmet questioning his morals,  as if he knew what he was doing, interesting). 

I completely understand Snoke filled his thoughts and feelings with deception and other abuse tactics like gaslighting since he was baby fetus Ben Solo (which don’t even get me started on that because people make it seem like Snoke was teaching fetus Ben the ways of the dark side and that murder is good when in fact fetuses have no concept of anything besides sucking up their mother’s uterus juices and floating like an egg yolk, and the fact that Snoke canonically coveted the light and dark conflict within him growing up therefore Ben grew up with all the cards on the table, knowing that murder is bad and light side is good and that dark sider believe murder is cool when you want power)

I completely understand everything the stans are saying about me having no soul for not thinking it was ALL snokes fault that he fell. And while I clearly disagree, and even if it truly was all snokes fault, Kylo still was complicit in countless war crimes and terrorism. UNLESS his literal brain is taken over by Snoke and he has no complicity in any of his actions and can’t even wipe his ass on his own, he is completely capable of being accountable. And seeing that he was tempted in the movie to go to the light again, he pulled through with killing Han Solo, his own father. He knew what he was doing was wrong. Yes, it’s sick that he thought what he was doing was just, that’s what makes him sick as well as an interesting character. That’s what makes him a villain.

By the way he is literally a white terrorist from a fascist cult. HE IS LITERALLY A FUCKING TERRORIST WHO THINKS WHAT HE’S DOING IS JUST. The world is already full of men like that, men who have been raised from birth and socialized into the world where murder is a way they can get what they want. And another thing, I’ve had relyos call me names and claim I’m a horrible human being for speaking out about this, who claim I have no sympathy for victims of abuse even as they know absolutely nothing about the  relationships I’ve been in and especially my girlfriend who I love more than any of this stupid online shit. 

And they claim other notions that I disagree with but I guess I’m not allowed to disagree with them or be his fan because I think he’s a villain. (Like a klyuxer said it’s ironic i’m dragging him because i love him when in fact they missed the point of my entire dialogue, also they said Kylo is popular with Asians because he has countering and conflicting forces in him? And not to be rude but that’s so fucking racist I can’t even deal with it, as an actual fucking Asian person, this is a horrible generalization that should never been spoken. White people be like Yin yang :v) yin and yang and pocky sticks! :v) murder is cool)

And the countless relyos who already have me blocked who call me names and tell me “just because of Kylos sex I’m making all these judgements” when in fact the fact that Kylo Ren is a man and there stretching this far to defend him is only a testament to how often men are excused for the downright inhuman acts of violence they commit. I stand by the masculinity argument and can gladly message and elaborate to anyone who disagrees. And nothing pisses me off more to see people say Hux is worse, when using their Save Ben Solo logic, Hux is as much of a victim and Kylo having been groomed since he was a child by the first order and his dad. I know, that sounds crazy, right? He’s literally a Nazi war criminal. (Also relyos think Kylo staring at a death laser on a war ship as well as passing a masked look of contempt and incredulity to Hux for suggesting they use Starkiller before his dark evil master– somehow constitutes as “omg maybe the first order is evil :c I’m not so sure about this genocide thing. Let me stand here and do nothing to stop it while everyone dies, also let me later in the movie try and sabotage the people who are the actual heroes”)

My bottom line is, while Kylo Ren is or (at least was) a victim, he turned into a victimizer and therefore he deserves to go to jail for the rest of his life. No happy ending, only closure, JUST like what happened it Darth Vader in ROTJ. He saved his son and killed the emperor, but he still committed countless acts of terrorism and war crimes and in the end deserved to die (with honor, perhaps?). I stand by this argument just as you Kylo stans stand by your argument which you are entitled to. I sympathize with him just as you all do, but I believe he should be held accountable for his actions.

again thank you for your message, im glad you share my perspective. 

[thebluntcritic]

10 Of The Most Stomach-Churning Horror Films To Watch (Or Not)

Horror is not a genre for the ambivalent. You either love them, or you hate them. However, even for fans of the genre there are limits to what they can stomach. All horror films rely on some combination of psychological, existential or physical horror, but goriness is optional. Here are some of the grossest horror films to watch... or avoid.

