#growing up in “conflict”

[psychologeek]

Your defense of Israel murdering or displacing all the Palestinians is disgusting.

You defend the government’s actions over the whole course of its existence and deny is subjugation and occupation of Palestine.

Israel is a colonist nation. Regardless of who your ancestors are from thousands of years ago, you do not get to go to another country and forcefully expel its current population out of some inane sense of birthright.

I am African American. My ancestors were stolen from their homelands, sold to slavers, and shipped across the sea where then endured torture in every meaning of the word for generations. The African American community is still recovering.

But that in no way gives me the right to return to the African country of my ancestors and demand that whoever lives there (and has lived there for centuries) leaves and gives their land to me so I can make a new country. And I’m talking about a crime that happened only 300 years ago, not thousands.

The Israel government is currently committing war crimes at unprecedented levels in modern times. And their only goal is to expel all Palestinian from Gaza (and the West Bank). They don’t care about the hostages, they just want land.

October 7th does not exist in a vacuum. Even if it did it would not justify the thousands of children that have been murdered as a result. Over the course of 75 years of occupation Israel have murdered countless children and other innocents, all far before October 7th.

Antisemitism is an incredibly serious problem in the world. But antizionism is not antisemitism. What right do westerners, regardless of who their ancestors were and regardless of what they have been through, to forcefully claim an already occupied plot of land in the Middle East. The answer is none. If they do so they are colonizers. Just like if I were to forcefully claim land in Africa today I would be a colonizer.

Real nazis exist. White supremacist exist. And many of them actual support Israel because they recognize it as a facist state that kills brown people.

True antisemitism exists and it is being largely ignored so Zionists can attack Palestinians and other Arabs for refusing to give their own land to Western transplants.

You should reflect on the empathy you have for Israel soldiers and the lack of empathy you have for the Palestinian children (the nearly 10,000) who have been blown up, shot, and starved to death of the course of the last few months.

You justify their deaths at every corner and talk about the fear of violence you feel, but not the actual violence they endure.

You have the nerve to write about a complicated middle eastern child like Damian when if he were real, you would be justifying his murder at the hands of western fascists.

Anon,

first of all - I do have to thank u for taking it to my Tumblr instead of the comment section on ao3. I appreciate it.

For those interested - this is the fic anon refers to at the end of the comment, when saying "You have the nerve to write about a complicated middle eastern child like Damian"

TL;DR:

Me (literally was a Middle Eastern child who grew up to be a ME adult, and have a complicated family relationship)

me: writing "Hi, Intifada is actually a bad thing. Bombs are blind, you know" in my A/N of one of my fics.

Anon from the USA: HOW DARE YOU VIOLENT WHITE FACIST!!!!!

me: ?_?

*********

now for the actual reply!

1."Your defense of Israel murdering or displacing all the Palestinians is disgusting."

Where, exactly, did I say I support murder/displacement of people?

(And yes, I mean ANY people)

2. "You defend the government’s actions over the whole course of its existence"

Umm, what?

I definitely disagree with (many many MANY) things the government did. 'over the whole course of its existence' - wow. You really went on with it, huh?

3. "and deny is subjugation and occupation of Palestine."

"subjugation, occupation " - again, what?

And, how do you enslave a LAND?

That is a very interesting claim you're making here.

(Not to mention that, Palestine was the COLONIAL name of the reign. But who cares?)

4. "Israel is a colonist nation."

Do you know what "colonist" means?

I'll give you a hint - it requires having a country in a first place, and expending.

5. "Regardless of who your ancestors are from thousands of years ago"

No, but you see - it DOES matter.

That statement means that heritage doesn't matter. That 'homeland' has an expiring date.

A. Since many of those who consider themselves Palestinians today do it bc THEIR ancestors lived in the reign, it is a crucial thing. And an interesting claim.

B. Does it apply to other places as well? I mean, are you also against "land back" and independence for Puerto Rico (which is, btw, ANOTHER colonial name).

C. There have always been Jews in Israel. Judaism (which comes from "Judea" - you know, the old southern Jewish kingdom? in the Jerusalem area?

6. "you do not get to go to another country and forcefully expel its current population out of some inane sense of birthright."

