#i benefit from anti-Blackness as a non-Black person

[khizuo]

I think there’s a lot more nuance to your f1nn5ter take that’s missing simply because it doesn’t really take into account… how and why people use tumblr?

most people don’t use tumblr to try and advance queer liberation or promote social justice and mutual aid…. they use it for entertainment first and foremost. they want to post/see things that they enjoy, instead of focusing solely on real life issues. hell, tumblr can also be an ‘escape’ of sorts from the shitty reality around them (or that they personally experience)

so they just… don’t want to make their entire feed about those real life struggles, and doom posts about those trying to kill and erase them, and people asking for help to escape their shitty lives. it’s distressing and sad and not what they come to tumblr for. instead they focus on things that are more simple and lighthearted and positive, like a popular gnc streamer.

the point I’m trying to make here is that…. I don’t think you can accurately judge someone’s moral beliefs or actions based on their posting/reblogging habits, because for them this isn’t the moral beliefs website— that’s not what they’re here for. It might be for you, and that’s okay! but that’s not how it is for, id argue, the majority of users. they want a safe space away from that and i don’t think pressuring or shaming bloggers for doing that (/for not posting about [X] issue) is going to help anyone.

hi anon! if anyone out there following me uses tumblr as an escapism site™, then good for you. i'm commenting less on the moral character of individual people as i am on a general culture i've observed on the site as a whole. and the fact is: posts about how "revolutionary" f1nnster are get tens of thousands of notes while trans crowdfund posts struggle to get to a thousand.

the thing is — very few people on tumblr are completely removed from the reality of queer oppression. posts on the topic are frequently reblogged, because such a large part of the userbase is lgbtq. this is why f1nn is so popular on tumblr rn — people are upholding him as a shining example of gender-noncomformity. the problem comes when people (mostly tme queer people) start legitimately calling him more "revolutionary" than trans women because he's "challenging gender norms" or something. this completely ignores context — f1nnster is a popular wealthy white streamer, while transfemme folks often face disproportionate levels of violence and poverty, often as a direct result of coming out.

a lot of tumblr activism is performative. i'm not saying this in a "this makes xyz a bad person" kind of way, what i mean is that posts about social justice and hating capitalism and shit will blow up with the people reblogging them doing nothing to actually build material solidarity, which, yes, involves mutual aid and uplifting marginalized voices. now, i don't know everyone on tumblr, so I'm sure there are people who do mutual aid/organizing work offline and then come on here to exclusively fandompost. but i'm also sure there are people who don't do any mutual aid/organizing work and who then come on here to reblog a few social justice-y posts and then never think about concrete actions to take to actually live up to that which they say they care about. and these are very often the same people who will reblog a post about how "revolutionary" f1nnster is.

I know of plenty of people on tumblr who could participate in mutual aid but don't. this popular tumblr idea that crowdfunding posts are evil or whatever needs to die. it screams of liberalism and a "not my problem" attitude that is actively harmful towards goals of liberation. my complaints are about the performative leftism that I observe a lot on here, and how this culture of performative leftism has chosen f1nnster to uplift as its newest hero. and honestly, I'm more worried about trans poc and multi-marginalized folks who are struggling to get their basic needs met than i am of white and/or class-privileged queer people feeling bad about their escapism site™.

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

AITA for bringing dahl to a compagny potluck ?🍩🍜🍝🍱🍛

Everyone had to bring "their speciality" at work for lunch. I didn't really paid attention to the wording and brought a Dahl.

Dahl is easy to make for a lot of people and very accommodating for people with food restrictions (I am vegetarian with various allergies and used to only rely on the food I bring myself in shared meal events). Emma, a colleague, was mad at me because she interpreted "speciality" as "cultural food" (no one was bringing specific traditional food, just the usual potluck food). She thinks I am committing cultural appropriation.

Emma is a Black American woman, while I am white. We both live in a white European country, however my patents were immigrants in this country, and European "racism" can see 1000 flavors of "white" and are quite xenophobic (if not plainly racist), so I have been victim of racism/xenophobia here.

Emma is well versed in a lot of woke stuff, anti racism, feminist and stuff and I usually look up to her on those subjects but here… I don't think there is cultural appropriation ? Maybe it's an American/European difference?

From what I understand, cultural appropriation is when a dominant culture (usually white) benefits from doing cultural stuff of someone else, while the minority who the stuff comes from is oppressed and forbidden of doing the stuff.

But I am not saying Dahl is a dish I invented. Everyone is well aware it's Indian. I didn't published "my" receive or anything. I have no social media influence and don't posted about the food I cook anyway. People at work were unphased by the dish.

In my country, Indian people don't face discrimination (that I know of) for cooking their traditional food. There is a ton of Indian restaurants in my city and they are managed by Indian people. I go to those Indian restaurant quite often. So I don't think there is a financial or systemic problem.

I have cooked Dahl for myself for decades as it works really well with my vegetarian diet (as lentils are great plant based protein source) and MY cultural dishes are way too meat based. A lot of foreigner friends taught me their cultural vegetarian dish, as I taught then mine. I have seen a lot of white an POC (but non Indian) people cook Dahl. It's really a go to dish in the vegetarian circle I frequent.

My Indian friends think Emma is dumb but they are biased. The only Indian person at work didn't care and is usually pretty racist himself so I wouldn't trust his judgment if he told me something was "safe to do".

Was I culturally insensitive or was her anger misguided ?

[david-talks-sw]

The fact that Dave Filoni called Anakin “the greatest Jedi ever” is proof that he’s bias AF. His anti-Jedi rhetoric is bupkis.

I wonder if he means "the greatest" in terms of in-universe fame...?

Dunno if this is the case in Canon (then again Dave Filoni blatantly ignores any *non-motion* transmedia elements in Canon so meh), but in Legends he's:

"Anakin Skywalker, the Hero with no Fear™, handsome, dashing, the face of the Republic's army during the Clone War, the only Jedi who tried to resist the nefarious Order's coup and was treacherously murdered for it".

And I seem to remember that, in Canon, he's like the Jedi Temple's superstar anyway, every Jedi recognizes him on sight. I mean, that line from Baylon about "Anakin speaking highly of Ahsoka" must have some meaning beyond artificial personal stakes.

So from a fame and a "power level" standpoint... sure.

He's the greatest.

I'm giving Filoni the benefit of the doubt.

While I've talked about why Filoni's entire headcanon about the Jedi doesn't track with what George Lucas' intended narrative, I think it's worth acknowledging that Filoni's bias comes from part of his duties while directing The Clone Wars was.

One of the goals of TCW was humanizing Anakin, expanding upon his character make him go from "a character whose only purposes is to embody the themes presented in three movies based on the matinee serial format" to a relatable person, a good man, the hero Ben mentions to Luke in A New Hope.

I think it's normal that he'll see Anakin in a more positive light.

Also (and full disclosure this is just me theorizing I am no authority on any of this so if turns out I'm wrong just come right out and say so)...

I'm pretty sure that Filoni, Lesley Headland and most of the recent Star Wars authors are all Gen X, raised by baby boomers forced to conform to society, obey authority and have proper decorum (boys don't cry!) all of which they strove to rebel against. Add to that the corruption they witnessed growing up and coming out of high school, and you see a kind of jadedness emerge. "The rules aren't as black and white, the world is grey."

So while most of them and the boomers despised the Prequels upon release, a few of them projected a more individualistic headcanon onto those movies that fit with where their head was, at the time.

As such: Anakin isn't interpreted by them as a cautionary tale about what happens when you're greedy. He's a misunderstood rebel, a non-conformist who has his flaws but is ultimately good at heart. Which isn't entirely inaccurate, but it is very clearly an embellishment of a character who will one day become a space nazi.

The fact is... the Prequels were made by a boomer. One with very liberal values and who was himself a rebel, but a boomer all the same. The whole point of his story is...

"we all must come together and fight as one, if push comes to shove; we must all be compassionate and selfless if we are to survive; don't be greedy, let people go when it's their time to leave".

And then he makes the Jedi say that, making them beacons of truth and good and compassion in his fairy tale, now aimed at Gen Z kids.

Gen X-ers hear/read that and project all the boomer BS they had been told onto the Jedi...

"oh, so the Jedi are saying you shouldn't love yourself, you shouldn't be yourself, you should give up on what makes you an individual to fit in, you shouldn't feel any emotions"

Because nobody is that good, realistically, right?

This happened in other mediums. The one that comes to mind on the spot is the relationship between Mufasa and Scar.

In The Lion King, Mufasa is strong and noble, Scar is weak and conniving. Simple enough. Around that same time, in A Tale of Two Brothers, young Mufasa is shown to be pretty nice with Taka (Scar), who is framed as a spoiled brat to begin with.

Skip to the 2019 remake, and it's hinted Mufasa gave Scar his wound, and in The Lion Guard they explain that Scar got his nickname from Mufasa mocking him for a misadventure.

He went from being a noble king to a bully who had it coming, Scar is an underdog who got picked on. Because again: nobody is that pure, right? Fairytales be-damned.

Nothing is black and white, it's all grey.

So yeah, long story short I do think that Filoni being part of the generation that wasn't the target demographic but was old enough to retcon the crap out of the Prequels also plays a role into his view of Anakin.

