#impact of a racist society as seen in get out

[autisticrosewilson]

It's not that I hate fanon or that I think fanon is inherently less intelligent or morally wrong, but a LOT of fanon is based in racism, misogyny, and classism that I feel like a lot of you accept without question.

WHY is Duke (Daredevil, son of a god, has never once allowed himself to be defined by anyone's actions but his own) relegated to a background role, only characterized by reacting to the whims of other bats?

Why is Babs - Birds of Prey leader and backbone of the hero society, tells Bruce to fuck off and die 4 times a day and is constantly ruining her relationships by being biased and unhinged - Gotham bound, the mature responsible mom of the group who never argues with Bruce and never gets in trouble?

Why is Dick, both a tactical genius and master manipulator, a himbo only appreciated for his sex appeal? Especially when he is both Romani (group of people demonized and condemned as hypersexual by their nature alone) and an SA victim.

WHY is Damian "feral" and "uncivilized" despite being raised as a literal prince? Half of you treat him like a sociopath with no hope of redemption for an unfunny three second joke and the other half of you go full throttle into Bruce's white savior bullshit so that Damian can be "redeemed". Y'know when you're not villainizing Talia and acting like Dick is his other parent, actually.

WHY is Stephanie - extremely intelligent detective who can't stand Bruce and has a living mother she loves - lumped in as another member of the Batfam, a blonde ditz who only cares about prank wars and emotionally supporting Tim?

WHY is Cass - intelligent, a grown adult, suicidal perfectionist - emotionally intelligent, primarily existing to support the characters around her, immediately accepting of everyone she meets regardless of her own morals?

Why is Bruce the golden standard? Enough so that though everyone in the fandom could agree that he's an emotionally unstable wreck, being considered "the most like him" is seen as a compliment and not the HIGHEST insult? Everyone would agree if I said that Bruce purposely self sabotages his relationship half the time and the other half he simply does things without caring about the emotional impact it will have on people because he has to be the smartest in the room, but if I said that makes him a shit partner and emotionally abusive parent the fandom would bend over backwards to argue with me.

Why is Tim "the best Robin" when Dick Grayson invented the mantle, it is impossible for someone to embody the spirit of Robin better than him because he made it and he created what being Robin means. Maybe Tim is the best in Bruce's eyes, but what Robin means and who has the right to give it over was a significant thing they argued about. Tim the high school drop out, and yet also somehow the smartest? Tim "the most like Bruce" except no he's not, that's Cass. Poor neglected, abused, victimized little Timmy (the rich boy at the elite boarding school with loving albeit busy parents and almost every instance of him being victimized by another character has either been racist bullshit - The Al Ghuls and Rose Wilson- or a complete 180 for the character that made no sense when examined through the lens of prior characterization - Jason for instance.)

Almost every fanon trope that gets passed around like gospel seems to deliberately push POC characters and women into the background and strip them of interesting complex traits and stories, usually for the purpose of fitting them all into bite sized incorrect quote character types and uncomplicated narrative roles that are not only completely divergent from canon, but primarily exist to prop up the two rich white boys.

Also the insistence that Bruce, a 20 year old at the time, should actually be excused for how much he mentally and emotionally fucked Dick up because really they're more like siblings! While deciding that Dick at the same age was actually the perfect candidate to be Damian's new parent/guardian...have you lost the fucking plot you don't even make sense to yourselves.

Okay I lied at the beginning, I do hate fanon. You guys are so uncritical about the media you consume it is BEYOND just letting people enjoy things and have fun. I guess it's one thing if you KNOW this stuff isn't canon and UNDERSTAND why these tropes are problematic and you engage with it as such, it's fine read and write what you want, but just spreading the same nonsense around and parading it around as "better than canon" (version of the character so bland and boring you've somehow made the old white men at DC look like geniuses in the art of representation) is just infuriating.

[weirdo09]

hobie brown

i’d just like to say, i hope y’all never meet a black boy nor man because y’all’s behavior over one black teenager is honestly disturbing.

like the racist headcanons, the not taking accountability for your disturbing fics about him because “HIS AGE ISNT MENTIONED!!” like don’t act dumb, you know them people said that he’s a slight older boy than miles which would be like 1-2 years, making him 16-17. it’s also just the “i want his dick inside of me” “i want to have his kids” and the sex hcs where it’s like “he’ll fuck you hard and not give you aftercare, just leaves you to take care of yourself.”

i’m not really bothered by the smut fics and hcs cause he is attractive and i will read them every once in awhile but y’all be taking it to the extremes, calling him toxic, making him out like some abusive boyfriend, he’s only sweet when he wants you to have sex with him, he only wants you for sex, he’s a full person but only cool because he’s in a band and has sex with you, he lets his band mates fuck you without your consent, he rapes you for whatever reason (y’all’s writings not mine), he doesn’t care about stopping to see if you’re okay or if you need a break.

basically what i’m seeing is that he’s only good for sex and some of the good fics about him only portray certain parts of him. like i’m all for writing about your favorite characters n what not but if you’re basically gonna treat his character like you’re personal boytoy and not see him as anything else, it’s really harmful. especially with y’all not tagging your fics correctly and the smut fics i previously mention get seen by a minor who would want to read smut of him but not that bullcrap.

y’all literally write him being abusive to his partner, not just physically but call it “teasing”. i’m sorry but if my partner said something about breaking up with me or that i’m not good enough, would i think that that’s just “teasing”? like honestly, if you treat all your ‘blorbos’ like this then i feel sorry for you because hobie’s an amazing character that isn’t just there for you to dream about fucking and getting pregnant by him.

he’s there to show you how corruption and fascism impacting your way of life can lead to you wanting to rebel and become an anarchist to that society. he’s there to teach you that you can make your rules, that you’re more than what one person tells you, you tell yourself what you wanna be. he’s a symbol for black people who don’t wanna follow the rules of a white supremacist, fascist society, for the people who’ve ever just been like “fuck the government, i’m my own person.”