I agree. I don't support any expel for anyone. I believe there's enough place for anyone that wants to live IN PEACE. About 20% of Israel's population are Arabs-Israelis. I had Muslim roommate in the past, and where I study, about 25% of my class are Muslims.

7. "I am African American. My ancestors were stolen from their homelands, sold to slavers, and shipped across the sea where then endured torture in every meaning of the word for generations."

Yes. So were my ancestors. (Guess who built the Collosum?) And my people are still being harrased and murdered.

7. "The African American community is still recovering."

So does the Jewish population worldwide.

8. "But that in no way gives me the right to return to the African country of my ancestors and demand that whoever lives there (and has lived there for centuries) leaves and gives their land to me so I can make a new country."

There is no demand for anyone to leave.

About the "lived here for centuries" claim :

In the first quarter of the 19th century, Israel population was about 250k (about 25% Jews.)

overall population according to year. origin mentioned.

Then, in 1948, the arab population in Israel was 1,237,000 (67%) and the Jewish population was 608,000 (33%).

for example, main cities population 1860-1946:

Jerusalem (over all, Jews, Muslims, Christians) ,Jaffa (over all, Jews, Muslims, Christians), Haifa (over all, Jews, Muslims, Christians)

Same origin also cites a lot of immigration (mostly from Egypt and Lebanon).

****

[So, you go by the right of conquer? as in "if you live there, then it's yours"? So, do you support the Jewish return to Hebron (Jewish community constantly, until 1929.) and Gaza (same)?]

Of course that you, as a single person, can't do that. May I remind you of decision 181 of the UN? about 2-state solution?

In fact, the first accords, the UN ones? said "we'll give 80% of the land to 70% of the population" (Arabs) "and 20% of the land to 30% of the population"

Jews said: ok!

Arabs said: umm. Nope. We want everything, or there'll be blood.

You can probably read about what happened to the Jews that were left in Gush Etzion and other off-border Jews after Israel declared independence.

[Why am I using the term "Arab" and not "Palestinian"? well, that's what they called themselves:]

Arab leaders like Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi told the Peel Commission in 1937: "There is no such country as 'Palestine'; 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented!" During the 1930s, anti-British and anti-Jewish riots were enflamed by the newly created "Arab Higher Committee,"( Arab - not Palestinian!) the central political organ of the Arab community of Mandate Palestine .In 1946, Arab historian Philip Hitti testified before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry that "there is no such thing as Palestine in history.” In 1947, Arab leaders protesting the UN partition plan argued that Palestine was part of Syria and “politically, the Arabs of Palestine (were) not (an) independent separate … political entity.” In 1947, the UN proposed a "Jewish" State and an "Arab" (again, not Palestinian) State.

9. "And I’m talking about a crime that happened only 300 years ago, not thousands."

Yes. If you want to know why the Jewish population is/was suspicious about living under arab/muslim authorities, feel free to look up the Hebron massacre (and ethnic cleansing - the eareser of the Jewish people in 1929. Also the EC of the Jewish community in Gaza in 1929, several exiles before. Also massacre of Zfad 'what year?' - ALL OF THEM).

And that before mentioning the EC of jews from MENA countries - arab/Muslims countries (there's a nice song about it. Feel free to listen.)

10. "The Israeli government is currently committing war crimes at unprecedented levels in modern times."

Uhm.

The Holocaust? Buko Haram? Hamas? Iran-Balochistan? dam, SYRIA?? Hello?

Funny how EVERYTHING can, all of a sudden, become "the worst thing in modern history".

(There are, probably, war crimes going on. Which is terrible, and should NOT happen, and there's a lot of ppl in Israel calling against it. But just bc you don't like something, or bc it's bad, doesn't mean it's a war crime.)

11. "And their only goal is to expel all Palestinian from Gaza (and the West Bank)."

No, hun. I'm sorry you fell for the propaganda.

Their goal is to return the quiet to the area. Since, you know, we STILL HAVE MISSILES FIRED AT CIVILIAN AREAS as had been in the 20+ last years. Not to mention terror attacks (hi, remember the 07/10?) And THE KIDNAPPED PEOPLE, MOSTLY CIVILIANS.

(Which is a WAR CRIME, btw. In relation to no.10).