[aikoiya]

DPxDC - Bell Above the Box

Dude, they used to put bells above graves in case someone was accidentally buried alive so that the interred could just ring the bell & be saved. Basically, if this happened to you, then you were supposed to feel around for a string inside the coffin, then pull. Or they'd tie the string to a toe so that if the buried begins to move, it just sets off automatically. Now, I get that this custom was originally for lead poisoning, but it feels pertinent here as well.

Now, imagine if Bruce, be it out of some vain hope, had had one installed, just in case, with a sensor that would alert the batcomputer, Alfred, & Batman if it were ever pulled. Never actually expecting for it to happen. Only for, in the wake of Superboy gutpunching reality, it does.

Because of this, Bruce is there as quickly as possible, before the League gets a chance to take Jason from him.

Jason is only half there & Bruce has him at home. But the confused boy tends to wander off.

It's because of this that Jason eventually wanders to a nearby swamp & finds what's called a "blue hole," though it looked more like a green hole to him.

The glowing green water that bubbled from the stone outcrop & filtered into the swamp felt somehow familiar. The closer he drew to it, the clearer his thoughts became until he fell in.

He's submerged for a moment, not really realizing what was happening, until it was as if someone had suddenly flipped a switch inside his head. His mind was clear & there was this strange, almost comforting energy in the center of his chest.

That's when Bruce reaches in & pulls him out.

Jason becomes a very low-grade halfa with only a few powers that he now has to practice at.

Things like advanced healing, increased strength, speed, & flexibility, intangibility every once in a while (like, he can't use it willynilly), the ability to actually grab & hit ghosts, night vision, able to walk silently, even the power to see the regular, non-GZ DC ghosts like Deadman & the Gentlemen Ghost. Not able to turn invisible, but he is able to affect people's perception of him similarly to ghosts. So, he can manipulate not only a person's sense of object permanence when in regards to himself, but he can also make himself unnoticeable. Like, he can basically do what the Chameleon Circuit does. Like this:

Spectral Acknowledgment

However, because he's not a very good ratio of halfa, his anti-gravity center isn't fully developed, so he can really only slow his falling. Just stuff that gives him an edge & a few benefits, while not taking away from his fighting style.

He also gets slitted pupils, pointed ears, tapetum lucidum, & fangs, as well as a core element once it's fully developed. I'm thinking an electric primary & either a fire or shadow secondary, but he can only really cover his body with the elements to give him an edge in combat.

The Pit Rage was much more manageable because the Lazurus Water he bathed in had actually been cleaned in the last century unlike the one in Nanda Parbat. At the same time, it isn't just that Ra's doesn't clean his bath water, it's also that Nanda Parbat's pit has been intentionally corrupted by dark magic & especially necromantic energy. Luckily, this one had recently (like, within the last 50 years) been purified via the same prayer used to make Holy Water (which is the proper means of neutralizing black magic from water). This helped to stave off Gotham's many curses from corrupting the water fully.

In the end, instead of becoming Red Hood, because he has no reason to, he becomes the Cardinal.

Not much difference in the costume to be fair. Instead, he wears the red vest (but it reaches his ankles like a trench) with an actual hood & a black mouth guard.

But, he does tend to use the All-Blades more often. Don't know how he gets them here, but he does because they're awesome!

One change to them, though. They don't only appear in the presence of pure evil & also work on paranormal beings. They are, however, only deadly to those who are evil. They can hurt those who aren't, but can't kill them.

However, despite Bruce having actually been there for him, the fact that the Joker was still walking around & killing people... stung...

The thing is that Bruce had been there for him. Had actually found him. Had kept him safe once he came back. And hadn't replaced him. So, Jason couldn't hate him entirely. But in a lot of ways, that's actually worse because it hurts even worse.

And because of this, he can't bring himself to trust Bruce.

And whenever Jason sees the Joker, it's like he's right back there in that chair being sold out by his own mother. Screaming for Bruce to save him.

You see, a ghost's killer is an extreme source of stress & anxiety for them. If they are still alive & able to continue on with what they do, it is a consistent source of trauma that can send the ghost spiraling if you're not careful. It is an IMMEDIATE & INTENSE trigger. Like, we are talking some serious PTSD! The sort that triggers the fight or flight instinct. So, even though it appears similar to Pit Rage, the source isn't rage, it's fear.

The only upside is that Dick is actually treating him like a brother now.

Then, one night, Jason hears Dick & Bruce arguing & learns that Dick had actually killed the Joker & that Batman revived him.

It shattered him.

He couldn't stay with Bruce anymore & went to live with Dick in Bloodhaven.

Edit: I also just learned that, apparently, due to being part of the All-Caste, Jason also has some basic precognative abilities, though he can't use them very long before they start causing migrains. As well as the apparent ability to just shut off people's powers.

I'm thinking about making Jason the resident magic-user/supernatural hunter in the batclan. Just as a treat!

I mean, does his love of literature also extend to research on ancient mythology & legends, even those of other cultures? Because if so, he could end up being a natural.

For those who don't know, I'm talking about the Supernatural-type hunters.

DP Character HC Masterlist

[transingthebourgeoisie]

funny how "non-black folks" can't have an opinion on whether US citizens benefit from US imperialism or not, even in a post that does not mention black people at all. I guess native americans don't actually have a history of suffering under colonization, genocide, and oppression by the US and the other settler states in America, since, you know, they are non-black.

(this person is one of the people running the harassment campaign btw)

I want to say that it's kinda've funny, but it's really not. It's somewhere between horrifying and pathetic. Of course we all know that the average USamerican 'leftist' becomes utterly deranged when forced to confront the idea that they are not, in fact, morally unimpugned, - even when we aren't making absurd moral judgements, and are just stating basic material facts.

Utterly disappointing, but what else can we honestly expect? Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds; tell a USamerican 'communist' that Imperialism isn't something they can dodge by telling their priest they're sorry at church, and in comes the aircraft carrier.

Edit; apparently the person in question there is south african, actually, and not american. Their position remains basically the same; absurd, anti-materialist feelgoodism.

[wathanism]

Your ideals are going to kill people. The only thing refusing to vote is going to do is ensure that the republicans win and their project 2025 gets enacted. This is not a conspiracy theory. They want a theocracy. They want authoritarianism. They want fascism. You and everyone you convince to not vote is letting that happen.

I don't know who convinced you that its impossible to care about two things at once, but abandoning the vulnerable here in the states because you care so deeply about the vulnerable on the other side of the world doesn't make you more righteous.

Refusing to vote for him is a foolish act that will do nothing to stop what is happening. Even if he finally pulls back all aid for Israel at the eleventh hour, no one will vote for him now, which means the vulnerable right here at home are fucked. Thanks.

i was really close to not answering you at all because i have a hard rule about not talking with selfish cunts who are commited to misunderstanding everything a non-white person says to them. but since you had the good sense to realize that you were being an ass right then, i'm going to assume that you're worth engaging with, and i'm going to hope you'll talk with me in good faith and read everything i have to say rather than blow up at me again. if nothing else, i'm going to use this as an opportunity to say all the things i've been wanting to say since i made that post. that said, i'm real pissed and i'm not gonna be all nice and palatable in my answer.

first of all, no i'm not a US citizen. i live in west asia. y'know, where all the wars are? gaza is five hours away from my hometown of damascus, which is also being bombed with your tax dollars, by the way! in fact, i grew up living under a textbook authoritarian theocracy. so don't sit there and talk to me like i don't know what it's like to be afraid of your own government. we're in this shithole world together, and you and i are a hell of a lot more like each other than the politicians putting our lives on the line.

second of all, i should have been more clear about what i actually would like for US voters to do. contrary to small-minded liberals' assumptions, i'm not republican nor am i anti-voting. i'm saying people should vote third party. i even have a preferred candidate in mind, jasmine sherman. they even have strict and well-defined policies to protect trans rights and provide universal healthcare that includes gender affirming care and reproductive care.

this is usually the point when usamericans talk down to me like it's my first day on earth, so let me be clear. i know about the electoral college. i know about the flaws of the first-past-the-post voting system. i know about ranked-choice voting and why that's a better system in almost every way. i know that until there's drastic changes to the US voting system, there is no chance a third party candidate could even win. i'm not delusional about that. and i'm asking you to protest-vote anyway. which, yes, i realize is a big ask, but consider that this is a big fucking problem that requires pretty drastic actions.

several absolute dumbasses who i refuse to engage with said some very interesting stuff that made me realize why so many people are quick to dismiss the idea of refusing to vote for either major party. some examples:

they describe the push to vote third party as us lashing out at biden. in their eyes, we're not politically aware adults with a righteous passion for justice. no, we're petulant children causing problems for everyone whose rights actually matter. maybe a nicer person than me can give them the benefit of the doubt, but i find it extremely suspect that they truly seem to believe that non-white people are irrational, easily-angered, thoughtless creatures with no understanding of the complexities of the situation. there's a complete refusal to consider that there might be an actual coherent strategy behind the activism of indigenous and black people.

and again, because this is not my first day on earth, i know about the "but trump!!" argument. i honestly am BAFFLED that liberals seem to genuinely believe they're offering anything novel or valuable to the discussion at hand when they parrot talking points that we've been hearing since 2016 with quite literally nothing to show for it.

