#i wish for the oppressed to receive the justice and freedom they deserve

[seraphdreams]

ran and corruption kink……..thinking about how he slowly gets you used to fucking anywhere and anytime….and about getting shy, little you used to his advances…..about how all he has to do is kiss you so sweetly on the face, whispering silk and candy and all things soft and sweet to you. nuzzling himself in your neck. sweet, sweet, and soft lips caught in a charming but dangerous smile against your skin because you’re so cute. shrinking and shriveling up into yourself like a tiny little turtle retreating back into its shell. but this time, this time, you try to accept him and his sweet words and his silky voice that makes you so ticklish and squeamish, and hot all the way down to your neck. this time, you don’t try to run from him to a safe distance away until you cool down. this time, you stay there and take it. take it until he can finally cradle you. take it until his tongue is finally down your throat and you’re clutching his nice expensive dress shirt till it wrinkles. take it until you breathe in his cologne and it makes your head dizzy with him. take it until you’re all wet and hot between your legs and ran is cupping his big hand over your mound, lithe, slender fingers surprisingly sturdy and firm on your cunt. he can feel you pulse and throb and he knows you’ll take his fingers like a good girl.

……….wow sorry for the horny word vomit, i miss him too.

(also hello, happy new years! wishing you health, safety, happiness, and success and growth. as well as a free palestine, sudan, yemen, congo, tigray, and many other countries suffering from occupation or interference from the western world.)

dior… you have me grasping for air… because why is this so?

it’s almost as if ran trains you that way. he uses those weaknesses you have for him as a weapon to get you right where he wants . . specifically speaking, giving into ran in situations you’d never even think of — the elevator ride from the top floor of his abode to the very bottom . . it gives him an ample opportunity to whisper those silky sweet nothings in your ear, kiss n bite at the flesh of your neck , and allow you to grind greedily over his palm . . had it been early into the pining stage of your relationship, you would’ve gotten all hot n bothered at the thought but now it’s your reality.

[sugar-petals]

Understanding The Death Card In Tarot

the great juxtaposition. we start with a detail and my favorite card reference. so, you’ve seen the skeleton, the horse, the people... i ask you to center in on the imagery again though, to extract whether DEATH really wants to convey all but despair and the inevitable. if you look twice, you see the message. plain image analysis: it's a sunrise scene. THE SUN in tarot is the absolute best arcanum you can get. happiness, freedom and enlightenment in its pure form. look at it, that’s paradise. it could even be the formerly kneeling baby that is now riding DEATH’s horse! DEATH can be read as the key to to all your wishes fulfilled, and you being spared from doom. that’s what it boils down to. so whatever you worry about has a good end. if you know that THE SUN is the level up-result of DEATH, you will view it differently.

relating the card. see how it intertwines with other cards. your spread will tell you what kind of sunrise it means. if it relates to a wonky card, rejoice because this issue will be resolved big time. if it comes with a wholesome card, even better, double the sunshine, a grand new reveal, the old is gone. the skeletal rider brings the tidal wave to usher in the bright atmosphere. humans cannot understand the concept of happiness without knowing DEATH equally. no DEATH, no sunshine.

DEATH’s power. if i had to associate an animal with the card, it’s the snake. shedding its skin and presenting the new shining self, pretty much. and it’s still the same snake, but with less baggage and old outer woundings and personas. so, if DEATH shows up in your reading, that skin shedding effect is already taking place and it’s a good thing. 

no hazards. there is few sense of immanent danger or doom in that card. at least, less than it seems. the skeleton on the horse treads very slowly. it’s not the KNIGHT OF SWORDS rushing in and mowing you down. also, unlike the sword suits that are all cloudy and gloomy, DEATH has the sun on it!  

predicting real death? it’s hard to know if the card means literal passing or not unless you create context in the spread. to be sure about that is crucial given the severity of the topic. of course, if you explicitly ask if there will be somebody dying and you draw that very card, the answer is unequivocal and you can take it at face value. but when DEATH pops up seemingly at random, check whether it is paired with the 5 OF CUPS (=grief), swords (=conflict, cutting away), and compelling reversals of beneficial cards to see whether an actual fatal event is involved, which, given the probabilities, is rare. 

metaphors. in most other cases, DEATH is best read as metaphorical, much like the fertility theme of the EMPRESS doesn’t mean you get pregnant 100% and extends to creative projects coming to fruition instead. so, read DEATH as a revolution in an area of life, e.g. with the 2 OF SWORDS you can interpret that you finalize a decision between two options. 

but who, and when? even if you do spot the 5 OF CUPS nearby, you gotta find out what person is involved in this. look for court cards or a signature arcanum that you associate with someone. e.g., the page that always jumps out when you do a reading on relative XYZ. this is where directions come in handy. IMPORTANT: where is the horse on the card headed? if it faces to the right, see what it points at. or, which card on the left it has embarked from. that way you can see what happened (lean back in that case) or what is still to happen (be curious what gift death brings in that case).  