12. "They don’t care about the hostages,"

I'm sorry, what?

Right. You say it as... someone who never been in Israel, and get news from Al Jazeera (funded by the same ppl who fund Hamas), I guess.

(Literally some of those who currently fight has family and friends that were kidnapped.)

Though, about the government - idk. I honestly lost any try to understand what the current PM trying to do.

13. "they just want land."

Of course. Which is EXACTLY why Israel has tried to make peace agreements 5 times before, willing to give away land. EXACTLY why Israel had exiled every last jew from Gaza Strip in 2005, during the disengagement. Exactly why, during the peace agreements with Egypt, Israel gave away Sinai (which is about the size of the rest of Israel.)

14. "October 7th does not exist in a vacuum."

Love this comment. Such a great idea.

I bet you'd say the same thing about Floyd, won't you?

I mean, it didn't happen in a VACCUM. That officer felt threatened and I'm sure he was very sad afterwards.🥺🥺

15. "Even if it did it would not justify the thousands of children that have been murdered as a result."

aaaannd we reach the part of PROPAGANDA. I'll be honest, I'm tired of it.

I'll only say - according to international law, and the laws of war (LoW), hiding in civil population is a WAR CRIME. So is using child soldiers, hiding HQ and ammunition under hospitals, religious places, schools, and kindergartens.

16. "Over the course of 75 years of occupation Israel have murdered countless children and other innocents, all far before October 7th.

check your resources about: 75 years. "murder countless children"

Antisemitism is an incredibly serious problem in the world. But antizionism is not antisemitism. What right do Westerners, regardless of who their ancestors were and regardless of what they have been through, to forcefully claim an already occupied plot of land in the Middle East. The answer is none. If they do so they are colonizers. Just like if I were to forcefully claim land in Africa today I would be a colonizer. Real nazis exist. White supremacist exist."

Love that you claim me to be westerner and\or white, as I'm neither. Go back to no.8. Jews ALWAYS lived here. wanting a state, when *all countries in the area started becoming their own countries* isn't the problem. Claiming that only THAT country has no right to exist - yes, it is antisemitic, sorry. Or are you also against Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. as their own countries?

Also - not forcefully. UN decision.

"Real nazis exist. White supremacist exist." - funny how they BOTH agree that Israel is bad. Almost like they have 1 thing in common

(Hint: this isn't a strong urge for world peace)

"And many of them actually support Israel because they recognize it as a facist state that kills brown people."

- Dog whistle!

"Jews are white killing brown ppl" + "jews are the REAL nazis"

"True antisemitism exists and it is being largely ignored so Zionists can attack Palestinians and other Arabs for refusing to give their own land to Western transplants."

"Jews are white colonisers that came to kill all the nice PoC who lived peacefully!

"You should reflect on the empathy you have for Israel soldiers and the lack of empathy you have for the Palestinian children (the nearly 10,000) who have been blown up, shot, and starved to death of the course of the last few months."

- you don't care about the kids!!!!

(Israelis are soldiers and murderous, VS. the Palestinians who are all innocent kids who did nothing.) don't care about the Israeli ones).

"You justify their deaths at every corner and talk about the fear of violence you feel, but not the actual violence they endure."

- YOU ARE VIOLENT! How dare you say you want ACTUAL peace, one that includes NO ONE being targeted by missiles??

[Can you, in your OWN WORDS, say what are "Nazism", "Facism", and "Zionism"? bc one of those isn't like the others.]

"You have the nerve to write about a complicated middle eastern child like Damian when if he were real, you would be justifying his murder at the hands of western fascists."

- Wow. How dare I, a Middle Eastern who grew up in a complicated family, write about a Middle Eastern child who grew up in a complicated area and complicated family situation?

really, SHAME on me!

But sure-

The problem is that I write about Damian, a FICTIONAL CHARACTER, and not that actual, real life, ppl suffer.

The problem is that I dare say "Yo, ppl, calling for Intifada, aka TERROR ATTACKS (that killed EVERYONE - Jews, Muslims, Christians, etc.) is bad and violent. Of course. No matter that rise in violence is destructive and harmful to EVERYONE.

