#i don't have all the answers for how to reform the justice system but what we have now just furthers the cycle of cruelty and violence

[marshmellowtea]

I just saw that post asking if you can justify doing human experimentation on “bad” criminals and eughhhh. For a website that’s so ACAB heavy they sure will jump the gun to suggest torturing people if they’re bad enough. Some people really haven’t grown out of their squishing anthill phases

fucking honestly though 😭 people will pay lip service to hating cops/the prison system but once you bring up the fact that hey, the way we treat even genuinely guilty people who have done actually horrible things is cruel too and we shouldn't be allowed to do that, then suddenly everyone is all for the same fucked up system of crime and punishment they were claiming to be against. so many people just want an acceptable target for their cruelty without realizing that the cruelty is inherently bad in the first place, and it's so frustrating to see.

[anistarrose]

Please don't tune out when you get to the non-partisan section of your ballot this November. First off, where state Supreme Court justices are elected, Republicans are trying their darndest to elect candidates who will destroy reproductive freedom, gut voting rights, and do everything in their power to give "contested" elections to Republicans. Contrast Wisconsin electing a justice in 2023 who helped rule two partisan gerrymanders unconstitutional, versus North Carolina electing a conservative majority in 2022, who upheld a racist voter ID law and a partisan gerrymander that liberal justices had previously struck down both of.

Second, local judicial offices will make infinitely more of an impact on your community than a divided state or federal legislature will. District and circuit courts, especially, are where criminalization of homelessness and poverty play out, and where electing a progressive judge with a commitment to criminal justice reform can make an immediate difference in people's lives.

It's a premier example of buying people time, and doing profound-short-term good, while we work to eventually change the system. You might not think there will be any such progressive justices running in your district, but you won't know unless you do your research. (More on "research" in a moment.)

The candidates you elect to your non-partisan city council will determine whether those laws criminalizing homelessness get passed, how many blank checks the police get to surveil and oppress, and whether lifesaving harm reduction programs, like needle exchanges and even fentanyl test strips, are legal in your municipality. Your non-partisan school board might need your vote to fend off Moms for Liberty candidates and their ilk, who want to ban every book with a queer person or acknowledgement of racism in it.

Of course, this begs the question — if these candidates are non-partisan, and often hyper-local, then how do I research them? There's so much less information and press about them, so how do I make an informed decision?

I'm not an expert, myself. But I do think/hope I have enough tips to consist of a useful conclusion to this post:

Plan ahead. If you vote in person, figure out what's on your ballot before you show up and get jumpscared by names you don't know. Find out what's on your ballot beforehand, and bring notes with you when you vote. Your city website should have a sample ballot, and if they drop the ball, go to Ballotpedia.

Ballotpedia in general, speaking of which. Candidates often answer Ballotpedia's interviews, and if you're lucky, you'll also get all the dirt on who's donating to their campaign.

Check endorsements. Usually candidates are very vocal about these on their websites. If local/state progressive leaders and a couple unions (not counting police unions lol) are endorsing a candidate, then that's not the end of my personal research process per se, but it usually speeds things up.

Check the back of the ballot. That's where non-partisan races usually bleed over to. This is the other reason why notes are helpful, because they can confirm you're not missing anything.

I've seen some misconceptions in the reblogs, so an addendum to my point about bringing notes on the candidates: I strongly suggest making those notes a physical list that you bring polling place with you. Many states do allow phones at the polling place, but several states explicitly don't — Nevada, Maryland, and Texas all ban phones, and that may not be an exhaustive list. There may also be states that allow individual city clerks to set policies.

You should also pause and think before you take a photo of your ballot, because even some states that don't ban phones still ban ballot photographs. But whether it's a photo, or just having your phone in general — in an environment as high-risk for voter suppression as the current one, you don't want even a little bit of ambiguity about your conduct. Physical notes are your friends.

[shitpostingkats]

(for the record. i love the aj trilogy. i'm not trying to dunk on anyone here. just calling it as i see it) one very funny thing about aa4 and aa5 and their active conversation with one another is aa4 is a game about defending criminals. all of whom are at least a little sympathetic but still. committed crimes (but it's still your job to defend them because they still deserve a fair trial and a shot at a better life). and its also a game that's like "hey evidence is cool and all. but like sometimes :) its not enough :) sometimes the law is wrong and sometimes you lie and you win and no one finds out you lied that's just for you to think about at night" (it wasn't even your choice. you didn't even know what you were doing). with that in mind. it's then really funny to play aa5 a game which is begging you PLEASE DO NOT DO BAD THINGS FOR THE SAKE OF A GREATER GOOD. PLEASE FOLLOW THE LAW FOR THE LOVE OF GOD. YOU CAN FLIP COPS BUT THAT IS IT. and with that in mind it's absolutely hilarious to me that one of these games was sponsored by the japanese government and it WASN'T aa5.

Oh definitely. I personally wasn't very grabbed by aa4 as much as I would have expected, partly because I was spoiled by playing the great ace attorney games first, and apollo justice brings a lot of things to the table that get further refined in that duology. (Everyone should go play tgaa if they haven't already- *I am dragged forcibly off the soapbox*)

But I find it interesting that in aa4, you are defending criminals, and that's a very good thing. You are Apollo Justice. All your clients are criminals, yes, and through investigation get found out and are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. (Aside from Phoenix, cough cough). The Kitaki's leave the mafia and become honest buisnessfolk. Vera's forgeries are discovered, preventing further pieces from being sold on the black market. Machi actually hands himself over to the Japanifornia courts because it is viewed as more benevolent and trustworthy than returning to his home country. They're all sympathetic criminals, and the court is sympathetic to them in turn. The judicial system is painted as something that reforms people and finds answers.

Meanwhile in aa5, the courts are a mess. There's a whole case dedicated to blatantly showing how legal professionals are being trained to disregard actual facts and the one person trying to root out corruption is murdered. Your client goes behind your back to indict themselves because they don't trust the system to not blame an unrelated innocent party. Multiple times. Aura kidnaps and threatens half a dozen people as a direct response to knowing her brother is going to be executed for a murder he didn't commit. There's multiple discussions of not just copaganda, but actual propaganda for the courts as well. It makes everything about the judical system come of as shady, dishonorable, and in desperate need of reform.

Aa4, the game sponsored by the japanese government, is the story of how guilty people come into contact with the court system and stop doing crime, while aa5 is the story of innocent people coming into contact with the court system and immediately doing so much more crime.

[cynfuldelights]

Wardens: Cops By Another Name

So, in writing my Dresden fanfic I've once again stumbled upon another interesting quandary in the Dresdenverse and that's just how remarkably pro-cop the series is. Not in like, its representation of the Chicago PD which someone tried to point out to me was not "copaganda" because there were "good cops AND bad cops" Okay. Let's talk about Wardens then. So, Wardens unequivocally are the police of the wizard world at least for human mages. They answer to the authority of the White Council and the Head Warden, they're allowed to use lethal force in order to enforce those laws, and members are generally pulled from the populace policed (e.g. other wizards). With maybe the exception of Morgan, they're all generally portrayed the same was as the CPD are. They're also about as easy to corrupt and abuse their power as normal police, are given extrajudicial power to murder pretty much whoever they want if given a good enough "reason", and are able to carry out that act using a means of force unavailable to the rest of the population they police. Warden Donald Morgan IN THE FIRST BOOK, deliberately tries to misinterpret the Laws of Magic in order to kill Harry, who Morgan sees as a dangerous liability to leave lying around. So he just like. Tries to lie to Harry about how the Law works. Either that or he just doesn't understand the Laws of Magic. Kinda fucked up don't you think? Isn't it even more fucked up that if Harry didn't know about the Laws of Magic, Morgan could've just killed him right there in that Chicago park and the series would've just ended? Like. There's not really a criminal justice system it seems in the White Council aside from the Doom of Damacles, a laughably terrible system, that puts people who want to help reform people instead of kill them in harm's way. The only other trial we see is when a poor kid is laughably fucked up from using mind control magic and we just had to kill the fifteen-year old don't you see??

Like, sure, the Doom of Damacles is obviously a terrible shitty system that you could say is a reflection of how old and backwards the White Council is but so little of the Wardens or even the Laws of Magic are shown in the same light. Like, Morgan, is our "quintessential" bad cop, but like NOTHING BAD HAPPENS TO HIM FOR ABUSING HIS POWER! If anything in the end he's given a heroic death despite the fact that he was a terrible Warden who most definitely killed innocent people. He almost killed Harry!

Not only could he have killed him, he could've killed him easily. All Wardens, after all, are given anti-magic swords, purpose-built to negate the magic of 'renegade' mages and warlocks that they're trying to murder bring to justice. Nobody else is given these. Only Wardens, using a method that only ONE WARDEN knows how to use.

All based on, not the letter of the law, but on Morgan's interpretation of it. Just like cops do. They don't have to actually understand the law. Just try to stomp on anyone they perceive as dangerous. I wonder how it would've gone if Harry wasn't a tall White guy. You think Morgan a guy raised in a different CENTURY doesn't have weird internalized views about people different than him? Y'know. LIKE HARRY?

Plus, like... what would've even happened if he did!? Who would investigate Morgan? Other Wardens?! You think a community as insular as The White Council would actually bother with doing something when a Law of Magic hasn't been broken? Do you think they're going to believe a warlock or Lawbreaker over a wizard and Warden of the White Council? After all, breaking the Law(s of Magic) is one of the most fundamentally evil things you can do. So in order to fix that, we need to use summary execution via military police, no matter if they're a child or an adult.

After all: KILLING SOMEONE WITH AN ANTI-MAGIC SWORD DOESN'T COUNT AS KILLING SOMEONE WITH MAGIC. SO THAT MAKES IT OKAY, DOESN'T IT? (And as an aside, uh, what do you mean killing someone with an anti-magic sword, doesn't count as killing them with magic.

Like, I understand that a certain level of semantic bullshit can be argued with a lot of things in any Fantasy setting but like... What? You're telling me a sword forged with magical properties does not count as killing people with magic, even if its magical properties are used to kill them? Like. If I stab someone with a flaming sword and they burn to death, does that count?)

[groenendaelfic]

Do you think Simon would actually be willing to become the Prince Consort tho?! Like yes he LOVES Wille but I don't think he'd ever wanna officially set a foot in that system let alone give up his career for being a working royal

The quick answer is yes, I think he’d thrive. Go read my fic Becoming Prince Simon for details.