DEATH and serfdom. if there is one historical theme that is always squarely ignored it’s that DEATH is about to trample over a highly decorated 1) rich 2) white 3) old 4) catholic 5) man. quintuple feudal threat combo. yes, the scene does depict a tragedy, especially as there are kids kneeling before DEATH to appease his horse. but the nr. 1 focal point is DEATH marching towards the guy who made a fortune via taxes and people’s fears of death and now ironically gets targeted himself. even if he is supposed to be the most blessed and protected of all as a cleric, and looks like a walking deity in his shining gown. interesting, isn’t it. so: ouch. the DEATH card is one huge medieval roast. 

the crown takes a tumble. it gets even wilder. check out the background. you see that there’s a king without his crown (!) lying on the ground as DEATH’s first casualty. this card is nothing but a savage blow to the feudal system. DEATH killed the head of state and now he’ll take down the top of the hierarchy, the clergy, too. the entire machinery is defeated. like why would you not want this card in all of your spreads, DEATH is the greatest symbol of nation-wide liberation you could possibly think of.

the warning that’s not for you. you gotta understand this. the card’s scenery is a rather deliberate potitical statement and probably doesn’t concern you unless you’re the 1%. DEATH, in essence, is a ‘lol, even you won’t last’ and a warning for larger-than-life elites. or, not even a warning, but a plain fact. the funny thing is, DEATH doesn’t do this on purpose, but naturally without giving a damn on his funky horse. as a tarot reader, if anything, you can interpret this card as the laws of nature working against privileges and buddha’s teaching of how everything passes. karma is a relief. 

DEATH and authority. the card is the better version of JUSTICE. there’s no court ruling that someone gets a fine and the case is closed. there’s no idle debate. no exceptions and cop-outs. death has not discriminated once. the bad guy gets what he deserves. DEATH is anti-hierarchy in nature. he tears down rigged systems, and whatever theme your spread has, this card hails of oppression coming to an end. the HIEROPHANT is quaking. the EMPEROR, too. the entire court cards, also. DEATH made the entire conceited and power-hungry population of the tarot his bitch. 

a lesser evil? i know that shifting your worry doesn’t help, but how dangerous the DEATH card really isn’t while other cards are much more alarming reflects the truth of the deck which is the ultimate goal to grasp as an advanced reader. if you draw THE TOWER, THE DEVIL, 3/5/9/10 OF SWORDS, 5 OF PENCACLES, and the 5 OF CUPS, possibly all at once, aspecting other positive cards in your reading, then you gotta watch out. DEATH is nowhere near as crazy. look at the coloring and weather deptictions of the imageries and the difference is very visible. weather in tarot reflects the entire meaning and mood of the card. DEATH has clear, neutral skies and big fat shunshine emerging. meanwhile, it’s going bonkers right here: 

the skeleton = you! i’m not kidding. it’s crazy. DEATH is the best self-insert as it’s a skeleton. it could be anybody. now think of what a good position you’re in. you got this badass horse, you got the flag with the rose of life cycles on it, you command the sea to rise and fall, you got an armor to protect yourself. you’ve likely been a knight. you’re about to make a clean sweep with this annoying bishop who thinks he’s god. because you literally rule life. pretty good position you’re finding yourself in. the DEATH card ascribes superpowers to the one receiving it, as exaggerated as that sounds. if you realize that DEATH is you, that’s a whole new dimension of interpreting.

[dr-nero-is-god]

i know why dr. nero read a tale of two cities: you’re welcome

let me assure you, you do not follow someone with an english literature degree for nothing. today i will deliver unto you some thoughts on a tale of two cities by charles dickens.

did it take me two months to read the whole book? yes. did i like it? kinda yeah. but did mark walden really pick this book for a reason? yes. yes. i promise you: it’s not just a random, old, boring book picked for the sake of being boring and old.

but before you fight me on that point, let’s all make sure we understand the story (under the cut). 

what is a tale of two cities about?

a tale of two cities (henceforth abbreviated as ATTC), in one sense, is about the triumph of family and the ability for social order to survive great evil—that is, the French Revolution—bonded with themes of great sacrifice and salvation. 

