#if you want to be a colonizer and kill natives who were there first

[trippymockingquake]

So I’m rewatching Avatar and I remember in the second one Spider says he can’t have his mask off for more than seven seconds or he dies. So why could his dad in the first movie sit there and shoot at Trudy with out a mask? And before y’all say he held his breath or he was trained too I’m going to just say I don’t believe that cause that man was out there longer than seven seconds before someone got him a mask.

I also really do hate humanity and the need to colonize everything and the movie just furthers my hatred. Not to mention Trudy the only one with some damn sense died and I just find that upsetting because since then I have seen no human other than spider and that one science guy that makes me like humanity in the second movie. Thank you for coming to my Ted talk.

[alllgator-blood]

I s2g if you add the layers of these comic pages together, it's over 350 layers. THIS is why I don't do full color for my comics lmaooo- ANYWAY EVERYONE HERE HAS AN AU APPARENTLY, SO THIS IS A BRIEF GLIMPSE INTO MINE. I don't know what to call it yet but I'm thinking of calling it "famous prophets" because 1. I like that car seat headrest song, 2. it's about shamura who is prophetic, 3. it's about trying to outrun fate with the Power of Love (and failing. Like the song!!!). It takes place when all the bishops were teens/kids during the age of hundreds of gods at war, and were trying to survive as a family.

I'm really excited to work on stuff for it but it's all gonna be drawn out of order. Maybe I'll write a full explanation of what it's gonna be about when I have a better idea...I want to channel my eldest sibling angst in a productive way, and maybe establish a QPP between shamura and a completely random npc everyone forgets about <3 also kallamar is trans too cause I said so. I'll do a comic about it eventually. Instead of an absence of gender he has TOO much gender. It simply cannot be contained.

I like that nonbinary genders are normalized in cult of the lamb to the point where nobody singles anyone out for being a they/them, it's not like "THIS IS MY SIBLING SHAMURA. THEY ARE NONBINARY AND USE THEY/THEM. ALRIGHT BACK TO KILLING YOU", it's just like "don't you fucking dare make my poor sibling wake up from their nap to kick your ass. Cause they deserve better than this."

But at the same time I like having the freedom to be more specific, and say "shamura is voidpunk and their gender is best described as the feeling that overtakes you during the first snow of the year, when everything outside is deathly quiet". This comic is actually derived from the time I was walking through a forest that's been torn down for a few years, and came out to my little sister as trans. I must've been like 13 or 14 and she didn't really get it as a 10 year old, but it was better than my mom FREAKING OUT about me coming out. So it was a nice little bonding moment between just the two of us. I don't have a good memory so I don't recall how it went unfortunately...

Now, the climate is a little different. My sis tried out transmasculinity for maybe 5-6 years before feeling happier as a woman, my mom is trying to be Based and flaunt her Woke trans children, and my dad remembered "oh yeah trans natives have existed before colonization. Maybe me being transphobic is a product of my culture being erased" and has gotten better about calling me the right thing. I have a mustache (thanks pcos!!) and wear skirts and am not a repressed "tomboy" teenager anymore. But I can't help but wonder what would've happened if I could've been like shamura and just...been nonbinary without people being fucking weird about it. Or been born as a badass war god who will tear you to shreds before you can perceive my birth sex. I know they're fictional but they are my ultimate gender envy GRRRRR BARK BARK BARK

Here is the secret image for this post- I listen to mostly EDM when I draw cause it keeps the energy up, but as I was finishing up shamura's poetry part, I was like THESE ARE JUST KMFDM LYRICS so I made this

[fairuzfan]

i seriously don't even have the words to describe what it's felt like as a native person learning about "holocaust exceptionalism" or whatever for the first time during all of this

the first time i saw a tweet talking about how it wasn't appropriate to compare any other genocide (and specifically this person was talking about the native american genocide(s), along with several others i've seen since & most of the "historians" who go this route, too) to the holocaust because unlike in those cases, where there was a clear logical reason for the wholesale slaughter of millions of people, the holocaust was senseless! it was just killing innocent people for no reason, which is completely different from when they got rid of all those dumb indians standing in the way of Progress & wasting the precious resources the colonizers needed much more... i thought they were just some random dickhead saying intentionally terrible shit online for engagement

but then i just kept seeing people saying similar things, and eventually while reading up on palestinian history, i find out that this has apparently been a zionist (and in many cases non-zionist, which maybe feels even worse) talking point for decades now?

(and increasingly, over the last few weeks, i've seen it shift to this more broad claim that comparing any genocide to any other genocide is harmful, actually... which is such a dumb argument to try to pass off as genuine when, among other things, there's literally an entire field called "genocide studies" that it's honestly almost funny)

i can't think of anything in recent memory that's felt like such a brutal slap in the face as finding out the belief that the systematic murder of my people was a completely logical, understandable course of action--arguably a net positive, even, in the long run--is now and long has been this commonly held. i've felt sick since ever since. how do you say shit like that and not understand that you're implicitly rationalizing and, to some extent, justifying it? how do you not hear yourself?

forgive me, i know it must feel very eye-roll-worthy to have someone come yelling to you right now about how badly their people are treated by zionists, but every time i see someone parroting off an argument along these lines, i swear i can just feel my faith in humanity slip a little more lol

yeah, fuck off with this bullshit for sure

oh don't apologize, i totally understand why you would want to talk about this. thank you for sending this, and I'm so sorry that youre going through this. it really is an inconsiderate talking point at the very least.... i wish the best for you and yours in these times.

[jewish-vents]

As a proud Jew and a member of the Iŋalit Iñupiaq people I have never felt as seen as reading a Choctaw Jew's post on here. Christian missionaries hauled my people off of our lands and killed most of us and they didn't even inhabit the land. They didn't even build shit there, they just took it to take it, and I'm supposed to go "ah yes America has no colonizers" and not laugh when these people say "Hebrew is a colonizer language"? Motherfuckers, MY LANGUAGE IS EXTINCT BECAUSE OF YOU! You know who didn't ever try and force a language on anyone? The Ashke Jewish man my great-great grandmother fell for and married. People really expect me to be onboard with their fact-free zero colonialism rewrite of history while my people's lands remain off limits to us, illegal to even visit, the US government holding onto it on the off chance there might be oil there even though they never bothered to even drill for it in over 70 years.

"No other religion acts like this" first of all please read up on Islamic imperialism and get your boot off the neck of my indigenous Middle Eastern brethren and secondly Christian-governed Alaska wouldn't let Native students attend school with "American" children - that is literally how the law phrased it - unless we abandoned our language, our clothes, our songs, our stories, our religion and even traditions as basic as sharing food with poor families in the community. You wanna know how my great-great grandmother met my great-great grandfather? They were both arrested for violating the law and "indoctrinating" children into "Native, anti-European practices" by which I mean THEY WERE BOTH ARRESTED FOR GIVING FOOD TO POOR PEOPLE. They were both arrested by CHRISTIANS!

And people mistake my brown skin for proof of goy status and want to talk shit about how the only good colonizer is a dead colonizer. You're white and you're in ALASKA, you might want to rethink the words coming out of your mouth when most of your ancestors came here to mine gold and get rich and mistreat indigenous people. Even if I accepted the idea that Israel is doing colonialism, which I do not, nobody moved to Israel to get rich and rape indigenous women with impunity to the point where there are words in Inuit languages for gangrape done by white men.