The long answer is that I think that just like we tend to make Wilhelm into this social justice prince who’d love being a house husband and hates being a royal, when in fact he is quite comfortable with ignoring staff while he walks past them in a ratty old t-shirt and sweatpants because there’s nothing more normal than living in a palace and having staff cater to him for him, and he actively enjoys ordering Jan-Olof to send him food to the middle of nowhere Hillerska, to name but two examples of how Wilhelm very much doesn’t mind being royal or privileged, and just hates being told what to do or say and having to act like someone he isn’t, Simon, too, isn’t this grand idealist.

Sure he’d like being treated fairly, who doesn't, especially when you always draw the short straw even while following the rules while your classmates get away with breaking them without problem, but the truth is he’s rather pragmatic.

He gets back in contact with his drug addict, alcoholic and to a currently unknown degree abusive father so that he can acquire alcohol for his underage classmates to drink so that Sara can attend a party, and then steals drugs to among other things pay for math tutoring because he wants good grades.

I’m not saying Simon would jump at the chance to join the royal family, but he’d come to see the advantages, and I’m not just talking about him being with Wilhelm, but also all the good he can do. He doesn't need to be a monarchist for that.

So yes, I don’t only think Simon would be willing to become Prince Consort, but that he’d thrive once he got accustomed to the idea.

After all modern day Sweden isn’t Czarist Russia or pre-revolutionary France, you can’t just burn that shit down (and get the Soviet Union or Emperor Napoleon), because that wouldn't work and attempting so would do more harm than good. 

You need reform and systematic change, and to change a system you need to interact with it, for example from the inside, and as spouse to the Crown Prince and later King, Simon would be in the ideal position to affect that.

He doesn’t need any actual power to highlight problems and topics important to him or for people to pay attention and listen. It doesn’t always have to be Diana shaking hands with a man with aids in the 80s, it can be something as trivial as the irl second in line opening a fairytale trail in her duchy as a toddler.

What the royal family does (and doesn’t! do) gets publicity and is reported. Simon knows that. He grew up seeing it all the time.

And the people most likely to take note of what the royal family does? Those I dare say are also some of the ones who could do with a bit more exposure to the causes Simon would highlight.

Also not to be mean but give up what career? We know Simon enjoys making music and he wants to get out of small town Bjärstad, but as far as we know he has no great, specific career ambitions he’d have to give up.

I’m gonna end this with a potentially triggering and extreme example, so take care.

When the royal court announced that the irl Swedish crown princess had an eating disorder I was in junior high. I'll always feel sorry for what she had to go through so publicly and it definitely is another point on the list of why monarchies and celebrity culture are the worst, but I also cannot overstate how much good that publicity did when it came to bringing awareness to the topic of eating disorders.

Suddenly that was something that was seriously discussed as an illness by people in power and who otherwise never would have, and not just in a ‘haha those silly teenage girls wanting to look like Kate Moss’ kind of way, because it was the crown princess and not some random pop starlet, and if that can happen to someone like her, then who is to say it can’t also affect our own children etc?

We were taught about it in school, in detail, when my older cousins never were, how to recognize them, how to help, where to go for help. More, there suddenly were places to help, places that were actively advertised which hadn’t been before.

There were clinical programs being opened and awareness campaigns launched, and not just in Sweden. (I’m not saying she was the only reason, it was the late nineties, it was really, really necessary, but she was a big deciding factor when it came to the amount and speed at which things changed)

It sucks that royals and celebrities highlighting important issues can make such a difference, and I’m the first to go yell abolish all systems of inequality irl, but Simon could do a lot of good as a working royal, and he’d actually care about changing things, instead of just finding it a boring necessity like irl royals and the YR royal family including Wilhelm do, which is why I think that in a few years, given time, he would very much be willing to become part of the system if only to bring what change he can, especially when no one else can take his place and do it instead of him.

[esther-dot]

"No. It was not courage. This one was dead of fear. You could see it in his eyes, Stark."- Bran(AGOT I).

"The poor man was half mad. Something had put a fear in him so deep that my words could not reach him."- Cat(AGOT I).

Jon and Ned noticed that Gared was terrified. Ned knew he was traumatized by seeing something. I do think Grrm wanted to be critical of NW system. Ned was doing right thing according to their world. Maybe there should be changes in rules like a trial before executing for desertion. Thoughts?

(in reference to this ask)

I’m back answering all my very old asks. Apologies @please-dot !

So, I answered that last ask without rereading the chapter, but your comments made me revisit it and Ned comes across better than I remembered. Actually, he sounds as responsible as he could be in the situation:

So I agree that not only was Ned doing the right thing according to their world (duty), he was trying to do it conscientiously. I've said before, I really don't think Martin intended us to be quite as critical of Ned as we often are. I posted a quote once about Martin’s aggravation that writers ignore the realities of medieval life. He said he wanted it to have teeth, so Ned, even though he is a lord, being constrained by his duty is a genuine reality in their world. He is flawed but upheld as someone with the right ideals, and knowing this is how it begins, Ned delivering the king's justice while Bran is instructed in his way of doing so which isn’t the Targ or Robert way, and that Bran will then end up king of Westeros, well, it makes you read this whole passage with new eyes.

All of this is certainly set-up for Bran to be the person who can administer justice, potentially an even more merciful and wiser version than Ned's, but I just don't know how much Martin will allow society to progress when he wants to keep things kinda realistic?

Will the Wall fall, forcing the Watch to take a new form? Rangers who have homes and families to return to perhaps? Or will everyone accept the continued threat of the Others and they're therefore able to fill the ranks of the Watch with volunteers rather than pressing people into service? We're shown not only how unjust that is, but how these boys don't understand what the vows mean for their lives, and that they can't resist the lure of love, family, so even if it's voluntary, the celibacy thing is a problem. So, reform? keep it but overhaul it? In post canon fics we write many variations of all that, but I've never felt like I understood how the problem could be handled in a Martin-esque way. Something better is in store, surely, but I’m not sure how dramatic a change he’s aiming for.

We do have the Watch as a “shield” and I’ve mentioned before that makes Ned and Benjen’s hope for the Gift to be a “shield” a potentially hopeful sign, but that was in thinking of the FF, and we have the Others to worry about so it all depends on how resolved you think that issue will be. If they’re entirely gone, maybe there’s no need for a Watch, if not…

And then we have the idea of an independent North to throw in there. If it is free, I don’t see how the Watch / the Wall doesn’t become their thing, and not only has Jon been thoroughly disillusioned and then killed, Sansa has realized some truth about it as well (and will no doubt learn more). If they are in positions of power, it’s hard to imagine things wouldn’t infinitely improve.

But then, I look at the less hopeful Jon endings, and think he was meant to be the person with the ideals who became disillusioned who might be able to reform it—a post canon purpose for him, the prospect of short adventures beyond the Wall (Martin had at one point mentioned the desire to write a post canon adventure for Arya, and somewhere I saw a comment that made it sound like he had potential ideas for Jon too), and with the whole sequel show now in the works, I wondered if GoT really did deliver his ending, the Watch still exists and Jon is the one wise enough/with the relationships to keep the peace between the Northerners and FF. 😖

I really can’t say. I find my ideal too simplistic and the alternatives entirely unsatisfactory. I need you to tell me what to think on this one 😅

[needabetternamelater]

"Yeah ok mate, hi, I'm Tolz, the only person you've been talking to the whole time. Not someone else." Yeah okay - my bad for not checking usernames. "As the comic and I have said repeatedly, prison abolition is not an instant thing" So? I don't think the timescale matters much. "It's a process of transitioning away from the prison industrial complex, by abolishing for profit prisons and reforming the laws that make them so profitable, improving society so people don't need to resort to crime to survive, and establishing constructive and rehabilitative systems of justice, instead of punitive justice being the only option" That would be a lot more believiable if the movement as a whole could actually address the root causes of why people ask the first and most obvious question rather than resorting to punitive practices like mocking. \

I don't think it needs to be the only option but I do think that unfortunately some people take not being stopped as permission and if we don't think through how to do no punishment without enabling, the fraction seems to reduce to enabling/1. "As much as people might tell you, we don't want to close all prisons and set everyone free tomorrow, we agree that that's as damaging as you say." The interesting thing here is that I don't think the 'tomorrow' makes a great deal of difference. What I don't understand though is why prison abolitionists would agree that that's damaging. If prisons don't help anyone, what would be the harm in letting everyone out tomorrow? "So to answer your question, yes, for most of the process of prison abolition, murderers and rapists would still go to prison"

who’s left- Mariame/Prison Abolition

by Flynn Nicholls

[stormblessed95]

So you don’t have to publish this if you don’t feel comfortable, but I kinda wanted your opinion on this.

It may sound dramatic, but I haven’t been able to call myself an army since the news of the World Cup came out. I am so incredibly disappointed in bts and bighit.

When I got into bts they brought me so much comfort and helped me through some tough times. I enjoyed their music and was always very proud of the message they tried to share with the world. Yes, some of their older content is uncomfortable to watch for the casual misogyny and homophobia, but as a queer woman I perfectly understand internalized homophobia and misogyny and I wouldn’t want to be judged for what I said or did in 2014. They had shown they had grown and learned. They always spoke up against people in power abusing it and about social justice.

So what happened? Did they became worldwide stars and decided “who cares about our message anymore! Let’s support a tournament that is basically a celebrations of the violation of human rights?”

Supporting the World Cup is basically saying they don’t care that over 6000 people died building the stadiums. They don’t care that lgbtq people die in that country. They don’t care about women and women’s rights.

This is not the bts I thought I knew, and I’m talking about all of them because if the other six were strongly opposed to this, I honestly doubt jungkook would be flying over there right now. But here we are.

I mean I could even understand that it’s a huge honor for a South Korean to sing for the first time at a World Cup opening ceremony, but let’s not forget that SK with Japan hosted the 2002 World Cup (and that was a mess as well, just google about the referee Moreno and bribes about that World Cup).

Idk I think they really fucked up this time. And if they have no qualms to stand up for human rights violations, than I don’t think I can call myself their fan. I’m also disappointed in armies (on twitter mostly) that have been insulting anyone who pointed out how this is a very poor decision that does not reflect well on bts’s character and morals. You may disagree, but you can’t deny the facts.

I read dualipa’s reaction (who I don’t follow and don’t know anything about) about being rumored to sing and the World Cup, and I can’t help but wish that had been bts answer as well.