Doctor Mannette was a prisoner of the Bastille for ten years, and when he escapes he hardly knows himself. He is rescued by the love of a daughter he has never met before, Lucie, and though she is nearly an adult they form an unbreakable father-daughter bond that carries them through Lucie’s marriage and eventual motherhood. Lucie marries Charles Darnay, who, like herself and her father, is of French nationality but lives in England. Unfortunately, Charles is the son of an aristocrat, and so when he is caught in France during the revolution, he is sentenced to death. Ultimately, though, a friend of the family (Sydney) redeems himself by arriving to die in Charles’ place, and Lucie’s family sets out back to England.

in one sense, ATTC is kind of a proto-political thriller—it's asking big questions like, what is justice? how should people respond when they are oppressed? how do they respond when they are oppressed? how do families survive when injustice reigns?—in the setting of spies and political clout.

and that’s well and good, but it’s also very abstract. in the concrete, why might mark walden have picked this book, out of all the books?

we can get the simple things out of the way. it’s long. believe it or not, dickens is a great author to read aloud, because his prose is very sparkly. it’s a weird book to use to try and get a teenager to like you. all of this is a factor, sure. but i have three reasons that I think *might* have mattered to this book’s selection. 

Neither Raven nor Nero is quite so stainless as these characters, but they are likewise united by a found family relationship. Nero pulls Raven from a life of death and torture and misery—a place where she has been just as much a captive as Doctor Manette or Charles Darnay. Though they must face the possibility of death every day, Nero says, “Hey. I’ll walk with you.” As I mentioned before, ATTC is about social stability winning out against chaotic violence, which is an apt parallel to the life Nero offers Raven against that which Anastasia Furan has provided so far. Nero is the stability that helps Raven find new life, and we know it to be a good thing. 

1) Because this is very much a book about found family.

Lucie first meets her father when she is about to finish the second decade of her life. Her father is a stranger to her, and yet their connection is immediate and saving for the both of them. At the beginning of the book, the relationship they build represents the first victory of family—and the hope that they survive the end is likewise our consolation. Yet even at the end, when only the guillotine awaits Sydney, found family is in play. Sydney goes to die in Charles Darnay’s stead and finds himself in the company of a seamstress, who also does not deserve to die. They don’t know each other, and yet they find refuge in each other at their point of death: companions on the road to the next life.

Dr. Nero would never love a book if the villains were not sympathetic, if not justified, if not right. And this is one of those books where—even though the protagonists are a little too perfect to deserve anything nasty—the villains might be right. In fact, they may not be sympathetic, and yet there's the possibility that they are right. The system has to come down, people have to be ripped from their pedestals, and things have to change. The ensuing conflict is violent and unjust, and yet it's that kind of evil and firmness I can see Dr. Nero admiring. Furthermore, it is the conflict that Raven might wish to embrace as retaliation against what she has experienced at the hands of Anastasia. There is a system that Raven would be ready to tear down, and this novel offers space for that.

2) Because despite the fact that our protagonists are a family we want to see win, the antagonists are extremely easy to root for.

The villains in ATTC include the government, a man named Defarge, his wife, The Vengeance, and agents Jacques 1, 2, and 3. It is true that guillotining a lot of people without necessarily requiring evidence is pretty bad, but you can also understand why these people are angry. People have been starving. The aristocracy has absolutely abused its power. Men are indentured in hard labor, women are held captive, children are murdered, and that’s life, because aristocrats are kings. Again, I am *not* saying that everybody in the French Revolution was altogether justified, but their motivations remain valid.

Now, let’s pause. I stand by my first two reasons—these are clear elements of intertextuality between ATTC and H.I.V.E. that absolutely exist between the books. They are valid, but I would also feel comfortable saying that maybe Mark Walden didn’t have them in mind when he published Deadlock. 

However, I still stand by my assertion that he picked this book for a particular reason, and this last one is that reason:

“‘Then tell Wind and Fire where to stop,’ returned madame; ‘but don’t tell me.’”

3) Because Madame Defarge is a fucking badass.

I could tell that Madame Defarge was a great character from the beginning. Though she was mainly in the background to start, she received a few flourishes of detail that indicated she was something special. Like a deathly Fate, Madame Defarge develops as the personification of the French Revolution: a violent, chaotic quasi-assassin character who is determined to rain hell down upon everyone she hates. (note: she hates the protagonists. a lot.) Madame Defarge is unfettered by constraints of family and so she is free to arm herself with a pistol and a dagger and take people’s lives into her own hands. She single-handedly leads her fellow women into the fray when the Bastille falls. She, too, is a character with whom one would not want to mess. And some of the things said about her are just FANTASTIC. 

“Of a strong and fearless character, of shrewd sense and readiness, of great determination, of that kind of beauty which not only seems to impart to its possessor firmness and animosity, but to strike into others an instinctive recognition of those qualities; the troubled time would have heaved her up, under any circumstances. But, imbued from her childhood with a brooding sense of wrong, and an inveterate hatred of a class, opportunity had developed her into a tigress. She was absolutely without pity.”