I don't want to hear another thing from a white goy in Alaska about Israel being colonizers when the US bought Alaska from Russia. We were colonized twice for you to get to be here and tell me to my face how colonizers are bad. AND THEN people want to say my Ashke ancestors were colonizers. Fleeing Russia is not colonization, one, and two, WHY DO YOU THINK THEY LEFT?! For fun? What, they heard our weather was nice and wanted to come visit?

I am going to need white goyim to learn US history before they open their mouths.

I'm sorry this is long and I yelled/capslocked but I have had to bite my tongue so many times to not cause a scene because I don't want the university to come up with an excuse not to let me graduate due to poor conduct. It is so tiring. I feel like I'm holding my breath all the time. Graduation is tomorrow. Shabbat shalom.

.

[neechees]

Hi! You don't have to answer this if you don't want to, that's totally fine! But you talking about Orville Peck's appropriation of indigenous culture with his fashion choices made me realize that I had never considered that there might be some aspects of "cowboy clothes" that white ppl shouldn't wear and that was super wrong of me. Again, you totally don't have to answer this, but I was just wondering what ways a white person could wear "cowboy clothes" in a manner that wasn't disrespectful? Or perhaps, should we not wear them at all? I can't afford T yet, but when I can finally get it I was planning on getting a cowboy outfit to embrace my trans mascness, but if that would be wrong of me I can scrap that plan no problem!

Ehhh again this is actually SUPER HARD to answer because almost everything about cowboy fashion & the cowboy "aesthetics" are lifted directly from Native American fashion and culture, either because a lot of cowboys back in the day were Native American themselves (including Afro-Natives & Indigenous Mexican vaqueros) or they were White & just kinda. stole the look from the Native cowboys due to a number of factors.

If you google "cowboy jewelry" the first thing that comes up is silverwork & belts & turquoise jewelry, which is taken from Navajo metalwork. Fringed leather clothing? Again, many Native tribes did that (& in some tribes the fringes could mean something, its not just for looks), most popularily with vests, jackets, and pants. A lot if the leather jackets were a result of Native women just sewing their clothes the same but in a European styled cut. Compare this "cowboy" look below to a Lakota war shirt: both have hair embellishments dangling from the arms.

Studded belts? Inspired by Cheyenne mirror belts, which often also have metal studs in them & you'll still see Native pow wow dancers have this in their regalia. Floral vests? A lot of the inspiration comes from Plains floral beadwork. Geometric patterns and blankets? Came from Southwest or Mexican Native American blankets & designs, ask any Navajo weaver & they'll tell you the same. Feathers in cowboy hats? Who else is famous for wearing feathers on their heads--? Native Americans. The look is still popular with older Native men.

Hell, if you visit this site that sells Western/cowboy fashion, you'll see a SHITTON of appropriation going on, taking Native imagery & designs, including one taken from Native American ledger art, all on White models.

The appropriation of Native culture and fashion in the cowboy/western sphere is ongoing, and the influence that Native fashion & culture has in Western/cowboy fashion as it is is absolutely MASSIVE. I once said in another post that the cowboy/western aesthetic essentially belongs to Native Americans, Latines (especially Mexicans), and Black people. And the history of White cowboys has been one largely of colonialism, racism, and displacement of Indigenous peoples, and the masculinity associated with White cowboys especially is also steeped into racism & American patriotism (think John Wayne. There's a reason he's an American icon who played cowboys & killing Indians in films.). I think the only thing that isn't influenced from either appropriation or colonization is like, jeans. Even the style of cowboy boots themselves and potentially chaps were influenced from vaqueros.

So if you're White I'm not sure that'd exactly be a good route to take because trying to seperate Indigenous elements from this fashion/look (nevermind the problematic history of White cowboys) is almost impossible. Obviously I can't force you to do anything, but honestly if I were you, I'd try a different direction, because otherwise I think you'll find trying to do this will be very hard.

[matan4il]

Hello. Can I ask why everybody is calling Israel a "colonial" state? Because it annoys me very much when I see that for three main reasons:

1. My country was a former member of the British colonial rule. Do you know what happens when a country gets colonised? Every bit of the wealth generated went to the Crown, every political decision had to be approved by the Crown, laborers were exploited as much as possible, my people were directly under the orders from a British Monarch who actively hated them. The economy was in shambles after we got independence. As far as I know, since the state of Israel was created, it does not answer to any foreign country (the UN is not a country). How is this a European 'colony'?

2. Most(All?) people who immigrated to Israel were refugees. If Jewish people living in Europe did not have any ties to the land of Israel and were completely 100% European, why were most of them killed horrifically during the Holocaust for not being the right race? Why does nobody talk about the expulsion of Jews from the surrounding Arab countries? Where should these people go?

3. People also seem to forget that governments can be stupid. Just because they are the ruling party does not mean they're capable of making sound decisions for their people. Even a non-colonial government makes bad decisions. If you can separate Trump from the rest of the US, why can't you do the same for Israel?

I do not want to reduce the suffering of the Palestinian civilians. However using the wrong terminology is not the way to help these people. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm really tired of this 'colonizer' takes.

(I hope I made my point clear as English is not my first language?)

Hi, lovely Nonnie!

Please, your English is great! I would have never guessed you're not a native speaker. :D

And you are absolutely right about every single point. Also, my heart goes out to you! I'm so sorry that your people have also suffered due to colonialism. I'm sending you BIG hugs!

Colonialism is what destroyed my people. After our homeland was repeatedly colonized, the Roman colonizers went even further than previous regimes, and expelled most of our ancestors from this land (a small Jewish minority wasn't, and that's why there has been a documented continuous Jewish presence in Israel for over 3,000 years). The expelled Jews became a spread out minority in other countries. With such small numbers in each country, it was easy to vilify us, we were vulnerable to every attack, with hardly anyone defending us, and no real option to defend ourselves. The Holocaust happening to us is directly linked to this way that we were forced to exist for almost 2,000 years in the diaspora.

Meanwhile, our land continued to be repeatedly colonized by different regimes. Each one did exactly as you said, exploited our country for their own benefit. The Ottomans, as just one example, cut off so many trees to build the Hejaz railway (which connected today's Syria to today's Saudi Arabia for the purpose of Muslim pilgrimage to the Saudi mosques), that the Land of Israel went through a desertification process. When Jews started returning in substantial numbers (because in small ones, there were always individual Jews who tried returning to our ancestral land), we did exactly what native populations try to do, restore the land, through continued research and development, to its pre-colonized state.

That's on top of the fact that, as you mentioned, we don't answer to or serve any European (or western) country. Colonies serve a metropole, but there is none for Israel. It's just our country. It's just the place where we live, even when it's incredibly difficult, because it's our ancestral homeland, which we've returned to, after our ancestors prayed for that for almost 2,000 years.

You're also spot on about the fact, that Jews were always discriminated against and persecuted in every country in the diaspora (with a few exceptions in South East Asia, the most important one being India). We were treated that way precisely because there was a historic recollection that we are foreigners. That we were south west Asians, living as a minority in countries that never truly wanted us, like Norway, or Spain, or Morocco. That's why it was so easy to kill us in the Holocaust. That's why it was so easy to expel us from Arab countries. Because we were never truly accepted by the locals.

But even after expulsions and surviving the Holocaust, there are so many places in the world Jews could have turned to! Places where there would be less resistance to us forming a country. Yet, the overwhelming majority of Jews rejected such suggestions. If they hadn't, then we would have truly been colonizers. But that's not what we yearned for. We always dreamed of returning to our homeland, so eventually it became evident to everyone that there's only one real option for a Jewish state, and that is in the Jewish ancestral land.