but i digress. the important thing is: yes, i fucking know. i know trump would have a near identical policy on gaza. he'd also have an identical policy on the police, on covid, on immigration, and on most other issues. you worry about project 2025, and you're right to! but the thing is, and you'll forgive me for quoting imani here but she is the most correct person ever always, "everything in project 2025 relies on biden doing exactly what he's fucking doing right now. the more successful this genocide is, the more likely project 2025 is to happen." because at the end of the day, it doesn't require a republican president. it requires a CONSERVATIVE president. and that's what biden is.

i don't know if you're missing it or if you don't care, but democrats benefit from you being terrified, and that's exactly why they'll never keep you safe. you will always be one election away from being killed by the system because that's what keeps you complicit. democrats won't shoot the gun, but they will ALWAYS make sure it's loaded and that you're trapped in a room with the person who'll shoot you. don't forget that roe v. wade was overturned on biden's watch. trans rights were rolled back on biden's watch. covid deaths skyrocketed and protections were dismantled on biden's watch. he'll find every loophole in the book to funnel weapons to israel's military but he'll never lift a finger to fix the problems ruining your life, because he needs you to be as scared as you are. that's exactly what's keeping you from showing an ounce of compassion or solidarity to palestinians right now. and no, your fucking lip service and crocodile tears don't count as solidarity.

liberals have managed to completely forget the most important lesson about social justice: none of us are free until all of us are free. you've been so busy yelling at arabs to even realize that this moment in time is one of the greatest pushes against the two-party system. do you not get how important that is? right now, when damn near everyone who's even mildly left leaning (and many who are right leaning) is so deeply unsatisfied with both major candidates, is the perfect time to be thinking of ways to break out of this system. to organize, to advocate for your mystical fucking ranked choice voting!

palestinians aren't asking you to lay down your life and throw away your human rights so they can mildly spite joe biden. they're asking you to grow a fucking spine and stand on principle and god damn DO SOMETHING to tear apart the two-party system. make people realize that a third party candidate IS a viable one, so that one day they can be.

you're framing this as a matter of pitting palestinians versus americans, which couldn't be further from the truth. maybe instead of directing your hate towards palestinians and their allies, show some gratitude. palestinians are uncovering the veil of all the atrocities and all the corruption in the world, and they're giving the people of the earth a banner to unite under. there have never been so many people (afaik, at least) pushing against the systems of corruption in america. that kind of thing ripples out. standing with palestine isn't easy, but all of our lives will be better for it, including and especially the lives of minorities living in the US.

there is so, SO much more i can say about palestine, and it will inevitably turn into a very spiritual rant about the uniting force of the holy land. but i'm instead just gonna leave you with this tweet that i think sums up everything about this.

[transcriptroopers]

"Non-Violent" Protests

I recently saw a disturbing video of the anti-war protests currently going on. You may have seen it; several cops are holding down a Black protestor, who is restrained and not resisting. Still, while the protester is being held down by three cops, one uses a taser on this restrained person for several prolonged seconds. The white crowd stands around them doing nothing. Scratch that - a bunch of them are filming - some quickly raise their phones when the tazing begins around 19 seconds in- and I assume they think this is doing something. 

Tasers are not a non-lethal weapon! Black people are disproportionately targeted and killed by inappropriate taser use by police, and Black protesters are disproportionately arrested compared to their white peers. Standing there filming knowing you’re in no danger is taking advantage of your white privilege! 

The crowd should have stormed those cops the moment the taser came out. Or at least after multiple seconds of contact. There is a single cop with a weapon pulling guard duty, who can easily be dispatched from behind. 

When your comrade is being arrested, don't just stand there with your thumb up your ass. DE-ARREST THEM. The cops completely ignored being surrounded by useless observers because they know that getting filmed doesn’t mean shit. Look at their armed guard, his positioning! His weapon at ease and his movements relaxed because he knows none of you represent a threat to him even though you outnumber him ten to one! Meanwhile, look at how many of them it took to restrain this man! You all move in at once, push ‘em away from your comrade, expect resistance so stay together stay tight, protect your comrade so we can get the handcuffs off and get 'em out of there.

These mass protests have served as a perfect example of how non-violent action is a mere spectacle. If you aren’t willing to defend each other from violence, you are a participant in the violence. 

I highly recommend Peter Gelderloos’ “How Nonviolence Benefits the State” regarding the tactics of student protestors over the past week. If you really care about putting up a real resistance to systemic violence, then it’s time to start re-educating yourself about what violence is.

[system-of-a-feather]

Sorry for all the Tulpa-discourse lately, this is more of a Buddhist ramble / discussion than syscourse but ya know

It's been on my mind a lot between it being in syscourse circles heavily and the fact that I'm actually currently on a system-designated theraputic homework assignment to reconnect with Buddhist concepts and to incorporate it into my self care routine so I can get back to my baseline after doing something of a survival mode to help balance out XIV being in borderline-crisis lately resulting in my burn out

I'm (as Riku as a part) actually usually very hesitant to talk about much of my cultural and personal experiences and AAPI-rooted parts of my life because of old system dynamics, persecution, and a lot of other things that make me very anxious and prone to fawning when me existing in a space I am involved in is at all challenged which is largely why I leave it to XIV to voice it for me since he also is the guy that keeps me from falling into old dynamics. (<- literally is the person who thought I was *checks notes* faking being asian like that is a possible thing let alone something I thought LONGER than me faking DID)

So honestly, its kind of a bit cathartic occasionally to actually have a sense of self and security enough to have the balls to actually defend myself in terms of this sort of crap and assert that I actually, ya know, have an experience in life. So as much as I typically hate the negativity and contention that bringing this stuff up brings, it's honestly theraputic and part of me expressing a valid part of my existence and self - so with XIV's nudging I tend to let myself have that space.

With all that said, I wanted to bring up a discussion point and correction point now that I'm not genuinely and authentically triggered about racism, I think a thing I do want to comment on in regards to the rhetoric on the tulpa topic that anti-tulpa-term people get wrong when talking about Buddhism and """""""tulpamancy""""""" is that Buddhism is not a closed culture or closed practice and stating that does a disservice to the group as well; albeit its the lesser of two wrongs by a LONG shot so I shirk it off as a "to get to later" point

But Buddhism is incredibly open to anyone interested on engaging with it and its part of why - when I specifically talk about the critiques of """"""Western Tulpamancy"""""" in terms of Buddhism I try to remind myself to desalinate between "westerner" and "white". There are many many many white Buddhists - as there are many black, latin, native, Middle eastern, etc Buddhists as well.

In some cases and for some people, Buddhism is a religion and/or spirituality, for others it's more of a way of life / philosophy. Tibetan Buddhism, as I know it as a non-Tibetian Buddhist, is a lot more on the religion side of things which is a different topic I honestly am under knowledgeable to comment on - but overall the thing that ties a lot of Buddhism together is the core and underlying principles of acceptance, letting things go, connecting to the greater world, and just general enlightenment as a means of finding peace.

Myself, and a lot of Buddhists, gladly encourage people to look into Buddhists practices and principles and ideology because its honestly extremely healing and regardless of if you are SUPER into it and go become a monk or what not or if you just dabble in it, so long as you do it respectfully and understand your biases and genuinely have GOOD RESPECTFUL intent and an interest on understanding it more, its an amazing and really welcoming thing to get involved in.

The thing all the 'pro-tulpas' quote on the Dalai Lama is honestly entirely true. Almost everyone could benefit from the practices and principles found within Buddhism.

That is to say however, that there is a large difference between spending a day or two at a monastery and learning more about the culture and the ideas of Buddhism and integrating them into your life and just grabbing this Really Cool and Quirky High Level Principle / Ritual / Practice of a Specific Typically Very Dedicated Version of Buddhism and ignoring EVERYTHING ELSE about Buddhism and saying "this aspect, this aspect I like and I'm going to completely warp it how I like it while calling it and/or referencing it in terms of Buddhism to make it look intellectual and enlightened for me to be involved in it."

I've seen it said in some Buddhist communities and discussions regarding the more ritual and involved aspects of Buddhism - specifically in regards to the Mahayana approaches - that a lot of the practices and rituals when used inappropriately or unguided can be "dangerous" with danger in this sense being a worsening of the individuals conditions resulting in an increase in a lot of the core things almost all versions of Buddhism considers unhealthy and unideal such as increase in conflict, desire, and disconnect from the greater world and thus generally more suffering.

And on that front, while not being of the Mahayana school of thought and as a result not really believing so much in bodhisattvas, I can - from my personal view and perspective - entirely understand how frustrating it is to see a term often sighed with "buddhists roots" be used in a way that - in my opinion - almost exemplifies the exact opposite of what I understand to be the crux of the idea of Buddhist peace.

A large part of me getting more involved into the concepts Buddhism has to offer and honestly a thing that had both helped my healing journey and how I interact with my system is the large realization that the existence of "I" doesn't really have much ground to it in what it is and what it means and what defines "I".