I see you came here through my fanfic. Fanfic that part of it was trying to get more comfortable with my grandma's old culture and language. And the other part was about educating myself more about religion I'm not familiar enough with, and reminding myself that people are people. (Hoping that knowing and understanding would help me coup with my own personal prejudice and trauma, as I keep seeing the faces of the dead I knew and keep dreaming about the baby from the terror attack when I was a kid and keep feeling the ground shaking, even though I'm no longer a child in an unprotected area when all I could do was lay on the ground and pray the missiles won't fall near me)

Let me ask you something -

I was born in Israel, and so did my parents, and so did THEIR parents (except for a grandma who immigrated as a toddler from Yemen. Yes, that country that just exiled the last Jewish family in 2022, current Jewish population: 1. That Yemen.)

And it seems like you have never even been to this continent. Never had to run to shelter. Doesn't have baby photos with gas masks, or know how to find the "as protected as possible" area (since not every place has a shelter) -

so you, a random anon, who doesn't really know anything about an ongoing war\conflict that affects many lives, come and criticise me for calling for no more violence.

Let me ask you something -

What gives you the right?

[chloesimaginationthings]

Mike can’t handle Abby in the next FNAF movie..

[nell0-0]

Just a bit more about my HC for this lil' guy

[musings-n-museums]

i don't know which one feels more like home. (the uncertainty or the chaos)

fireworks by jaedha godwin, pinterest // split by niki // post by @haykhighland (infinite thanks for letting me use your post // special by sza // images from pinterest // post-glacial by tori mccandless // "saga (i won't forget you when i'm gone)", andrei voznesensk - translated by @metamorphesque // split by niki // image from pinterest

[bacchuschucklefuck]

space sweepers but they're delivery people and are at no point on screen through the entire movie

[greeneyessmize]

Today's thoughts are of the youth of Penelope & Colin and how it affects their relationship, specifically: how they fight.

Penelope is maybe 20 at most. Colin is perhaps 23.

They are also a part of the upper class. This allows them essentially a longer childhood in some ways for the era. They are emotionally pretty on par with a somewhat shy and sheltered 18 year old today who has never had a relationship and a 20 year old college kid who was also a bit hiddenly shy but has dated around a bit.

This means that neither of them have ever had to compromise on a larger, but intimate, and more important scale.

They don't know how to fight from a place of common goal. This is what they have to learn together.

I am going into detail with how this affects multiple scenes, so here is a cut for everyone. :)

Pen & Colin only know fighting with siblings, parents, friends, and enemies. So they know fight against, not fight for.

Penelope specifically only knows how to fight by false retreat and full opposition.

Her false retreat is seen most clearly in her use of Lady Whistledown. This is where she cocoons herself outwardly but lets her anger fly using precisely cloaked arrows. Her LW comments on Colin's fakeness upon his return to Mayfair showed a lethal strike.

Her full opposition fights are seen in her arguments with Eloise, both over her yelling that yes she does want to be married some day and then when Eloise confronted her about being LW, and then in her fights with Colin over LW.

When she and Colin fight in the middle of the street the night before their wedding, Pen goes full opposition, even going up on the high step to put her on the same level as Colin as much as possible. She does not retreat, she does not shrink. She goes conflict blow to conflict blow with him. She apologizes but does not bend or break. There is no compromise to be found because they are fighting against, not for. As one raises their voice, the other matches. There will not be a winner, but they don't know that.

Colin's fighting styles are either full shutdown, or like Pen, full opposition.

His full opposition fight with Pen in the middle of the street shows that he also will not back down. Each thing Pen says, he counters until she loudly declares the one thing he can't refute: that she loves him.

You also see that he is unwilling to compromise in his full shutdowns. He won't even try to talk to Pen after they are married during the nights and mornings where he places himself on the settee. He doesn't know how to say what he desperately needs to express to her in any constructive way. So. He stays on the settee, as close as he can to Pen, but unable to engage with her.

When she tries to engage with him, like at the review of the wedding breakfast planning, and it is she who makes the majority of the attempts, Colin still only knows how to go full opposition and/or full shutdown. Pen tries to answer him honestly when he asks if she will end LW because she really doesn't know. But since he can't give her grace to understand her on this... It only leads to more teary eyes and more distance.

