#cw genocide mention

[reasonsforhope]

Btw I think it's worth mentioning that I'm like. In some ways an extremely cynical person:

Literally, one of my major opinions on humanity is "Humans really seem to like committing genocide???" (Look, obviously genocide is a fucking atrocity, and I'm in no fucking way diminishing that. It's just also something that people keep fucking committing.)

I work professionally with survivors of abuse, rape, and incest.

I think that most people are (by design, aka evolution!) fundamentally self-interested (and also that that's usually okay)

I am more caught up on the news than like/at least 90% of people.

So when I say that I think that:

Hope is real

There is real, substantial evidence for hope

I think we're going to beat climate change

There is a ton of evidence that supports us beating climate change,

We're going (continue) making the world a better place

The good of humanity and the world ultimately outweighs the bad

It's not because I'm sticking my head in the sand. It's really, really not!

I'm saying that in very real knowledge of how fucking shitty things are and can be.

And despite all that, I'm still hopeful. I'm still optimistic.

I still think hope is going to win.

You don't need to be some huge optimist to have hope.

Anyway here's a link to my masterpost on why we're going to beat climate change,

And here's a link to a great article* on all the reasons that this century is, on average, the best time to be alive in human history.

*It is mostly a great article but warning for some brief but serious fatphobia and some annoying Western-centrism.

The world isn't perfect. It's so far from perfect. Hope is still worth it.

[idiot-mushroom]

Please help them, they are so far from their goal, it breaks my heart knowing time is running out and how their family might be in more danger because of it. Anything helps.

[kitabasis]

Well, it seems this video is relevant as ever:

(Although of course it's not just the porn they're trying to get rid of now. And, frankly, never was...)

[deadlypincers]

100% agree on the entire tekken fandom being so fucking weird with jin kazama smh (especially fucking reddit, twitter, and the youtube comments section which is why i rarely look up tekken content on those sites in particular). that would be like if you were a star wars fan and you can't even enjoy luke skywalker without someone talking about how "luke tried to kill his own nephew yet he forgave his father, he is a hypocrite and a bad hero you're a bad person if you like luke". just like luke in star wars the last jedi, jin was ooc as fuck in tekken 6. even the writers themselves admitted they didn't want to do this, it only happened because of harada and they got so much backlash for that character assassination back when tekken 6 was first released. so why...why for over 10 years do i have to constantly see so many unfunny repetitive jokes, hate, and slander about jin kazama. why is the only thing i see when i look up jin is "ww3" for the billionth time. why did i have to see people making customizations of jin dressing up like h*tler, p*tin, and fucking s*suke uchiha. why do i have to see fucked up fan fiction of kazuya, miguel, or fucking s*suke uchiha raping and torturing jin kazama to "punish him for his war crimes and also because he never suffered what kazuya/miguel/s*suke suffered from". i'm also so sick and tired of seeing fucking s*suke uchiha stans and r/Tekken daring to comparing my boy jin kazama to that stupid uchiha from naruto who is a misogynistic egotistical narcissistic irredeemable skinny femboy twink asshole. jin would never try to kill xiaoyu multiple times, unlike s*suke who tried to kill two women who admired him. jin has no ego unlike that ego obssessed jerk s*suke. jin is actually handsome and hot, he's a muscular toned man and not just anohter generic femboy twink. jin was never cruel to either her or hwoarang. if anything jin was always more like itachi uchiha, jin always said "forgive me" to his opponents and his motivation, both jin and itachi have the whole black feather aesthetic, both jin and itachi hate their own bloodline, and jin's goal is to kill/stop his own bloodline for the greater good just like itachi. jin would fucking choke and then brutally murder s*suke for what he did to both team 7 and team taka. damn it harada, why didn't you just retcon it like how you retconned kazumi having the devil gene but not jinpachi. why didn't they just say that jin kazama was brainwashed by azazel or something. sometimes i can't help but think about an alternative timeline where tekken 6 scenario campaign never happened, jin was still loved and the side characters (ex. Asuka and Paul) were not made irrelevant joke characters and had something to do.

forgive me if i got a bit too extreme here, but i...i...i just had to let out my emotions now. jin has always been important to me, he's my childhood crush and also one of my biggest comfort characters (along with mitsuru from persona 3 and kiryu from yakuza). which is also why i'm so glad i found posts like these, my feelings feel validated.

