#i bet that's counterculture

[guildwuff2]

i can at least speak to my charr headcanons:

camel hair art! i would imagine this takes a lot of time to do and needs a lot of maintenance so it's a special-occasion kinda thing

also: freeze branding! the area's shaved down to the skin and a freezing-cold iron's applied, and the hair in that area grows back completely white. much more like a tattoo in that you care for it while it heals and the fur grows back, but in the end, it's a long lasting result! i've been sorely tempted to give a charr freeze tats (and i'd imagine local anesthetic is applied in tyrian practice, at least the professional ones)

aaand then of course regular branding! better for thinner or lighter coats. i wonder if charr do cosmetic branding, if they'd have to have a metalworker design something for them? or if there'd be some process more analogous to tattooing...

anyways! other stuff like ear notches, piercings... horn carving is definitely a canon thing with one of the skins, but yEAH i bet charr body mods are intense, especially legion charr!

I am once again thinking about body modification among the GW2 species

Perhaps there are asura who dock their ears, possibly for cosmetic reasons, but also maybe for combat reasons (as long ears are more likely to be damaged in battle). Asura who insert little implants under their skin that are capable of interacting with golem technology. Sylvari who perform scarification on themselves in order to create a certain pattern of glow. Charr, typically unable to get tattoos on account of all the fur, instead shave intricate designs into their fur; carving details into the ivory of their horns.

[ranticore]

some thoughts about Clothes For Horses

out of practicality the average ironwall citizen wears a blanket made for horses (even if they are not horses). the blankets are bulk-ordered by specialist ironwall tailor shops and modified on the premises, sometimes while the customer is waiting. the modifications lengthen the straps so that they can be easily reached. this is considered okay for casualwear but tacky for formal occasions.

the upper body can usually just wear whatever mass produced human clothing they like. the only item of clothing which is made specifically for these guys is the waist sash (sometimes with an additional cloth drape on the front, which can smarten up an outfit). these are people whose culture has a deep seam of embarrassment at being part animal, and this fact should be hidden if at all possible even though it isn't possible but you just have to try. the junction between fur and skin is always hidden. the orange blanket pictured above is about as skimpy as you could get away with in public. mane hair is usually shaved off for practicality's sake.

for practical work where harnesses and tack are required, these are usually worn over blankets and modified to include no reins/other control apparatus. for those for whom it is possible, horse-shoes are worn on the front feet for daily city life, and on all feet for hard manual labour or any activities/hobbies/etc which require good traction on the hind legs. shoes are usually not made of metal but of a composite into which grip studs can be inserted if necessary. the imagery of hard metal shoes is associated with counterculture movements and sometimes if you wanna look hard you can have your shoes spraypainted to be shiny. barefoot is actually fine in most circumstances

dedicated centaur clothing is stupid expensive because very few manufacturers produce it and the fabric yardage is insane so it is a class signifier. the garment shape & purpose is unisex though due to influence from dominant human cultures in the area, there's still a difference between a Stallion's Manly Robes and a Demure Filly Dress. ideally the full body is covered and the overall impression is of a human strapped to some mysterious shape idk what could possibly be under there. normal human legs i bet.

[copepods]

thinking about ancient society and how a civilization might cultivate something like mass ascension. i think itd be interesting if void baths required some sort of application and even a vetting process-- after all, if your occupation is too "essential", it would be more fitting for you to stay behind and care for your society until more people are gone, wouldn't it? like surgeries, you probably get shoved into a wait list even after acceptance and have to wait months to actually get a bath reservation (i imagine they'd book a private bath room and do some sort of ceremony with friends and family present for the ascension) of course all the wealthy elites would be jumping forward in line and get into the baths immediately. moon mentions the baths being "cheaper," so price is baked into them from the beginning. i think it would absolutely be a class thing--- only the wealthy get the privilege to move on from the world, and the working class are stuck continuing to care for the city and their iterator until the population shrinks enough. it would be interesting to think about how counterculture and class warfare would cultivate in such a setting, where moving on from the world is seen as desirable but the poor are denied it. void baths would probably have really beefed security, and i bet many people tried to break into them at some point or another. fun to imagine social movements calling for government regulation of void bath prices. maybe there were even private corporations who advertised "cheaper void baths" that turned out to be some kind of acid or other fluid that wouldn't ascend you but would certainly injure you.. idk just many interesting things to think about

[neroushalvaus]

Tumblr in the 60s – deleted posts

Some people requested a sequel to this post so I thought I'd post these drafts that didn't make it to the original. Maybe doing more at some point if the inspiration hits me but I hope these bring you some joy.