Hi. So I'm not going to tell you how to feel. Your feelings and concerns are valid and they are your own. What you choose to do based on how you feel is also totally and completely up to you. Your choice/feelings aren't wrong either way you feel about. Nor do i want to dismiss all the issues and valid crisitisms surrounding the world cup and Qatar. So please know that its okay to be upset about it. And I don't want to bring up past controversies either but idk if you were around in 2019 or if you feel like this is any different than the issues surrounding their choice to perform in Saudi Arabia?

For background if you werent aware of the issues they faced for the decison to hold that concert, ill give an overview:

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman took the throne in 2015, and he has since been making efforts to make the country more moderate and less conservative with several reforms. According to Wikipedia, some of those reforms would be: "regulations restricting the powers of the religious police, the removal of the ban on female drivers in June 2018, and weakening the male-guardianship system in August 2019. Other cultural developments under his reign include the first Saudi public concerts by a female singer, the first Saudi sports stadium to admit women, and an increased presence of women in the workforce." Regardless Saudi Arabia is still quite a bit most other countries in terms of human rights. Its bombings and attacks in Yemen have led to mass famines and deaths, and the Saudi government has been criticized for detaining and torturing human rights activists and LGBTQ people. Women also still don’t have most of the rights they should, and still require a male family member’s permission before doing things like traveling or getting a passport among other things. The Prince and the Gov there have also been heavily critized for their actions being more performantive and less about actually pushing forward more human rights. I don't know much more, so I don't want to speak to heavily on either country (SA or Qatar).

In an effort to be more modern and open, they invited many artists to perform. Among those artists were BTS and they accepted. You mentioned Dua Lipa refusing Qatar performance, so I'll also mention Nikki Minaj refused to perform in Saudi Arabia for similar reasons, citing women's treatment in the country as her reason. Regardless of her close friendships with pedophiles and rapists, she was lauded for the decision as a morally righteous one by many people. Dua Lipa's stance on Qatar is just as morally questionable as being performative based on where else she choices to perform. But that's stuff (for both Nikki and Dua Lipa) that you can look up for yourselves if you want.

BTS were questioned about this decision too actually and in an interview stated: “I wouldn’t say the decision it was easy,” Namjoon said. Jimin added: “But we were officially invited. It’s been a while since we’ve performed in the Middle East – I guess the last time was 2015 in Dubai. To put it simply, if there’s a place where people want to see us, we’ll go there. That’s how we feel.”

Many fans stuck up for BTS during this and said that this performance was for their fans, not for the Saudi government. Which is what their reasoning was. They weren't promoting the governments actions or laws or decisions. They weren't supporting it. They were going to see their fans and share love and music with the world. Both BTS and their staff was also praised for being very considerate of Saudi Arabia's cultural customs and giving space to them and following them when they could (such as not wearing gold jewelry, not showing skin during performances they otherwise do, like Serendipity, pausing rehearsals for muslism prayer times, etc)

Similarly again, just more recently in 2022, BTS were invited by the President of the United States to speak at the White House. And they accepted and went, with little criticism in that aspect. Regardless of the fact that the US is steadily stripping human rights away from people more and more, with endless human rights violations and imperialism over the past few years. With children being taken from parents at the border and put in cages, with POC being murdered by the policing force constantly, with LGBTQ people in fear of their basic human rights being taken away, with women's rights to their own bodily autonomy being argued over daily and taken away in many places in the country. They came to speak specifically about one issue, one problem, that they and many of their fans relate to and face. Anti Asian hate crimes. So they accepted. That's not them promoting and accepting and being okay with everything else.

And yes, BTS are known for talking about controversial topics about their own country in their lyrics. Standing up for people and being willing to criticize their Gov and laws at times, this does not make them politicians or responsible for making a statement over everything. That hasn't changed. Their stance on things or how they feel about it. At least, not that I can tell. I don't know Jungkook's or BTS' motivations behind accepting to do a performance at the World Cup or to do a song for them (because they did release a new verison of Yet To Come specifically for Qatar World Cup promotions). Maybe they will make a statement at some point. Maybe they won't unless asked about it. Maybe they just wanted to do something extra for their fans and found this to be a big opportunity to do so. Maybe they are bigger fans of Soccer/Football then we thought and so they were excited about that portion of this as well. We know they like Messi they've said so. They've had multiple good interactions with Son Heungmin, who is a soccer player for South Korea. We also know Korea will be playing in the World Cup to, so maybe they were asked to represent their country more at the World Cup. And they accepted. Similarly to how they accepted to support Busan's bid to host the World Expo with their free Yet To Come concert held in Busan. Despite the issues with that and with South Koreas own issues with government and laws that are heavily conservative against LGBTQ people and woman as well.

So I guess, my point is, we don't know why they accepted. Even if it's as simple as it's a huge opportunity and they just wanted to... I don't think it changes how they've made it clear that they stand in support of queer people, of women, of love. How they really value their fans and people and want the world to be a better place. They just spoke about all these values at the UN recently as well. So no, I don't think world wide fame changed that for them.

BTS are human. They are not perfect. They will make mistakes and will and can grow from the choices they make. You also, as a fan, do not have to like or agree with everything they do. You aren't even necessarily SUPPOSED to. They aren't God's. They shouldn't be placed on a pedestal of beings who can do no wrong. You will then be disappointed. You are allowed to not like this choice or to think it's a bad one. But I don't think this choice means they are supporting the fucked up violations of human rights that are present there nor do i think this choice is indicative of them not being or no longer being good people. And I think saying that this is them supporting those policies is not fact, as anon stated, but opinion. And you are entitled to your opinion and to your feelings over the matter as well. But these are mine and if you are upset solely about one thing with one place they've traveled to, but not the others, that's something that might be cause for some inner reflection as well.

[haleigh-sloth]

Hello,

I just found your page and after reading some of your mha posts had a couple things I wanted to ask if that's ok.

1. Since you feel Hawks is not justified because he could have chosen options other than killing Twice, do you think he would have been had he genuinely been made to choose between killing him and saving others? I.e. do you think it's just this killing in particular that was not justified and thus murder, or do you think heroes killing can never be justified, even if in self-defense or defense of others? If we take the "Heroes save people" maxim to its limits, it might be reasonable to argue for a deontological approach to ethics rather than a utilitarian one, so that killing one to save others is not justified because you actively break your code (as opposed to risking not being able to save others, which would be considered a lesser moral wrong under this mindset).

2. This might very well be a stupid question, but if we consider that heroes shouldn't treat others as an it and put them down for the "sake of society", do you feel this ought to extend to AFO too? I really don't mean to use this as a gotcha moment or anything like it, but I feel like if MHA is trying to move away from a punitive justice system in favour of a rehabilitative/restorative one, we ought to consider where people like AFO fall into this system as well. AFO is seemingly entirely unlike any of the other villains in the show, but if we judge that he deserves a different fate for this it also feels like playing into the "Some people just can't be saved" notion that's been perpetuated by hero society. It is of course entirely possible, if not likely, that he'll fall in battle, or that Shigaraki himself will kill him eventually, but I feel like that skirts the issue rather than answer it. As someone who does not seem to show any remorse, desire or even ability to be saved, and in fact feels rather inhuman, what should a reformed society even do with him? Even if we could convincingly argue him to be fundamentally different and thus deserving of punishment, it is much easier for us readers who have more information to make this call, rather than in-universe characters whose judgement will inevitably be based on something less than the full truth. So even if AFO's case in particular was easily answered, it would set a precedent for cases that may appear similar, but in truth be less clear cut. Basically, I believe you feel the villain league deserves another chance because they were victims of their circumstances, and thus not necessarily beyond salvation, because they never knew normality to begin with, but what about those who were not victims, those who by their nature have insurmountable trouble fitting into a peaceful society? Perhaps it's just my mistaken assumption that such people exist and I'm reading AFO wrong, or perhaps it's the opposite and I'm giving people like AFO undue consideration, or perhaps my assumption that AFO ought to be treated as a person rather than a carocature, a symbol, is flawed to begin with, but I just really don't think a manga that wants to argue that villains are people too should go "but here's THIS vile piece of shit, let's kill him!". Am I making sense here?

3. On another note, what do you think of Endeavor's recent speech and general recent development? I've seen some people who were upset by his "Would it fix everything if we showed you our tears" line, but rather than him being dismissive or callous I just see it as him awkwardly saying that he doesn't think anything other than actions can help him atone for what he did. He's still got a lot to work through, but him recognizing that he's got something to atone for and freely talking about what he did to his family is, as I find, certainly a huge step in the right direction.

WHOO hey! Sorry for taking a while to respond. You gave me some really well thought-out questions and I wanted to return the favor with well thought-out answers. Also I was heckin busy yesterday when you sent this. So, here we go:

To answer this question about Hawks, I first need to clarify what it means to be a hero in the eyes of the story that is BNHA:

This honestly doesn’t even make a dent in the amount of panels in BNHA that reiterate time and time again that heroes SAVE people, but I don’t feel like I should have to spend too much time looking for them, these I used above should suffice. The one with baby Midoriya and baby Tenko doesn’t even have any words in the panel, and it’s still powerful enough to get the message across. And make me cry.

Almost every story has its own “heroes” in it. And every story’s definition of a hero is different. In Marvel and DC superhero comics and movies, the heroes usually end up killing the villains, yes? I can’t say I’m familiar with these stories because they aren’t interesting to me in the slightest, but from the ones I HAVE seen, the final boss at the end dies. But all of the heroes get to keep their title of “hero”. That’s not really the standard we have in BNHA.

“Do you think it's just this killing in particular that was not justified and thus murder, or do you think heroes killing can never be justified, even if in self-defense or defense of others?”

So this is a fair point and I feel that the best way to answer this is by asking what you consider self defense? Say Hawks is at home mad chillin and not prepared for a fight in the slightest, and somebody breaks into his house and starts trying to hurt/kill him. He’s unprepared and at this point just trying to keep himself alive. If he ends up killing the guy, is he wrong? In my opinion, no. In real life this happens to people, and they aren’t considered murderers, as they shouldn’t be. To me, self defense is a situation where:

It’s either you or me. It’s one or the other.

I think it’s fair to say what happened with Hawks and Twice was absolutely NOT self defense. I’m not going to go into detail about how deciding to kill Twice was absolutely 100% premeditated, because there’s a wonderful post by someone else that already explains that in great detail here. But I’ll end this thought by saying that Hawks was not committing an act of self defense.

Nothing about this says “self-defense” to me.

“If we take the "Heroes save people" maxim to its limits, it might be reasonable to argue for a deontological approach to ethics rather than a utilitarian one, so that killing one to save others is not justified because you actively break your code (as opposed to risking not being able to save others, which would be considered a lesser moral wrong under this mindset).”