“Lying hidden in her bosom, was a loaded pistol. Lying hidden at her waist, was a sharpened dagger. Thus accoutred, and walking with the confident tread of such a character, and with the supple freedom of a woman who had habitually walked in her girlhood, bare-foot and bare-legged, on the brown sea-sand, Madame Defarge took her way along the streets.”

Wow, right?

What we have here is a woman who is more immovable than the elements, a primal embodiment of predatory strength, and, one might even argue, a picture of liberated femininity whose freedom is rooted as much in her body as in her weapons. 

This is something I know: Dr. Nero and Mark Walden both would notice and care a great deal about such a character. 

I shan’t make mincemeat of Walden’s personal thoughts, but I can speculate why this woman would matter to Dr. Nero. 

One, Madame Defarge is cheated of her victory. Dr. Nero would absolutely take issue with the way the madame exits the book, not least of all because he would know that she could do better. You know those books where you think the villain should have won? This is one such book.

Two, Madame Defarge parallels the violence in Anastasia Furan. This is a woman whose family has been shattered by violence, who may well deserve remuneration for what happened, who is hurt and beaten but not yet killed... and she’s also totally stuck in the past. A main theme of ATTC is that oppression will only beget violence, and likewise, Anastasia doesn’t have anything in her future but death. 

But third, and most importantly, Madame Defarge is the character with whom Raven is most likely to identify with, and the character she most needs to escape. Raven starts her story also shattered, also violent, and, most tragically, trapped in somebody else’s past. I think teenage-Raven would find Madame Defarge the most engaging character to listen to, but she is also the character she must break away from—leave behind the chaos and accept a more reliable structure in her life—to avoid being smothered by anger that will never really get anyone anywhere. 

In other words, it may be that Madame Defarge is the villain who first inspired Nero and who he hopes will inspire Raven as she reinvents herself apart from Anastasia’s chaos. Madame Defarge is a call to action.

If you’re still with me after all of that, you might be thinking, cool, but why does this matter? Who really cares about a book that got mentioned one time and nothing came of it?

I’m glad you asked.

At the end of the day, Nero and Raven’s relationship parallels the love that ATTC’s characters find when they are trapped in darkness and death, but their business parallels the grim revenge that Madame Defarge sets out to wreak upon the world—and it is the business of their enemies, as well.  

It matters because we get a more complex moral landscape with morally complex characters.

In A Tale of Two Cities, the good people are saved and the bad people do not get their revenge. Things in H.I.V.E. are not so simple. Nero and Raven share the stability of family at the same time that they long for revenge; traditional poles of “good” and “bad” occupy the same hearts at the same time. 

Why does Dr. Nero read this book to Raven? I think one way to read it is that it’s his way of saying, “We’re together in this, and I believe that you can be saved and have your revenge too. We can admire Madame Defarge, and we can do better. ” 

For Dr. Nero to read this book to Raven when nothing but a story can save her, A Tale of Two Cities is a promise that there is room for badass assassin ladies in literature and in life. Raven’s story doesn’t close with her first failure.

For those of us who live outside the pages of the book, the presence of this book means something for us as well. If you, too, can hold an assassin in your heart, then you are also participating in the work of salvation. When you listen to a story and get to know someone, you pluck them from obscurity and bring them into the fold—if even the most chaotic and violent of us can belong, then anyone can. 

Raven can. 

Nero can. 

And so can you.

[blessedarethebinarybreakers]

Hi. I saw a post today comparing God to an abusive father/husband. I can’t get this out of my head. Is he? I feel in my heart that he truly loves every one of his children but I can’t explain how.

cw discussion of general abuse and abusive tactics

Hey there, dear.

I’m going to start by saying that this is a really hard topic, and I’m not sure I can answer in a way that is super helpful. But above all this I can say this: in my experience God is not an abuser. God is not an abuser, because being caught in an abusive relationship brings fear and guilt and exhaustion and hopelessness, while in my relationship with God I find freedom from those feelings – I find energy and joy and hope.The huge issue is that many people do feel fearful and guilty and hopeless when trying to pursue God, because they’ve fallen into what churches have told them God is and says and expects. God is not abusive – but so many churches paint God as an abuser, and are abusive themselves. How can we rethink our language and visions of God in our pursuit of the true God, the God of love and justice, the God of the oppressed and the forgotten?

I’ve seen that post going around too, and it also hurts me. On the one hand, I get where the post is coming from – from church hurt turned into disgust, from pain into anger. And that anger is well founded. The quotes in the post are messages about God that are too often spread in our culture, the understandings of God promoted by so many of our churches, so it makes sense that the post attributes those quotes to God.

I am not going to link that post because I don’t really want to spread it around more, but I’ll address some of the quotes on it that are attributed to God.