🚀 starrfleet Follow

HEY GUYS!! We're buying The Beatles so John and Paul can finally get together!! Who's in

🎹 nixonsafascist Follow

Call that... Beatles for Sale

🚀 starrfleet Follow

Dude this is serious. We want to free them. Why is homophobia so very funny to you?

🎶 mclennstarrison Follow

Didn't The Beatles start managing themselves after Mr Epstein died? So you plan to buy them... From themselves?

🚀 starrfleet Follow

Oh so the george harrison vampire mpreg blog is going to preach to us now.

92 notes

📻 lesbianbobdylan Follow

"Let men have short hair!!" "It's okay to not agree with the civil rights folk" "Don't let tumblr tell you that serving your country is bad" You are all so chronically online and convinced your little hippie bubble represents the world that you have the worst takes. Conservatism is alive and well, us hippies are the fucking minority. The outside world is perfectly okay with all the anti-mlk short-haired men who are happily getting drafted. You are not counterculture.

15,5 t. notes

☁️ ankin-vaimo Follow

Tumblr is so US/UK centric. Scrolling through this site you'd think there were no other tv shows than star trek and no other bands than the monkees and that the stonewall riots were the only meaningful political activism that has ever happened. There's so much great culture elsewhere. I bet you have never even heard of Tapani Kansa.

🇻🇳 shirellesofficial

#shhh don't tell Tumblr that other countries exist #they couldn't even admit Please Mr. Postman was originated by black women (tags via @marvelettesofficial)

peer reviewed tags

#sorry for going through your tumblr marvelettesofficial #you're just so funny #hope i'm not annoying you

54 notes

🌼 andpeoplesaywebeatlearound Follow

People really like to pretend us Beatles girlies hate Y*ko for being asian and a woman like she didn't literally make John cheat on his wife and leave his young son

🪕 prostitutesandlesbians Follow

don't talk like us beatles girlies are all the same, i personally want to fuck her on a canvas while we're both covered in menstrual blood, creating modern art by making love

✝️ jesusrevolution Follow

Op is this you? ↓

🎶 mclennstarrison Follow

Also like, "made John cheat on his wife and leave his young son", did John himself have nothing to do with that decision or..?

🪕 prostitutesandlesbians Follow

do you guys think she and john do mommy play

🎶 mclennstarrison Follow

I appreciate the input @prostitutesandlesbians but we're trying to call the op out for being a racist misogynist

🪕 prostitutesandlesbians Follow

sorry

346 notes

🤪 thekinkykinks Follow

Why is there even discourse about this... Yeah, the folks at Stonewall could have been more respectful towards the police officers who were just doing their jobs, but why are we acting like throwing some pennies at the police officers and calling them "Lily Law" is the worst type of oppression

🥿 trustnobutch Follow

You know what? No. Fuck you. I'm tired of you all talking about these people like they were your poor little meow meows. Have you read about this at all? The raid did not happen because the police "hates gay people wah wah". Stonewall Inn was run by the mob. The. Fucking. Mob. Would you rather have the police not protecting us from criminals, huh??? And the rioters were nothing but a bunch of attention seekers. I heard that a guy from the fucking Mattachine Society phoned newspapers and took pictures of the riot. I'm so disappointed, that was the only gay group that seemed to care about looking respectable in the eyes of the heterosexuals. People who were there made us all look bad and set our movement back like 50 years. Fuck you for supporting them.

🍊 kissmemissoklaholma Follow

Yeah. I heard someone threw a brick.

✌ draftdodgerdyke

??? Nobody threw bricks, where the fuck do you get your information ??

#they should have tho #chilling at the stockholm airport finding the weirdest takes

998 notes

🧸 teddyboyfemme Follow

i'm sharing a joint with this cute ass butch with the cutest curliest hair ever guyyyyssss I think i'm falling in love

🧸 teddyboyfemme Follow

she plays the harmonica for me i want to fuck her to the mattress

🧸 teddyboyfemme Follow

i don't have any idea what she's singing about but i think she likes the rolling stones too, we have so much in commonnnn

🧸 teddyboyfemme Follow

So it turns out that was Bob Dylan.

70,9 t. notes

[sapphicsophos]

God, it really is a fucking shame that skinheads got taken over so hard by nazis. Like, yes I'm aware of SHARP, Trojan skinheads/trads and other anti-racist and anti-fascist skinhead movements and orgs but like. If you're talking to someone who doesn't know counterculture or punk history and you mention skinheads, they either don't know what you're talking about or they immediately think of neo-nazis bc that subculture got so tied to them, especially in the UK. At the same time, I'd bet you anything that most people on this site don't know that "All Cops Are Bastards" was popularized by skinheads in the 80s, especially by the band The 4-Skins' song "A.C.A.B" which is where we also get the acronym, or that AFA and Red Action were originally Skinhead orgs. Skinhead fashion also went extremely hard, especially for the butches, like holy shit. I know we technically haven't lost anything but like. It still feels like we lost so much.