The reason why people claim that Jews are colonizers of their own land (some deny all historic ties Jews have to Israel, despite every piece of evidence to the contrary, while others acknowledge the Jewish history of Israel and the continued Jewish presence there, but claim that it's been so long ago, it doesn't count anymore. I've never seen any other native group being told that there's a time limit on their native rights. Have you?) is because it allows a narrative that once again vilifies Jews.

When the worst thing Jews could have been was of an evil religion, they described us as evil in religious terms (accusing us of having killed Jesus, and accusing us of using the blood of non-Jewish kids to bake a special kind of bread meant for religious purpose). When the worst thing Jews could have been was of an evil race, they described us as evil in racial terms (describing us as being sub-human, and accusing us of wanting to take over the world, to destroy it for the rest of the human race). Now that de-colonization is such a powerful (rightfully so) narrative, the worst thing Jews can be is evil colonizers... So guess what we're suddenly described as? Evil colonizers, who plot, steal, abuse and genocide another population (when in reality we consented to coexist with it 76 years ago).

I hope that sort of answers it? Basically, it's the newest form of the same age old antisemitism. Find the worst thing Jews can currently be, and depict them as that.

Thank you for seeing past the vilification! It means a lot. I'm sending you lots of love! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[cyren-myadd]

Do you have any thoughts on the fact that in first scenario Spider was supposed be from Mexico and his name was Javier?

I don't think we ever had any real confirmation of original-Spider's ethnicity or nationality, but when his name was first announced as "Javier Socorro" a lot of people assumed he would be Latino Hispanic (from a Latin American country) instead of White Hispanic (from Spain) like he ended up being. That meant he very well could've been Mexican, or at least half-Mexican on his mom's side since I think he was always intended to be Quaritch's son. I believe they changed his first name to "Miles" to make the connection to Quaritch more obvious.

If Spider had been Mexican, it wouldn't have really changed anything in The Way of Water. He's still a human, and being a different color wouldn't change the way the other characters perceive him. The only thing that would've been different is that he wouldn't have had the nickname "monkey boy/monkey mascot," since having Sigourney Weaver and Stephen Lang calling a Hispanic kid monkey would NOT have gone over well.

Even though making him a different ethnicity wouldn't have changed the movie itself, I actually think it might've changed the way he was perceived by the audience.

This is a thought I've had in the back of my head for a long time, and this question finally gave me a reason to type it all out. But before I get into it, I do want to say that I am white and American, so I'm speaking from the perspective of a white American when I make this analysis of Spider's character and how he was perceived by American audiences. Now let's get into it:

Spider was a pretty controversial character. A lot of people hated him, but there was also a minority of people who really loved him too (me lol). Some people hated him because they felt like Neteyam's death was his fault or because they didn't like that he saved Quaritch in the end, which are reasons that wouldn't change because of his ethnicity, but there were also people who hated him because of his appearance. Spider was often described as "feeling out of place" and off-putting to some viewers. After I saw the Way of Water with my cousins, one of them (he is also white) told me that he hated Spider. When I asked him why, he shrugged and said, "he's a white boy with dreadlocks!" like that was the only reason he needed.

Now I'm just speculating here, but I think a small part of the reason why so many people can't stand Spider might be because he is white. Not because of racism against white people, but because of the context in which Spider exists as a white person. The Na'vi are very obvious allegories for indigenous American, African, and Maori people, and the RDA is a very obvious allegory for European colonizers and US corporations that exploited those groups. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but in America there are social controversies over white American people taking items that are culturally significant to other groups and wearing them as costumes. I know there's a lot of controversy over what is and isn't cultural appropriation, but when it comes to specifically white people wearing specifically Native American clothing, it's generally regarded negatively since most Native American people have said it's disrespectful because the clothing has cultural and spiritual significance.

And then we have Spider, who is not only white, but is also the son of two people who actively harmed the Na'vi, and he wears Na'vi clothing.

In the context of the Avatar movies, it makes perfect sense that Spider would dress and act the way that he does. He was raised alongside the Na'vi so it's all he knows. If you were going to fit Spider into the greater allegory of Avatar, he is similar to the historical figure, Olive Oatman. When Oatman was a child in the 1800s, her family was killed by a group of Native Americans, and she and her sister ended up being taken in by the Mohave people. She lived with them for several years before returning to a white settlement, and during that time she was assimilated into the Mohave tribe, wearing their clothing and receiving traditional tattoos. (Her story is super interesting, you should totally read more about it!). Spider is like a sci-fi version of Oatman, since his parents were killed by natives and he ended up being taken in by them and assimilating into their culture. In the context of modern day culture, a white woman getting Mohave tattoos would be considered appropriation, but in the context of Oatman's situation, it makes sense. Same thing with Spider. In-universe, adopting Omaticaya culture makes sense.

However, if you look at Spider through the lens of modern American cultural context, he looks an awful lot like a white kid dressing up in the traditional clothing of a culture his people harmed. If Spider had been raised on earth and was actively benefiting from the RDA's exploitation of Pandora, then what he's doing would be considered appropriation. But he wasn't. Even though that's not what Spider is, the association is still there. So when people see this "white boy with dreadlocks" as my cousin put it, they feel like there's something wrong with what they're looking at because they associate his appearance with cultural appropriation. I think if Spider had been cast as Latino, he might have been received a bit more favorably by the audience.

Once again, this is all just speculation, I don't really know if Spider's perception would've been different if he'd been a different ethnicity, and I acknowledge that most of the hate Spider received had to do with his character actions. However, I do believe that American audiences may have been partly influenced by the concept of cultural appropriation, which is where that feeling of Spider being "off-putting" comes from. I think it's definitely where my cousin's dislike of him comes from, since it's not about anything he did, but rather how he looks like.

[chilewithcarnage]

That post (Korean fried chicken post idk what else to call it it…) is so weird for me cause like YEAH in a way they were right but the language used is like… I feel like you just subconsciously don’t like black people and wanted an excuse to talk about that in a way other people took in a way to ALSO subtly express how they don’t like black people by tacking on ‘American’ first. I’m not denying that marginalized people in America contribute to imperialism but it feels so odd to specifically point out black people predominately when white people do WAYYY worse in nearly every situation regarding imperialism.. but that could just be me, I have very conflicting feelings about it

black americans can participate in imperialism as we know already. We know how the military works, we know Obama is a war criminal. We literally already know. We know, We know, WE KNOW. But this notion that every single person of color in America is engaging in imperialism by simply just existing. Reactionary bad faith & inaccurate bullshit stoked in anti blackness. I only ever see this conversation brought up when it comes to Black Americans. I don't EVER see anybody mention Asian Americans, MENA Americans, Chicanos, Native Americans, anybody else when it comes to this fucking topic. And idk who it was in that reblog chain but they were trying to use Israel as in example saying 'if you recognize that all Israelis are bad not just the soldiers you can recognize that all Americans are bad too' like....Israel is an apartheid ethnostate that is less than a century old. America was colonized by white Europeans who genocided and enslaved millions of indigenous Americans turned around invaded West Africa captured, tortured, raped, pillaged, killed and colonized. Brought Africans to the new world, enslaved them from centuries. Raped, tortured, killed, & cannibalized them. Decided we weren't human. Fast forward to the civil war, emancipation proclamation pretends to free us from slavery. Not everyone is freed. Reconstruction, Jim Crow, Civil Rights Era, Black Activists and Liberation leaders are assassinated movements get snuffed out. The government floods black neighborhoods with guns and crack. Aids epidemic devastates the black community, especially black lgbts. Fast forward 40 or so years to now and we're all still facing the ramifications of ALL of this. And this isn't even covering half the amount of antiblack & anti native racism that is entrenched in this country. All this to say it is fucking CRAZY that that person would even type that shit out to compare Black Americans to Israelis or compare the inception of America to the creation of Israel....like these people know less than nothing

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

New Rule: Dear Chappell Roan... | Real Time with Bill Maher

And finally, New Rule: To mark the October 7th anniversary, we must launch a campaign to educate young Americans about the Middle East. And the way I'd like to begin that process is by addressing an open letter to Chappell Roan.