i really feel like y’all take him for granted and he is a character for a children’s type of media so the “well minors shouldn’t be looking for his smut!!” doesn’t work here. honestly, do y’all ever care about characters that aren’t perceived as “fuckable” or “attractive” by your standards? it just really pisses me off because y’all act like that’s all he’s there for, your yearning for BBC has really dimmed your perception of this character. HES A IMPORTANT CHARACTER FOR YALL TO ROLE MODEL CAUSE ITS OBVIOUS YALL DONT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE MOVIE’S CHILD AUDIENCE BUT YOU GIVE A FUCK ABOUT HIM SO

if you care about hobie, please remember that there’s more to him than you wanting him to fuck you and he would hate the things that you’ve done to him because you have bigger issues in the world than “he would fuck you with his big cock.” LIKE WAKE THE FUCK UP WE COULD BE MAKING ANALYSIS OF HIS CHARACTER BUT INSTEAD YOU THINK THAT HES JUST THERE TO BE EYE CANDY LIKE OMGGGG

just please for the sack of everyone, learn more about his character and stop tryna be antiblack and sex crazed over him. if you love hobie, just stop being the way that you are because it’s honestly disgusting to have to see grown adults wanting a canon minor to fuck them. you ain’t slick, the fact that i even have to write this is disgusting. do better, fandom is more than saying that you would fuck a character, care more about the teenagers on this site that are in the fandom with you as well. stop being selfish and start caring about the other people in the fandom.

[nuancefem]

girl i usually agree with you but…what?? I understand you’re talking about radblr, but your post is almost word for word what people who believe in “female privilege” say. Outside of radblr, most people agree with you to an extreme. People in real life hate women and will always reach to make privileged women the focus of every problem, and will always blame women for any bad thing happening. Radblr is one very small pocket of tumblr where the opposite happens. A post about how “women can be bad people sometimes” is not needed.

shockingly enough after seeing a fuckton of disgustingly bigoted posts that were brushed off because the bigots were female, i had to say something! how libfem of me!! guess i lose my radfem badge!

who the fuck else is, right now, calling it out in radblr spaces outside of anti-radfems? sometimes outsiders have healthy criticisms that aren't totally unwarranted. marginalized women will still feel unsafe and want to call shit out when it's said about their male counterparts within those marginalized communities. as a wheelchair woman, the ableist bullshit i've seen brushed off the moment it's about a male person makes my blood boil. the insane rate of abuse against disabled people at the hands of nurses means that this shit cannot go unnoticed. i'm sorry but feminist activists are allowed to keep an eye on bigotry in their spaces and root out that bigotry, even if it makes you personally defensive since it includes female folks. if it wasn't necessary, why does that female bigotry keep spreading?? why isn't it magically fixing itself? sometimes we gotta face issues head-on, even if it involves issues that outsiders call us out on.

libfems brush off their internal issues all the time bc to them, it seems minor compared to their Real Issues tm. that is a common trend on the left, and i refuse to let feminist spaces continue it. i see an issue in our spaces, i talk about it. plain and simple. if we leave it all under the rug, it'll just fester and be horrible publicity for the movement. bigots only appear nice to fellow female folks of a certain marginalization bc they know they would face backlash if they said what they believe. they also still have an Us vs Them mindset about themselves as white/abled/higher-income/etc. if we're too cowardly to address female bigotry, and female abuse - especially maternal abuse - it means we're also failing the marginalized and vulnerable girls and women being harmed by those "females" as well as male victims of bigotry/abuse, who i know gyns tend to inherently care less about, as most radfems tend to be very vocal about, at least in jest. i personally prioritize female issues as well, but i still know that unrooted bigotry in any movement is a bad sign, and only gets worse.

many ppl say that white-passing issues are not worth talking about, or invisible illnesses don't deserve indepth discussions because visible poc and disabled people face worse things. but we hopefully both know that's bullshit, since they are impacted in a complex way, and to fight ableist society & racist society we need to know those povs. complex issues are ALWAYS worth talking about. to maintain a unified front, we need to root out bigoted rhetoric and tell fellow gyns that they MUST put in the work to unlearn the bigotry they learned growing up too. you can't just let gyns who don't face certain kinds of bigotry be let off scot-free in our spaces just because they limit themselves to mocking "moids" or whatever in bigoted ways. i'm sorry to say it, but i've been abused by many women, and faced bigotry at the hands of women, and i do breathe a sigh of relief everytime a feminist addresses it more than just as a quick defensive mention. female bigotry is often deeply affected by the patriarchy, so it's 1000% worth analyzing properly, and is necessary to defeat it.

i get where you're coming from, i do - we're always told to think of others instead of female issues, always told our issues are lesser. but leaving these issues out of our to-do list is not the way to deal with it.

white, abled heteropatriarchy actually BENEFITS from a radical feminism movement that isn't self-aware and won't clean up its bigoted members, or prevent bigoted female rhetoric. i don't tolerate hypocrisy or knee-jerk defensiveness. i don't tolerate bigots, period.

[hareofhrair]

Screenshotting because tumblr keeps shitting the bed when I try to post this, or reblog anything from OP, which I'm sure is for normal reasons. :)

I was just recently reading Pratchett's "The Wee Free Men" and it had a bit I think applies here.

"Every family in the village bought a copy of the Almanack every year, and a sort of education came from that. It was big and thick and printed somewhere far off, and it had lots of details about things like phases of the moon and the right time to plant beans. It also contained a few prophecies about the coming year, and mentioned faraway places with names like Klatch and Hersheba. Tiffany had seen a picture of Klatch in the Almanack. It showed a camel standing in a desert. She’d only found out what both those things were because her mother had told her. And that was Klatch, a camel in a desert. She’d wondered if there wasn’t a bit more to it, but it seemed that ‘Klatch = camel, desert’ was all anyone knew."