[grandhotelabyss]

Is the very idea of a contemporary counterculture an impossibility? Considering that the traditional concept of counterculture was often opposed to a hierarchical, patriarchal, and corporatized society, many of the demands of the counterculture have already been absorbed by modern progressive capitalism. To the point that perhaps the only possible outcome is that strange oxymoron called reactionary counterculture, which I personally find neither interesting nor stimulating.

"Counterculture" may have been a time-limited phenomenon, circa 1792-2012. It depended on the interplay between the cultural and technological centralization of the nation-state, on the one hand, and the freedoms of an independent civil society, on the other. When art was monopolized by academic salons, Salons des Refusés meant something revolutionary; when there were three identical broadcast channels with strict decency standards, it was almost enough just to say fuck. With increasing technological and political decentralization, there can be small countercultures relative to the nearest cultural center—thus it's countercultural to be MAGA Catholic in New York City, and also countercultural to be blue-haired they/them in Paducah—but there can be no single counterculture as there could be in the long period that runs from the Romantics through the last of the late-20th-century subcultures. This need not necessarily be a bad thing from the artist's point of view; there is more to art than "fighting the power," and it's possible that "fighting the power" (which, as you correctly point out, fed the power structure anyway) may have been misleading, that art's more traditional roles of assembling a community, seducing the beloved, or honoring nature and/or divinity may yet have life in them. (Not so much for me—I'm old and am therefore still trying to sum up the whole of society in epic novels—but for future generations.) On the other hand, a monoculture could be reconstructed using the new technologies that created the fragmentation in the first place, but I wouldn't bet on it.

[porridgefeast]

Which Thai QL actor is your teen self's fantasy valentine?

My dear @emotionallychargedtowel tagged me.

Teen Porridge buried her crushes so deep in her heart, I actually have a slightly hard time fully bringing them to mind. Her #1 lifetime celebrity crush at that point would have to be River Phoenix, which I still think is a damn good choice. Her crushes on peers could be a bit arbitrary-seeming at times, but they definitely tended toward a. skaters (back when that was a meaningful term and a personal style), b. less-than-overtly-masculine types, and c. somewhere on the spectrum between pretty and striking/unique. Over time I found more appeal in burlier, more butch people (just not exclusively), but the skater thing (as an added selling point, not a requirement) and the general axis of attractiveness haven't changed a lot. And one thing has always been sorta paramount for celebrity crushes—if someone "has a lot of feelings," in my personal shorthand, that's a huge factor. By which I mean that person brings feelings out in me through empathy, they project feelings in a way that seems meaningful. Which is particularly appropriate for actors and musicians, your standard celebrity crushes.

Before I get to my choice, I'll say that other contenders were Perth Tanapon (a tough/sensitive thing that I bet would have appealed, and he's definitely got a lot of feelings), Sing Harit (especially but not only for Not Me reasons; Warp Effect doesn't hurt either), Boun Noppanut (the most skater-y option what with the piercings, the tsundere-ness, and a stellar repertoire of eyerolls), and Off Jumpol (a bit skatery, definitely rather pretty but with strong, unique features, endearingly gawky, cool but also a little goofy—a bit like my high school crush / ultra-long-term college partner). Honestly I could think of other maybes, which goes to show that I don't have the strongest handle on teen Porridge.

But I'm gonna say the title goes to Khaotung Thanawat. Khaotung has the MOST feelings. I haven't seen him with anything like skater hair, but he's worn many a slut bang and that's getting close. You don't get much closer to "skater" in demeanor and attitude toward authority than his character in the Eclipse. He can definitely be cool in a throwbacky counterculture sort of way, I think more convincingly than many GMMTV boys, but he still seems approachable—you want a celebrity crush not to be too intimidating. He can even go convincingly evil, which if done the right way actually grinds my gears for some reason. I'm not especially proud of it, but it's true.

Well, turns out I was wrong. There totally is skater hair Khaotung out there and this photo is the evidence. He also looks insanely young here, but I suppose that wouldn't have burdened teen Porridge.

[transcendence-au]

In the future, I bet Alcor and Mizar are names hippie cultists name their kids. I'm thinking of a Ford or Soos reincarnation named Mizar and Dipper is trying so hard to keep the person's name straight

I think that Alcor-worshipping cults probably wouldn't, out of respect for their target of worship. Anyone else is fair game though. Being a cultist isn't even required -- I could totally see stereotypical counterculture parents just deciding to name their kids stuff like that. There are children alive in the real world named after demons, so why not? It absolutely would screw with Dipper's head.