Now, to those viewers who aren't watching this while also looking at their phones, let me explain. Chappell Roan is not the name of one of Tru.mp's golf courses, she's actually a great new recording artist who, like a Hezbollah pager, is really blowing up. In just a few months, she went from a struggling artist to getting three billion plays on Spotify. Netting her almost 11 cents.

But here's what caught my eye. She seems like a Gen Zer who can be reached, because I saw her on TMZ say: "it's like, obviously, fuck the policies of the right. But also, fuck some of the policies on the left." That sounds like something I would say!

She also said, "I think it's important that people use critical thinking. I think it's important for me to… question myself… question my algorithm, question: is some person that tweeted something about someone else even true?" Preach, queer ally, preach.

But then we get to Israel, and Chappell, this is where we must put to the test your pledge to use critical thinking and to question whether what you're reading on social media is true. Because it isn't. There's a whole history of the Middle East that you and your fans aren't hearing about. So, why don't you let me be your spirit guide through this?

But before I do, let me tell you a little about myself, since you may have no idea who I am, considering that when this show went on the air you were barely old enough to be told you were in the wrong body. So, my name is Bill Maher, I'm 35. I've been to all of Diddy's freak-off parties, and I work at the same place as Euphoria. In fact, she's right down the hall. My TikTok handle is "B-Nasty" and I go live every Friday night with the anime filter on, and I once won a smoke-off against Willie Nelson, Woody Harelson and Snoop. Okay, that one's true.

But, no, look the truth be told, I'm a baby boomer, I remember phone-booths and cars with ashtrays and vaginal sex. And I didn't learn about the Middle East from TikTok, which is a Chinese company whose totalitarian government would just love to have America's youth hating America. That's some of that algorithm stuff you say you want to look into.

Now, first off, the fact that you don't know much history isn't your fault. You live in the United States where the schools stop doing that whole "teaching facts" thing a while ago. But getting all your history from TikTok is like getting all your calories from Hostess.

I know you're moved by what you see on there, we all are. The dead Palestinian bodies. But it's odd that your generation didn't seem nearly as moved by the Jewish bodies on October 7th. You killed at Coachella this year, but when Hamas kills at a music festival it's a whole other thing. Doesn't the sight of so many young women raped at a music festival make it a little personal? My guess is that Gen Z hearts are hardened by the propaganda you see on TikTok, which likes to call the Jews "colonizers." But colonizers are intruders who have no history in an area, like when Spain conquered the Mayans. Or when your mom took over Facebook.

When the Dutch took over South Africa, they had no history to the land, they just wanted it. But Israel is the Jews homeland. And Jews have always lived there, I cap you not. You can look it up. It's in this book called The Bible, which is horribly wrong about sex ed, slavery, science and cooking, but the archaeology checks out. It says the Jews built a temple with a really big wall seven centuries before Muhammad or Islam ever existed, and sure as shit, you can still go there and touch it. Calling Jews colonizers in Israel is like calling Native Americans colonizers here. It's ridiculous.

Chappell, did you know that for 2,000 years, Palestine was like an Uber driver with a three star rating? Nobody wanted it. And there was never any Arab country called "Palestine." It was an orphan province, and if you ask people what they thought about it back then, they'd say it gave them the ick.

But after World War II, and after the Jews were very nearly wiped out by an actual attempted genocide, they decided it was time for their historic homeland to be an actual country so that for once they could defend themselves.

And the UN - we like them, right? Yeah, they agreed, and voted a country for each of the indigenous peoples. One side agreed to that. But the Arabs had a slightly different proposal. They said, "how about we keep it all and wipe you out?"

Chappell, if you think it was repressive growing up queer in the midwest, try the Mid East. You're a female drag queen and you sing, "I fucked you in the bathroom when we went to dinner, your parents at the table." Yeah, that wouldn't fly in Gaza. Although you would, straight off a roof. The same goes for, "knee deep in the passenger seat and you're eating me out." Yeah, my guess is the morality police would figure out that one's not about the drive-thru and kill your featherboa wearing ass. You know when you sing that LA is where "boys and girls can all be queens every single day"? You're welcome, but offer not good in the West Bank.

Chappell, you're not wrong that oppression is bad or that Palestinian and many other Muslim populations are oppressed and deserve to be freed. You just have it completely ass-backwards as to who is doing the oppressing. Hamas is a terrorist mafia that took over Gaza. The Revolutionary Guard is a terrorist mafia that took over Iran. ISIS is a terrorist mafia that took over Iraq. The Taliban is a terrorist mafia that took over Afghanistan. These are the oppressors and when you make it all about Israel, you take the pressure off of them. You enable them.

The Iranian regime has killed 600 protesters after a 22-year-old woman died in police custody following her arrest for the crime of wearing her head covering incorrectly. Just to be clear, that's your team. Iran is who sponsors Hamas and Hezbollah. Are you sure this is who you want to throw down with?

Meryl Streep spoke at the UN recently and said this about the Taliban, who are only slightly more conservative than your heroes in Hamas. She said, "today in Kabul a female cat has more freedoms than a woman. A cat may go sit on her front stoop and feel the sun on her face. She may chase a squirrel into the park. A squirrel has more rights than a girl in Afghanistan today… A bird may sing in Kabul, but a girl may not." You're a singer and you're advocating for a place and a culture you would never want to live under.

Gender may not be binary, but right and wrong kind of is.

==

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ushistory/results/achievement/

Baseline: NAEP Proficient

And this is just US History. Now consider proficiency in World History.

Having watched the full video, I've come to the conclusion that Chappell Roan is a window-licking weapons-grade ignorant moron. What's more concerning is that her fans will uncritically parrot her ignorant, ahistorical politics just because they like her music.

https://www.ancient-origins.net/history/black-sheep-empire-actors-actresses-ancient-rome-0010292

The ancient Greeks loved the theater and ancient Greek actors enjoyed a position of eminence and respect. In contrast, although entertainment and drama were similarly adored in Ancient Rome, theater performers were often demeaned by the upper-class society and also perceived as morally unclean.

We need to go back to this.

[jewish-sideblog]

a two state solution is racist. there is no way an occupying colonial force deserves the land of those it colonized ever, especially if the people whose land was stolen are still alive and want to go back to it. a one state multinational secular palestinian state is the ONLY solution.

About 50% of Israelis, accounting for about three and a half million Jews, are ethnically Mizrahi. I’ll save you the trouble of looking that word up because you’ve clearly never heard it before. They’re Jews that never left the Middle East. Plenty of them never left the land that became the Mandate of Palestine in the first place. The rest were forced to emigrate to Israel by neighboring Arab countries. Where do you want them to go? Hamas certainly won’t let them keep hanging out.

The rest of the Jews in the country are diasporic. Which means Jews who were violently uprooted from their homelands in 70 CE. And 132 CE. And 617. And 717. And 1066. And 1099. And 1465. And 1834. And 1929. Plenty of those dates refer to times when imperialist Muslim caliphates tried to destroy Jewish presence in their ancestral homelands to replace them with Arab Muslims. One of those dates refers to a time when Palestinians mass-murdered and ethnically cleansed indigenous Jews. Do you know which ones are which? Do a little research and find out, instead of just parroting propaganda.