It's obvious, when thought through without the lens of racism, that the modern world exists everywhere, and that a continent where people have been living since 6000BC has probably developed beyond camels in the desert. But most people have no incentive to think it through, it's got no impact on their daily life, and so they just accept what they're shown. Which, because we live in a deeply racist society, is sepia filters and camels in the desert.

That's why it matters that American perspectives dominate media, and that so very little foreign media is allowed to get a foothold here. Unless they are curious and self motivated, all Americans will see of the rest of the world is a camel in a desert. They have to go out of their way to see otherwise, and Americans hate going out of their way.

I've griped before about the pervasive attitude towards foreign film in the US being that it is exclusively either boring art films or low budget garbage, but the way it exacerbates the cocoon of exclusively racist American perspectives we live in by discouraging people from even considering foreign films is insidious.

So US followers, this is your invitation to go watch a foreign film today! In fact, let me make it easier!

Here's a list of 10 important Palestinian films. Any of these is a great place to start. But they can be heavy, and maybe you're not a fan of dramas and want something a little lighter. Here's all the films from Southwest Asia and North Africa on Netflix, including plenty of action movies and comedies. Still not doing it for you? Here's a list of famous SWANA horror and fantasy films. Only into sci fi? Got that too! You want animation? Please god I love animation so much and America is the fucking worst about it. Pick any country in the world and it's probably making better animation than America.

If you can't find where to watch them, DM me any time and I will find them for you! I promise you will not be bothering me! I have a lot of free time and I fucking love movies!

So break the American media bubble and see what life is like in the rest of the world! What have you got to lose?

And if you're not from the US, why not throw down some movie recommendations!

[farfromstrange]

Thank you for your post. This just sucks major ass. It’s just you fight and you fight and you hope and believe but women are always seen as second class apparently and a distinguished brilliant woman who defied odds still wasn’t as good as a old white male FELON WHO TRIED TO OVERTHROW THE GODDAMN GOVERNMENT.

FUCK MAN WHAT THE HELL. What do we do next?? What’s the point of voting or even of fighting if we are continuously going to lose against fascism, racism, and sexism???

Men like to say they don’t hate women, but they don’t view us as human beings. They don’t respect us. They don’t believe we deserve any power whatsoever. And as soon as Trump was announced president elect their true colors started to show. Because it has been about controlling women from the start.

They’re terrified of women’s “liberal” views because we strive for equality. We strive for the right to make decisions about our own bodies, to feel safe on the streets, to take charge, and it threatens them. Because men think they are superior. And they don’t want to see women succeed unless they get something out of it. When a woman is in charge, they can’t control her. When a woman is more qualified than them, it hurts their egos.

They’d rather take away our rights than see women as their equals, let alone see a very educated and qualified black woman run the country.

It might not be all men, but it’s almost all of them.

Men hate women, and women hate women. I mean, it was a majority of white women who voted for Trump, and that already speaks for itself. It’s girls support girls until the girl in question isn’t a cisgender, straight white woman.

That alone is terrifying to think about, but we live in a patriarchal society that is harmful to humans of all genders. Women died to get us this far, but the fight is never over, not until the word patriarchy has become a term of the past. That might still be centuries in the future, but we have to do our part.

All we can do as human beings is use our voices. Germans have taken to the streets months ago and started protesting against the far right, and that particular party lost some percentage in votes. Not much, but it did something. It’s not a good comparison, but it’s an example of what using your voice for what you believe in can do.

Voting also does mean something. As hopeless as it seems right now, especially with what’s going on in the US and what has become of people, casting your vote is still casting your voice against racism and fascism and sexism and all the other bad -ism’s. It’s taking a stand. And there are other elections you can take part in in the future that aren’t a presidential election but that could still help.

One vote for Kamala was one less vote for Trump, but Americans and every other citizen of a country with a right-shift also need to use their voices to appeal to those many young men who the internet is turning into fascists. Racists. Women-hating and homophobic bigots. We need to use our voices to educate those who think their small-minded views are doing anyone any good. We need to debunk fake news, and we need to engage in politics as much as we can, even if it’s just signing petitions.

It’s important you don’t give up because voting is never pointless. Don’t let your voice be abused for something you don’t stand for, and don’t let it get to waste. Be angry. Stand up. But if we want to actually have an impact against those people, we can’t roll over and take it.

We need to spite them. We need to do our part because even the smallest steps could mean the world. Even the smallest steps have an impact.

All those of you in the US who voted blue need to protect yourselves, and you should research what you can do to fight back. You have some time before Trump will take the White House. People are starting to share important resources across all media. Read, inform yourself, and take a deep breath. Try not to panic.

You can get through this.

We don’t know what will happen next. A lot of the things that happened and are starting to come up are still unsure. But you shouldn’t abandon all hope. There will come a time where you don’t have to feel this way anymore, and that alone is worth it.

[eobarried]

ok let’s talk about miguel o’hara because it needs to be done. i want to clarify that this is not a hate post or anti-miguel in any sense, but it is a critical analysis of his character and role in the spiderverse. if you don’t feel like you can read this right now, i suggest you like it/save it for later and read it when you feel like you can with an open mind

especially for anyone who’s a miguel enjoyer (i consider myself one as well) because if you really love his character, it’s important to understand why his character was created and what a great narrative tool it is! anyway-

miguel o’hara is, allegorically, a bigot. 

now - let’s unpack and clarify that. miguel is allegorically a bigot - his character is used to represent a certain, specific type of bigotry we see in real life. notice how i’m saying “bigot” and not “racist” - because despite the memes, i don’t think miguel’s hatred of miles is rooted in antiblackness. i think it’s rooted in something a little more complicated, which is why i’m using the term bigotry. but this can be a little confusing, so let’s start from the beginning. or, at least, the most important part.

the canon.

i want you to really think about the word used here - canon. hearing that word should break the fourth wall for you, just like hearing “he’s got hammerspace!” should have earlier in the movie - or discussions different characters have surrounding their distinct art styles. it’s meant to break the fourth wall and draw attention to itself. specifically, the use of the word canon here is meant for us to take a step back from the in-universe events (treating the characters as “real” people and looking at events logically) and instead think of the spiderman story and mythos.