On their wedding day, their tenuous truce after the middle of the street argument is broken in their fight after the Queen's threats. Here we see Penelope go full opposition and proclaim clearly and for the first time that she is Whistledown. And then Colin ultimately reacts with full shutdown, saying he will sleep on the sofa/settee.

The morning after their wedding, Colin is teary-eyed, taking tea fully dressed on the settee where he clearly spent the night. He leaves Penelope abruptly while she is still undressed for the day, intending to leave her out of his plans for the day. He definitely saw she was upset by this. I do wonder if that gave him a bit of dark satisfaction.

When Penelope comes to Bridgerton House to inform Colin of Cressida's blackmailing, Penelope gives way when Colin focuses his full opposition towards Cressida instead of her. Granted it takes a few times of being ignored, but she doesn't yell and ultimately lets it go. You can see that it hurts her to let Colin disregard her wishes, but she still ultimately allows it until he messes it all up. In this debacle they both learned to step back from full opposition between each other.

Penelope realized that even when it does not end well, sometimes she must let Colin have his way. Colin realized that not listening to Pen is where mistakes are made. Neither of them are yelling anymore.

Then comes the day of Francesca and John's wedding. It's not until she doesn't give him the reaction he thinks he wants that morning, as he is forlornly laying on the settee... that we see a shift. She does not react with regret or sadness or pain or anger. Pen is calm, cool, collected. She says she will spare him the confined shared carriage to Bridgerton House. She breezes out of his reach while he is still processing this new development.

Colin takes an important step by going to reread all of Penelope's letters. This is something he did not do in anger. He did this so he could gain perspective. This is his realization that full shutdown is ineffective and is not doing anything he wants or needs.

Penelope also is taking a step forward. She recognizes that false retreat and cloaked attacks are only increasing her own damage. She appeals to Colin with earnestness and honesty after the wedding of Francesca & John. She and he both refrain from moving into full opposition fighting this time. They are listening to each other. Colin asks what Penelope needs from him. She answers with everything he has needed to hear. He tells her what he needs, she listens. They are looking at a common goal. She moves forward with her plan to confess to the queen.

Then after her confession to the Ton at the Butterfly Ball, Penelope does the one thing for Colin that she can think of to heal the wounds of their fighting: she offers to let him go.

This is not something either of them ever wanted. But Penelope offers it because she truly feels, that with their very little communication through this, that Colin must want freedom from her. She cannot see through the pain they have inflicted on one another.

Colin immediately recognizes that now is the moment he must say everything in his heart. He has a moment of panic, of potential loss. Through everything he has always wanted and loved Penelope. He just had no idea how to show it while he was also angry. But now he has let go of his anger, and he will deal with it better should it happen that he is angry again.

Colin does what he needs to most. He tells her everything he is feeling. They are honest with each other. They have their common goal. They won the fights together.

[paunchsalazar]

Dean and Castiel in season 14

[bixels]

Be honest, what are your thoughts on appledash? Do you hate it or its more of not a big deal

Not a big deal to me. I like it, I see all the appeals, I just personally like Rarijack more.

[story-book-sillies]

The “girl who grew up as a tomboy and liking “boy things” to trying to reclaim her femininity through her regression” pipeline is so real

[epicfirestormer]

Will never get over how Starscream and Skyfire's relationship is always doomed. There's never an iteration of them where they both stay on the same side at the end. They always end up being against each other, tearing each other apart (whether intentionally or not). They always end up losing each other, be it by a snowstorm, by the war, or by death itself. They never receive a happy ending together, one if not both of them is doomed to suffer.

Skyfire is doomed to be an Autobot, by forces out of his control. Starscream is doomed to be an Decepticon, by his own self destructive tendencies. They are both doomed, because of who they are. They always try to save the other, in their own way. But it never works. They are doomed to fail, whether they stay together or not.

[squash1]

so very raven boys :’-)

but we grow up.

[lgbtlunaverse]

So since mxtx has said that in novel canon nie huaisang is eventually going to end up being chief cultivator we can presume the headshaker thing, while based on his existing personality, was in fact an act and he is way more competent at his job than he's let on. And with Jin Guangyao dead and gone he has no reason to put on that act anymore.