10. Visitor Q

Japanese director Takashi Miike is a horror icon. He's responsible for some of the most iconic films in modern Japanese cinema from Yakuza masterpiece “Ichi the Killer,” to J-horror favorite “One Missed Call” and of course slow-burn horror “Audition.”

“Visitor Q” is not one of those iconic films.

The story is simple enough; a strange visitor throws a family's world into chaos. The content is bizarre and disgusting. With gag-inducing scenes including incest, necrophilia and, worst of all, human milking, “Visitor Q” is not for everyone. In fact, it's for almost no one.

Yes, human milking.

9. The Fly

David Cronenberg is the unrivaled master of the body horror subgenre. His body of work, no pun intended, includes “Scanners,” “Videodrome,” and “The Brood.” Just amongst those three films you can find exploding heads, human-machine sex hybrids and a woman that births demon children from pustules on the outside of the body.

“The Fly” tops them all. In his most gruesome role ever, Jeff Goldblum plays an ambitious scientist that resort to using himself as a test subject for his cutting edge project. Unfortunately, the experiment goes terribly wrong and Goldblum finds himself slowly morphing into a giant fly. Audiences are treated to watching his body slowly fall apart, piece by piece. If you long to watch a man remove his own fingernails or dissolve his food with his vomit, check out “The Fly.” Disgustingness aside, “The Fly” is a horror great and deserving of acclaim in the annals of horror filmmaking.

8. The Midnight Meat Train

You might be surprised to see Bradley Cooper, four-time Academy Award nominee, in this 2008 scare flick. The film itself is a solid psychological horror, buttressed by an actor of Cooper’s caliber. But it’s the moments of gross out gags that will linger in your mind when you’re done with this one. In a role that will send chills up your spine, Vinnie Jones plays a mysterious butcher whose midnight rides on the New York subway draw the attention of freelance photographer Cooper.

As Cooper tumbles down the rabbit hole, you’ll witness Jones’ daily routine of cutting curious boils from his body, and his nightly routine of popping eyes from the skulls of public transportation patrons with a meat mallet. I’ll leave you to discover the shocking climax for yourself, but suffice it to say it’s repulsive.

7. The Last House on the Left

The 1977 exploitation film by Wes Craven is undoubtedly his most gruesome film. Craven went on to have more commercial success with his “Nightmare on Elm Street” franchise, as well as the huge success of the “Scream” franchise.

However, “The Last House on the Left” is stylistically quite different. The film almost plays like a PSA against drugs after the protagonists fall into the grasp of psychopaths whom they mistake as marijuana dealers. Scenes of sickening violence are juxtaposed with comic relief of the bungling detectives that are on the case. Those moments of comic relief are much needed, because the violence is very hard to watch. Rape, disemboweling and severed genitals are bad enough, but the accompaniment of a cacophonous score seems to amplify the violence.

Don’t be fooled by the B-movie style of “The Last House on the Left.” The film gets its story from Ingmar Bergman’s 1960 film “The Virgin Spring,” which can be found on the lauded film library Criterion Collection.

6. Excision

Sure, a film about a teenager obsessed with surgery is clue enough for what you’re getting into. Yet, “Excision” is so much more. The underlying themes of sexual autonomy and misogyny elevate the film beyond its shock factor.

But shock it does. Dream sequences laden with blood-slathered sex and murder set the tone for the protagonist’s obsessions. While the majority of the film’s grosser imagery has to do with the combination of blood and sex, its climactic open-chest surgery is the one that will really have you diving for the trash bin. Be forewarned, this is a film for fans of the strange and unsavory.

5. Imprint

Here we have another entry from Japanese master Takashi Miike. “Imprint” was actually an episode in the series “Masters of Horror,” not a feature film, but it is no less terrifying.

The film starts in the same way many Japanese parables do, with many retellings of the same story to show varying perspectives. However, there is only one storyteller in this film, whose story changes the more she is pressed for the truth.