[rametarin]

Personally I think a lot of the shit happening in the states on the right wing side of politics has less to do with any genuine concern of "the harmful LGBT ideology attacking our children that's evil and wrong" and more just the latest in a long line of "the republican party can't function without some group to point at and say 'that's the enemy you must hate them'" I mean think about it. Mcarthyism, the war on terrorism, the Mexicans, now its the LGBT. I'm not saying the democrats don't have similar issues so don't take this statement as clearing them of any wrongdoing. But yeah in a couple years I bet they won't be able to generate enough public outrage over it and will start to target some new group instead because it's all politics not genuine moral concern. Sorry for rambling.

Gonna stop you right there at the McCarthyism; that's wrong. Socialists and communists throughout the US through the early 1900s right up through the cold war got their literature and inspiration from leftist college professors, advocates, guerilla agitators and that cross pollenated with partisans and pseudo-intellectuals, that deliberately fed into American counterculture.

That one was not incorrect. They did, actually, conspire with labor unions not for the purposes of securing rights for labor or people, but consolidating power and taking over businesses from the sidelines. Which was their intention of co-opting and parasitism, to begin with. "There is no you, without us."

"McCarthyism" is revisionism by those that seized the means of printing the history books in the federated school system.

The War on Terrorism was never solely a right wing war, either. And while one is forgiven for believing it started at 9/11, it very much was only officially kicked off at that point.

but there's more.

It's also incorrect to think the religious people and the social reactionaries with particular animus against homosexuality and transgenderism are only doing it now and only against LGBT because "they need someone to fight against." That is a very egregious misunderstanding of their actual problem, and even though their issue with it is either misguided or VERY wrong depending on the case, no, it is absolutely a mistake to think, "those republicans just always need someone to fight against." That is a fiction I will not support. It's a wishful misinterpretation of the situation, and no positive or productive resolution can come from trying to handle it this way.

The reason 'the republicans' have issues with LGBT are a few fold, and actually are an overlap of a few different interests. The only thing they have in common is the outcome, but the reasoning for their concern comes from different places. And it's not limited to republicans, it's just louder there since the competing interests that believe the same things among the democrats are shut out by the overarching party values and populism there. And they're not dividing enough for Vote Blue No Matter Who to jump ship to vote republican.

The Religious Interest: This particular group among what today are right leaning republicans have a particular religious lens through which they see reality. This can vary dramatically between individuals, as religious cultures do, but all of them err on the side of religious culture sentiments on what reality means and how it works. And to them, God/nature created things a certain way. They see male and female not just as self-evident biological reality, but immutable characteristics applied to man by divine mandate that should not be modified. When you believe good and evil are effectively more real in the souls of man than periodic elements on the table, and that God's intention and spirit and word are absolute and not to be questioned or told, "I know better than you," everything from marriage rites under God, to sexual policy under God, to reproduction under God, to the way one sex relates to the other under God, is thrown into jeopardy.

These ones are ideologues and are themselves diverse, and while they may not all follow the same literature or preacher of said literature, they agree on the same things; that to be gay is to be at its most innocent, incorrect or defective, and at worst, possessed by the devil to various degrees of willful to unknowing. Everything must fit into the way their religion subscribes to reality, everyone must march in lockstep to their values of right and wrong and what something is and why and how, or else it's either in error or evil.

But the religious LGBT-phobes are not alone.

The Sociologists: These ones may have a few sentiments borrowed or sympathetic with the religious ones, either as vague interests or guides, even secularly, but they largely err on the side of earthly things. Even though they do try to rationalize why a society doing or not doing a thing may be in error, it's largely but not necessarily totally on the basis of secularism and science. Except when it isn't. And that's a crucial distinction.

And, unfortunately, this does include some of the worst examples of trying to use a social value system to arbitrarily determine something "harmful" and not. You'll know these ones by their constant use of the term, "degeneracy" for "icky" things, and tend to conflate "pedophile" with LGBT the way far-leftists try and make everybody that disagrees with them into fascists. Even if their beliefs do not include celebrity focal political figures, militarism as the source and center of their movement, or a culture that subsumes the individual to the will of the idea of the nation or collective.

The alt-right sits at the far end of this spectrum when they talk about how LGBT are "degeneracy" and "signs of a crumbling civilization" and "corruption." But they themselves do not embody every sociological reason someone may have LGBT views. I'll speak of them next, but they do not embody the pure sociological anti-LGBT view.