“You’re a terrible person, and you need me to do better.”

God does not call us terrible! God calls us Good – right from the start! (Genesis 1:31)

That being said, I think it’s pretty clear from looking around us that humans are flawed creatures, capable of vast cruelty. God does long to guide us into a better way of living. 

I personally do believe that we need God, as God is the source of life itself, and that God can help us do better. However, God does not threaten us to get us into that relationship – on the contrary, God has gifted us with free will for the very purpose of allowing us to choose whether or not we will seek a relationship with God. Love is not love when it is forced – and God longs for us to love Them, a true and healthy, mutual and fruitful love.

I imagine any abuser would jump on the chance to force their victim to love and obey them. God gives us free will so that love and obedience cannot be forced on us.

“You don’t deserve me.”

I can’t think of anywhere in scripture where God claims that. Certain churches do all the time – that we don’t deserve God’s love. And honestly, I feel that way sometimes – that I’m so flawed and messed up that I am not worthy of God – but I’ve never felt like God has made me feel that way. 

Instead, God makes me feel loved, not despised: “You are precious in my eyes, and honored, and I love you” (Isaiah 43:4)

Still, if one believes in an all-good God, one might consider that in some ways it is true that we don’t “deserve” God. But in the words of Wonder Woman, “it’s not about deserve” – it’s about love!

We do not need to earn God’s love the way abusers force their victims to try futilely to earn their love or respect. God gives Their love and all other good things to us completely freely:

“Freely you have received; so freely give” (Matthew 10:8). 

“Peace I leave with you; My peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you” (John 14:27)

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let them ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to them” (James 1:5)

It’s so easy in any relationship where you feel lucky to have the person to look at all your shortcomings and think “crap. I don’t deserve this.” But it doesn’t matter – if someone really loves you, as God loves us, it’s not about “deserve.” The love is given freely and mutually. 

“If you even think about leaving me…”

This one in particular really makes my heart ache, because fear has poisoned faith for so many people I love.

Too many churches use fear as a weapon to keep people in their pews – they claim that if you leave them you’re leaving God and leaving God = automatic sentence to hell, automatic suffering. Go and God will punish you; go and you can never come back.

There’s a twitter thread by Mandy Nicole that talks about their experience leaving a church that taught them that their church was the one safe haven loved by God, that everyone outside is dangerous and bad and going to hell. Churches like that isolate their members, use fear to keep them from leaving – that is abuse. God does not desire that from us.

We see in the story of the “prodigal son” that if we leave God, we can always come back. The father in the story lets his son go with his blessing even while hoping for his return. Thus so, God welcomes us back with open arms, without any “I told you so” or anger.

Christianity should never be based in fear but in love! If someone is trying to convince you that God is just waiting for the chance to punish you, that God will shove your ass in hell if you do wrong by Them….they are not preaching the Good News. 

“Don’t listen to anyone who doesn’t understand what we have.”

Nah, friend. Engage in discussion about religion with people of diverse backgrounds! Ask God all the questions that are on your mind, and wrestle with those questions in the company of other people. God is cool with us asking questions. And exploring faith with people of diverse faiths can help us get to know God and ourselves better – see my #pluralism tag. 

“You’ll never find anyone as good as me.”

Okay, so, by my belief that is technically true. God is….God. But God does not isolate us with sayings like this – does not block us off from relationships with others, from finding joy and fulfillment with others. In fact, to form a relationship with God is to form a relationship with all the rest of humanity and even with all of Creation!

A hallmark of abuse is isolation, and God does the opposite of isolate us – we are called to break down walls and be bold and love one another and fight for the oppressed! 

God is Themself a Trinity – Their very existence is a relationship. Thus we who are in God’s image are made for relationship. God does not call us to isolate ourselves from everyone else and be in relationship only with them, but rather to go out and serve and love everyone we encounter. 

See my #community tag for more on this idea that you can’t worship God in a vacuum, that you can’t be Christian in isolation, that God calls us to radical relationship with all people and all Creation.

I also want to mention something tentatively, and I welcome correction here: I think that some language that is a major red flag when it comes from another human being makes sense when referring to God. One of the other quotes on the post is “I know best” and when it comes to God, I think that’s true. Even so, God invites our questions as I mention above, God invites our input and does not use this “knowing best” to deny our free will. 

Another one I can think of is the idea of the “inescapable God.” I have always loved Psalm 139, which describes how God is everywhere we could possibly go (“Where can I hide from your presence? Where can I flee from your face?”). It was only earlier this year when discussing it with classmates that I learned that some people are extremely uncomfortable with that idea of a God they cannot get away from. After thinking about it I completely understand why – the concept of not being able to escape someone is horrible; there should be no human being from whom we cannot get away. But God’s constant presence is simply an aspect of God’s Being – God exists as an all-present deity. But even this inescapable nature of God is different from when a human being tries to be inescapable (a mark of an abuser): God does not pressure us to acknowledge Their presence, and God is not present to catch you doing something wrong or to make you feel trapped or to monitor your interactions with others.