Oh believe me, I feel ya, anon. I guess this is just what they call the pain of loving a cursed character doomed by both the fandom and the narrative... but in the end, we all know what's actually beneath all that and that there is much more than meets the eye to Jin (and other characters too).

Also, comparing Jin to fucking P*tin and H*tler is.... something entirely else and I am honestly terrified of those people if their reading comprehension leads them to these comparisons. I just-

You don't know how much patience I have to build up to (sort of) stay in the fandom with all these "jokes" still running around kn freaking 2024. I wanna say that I sincerely hope it will get better, but seeing the overall state of the fandom now and 5-10 ywars ago... I kind if doubt it will get better any time soon.

[dappercritter]

I reblog a lot of political posts on here so I guess it's only natural I'd make one myself at some point. Anyways... (*deep breath*)

While Genocide Joe absolutely deserve to have his approval ratings plummet for ongoing support of the IDF's brutal invasion of Gaza, I worry about what this means for the elections this year.

I worry about how many people realize that refusing to vote blue at all in November to protest a genocide could lead to another one in their own country over an angrier Trump.

Palestinian lives matter, do not get me wrong. Do not stop talking about Palestine. But we all know Trump's not going to fix it. He's going to endorse it.

Just like how he'll endorse America becoming its worst possible self at this point.

I don't know if it will get as bad as Gaza, but I know that I have a lot of friends who mean so much to me that could be put in serious danger if the government doubles down on rolling back basic human rights. Especially internet privacy and protection for queer people.

I know it's sickening to see another POTUS endorse another attack on an Arab country with all the horrific casualties it entails, but listen.

I watched the last one endorse turning the country into a living nightmare with influence still felt today, wondering if my friends--my only real friends at the time--would make it if he got another term.

It's not a perfect solution I know. But unless you guys are ready to storm the White House for different reasons this year, and you have a plan to keep this kind of scenario from ever happening again, you need to vote in the Democrat primaries and/or vote Democrat in the November elections.

And yes,

Palestine still matters.

But so does the trans community.

So does the gay community.

So does the ace community.

So does the black community.

So does America's own muslim and arab communities.

So does every community living in America under threat.

[eclaire-went-bam]

i'm THIS close to just making my pronouns he/it, or just it/its, bcs istg ppl see "prefers it/it but also ok with he/they" & think it's a good excuse to not call me by my "weird" pronouns

people hardly ever use "he" either, bcs i don't pass

like. it/it's my preferred pronouns. he/they is tolerable but over time i'm just going to get annoyed. wait till they hear abt my super secret neopronouns

[bethanythebogwitch]

I find it amusing that Disney forced the Digimon Savers/Data Squad english dub to change a living bomb monster of the week into a giant orange because it was "too violent" but were perfectly OK with the two main villains of the series attempting literal genocide.

[vampirekissingbooth]

please correct me if i’m wrong or missing something, but a term I hear a lot about native communities is that european colonizers “stole their land,” which, I understand what they mean, but doesn’t seem like the right term?

my understanding is that (at least in the USAmerican regions) for many native peoples, land did not “belong” to anyone. the terms i would use would be “pushed out of their homes” and “genocide.” maybe “fenced in,” in some cases.

[alertarchitect]

I genuinely do not understand The Discourse around Palworld. Now, for full transparency, I don't really particularly care about the game, I've not played it, nor do I plan to. I'd rather stick with my FPS games and metroidvanias. I'm probably the closest to being a neutral party on the issue you can find in the gaming community. That being said...

Stop with all of the "[Megacompany X] needs to call their lawyers!!" nonsense. Yes, they have designs that look like Pokémon. Yes, they have designs that look like Monster Hunter monsters. However, I have one important question here...

Why the hell do you care?