Imagine being an Nie cultivator. Your flopppy incompetent sect leader comes home from traumatic events after it turns out his older brother's sworn brother- who's been over to your sect basically every other week for years now- is the one that killed said brother and you're fully prepared for tears and dramatics. And while you definitley don't like lianfang-zun since it just came out he killed your last (way more competent) sect leader he was sorta the one holding the sect together so you're bracing yourself for the worst, and instead he's... stoic? Paperwork is suddenly getting done well and on time without help. He's not wailing during negotiations anymore and you're getting actual good trade deals for the first time in over a decade. He answers questions now? With something other than "I don't know i don't know i really don't know!"

And even if you had none of the revelations wei wuxian had in guanyin temple, slowly the realization creeps up on you that all his earlier embarassing antics that cost your family their comfortable livelihoods and your sect their good name was on purpose. And from there it's not that hard to put two and two together. The rest of the cultivation world assumes the shock of jin guangyao's betrayal has finally forced the headshaker to grow up a little but you have worked side by side with him for a decade, probably even watched him grow up under his brother's rule. You know better.

How do you feel at that point? What can you even do? He's your sect leader. And he's finally doing his job, things are looking up, shouldn't you feel relieved? It' not like his incompetence really caused any deaths among the nie, just wiped out generational wealth and reputation that will take years and years to build back up. Is it really reasonable to only start hating someone for something when they've stopped doing it? Thereby proving that they were capable of stopping all along?

[daisyachain]

I’ve made this post before but I can’t be bothered to find it. In what we commonly consider a ‘traditional’/patriarchal European society, the paths in life are: marriage with children (acceptable), bachelorhood (frowned upon, locked out of certain professions/roles), spinsterhood in servitude to parents (probably suffering), religious servitude. An unmarried person is a servant either of the local lord, the Lord, or the parents. The parental relationship has a built-in hierarchy of the senior parents and the underling child. All pressures push down and toward marriage as a form of (highly limited for women) freedom.

One of the few ways around this system is the sibling relationship. Sticking with a sibling can provide an avenue to independence from hierarchy via a peer relationship, a person who moves in with a married sibling is protected under the auspices of that marriage (though somewhat dependent on the sibling) and is not automatically subordinate as with aristocracy/religious orders/parents. I’m interested in the sibling relationship as a kind of lifeline or shield against the buffets of social expectation specially in a world where there is some kind of censure against unmarriage and in which marriage is seen as the final step in growing up. Siblings are the playmates of childhood, they are biological family, to remain part of s biological family unit is acceptable, to remain unmarried is not, the sibling is the last line of defense against a spouse without submitting to hierarchy and/or could be read as the last line of defense against growing up.

This isn’t coherent. I like the idea of two siblings choosing to remain close into adulthood not because they necessarily like each other that much, but because they understand the consequences of abandoning someone to social forces. Siblings as a kind of delayed maturation, a sign that something is wrong, a failed evolution, a vestigial relationship, you’re supposed to be close growing up and then split into different clans, but they have failed to do so and have closed the loop to return to childhood.

[nehoteika]

it's strange, knowing now who it was this whole time...

[linkedin-offficial]

ilaw's mama, from a simpler time

lady sariwa; a medic borne of the nesters family

[alphaketoglutaricacid]

when toshiro got on laios ass for being inconsiderate and never thinking about how his actions affect others like he was mean abt it but hes not wrong. Thats a pretty major character flaw and a pattern of behavior for laios — w not choosing jobs that made money for namari who is in a pretty dire financial situation where she cant even get off the island and has to go adventuring in the dungeon to get out of debt, who even explicitly brought this up, eating marcilles familiar immediately even tho she was attached to it, kidnapping shuro into his party and putting him in life threatening situations without like really checking he wanted to be there…?, wanting to see if izutsumi has more than one set of nipples when dehumanization is a HUGE huge issue for her the list goes on and on and on. Like when a friend does this to you its just kinda annoying but when ur the leader u really should be checking if everyones needs r met without them telling u. Like the autism plays a factor for sure, his cultural upbringing plays a factor for sure, but as ppl regardless I think u gotta step up to meet the needs of ppl in the moment or realize u shouldnt be calling the shots. just bc its influenced by factors out of ur control does not make it not a serious character flaw. And its written as such in the story.