This episode was actually banned from television, despite being on premium network Showtime. Its horrifying depictions of bamboo fingernail torture and aborted fetuses is likely responsible for that. Or perhaps it was the tiny hand growing from the side of a prostitute’s head that tells her what to do. Either way, it’s hard to watch “Imprint” and makes you wonder what is going on inside the melon of Miike.

4. Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)

While every film I’ve mention so far has merits worthy of exploring, “Human Centipede 2” does not share that trait.

A follow up to Tom Six’s cult horror hit “Human Centipede,” “Human Centipede 2” takes a weird turn. The protagonist is inspired to make his own eponymous human centipede after watching the first film. That’s right; Six references the first film within the second film. Vainglorious aspirations aside, the film itself is a joyless trek through abuse and misery, replete with shameless gore and unnecessary death. At every level, the film is repugnant and stomach-churning. For example, I checked out after a newborn baby was needlessly crushed beneath a gas pedal by its own mother. There is nothing of values within the minutes you’ll spend watching this nightmare.

3. Martyrs

An entry into the movement of New French Extremist horror cinema, “Martyrs” might well be the greatest of the subgenre. Aside from the shock factor of blood and gore, the 2008 film is pack with twists and turns that keep the audience wanting more, despite what they’re seeing.

“Martyrs” is the story of a young girl bent on revenge, searching for the people that abducted and tortured her in her youth. The protagonist is desperate for an answer to the great “why,” which is ironic because that’s exactly what her captors were after as well. Members of a creepy cult, her captors believe in the concept of a Martyr; a woman that, driven to the brink of death by torture, can see what lies beyond this mortal coil.

Though the moments of torture are difficult to watch, bordering on unwatchable, it’s the fascinating questions about existence that will linger in your mind long after you finish “Martyrs.”

2. Dead Alive

Fans of “The Lord of the Rings” series might be surprised to discover that New Zealand director Peter Jackson has a healthy résumé in gross out horror.

“Dead Alive,” also known by the title “Braindead,” tells the story of a town overwhelmed by a deadly primate virus that turns victims into zombies. Though it sounds like the plot to “28 Days Later,” “Dead Alive” couldn’t be more different in tone or content. The absolutely revolting practical special effects are paired with physical comedy, a combination that has audiences clutching their guts from laughing and disgust.

The film boasts what online pundits call the goriest scene in cinema history. Think about a protagonist taking on a town of zombies with an upturned lawnmower. But it wouldn’t be a Peter Jackson film without a creature of horrendous size and repellant appearance, and he delivers exactly that in the film’s insane climax.

This film, though likely the nastiest in the list, is easier to swallow given its humor. Though you probably won’t want to swallow anything after watching the dinner scene…

1. A Serbian Film

Let’s start with a disclaimer: I have not seen this film. I do not want to see this film. I will never see this film. And as you may have determined from this list, I’ve seen some disgusting stuff.

However, “A Serbian Film” takes it to a different level. For some context, the film is made by Serbian filmmaker Srđan Spasojević and is allegedly intended as commentary on the overly restrictive censorship in Serbian filmmaking, hence the name “A Serbian Film.” And though I lack the context of in depth understanding of the Serbian film world, I imagine he could have found a different way of standing up to the censors.

How bad could it be? After everything on this list, what could make this the worst? Let me paint a picture with words for you. Murder by copulation with an eye-socket. Newborn porn. Forced inces-

Okay that’s good. Just read the film’s Wikipedia page and decide whether you want to watch this repulsive, abhorrent film for yourself. I for one cannot and will not. Ever. My stomach is turning just thinking about it.

[yonqcais]

What a bold URL, Huiting. Do you have something to tell us? (¬‿¬)

I’m guessing I’m supposed to publish this out so HAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAAH

YES I DO.

(whispers) I actually have dreams of being made love to while someone is lovingly embracing my neck, telling me to call him a parental figure. i asked for him to show me more love because i need it badly, and i called out the parental figure name lovingly as i felt my heart soaring into bliss.