To make it simple for some people to understand these terms:

“Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines right from wrong by focusing on OUTCOMES.“ In a nutshell, utilitarian ethics means you make a decision based on how it will affect everything else.

“In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules, rather than based on the consequences of the action.” In a nutshell, deontological ethics means you make a decision based on whether it follows rules or not.

So this is a complicated question, and my answer to this is....both? Throughout BNHA we’ve had this dilemma over and over again:

Break the rules and save the day? Or follow the rules and possibly suffer the consequences? Well, BNHA just says “Yes” lol. Do both. Break the rules and save the day. Make a decision based on the consequences of said decision, but also try to follow the rules as best as you can. Even in reality, people do this to get through life. You really can’t live life under a strict utilitarian approach or a strict deontological approach. If Midoriya hadn’t persisted against his classmates and the law to go save Bakugo, he WOULD have gotten kidnapped AGAIN. They were actively trying to take him with them. If Midoriya didn’t break the rules to save Kota, Kota would have straight up DIED. Muscular was actively trying to kill Kota, not to mention Kota had zero ways of defending himself. But here’s where I don’t think this is a fair comparison:

Hawks claims his killing of Twice was to save others. I don’t completely disagree with this logic, if the situation was more dire and dangerous for Hawks. The league was taking peoples’ lives. Somebody had to do something. The problem is that Twice was RUNNING AWAY when Hawks killed him. Twice wasn’t fighting Hawks back, he wasn’t endangering Hawks himself. Hawks stabbed him in the back. AND Hawks had Dabi to worry about, who was actively trying to attack Hawks. But Hawks chose to murder Twice instead of fending off Dabi. And if you refer back to the post I linked above about how it was a premeditated decision to kill Twice, you’ll see that Hawks had the capability of knocking Twice unconscious. He should have done this from the get go. And honestly? There are other heroes who could have captured Twice. There SHOULD have been other heroes to capture Twice. If Hawks was the only hope for the heroes in that war then jeez, the heroes suck at their jobs.

So TLDR for this question: Hawks’s circumstances were not drastic enough for him to be justified in killing Twice. As I said above, self-defense is one thing, where yes I could understand how if a life is lost while defending oneself is probably inevitable in some cases. But this wasn’t self defense. Twice was running away. Hawks should also be able to rely on his hero comrades to help him out.

Instead Hawks chose to be law-enforcement, judge, and executioner all in one moment.

I hope this answers your question? I tried my best. If I misunderstood or missed a talking point, feel free to shoot me a message or another ask.

Next question:

Believe me. I have thought about this! What about AFO? He’s human too isn’t he? You have a point. Should the restorative justice system extend to AFO? I would say yes. If I’m going to stick to my guns that the villains deserve restorative justice and not punitive justice, I should be fair and say it should extend to all villains.

The problem is not in the idea of exploring saving AFO, it’s just that there simply isn’t enough time to explore this in the story. If Horikoshi had said “I’m not going anywhere guys! We’re in this for the long haul!” I’d say it’s possible to explore that route. We don’t know anything about AFO except from what we’ve seen on screen, and what we’ve been told by All Might and the other OFA holders. Which still isn’t much to go on. You’re not giving AFO undue consideration. It’s definitely a deserved consideration. There are people in the story (and the real world) who may not be victimized in any way and end up being villains. Do they deserve a chance? I’d say yes. It’s in my nature as a social worker irl to give people the benefit of the doubt and give them a chance to learn. You’re right that in the end, the league being saved and the characters not considering what could have led AFO to villainy is just “skirting around the problem.” And honestly, that’s probably what we’re going to get. I wouldn’t be surprised for the thought to pass in Midoriya’s head. After saving somebody like Shigaraki, who everybody in the story (and many readers) considered to be “too far gone”, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Midoriya entertained the thought for a brief moment. “What could have saved AFO from himself?” So honestly I don’t have an answer to this question that qualifies both sides. I can’t say that AFO is “too far gone” without undermining that fact that I never believed Shigaraki was “too far gone”, simply because we don’t get to decide what “too far gone” is.  All I can say is that in the eyes of the story, there are far too many differences between AFO’s circumstances and Shigaraki’s circumstances to compare the two, and say they deserve the same type of sympathy from us readers.

Truly I have no sympathy for AFO, because the story doesn’t ask for it. The story wants sympathy for Shigaraki, Toga, Touya, Spinner, and even a tiiiiiny bit for Overhaul. It asks for NONE for AFO.

Another post I’ll link here that isn’t by me but by another awesome meta blogger (@hamliet​) is this.

In a nutshell it says:

It’s not that AFO can’t be saved, it’s that he won’t. That’s the best answer I can give to that question honestly.

As for the third question:

That press conference was just...eh. I mean yeah, Endeavor not denying the allegations was good. Not that he really could anyway. It sucks for the rest of his family though. But at the same time Touya deserved his revenge, even though it was at the expense of his siblings and mother. It sucks, it’s a double edged sword because somebody is hurting no matter what was gonna happen. Endeavor was an asshole to that lady but I don’t really care too much. I’m really torn on what I think is going on inside Enji’s head because the Todofam is either extremely dense, or Horikoshi is writing their dialogue extremely vague on purpose to keep reader’s on the edge of their seats regarding what they want to do about Touya. I really don’t know. I’m not thrilled with the way the Todofam plot is being written right now, even though I’m 100% sure Touya is going to get his happy ending. But right now anything to do with the Todofam that isn’t Shoto and Touya just bothers me. I don’t think Enji really understands yet what he has to do for Touya. Yes he recognizes that he has to atone, but he’s not recognizing HOW he has to atone. Right now he’s still stuck in that “I have to be a hero to absolve my crimes against my family” headspace and I don’t think he’s going to get out of that headspace until he comes face to face with his son and realizes that he can’t just fight villains and go home to a happy family that he terrorized for 20 years. He’s going to have to let his family go, let them decide when to let him back in, if they ever do (I think they will just because of the way the story is being written.) As a reader, Enji is just a character that I cannot vibe with, no matter what happens. I definitely appreciate his role in the story. His role is vital to Touya’s saving and redemption. Touya is in my top 3 favorite characters from this series and I’m emotionally invested. So while I appreciated Enji’s role in the story, I don’t like his character or anything to do with him, at least until it comes time to help save his son. Also the trio of Hawks, Best Jeanist, and Enji just gives me major back the blue vibes and I just can’t read their chapters and be in a good mood lol.

Thank you for the ask! I hope I answered everything! This was fun to answer!

[tlbodine]

There's something I struggle with RE: police brutality. The police need reform. Their needs to be a certain, independent force to immediately bring justice for any misuse of authority in a democracy. The thing is now, though, the talk has shifted to the complete removal of police and prisons. That alone makes me pause. Then there's another layer. I'm a gun-owner for home defense purposes. The same people who want to abolish the police, do not want me owning a firearm. I don't know what to think.

I know what you mean. I’m struggling with the same issue, and I admit that I have plenty of ignorance in regards to the topic. Like most (white) people, I grew up conditioned to believe that legality and morality were basically equivocal; that police are first responders, helpers, heroes; that the legal system keeps us safe; that criminals are bad people who deserve to be in jail. 

It’s very, very hard to question any part of that conditioning, because it’s so deeply embedded in just, like...my understanding of reality. To concede that point is to admit that things I hold to be true about the universe are fundamentally wrong, and that is very scary. 

But pushing past that discomfort is important, because lives are on the line. And the only way we’re going to be able to fix it is if we can very clearly see through to the actual roots of the problem, and correct the issue at that level. 

I don’t know what law and order looks like without police. I don’t know how we protect vulnerable people without some sort of legal system in place -- because that’s really the point of a legal system, right? The whole reason we should even have laws (and guns for that matter) is to even out the balance of power. Otherwise, it would just be a dog-eat-dog world where the strong take from the weak, right? So it seems to me that if the legal system we have in place does not perform that specific role -- if it does not protect the most vulnerable people from harm, if indeed it commits harm against the vulnerable -- then that system has fundamentally failed and needs to be changed. 

What does that look like? How do we protect our citizens and ensure that everyone is safe and secure and following the rules of society? 

I don’t know. 

I don’t have a good answer. I really don’t. 

The best I can do right now is to try to research as much as I can, and listen to the voices of the people who are fighting these battles and who are affected by injustice, and try my best to really hear and understand what they’re saying. 

I am certain that there are people -- advocates, scholars, social scientists -- who have put quite a lot of work into thinking about these problems, and right now I am going to work on finding them and studying them. 

I wish you luck on your journey toward understanding, as well. It is frightening and confusing and challenging to watch all of this. But I think it’s important that we not look away just because we are uncomfortable. 

[quoigenicfromhell]

Oops I'm sorry this got long

I consider myself psych critical but I relate to what you're saying here, SAS. Three of my grandparents died of alzheimers, and I watched all of them decline basically from before I can remember to 2020. My paternal grandfather got it first, and earlier than any of my other grandparents, and he did get violent.

I also totally understand your frustration about this because I share the frustration; lots of people criticize 'putting the elderly in homes', pretending that it's where people put their parents when they don't care about them anymore. Having witnessed my mother put both her parents in them after needing to care for them constantly with no support, the idea that we should just get rid of facilities that care for elderly people when families cannot dedicate themselves to being a fulltime caregiver for years because they have jobs and families of their own absolutely makes me livid. I will likely be in that position as my mother ages, as much as I hope I won't be.

And tbqh I am not defending the people that believe all psych wards and care facilities need to be abolished because it seems they have not considered that there would be clear and disastrous consequences. In the same way I'm for prison abolition but realistically there has to be a place where people who are a genuine danger to society can live--it's just that the current system causes more problems than it solves.

I also won't propose a solution because IMHO there needs to be a massive shift in psychology as a discipline. The understanding that scary/abnormal =/= dangerous or even necessarily illness. I personally have never been in a psych ward or institution, but I've had friends that have and have heard stories, and while sometimes it doesn't seem like it was too bad a lot of the time the way these places are run are fundamentally carceral, with the patients at the mercy of the nurses and doctors. Sometimes that's fine, sometimes there are bad nurses and bad doctors and abuse of patients--and those patients are not believed or taken seriously because of their conditions. This system of care needs a complete overhaul. I couldn't tell you what that would look like exactly, but I know for sure patients should have some kind of advocacy inside any kind of care facility, and involuntary holds should be used incredibly sparingly, with legal representation for the patient, the same as any other prisoner.