Secular anti-LGBT tries to come at anti-LGBT from the idea that somehow not suppressing homosexuality among males and females leads to a destruction of art, science and culture the way letting 2 year olds draw whatever they want inevitably leads some naughty jerk to just drawing dicks and vaginas everywhere and turning the classroom into a bawdy fight cloud of chaos. That it breaks down marriage and disrupts a healthy, ordered society and leaves behind a wreck for the generation to follow, purely because gay was considered a thing to permit. Similarly, to transgendered rights and validation. But also, the view this sexual openness will inherently and inescapably lead to socially sanctioned zoophilia and pederastry

This is not inherently true, but sadly, it's coincidentally not 100% untrue if you know too much about Foucoult and Simone de Beauvoir. But by and large, the conclusion comes from not knowing anything about actual leftist initiatives to "liberalize" sexuality involving childen and animals and comes purely from their own cynical assumptions about where we'd be if not for only validating cisheterosexuality as the end all be all of sexuality. It's untrue, because they reached this conclusion in the absence of worldly data, and then they find worldly data that fits their preonceived or desired notion. The fact that you can find such LGBT sympathetic organizations just reinforces their worldview.

And then we come to the unholy marriage of these two things.

The alt-right view: Considered the most dangerous is a mix of the two. These things are a marriage of the rationalist secular view about societies and social contracts and moralism mixed with religious traditionalism and originism.

Unrestrained by singularly real things, this can encompass everything from a literal take on Reagan's, "shining city on a hill" seeing the United States, or your home nation here, as a holy and wholly wonderful space and construct endowed by creation as a singularly amazing thing in time and space. They may see LGBT as intruding on that glorious image they concoct for themselves at best, and a corruptive, corrosive element that seeks to unmake it, at worst. It's a gradient and no two alt-righters likely share a similar mythology, but they'll agree that LGBT doesn't fit into their grand vision of what they like, is.

But here's the thing: Alt-righters are fewer in number than literal communists across the United States. They're insignificant. The only purpose they serve is to create an end-stage bad guy with some characteristics tangentially similar to those that are either not religious fundamentalists, nor national socialists, and a magnifying glass is held up to them to go, "SEE!? SEE!?!? I TOLD YOU THAT REPUBLICAN WAS JUST AN ALT-RIGHTER!" Because to them, any opponent with any opposing views is as bad as the worst of the worst, and it's important to make people think not only are the worst of the worst more populous than you think, but more people than you think are among them, and if they share any of those characteristics, owing to being similar to the worst example caricature, they must also be an example or but a few nodes removed from the most threatening caricature, and hence, be imminently dangerous.

Far-leftists have a thing where they desperately want any resistance to be seen as Nazis, without exception. Because if you are a Nazi and oppose their beliefs, your reasons are never good and can be discarded without even a rebuttal beyond a punch in the face. So, their goal becomes to undermine and redefine all your opposition as either Nazis, in league with Nazis and acting in bad faith, or part of a sprawling system that means even if you're acting in good faith, just the fact you're resisting them proves you're tangentially and subconsciously motivated by Nazism so far removed from you that it permeates you unconsciously through your society's default state, and you don't even know it. So when constantly calling someone a Nazi doesn't work, in the past, they'd call them far-right, which they made synonymous with Nazi; until the kids started rejecting that just because you were nationalistic and individualist that inherently made you a Nazi, just because you weren't open borders and collectivist.

When the actual social collectivist more self-identifying right wingers collaborated to distinguish themselves, the left HAPPILY took to putting the fact they existed under a microscope and started screaming about how, "THE GRAND RIGHT-WING MOVEMENT IS IMMINENT! QUICK, PUNCH A NAZI, QUICKLY!" in what had to be the most transparent and political psychodrama ever to stir up negative sentiment and give their group social points and the kids something to rebel against. Even if the actual threat posed was nill and they just saw vague fascimilles in mostly unrelated but similar organizations.

So that brings me to this point, explaining the sources of their resistance. And it's a mistake to think that the only source of it is erratic irrational rage, or just needing an enemy to fight to spur up the troops.

The source of conservative and republican apprehension for LGBT comes from the initial disgust at the idea of trying to pathologize and normalize non-standard sexualities and genders, but also it comes from suspecting ulterior motives from ideological opposition as to why they're being given platforms. Most haven't researched it, most haven't found actual evidence or proof, but they smell a rat, and therefore conclude not only is LGBT inconvenient, but a poisonous pill being pushed under perilous pretenses.

And to their credit, it's not 100% wrong. Look at the history (embarrassing) of ideological political lesbianism that was popular socially among radical leftist sapphic/gynophilic feminists throughout the 60s to 90s. That social culture that pushed the idea, based on using Marxist and class struggle theorist political lenses, that A.) woman was oppressed B.) by the transitive property of oppressor/oppresed class dynamics, the sex of man was therefore her oppressor. C.) there could be no ethical sex and romance under 'patriarchy.' D.) All marriage and relationships between males and females, under this ridiculous view, were therefore incapable of being consented to and were therefore a form of rape.