You’re totally right. There’s no way an occupying force that’s killed and displaced native peoples deserves to rule over the land it’s colonized, especially if the people who’s land has been stolen are still alive and want to return to it. That was one of the foundational ideologies of early Zionism when the land was ruled by… Turkey. Not Palestinians. Not even Arabs. Turkey.

Colonial rule can be avoided when two indigenous groups with equally valid claims to the same land stop butchering each other for land grabs, nationalism, and dominance. So either a joint rule, or a two-state solution.

And where are you calling from, America? Next.

[filipinfodump]

Hi, I want to ask if you have any topics about the Philippine-American War? I have gotten myself in Philippine History and I want to know deeper. Thanks:)

I was thinking of many ways on how to answer this because this is such a large and complicated topic but I could just try to summarize some stuff here and tell you what I know and what I could find.

The Filipino-American war mainly started as Filipinos felt betrayed by their former American allies after the country was sold to them by Spain after the Spanish-American war during the Treaty of Paris of 1898 for $20 million alongside other Spanish colonies like Puerto Rico, Guam, and Cuba (American Historical Association, n.d.). This feeling of betrayal had come from the fact that the leader and dictator president of the Filipino revolutionaries, Emilio Aguinaldo of the Kataastaasang Kagalang-galang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan (en. The Supreme and Honorable Association of the Children of the Nation) or the Katipunan for short, actually sought assistance from the Americans in Hong Kong during the Filipino Revolutionary War against Spain which was happening at the same time (Kedmey, 2013). This is why tensions were so high with the Americans when they first formally colonized the Philippines.

Interestingly, the purchase also included some territories that weren't actually part of Spanish rule such as the Sultanate of Sulu as well as some indigenous territories which led to a strained relationship with the Americans moving forward such as the independent Moros of Muslim Mindanao later being forced to assimilate to the rest of the colony of the Philippines despite previous agreements that state that they will leave them alone, mirroring the way the United States government treated Native Americans (Gowing, 1968).

Fighting between the American army and the Filipino army first broke out when on February 4, 1899 after Private William W. Grayson fired at 4 Filipino soldiers who cocked their rifles in response to them ordering the men to halt which later broke out into the Battle of Manile of 1899 (Chaput, 2012). As the Filipinos and Americans declared war on each other, the Katipuneros resorted to the mountains to start guerilla warfare against the American army (Philippine-American War, n.d.) which then lasted until 1901 when Aguinaldo was captured on March 23, 1901, just a day after Aguinaldo's birthday actually with the capture being attributed to two of his men, Lazaro Segovia and Hilario Tal Placido who betrayed him to the Americans with his other men still being too relaxed from the festivities the day before (Ocampo, 2010).

The fighting continued despite his capture and surrender until the last of the generals, General Macario Sakay, surrendered in July 14, 1906 who was then later executed along side his men on September 13, 1907 despite the initial promise of amnesty by the American government (Pangilinan & Pimintel, 2008).

The war ended the lives of 4,300 American soldiers with only 1,500 having been killed in action with the rest succumbing to diseases, while Filipino forces suffered 20,000 casualties alongside the death of 200,000 Filipino civilians due to hunger, disease, and combat (Philippine-American War, n.d.).

The violence of the situation and especially committed by the American soldiers prompted a lot of protests in the United States to stop the war immediately, as letters of the situation had been sent back to their homes which describes in excruciating detail the war crimes that these soldiers were ordered to commit such as blockading and burning down villages, extreme torture of captured and suspected enemies, and much more. The most well-known of these torture methods that I remember being taught to us in history classes as early as 4th grade was the "Water Cure" where American soldiers would force water down the victim's throat in and force them to vomit it back out. This article has a detailed account of the exact nature of this torture method as it discusses the torture of Mayor Joveniano Ealdama of Igbaras, who, although no American troop was actually hurt in his town, was tortured with his town being burnt down by the Americans the very next day (Vestal, 2017).

I do have to be honest, I was utterly shocked at how little Americans really knew about the Philippine American colonial era and by extension the Philippine-American war especially with the sheer amount of brutality the Americans had done to Filipino locals as well as the large impact the American government and American culture has had in my country and I am glad that more and more people are starting to learn more about this but it's still rather disappointing.

Videos on the Philippine-American War

If you want to learn more about the Philippine-American War, I have a couple of recommendations for videos that you can watch.

This video by Crash Course explains the origins of American Imperial idealization as well as the wars that led up to the colonization of the many territories that America acquired during this time era:

Here's a good summary by history teacher Mr. Beat of the major aspects of the war as well as the American public's perception of it that you can watch:

Here's a video made with a Filipino-perspective by Jonas Tayaban on the topic:

Here's a summary in Tagalog. It doesn't have English subtitles though but it does detail more things about the build-up and the subsequent wars between Spain and America and later the Philippines and Spain and then America too:

Movies about the Philippine-American War

I would also be remiss to not suggest some historical movies that tackle the events of this time period and especially TBA Studios' Artikulo Uno films Heneral Luna (2015) which focuses on the most popular and effective general of the revolution Gen. Antonio Luna, and Goyo: Ang Batang Heneral (2018) which focuses on Gregorio "Goyo" del Pilar, one the youngest generals of Filipino history who died a very tragic death at a young age:

You can watch the full movie here complete with English Subtitles

Another well-known movie about this time period is Viva Films' El Presidente (2012), although I had heard people say it's very much biased to the controversial dictator president Aguinaldo's side with many people citing that as the reason why they don't like the film.

Here's a reupload of the full-movie. It doesn't have subtitles though.

I don't know of any American-made movies that focuses on this topic and I know there's several other films that focus more on the politics of the Katipunan and the Filipino Revolutionary War against Spain, but not necessarily the Philippine-American War so if anyone has other suggestions, please let me know.

I would also like to suggest documentaries but most of the ones I've seen are on World War II and the others are other YouTube videos by history channels that I'm not too familiar with made by mostly white American YouTubers. Not that that would disqualify their videos (I did reference both John Green and Mr. Beat here) but I don't know these history channels and their hosts enough to recommend them in good faith as of right now.

Books and Further Reading on the Philippine-American War

For books on the subject, I often reference the many writings of Ambeth Ocampo such as his Looking Back series, specifically:

Looking Back 2: Dirty Dancing (Shopee, Lazada, Amazon)

Looking Back 11: Independence x6 (Shopee, Lazada)

Looking Back 13: Guns of the Katipunan (Shopee, Lazada)

I'm also currently interested in buying some other books about the topic like The Hills of Sampaloc: The Opening Actions of the Philippine-American War, February 4-5, 1899 (Shopee, Amazon) but I don't really have any extra money to spare for it right now.

I remember that my father had some other books about this too but the names had escaped me and it's far too much work to try to sort out through his entire book pile in our house.

I hope this answer's comprehensive enough since the subject is, as I said before, quite complex and rather large so I can't really get into all the specifics right now.