I don't really have answers for what the best solution is, though, as in a detailed road map. I don't think a lot of people do. Psychiatric institutions are abusive and oppressive because their existence stems from oppression. I think the field of psychiatry has to change majorly before we can reform the system care facilities use or get a clear picture of what that would look like. But psychiatry is tangled up in the web of carceral justice, ableism and saneism, and importantly, capitalism. So often what determines someone who has illness and someone who doesn't is based on whether someone can hold conventional employment; whether they act 'normally' whether or not their actions are actually harmful; etc. (I am not saying this is true in all cases--I'd still be dysfunctional due to my adhd even outside of employment, even if it wasn't as bad.)

Personally I have no doubt there will be paradigm shifts of psychiatry in the future that redefine illness. Whether those paradigm shifts are more liberatory or oppressive remains to be seen, but I hope for liberating. But I understand your frustration and anger and I don't think these are questions that should be ignored. The ugly reality of a lot of people that are severely ill and really do need full time care is easy to ignore because it complicates the simple idea of total abandonment of psychiatry. Those people still deserve respect and dignity, and currently it isn't given to them much of the time because of how the system works--but the idea of full time medical care shouldn't be thrown out, that I know for sure.

Psych Critical

This post is highly related to this post, and I hope you'll read both. This was written second.

I've sent a couple asks to anti psych blogs talking about my own situation.

My goal isn't to change their minds, but to see what options they think are available to my family. Not every attempt at communication is an attack on a stance. I have real questions.

If there are other options, I'd love to hear them. I want these options to exist. I want more than what my family is going to get.

However, no one has responded to my asks. Maybe they think it's bait and I'm trying to catch them in a trick, maybe they don't know the answer, maybe they don't care (if you're one of those blogs, you've forfeited an opinion on my life).

So I'm going to post, under my own name, and ask again.

This isn't bait. This is my life, my every day normal. This is my father's life, every single day.

Psych Critical is a stance that I don't have a choice in. The psych system is only one thing that my family will turn to for help, and if we don't approach it first, it'll approach us on less kind circumstances. And that's genuinely what we're looking for.

Help.

And I think blanket generalizations like the above are about as useful as trash. I shouldn't have to hate myself and my family for needing help and seeking it out.

My father has something called NF (Neurofibromatosis). You might know this as "elephant man disease," though these are distinct disorders that are different from each other. It's the easiest way to describe it, though. He has tumors all over his body, inside and out, in his case. Visible lumps all over his body.

Unfortunately, these tumors are also on his brain. This causes him to have seizures, strokes, hallucinate, and have bouts of violence towards anyone and everyone. Specifically concerning is the voice of God telling him to punish his (now adult) children, and threatening to harm people based on the colour of their skin and religion. These hallucinations likely stem from the fact that he was raised as an orphan in the church (yes, it's exactly what you think).

There was a time when he could have gotten treatment, but we're past that. Initially, he refused. He was scared, I'm sure he didn't think it would end up like this. Now, he's unable to consent to treatment, and it's so progressed that surgery isn't an option. Chemo never was. To make matters worse, he's an alcoholic, to the point that not drinking will cause seizures and will likely result in death. Not to mention the damage to his liver that's slowly killing him. It's not functioning well these days.

There is no POA or will, and he's not able to consent to signing either. He will not go to any doctors at this point. You can't even have a conversation about this with him. Every plan he's set up on, retirement, pension, disability-- he calls them constantly to fuck around with it, cancel it, take his children's names off it, tell them he doesn't need it. They've stopped talking to him and will only discuss with my mother, despite there being no POA in place.

He is only going to get worse. He is going to die, and he doesn't understand.

My father is already dead. The man that raised me is gone, the man that cared isn't in that head anymore. It's a cruel soul using his body like a puppet until it finally gives out.

At this point... my siblings, mother, and I have had to cut him out of our lives. He's mean. He's so goddamn mean and cruel. His words cut harder than his fists, only because there's nothing left to him. He's skin and bones.

I don't know how much longer my cousin can let him stay there. Then what?

At some point, he will need to be forcibly committed and treated, if only to make him comfortable during his final... years? Months? Days? Because of the unique circumstances, there's likely not a drug that can help curb any of the symptoms. Drugs might be able to get him off the alcohol, but he's not going to like that at all, and that's not what's causing the hallucinations. His memory only gets worse by the day. Simple daily things like using the stove are becoming more of a danger, because he keeps walking away and forgetting.

I have about as much choice in this as he does, and the sooner he's committed, the better for everyone, including him. I mean, he can continue to stay out, and pass out on the streets trying to get home from the bar after getting kicked out for starting fights or getting angry when he's cut off. I don't know if or when he's going to forget the way home, and even if I try not to care... I'm scared.

I fear the day he's picked up by the police. I want him in the legal system even less than the psych system, and I think he'll fight any police that try to approach him. This is a man that, I promise you, would rather be homeless than denied alcohol.

This is not my biological father. He came into my life when I was only 1 year old. My biological father was, surprise surprise, also an alcoholic. He was in a drunk driving accident before I was born that killed other people. He was the driver.

My step dad, the only dad I've ever known, scares me sometimes.

I don't want to be the child of two murderers.

So I ask again, what do you suggest? How is this ableist? Your focus is psychotic people, but that's not the only people in these facilities. That's not the only disease that they treat. I read a couple posts from a linked resource (it's tumblr posts, let's not lie), and one of them mentioned something akin to outpatient treatment. @trans-axolotl because I'm using your post. I actually appreciate the "I don't know" of your answer.

It's a lot better than, "you're ableist for even thinking about this."

Friendos, I don't have a choice but to think about this.

This seemed silly to me, though, because psych wards already act like that. Many of the patients leave during the day to work, shop and visit family, and return at night. Rinse and repeat for them, every day. There's a surprising amount of individualized treatment, freedoms, and steps for each patient.

But not everyone can adhere to that. If my dad got out during the day, he would be drinking, and this would exacerbate the symptoms. He's a dick when he's drunk on the best of days. It's why my mother divorced him originally, before the hallucinations started.

A dry house wouldn't work, either. The places this man has hidden alcohol... he's like a squirrel, it's just everywhere, and he comes across them like,

Inside the WALLS, my guys. Hidden in the basement, the wall goes up to uncovered beams and there's a gap, and he hides them down behind those walls.

Do you know how many spiders are in there? He can fucking drink them, he wins that battle. Touché, dad.

When they tear the house down in the far future, I'm willing to bet they'll find a full liquor store down there. And again, the first time someone says, "you can't bring that in here," he'll turn around and say, "then I'm not going in there, diddles," because his fucking language part of the brain is broken and no matter how many times you explain that "diddle" is a CSA word that you can't just use randomly like that, he forgets.

When I first got married, I had him over to my apartment to spend a few nights. The amount of alcohol that got into my house... I don't even think he brought boxers, just alcohol, and it ended in a fight, and I made him leave. After that, he refused to come visit me. He's never been to my sibling's homes. It was the final straw for me, the things he said to my husband are unforgivable. I keep watch from afar now, talking to my cousin about him.

I said a few paragraphs up that the man that cared is gone. Sometimes, I look back, and I'm reminded of all the doubts growing up that he ever really cared. But I still care, and loving him is painful. The fear of what he's going to do next is even worse.

I want to finish this off with one of my... I don't want to say favorite, but this documentary was one that helped me, a fair bit, when it came out. I'd genuinely like the opinions of anti psych people on this documentary, and the true extent of violence and self harm that some patients display. Heavy trigger warning for severe self harm and violence toward others. Obviously.

For some of these patients, do you see another option for treatment? If not psych wards, what do you suggest happens to some of the patients in the video? What role did the staff actually play in some of the events portrayed?

As a general reminder, this isn't to change minds but open dialogue.

"Psych crits are ableist," is a pretty harsh statement considering the number of people in similar positions to myself. I feel like there's a huge disregard and ignorance for the violence that real people are experiencing.

Again, I'm psych critical, I don't accept the system as it is now, I think there's many improvements to be made. I think there is a need, in a very not small number of cases, for this type of system. I understand and appreciate the intersection of race, poverty and mental health that leads to anti psych sentiments, and I agree. There is a large number of people in psych wards that shouldn't be. This needs to be addressed.

But how do you reconcile both? I can't figure it out. I don't know.

[msbluebell]

what about a "you start war, you face consequences AU"? At the end of BE Route, Edelgard thinks have achieved her goal. But everything go wrong! First, Claude, who has survived, becomes the king of Almyra and declare war to her to the Empire . And he's VERY powerful. Also some former nobles of Alliance and Kingdom don't accept the reunification and start a rebellion with the former knights of Seiros . The peace wil not happen any soon and a lot of people die or suffer or join the rebellion 1-2

2-2. Finally, Felix has survived and becomes the feral guy and decides to avenge Dimitri (his best friend), Rodrigue (his dad) and Sylvain (his lover) by killing the black eagles one by one and nobody (even Byleth) can stop him, no matter what they do. And Byleth has not the power of Sothis anymore. They can only watch everything falling apart, while being powerless. They can only watch their friends die by Felix's hands, Claude taking back the Alliance AND the Kingdom, ect...

This is actually what would have most likely happened if the Black Eagle Route didn’t have an Deus Ex Machina ending and the Crests and God powers didn’t disappear for no reason. I have made no secret of the fact that Black Eagles is my least favorite Route (yes, I’m including Church Route in this), and the lack of actually having to reform and change the system thanks to magical convenience is one of the reasons. 

Nobles will not give up their crest fixation just because Edelgard hates crests. And without crest disappearing, it is unlikely they will take to Edelgard’s reforms. She may end up turning her own allies against her. Especially ones that don’t believe in her cause and just gave up because they didn’t want to be killed.

Also, it is a very, very, very dumb move to spare Claude in the Black Eagles Route. No matter what, he is a political opponent that proved he’s 1) very manipulative 2) very good at thinking on his feet and gathering resources. He should have died just to eliminate the potential for later rebellious uprisings, even if Byleth and Edelgard didn’t know anything about his ties to Almyra. Looking objectively at Claude’s goals and the ending of Black Eagles Route, yeah, he still has a dream of uniting Fodlan and Almyra. And unlike Fodlan, Almyra isn’t suffering from being war torn for five years. There IS a chance he’d come in take over, especially if any of his friends died in the battle. 