Because this is what Marxist and similar political ideologies do. They latch on to a natural phenomenon and pathologize it and try to imagine a cause and source into being that fits their preconceived notion, which just so happens to be trying to convince one party that the other party in the room is threatening to kill or abuse them, and "help the underdog fight back against their oppressor!" then celebrate with them right after. Right before making them dig their own grave and supplanting them with bullets to the head.

Political lesbians made a ruckus trying to understand and push this psycho-social view of how sexuality and society and relationships and theory works while choking back their own heterosexuality, and it made them as miserable as any gay person that tries to suppress their own homosexuality to exist in a society and culture where being gay isn't considered legitimate at best and acknowledged but considered wrong or dangerous. When left wing political groups are picking up your cause, if they're the authoritarian socialist or communist types, there's always an angle and an area of subversion and exploitation to them.

In the United States, picking up a minority to use them as a spear tip, an undefeatable argument that you need to argue against and thus incriminate yourself as against that minority to stop what they've been weaponized to do and thus alienate yourself to your next generation in the history books, is old hat. But eventually, this exploitation breaks down.

Trying to argue black rights and black nationalism and cultural/ethnic separatism was a social justice throughout the 60s and then a resurgency in the 90s and leading up to the 10s; People silently got tired of it and abandoned ship, and it collapsed and imploded. Trying to argue gay rights from the position that sexuality is a "choice" and being "queer" was a decision and a political minority culture, and not just an indivisible and natural state of being (one might call that, 'bioessentialism' today) eventually culminated in LGBT shrugging off the social constructionist views and arguing for gay rights on the basis of immutable and unchangable and benign sexual attraction, not arbitrary rebellion, or sexual trauma, or conspiracy, did more for progress than political lesbianism and the values and legislation imagined for that, could ever do.

Whether ethnic rights or sexual minority rights, trying to use them to argue for more "social justice" and seize power and narrative of legislation for their ideological solutions, seldom works. But they're going to keep trying to elevate minorities out of the interests of politicizing and exploiting their cause, as cover for their own.

Which kind of does the work of society for it, which is why I think they let only the most uninformed morons argue against them. It creates victims and reveals the faces and thus gives fodder for caricaturizations opposing them, and creates a tone and conversation for the younger generation to study and learn from before making their decisions on how to resolve it, without too awful much effort on behalf of the state.

In my view, the consensus on trans rights will be such that the process to clinicize the dysphoria will continue on the basis of medical diagnosis and a better, more accurate criteria based not on bias or preference by the state or the diagnoser will be used to more astutely differentiate gender dysphoria from ideological dysphoria, and devices or clinical tools developed to tell the difference.

Having a more objective method to diagnose gender dyshphoria will mean the argument, "gender is a purely self-identification phenomenon" will go away. The same as the argument for a deist, creationist, geocentrist universe went away with the revelation we revolve around the sun, and so any religious view where the cosmic bodies revolving around the earth is wrong.

And similarly, that will mean the movement occurring between the lines and in the corners in the far left that is trying to argue that there should not BE any biological or empirical origins to whether somthing is considered male or female based on biological states, merely self-identification, will by necessity go away. Because it argues through appropriation of gendered language that chromosomes and secondary sexual characteristics should no more determine whether you are linguistically and socially male or female gendered, than your blood type or stool sample should affect your pronouns. Just like sexuality being revealed to be inborn and static and not at all "chosen" made Political Lesbianism into a mockable phenomenon, after society asked itself whether sexuality was a choice or part of your makeup, and determined definitely, the only people that could choose, were themselves bisexual. For everybody else, it was not a matter of preference. It was a matter of immutable taste.

After that you will have transgendered people welcomed more often among mainstream republicans and the wing of conservatives opposing them will be as marginalized as the ones that believe all vaccinations are wrong are marginalized; and yes, outside the COVID debacle, even the republicans marginalize the ones that see all vaccinations as snake oil.

It is true that there are republicans that get visibly outrageously mad about homosexuals, racially integrated schools, vaccinations, etc. But those ones will absolutely get more screen time and space in the papers, specifically because ideological opposition wants others to think these are normalized, mainstream, dominant positions held by most right wingers. It will always be like this. Especially among newspapers that do not want to print similar things about the way hate is expressed among progressives, and in fact seek to neutralize anything that may give them and by extension their beliefs and movements, bad press.

It's not true that the only thing keeping them going is outrage. And anyone banking on that simply will not understand what keeps them going if that outrage ever runs out and the conclusion they live with seems anathema to what they are. They may even come to the conclusion that there's been any sort of transformation or change. When no.. you aren't really seeing them for what they are.

[goldendiie]

Hey I'm not sure if you are doing asks but

What If sarge did go with Fillmore when he moved?