References:

American Historical Association. (n.d.). How Did America Enter the Picture?. Retrieved on 3 February 2024, from https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-archives/gi-roundtable-series/pamphlets/em-24-what-lies-ahead-for-the-philippines-(1945)/how-did-america-enter-the-picture

Chaput, D. (2012). Private William W Grayson's War in the Philippines, 1899. Retrieved on 3 February 2024, from https://ne-test-site8.cdc.nicusa.com/sites/ne-test-site8.cdc.nicusa.com/files/doc/publications/NH1980GraysonWar1899.pdf

Gowing, P. (1968). Muslim-American Relations in the Philippines, 1899-1929. Retrieved on 3 February 2024, from https://asj.upd.edu.ph/mediabox/archive/ASJ-06-03-1968/gowing-muslim-american%20relations%20in%20the%20philippines%201899-1920.pdf

Kedmey, D. (2013, June 13). Exiled in Hong Kong: Famous Company for Edward Snowden.Time. Retrieved on 3 February 2024, from https://world.time.com/2013/06/15/exiled-in-hong-kong-famous-company-for-edward-snowden/slide/general-emilio-aguinaldo/

Ocampo, A. (2010). Looking Back 2: Dirty Dancing. Anvil Publishing

Pangilinan, F., & Pimintel, A. (2008, September 9). A Resolution Expressing the Sense of the Senate Honoring the Sacrifice of Macario Sakay and all other Filipinos who Gave Up their Lives in the Philippine-American War for our Freedom, Senate Resolution No. 623, 14th Congress of the Republic of the Philippines. Retrieved on 3 February 2024, from http://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lisdata/83927584!.pdf

Philippine-American War. In Britannica. Retrieved on 3 February 2024, from https://www.britannica.com/event/Philippine-American-War

Vestal, A. (2017). The First Wartime Water Torture by Americans. Retrieved on 3 February 2024, from https://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/mlr/vol69/iss1/2/

[elbiotipo]

Isn't Argentina as much of a settler state as the USA, Canada and Israel? Say, what happened to the Indigenous and the Afro population after independence?

The independent Argentine state commited genocide against the native peoples of Patagonia during the "Conquista del Desierto", and the less known yet not-less brutal colonization of the Great Chaco, by displacing or outright killing native populations. With regards to the Afrodescedant population, there was not an organized campaign of genocide, but rather a process of "invisibilization" where Afrodescendants hid their heritage to assimilate to eurocentric society, same with mestizo people. These are historical and current debts that the successive Argentine state has not repaid or adressed properly despite recent advances.

Sarmiento was the first and main architect of the conception of Argentina as a country for European inmigrants that "to modernize" needed to get rid of the native and afro-descendant population, the now celebrated figure of the gaucho, the same people who fought for independence, was disgusting to him. Julio A. Roca was inspired by the genocide of the native peoples of the United States and tried to use the same mentality and tactics here. Despite there have never been formal laws of racial separation, this mindset continued as part of state policy until roughly the early-20th century and still shapes national attitudes today.

Despite the desires of these men to destroy them, they ultimately failed. Over a milion (probably undercounted) Argentines belong multiple native peoples, with 30-40% of Argentines (depending on region) from partial or full native descent and 4-7% from african descent. Culturally, because of the aftermentioned process of invisibilization and the way the concept of race expresses itself in Latin America, there are fewer people who identify themselves with such groups than genetics show: racism still exists against "morochos", that is, brown-skinned people, compared to the Eurocentric ideal.

These are not hidden facts, they are taught in Argentine schools and universities, widely discussed and regarded as shameful, and they still shape our society and politics.

When I read the term "settler state" it confuses me because every Latin American country is a settler state, because by definition they were colonized by Spain and Portugal. Independent nations in Latin American inherited the racial and colonial mindsets of their "parent" empire. From Chile and Brazil, which also commited similar genocides on native lands following the procesess of the Spanish and Portuguese, to the opression of native and afro-descendants in favor of the european-descended elite in places like Perú, Bolivia and México, and the overall "blanqueamiento" (whitening, or however you want to call it) theory common to all Latin America where mestizaje was encouraged to "whiten" the popluation. Every Latin American nation was born, like it or not, from these violent processes.

The genocide did not begin with Argentine independence, it began in 1492, and it continues to this day. Similiarily, it has not started or stopped with a single administration or another, and it expresses itself in multiple ways. The only way to solve such deep rooted problems is by the state assuming its political, social and economical debt, but also for the entire mindset of society to change, which will take generations. I like to think we are progressing on that front, but when I see recent events such as the repression in Jujuy, I also know we have decades, if not centuries as my grandfather says, to go.

[moorishflower]

Hey I wanna be really clear about something because I do occasionally reblog stuff wrt Palestine and its current occupation, so if you don't have any interest in politics (because this IS politics, this whole situation is very much NOT about religion) feel free to skip over

But I want to make it absolutely clear that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are not the same thing, and when I reblog things in support of Palestine I am not doing so because I think that Jews are evil. I'm studying Judaism. I'm trying to convert. I hope I'll be ready for that someday. So it is not Jews who've stolen land and killed locals and started a genocide. It is not even, to a certain extent, Israelis who've done this. The country of Israel, our modern understanding of it, was flawed from the beginning, built on colonized land that had been already occupied by the British Empire. It has since been taken over by a far-right extremist government who views the native tribes and people of Palestine as little more than animals, or worse than animals. And what's tragic is that this government is using Jews as their footsoldiers and their scapegoats and their pawns. Promising them a return to a homeland that has been gone for thousands of years. Promising peace and safety to a people who have been hurt and oppressed and murdered and driven out again and again. But you can't buy peace with blood. What Hamas did was horrific and is NOT to be celebrated. But what Israel is doing in response is worse.

Halacha tells us that we have the right to rodef, the right of the pursuer. The actual line is "You shall not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor." In the Talmud, it's decided that "if someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill them first." It's the right to self-defense. What Israel is claiming is that Hamas is SUCH a threat that the deaths of more than 30,000 people, most of which are civilians, most of which are women and children, is justified under Talmudic law.

Right now, the estimate for Israeli casualties (including those killed at the Sukkot gathering) is around 1,139.

The estimate for Palestinian casualties is at least 30,000. Quite possibly more, as some 10,000 are missing. Professor Yagil Levy of the Tel Aviv University estimates that about 61% of that 30,000 is women, children, and the elderly (he places all men over the age of 18 in the "combatant" category and thus are not considered civilians, which is problematic in and of itself).

So where is the line drawn? The Talmud doesn't tell us. But I don't think that the tragic deaths of 1,139 people justifies the wanton and senseless murder of 18,000 women, children, and elderly.

What Israel is doing is horrifying, and it isn't to secure a Jewish homeland, and it isn't in the name of G-d, and it isn't for the continued existence of Jews. It is, plain and simple, an attempt to consolidate power. Netanyahu was (and still is) an extremely disliked Prime Minister. He has put himself into bed with whoever he thinks is most powerful and most likely to keep him in power, which is unfortunately a gaggle of right-wing extremists who are no different, fundamentally, from any other extremist, and who are using Judaism and Jews as a vehicle towards their own enrichment.

I guess what I'm saying here is that in a way, I feel sorry for the Israeli Jews who were told that Israel was the home they had always been promised, but were never told about the strings attached to it. And I wanted to make it absolutely clear that I will not hold with anyone who says that Jews, specifically, are to blame for Gaza, or any other antisemitic statements, because it is not a religious contention.

Oseh shalom bimromav hu ya'aseh shalom aleinu v'al kol yoshvei tevel. Palestine will be free and Jews will know peace again.

[kosmic-apothecary]

I have some thoughts I'd like the pro-Israel Jewish community to consider with an open mind and open heart.

As a white person who has been fully supportive of calling out the evils white people have done in the past (and to a lesser extent continue to do in the present), I can't come to grips with how so many Jewish people who have been at the forefront of every other social justice movement in American history can be so resistant to recognizing that Jews can commit evil acts too, and in admitting that supremacy and racism are never okay, even when it's your own people who are doing it!