First off, we're talking ripoff designs of IPs owned by companies that make profits in the billions. These companies, especially Nintendo, have - or at least have access to - very good lawyers. Do you really think Palworld - a game made by a company based in Japan, the SAME COUNTRY as the companies I see people saying are having their designs stolen, meaning this theoretical lawsuit would be 100% domestic instead of bringing the headaches associated with an international suit - would have made it to release if Nintendo, Capcom, or any other company had standing for a plagiarism lawsuit? Especially when Japan doesn't have fair use laws? That, to me, already tells me these designs are clearly in the "legally distinct ripoff" category, and that's okay. Obviously plagiarism isn't a good thing, but if this was close enough to be considered such under laws that don't include fair use provisions, it's FINE. Even if it's not the most ethical, ripoffs and bootlegs are gonna happen. This one is just has more publicity than most.

Second, these are - again - billion-dollar companies that make more money than most people can even truly comprehend. Why are you defending them so much? No matter how much I may like the older Pokémon games, such as Platinum, we are talking about one of, if not the single most profitable franchise on the fucking PLANET. Not only does it not need Random Schmuck #582183 to defend it online, the people behind it likely don't fucking CARE. The Pikémon Company is like 50% or more owned by Nintendo, which is a company that - as we've seen time and again with their takedowns of passionate fan projects with 0 profit incentive such as AM2R as well as their draconian YouTube content policies for creators - doesn't care about their fans at the best of times, and is actively hostile towards them more often than not. Why do so many people defend these large corporations like doing so is going to get you a "thank you" letter from Miyamoto? Why are you supporting massive billionaires like your life depends on it over some 3D models that, as previously established, are more in the "legally distinct ripoff" category than anything else? Are you so invested in their corporate wellbeing that you feel the need to try and do their PR & legal teams' jobs for them?

At the end of the day, Palworld is a game made by a team that seems genuinely passionate about their craft, that has been a fun experience for many people across the world. Let those people have their fun. And if the designs being ripoffs is such a problem for you, just don't buy the game. Simple as that. If you're that worried, let the notoriously litigious companies like Nintendo handle it. Don't try to be an ass to people just having fun in a video game. Hell, if you're so convinced this is a case of direct plagiarism, just stop supporting the people making stuff about it like we did with the people who played the Shitty Wizard Game. Obviously this issue is nowhere near as bad, as it's just a case of ripoff designs instead of people financially supporting an anti-semitic, racist TERF who sees financial support of her franchise as support for her ideals and uses the platform that gives to call for things like trans genocide, but the principle is the same in practice - just don't support it or anything to do with it, and chill the hell out.

[heyclickadee]

Tech’s Alive, Part 6: The Matter of Weight (cw for discussions of death, suicide mention, genocide mention)

AKA, why “Tech should stay dead for the stakes” and “Tech should stay dead so the moment he sacrifices himself retains its weight” are arguments I will not be entertaining in this household. And by this household, I mean my blog. But also probably my actual apartment here in real space.

So, this isn’t really an argument for why Tech is alive, per se. It’s more just me trying to counter the two most common arguments I see people making for why he should be dead, whether the person making the argument thinks he’s dead or not.

Stakes:

The first argument, that Tech should stay dead for the sake of the “stakes” is, to me, the most nebulous. On this here interwebs we tend to talk about “stakes” purely in the negative; everyone’s going to die, the villains are going to win, everything is going to be sad forever, etc. But stakes in a story are really just about potential consequences—what could happen if the characters succeed, and what could happen if they fail. And while it’s true that killing a character can raise the stakes in a story, it’s best accomplished by killing off a secondary character, and it can really only raise them in a story in which death was never a potential consequence.

Death has always been a potential consequence for these characters, not just for failure, but just for existing in the world in which they live. Scratch that, dying is quite literally what they were made to do. This is a series in which two genocides have already taken place—that of the Jedi, then of the Kaminoans—and which has us watching a third ongoing—that of the clones themselves. Almost every new named clone we’ve met has died, and died violently. The clone force 99 characters have all almost died about once an episode so far, and every time they do, the show tends to treat it as a serious close call.