Hey there! I'm ALWAYS doing asks! I love interacting with you guys! (Also, for anyone else reading: if you sent me an ask and I haven't answered it yet, it's because I'm attempting to write a oneshot/drabble for it. Just a heads up!)

First off, I think it's important to say that, realistically, Sarge would never have moved with Fillmore. In any universe. He got too comfortable in Radiator Springs, and was sort of freaked out by the whole "run away with me" thing. And, further, what Fillmore had in mind for San Francisco was far too countercultural for the likes of Sarge: he had planned to work with the Diggers, set up some kind of "free store" situation. Sarge certainly wouldn't have approved of that.

But, if Sarge HAD moved with him, I'd like to think that everything would have gone exactly how Fillmore wanted. As in, they'd have a cute little apartment together somewhere near Haight-Ashbury, they'd run a small business together, and they'd grow old together. When they get old, they might move to some suburb: they'd have a nice house, with decent yard, and two dogs named "Floyd" and "Gunner" (they each named one). Sarge throws Super Bowl parties, and Fillmore has his old protest buddies around every now and again.

Undoubtedly, I don't think that their relationship would experience the same stresses that it did in The Third Blink and Americana. They would not argue so much about whether or not to move, and their relationship would not be constantly under pressure from Fillmore always trying to run away. I think if Sarge had simply decided to move to California with him, all of that could have been avoided. I bet they'd still bicker about politics, and why Nixon sucked, and whether or not to end the war in Vietnam. But, they wouldn't spend thirty years breaking up and getting back together again. They'd probably just stay together, and weather out the politics stuff as time went on.

tldr: if sarge had actually run away with fillmore, they'd absolutely be married right now. no breakups involved.

[witch-apologist]

uhm no the movies and books is prolly gothIC, goth is a music based subculture, thats literally the whole point, its the ideology and the music (same as punk and emo etc music based counter culture). Thats why the response to "I wanna be goth" is "listen to the music".

Funny that you mention punk, which while yes the subculture is heavily tied to punk music is a subculture whose primary focus on being counterculture in ways that stand up to unfair rules imposed by an opressive society. Punk is an umbrella term for a vast variety of subcultures who all center around the central theme of actively pushing against unfair and unjust supression. This is why we have subcultures and movements like cripplepunk and cyberpunk. The music you hear in cyberpunk is not always the same as what you hear in steampunk, they're vastly different genres yet both are punk. And you certainly dont need to listen to RATM to be cripplepunk if youre a disabled person dedicated to giving the middle finger to ableists.

Same thing with emo, its about radical acceptance of being an emotional human being.

Goth is similar. Goth music is SHORT FOR gothic. Goth is a subculture cebtered around the celebration of, and finding solace and even beauty in the sad, scary, and other darker things in life. There are so many different subgenres of goth that you can hear something in one subgenre that sounds completely different than what you hear in another. Theres cybergoth and romantic goth and even PASTEL goth. The thing that connects the music genres is the centralized theme of appreciation of the gloomy, macabre, etc etc. While yes there is a significant and important bond between gothic music and gothic subcultures participation in the music part of the subculture is not required and even if it was the music that fits into various subgenres of goth. The Cure and similar bands did not materialize from thin air and decide to invent goth subculture. The subculture existed before the music did. The subculture shaped the music and the music shaped the subculture. Take Lacrymosa by Evanescence, that song samples Lacrimosa by Mozart. Why? Because the original song Lacrimosa uses dark, haunting sounds to create something beautiful. Goth art is so vast and varied you cannot possibly act as if the music is the only thing that matters. To reduce "goth" to fanfanaticism of a few bands is to erase a vast and beautiful intersection of human creation that has evolved and expanded over hundreds of years to culminate in a sense of comraderie between people who find meaning in the same overall theme of finding beauty and comfort and fascination in the darker things life has to offer. Goth is music, goth is fashion, goth is literature, and dance and cinema and every other form of art becuase goth is an ART subculture. So yes the music is super important, but so are the paintings and the fashion and the movies and the books and the history of it all!