That identity and human nature is largely a mobile and constant changing force part of a larger and grander thing that is just really existence as a whole and there is little that makes me more unique than say the trees or the squirrel looking for nut or a bird singing in the tree other than the fact that I have the "curse" of conscious awareness and 'advanced intellect' that makes it so that I both feel the need to >Be< something and the bother of "the next thing". A large part of practice is letting go of a lot of notions that a lot of society and life reinforce - one of the most in my current stage of learning and practice - is letting go of the concept of "me and I" and just, ya know, being.

And to me, looking at the """""Western Tulpamancy Community""""" you have people who are sectoring off a part of themselves, their experience, their life whatever and not only identifying it as seperate from them (NO!!!! We are all connected >:[ <- light hearted comment) but also giving that part of themselves an entire identity of it's own and a whole second sense of "I" beyond what was already there - combined with the overall themes of 'developing your tulpa' by giving it more traits and details and stuff until it 'becomes independent' is rooted in such American / Western individualism which DO not even get me started on how toxic individualism is and how inherently opposite it is to Buddhism and

//deep breath//

I'm getting ahead of myself, the truth is while the concept of 'creating a headmate' or whatever greatly concerns me as a Buddhist - as a human and as a Buddhist (in a different perspective), seeking out to change people is the last thing I'm interested in and it's honestly not this uber horrible or harmful thing and its really not my business; so as long as it is making someone happy and what not, I really don't care if it doesn't match to my theory cause ya know, theory is that - just theory. Live and let be ya know - yall have your own life to live and yall know how to live your own life better than I could assume to know so I'm not gonna try to tell you how to live it. Philosophical theory comes second to philosophical practice and practice says to live and let be.

But its just really frustrating a lot of the time to see how the topic is handled when its far from really what it is. And in theory, I should let it go because honestly, people using the word "tulpa" to describe experiences that are largely anti-thetical to my understanding of Buddhism - while annoying - is not the end of the world and fostering hate and aggression does nothing but increase the overall suffering (dukkha) in the world. Often, when I think about talking about it or getting mad, I do tend to repeat that mantra back to myself and most of the time I refrain and leave it be.

That being said, XIV runs on the philosophy and critique of the over theroretical approach to Buddhism over the realistic and practical in saying that by "letting go of" certain frustrations and annoyances and grievances - while healthier for the individual person - enables and perpetuates long term suffering for the masses and years to come. So that while it would be best for me / us to let it go and exist in a state closer to Buddhist peace and doing so is an entirely valid decision (thus why I respect Buddhists who say using the tulpa-term is fine), I would also be choosing to maintain my peace over acknowledging and speaking up about the honestly long and ongoing racism and disrespect that plague those that I feel particular kinship with and in XIV's perspective (one that I am starting to take on a bit more lately) - the choice of personal peace is a selfish one that is complicit in increasing the suffering of the world as a whole in favor for the individual "I" that honestly has become a bit distasteful for our system.

But anyways, I digress. Buddhist ramble done.

[genericpuff]

I hope you won't mind this in particular because I have no way of posting this anonymously to the critical community outside of making a burner account but I'm hoping that maybe you could share this as you're well respected in the community and may understand where I'm coming from.

It has become increasingly uncomfortable the way I've seen some people in the community comment on Psyche's design. I'm Black, and while I have my issues with the way she's been introduced, her entire character arc, or the fact that she was made into a token character for diversity points, I still find the way part of the community discusses her increasingly uncomfortable and nearing anti-Blackness at times. Really all I want is for non-Black criticals to please be more mindful of their criticisms when it comes to her character. That's all. Some comments are starting to become hurtful, like her current hair being called ugly (which I get isn't done in more creative styles but puff ponytails are a thing Black women wear often) or just the fact that she's Black now at all, she was always brown, the only thing that really changed was her hair texture and eye color. And repeatedly seeing things like "She looked prettier before" when she isn't ugly or "I liked her hair before" it's...uncomfortable, which hurts because I really enjoy this community full of creative and intelligent people. 💔

That's all, thank you for taking the time to read this.

Ouu, this is a great post with some great points, thank you for sharing! I don't mind people sharing their takes through my inbox if it gives them a safe outlet to do so, just so long as y'all don't mind me responding to them!

CW: this is mostly just a very sensitive post regarding race and culture representation in LO so just be aware that this one miiiight be heavy and/or triggering, please please please if anyone has anything to share in response to this just let me know, these discussions are important to have but they can still be emotionally draining and I don't want to make anyone feel upset or invalidated by this lil' essay post!!!

So obviously I can't speak on this as a black person BUT as an Indigenous person, I feel like I would be in your same boat if Psyche were being drawn with Indigenous/Mi'kmaq traits and I saw people going "well she looks UGLY now and she was PRETTIER before." So I can empathize with you there in that regard, people's takes can be a little rough around the edges with this kind of topic.

But I'm willing to give people the benefit of the doubt most of the time when these topics do come up because a lot of the criticisms aren't aimed at Psyche specifically being black or having textured hair, they're aimed at Rachel for suddenly retroactively retconning Psyche from being a dark-skinned/brown Mediterranean woman into a black woman.

Like, straight up, what pisses me off about how Psyche is treated is simply how she's been drawn as 4 different women of color over the course of the comic. Having a hairstyle that changes often is one thing (literally every character in LO lacks consistency) but her hair texture and length is constantly changing (which isn't something you can just change on a whim unless you're Persephone LMAO) AND her skin tone has flip flopped between, again, dark-skinned/ woman and black woman. In some panels she's outright orange which is... ech.

Now, take this with grains of salt because I have no source on it, but I've seen claims that RS once stated she "always wanted to draw Psyche black, but didn't know how to." Besides the fact that this sounds outright lazy (it's not hard to learn how to paint skintones that are not your own, Google exists) it also seems like RS trying to paint herself as "progressive" which she's done for a LOT of things beyond just POC rep (ex. fat rep, mental health rep, etc. all things that she's butchered or misrepresented entirely but still pretended like she was doing well).

Again, I'm giving a lot of benefit of the doubt here and I'm sure I'm gonna be proven wrong on this (I welcome it if there's something I've blatantly missed here, educate me in the comment section below pls) but when I see people say Psyche's hair is "ugly" in the newer panels or they "prefer her old design" I don't see it as them saying the hair style or texture itself is ugly or that she, in and of herself, is ugly. Often times people will short form it to "it looks ugly" especially in the faster-paced discussion circles, but really more often than not they mean "I think the way RS is trying to draw her just isn't good." Especially considering how low effort and lip service-y it feels. Like, Psyche's hair rn is literally just a giant texture brush pressed onto the screen and her skin tones are just brown + brown set to Multiply.

And that design is a far cry from where Psyche started.

Like, these are LITERALLY not the same women and while some might say "well maybe it was after she became a Goddess-" nope, she looked like her S3 version when she turned back into a mortal from nymph form, except she had an entirely different hair texture and skin tone.

None of this is to invalidate anyone's feelings regarding this criticism and how it's delivered. There doesn't need to be an intent to hurt for something to be hurtful. The purpose of this post is more so just to explain my own interpretation of where these criticisms come from (as someone who's had them myself) and how I interpret them as a POC. I don't think anyone's trying to be intentionally malicious to people from the POC community (though they can be blasé) especially considering a lot of the people talking about it are black themselves. No one person is a monolith for the entire community so while some are fine with how Psyche is being drawn, others aren't, and I think both are valid in their own ways. Often times it can come down to individual experiences and what people are used to seeing in media when it comes to POC rep and that's something that will vary per person. I've definitely seen conversations revolve around something being racist towards the Indigenous community that I couldn't care less about because it just wasn't something that I found offensive due to my own upbringing or what I'm used to seeing in media. Doesn't mean I can't still be educated on why it's hurtful to others, though!

All I'm gonna say on it is that, personally, I don't find anything inherently wrong with any of the designs on their own, there's nothing ugly with any of those looks. If they were all each their own character, I'd be down for it, absolutely. It's just the fact that all these designs are for ONE character. It's a shame to see Psyche robbed of any consistency even more so than every other character in the plot, and it very much feels like a case of a white New Zealand woman trying too hard to win representation points (and yes, that's a hot take, but it's a small hill I'm willing to die on because we all know RS' history with this sort of thing at this point, she's not good at hiding it lmao). It feels very low effort and obligatory, like Psyche is just there to check off a list of mandatory representation rather than be her own character with her own goals or traits or motivations.

And, REAL hot take, though it isn't really related to the majority of this post, I have to point out that it gets even weirder/ickier when you remember the fact that nymphs are treated as lower class in the narrative and Psyche... becomes a black-coded nymph... who works for Aphrodite as a servant...

(sigh how was this any better than just doing the OG myth, Rachel?)

Anyways, that's all I'm gonna say on that. That is, again, my personal take on it but I obviously can't speak on behalf of the black community or people in it, most of what drives me nuts just has to do with the lack of character consistency and the feeling that RS is just phoning shit in. The designs on their own independently from one another are fine and I don't think that's what most of the criticisms out there are annoyed about anyways - we're all just tired of seeing Psyche morph into different POC rep characters every other week.

Thank you for taking the time to write and voice your opinion on it, it's definitely a topic that can veer into nasty territory if not treaded carefully but it's one that interests me in talking about because POC rep is important to me, whether or not I belong to the specific culture that's being represented. I know I would be in the same boat if it were concerning Mi'kmaq characters.