When the language we use for God and the ways we talk about God lead to people feeling helpless, abused, fearful, or guilty – we need to stop and reconsider that language. 

God is the Great Liberator. God calls us Good; God empowers us to do good; God respects our free will. Let us seek new ways to talk about God that speak to this truth, asking the Holy Spirit for guidance as we do so. 

I’ll close with part of a passage from Shirley Guthrie’s Christian Doctrine in which he addresses the concept of the abusive God (full quote here):

“God the great heavenly (male) Tyrant is also dead – the ‘sovereign’ god who could do anything he wanted to and proved it by arbitrarily being sometimes cruel and sometimes kind, loving some people and hating or simply ignoring others, according to the whim of the moment. The god who sneaked around spying on us, trying to catch us doing something bad so he could get us. …That god is dead. We may rejoice and be thankful that he too was never alive.

Which god is dead? All the gods that were really nothing but a projection of our own fears, wishes, insecurity, greed, or speculation. All the gods made in our own image. If talk about the death of God in our time exposes our idols and their inadequacy, we may welcome it. The quicker we bury and forget the gods we make for ourselves, the quicker we can learn who God really is.”

[loudlytransparenttrash]

College Feminists And Their Perversion Of Education

Feminists don’t like when people call themselves anti-feminists because feminists have been successful in equating feminism with support for equality, so to say you’re anti-feminist seems to suggest you are opposed to equality. But if feminism was ever about the equality of the sexes it emphatically no longer is. 

Feminism today is about special privileges and advantages for women and special exemptions from responsibility. So as a woman I am happy to go against feminism because I object to an ideology and practice that sets one standard for women supposedly because we are victims and one harshly punitive standard for men supposedly because they are privileged. 

I also object to anyone giving false information about my safety and odds of being raped and what I am and aren’t capable of. All fair minded people should object to unjust double standards. The hypocrisy and double standards of today’s feminist movement deserves to be exposed and denounced. 

There are many aspects that I find wrong with modern feminism but I usually tend to focus on feminism in college and the impact it is having on the young men and women on campus. My first concern is the irrationality that has overtaken academic feminism. It promotes the idea that women’s feelings are more important than objective reality or the search for truth. Victimhood and feelings now trumps fact, argument and debate. 

According to the Feminist Worldview women must never be made to feel unsafe, not just physically but emotionally and psychologically. They must never be “triggered” (their word, not mine) or made to think about things that challenge their view of themselves as permanently innocent victims. In a feminist world women are always to be believed and always be spoken of in sympathy. 

Although the idea of protecting women sounds admirable, it has become a potent weapon to intimidate anyone who fails to toe the party line on feminist’s wide range of ideologies. In colleges, feminist students believe they have the right to silence others who have opposing views because it makes them feel unsafe and at risk of triggering PTSD (again, their words, not mine.) 

Their silencing methods have spread all throughout colleges and universities and it is fast making it almost impossible for anyone to challenge any facet of feminist dogma which is a disaster for academic debate and learning. At Harvard Law, professors can’t even teach a class regarding rape or sexual assault laws as it's too much for students to emotionally cope with. 

They are actively shutting down speakers from attending campus and giving lectures on “controversial” topics and demonizing and attacking anyone who wishes to listen to an opposing perspective. Professors are receiving onslaughts of demands from students to be more accommodating to their feelings and if they don’t, the students - often successfully - protest for their resignation or to be fired. This is the regressive victimhood that feminism is successfully spreading every day.

My second concern is the near total disregard for the problems and experiences of male students. Men in colleges are told in no uncertain terms that they are uniquely guilty, prone to violence and responsible for war, inequality, rape, domestic violence, pedophilia, sexual harassment, “hetero-patriarchal-capitalistic domination” and all that is wrong in society. A young man entering into college today soon learns that he is a second class citizen in terms of having less rights, financial aid, freedom of inquiry and social support.

His female colleagues enter into a pro-woman campus culture where they gain these immediate advantages and see positive images of women, everything from advertising campaigns to course textbooks. Women students outnumber their male peers by a significant margin, they are taught by pro-feminist teachers dedicated to female success, they are provided with women only spaces with sometimes kindergarten-like surroundings.

They can take advantage of a plethora of special scholarships and bursaries for female students only, they can access feminist counselling if they so desire, they are encouraged to write feminist pieces, instructed on righteous indignation against the wrongs done to women throughout history along with a multitude of other ways they are told that their experiences and concerns matter at the college.