spiderman, as a story, has been told over and over again. we, as an audience, are deeply familiar with this story, as we’ve seen it as a live-action blockbuster in no less than three separate franchises. that’s not even mentioning all the cartoon adaptations, and of course the comic runs. adhering to a specific formula surrounding the story makes sense. when someone walks into a spiderman movie, they have certain... expectations. that no matter what version of spiderman this is, that they follow certain story beats and adhere to certain rules as they follow along in their journey. miguel, when explaining this to miles, focuses on said story beats (which i’ll get to in a second), but there’s something that’s way more important than specific plot points that we need to address here.

and that’s theme. 

theme (if you’re not an english literature person), is basically something you take away from the story. it’s usually a moral, idea, or concept that can be applied to the world around you, and helps you learn more about yourself, society, culture, or history. all stories have themes - usually they have multiple. so let’s get into it.

the original spiderman comic was notable in several ways. the thing that made spiderman so popular and successful is that he was the first (notable) teenage superhero that wasn’t a part of a greater team. spiderman wasn’t a sidekick that was written in to appeal to an audience of children. he was a teenager himself - but he was no less competent or strong than the (mostly adult) villains he fought. 

and not only was spiderman a kid - he was the kid. he was a nerd. he was an older white teen, yes - but he represented the type of person who would go out and buy a comic book more than any other hero at the time. before he became spiderman, peter parker was just kind of a geek. at the time (the 60s) this still identified him as an outcast. peter was socially awkward, not good with girls, he didn’t have many friends, and he was bullied consistently. the only thing he was good at was science, basically. we can connect peter’s original portrayal to many legitimately marginalized groups - specifically those that might be autistic and impacted by ableism. to those kids reading that comic, they saw a hero that represented them.

and how does peter represent them? what does spiderman teach these children by reading these comics? the original spiderman is the story of a man who, by chance, was granted the opportunity for greatness - to become an integral part of his community. spiderman uses his skills (both those granted to him by the spider, but also those that he inherently has, such as his skills with science and engineering), in order to prove his worth and merit. it’s lonely, the road he has to walk - he can’t tell his friends and family who he is, lest they become victims like uncle ben - or lest they betray him. he can only rely on himself and his own knowledge in order to protect his community. the themes we draw from spiderman are this: luck can strike at any time, but you need to use your own strength and intelligence to pull yourself up afterwards, no matter how hard things get. no matter how many people you lose.

that’s what miguel believes spiderman is about. this original spiderman story is that of the american dream. of a youth who is ostracized by society (for whatever reason), but is still able to use their own merit to overcome the obstacles placed in front of them and the grief and pain they face on their path to greatness. it’s a hard and lonely path, but miguel values anyone who has the bravery to face it.

so why does he hate miles?

because he didn’t do it alone. because miles doesn’t believe in the traditional american dream.

if you want to read more about that, check out my analysis comparing spider-society and visions academy over here (it’s not as in-depth as i would like it to be, but it gets the job done) but basically: miles believes that every person deserves greatness. he states it very clearly when talking to his dad about how he won the lottery to go to visions: he just got lucky. he feels as if he took an opportunity away from someone else. why is it just given to him, when anyone else at brooklyn middle is just as deserving of an amazing education? when these resources should be put to use to uplift his whole community, not just miles alone?

miles brings that same energy as a spider-person. he’s not just an anomaly because his spider was from a different dimension. he’s an anomaly because he had a mentor. not only a mentor - he had a whole clan of spider-people there for him. while peter b parker and the crew weren’t always very good allies for miles, they still wanted him to succeed. each spider-person was an outcast - not in the same way as miles, but they were eager to describe what miles needed to master in order to keep himself safe as a crime-fighter. although they weren’t always supportive, it wasn’t because they were “gatekeeping” - it’s because they were worried miles might hurt himself. to them, he hadn’t put in the work on his own, and because he hadn’t proven himself as a spider-person in isolation, they thought there was no way he could be successful as a spider-person during a very high-risk mission.

however, miles proves them wrong. it’s true that miles has to pull upon his own inner strength, but he also pulls on wisdom from those that mentored him - his father, his uncle aaron, peter parker, and peter b parker. as well as love and support from his community. miles became spiderman - but not in isolation. he had help, and support, and love - always - that helped him succeed.

because spiderman - in all universes - represents success in america. in the original comics, spiderman is able to overcome his status as an outcast in order to help his city. he now has great power - a potential allegory related to wealth and social or political status. he uses that power in order to protect the community he loves (nyc) as they can’t all protect themselves.

now let’s bring it back. miguel. right.

miguel has already made his mark as a spiderman. although we know he broke canon, it wasn’t related to him becoming spiderman. we can assume that miguel still went through serious struggle and trauma to get to where he’s at. and now, through thematic analysis, we know that becoming spiderman represents success in america.

so, miguel’s dislike of miles, thematically, connects to how older generations may believe that younger generations “have it too easy” or “don’t put in the same effort.” it’s the (mainly capitalistic) ideal that in order to succeed, it has to be in isolation, without outside help. we can infer that miguel is not only upset that miles didn’t do things “canonically” - but that he is afforded success that miguel doesn’t think he deserves. miguel believes that in order to succeed in america, one needs to do it on their own, and suffer in order to succeed. no “hand-outs,” no support, no community outreach. it’s a very rigid capitalistic standard - which is why i called it “bigoted.” miguel is still a marginalized figure - and it’s important that miguel is the one stating the viewpoint, not a white spiderman. because this isn’t a white vs black storyline. miguel’s dislike of miles is specifically a sort of generational, inter-community bigotry.

for someone who hasn’t experienced it - think of it like hazing. you join a new sports team. the senior players say “you carry the equipment out and clean everything after the game.” you ask “why? can’t we all just do it together? aren’t we supposed to be a team?” and they say “no. you’re the new guys. hard work builds character. deal with it.”