And by all means, if y'all think I'm just spouting shit out of my ass or speaking completely out of turn, tell me in the comments or in my asks, this isn't a discussion with one simple clear cut answer or solution so I'd love to hear your own takes o(*￣▽￣*)ブ

[newsfromstolenland]

Do you think Asian Americans need to work on anti-black racism in their communities? It seems like some Asian Americans are against affirmative action, even though it benefits them too. And some seem happy it was overturned. Which seems a little racist.

oh absolutely, anti-blackness is rampant in asian communities

opposition to affirmative action from asian communities has been a problem for as long as affirmative action has been in place. it's hypocritical, because many implementations of affirmative action have provided opportunities for asian people as well

it also ties in to the whole "model minority" concept, and the extremely racist idea that asians are the good, smart, hardworking racial minorities and that black people are none of those things

when in reality, non-black people of colour like myself have a leg up over black people for multiple reasons. colourism is a huge factor. also, the stereotype of the "smart nerdy asian", while racist in it's own right, does provide an advantage in accessing education and finding jobs. and then of course there's the fact that many black people in canada and the united states are descended from slaves, making them significantly less likely to have family wealth being passed down to them, because their ancestors didn't own property, instead they were considered property. while all people of colour face systemic racial injustice, there are specific and heightened systemic injustices that black people face and that the rest of us do not

and those are just the systemic factors! there's also cultural factors among asian communities, including my community as an indian person. colourism is rampant in asia and among asians all over the world. stereotypes about black people are shared between white people and non black people of colour, and we are absolutely complicit in their oppression

a few years ago it came to light that the government in india had as a part of its education curriculum for children an extremely racist concept floated by the hindu nationalist government. the story that was being taught in schools was that when the deities created the first humans, they constructed them and cooked them over a fire. and that the first attempt was undercooked, and those were white people. then the second attempt was "overcooked and burned", and those were black people. then the third attempt was "perfect" and when they "got it right", cooked the right amount, and that was indian people.

I don't think I need to explain how racist that concept is and how it negatively impacts how indian people treat black people, and is outright claiming that we're genetically superior in some way

when it comes to affirmative action, a lot of asians have bought into the "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" bullshit, and view it as giving unfair "handouts" to black people. of course, the truth is that affirmative action is nowhere near enough to balance out the injustices faced by black people, and any asian who thinks that it is too much is both a hypocrite and a racist who has decided to side with the oppressor and throw black people under the bus for their own benefit

[wendytestabrat]

kyle’s most toxic/chaotic episodes:

•ike’s wee wee - for harassing ike once he found out he was adopted and saying he’s not his real brother and then sending him on a train to nebraska

•cow days - for him being a spoiled materialistic brat and a jerk to cartman all for some terrance & phillip dolls; HE FUCKING THREATENS CARTMAN INTO RIDING A BULL AND THEN WHEN CARTMAN GETS HURT AND HAS TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL HE STILL MAKES CARTMAN GO BACK ON THE BULL

•douche & turd - for bullying and pressuring stan to vote for a giant douche, sending puff daddy after him, LITERALLY SPITTING ON HIM, and using kenny for his own benefit all so he could beat cartman. also the fact that he wanted a giant douche as the mascot was just immature af LOL

•cartman’s incredible gift - for jumping off a fucking roof because he couldn’t stand to see people taking cartman seriously as a psychic

•mr. garrison’s fancy new vagina - for his blatant racism (and internalized anti-semitism) assuming he would only be good at basketball if he was tall & black - basically he did blackface here LOL

•two days before the day after tomorrow - for hiding the jew gold

•ginger kids - for BREAKING AND ENTERING into cartman’s room to turn him into a ginger which caused cartman to go on an extermination against every non-ginger

•le petit tourette - for rounding up 47388392 pedophiles to shoot themselves on dateline because he was mad abt cartman pretending to have tourettes (even tho he was just jealous of cartman’s brilliant idea LOL)

•imaginationland - for being so fucking arrogant and sure that leprechauns aren’t real that he signed a legally binding contract to suck cartman’s balls (which wasn’t very smart) and then couldn’t honor his commitment when he was wrong. i’m sorry but like IDGAF what a bet is about you just don’t agree to suck someone’s balls idc how sure u are that you’re gonna win LOL.

•tonsil trouble - for making fun of cartman for having aids and then gets MAD at cartman for making aids jokes later on to stay positive smh

•britney’s new look - for coming up with the idea to get a paparazzi photo of britney for $$ - it was his fault that britney shot herself

•fatbeard - for purposely trying to get cartman sent off to somalia to die and inadvertently making his brother go there too

•you have 0 friends - for being an annoying social media prick and not leaving stan alone about facebook and doing dumbass shit to get more FB friends WHO GIVES A SHIT people who care too much abt their social media followers are losers

•it’s a jersey thing - yeah do i even need to explain this one?

•crack baby athletic association - for exploiting crack babies for money and acting selfish & greedy like cartman in the process

•you’re getting old/ass burgers - FOR SELLING OUT STAN AT HIS WORST AND BEING A BACKSTABBING ASSHOLE

•a history channel thanksgiving - for throwing a hissy fit over cartman’s idea to use the history channel for their thanksgiving report and then getting all pouty later that he was wrong about aliens or whatever the fuck

•ginger cow - i don’t need to explain this one

•go fund yourself - for being all extra and causing drama by making his own startup company bc he was jealous of cartman for coming up with the name ‘washington redskins’

•stunning and brave - for encouraging cartman to stand up to PC principal and getting him sent to the hospital (AND BTW KYLE DIDN’T WANNA DO SHIT ABT PC PRINCIPAL UNTIL IT PERSONALLY AFFECTED HIM AND HE GOT IN TROUBLE FOR THE COMMENT HE MADE ABOUT CAITLYN JENNER)

•skank hunt - for accusing cartman of being the troll and getting everyone all riled up to break his shit

•wieners out - for him being salty when he found out cartman moved on with heidi, you know after he deadass broke all of cartman’s shit

•fort collins - for him threatening to expose cartman’s INTERNET HISTORY to heidi

•doubling down - for stealing heidi from cartman

•super hard PCness - for blowing up canada bc he was still pissed off about cartman & heidi LOL

•tegridy farms - for enabling cartman to sell vapes to kindergarteners (including his brother) despite his original stance of being against it, deadass almost giving up his entire birthday money for cartman, and then letting cartman beat up the drug dealer & helping him break into a vape shop 🙄

•south parq vaccination special - for trying to steal the vaccines for himself - yet bitching at stan & cartman that they were being selfish JFC

•south park post covid and the return of covid - for getting mad at cartman for being a rabbi and having a happy family and accusing him of stupid bullshit and cussing in front of his wife & kids (bringing up shit from 40 years ago) and then making cartman sacrifice his entire family to help him

•the streaming wars part 1 - for giving up all the money they earned on the streaming services to let cartman get tits LOL

[a-slut-for-smut]

Nanamin deserves better than Mei Mei

Don’t forget how creepy she is towards Ui Ui

Ya know, I really wish people were more willing to think critically about the stories they consume vs taking every at face value. Sure, when you see something questionable in a story, question it, but immediately writing off the story/story element as “problematic” just because you don't like it or triggers you is such a disservice not only to the storyteller but also yourself by stunting your own media literacy skills.

As ive addressed why NanaMei pair well in previous asks, i'll focus more on the controversy revolving around Mei Mei because its something i really want to get off my chest. The more i think about the arguments made against her the more i get these puritanical and anti feminist/non-conformist vibes from them and its really concerning to say the least.

She's Greedy/Selfish

Yes, shes money hungry. She shamelessly honest with what she likes and what she wants; she has a personal code/credo and stanchly follows it and its hard not to respect that energy. She's motivated and grounded in a way that seems out of place in the 'sorcerers must protect humans' fantasy world, but in the real world? Of course we'd look out for our own self-interest/preservation- shes as real and relatable as they come. She's logically driven (vs emotionally) and honestly if she was a man i bet the fandom wouldn't blink an eye (and prob would slobber all over him) but as always God forbid women have a strong sense of self and refuse to conform to the patriarchal ideals of what a woman should be.

THAT panel

A lot of the fandom screaming in*cest & p*edophile for this panel and i'll admit not surprised it raised eyebrows but not really reading this as sexual. Yes theres nudity, but body language makes it pretty obvious if nudity is sexual or not and well, its not- and how the first thing fandom thinks is "omg they f*cked" because shes topless or whatever is very telling. It's not a stretch to think she would be comfortable with nudity and a sense of propriety seems out of character with someone as shameless as her. She probably splurges on 1000 thread-count Egyptian cotton sheets with all the money she makes, who wouldnt regularly sleep nude on those?

As for UiUi its inferred he used his CT to escape/save their lives directly before, all the more reason he would be tired. Mei Mei even apologies for waking him, implying his CT exerts him and he should rest for the day. Ui UI’s “oh my how shameless!” is said in surprise, indicating he probably blacked out after his CT and woke up fully clothed in bed with her, NOT that he’s tired from having a wild night banging his sister 🙄

I wonder about the japanese dialogue and if there is any nuance/context lost from the english translation, but I interpreted her "Do you not like me that way" was in reference to the shamelessness of her personality, essentially asking him "do you not like me the way I am?" and not her nude body because the translation used "that way" vs "this way", the latter being suggestive. And the fact that they shared a bed to sleep didnt seem OOC given their close familial dynamic.