On the other hand a male student has a very different experience. He will likely have to attend a gender sensitivity and anti-violence workshop at the beginning of his first year where he will be lectured about his tendencies for sexual predation. If he is studying in the humanities or social sciences he faces the prospect of having most or even all of his classes taught from a prospective that denigrates the actions and achievements of men. 

Some or many of his teachers may often believe men too often dominate class discussions and should be discouraged from setting a competitive or adversarial tone. Particularly if the man challenges the feminist party line, he will often be told that his “maleness” prevents him from understanding or even having the right to speak. Women on the other hand are never told their “femaleness” prevents them from understanding or voicing an opinion of men.

A young man will learn that if he is allowed to speak without harsh criticism, he will need to soften his comments with apologetic admission of his male privilege. He will learn there are women only spaces where he must not intrude and female sensitivities that he must not offend. If he wishes to write a paper about men’s achievements or problems, it is likely he will be discouraged to do so or he will encounter an instructor who will not even believe in its legitimacy.

Although men are a minority in many of the courses at college he will not find any special scholarships or bursaries to redress the gender imbalance. If he tries to form a men’s issues club or wishes to meet with other men in a male only space to discuss his experiences as a man, he will be refused and told he is a misogynist, that his presence on campus is a threat to women and that the final word on gender has already been determined by feminists and he should shut up and listen to women’s accounts and demands. I wish any of this was even a slight exaggeration.

My third concern is that the result of the oversensitivity to women’s feelings and the indifference to men’s, a host of asymmetrical and unjust polices have been put in place on college campuses, many of which not only sideline men and restrict their right to self-expression but threaten their well-being and livelihoods. Most shockingly perhaps, a zero tolerance policy for what is called sexual misconduct of even the most trivial kinds such as a crude Facebook post or a sexual joke. 

A manic expansion of the understanding of what constitutes as rape now result in much public press beatings about male violence and harsh retribution against individual male students. Young men who engage in what they thought was consensual sex can find themselves accused of rape because of stringent and bizarre new affirmative consent polices. Instead of letting the police and courts deal with such accusations as they should, most colleges have set up in-house “judicial panels” to investigate charges of sexual assault or harassment. 

These panels are made up of members of the college community with no legal training. The accused is routinely denied the right to counsel, the right to know what evidence is brought against him, the right to know his accuser and other fundamental legal guarantees. These in-house panels have serious power. Men face expulsion, a permanent blotch on their academic records, indelible stains on their reputation and in many cases the end of their career dreams even when like in many high profile cases the accusations turns out to be complete fabrication. 

When lies about rape culture statistics are spread throughout campus and the demands that women must immediately be believed is not helping anybody. It’s almost inconceivable that this is happening now in a system that once prided itself on such principles as the presumption of innocence before guilt is proven. In the name of making the college seen as a safe space, we are absolving women of responsibility for their actions and severely compromising the legal rights and freedoms of men.

Where it will end is anybody’s guess but it is clear the feminist agenda is incompatible with the academic ideal of truth and the social ideal of justice for all, which means everyone. The obsession on campus with female trauma and male aggression, the constant harping on the need to promote women, pander to women and provide endless undeserved reparations. 

None of this should have a platform on college campuses today. College feminism is not only a distraction from the pursuit of education but is a serious impediment for mostly young women. They are coming out of university dumber and more pampered than when they went in. They are leaving in debt, completely unprepared for the real world, they are riddled with phobia and paranoia after being lied to about rape statistics and their oppression and they walk out with no skills or credible qualifications. It's about time our colleges took a stand against this corruption and infantilization.

[itsnelkabelka]

Speech: Lord Ahmad addresses the 39th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

Mr Vice-President, Excellencies. It is an honour to address you today.

I would finally like to express the United Kingdom’s gratitude to outgoing High Commissioner Zeid for his commitment and dedication to furthering the cause of human rights during his tenure. We thank him for his principled and considered approach, and his willingness to speak out in defence of human rights around the world.

I would also like to congratulate his successor Michelle Bachelet on her appointment. Michelle’s extraordinary wealth of knowledge, and her personal and professional experience, will be invaluable in this role and we wish her every success and look forward to working with her.

Mr President, we deeply regret the decision of the United States to withdraw from the Council. However it should give us all pause to reflect on the challenges this Council faces, and look more closely at the areas where it can and should improve.

Membership is one such area.

Countries standing for the Council are duty bound to uphold the highest standards, and to cooperate with this Council and its mechanisms. We believe that they should be prepared to make campaign pledges, and to discuss their candidacy at open hustings. People look to this Council to defend their rights, guard their freedoms and ensure respect for their dignity.