Point is, Black Eagles Route has a lot of potential for mess if the crests don’t vanish (which I am so fixated on. The CHURCH didn’t make the crests, so why did they disappear? I interpret Byleth’s powers disappearing because they choose to relinquish them, which is a slap in the face to Sothis btw Byleth, but why did the CRESTS disappear when the Church fell? They had nothing to do with their creation! Ugh.)

(Black Eagles, much as I dislike their Route based on their actions and lack of self-awareness, still deserved a better written ending.)

But I’m ranting. Let’s get on to the prompt with Consequences AU:

I’ve spoken in another post about how Byleth, as I interpret them, more accidentally sided with the Black Eagles than anything. It would be the same in this AU, accidentally burning their bridges when they saved Edelgard in the tomb. Then they were forced to see the path through to the end because they couldn’t go back to anyone else, and they DID disagree with Rhea and distrust the Church, so maybe Edelgard is right...?

It was foolish to hope, in hindsight.

Rhea going mad was something that they expected, but they didn’t think their own actions would be the breaking point that drove her to such insanity. And they can’t erase the image of Dimitri kneeling in the rain as an axe meets his flesh. So many of their students died...but that was just...pitiful.

Edelgard assures him that it was for a better future, that all the death and sacrifice now will mean less suffering later.

But it’s hard to look at the people suffering in the NOW and think it’s better for the future. It’s like Edelgard is so fixated on the world that will be she forgot to take care of the world they’re in, or maybe she didn’t, and the people around her just don’t seem as real to her as the people in the future she’s envisioned.

Byleth’s first clue that everything was going wrong should have been their hair and eye color returning to it’s original state.

Sothis and they...the both of them have always been one, whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing. They are a single entity that was separated and then made whole again. But now there is an emptiness inside of them, and the emotions they’ve developed are fast fading again. They’re becoming numb once again as they lose the part of themselves that was her, and they don’t understand why.

Soon, they even stop caring.

Edelgard insisted that it was a wonderful sign. That they pointed their blades towards the heavens and won, so her path must be the righteous path.

Byleth no longer cares enough to correct her.

Their students, the Black Eagles, frown more when they speak now. Byleth has lost their emotions, so the fondness is ebbing away again. They’re distressed as they lose their teacher, and Byleth tries to pretend they care until even that seems pointless.

They follow Edelgard because they know that’s what they decided to do, not because they care. They’re too muted now, and even guilt is slipping away as time erodes more and more of Sothis from their very being.

Then the murders start to happen.

It starts when Dorathea was found outside of the Opera House. Her body had been cut down by the singular strike of a sword, left to rot in the street by an unknown assassin. The Black Eagles mourn, and Edelgard swears justice will be paid. The guards are doubled in the city and the hunt is on.

It doesn’t keep Fernidand from dying later. His entire platoon was killed, a mix of sword wounds and Reason magic leaving behind a field of corpses. Witnesses say it was a pale, dark haired, man. Just one. With an unused lance tied to his back. Something about revenge, the witnesses say. For a father, a best friend, a brother, a sister, and a lover.

A year goes by and the guards get lazy again. It seems the assassin had reached their goal or died in the process.

Until Almyra declares war.

Byleth gives their advice as it is sought, but no longer cares enough to see to the personal welfare of the troops themselves. It’s...demoralizing, to say the least.

Then Berneddeta dies in her room, a knife left behind, the signal of House Gautier’s crest carved into the hilt of the blade. A warning.

There are no Gautiers left, though, they were all killed, so it can only be Felix, Byleth explains to Edelgard, because there is no one else left to avenge House Gautier, and Felix was a childhood friend of both Dimitri, who is dead, Ingrid, who died defending Dimitri, and Sylvain, who also died in that battle.

Edelgard puts a bounty on his head.

But her troops are too spread thin with Almyra’s sudden and unrelenting assault. With another war on the horizon, many nobles that don’t care for Edelgard or were taken over surrender to Almyra without hesitation. Fodlan is once again halved, and with it Edelgard’s forces.

Then Lindhardt is killed by Felix, this time with a note: “I’m coming for you Edelgard.”

Claude, it seems, is the leader of the Almyran forces, and declares quite happily that he’s going to make Fodlan a part of his country. His smile doesn’t reach his eyes when he says it though, and he’s barely holding back heavy disgust.

Byleth can’t help but think of how foolish they are when they have sentiment.

Byleth also advises Edelgard to surrender.

“Not you.” Edelgard begs, knuckles gripped against the table, “Of all people, you cannot abandon me.”

But the Byleth she wants is long gone. Or, actually, they never existed. But if if they had her dream killed them until nothing but a numb shell was left behind. Byleth, as the are, is under no illusions of what they are now. A walking corpse, with all that made them human faded into the back with a sleeping Goddess that was once themselves. 

Casper, who swore he wouldn’t let another one of his friends die, falls next. Felix, it seemed, has sided with Claude and is now leading the lands that was formally Faerghus. The people of the Alliance and Fearghus help rebel, throwing riots so large that they cannot be suppressed.

Petra is gone shortly after, taken by riots.

“FOR GOOD KING DIMITRI!” Cry out the people of Faerghus as they flood the streets of Fhiridad. Imperial soldiers are pushed back by people not even wearing armor, such is their numbers, and when actual soldiers come Faerghus is no longer a Dukedom of the Empire.

“FOR THE NOBLE CAUSE!” Cry the people of the Alliance as they’re lead by those still left of the Golden Deer. Hilda’s older brother has taken the helm and lead them to victory.

When they finally take Enbarr Byleth isn’t fighting. They don’t care, and watch from Edelgard’s side as they march her palace. They warn her to surrender, but she claims she’ll die first.

Felix walks in, and cuts down Hubert. Claude walks in behind him, hands on his hips, looking up at Edelgard and Byleth with a cold smile, “Did you get what you wanted?”

“I don’t want things.” Byleth answers, emotionless, “I haven’t since the power Sothis gave faded away, and I was left incomplete again.”

“Sounds awful, hope all this was worth that.” Claude answers as Edelgard’s eyes widen in horror.

“Perhaps if I could still feel, that would hurt.” Byleth answers him, “But I can only remember what emotions felt like, the experience is lost to me now.”

“...wow, that almost makes killing you feel like I’m being merciful.” Claude remarks as Felix glares from beside him, “Teach, why did you DO this to yourself?”

“I had meant to take Edelgard prisoner.” Byleth confesses, “I was simply run out and had nowhere else to go. Helping her seemed like the logical choice at the time, but it’s strange, I can’t see the logic in it now.”

Claude originally meant to take Byleth prisoner, if they could somehow be captured. Interrogate them and whatnot, allow their former students to air their grievances before they were executed for treachery. 

Not that just feels too cruel when Byleth was apparently already killed long ago.

So, when the final battle ends, Claude tells Felix to end Byleth.

Byleth never even lifts their sword.

[morningsound15]

I agree with you that the whole political system in the US is rotten to its core. I don't know what it is, but it's not a democracy. And yes, Biden won't bring the structural change that's needed. However, don't you think it'll be easier to get any change at all if after the election we get a blue house, senate and president? (Not to mention the supreme court seats won't fall into Republican's hands.) I mean, at least this way there's a chance progressives can get some of their causes through.

okay, so this is like the only ask i’m going to answer about this because i do NOT want this page to turn into this, this blog is the only part of the entire internet for me that isn’t entirely devoted to politics, organizing, radical education, theory, community-building, mutual aid, agitation, etc. i do that on literally every other social media platform and i do not want to do it here. that said i will answer this ask, i guess, though not exactly in the way you asked it i’m just gonna dump my thoughts on electoralism & this election here and i apologize in advance for how long this is going to be

to your general ask: yes, some people believe that. that is a reason many people are participating in this election (i go into that further down). my objection is not to the idea of participating in this election, the idea of voting, or the idea of voting for joe biden. it’s the entire framing of the situation & it’s the complete disregard for any people who have decided not to participate in this election, or who have decided to participate in this election & not vote for joe biden (i am NOT talking about republicans or trump supporters, that is a party of fascists & white supremacists & i am NOT talking about them, i’m talking about young people and the disaffected left). i’ll explain (under the cut so it doesn’t clutter y’alls feeds & so hopefully i won’t get as much hate because if there’s one thing i know it’s that no one on the internet reads)

what i object to is the framing of joe biden as anything less than an active enemy of the left & progressives. (the left & progressives are not the same thing, but they are both to the left of the dem party so i am putting them together for the sake of this argument but progressives are not leftists, though some leftists do describe themselves as progressives & vice versa, just want to put that out there to start.)

what i object to is the framing of joe biden as an ally. this kind of “at least he is willing to be pushed” “at least he’s already been pushed to the left by progressives” “at least he’s willing to listen & maybe with enough pressure we can get him where he needs to be!” “at least maybe a biden administration will support the policies we want them to!” because he’s not willing to learn, he’s not willing to help, he’s not willing to listen, he’s not willing to support progressive policies to tackle the healthcare/climate/war/imperialism crises or do any of that stuff. his policy goals, his entire campaign is basically to figure out what is the absolute bare MINIMUM thing he needs to do in order to say that he’s “moving the country in the right direction” so he can get elected & so he can get political cover from well-meaning but ultimately extremely sheltered dem figureheads while at the same time actively standing in the way of any real reform, progress, change, abolition, justice, etc. that’s his goal, he’s been very clear about that fact, i do not need to go into all the ways he’s already said & proved that! it’s obvious in his speeches, in the entire dnc (i watched every night of the dnc hoping for someone to lay out a good reason for me to vote for biden & i came up with 0 thanks democratic party), the people he has running his campaign, the donors he has, the lobbyists he hires to write his policy platform, the way he cozies up to billionaires, racists, segregationists, war criminals, and the way he always has in order to ‘maintain the order of politics’ & it’s gross & we don’t really need to go into it. he’s a capitalist, he’s a corporatist, he takes $$ from pharmaceutical companies and oil lobbyists and he is not a good person. BUT! many progressives know this and believe this, & still are voting for him. that is fine.