Sibling Relationship

Its established in-universe that they are "calculating", so naturally they work very much in tandem as far as motivations go and re-enforced from what we seen in their battle tactics. Clearly Mei Mei is offense and 99% of the time can handle any issue on her own, but for that 1% she cant? Thats where Ui Ui steps in.

Ui Ui would never be in danger if Mei Mei is around, and fandom seems to ignore this fact when they say Mei Mei manipulates him to self-sacrifice himself (and her crows) for her benefit. If Mei Mei is fighting and her life's at risk, yall think Ui Ui (or the crows for that matter) stand a chance?? Maybe if he could teleport away himself which is what his CT suggests, but who really knows, and more importantly would he even consider abandoning his sister from what we seen?

I see it as a failsafe CT, only to be used in emergencies since it drains him considerably as Malaysia scene suggests- which is why he wholeheartedly waits (and binding vow) for permission from her to use it, not as a form of control or abuse or simply to please her, but to know if/when as accordance to the battle strategy mapped out by her. Shes shown as a tactician/extremely logical when it comes to battle and will use whatever is at her disposal to win if it means self-preservation (even if it means abandoning the battlefield altogether). Her loyalty is to herself above all.

And her asking “are you willing to die for me” is literally asking consent- she is asking, 'this could be the end- will you do what’s necessary for me to win this?' To which he resoundingly concurs, seemingly out of devotion but realistically if she dies where would that leave him? It’s as natural a response as one could be- in nature mothers will fight tooth & nail to protect their offspring, but at the cost of her life? What would be the point??? Offspring wouldn’t be able to survive without her, they’d be good as dead.

As far as their dynamic, there is clear affection from both sides- Mei Mei is more playful while Ui Ui is reverent. Ui Ui adores her, not atypical of a much younger sibling, but especially so given how accomplished Mei Mei is. It's stated that she inherited their weak family cursed technique, but rather than be solely defined by it, she trained herself to the maximum physical limit, THEN mastered her so called "weak" technique into one of the strongest out there (probably why she acknowledges Maki as a promising sorcerer, she sees herself in her).

If that isn't admirable than i dont know what is, and if GOJO of all people respects her, then thats saying something. But while he respects her and acknowledges her strength, does he trust her? Probably not, not like he does with Utahime who is supposedly "weak" in comparison. And i personally like that dynamic- despite not trusting her to "do the right thing" and expecting her to be self-serving, Gojo knows/respects her as a person and fellow sorcerer. Gege gives us layered interpersonal relationships between multi-faceted characters and yet so many are quick to reduce them to a single trope and its a little sad honestly.

In conclusion, yall need to relax on the pearl-clutching and have a little more perspective by all means hate on her if you dont like her but at least hate her accurately lol

[darkwood-sleddog]

Hi! I was curious about something. Often times in photos and videos sled dogs and other working dogs are tied up with their dog houses. I was wondering why people choose this over large fenced enclosures? Or do more owners do this then the media portrays? Does it come down to the cost of it or is there a purpose? Or do you think it would benefit dogs to switch over to enclosures? Sorry, I don't have any experience with this stuff so I'm very curious!

Random, but I follow this project on TikTok called chain free Knoxville which builds enclosures with high chain link fence and better shelters for free so dogs don't have to be tied up on a leash 24/7 with minimal protection. Obviously this is a different situation from working dogs but I think it's really neat that it helps people without judgement while still making the dogs life better.

Anyways, I loved to hear your answers! Thank you!

The main reason chains are used often for sled dogs is that it keeps them contained no matter how much snow falls and builds up, which can be a very big issues with dogs kept in pens in snowy environments. Of course many mushers also keep dogs in pens, but it requires a lot more work keeping snow away from the barrier than chain containment. Considering that huskies and sled dog types tend to be excellent escape artists regardless of containment, chaining also tends to be first choice containment as it is often the most fool proof way to keep your dogs where they need to be.

I want to impress that nothing about keeping dogs on chains is inherently cruel. If dogs are provided food, water, shelter, vet care, an environment free of feces, and enrichment such as work, play, free running etc. than it is not cruel and this includes non-sled dogs.

It is often the most affordable way that people can keep their dogs properly contained and properly contained is better than a dog that can jump fences and climb fenced constantly getting loose. I personally see no difference when a dog is kept on a chain properly then other types of non-fence containments like cable runs (considering most people don't have enough space for a large cable run, it really just is a longer chain...). I also don't think that chaining is any more or less "cruel" than keeping a dog crated all day (both restrict a dogs ability to move around during the day, but a crate much more so imo, at least a dog on a chain can go to the bathroom as needed...).

That being said, looking at Chain Free Knoxville's approach, I really like what they're doing and their mission statement. The type of the work they are doing, providing those in their community with resources to better care for their dogs, is greatly needed instead of judgement and harmful (often and historically anti-black, anti-poverty) legislation. Many people are extremely limited in what they can afford and good fencing is VERY expensive. I do wish that organizations like this would also educate about the correct way to chain (providing off chain time, exercise etc.), but I don't think anybody at such organizations sees any chained dog as a positive, so that nuance is probably out of the question from non-working dog folk.

Unlike many dogs deemed as "chained dogs" though, sled dogs do not spend a majority of their time on a chain because they need to build muscle and keep fit. A musher will be allowing their dogs to free run and play, the dogs will be taken out to work, many even spend rotating time inside their musher’s houses for individual and team bonding (I cannot even begin to list the number of Iditarod mushers I follow that posts pictures of like 16 dogs piled on their couch at once). Sled dogs that are going to be worked in extreme environments need to be kept outside often. 1.) they are bred for it and prefer it because of their insulating double coats which often cause them to be uncomfortable (sometimes to the point of overheating) indoors and 2.) they need to properly acclimate to the weather to be able to do their work safely.

What type of containment a musher (or any person honestly) may choose is an incredibly personal decision and there is neither a "better" or "worse" type of containment when it is done properly and dogs are cared for, just different options for different people. Again I impress, (as somebody that has crate trained dogs), how is people keeping their dogs in crates all day any better or worse than a dog on a chain with proper shelter, food and water? There is no one answer.

Being able to be chained calmly is also an important sled dog skill if you are going to take your dog places (being able to sit calmly on a short containment is a great dog skill regardless if you have a working dog or not imo). Expedition overnight? Dog needs to learn how to be on a drop chain/picket line which is similar to chaining. Same with a race. Same with if you are pulling over to have lunch on the trail and your dogs need to hang out calmly in harness for a bit. This is an important skill regardless if your dogs are kept in pens or on chains at home. My dogs sleep in my house, but spend a LOT of time outside. They are also trained to be chained because it is a necessary skill.

When looking into proper sled dog care guidelines I highly recommend the Mush with P.R.I.D.E. sled dog care guidelines and kennel inspection program requirements. The care guidelines lay out how dogs should be kept in multiple types of containment and it is a care ethics organization run by mushers, for mushers. I personally find their guidelines and kennel requirements a step above what pet dogs often receive in terms of care, enrichment and living environment.

[woomycritiques543]

(BIG NOTE! : In the first draft, I thought that the author said "ACAB!" not "AFAB!" Sorry, the words looked extremely similar and I was having a hard time seeing it since it was early when I wrote this. Sorry!)

1. Real BLM support other BLM supporters. Not fake BLM that aren’t even black and supported blackface and uses bigoted stereotypes as a substitute for “comedy” like Vivziepop. (The evidence is in the past post im not going to repeat myself.) If you actually supported us, you wouldn’t automatically assume that she’s “innocent” just because of word of mouth or out of context screenshots from people who did little to no research.

2. True BLM doesn’t deny evidence of racism and play the victim while supporting racists just because they make you cartoon fetish porn.

3. REAL BLM doesn’t go “BU BU BU if you confront someone you’re a harasser!” (Wtf happened to fighting the system?! True BLM doesn’t kiss the feet of bigots like this. You’re clearly just another “PICK ME!” hiding behind bigots out of fear, to benefit off their platforms, and using our labels to get clout off of blm while doing so. -and i’d have full sympathy for said fear, if “PICK ME’S!” weren’t some of the most bigoted people known to man.) or use irl harassment towards innocent people as a strawman argument to support people with blatant anti- blackness that supported blackface and tried to hide the evidence of it, while being supposedly “anti harassment” people that harass other fans, including having harassed many black lives, as a meat shield to hide behind.

Sick of all you “PICK ME!” folk who support racist creators, same for people who supported the looting or the rioting while making the rest of BLM miserable and getting in the way of progress by destroying black communities.

Vivziepop isn’t trans.

Vivziepop isn’t NB, in fact if you actually read the post instead of being stubborn and supporting her anyway just because she makes cartoon porn that you watch- she’s transphobic!

Vivziepop isn’t black. Supporting her and trusting her word of mouth to get clout off of her twitter level “progressiveness!” or because you benefit off of her cartoon softcore yaoi porn instead of actually caring about the black lives around you is just sickening. True BLM don’t support racists over cartoon porn or to get clout off of their channel. True BLM SUPPORT EACH OTHER! Not non-black racist people!