What Zionists have done to Palestine over the last 75 years is a disgrace that should be condemned by every decent person on earth, just like any other instance of colonization, ethnic cleansing, apartheid or genocide. If you expect white people to admit that many of our ancestors had slaves, and ethnically cleansed and genocided native Americans (which I fully support), then you must also be willing and able to recognize that a great many Jews are currently taking part in commiting same horrors in Palestine right now. (I know Zionists claim, and some genuinely believe, that they're "de-colonizing" Palestine and therefore the ethnic cleaning and mass murder of the "invasive arabs" is flipped on its head to be seen as moral and just. To that I will remind you that Zionists openly admired they were "colonizing Palestine" for decades until it became unpopular to do so. Now they claim that same statement they used pervasively is "antisemitic", which is obviously disingenuous and entirely hypocritical.)

Secondly, it wouldn't matter if Israel actually were a decolonization project, the people of Gaza have been trapped there with the vast majority never allowed to leave, for 17 years. Bombing innocent people who have been held captive like animals is barbaric and inexcusable, no matter WHO was there first.)

I never felt personally threatened when people call out white supremacy or white privilege, because I want those things to end. It's not anti-your own race or religion to want it to become more moral and less harmful to others, but for some reason a lot of Jewish and Christian zionists apparently believe that any criticism of Israel or Jewish supremacy is antisemitic and intolerable. This doesn't make ANY sense. All systems of oppression are unjust, no matter WHO is benefiting.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, so if you care about social causes and human rights at all and you're not yet loudly and boldly condemning Israel and demanding a permanent ceasefire, a total withdraw from Gaza, and a sovereign and free Palestinian state, then you were never serious about social justice at all, you were simply following trends.

To date over 30,000 people have been killed (a number that’s been static for weeks despite continued attacks on civilians) half of them children. Never again is now. This is another Holocaust, and Jewish voices have the most influence to stop it.

[eddiedefender]

“eddie is a bad father"

Since 7x09 aired, I've been seeing a lot of people saying that Eddie is a bad father, and it's just so ????????????? Have you even watched the show???????

I'm not denying the mistakes Eddie has made regarding Chris, especially during the first years of his life, but making mistakes does not automatically make him a bad parent. The important thing is that after making those mistakes, he has done everything in his power to correct them. He has always tried to shield him of whatever disasters or tragedies life has thrown at Chris.

So for those people, now I'm going to do a rundown of Eddie's and Chris' relationship, but I'm also going to be focusing on Eddie as a person and not only as a father. i tried to keep it in a chronological order. (I'm so sorry for any inconsistencies :( )

El Paso, TX.

Shannon and Eddie begin

Eddie and Shannon were never a healthy relationship. They are high school sweethearts who had to get married due to her getting pregnant accidentally at 19. High school relationships, especially the first ones, are almost never meant to last. Eddie forced himself to get married to her bc he felt it was the “right” thing, due to his catholic upbringing and subsequent catholic guilt. He automatically assumed his role, not bc he wanted, but because he felt like he Had to. This caused his marriage to be extremely dysfunctional.

Catholic guilt and his identity Eddie's catholic guilt is likely closely related to his identity as the son of Mexican immigrants. Catholicism in Latin America was introduced in a very traumatic and forced way by Spanish colonizers. Thousands of Native Americans were killed for refusing to converse to Catholicism, therefore causing Catholicism to become really intense in Latin America, a way in which it remains until now. Entire Latino countries values and laws circle back to catholic traditions, there is virtually no way to escape religion. This is then mixed with the innate sexism that is common in those countries, leaving a pretty extreme view of gender roles. When a kid is raised in these environments or, in eddies case, by people raised in these countries, their life will always be dictated by Catholicism rules, especially when the family is especially (extra) religious, as is implied in Eddie's case. Coming back to how people's life is dictated by Catholicism… this is especially true regarding matters of sexuality and gender. As we all know, Latino Catholicism has strict views regarding gender roles. A man should be the “provider” and “strong” and the woman should “take care of the family” and be “gentle”. That is basically what Eddie is. He always paints himself as the strong one, bottling up his emotions; and also thinks of himself as only the provider for the family. This heavily affected his relationship with Shannon. When he got her pregnant, he automatically assumed that role by marrying her.

Newfound “family”

His marriage and new “family” life caused to be so overwhelming that the only out he saw, was enlisting and going to war, leaving his newborn son and wife alone. All of this was done under the pretence of being the “provider” for his family, because he thought that was what they required from him. He didn't comprehend that his wife and kid also needed him emotionally. Sadly, that was never going to happen due to the very circumstances in which the family was created. He never loved Shannon enough to make things work between them; but he still tried, for the sake of Chris' and to give him a chance to have a proper family.

Shannon leaving

after coming back from war, Eddie and Shannon tried to live the “family life” but that came to be impossible and overwhelming for both of them. This time it was Shannon that left. When she left, Eddie ended up alone with his son, fresh out of the army and with a family that wanted to take away his kid. He instantly knew that Christopher could not go through the trauma of losing another parent. That's why he decided to fight his toxic family for Chris' custody and took him away to L.A., so that they could live and navigate their new family dynamic far away.

Los Angeles, California

Eddie begins again

When Eddie moved out to L.A. he was still discovering how to raise a kid with a disability and also fighting his parents for Chris' custody. He did everything he could to ensure his kid was well taken care of, shielding him from his own struggles. When he got the job at the 118, he still did his best to keep him in a sort of normal environment. Due to Chris' disability, this came to be more of a challenge, but Eddie never stopped trying to get him the extra help he needed by every means.

When he joined the 118 he met buck who then introduced them to Carla, the social worker. Then, Carla and Eddie started to work together, so that they could improve Chris' quality of life, always looking out for his happiness.

L.A. life

Besides Carla, Eddie also found his support system on the 118. These people always helped him in everything he required and became his friends; especially Buck, as his best friend. Eddie found in Buck a person very similar to him, one that had Chris' best interests at heart and someone that would fight tooth and nail for him. Seeing the positive impact buck made, he decided to make him a constant presence in Chris's life. This made nothing but improve both Chris' and Eddie's family life.

Nevertheless, life in L.A. was not so happy for Eddie. Although he had found a support system and strong friendships, he was still processing Shannon's absence. He always blamed her for leaving him and her son. However, he never made these concerns known to his son, as he didn't want Chris' to grow to hate his mother. The only people who knew about this were the 118, although he was always reluctant to be open about any feelings he experienced.

Shannon

All this came to a halt when Shannon came back to their already settled lives. At the beginning, Eddie tried to navigate his issues with Shannon, without letting Chris know that she had come back. He was afraid that Shannon would leave and therefore scar Chris again. He wanted to shield him from that pain.

After a while, Eddie decided that it was OK for Shannon to come back to Chris' life and for them to try to be a family again. During this time, Eddie and Shannon were still figuring out what they were and how they wanted their future to look like, while also living the family life for Chris' sake.

After navigating their family life and personal conflicts for a while, Shannon asked Eddie for a divorce. She died days after. This was a very big hit for both Eddie and Chris. They both navigated their grief together. It was not a perfect journey, but Eddie never stopped having Chris' best interests at heart.

(natural) Disasters

Soon after Shannon died, another tragedy hit Chris' life: the tsunami. Both tragedies resulted in Chris having recurring nightmares, sometimes blending the lines between his mother's death and the tsunami. Eddie was constantly worried about the state of his son, even though the latter was not opening up to him. He took him to the psychologist to see what he could do to make him feel better and process his emotions.

Mothers or girlfriends?