but we have to remember that joe biden is not our friend, he is not our ally, he is an enemy of the left, he is an active obstacle stopping us from achieving what we want to achieve (liberation, equality, justice, the dismantling of capitalism). so let’s not get it fucking twisted, like we need to be clear about that from the jump. we shouldn’t talk about him like he wants those things, like he’ll help us achieve those things, because he doesn’t, and he won’t, so we do not need to talk about him like he does. it is damaging to the progressive left of the democratic party to talk about biden like he’ll help us achieve any of our goals, because he won’t. we will need to fight just as hard if not HARDER under a biden administration to get the things we want, because we’ll be fighting with the people supposedly in our own party too, and they (along with the political machine they worship & kill themselves to support) are going to do everything they can to demonize and push out the young progressive diverse left, to break their spirits & destroy the political potential of the few politicians they actually do like, because that’s what they’ve always done, because the progressive left represents a threat to institutional capitalist white supremacist power. so our job would not be EASIER under a biden administration. it will just be different. we have to be very clear about that when we talk about what might happen in november.

now, that’s NOT TO SAY that there are not good reasons people have for voting for joe biden. i’m not telling people not to vote for joe biden and i am not telling people not to vote. that’s not what i’m saying. you just have to understand what this country is, what these politicians are, what they want, and what they are going to do to achieve what they want. just don’t lie about it. and only when you understand all of that can you make a truly informed decision about this upcoming election.

you can support joe biden for a lot of reasons. there are a lot of people whose politics don’t align with mine who want me to vote for joe biden, and there are people whose politics do align with mine who are making the choice to vote for joe biden. and the things that the latter group says, stuff that i find persuasive, is stuff like “joe biden is an enemy. donald trump is also an enemy. putting joe biden into office is better for the cause of liberation/leftists/revolution because he is a weaker enemy. he is a weaker opponent. we might be able to do things with him in office to help us tinker with the way our system is structured that will ultimately be for the benefit of the true left wing of this country, which will help future political actors survive in our rigged electoral system and maybe actually gain & maintain political power.” (stuff like abolishing the filibuster, getting rid of the electoral college, packing the courts, systemic changes that we need to make if we want to wrest control of this broken political system from the hands of fascists and white supremacists - many of whom sit inside the democratic party too, so let’s not get that twisted. all of these proposed changes, by the way, it’s important to note (unless i’m incorrect which i don’t think i am) joe biden doesn’t openly support or advocate for ANY of them, so let’s not get THAT twisted either.)

here’s the argument i think you’re making anon, from the mouth of comrade Angela Davis (libs love to weaponize angela davis’ words on biden without comprehending any of her politics or supporting her abolitionist policy positions, also there are other abolitionists who do not agree with davis here but i digress):

“In our electoral system as it exists, neither party represents the future that we need in this country. Both parties remain connected to corporate capitalism. But the election will not be so much about who gets to lead the country to a better future, but rather how we can support ourselves and our ability to continue to organize and place pressure on those in power. And I don’t think there’s a question about which candidate would allow that process to unfold… if we want to continue this work, we certainly need a person in office who will be more amenable to our mass pressure. And to me, that is the only thing that someone like Joe Biden represents.”

i don’t know if i fully agree with that argument per se! but i understand it, and i think it’s valid and valuable, and i understand arguments like that, and they are persuasive to me in many ways. because the republican party maintaining power is the way we slow-march into fascism, but also the democratic party getting/maintaining power is the way that we continue to slow-march to neoliberal destruction of the planet. so they’re both bad, obviously. but there are people who think (maybe they’re right! i’m swayed by this argument) that the biden administration would be easier to manipulate, easier to transform, than a trump administration.

(the counter-argument would maybe be that there are a lot of fucking liberals paying attention & even showing up in the streets right now because donald trump is the president, and if donald trump is no longer the president they’re gonna go home and be quiet and go back to brunch and close their eyes and plug their ears like they did with obama, just like they did during standing rock and ferguson and occupy, and be like “oh kamala harris wore CHUCKS on an AIRPLANE look at how COOL she is don’t you remember when there was a COOL war criminal in the white house?” there are people who are going to do that if biden/harris win, and that’s risky to me! like that is a risk we need to be talking about. i see that as dangerous. now, that’s not to say that’s more or less dangerous than what we currently have, it’s just a different kind of danger we need to be cognizant & wary of. and it’s people who post statuses like “fuck you all if you don’t vote for biden you privileged snowflake how dare you look at everything biden’s ever said done or promised he will do and decide that you don’t like that and you don’t want a part of it how dare you you fucking cuck you fucking idiot you support fucking fascists you fucking idiot” who make me lose my mind because like shut up! you don’t know what you’re talking about. there are people who know what they’re talking about who have decided they’re going to vote for joe biden and there’s people who know what they’re talking about who have decided they are not going to vote for joe biden, and you know what they don’t do? they don’t fucking fight each other, they don’t attack each other, they understand & support the reasons their comrades have for taking the action they are taking. and that is just what this is about. stop yelling at people that you don’t know who are making choices you don’t understand just because you don’t understand their choices.)

(this is even assuming biden will win, which is unlikely, or that trump will relinquish power, which is unlikely, or that there will be a peaceful transference of power and not a full-scale right-wing armed militia explosion of violence on american streets after november 3rd, so let’s all really be prepared for what might be coming in the next couple months!!!! all of these arguments mean next to nothing when we don’t even know what kind of violence awaits us in november)

it’s just psycho to think that joe biden is anything but an enemy. he is an enemy. and you can vote for an enemy and you can have your reasons for voting for an enemy, but don’t sell me shit and tell me it’s gourmet.

that’s mostly what i object to. the framing of this. and i’m not telling people not to vote for joe biden i’m not telling people not to vote. i think people should vote, because for those of us who are able & haven’t had that right stripped away from us or stolen from us by our own government, voting is easy, it’s literally the easiest thing that you can do because it’s also the LEAST politically effective thing that you can do. it’s like step fucking 1 because its impact is so low. that’s not a reason not to do it! that is not a reason not to do it. voting is important because any functioning society needs to have an engaged citizenry and an engaged electorate. now we don’t have that here, but you know what i’m saying. electoralism is a conditionally useful tool of enacting change and what we choose to do with that tool is an individual choice and there are people who are making different calculations than you, and they’re coming to different answers. and those people are often radicals, they’re often poor, they’re often black, or indigenous, or undocumented, or incarcerated. they’re often the most marginalized people in this society who are making these kinds of non-voting decisions, and it’s racist and misogynistic to assume that it’s all privileged white kids who are making that choice, because it isn’t, okay? it fucking isn’t.

and it’s so crazy because it’s always white cis libs who are talking about how important it is to get out and vote and to vote for people who aren’t like you and to vote for someone who isn’t you and it’s like, the black radicals i know are not voting for biden! they just aren’t. they do not see the electoral system or the fucking presidency as the thing that’s going to help & protect their communities. so instead they’re organizing on the ground, they’re distributing food & funds & housing comrades & fighting the police & helping elders shop and pick up medicine & making sure kids have internet access so they can go to school and that is what people are doing on the ground. they aren’t all up on instagram or tumblr sharing voting memes & telling people to hold their nose & “just vote for biden he’s the best choice we have” because they understand that for their communities, that’s not what liberation looks like. that’s y’all doing that goofy social media shit.

political power lies with the people always. the people collectively will prove whether or not the biden electoral strategy (of appealing to older, conservative/moderate, white voters in the midwest instead of young voters, poor voters, and voters of color all over the country, but i digress) is successful. whether or not his strategy is successful, the responsibility for the outcome of this election lies SOLELY with the biden campaign, capitalism, voter suppression, white supremacy, and our undemocratic election system — NOT the individual voters. know your enemy & know which system you need to fight. hint: it’s not apathetic or disengaged voters.

vote for whoever you want to vote for. don’t vote for trump, obviously, he’s a fascist do not vote for him. but for people who are not fascists or white supremacists, just try to understand what you’re doing and your position in the world & in this political system & act accordingly. not voting is not an excuse to do nothing; if you are choosing not to engage in electoral politics the expectation is you should be working twice as hard to make sustained impacts and improvements in your community. and if you ARE choosing to engage in electoral politics, the expectation is you should be working twice as hard to make sustained impacts and improvements in your community.

if what you think the liberation fight is is making sure you turn out at the ballot box on november 3rd, if that’s how you think you are being the most helpful, it isn’t and you’re not. you’re doing something, sure, and it’s not bad. like i did this, this was my job for a year, my job was to register voters and get young people to vote. i don’t have that job any more because i don’t believe that’s the solution. i just don’t believe it’s the solution. i don’t believe we should be talking about this upcoming election like it’s a solution, because it’s really just another problem we’re going to have to face and tackle, and we can’t talk about this election like anything is going to be solved if joe biden is president instead of trump because it’s not, and it won’t be, and these people are all our enemies, and we have to treat them like they are. that’s not to say don’t vote for them, if you understand all that & that is the decision you come to! just know what you’re voting for, and know what it means.

whatever, i’m not gonna keep going on this, rant over forever just had to spit that out somewhere and if i put that shit on my Facebook i would get unfriended by every white lib i went to high school with so fucking quick…

[elareine]

Don't make me close one more door (DamiDick)

“Investing in health care is not just an investment in the current workforce. It’s also an investment in education and our future.” Richard gestured towards the graph projected onto the screen behind him. “Ladies, gentlemen, and gentlefolks, did you know that providing treatment for worm infections is the single most effective measure we can take to increase the days kids in developing nations spend in schools?”

Inwardly, Damian smiled. In a minute or so, Richard would switch to images of tapeworms. Watching people react to that was a highlight of these evenings.

There had been a bit of an argument, as always, about how close Damian was allowed to stand. In Damian’s opinion, a bodyguard that wasn’t close to enough to shield their charge with their body wasn’t worth a penny. Richard, of course, argued that he needed to be unencumbered and free to move on stage. (And on a walk. And doing his job. And doing his volunteer work. And—every day, all day, really.)

It was a well-worn argument, by now; a habit more than a real fight. Damian stood a few meters away, blending into the curtains of the stage as well as he could. His partner and occasional relief, Colin, was guarding the other way onto the stage. Richard had moaned and whined, but he was wearing the bulletproof vest. Damian had checked.

It was a good comprise, he thought, one that left him free to listen to Richard’s speech with half an ear, noting the rapture on the audience’s face with some amusement.

In the beginning, he had constantly imagined himself in Richard’s place. His rightful place at his father’s side—or so he had thought back then. The heir to a fortune and a heritage that was very different from his mother’s.

These days?

Well. These days, Damian carried some too-sweet cereal bars with him to make sure Richard ate.

“How was that?” Richard asked when they were safe backstage. By now, he knew better than to ask Damian these questions when the younger man was trying to focus on possible threats in their environment, and Damian appreciated his reticence. It didn’t come naturally.

“Good,” Damian answered honestly. “Too wordy when you talked about the financial situation, of course, but you convinced everyone.”