alright. so we took a look at canon through a meta-story lens. now let’s pull it back even further.

so, miguel’s ideology. he adheres firmly to canon, a series of events that cannot (or, should not), change. if we apply that to our lives, that sounds a lot like predestination. destiny. fate. let’s call it predestination for now - you’ll see why in a minute.

now, a belief in predestination makes sense. it can bring a lot of people comfort, thinking that horrible events are out of their hands, and often times it can be harmless to believe in predestination in these instances. for example: someone who blames themselves for not being able to say goodbye to a loved one who died suddenly. if this person believes in predestination, it might ease some of their pain and guilt to know that there was nothing they could do - that it was the will of some higher power that their loved one is gone, and that there was nothing they could do to prevent it. some individuals might find comfort in knowing that they are not to blame for the work of the universe.

however, predestination can also be malicious. thinking that things are the will of the universe, or the will of god... that’s been used for some pretty fucked up stuff in the past. in a more moderate (and topical) example - royalty. many kings used the concept of predestination to explain why they deserved the crown. their bloodline was chosen by god himself - that’s why they’re powerful (compare to spider-people and their success. if they are also predestined for their spider-bite, doesn’t that make them akin to monarchs?)

in more nefarious examples, predestination can be used to subjugate and oppress others. predestination was used in ancient indian society in order to justify the caste system - utilizing the hindu concept of karma to justify why certain members of society were mistreated and oppressed. in a more american sense, predestination was often used as a way to justify both slavery and segregation. originally, slavers tried to justify that god wanted black individuals to serve as slaves because it was his will. later, when divine intervention fell out of fashion, they attempted to use eugenics to justify that black individuals were simply born inferior - that it was just science, and that there was nothing they could do about it.

that’s the other reason it’s called canon. the original usage of the word was to refer to the books of the bible that the church recognized as legitimate. it ties back to faith and religion. 

now, religion, faith, and even the belief in fate itself - are not inherently bad. miguel’s belief in predestination doesn’t make him a bad or bigoted person inherently. however, the way he forces other to believe and adhere to it is. it’s very likely that miguel became so attached to the canon in order to justify why his wife and daughter died - in order to remove his own accountability for their passing and instead place the blame on some higher power. this belief snowballed out of control, however - and now influences his jealousy and distaste for miles and his way of life.

because forcing a canon - a story - on miles, is wrong. when miguel tells miles that his father must die, that he has to adhere to canon - that’s a horrible thing to say to a young black boy. to tell him that in order to be successful as a marginalized individual (to be spiderman) that he has to lose the last black male role model he has? it’s heinous! it’s akin to telling miles that in order to succeed, he has to cut ties with part of his culture. which does happen to young marginalized people in america. they are told that in order to be successful, they have to leave their culture, community, and support system behind.

it’s especially sinister when looking at it from the point of view of storytelling. when looking at it from that angle, miguel is basically telling miles that in order for his story - the story of a young black boy - to be profitable, he has to go through even more trauma and loss. it’s similar to what his guidance counselor mentions when discussing how miles should write his college entrance essay - that he should lie, and emphasize that he struggles while growing up, and that his support system was unstable. it’s the traditional story of a struggling black boy - which i discuss more here when talking about earth 42 miles and his inclusion in the spiderverse.

miguel’s bigotry is centrally tried to his idea of what american society expects of marginalized individuals who were able to achieve their dreams despite it all. a story of pain and struggle. one where they were able to - only through their own strength and intelligence, and maybe with a little bit of luck - pull themselves up, and quietly work towards their own success.

miguel’s belief in the american dream and predestination not only influences his treatment of miles, but also his creation of spider-society. now, let me be frank: miguel, in this franchise, is not supposed to represent someone who created systematic oppression. he’s simply one of the people who believed in bigoted ideals and allowed those ideals to influence his decisions. because when miguel created spider-society, it basically became an elitist isolation chamber. spider-society is located in a huge tower on miguela’s earth. the tower is so tall and imposing on the utopian landscape, there’s no way that miguel is able to properly support his own community as spiderman - he’s not worried about what happens to his own community. especially once we learn that a good portion of them live underground, where miguel can’t even see them. even if he wasn’t occupied with anomalies at all times, there’s no way he could even connect with nueva york around him.

the same can be said of all the spider-people in headquarters. they’re not even in their home dimensions. how can they possibly support their communities when they have isolated themselves as far away as they could literally be? it parallels how successful individuals often treat their communities in reality - what do wealthy people usually do at the first sign of their wealth? they build a huge mansion to get away from it all. many times in our capitalist society, wealthy and successful people abandon the communities they should be supporting. 

miguel represents that. he is a successful, powerful person, who decided to focus only on other successful, powerful people like him. marginalized people who achieved the american dream on their own. people who, instead of uplifting others, instead tear down those who don’t fit into their “mold.” who are successful in their own right, but don’t hold the same ideals and values that they do. who aren’t the model example of marginalized success in the eyes of the (white) american “audience.” 

miguel is a product of a great problem within society. while he partakes and perpetuates bigotry, that doesn’t mean that he’s irredeemable. the narrative shows that miguel is a broken man. if we think about to the end credits scene from itsv, where he calls his dimensional travel bracelet a “goober” - he wasn’t always so hateful. he wasn’t always like this. he can un-learn his bigotry and he isn’t completely lost. the way that he discusses his ideas - it’s clear that he knows that there are flaws in them, just as other spider-people consistently point out. he can be changed and improved - just like our real leaders and role models can be changed and improved. miguel is not without saving - but it’s important to remember that he does need to be saved. 

[earlmothraoffangbanger]

Thoughts on Community, Media Literacy, and How One Conducts Themselves on the Internet.

Before I get started I would like to preface this with the fact that I am currently sick from coming off of medication. I will do my best to be coherent and concise in my writing. Thank you for your patience. Feel free to send Asks if you would like to hear more from me or need clarity.