After Shannon's death, Eddie, maybe involuntarily, leaned back into the “provider” role, and he looked for someone to fill the “mother” role for Chris. His next relationships were solely based on how much Christopher liked his girlfriends. He was focused, perhaps too much, on what he thought was best for Chris. He never noticed that Chris' didn't need another maternal figure, he already had everything he needed in Buck, Carla, and the rest of the 118.

The only relationship he had, prior to L.A. was the one with Shannon. The outcome of that relationship left him severely traumatized and unable to form emotional bonds with women. And anxiety when thinking of a future or marriage with them. He only valued his girlfriends regarding on how much Chris' liked them, removing himself completely from his own relationship.

Grief

since Shannon died, Eddie has never got the chance, or given himself the chance, to grieve her properly. He has constantly bottled up his emotions, until he couldn't anymore, resulting in extreme reactions. Or, on the other hand, completely gaslighting himself into believing something that wasn't true.

First, soon after she died, while dealing with the aftermath of the tsunami and its impact on Chris' he stated to develop feelings of anger towards her. To try and “process” his rage, he turned to illegal fight clubs, only stopping when he almost killed a man. Eddie then confessed to bobby he did that so that he could keep his anger under control as to not let Chris down, seeing he was the only parent Chris had left.

Second, during the subsequent seasons, Eddie started to completely morph the mental image he had of Shannon and their relationship. Shannon suddenly became the epitome of motherhood and the perfect wife. He completely stripped her out of her humanity, putting her on a pedestal or an example he should seek to obtain. All of a sudden, they never had any marriage problems, and he even forgot that she asked him for a divorce. Their marriage was only perfect since the day she died.

His delusions have reached their breaking point in s7. He quickly fell down into a hole after seeing a girl similar to his wife. He started pursuing her, even though he already has a girlfriend. Also, leading this woman into a situationship without her knowing about the wife.

It was only after buck said something, that he realized that he wasn't even sure of what he wanted from Kim. He soon after came clean to her, and tried to stop their relationship. (then she matched his 𝓯𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓴 and actually got bangs and got into a weird role-play as shannon, to “try” to get Eddie to get over her, is suppose.... I don't even know what she was trying to do there😭😭😭😭). That is when Chris caught them. Eddie never intended for his son to see him in this broken state, and he had actually done a great job at hiding it until now.

This mistake does not erase how much Chris means to Eddie and all the things he has done to maintain Chris' wellbeing.

This is simply an example of a very broken man.

i wanted to clarify that when i refer to "catholicism" in the text im not talking about what the scriptures (Bible) say, i talk about how people interpret them in latam context. also im probably forgetting some things but I think this gets my point across.

[lol-jackles]

You really support israhell? After everything they have done? The 75 years of brutal and inhumane colonization and oppression, the torture, the rape, the theft, the burning of hundreds of years old indigenous olive trees, everything? Don't you even see that they did to Palestinians exactly what Americans did to the natives? This is honestly really disappointing. I hope you at least just remember that Palestine was given by one white racist man to another white racist man to get rid of the "jewi

You really want to go there? Okay, lets go there! To use your own logic, the native American analogy you’re so found of also applies to the Jews in Israel.  Romans tried to expel all Jews and then rename the territory "Palestina" after the Philistines (enemy of the Jews), and Jerusalem "Aelia Capitolina" (after Hadrian and Jupiter) to erase the Jewish connection.  Except that did not work because some Jews remained and then others came back.  And they never stopped returning: from immigration in 200-500 AD, the eleventh century, until the movements in 1882, early 1900s, right up to 1948.

I'm sure you know the Ottoman Empire happened until it didn’t, and the territory switched to Britain who called the territory Mandatory Palestine, so the “Palestinians are those who live there, meaning Arabs AND Jews.  This is inconvenient historical facts for you, Jews were living there already!

Do you think the Ottomans would have tolerated state-building by Jews?  Neither the Ottomans nor the British would ever have tolerated an illegal or violent state-building attempt by Jews.  That is why until 1948, the future state of İsrael consisted of territory bought by the Jewish National Fund and empty lands accorded to the Jewish state under the UN partition plan.

Then the Arab world declared war in 1947 and got their asses roundly kicked by the Jews and end up occupying a number of territories originally intended to be part of the abortive Arab state of Transjordan. The furious butthurt Arab nations expelled 900,000 of their own Jewish citizens (those they didn’t kill) so the refugees made their way to Israel in 1948.  Judea and Samaria (aka the West bank) belong to Jordan, Gaza to the Egyptians, Golan Heights to Syria. Green line established as an armistice line.

The Arab world declared war again in 1967 and got their asses round kicked by the Jews.  Just before the war, Arabs left the area and figured they can come back after all the Jews are killed and take everything the Jews owned or had build, the farmlands they built out of swamps and desert…. Except that didn’t happen and they became sore losers. 

Jordan gave up their claim to Judea and Samaria in the 1990’s and Sinai was given back to Egypt, Israel immediately started negotiating with the PLO for peace. Oslo granted the Palestinians the first land that they could claim was theirs and no one else’s. Israel then moved on to direct negotiations with Arafat to give them a proper state with legal borders in exchange for peace. Arafat rejected it and launched the Intifada.  Israel tried again when Abbas took over, but he refused to even talk. In an attempt to buy peace, and as a test of the Palestinian’s intentions, Israel completely pulled out of Gaza, hoping that it could become something like Singapore or Monaco. Instead, Hamas took over, destroying the infrastructure that Israel left behind and launching terrorist attacks against Israel ever since.

Hamas could have rebuilt hospitals and schools with the millions of dollars given in previous conflicts in Gaza. They could have built bomb shelters for their citizens. But no, they built underground tunnels and bunkers, designed to breach Israel's boarders and protect their own. You cannot have peace with Gazans whose sole aim is to kill you and rape the women and then kill them.

Then October 7 happened.  Hamas gleefully opened fire on babies, children, families in their beds. They stabbed children kept the knives in them before killing their parents.  They didn’t spare family dogs.  They gang-raped women and paraded their dead bodies in the streets. Hamas exceeded the Nazis in brutality.  Any collateral damage to the innocent is unintentional on Israel's part as opposed to Hamas who surround their own soldiers with children.  Hamas is literally using their own children as meat shields. 

Gaza started a war. They are getting what they wanted. Why are you complaining?

Did you protest in 2006 when Gaza elected Hamas?

Did you protest in 2007 when Hamas declared war on Israel and said it would eagerly murder Israelies  - which is what caused the Israeli blockade and later the Egyptian blockade.

I bet my two houses you didn’t protest for the past sixteen years while Hanas fired at Israeli civilians, sometimes causing Israel to fire back.

You weren’t at all bothered that for 16 years the Hamas used their own citizens human meat shields and build military infrastructure beneath hospitals and schools

Meanwhile, 21 Arab countries would rather let Gazans die than admit them as refugees.  Where are your complaints about that?

In conclusion: Unlike all the countries in the Americas and Australasia, and many elsewhere, Israel actually is NOT on occupied land, illegal or otherwise. The fledgling state of Israel bought land fair and square from Ottoman landlords and was granted statehood by the UN.  Now, you could argue whether the Ottomans should have been able to sell that land, as they were absentee landords – but they did have legal titles to it and they legally sold the land to the Jews.  So Israel has much greater legitimacy than the U.S, Argentina, Australia, or New Zealand.  Go bitch about them, you cowardly hiding-behind-greyface-Anon.

Btw, I'm always hugely happy to disappoint pro-rapey-terrorists people like yourself.