So killing off Tech doesn’t raise the potential consequences of failure to “death” because that potential was always there. Killing off a secondary but known clone character like, say, Howser could have made heightened that risk more effectively. Heck, Mayday’s death does a better job of raising that risk for Crosshair, for example; the only reason Crosshair wasn’t the one who died in the avalanche was was because Mayday noticed the rock and pushed Crosshair out of the way. Killing off Tech and leaving him dead, by contrast, would actually, in a way, lower the stakes—because, again, the risk of “potential consequences” is gone (it’s just reality now), AND stakes are also about what could happen if the characters succeed and get what they want. Meaning that if Tech’s gone for good, the potential positive consequences are much, much lower. The positive consequence of the clone force 99 family reuniting—the thing the story keeps making us want—would just be gone. There’s only so far you can ratchet the spring of tension before it snaps.

That said, when some people argue for Tech’s death in favor of raised stakes, I don’t think the above is really what they’re talking about. They’re mostly making a somewhat edgelordy argument about death needing to feel real in the star war and darkness being the “mature” option. Let’s say I bought that argument. Let’s say I actually thought “the reality of death” and “maturity” were valid reasons to kill off a main character. Let’s even push aside all the reasons why I think killing off any one of the bad batchers permanently would break the story. Let’s do this thought experiment. Killing off Tech in this season and leaving him dead still doesn’t work, specifically because so much time this season was spent on developing and helping the other characters to understand him better.

You can spend time building up a character and developing them for the sole purpose of killing them and giving them a send-off if your show has an unserialized format. Think Gray’s Anatomy or Bones; unserialized shows are just taking the characters and putting them in different combinations or scenarios until the end of time without really worrying about arcs or narrative threads, so in that format spending time with a character before killing them off makes sense. Spending an entire season of a serialized show building up a character and their relationships, using them to develop certain themes and narrative threads, using them to push certain parts of the plot forward, and then killing them off in which a way which does nothing to resolve any of those arcs, themes, or narrative threads, though? That’s just a waste of time. Of limited time—because fully serialized shows have an ending. I’d be more willing to buy into this line of argument if it was Wrecker, not Tech, simply because he hasn’t had the kind of development Tech has.

Don’t get me wrong, I’d still absolutely hate it and would see perma-deathing Wrecker as just as story breaking as perma-deathing Tech. But if we’re doing the thought experiment where I’m talking about stakes the way some people seem to be doing, I could see it working better in that context than perma-deathing Tech. People can make that argument about Tech’s “death,” sure, but what they’re really advocating for is bad writing. And hey! Maybe we’ll get to the end of the show and it will turn out to have been badly written! I just…don’t really buy that right now.

(Of course, this is all moot anyway, because I fundamentally disagree with the definition of stakes being used by some people making this argument and see this line of thinking as somewhat edgelordy bologna anyway. But! Moving on.)

Wanting Tech’s Sacrifice to Have Weight:

So, I’m more sympathetic to this line of thinking. I don’t agree with it, but I can kind of respect where it’s coming from. I’ve mostly seen this from people who really hate the idea that Tech is dead, but don’t see a way for the moment in which Tech sacrifices himself to maintain its emotional weight if it turns out he’s alive, and who want the writers to respect Tech’s choice. And I get that. I’ve watched more than one show that had some big emotional moment that got completely ruined by being undone or having some other development come up later on. So it’s not that I think this argument is invalid; I just don’t think it applies in this specific case.

Because…okay, first, when it comes to the writers respecting Tech’s choice, I want us to think really hard about what he’s choosing to do. Because he’s not choosing to die. Not exactly. He’s choosing to do something extremely risky that will probably get him killed, and he knows it, in order to save his family. And I know it maybe doesn’t seem like there’s a distinction there, but there is one, and it’s important, because—I mean—listen to that last heavy sigh he gives before his last line. He doesn’t want to do it. He doesn’t want to die. He just doesn’t see any way out for the others if he doesn’t risk it. (Also I feel like the “the writers need to respect his choice argument” really kind of…not…real great bad, actually, it’s real bad guys, even if he was choosing to die, specifically, because that’s way too close to advocating for suicide for comfort. I don’t think that’s what anyone is intending by this argument but….)