Also- Rebecca Sugar is a white passing person that had porn of literal kids! What’s with you and supporting white passing people instead of black folk?! Your entire argument just mentioned white passing or white people while vagueing about other blm members as a strawman excuse to support bigots when the evidence is so easy to find, the fact that you pulled this “I do my research!” crap and victimized yourself, blocked me, deleted the replies from people telling you to stop supporting racists is just sad to watch. So trying to use the violence ACAB and trans folk go through on a daily basis as a strawman to supported bigoted (not even black OR trans!) people to benefit yourself-

Makes this post entirely fake. Vivziepop is not BLM, she’s not black, she’s not trans, and she’s a privileged white passing woman that treats us like crap by hiding anti-blackness within her content, so the fact that you tried to play these games and denied/didn’t even try to look into the evidence just because you want to keep benefitting off of her is sickening.

Stop claiming to be BLM while supporting anti-blackness!

Im not even going to link anything since the evidence is literally on the post this person blocked me over after people started to share the evidence of what Vivziepop actually did. It’s on the other post, and im not going to waste my time giving people like this anymore attention since i’d just be repeating myself.

#BlackLivesMatter!

[khizuo]

intro post!

commission info | art blog

hello! i'm khizuo on the internet. i post art and other stuff. read the whole post before following.

chinese settler on turtle island

19

they/them and ze/zir pronouns in english; 他/X也 pronouns in chinese

trans genderqueer (tme), aspec bi

i have ocd (with stigmatized themes) and i am adhd/autistic. feel free to talk to me but please keep these things in mind if you do because they do tangibly affect the way i interact on the internet

for the end of settler colonialism, capitalism, imperialism through revolutionary action

decolonization is not a metaphor. death to all settler colonies on stolen land

covid isn't over, it's an airborne mass disabling event and if you don't take the precautions available to you you will not like my blog

vegan for total liberation

shoot me a dm or ask if you need me to tag anything

if you like my art, please check out my ko-fi! all funds i raise there will go into community care and building a safer, financially independent life for myself. or commission me!!

all new followers must be 17+. all minors following must block the tag "minors don't look" and confirm that you have blocked the tag by liking this post, or you will be blocked.

fandoms, tags, and more below the cut. read the whole post before following.

interests that you may find on this blog: mcyt, diy music/clothing, punk music, post-punk and related genres, alternative fashion, hanfu, and more.

(i used to be a big dsmp fan and i may talk about that time sometimes so if you have 'dsmp fans dni' in your bio i recommend you don't follow me lol. if you want to follow me but don't want to see me talk about it, block the tag 'd/smp'. that being said, fuck the dteam)

additionally: as a non-Black poc and gentile who is thin, tme, light-skinned, and able-bodied, as well as a fairly low support needs autistic and not intellectually disabled, i benefit from anti-Blackness, anti-Semitism, fatphobia, transmisogyny, colorism, and ableism against physically and intellectually disabled folks. if i do anything to perpetuate these systems of harm, please call me out. i will take full accountability.

pr0shippers and dream/dteam supporters do not interact with me. I block liberally.

personal tags:

my text — original post tag

my art — original art tag

my analysis — original meta tag

about me — where I talk about anything somewhat personal

khizuo reads — my reading tag for quotes and thoughts

khizuo diys things — where I talk about diy and share my upcycling/diy work!

khizuo talks music — my music rambles tag

khizuo talks vocaloid — my vocaloid rambles tag

khizuo_irl — irl tag

khizuo plays minecraft — my minecraft rambles tag

khizuo vents — for personal vents. may include triggering topics (especially when my ocd gets involved) so filter if you don’t want to see them. these posts will usually also be tagged with “don’t reblog”, and they’re not okay to reblog unless I specify with the tag “okay to reblog”.

like this post once you have read it!

[horizon-verizon]

People like to excuse Rhaenyra’s cruelty and stupidity during her brief reign as a queen because she lost her children during the war, and in my opinion, that is no excuse. She ordered daily executions, established “knights inquisitors” to hunt down innocent children, would not offer peace terms, imposed ridiculous taxes while throwing a lavish birthday party for her son. It has nothing to do with gender but everything to do with her despicable actions.

Daemon gets some “redemption” in the end because he cared about Nettles (whether or not she was his lover, bastard daughter, or both), or whatever, and Corlys, also a grasping and power hungry snake, had a change of heart after losing practically everything, but other than being badass, I thought these two men, Daemon especially, were awful. People called Daemon an anti-hero, and I am trying to recall when anti-heroes behead children, started wars for fun because they are bored, seduced their 14 years old nieces, screwed and raped virgin prostitutes, etc. Yeah, I enjoyed reading about the character and thought he died in a totally badass way, he was much more competent than Rhaenyra, but let’s not kid ourselves about him.

Probably a response to this post and all those it is connected to it.

I hope people see what I mean about how misogyny can creep into genuine criticisms of rhaenyra's flaws OR mask entirely as good faith criticisms of her moral character & fitness as a leader from this ask.

*EDIT (5/31/24): Rhaenyra suffers from really bad sexist writing on GRRM's, not just the maesters', part and it undermines his own point.* And no, she doesn't need to be necessarily "moral" like Dany to be a deserving ruler.

The point of her story was to highlight how no matter how good or evil or morally ambiguous a person you are, if you are female, you are subject to losing a power men are just granted. Or usurped. And this is inherently wrong. Rhaenyra chose to go to war rather than give up. This is valuable. Visenya was not thinking "for the realm" or for the benefit of smallfolk or outside of her family, yet she as so many fans bc she was not passive or restricted by "madness". She has less sexist writing.*

On Rhaenyra

These posts go into GRRM's writing of Rhaenyra as well as other notes about her leadership: POST #1, POST #2, POST #3, POST #4, POST #5, POST #6, POST #7, POST #8--esp Section B, C, & D. Read them!

You: "established “knights inquisitors” to hunt down innocent children."

1.

This is the quote you refer to ("Rhaenyra Triumphant"):

This is the quote of Larys' plan of the Greens' escape before Rhaenyra entered KL ("Rhaenyra Overthrown"):

Assuming you mean Maelor, once more, Larys took this boy out of the Red Keep to take away Rhaenyra's advantage against the greens, as Maelor would be an official hostage. And seeing as Rhaenyra refuses to kill ALicent and specifically gets rid of just those who had a militant hand in her aspiration or/and was an adult once she gets to KL

("Rhaenyra Triumphant"):

("Rhaenyra Triumphant"):

Rhaenyra did not send out those inquisitors to harm or kill MAelor. She sent them to kill/harm his holder, anyone who took him and is taking him from the Keep. He and those for Jaehaera and Aegon II. she specifically says "traitors" to mean Aegon II, who she also already warned she would kill after he was the one to reject her terms BUT NOT HIS CHILDREN! ("The Black and the Greens"):

I would go as far as to say Maelor & Jaehaera were both safe with Rhaenyra, and I say that despite Blood & Cheese bc B&C was an answer to Lucerys' non-hostage, anti-diplomatic (images and all), and wrongful death. a death sparred by anti-bastardism and patriarchal privileges entitling Aemond to kill his own family. With intent and malicious desire. Don't let the show fool you. Aemond willingly choosing to murder his own nephew, especially during the process of diplomacy and getting allies is the catalyst to the violence of the Dance, the war, and the battles themselves. Tracing the motivations, how he wanted to take back what he thought of as an "indignity" of a bastard somehow hurting and showing him up (the eye incident) despite his "trueborness" is exactly what spurred him on.

Meanwhile, we have Aemond killing children at Harrenhal, a rumor of Alicent laughing at raped and murdered children at Tumbleton, Alicent & Aegon (not a rumor, very much confirmed to be true) wanting to mutilate their own hostage Aegon the Younger to protect themselves. No proof nor rumor of Rhaneyra trying to hurt her siblings or other children until she gets to King's Landing and faces the lack of moneys bc the greens stole it to disable her.

Not to mention the riots stoked against her by both the Shepherd and the hiding Larys Strong...interesting how this doesn't figure in the assessment, and how you think you would have done with all this at once.

You: "imposed ridiculous taxes" & "daily executions" & "while throwing a lavish birthday party for her son"

...there was literally no money...bc the greens stole it all to make her unable to actually fund projects, whether she wanted to or not. While the executions leave a very bad taste in most mouths, most of the executions were specifically carried out for the money:

Context:

The greens didn't care about the smallfolk by taking the money that could help them. Nor did Viserys care--whose main issue with Daemon performing his brutal "cleansing" of KL was how it made him look and not the commoner's fear or vulnerability--much about the smallfolk. They are all aristocrats who lived in the lap of luxury or use clothing, dinners, etc. it to denote their status and or triumphs fopr most of their lives.

Come up with a better way for her to make money fast in her particular situation and maybe I'll concede, until then, just block me. Or reveal yourself and let me block you.

And as for the party, instead of it being a malignant thing as you painted it, I'd say it was unwise (EDIT: "altruistic") but also not as morally corrupt as Aegon throwing a party for his own nephew's unjustified death ("A Son for a Son"):

While Aegon was celebrating his "triumph" over his nephew's death because his life meant little to him was he thinking about how Rhaenyra's hypothetical anger rained down on KL and hurt his subjects? If not for strategy (Alicent & Otto), why doesn't he consider the harm this could for his subjects and castigate Aemond for this?