You are erasing entire swathes of goth culture to hold just one of its important aspects above all others! If these subcultures are only about listening to the music then Taylor Swift is emo. But I am willing to bet good money that you don't agree with that. Why? Fall Out Boy is one of her favorite bands of all time, she has cited them as inspiration from her lyricism, she even collabed with Brendan Urie. But I would bet that you would not consider her emo, because she does not fit the aesthetic you associate with emo. But if you saw someone on the street with pink neon fishnet gloves, super teased hair, thick eyeliner, and a gir backpack you would automatically see that person as emo, only revoking their emo card after hearing that they dont listen to the music you deem as the litmus test for being emo. But why would you think that person is emo in the first place? It's not because the person is a total poser who just copied emos who completely invented everything after hearing Panic, it's because that person is engaged in multiple forms of art that fall under the umbrella of "emo" the teased hair comes from a long line of art that uses such hair to symbolize distress, the thick eyeliner comes from makeup art that emulates negative emotions by accentuating aesthetics associated with emotiobal turmoil. The pink fishnet glove comes from fashion where the taboo is celebrated, fishnets often being associated with undesirable classes of people. Gir as a character became a part of emo culture BECAUSE he is from a show about children in a horrible environment dealing with a level of emotion that is considered by "polite society" to be ugly. Gir specifically, is incredibly unhindered in his emotional expression, shouting his joy so loud it echoes through a grim cityscape, and wailing terribly when upset. Zim too.

You say its about the music but if you saw someone in the crowd at a cure concert wearing, idk, uggs and galaxy leggings and a sports hoodie, you probably would view and treat them as an outsider.

Goth is way bigger and way more diverse than you can even begin to gatekeep, and it feels cheap to ignore and erase all of the other artforms that all contribute to the subculture you supposedly love in the name of exalting just one of the important pieces above all.

[jash-dun]

depression has given me knowledge only the very sad and very serious also get. is there a darkness in me? Anthony Bourdain and Carmy from The Bear. Eric Bogosian because I'm obsessed with Interview with the Vampire so of course. Counterculture. at many times anti conformist. i bet there's a better word for that.

[heartthatwontquit]

Damn it would cool to talk to Jim Morrison

He knew how to party hardy if you want to try to set the night on fire.

Like omg he's is sixties madness culmination apex in one man. Fucking amazing dude.

He's the lizard king, he can do anything.

He would've been 81 years old today.

Such a cool man.

Listening to Light My Fire. Oh Richard LinkLater what do you think of The Doors, Aldous Huxley, and Jim Morrison plus the counterculture mainstream times of the 60s/70s? And Weed, psilocybin mushrooms DMT and LSD. Come one you can't forget the moon tower vibe.

" I bet there's people out there right now, fuckin'."

This was such a fun iconic time. We need more Alice in wonderland type attention into this time period. It's so colorfully and psychedically fun.

[kiseiakhun]

I wonder what Weird Counterculture Youth Movement will characterize the early 2000s in the next century. Personally my bet is on the bimbos

[sloshed-cinema]

Trouble in Mind (1985)

Seattle is a state of mind. At least as far as the movies are concerned. It captured the fascination of 90s counterculture with the likes of Cameron Crowe’s Singles and Lynn Shelton’s career apex. And even independent of the grunge craze, it remains this sort of damp pocket of American exotica, a strange little otherworld with its residual World’s Fair infrastructure to make it seem retro-futuristic and its repressed. Need to make an American remake of a successful Nordic TV series or film? Just shoot it here (or set it here and shoot in British Columbia), there’s knitwear, docks, and icy glances to spare! The bonkers noir bonanza that is Trouble in Mind anticipates these bets and takes it all the way to the bank. This is a sleazy, greasy, grimy Seattle, but it’s not Seattle, it’s Rain City, bitches. The mayor or police chief or whoever the fuck has a map that says so. And it has to be. Our heroine enters on a ferry, but the ride is long enough that she can fall asleep on it, so she’s sure as shit not arriving from Bainbridge Island or Bremerton. No, this is heightened. This is a Seattle so filthy that it demands the queen of filth, Divine herself, to show up in an incredible supporting role. Eat shit, Macklemore! This is a Seattle of neon lights and occasional dampness but mostly dry skies despite the city’s name. This is a Seattle of crazy night clubs with weird, dumb art that some dipshit made which clashes horribly with the off-putting diner color scheme of the establishment itself. Everyone’s kinda gruff and apparently also ready to shoot one another. But this is also a Seattle gone by. The Alaskan Way Viaduct looms large in a simpler time before the Nisqually earthquake made it a hazard. The Kingdome remains, bless its weird pre-astroturf field. Smith Tower and the Space Needle still linger in the background, twin reminders of the city enduring through the decades, but still times have changed. But yet. Even more so than Singles or The Changeling or Laggies or certainly the The Ring remake or that fucking trash Chronicle, this feels like an authentic character statement of a city through an absurdist, affectionate lens. Do I have a single idea what in the hell was the plot? Certainly not. But who really cares about that in the end?

THE RULES

SIP

A Seattle landmark appears onscreen.

Drinking in the precinct.

Rain-washed windows.

The Wanda's Cafe window sign is visible in a scene.

Someone pulls a gun on another.

BIG DRINK

Model city footage.

Neon sign.

[tigercomplex]

i really do just get mad at fallout too often