Second, I don’t agree that Tech’s “death” is what gives that moment its emotional weight. Let’s say that Tech does die here. Let’s say he really isn’t coming back. In that case, his death is kind of meaningless, because he was going to die anyway. If we’re saying he died, then it was either all of them die, or just him. Which means that the thing that gives that moment weight can’t be his death, because he had no way out of dying, if we’re looking at it that way and accepting that he’s just gone for good.

The thing that gives that moment weight—just a warning, I’m about to get tooth-achingly schmaltzy here, and I’m not sorry—is love. It’s everyone in the batch’s love for Tech shattering into a million little pieces of grief and horror as they watch him fall. It’s Tech loving his family so damn much he refuses to even consider letting them fall with him. It’s Tech, not knowing that he’s a character in a story, looking at the situation, knowing what he’s about to do will probably kill him—because if he wasn’t a character in a story, it probably would—knowing that if he does it he’ll probably never see Crosshair again, never see Echo or Hunter at peace, never get to hear Wrecker laugh again, never get to see Omega grow up, and still choosing to take the fall for them because there’s no chance he’d let them take the same risk. That’s why that moment has meaning. And because that’s where the meaning comes from, I can’t see how that meaning or weight would evaporate if he came back.

I mean—let’s say you were waking down the street with a friend. You step out in front of a bus, purely by accident. Your friend notices and pushes you out of the way, and in so doing steps in front of the bus, gets hit, and miraculously survives. Does their survival do anything to decrease the fact that they were willing to get hit by a bus for you? Are we really going to argue “death, or it doesn’t count” when it comes to self-sacrifice?

Furthermore, the “Tech has to stay dead for his sacrifice to have weight” argument seems to be made at least partly from the point of view that “dead” and “fully abled” are the only two options. They’re not. Other people have covered the possibility that Tech will come back with a physical disability that he has to adjust to way better than I ever could, but that’s a very real consequence the show could deal with.

I don’t really have a conclusion to this. Basically, while I have seen the stakes and weight arguments floating around, I don’t really see either of them as valid narrative arguments for keeping Tech dead, and I wanted to explain why.

[reasonsforhope]

The bison.

I know this seems like old news to a lot of people but Americans slaughtered the bison to further the genocide of the indigenous peoples (who are still here) and despite that the bison have been reintroduced.

they have returned to their native grazing grounds, the ecosystems where they have returned are flourishing for it. and to top it all off it was the peoples this government tried so desperately to erradiacte that brought them back.

the day I heard Bison had been reintroduced to the plains I sobbed like a baby and began to choose hope.

!!!! The recovery of the bison is something I've been following and it's been such a source of hope and and sign healing for me!!

Especially tribally managed reintroductions and herds!!

Really impossible to understate how much of an ecological and and humanitarian and ethical tragedy and atrocity is finally beginning to be healed

[some-teeth-in-a-trench-coat]

hi

you are not morally obligated to give platform to every voice that makes you feel guilty, ever

guilt does not make you a good person, that's not how anything works

thanks for reading I sincerely hope you can also comprehension

[soulsfthebrokenwarrens]

>Take a moment to get your heartbeat back under control. "It's ok.. You're also alone, I can ask you the same question"

"I-"

The rabbit thought for a moment, before giving off a sigh.

"Well, I... didn't think of bringing anyone else with me," he admitted, "what I'm doing is that I'm scouting and foraging for my warren. We're one of the last groups of rabbits alive after..."

He closed his eye and gave off another, more dejected sigh, as if in lament.

"Well, I'm sure you can infer with the hordes of rabbit skeletons around that we're not exactly safe."

He draws your attention to the ashen fields. It had already registered that there were already rabbit skeletons around, but... you can't count just how many there are due to their sheer quantity.

"They're all... recent, too. Some of 'em were my friends." The rabbit took a moment before shaking his head and addressing you once more. "But enough about that. My point is, there are very powerful people trying to kill every last one of us and seeing anyone outside our warren alive is a blessing. And quite honestly, we need all the help we can get. So... I'm Juniper," the rabbit chuckled a slight bit, "Do you want to come with me? Either way, I have to go back or else my warrenmates will think I'm dead."

He extends a paw.