CW: Mild mentions of abuse, SA, as well as harassment in general. Feel free to not read, your mental health is more important than my ramblings.

In this section, I will cover things I have seen in the trans community that I feel need to be addressed. The most pressing issue I feel is this presumption of guilt or innocence based on an individual's gender identity. Point blank I want to say it is not okay to assume ill of someone purely based on their gender. This is misogyny and there's no other way to skin it.

I've seen this weird idea that Trans Women are infallible to criticism or being called out on bad behavior just because they are trans women. On the opposite side of the spectrum, I have seen people say that all trans men are terrible based on the fact that they are men. If you believe this you are playing into misogyny and mysoginysic ideals. No one is absolved of criticism in this world especially if they are actively doing bad things. You can still be a trans ally by calling out the bad behavior of a trans person just because they're being a bad person or behaving poorly isn't a reflection of their transness it's a reflection of who they are as a person as a whole.

The whole point of the feminist movement is to give people more freedom regardless of gender. To break down the barriers that gender poses. This is not only for cis women but trans women as well as cis and trans men and people who fall under the nonbinary umbrella. Saying trans men have it better than cis and trans women is actively counterintuitive to this goal. Saying cis men have no issues is also counter-intuitive to this goal. For example, many men are taught the only emotions they can have is happiness, anger, and horny and because of this many cis men have poor emotional regulation While this can and does harm society we also need to remember the negative impact this has on cis men be it men that fall under the binary as expected by society, are nonconforming to said societal standard, or trans men who are already not seen as a man enough for some people and constantly have their manhood under fire. Cis men also continuously have their manhood under fire if they dare show any sort of "vulnerability" such as crying or actually being in love with someone. This also comes back around to harm cis and trans women as they can be seen are not feminine enough if they have even just one masculine trait.

This is not to say that cis men don't have an advantage in society, I am painfully aware of this fact. We just need to remember misogyny affects EVERYONE.

Another thing I notice is that trans women can tend to be treated overly delicately which is something that stems from how society treats women in general. For example, there is this media "critic" (if you know me you know who I'm talking about) who despite having actively harmful and downright racist and fatphobic takes on the media she attempts to criticize there are those who think she can do no wrong because she is trans. Her fan's arguments are always "She is a trans person of color there by default you are over-criticizing her." This is actually harmful as it the person in question is not expected to take any responsibility for any of her harmful retoric and actions. And that's just about her takes on media. I'm not even going to get into to the actual allegations of crimes levied against her.

I'd like to conclude this section that just because someone is (insert characteristic here) doesn't mean that they are by default a good or bad person. you need to look at them as a whole and what they're actually doing and saying.

Next, I just want to say not all media has to be happy and nice to be good media. Some media has darker stories to tell and in doing so bring concepts to people that they may not have thought about before. For example, I would have never known that my father was abusing me had I not watched shows that painted his exact behavior as abuse and not okay. Up until that point, I had just thought "Well dads are just like that." Sometimes the stories that are being told bring much-needed awareness to those who need it. That is not to say that you have to consume this media I'm just saying it has a right to exist and a purpose.

Lastly, this is a comparatively small section but I feel is just as important. If you tell people that you want to rape or sexually abuse them or you tell them to kill themselves or you doxx them you are a bad person. There's no other way to look at that. I've seen so many people do this over just little things like disagreeing on headcanons or even someone just liking a character. This could not be a more extreme overreaction. Stop doing this and if you see people close to you doing this stop them too they deserve consequences for their actions. It's disgusting when people get away with this.

Thank you for reading my rambling and have a good day!

[dapg-otmebytheballs]

tell me what the video Basically, I’m Gay means to you?

It was way past midnight for me when the video dropped. The first thing I felt when I saw the title was, inexplicably, fear.

Or well, I can guess at where the fear came from. I've known what it's like being outed, I've felt that same kind of fear every time a family member brought up anything queer, that feeling of "oh god they know, do they know? what's going to happen now?" and I've never quite gotten over it. I knew it was a long time coming, but over the years it has become such an unspoken thing, the elephant in the living room, that my knee jerk reaction was to brace myself. I remember immediately getting up and getting into the washroom, locking the door, knowing that whatever it is gonna be I'm probably gonna want some privacy with it XD

And I did, I laughed and cried and remembered the best and the worst parts of being queer, but what I loved was, it didn't just feel like a confessional or an address or vlog. It was a proper essay, it was divided up so well and coherently, taking the biographical elements and basing thematic segments based on the issues that crop up at each stage in the journey. It is incredibly personal as such things often are... but it remains to me first and foremost beautifully academic.

Maybe that makes it boring or less impactful for some people. Personally, I was never one to watch personal accounts of oppression and call them "poignant". I've read and seen plenty, I offer all the strength to people who share them, I see the merits of it, but none of those accounts stick with me. What has stuck with me, over the years, what has genuinely moved me, is political and academic accounts of oppression. I feel more seen in them, I feel like they go to the crux of the issue, I feel empowered by them.

Yk why? Because if Dan had just talked about how he was bullied and his fears and insecurities, too many people could have easily looked away. Too many people can see those accountants say "well I'm not like that". When I read academic and politically charged accounts of oppression what stood out was the clarity. There's no obfuscation, there's no mystification, there's no 'oppressed' with vague faceless figures of bullies ('oppressors'), there's named methods of oppression, of validating those oppressive systems in the smallest ways that people are quick to ignore. Even now within queer circles we see so many people reinforcing oppressive systems, being casually misogynistic and racist and transmisogynistic and a number of things that they look away from because "I'm queer I can't be oppressing myself".

I understand personal accounts and I think they're great, but I do not like when these things are pinned on faceless bullies and a nebulous idea of "society". Who is "society"? No one knows. This is why it mattered so much to me that Basically I'm Gay wasn't just a story about overcoming struggles but also a systemic exploration of power systems and various facets of existing as a queer person in a queerphobic world. You can't look away from that. And the reason it sticks with me is precisely because of that, because the topic is given the political seriousness which it calls for.