We all have a responsibility to make this Council work more effectively, to ensure these rights and protections are upheld, for all individuals around the world. This includes identifying where assistance is most needed, and how best to deliver it. We must start this process now, and do it quickly, because around the world human rights remain under threat.

Mr President, I spoke about some of the most serious and pressing issues in this Chamber earlier this year. Sadly many are no less urgent today.

Burma

The conclusions of the UN Fact Finding Mission have provided an authoritative account of crimes committed against the Rohingya community in Burma. The descriptions of atrocities, including murder and rape, make for horrific reading. The report confirms the appalling and systematic oppression of the Rohingya people over a number of years; and highlights patterns of violence and violations elsewhere in the country.

The Rohingya must receive justice for the horrific acts perpetrated against them. There cannot be impunity for these crimes. The Fact Finding Mission concludes that these acts warrant the investigation and prosecution of senior Burmese officials, to determine their liability for genocide in relation to the situation in Rakhine State.

We commend the Fact Finding Mission for its detailed and comprehensive report. These are the gravest findings that could be placed before this Council. They deserve our full attention, both here and at the Security Council.

The Burmese government must set out how its Commission of Inquiry will investigate these crimes with impartiality, and how those responsible will be held to account through a judicial process.

The UK will continue to focus on ensuring that Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh can voluntarily return to Burma, in safety, in dignity and with international oversight. We will also continue to support a democratic transition in Burma. One that promotes freedom, tolerance and diversity and charts a path towards sustainable peace and prosperity for Burma and all its people. This remains a key priority for our government and the Foreign Secretary will himself be visiting Burma shortly to sustain the momentum for progress.

Syria

In Syria, human rights and international humanitarian law continue to be flouted on a daily basis, with the torture of detainees, bombing of schools and hospitals, and credible reports of chemical weapons attacks. The UK is deeply concerned about the escalating military action by the Syrian regime and its backers in North West Syria, which is putting millions of civilians at risk. The UK calls on the regime and its backers in Russia and Iran to uphold the ceasefire they have previously agreed, and to respect international humanitarian law.

The decision by the Asad regime to name the Syrians who have died in its detention facilities confirms the long held and worst fears of concerned families. It has been rightly highlighted by the Commission of Inquiry and is further proof, from the regime itself, of the brutality that it has inflicted on the Syrian people. The UK also remains concerned about sexual and gender-based violence against women and girls, who have been disproportionately victimised since the beginning of the conflict.

Sri Lanka

We welcome the steps taken by the government of Sri Lanka to return land to its people, and to begin the work of the Office on Missing Persons.

We urge them to make more progress in implementing the commitments made to the Council to secure long-term reconciliation. This includes devolution through constitutional reform, and progress on truth-seeking and accountability.

Yemen

The report of the Group of Eminent Experts on Yemen further underlined the deeply concerning human rights situation in Yemen and the importance of reaching a political solution to conflict. We are carefully considering the contents of the report and support the extension of the mandate of the Group of Eminent Experts.’

Maldives

The UK continues to urge the government of the Maldives to cease all interference in independent institutions, including the judiciary, Parliament and the Elections Commission. We urge it to guarantee that the Presidential elections later this month are free and fair.

Girls’ Education

As the Council heard in June, the UK is committed to ensuring that all girls, everywhere, receive 12 years of quality education. This Council has set a record in bringing together 152 states to make a joint statement on the need to step up efforts to ensure every girl has access to quality education.

This support underlines the strength of our shared desire to achieve this goal by 2030. However, delivering on it will require genuine political commitment and cooperation from all member states.

To address this challenge, the UK will be co-hosting an event during the UN General Assembly later this month to encourage concerted action. I invite you to join us and lend your support.

Conclusion

Mr President, the human rights picture in many parts of the world is bleak, but we should not lose heart. We should recognise the immense value of this Council, and the wider human rights system, and acknowledge their achievements.

Within the last year this Council has, among many other things, convened Special Sessions that have focussed international attention on the desperate situations in Burma and in Syria’s Eastern Ghouta; it has also reviewed 42 states under the Universal Periodic Review Process. It is vital that we work together to help states implement their accepted recommendations.

Finally, while it is the duty of this Council to challenge those who violate the rights of their citizens, we should also welcome the progress of those governments committed to change, to making improvements and to engaging constructively with this Council and the mechanisms at its disposal.

We know that for the individuals whose human rights are violated today - and tomorrow, and next week - change cannot come soon enough. It is heart-breaking to see their suffering. But we know that by working together, in this Council, by going step by step, we can bring about lasting change. Change that will relieve suffering, repair trust and restore fundamental rights and freedoms. The United Kingdom is committed to working with this Council to bring about that change.

Thank you Mr President.

from Announcements on GOV.UK https://ift.tt/2Oto0JP via IFTTT