Richard laughed. “Yes, I could see some eyes glazing over. I’ll have to adjust that part of the presentation. But it’s really for a good cause, you know. That’s the most convincing thing.”

“If you say so.” Damian doubted it. Richard was much more of an idealist than he was, but he surely must have noticed that it was his personal magnetism that drew people to—there was a stranger backstage. A big hulking figure, dressed in army cargoes and making their way toward them.

Damian’s eyes narrowed. He knew that walk, had followed that back through half a dozen combat missions. If Jason Todd was here to make trouble—

“Jason!” Richard called out, sounding delighted. He ran past Damian, completely ignoring his bodyguard’s protective stance to fling himself into Todd’s arms.

Todd, to his credit, only looked mildly inconvenienced at those proceedings, returning the hug gingerly. “Hi, Dick. Happened to be in town, thought I’d stop by.”

“Oh, now you do. And you just happened to forget letting us know beforehand, thereby ensuring that Bruce isn’t here to see you?”

“Exactly.”

Richard turned to Damian, gesturing excitedly. “Damian, this is my brother, Jason. He’s a fuckwit who doesn’t call often enough.”

“I can tell,” Todd said drily. “For example, I completely missed that you have a bodyguard now, much less one that’s so… well-trained.”

His eyes on Damian were thoughtful.

“Jason? Do you know Damian?” Richard asked.

Damian couldn’t help but hold his breath. If Todd chose to betray him now…

It wasn’t that he couldn’t fight his way out of the situation. He could. Todd was a formidable fighter, but he would have no reason to go all out on Damian.

But… Richard would be disappointed in him, Damian realized. If he was exposed like that—how would he be able to convince the other man that he had never meant to harm him, had stayed on only because he wished to keep Richard safe?

He could lose Richard, and at that moment, that was the most terrifying possibility of all.

“We worked security together in Afghanistan,” Todd said. It was not a lie. “Maybe he will tell you all about it.”

“I did not realize you are brothers,” Damian replied evenly, trying not to betray his relief.

“Yes, we do not much resemble each other, do we?” Richard asked ruefully. “And of course, Jason is always traveling around the globe these days.”

“If I remember correctly,” Damian dared to point out, “that is a better option than having him deliver a speech.”

It was the kind of ribbing they had shared many times in those darker days, back when they’d been trying to scout a cave system riddled with traps, and Todd reacted accordingly, shooting back: “Oh, look, he’s saying fifteen words in a row. Is that some kind of record?”

“Great, more bickering,” Richard groaned, though Damian could tell he was hiding a smile. “Can we at least get dinner while we insult each other?”

“Sure, as long as you’re not cooking.”

“It was nice, seeing Jason again,” Richard told Damian that evening as they were getting ready for sleep. He was stripping down to his shorts again; at this point, Damian had given up on trying to get him changed into something more suitable in case of an emergency.

He himself was changing into silk pajamas, his service weapon close at hand. Richard knew better than to comment on the knife holster strapped across Damian’s back. Damian seldomly took it off, and certainly not for sleep.

As always, they met in the middle of the bed, Richard crawling into Damian’s arms with a sigh. Early on in their relationship, Damian had realized that his charge craved bodily contact, needed touch like other people water. It had only been rational to offer to provide for that need himself, instead of having Richard go out and potentially endanger himself. That was how the need for a bodyguard had arisen in the first place, after all.

It was deeply unprofessional. Damian wouldn’t have it any other way.

By his side, Richard began to laugh. Damian supposed one could call it a chuckle, though it was more of a giggle, really. Though it wasn’t clear to him what was so funny.

“You put yourself between me and literally every entry-point.” Richard shook his head, still laughing. “You can’t stop doing your job, can you?”

Damian stayed silent. It was more than that. Protecting Richard had become part of his very nature. It wasn’t about preserving the symbol anymore—Richard Grayson, born to the circus life, adoptive son of Bruce Wayne, a shining symbol of change in this city, advocate for healthcare and justice reform—it was about making sure that Richard could laugh like this every day.

“Anyway,” Richard murmured, talkative as always. “I was saying—it was good to see Jason again. I would’ve never known about your past, otherwise.”

They were so close. Damian knew there was no way Richard would miss the change in his breathing. “I am not so mysterious.”

“Oh, I don’t know,” Richard mused. “A man in his late twenties, evidently terrifyingly well trained in all fighting styles imaginable, shows up with a resume that’s faked well enough it manages to fool even Bruce for a while. Instead of enacting any dastardly schemes, he’s prevented at least three assassination plots he thinks I don’t know about and cuddles me every night. I’d call that plenty mysterious.”

“I—” Damian felt lost. On the one hand, this was his chance to come clean to Richard, as he should have done months ago. On the other hand… he couldn’t bring himself to lose this; not now that he knew what it meant to him, to have Richard so close, safe in his arms.

There was a warm hand on his cheek, bringing him back into the present. “I’m giving you a blank cheque tonight,” Richard told him. “Tell me everything, and I promise I will not be angry.”

Damian shook his head. “You cannot promise that.”

“Maybe not.” Despite the concession, Richard was beginning to smile. “But I can promise you that I will not push you away, no matter how angry I am. If I am, which is less likely than you think. You’ve done more to earn my trust than… anyone, in a long time.”

“I lied to you.” A lie of omission was a lie, nonetheless. Damian had seen people killed for less.

“You earned it through your actions, not your words. Tell me about yourself, Damian,” Richard whispered, dropping the gentlest of kisses on Damian’s forehead. “Tell me about yourself, and stay.”

It felt like a benediction.

Damian took a deep breath. “I was born in 1990 in the Syrian steppe. No one knew who my father was then…”

[jeyhong]

Asian-Americans not only need to be lending their ears to listen, their voices to amplify, and if possible their bodies to join in protests- but we also need to reflect on how we have benefitted from the systematic oppression of black communities and how dismantling the institutions that hold them in place will only serve to benefit us more. Perhaps it's a selfish way to think but there is no better motivation than self interest. We are all outraged but that's emotionally driven and we've seen those fires die quickly time and time again. Black community members have always been at the helm of social reform in American, and we have reaped the benefits with much less cost. Throw the "model" minority title away, all it offers is an impossible goal to reach. There are social and institutional things in play that give us the advantage over black people, things we never asked for but in the same breath never corrected. Oppression in America is not just whites at the top and everyone else under them. It cascades; starting with the whites and then light skinned POC communities, like East Asians, being a far far second, and at the bottom is the black community. The injustices and horrors we face are not equal to that of the black community, this does not mean that our traumas are not valid nor am I saying we should not fight for our rights too. What I AM saying is that the fight for black lives is also a fight for our lives, we are intertwined in intangible ways and saying their lives matter will always inherently imply ours matter because of the unspoken societal hierarchy not only in America but around the world. All eyes are on America, and we NEED to make sure that the end result is in favor of black communities, otherwise we best prepare for white institutions that will surely come for us next. Stand in solidarity, lend your voice to support their narratives, put aside for one instance in time our own problems in the POC community and rally against the common enemy that has plagued us for centuries. Black communities have always been there for us and have always been at the helm of social reform movements that gave other marginalized groups rights, and many times our communities have stood together in these movements. This is another such time, and we cannot afford to fail to support each other. It's hard, and it's going to suck realizing how racist you are due to the way you were raised, whether by cultural ignorance or by our school systems failing us, but it has to be done. Please, acknowledge your past and then raise your head towards the future as we all join our voices in the cry for justice for a community that has been taken advantage of. Also, it's okay if you can't be out there in the protests, it's okay if you can't donate money, it's okay if you're not posting about this actively on social media. If you're doing something that you have the resources to, are capable of, and comfortable doing then it's enough. In the heat of the movement many activists are forgetting that many ways to support are exclusionary in some way, there are resources that circumvent many problems but there are many people who want to help but can't do more than send thoughts and prayers, and educate those near them. Please let those people know they are doing enough, they don't need to feel guilty for not being able bodied, neurotypical, or financial stable, and whatever else is a barried. Lastly, if you're Asian-American I implore you to think about your biases and if you truly believe in the movement. Things WILL change but it won't be instant. Ask yourself: do you have the stamina left for it? Are you pacing yourself enough? Once the initialize outrage subsides are you prepared to continue this work? I hope the answer is yes and I wish you all the luck in the world. We can do better. We have to do better. Asians have stood together with the black community before, there is absolutely no reason to not do so now. Be good, be safe, keep the black community in your thoughts/prayers/whatever else, and remember to take care of yourself too.

[carryonmyfallencas]

I'm gonna be real, my problem with this is pedophiles/rapists in general. I 100% believe that an abuser may change their ways if given therapy (perhaps not in every case, though), and that justice should mostly focus on being restorative; that is, put in place enough help/mental health services/social welfare that the majority of crimes are stopped before they are commited, and that once they have been the focus is on helping the victim rebuild and the perpetrator to improve.

However, that all comes crashing down when I get to pedophiles. I really don't know what the fuck you're supposed to do with that. Someone who has already preyed upon minors (and ESPECIALLY those who prey upon literal 6/7/8yo children) is going to keep behaving that way, no matter how much help you throw their way. It's a proven fact that even countries focused on helping people, like Finland or Norway, show that pedophiles continue to act in pedophilic ways.

And that's my issue with getting rid of the jail system entirely. I'm not sure what else you're supposed to do with people who are a prove danger to society—to society's most vulnerable group at that! Doesn't matter where they go, there are still gonna be children.

I know that a lot of time prison abolitionists don't want to answer this question because it seems to be asked in bad faith, but I genuinely believe in prison reform, in trying to help people rather than incarcerate them, in ensuring that crimes stop before they are commited, focusing on community help rather than punishment. But I can't get past this. Might be because I myself am a CSA survivor, and I have had enough of people telling me to forgive, forget, or give second chances to a man who I know for a fact still hurts children.

What do you do with these people in a world without prison? What would be done about it? How do you ensure children's safety? Genuine question. Again, I'm aware of my own personal biases, and although I want to believe in this, I can't until I get a satisfying answer to this.

it’s a long shot, but i really really really hope these social distancing, self-isolation protocols make people reconsider our justice system. people are struggling with staying in the comfort of their own homes for a few weeks, with all their shit, food delivery options and internet access. and of course, it IS a struggle, i am not diminishing that! but hopefully this sheds a light on just how inhumane it is to put someone in a cell for 25+ years. hopefully it hints at how solitary confinement is actual, literal torture. anyway abolish prisons.