Ik, we've watched Dan grow up before our eyes, ik this is deeply personal for so many people. But I much prefer when it's political honestly. I much prefer when it's academic. And I am much more moved emotionally by it because I find it a lot more empowering. I don't wanna talk about how oppressed we are without talking about how we are oppressed, by whom are we oppressed, how are these systems being kept in place. That's what BIG means to me, something that didn't shy away from making it political when it could have been left personal.

[kentuckycaverats]

Is there anything in particular about New Orleans that has drawn your eye for use as a domain?

yeah there's a whole bunch!!

i read this book a few years ago, the new orleans voodoo handbook by kenaz filan, about the history of nola through the lens of new orleans voudou, and how as both a faith and a practice derived from those of haitian immigrants to the city, these folk magics are really inextricable from the history of the city overall. im really interested in what voudou means to those who practice it and am captivated by the idea of like, what is life like for kinfolk in a city where there IS belief in the supernatural baked into the history of the city itself? what does that mean for the masquerade?

in vtm canon nola is important to a bunch of different splats; obviously there's a significant kindred presence, especially in the french quarter; the garou have considerable uktena/glass walker/bone gnawer populations, and there's a black spiral dancer and a pentex base there; the mages have two competing chantries and strong technocracy roots; it's a hotbed of glamour for kithain and under the banner of the unseelie court; there are soooooo many wraiths and a large piercers of the veil chapter; and given all the monsters running around, there's a hefty hunter presence and one of the oldest society of leopold cenacula in north america

a lot of vtm games seem to skew pretty white american/european, and while there's a ton of french influence in nola there's also a bunch of really interesting haitian, caribbean, and african american history and mythos to delve into. from what ive seen so far (unsurprising from white wolf) a lot of the canon lore re: voudou and african vampires is super racist so we're gonna retcon that shit real hard.

nola doesn't have an extensive underground sewer system, so the nosferatu warrens are not traditional warrens and i get to figure out a fun alternative for that!

in canon nola hurricane katrina decimated the local kindred population, along with the rest of the city. irl katrina obviously had an impact on nola still felt to this day and i think there's a lot of interesting material to work with there too. what was it like for kine vs kindred vs other kinfolk during that time? how has that history shaped the way supernaturals get by in nola? how did power dynamics shift in the city as a result? and so on

mardi gras/carnival. can you imagine

[dogmetaph0r]

10, 13 (alfie - i mean i have to - plus one of your choice) and 14 for salty asks game 👉👈

OOOH HERE WE GOOO

10. Most disliked arc? Why?

I didn’t not like it narratively, but I didn’t particularly enjoy the whole arc of trying to get Linda and Arthur back together :/ I did appreciate it in a “fellas we are never breaking the cycle” way, but it kinda drove a wedge between me and my enjoyment of Arthur’s boyfailure arc at some points. Linda kinda reminds me of my adorable little WASP-y mom so seeing her threatened and upset because a man will do anything but go to therapy……eugh, hard watch.

13. Unpopular opinion about XXX character?

Alfie - this is gonna maybe be a bit controversial (or not? idk it took a while for me to wrap my noggin around the vibes) but……I don’t think Alf is all that religious? He is very very involved in his community and seems to be a well respected member of Jewish society in Camden Town, but idk how much he really practices in his day-to-day. I could be entirely wrong (would be happy for a Jewish PB fan to correct me if I am, and honestly I much prefer the headcanons that imply it matters a bit to him because as you’re about to see….I love cultural exchange) but Alfie’s irreverence and self-deification don’t really come across as terribly devout to me. If you consider the non-TV works to be canon, he definitely seems to be of the impression that nothing really matters beyond the carnal. He does seem to believe in a God, but that God’s existence isn’t really consequential to him. So I think his Jewish identity is more forged in community than shared reverence! I can relate, in a way; I never practiced Catholicism, but because my entire dad’s side did and I grew up in a highly Catholic neighborhood, it impacts how I interact with the world. So that’s how I kinda see it: it’s not the religion that he practices, but more the identity of someone raised with the religion.

I also wanna doooooo……..

Polly - she wasn’t always a wise, rational woman throughout the show. There were plenty of times she acted out of anger, fear, stubbornness… and while I do love that we kinda treat her as our voice of reason, she’s still as flawed as the rest of them. I feel like I’ve seen a lot of fics fall into the idea that Polly knows everything. It makes for a good story driver, but I feel like that unfortunately just doesn’t encompass who Polly is as a person. I don’t wanna ramble super long AGAIN but I think a lot of her interactions with/about Michael kinda demonstrate that. She’s easily blinded by her fear of loss in particular, and in a way it’s very similar to Tommy’s motivations. I think that’s part of why they butt heads sometimes. I’d like to explore that more myself!

14. Unpopular opinion about your fandom?

Oooh boy, this one is kinda tough to say. But I think we have a looooong way to go as a fandom in terms of cultural sensitivity. I know we’re working with source material that already has a pretty problematic and shallow way of going about Romani characters, but I think it’s our duty as fans to sorta….grapple with that a bit? Address it with nuance? Or at least listen to POC, particularly Romani, creators who take issue with the things done in the show and in fan content. There are SO many aspects of the show itself that play into racist stereotypes about Romani people, and I’ve seen a number of tropes and fic concepts that revolve around those stereotypes in particularly shocking ways (for example, maybe don’t have “sold to the Shelby family” or “magical g**** fortune teller” as a plot point??? Many levels of inappropriate to that). I do largely give people the benefit of the doubt because I know that not everyone knows what to look out for, especially if they themselves are not targeted personally by bigotry in their communities, and fewer people know where to go to figure that out…. but I feel like specifically Romanichal culture is a strong enough theme in the show to warrant SOME promotion of cultural research. Of course we all have work to do (I’m no exception, and I wholeheartedly welcome concrit if anything in the story seems off) but I feel like some people really lean into exoticism and stereotypes without any unpacking of why they’re doing it. And, when other people express discomfort, I’ve seen more than once the sort of response that sums up to “well so-and-so said it’s not a slur/bad trope/stereotype so I’m gonna keep using it”. Thankfully it’s less prevalent here on tumblr but it’s still a problem! Let’s rid ourselves of the idea that any one culture is a monolith! Cultural exchange and education are exciting! Decolonize your writing! Respect and an open mind go a long way!