[peridot-tears]

Finished Freedom Cry.

As far as American education goes (mind you, the bar isn't just low, it's underground), I received one that didn't give us a rose-tinted version of history. I was taught about Euro-American atrocities, including what Columbus was actually like, the Triangle Trade, and how slavers turned from oppressing Tainos to Africans. My textbook even mentioned Haitian independence (again, bar's underground). But I had to learn about the cultural significance of voudou during the uprising, Code Noir, the backlash from Europe that established the current relationship between Haiti and DR, etc. from other sources, including Freedom Cry.

I like that Ubisoft doesn't flinch away from what Black and Indigenous folks (including the Kanien'kehá:ka in ACIII and Kesegowaase, who is Wolastoqiyik) had to go through during this time period, but instead of painting a pure victim narrative, it reminds us that they had agency, and because people are not monolithic and always clash over the "right" way to help others, there was inner conflict too. And that's not something that's shown in a lot of historical media about slavery, segregation, the Trail of Tears, broken treaties, etc. because they end up taking the white guilt route.

But it's still incredibly difficult to watch. I played that scene on the ship in the final sequence before killing De Fayet, and SPOILERSSTARThaving to leave people still chained up in the ship behind was awful I ran at them several times and tried to find a way around to get to them before realizing there was no way to do soSPOILERSEND.

I still can't believe the audacity of Ubisoft to show these scenes. That includes when Ratohnhaké:ton's village was burned down; Noah Watts mentioned that it was hard to watch with the knowledge that this was the reality Indigenous folks had to face then. I...personally think they should be shown, because that's just reality, but it's difficult to watch.

Speaking of, I'm still salty about having to kill Jing Lang in Black Flag, she was the ONLY Asian around and they did THAT, even though as a group we were not getting oppressed by Europeans or anyone in the Caribbean at the time. If they ever released a game about atrocities against Chinese or Chinese diaspora I'd just turn off the game and leave tbh. Again, should be shown, but difficult to watch.

I love Adéwalé so, so much.

I said I'd probably have a different opinion on what my favorite AC songs are after playing Freedom Cry, but tbh I don't have a particular favorite on this track. It might be my favorite overall track, though.

I had a good chuckle over learning that Tristan D. Lalla was in Raisin in the Sun iykyk.

I'm gonna reboot the sequence where I kill De Fayet again, the first time wasn't satisfying enough brb.

[feral-renaissance-cat]

Unless you are or your recent ancestors were actually from the Caucasus, you're not Caucasian. Caucasian is not a synonym for European or "white" (although some Caucausians are what you USAsians call white, while others are not, and some Middle Easterns and North Africans by European standards are white, too, because for us it's a skin colour, not an ethnicity). Most Europeans are not Caucasian and the Caucasus is a relatively small part of Europe (but very ethnically diverse!). Bottom line, please stop appropriating the term Caucasian. You're USAmerican, not Caucasian.

My great-grandfather didn’t rush his wife and ten children out of the jaws of the Armenian Genocide for you to be petty at me on the Internet.

[grungepoetica]

you know... the more i think about it, the more i realize that the biggest thing hindering my transition is the fear that i'll end up alone because of it

like obviously i know i'll end up alone at the end of my life because that's how life and death work, but the journey to get there feels. very empty. large chunks of my family have had & will continue to have negative reactions (or acting like i never came out), friends are a very temporary presence that fade whenever somebody moves away, and the romance i thought i could depend on doesn't exist anymore

but so much of transition is physically and emotionally draining and the vast majority of people NEED others that they can lean on and trust with that level of vulnerability, and who also won't see this leaning as a burden

and i don't really have anyone like that. i have one or two friends that would be willing, but they don't have the resources to help as much as i need it, and my friends that have resources probably wouldn't be willing for one reason or another. which means i'm left with myself.

realistically i know that someone would be willing to at least try to help if i asked, but that doesn't make me feel less alone with this chaotic mess of gender anxiety and rejection and dysphoria and religious trauma and psychic damage from the looming threat of genocide. which i never want to bring up, because i don't want people to avoid me because i talk about the negative too much.

it's self-destructive and idk how to get out of it :/