Why is Rhaenyra made to be the worst person of this bunch when she herself decides to quickly name her oldest remaining son her heir and publicly so, even more so because he is suspected as a bastard so she could give him a stronger claim? Alicent did the same for Aegon when she left Viserys' body to rot, imprisoned people to silence/stop the flow of any information in or out of the Red Keep, and convened the council to convince-coerce them into making Aegon the king through the ceremonies of ascension. All the bells and whistles, to create his legitimacy in the eyes of the lords and smallfolk. Alicent 100% would not care if it was winter or spring and wait to crown Aegon publicly whenever Viserys gave up the ghost, because she knew that time was of the essence and she only cared about the smallfolk as far as making sure they felt Aegon was the ruler and maintain all their images. I despise the scrutiny against rhaenyra and not against Alicent, bc Rhaenyra happens to be the woman who actually flouts constrictions against her sexual autonomy and freer model of matrifocality!

Rhaenyra also celebrated her taking of KL's with the mind of a semi-typical noble who wishes to mark their reign or victory with a feast. Again, not wise nor altruistic, but it's weird how you don't apply the same need to consider care towards subjects and the effects of one's own actions on our other claimant. That you fully ignore how Aegon is still worse than Rhaenyra both practically & morally in this area. that Rhaneyra is the one who must be the morally perfect aristocrat-claimant over him?

Finally, while I'm sure that there were people who grumbled at the princess throwing a party during the city's pennilessness, it was not a big enough deal to enough to be expressly compounded onto her imposing taxes--as she is only called "Maegor with Teats" for the taxes of all things! More protests were against her taxes, then rumors of her whoring out Alicent/Helaena, then Helaena's death, then Maleor's, until the Shepherd came along and directed the built-up hatred and fear towards the Targaryen dragons. Again, rumors and fear-mongering were first incited by the hidden Larys Strong ("Rhaenyra Overthrown"):

You: "would not offer peace terms"

1.

I already showed how she did back before the Dance even began when Aegon was the one to lose his cool and try to get her imprisoned and killed before hearing of any terms himself. Go back and read the given quotes. Rhaenyra, having to be consistent and firm as a leader, must stick to her own words even if she hadn't already hated her brother and wasn't trying to protect herself. Why the fuck would she offer peace terms after they were rejected and her life is on the line?!

2.

Regarding her refusal of Alicent's terms about dividing the realm...huh?

This is the quote, btw (Rhaenyra Triumphant):

In context with Aegon already rejecting Rhaenyra's terms way back not once, but TWICE!, why do you think Rhaenyra should have let him & Aemond off? Does Alicent only get to love and try to protect herself and her sons? Alicent the one to plunge said sons into this war by being so misogynistically out for more herself and her ambitions? (Again if this was another story with only someone like Alicent, I'd root for her more, but Rhaenyra as a queen is good to set that precedent of public female leadership being seen as valid for other female claimants and is thus the better option. Plus, the internalized misogyny is really too much with Alicent, both book & show. She is the sort of woman who'd supply the gas to help a man burn another woman alive if it got her wanted she thought was either male validation [show] or personal power and family prestige [book]).

Anon, you're both using straight-up lies, misinterpretations, and exaggerations--just like Fire and Blood's Dance account sources and writer-- to present a woman that much worse than she actually was. Thank you for being an example of blind misogyny twisting facts.

On Daemon

1.

You: "People called Daemon an anti-hero, and I am trying to recall when anti-heroes behead children, started wars for fun because they are bored, seduced their 14 years old nieces, screwed and raped virgin prostitutes, etc"

Posts about Daemon being a Character as Categorized as a Byronic Hero (which can often be a version of an anti-hero): #1, #2 (esp #2)

On Anti-Heroism: #1, #2, #3 (number 3 defines anti-heroism itself, but you can see how Daemon qualities as an "anti-villain"...which goes into GRRM making him a being of both light and dark, hated and loved)

When it comes to Daemon if we're looking at him as a character with a moral balance, he is a guy who grew up with patriarchal privilege (yes even with him being forced to marry like most young girls, he still can move about and wage wars and have an extramarital- premarital sex life without suffering shame or censure like noblewomen) and is mainly motivated by his love for his family. Pretty much it. That is his saving grace, not (just) the Nettles thing.

I have nothing to really say about Corlys apart from his: blaming Rhaenyra for Rhaneys death while Rhaenyra was recovering from a stillbirth; daring to cheat on Rhaenys for at least 2-3 years and having two other kids from this younger woman...after marrying an already way-too-young girl (16 to 37 at the time of marriage); his misogyny guiding the Rosby-Stokeworth decisions. Other than all that, I don't see what other sort of "snakiness" you refer to. Aegon needed killing.

You: "started wars for fun because they are bored"

The Stepstones was not just Daemon being bored. Corlys had been complaining about the Triarchy and its threat to his own ships and lands. And larger, the Triarchy and those who worked for them became a problem for Westerosi trade/merchants after high tolls (it's funny how we keep coming back to money, eh?) ("A Question of Succession").

No one was "bored". Daemon chose the right conflict to gather some military experience, military glory & honors (as is the feudal dream for men in general, look at Aemond!), and bide his time after he had been exiled again. Was it altruistic, no. Was it actually maliciously wasteful, also no. Very much like Rhaenyra's feast wasn't either of these things.

Speaking of Aemond, Aemond is a worse character concerning warfare and child killing bc the Strong genocide AND he refused to help his own brothers bc he wanted all the glory for himself...at a critical moment when they could have attacked KL together. He specifically called it a "craven" move to do this even though he was the one to suggest attacking KL to Cole! And again, compare it to the actual amoral selfishness of Aegon's feast to Luke's death.....Well, we got out parallels.

You need to stop lying to yourself.

3. You: "he was much more competent than Rhaenyra"

Did you somehow believe that most of the hype for him is how much "better" at politics he is, or just "better" (since you are so vague and I'm left assuming) than Rhaenyra?

Back to assumptions because of vague language, I assume that you mean that he was able to capture KL for her, and make the plans for ravens and diplomats sent out (forgetting that after she had stillborn Visenya out, she calmed down to "work"), and how he was able to take down Aemond. Anon, this is where the misogyny jumps out again, bc apparently to be a good ruler, you must learn how to fight and put yourself in the forefront of battle....but most noblewomen were actively barred or discouraged from military pursuits equal to men

AND

Rhaenyra knew her weakness concerning actually fighting, and I believe that this gets lost in all the "she's always been a bad candidate because she made dumb choices--she deserved to die and lose to Aegon, even!" bullshit. She called her council many times to get advice, so yes, it really is her own aristocratic blood purity and grief motivating her into making all the actual mistakes and sins she makes. I thought good leaders listened to their council?

AND

what is so wrong with a ruler not putting themselves in danger like Aegon II did? The same Aegon who got put out of commission for nearly a whole year and is likely unable to have kids due to said injuries from Rook's Rest?! Do not put the very person whom your side is fighting for at risk! Minimize it as much a possible!

AND

Fighting and personal physical prowess--despite the idea of leadership--don't have to be a ruler's main strength. Think of Daeron I (not so versed in swordplay but known as one of the better Targ rulers). How though Maegor was very much the warrior and a determined king, was also very cruel and incurred the hatred of not just the Faith but several others in justified fear of him and it lead to his end. Aenys was weak not because he wasn't a warrior but because he gave in too much and didn't use his dragons and dragon riders for the sake of what he thought was conciliation and respecting his subjects' desires! To garner love and admiration!

Last....

If we compare her to Alicent, Alicent is a heavy-duty blood purist who never looked out for other women, even seized power from another woman entirely for herself and her house's patriarchal prestige and power. No matter who Rhaenyra was before King's Landing or after, Rhaenyra was "vulnerable" to this due to her gender's inequitable access to higher positions of power in Westeros. Rhaenyra was never a tyrant before King's Landing and the greens' usurpation.

*EDIT* (8/21/23):

THIS is a great post by @mononijikayu about medieval queens, female rulers, the history of how women in leadership positions were made and seen as threats to the very structure of social "order", and contextualizing Rhaenyra thru Empress Matilda. I didn't even know about Matilda's husband being comparable to Rhaneyra's Daemon! PLZ READ!!!!

Excerpt:

just as much, along with these fictitious portrayals, more lies are depicted. these women are considered vixens that cause havoc to men by shifting them into desires and danger. through the written word, we see how women are cast in roles of villains in men’s lives. it is because by their conclusive thoughts, women are the only creatures that are able to turn ‘good honorable men’ into despicable creatures who do shameful, deplorable acts for the sake of women’s pleasures.  it is within this narrative that ancient chroniclers declare that women were in fact the doom of men. if they were not able to control the dangers posed by the wiles of women, then the foundations of the mighty society they had built would be up in flames.  [...] as i mentioned, these factors of community are written down and preserved. and with that, the example of the ancients were the foundations by which medieval society built itself. the same concepts continued to cause the same issue within society and that was the exclusion of women from participating in the bigger picture of community and state, much so with governing states in their own right—without judgment or disapproval.