BUT YEAH basically that’s it teehee :•)

[septembersghost]

Am I a bad person if I really want to listen to Taylor today...not excusing her but I miss her music so much

anon bestie. first, *hugs*. second, i do not know how to stress, plead, implore enough with you all that loving music is not a moral or immoral action. yes, of course there are particular artists i myself would never engage with (and that is due to extremes), and there are artists i just don't like for whatever reason and that's subjective. on the "i would never engage with ___" side, i can say that for myself, confidently understand why, yet recognize i still don't have the right to tell others to follow suit. people have different boundaries, different tastes, and different ways of going about separating their enjoyment from other issues.

i know there's sincere concern about supporting "problematic" artists, particularly financially, and i do think that's an important conversation to have, especially when we're discussing people actively doing harm to others or platforming hate speech. taylor is not an abuser, taylor has not been trumpeting racist or homophobic etc rhetoric. i also realize the issue of complicity has come into play here because of that man, and that's why there's so much anger and hurt and disappointment right now, but ask yourself: does that man, who is not in any way, shape, or form a part of any of her music, have the power to steal that from you? do you feel like you have to suffer the loss of her music, which is clearly valuable to you, over one dirty rag of a man? i've been upset and critical too, but also feel like there's a call for perspective here. taylor alison swift is not causing the world's ills. tbh that man has no significant power or influence even compared to, like, a local politician. bigotry should be confronted and called out. at the same time, this is a microcosm of a conversation, and that doesn't mean it's not important to have it, and that doesn't mean people aren't absolutely valid in their criticism or hurt, what it means is that it is not impacting society as a whole. we get very caught up in fury over small things, especially when it's connected to something we are invested in, because it feels simpler to fix or righteous in some way or like the onus is on us to definitively prove we're upstanding people who don't condone harmful things, and that's fine, but at what point does it become futile? at what point are we just screaming into the void and self-recriminating for approval?

part of what's making this harder is we've connected taylor's music to her very personally, and she has fostered that herself, but i think now is the time to change that a bit. detach it from her however you can and think about what it means to you. you singularly not listening to her on streaming is pennies she won't ever notice are gone, it is causing her zero consequence whatsoever, but it sounds like it's hurting you. that, to me, isn't fair. you're suffering for her mistakes? or because that dude is a dirtbag? you do not have to punish yourself and crawl on your knees for forgiveness because you'd like to play my tears ricochet every once in a while. how exactly is the moral burden on us, as listeners, when we aren't condoning any -isms, we just want to hear songs we love?

i sound hyperbolic here but i'm really serious, it's concerning me that we're tying individual morality - am i a bad person inherently? (bad people don't tend to ask this question because they don't care). does listening to this artist whose work i enjoy taint me in some way because they've done things i disagree with? - to enjoyment of art. it's frighteningly conservative to think that you and your character should be called into question because you love something that isn't causing any outside harm. engagement with art cannot make you a bad person! it's (if you've seen the good place) chidi and his almond milk. we're damning ourselves for miniscule actions and so trapped in the anxiety of that it causes far more important things to slip by. what matters is what we do, how we engage with others, how we take action in the world.

the fact that you're worried about this, which means you've been aware and empathetic during this time, proves you care and are not a "bad" person. i haven't been listening to her and it's not because i think that's giving me moral high ground (it isn't), it's because i am very sensitive and don't want any of that music emotionally tied to what's been going on because i do actually want to go back to it someday, it's too cherished and too intrinsically part of me not to, and at the moment distance itself is healing. i also don't believe her music being such an aspect of my heart says anything about my moral fiber, you know? if i suddenly wanted to listen to red tomorrow, i'd give myself permission to do so knowing it is no measurement of my intellect or my moral integrity, and we've got to stop acting like art can make you good or evil.

sorry this became a very long soap box essay! but i'm worried at how much of this specific idea, of someone so far removed from us making a bad choice reflecting on you and making you personally responsible or irredeemable for that, is being perpetuated. listening to an artist because they make you happy or bring you comfort is not having a measurable impact on human rights or global crises, and it just feels super unfair that we're burdening and judging each other with this idea that enjoyment or passion for something harmless makes you fundamentally bad. the world is hard enough. i promise you that it's okay to allow yourself joy.

[ipoddymouth]

Wait bestie I want to know your thots on the matty healy being problematic thing he’s said a lot of weird/offensive stuff for sure but apparently some of that stuff is supposed to be satirical/ he’s an edge lord or whatever like the n*zi salute thing he did and it’s not a good thing to do no matter the context but I feel like it’s probably more harmful to call him a n*zi when he isn’t actually one it’s probably better to call that action antisemitic than a whole n*zi no?

wait gjargigjag you just basically summarized my thoughts but imma ramble more under the cut

i dont think matty is actually, truly, deep in his core racist or a n*zi (i'm also p sure he's given enough interviews explaining himself and his political ideologies bc he's annoying and never shuts the fuck up) BUT he also does say a bunch of shit on the side that doesn't help his case.

i think intent is a big issue in society in general bc it's like 'are you saying this shit to be funny? or are you saying this shit to be mean?' and people don't ask that question anymore. i remember when ariana dated pete and he made that joke about manchester and people were like 'he's disrespecting the dead!!' and, like, i can defs see where people are coming from for sure, and i can also see why he was like ???? in response to the backlash because his attention clearly wasnt to offend.

i will not lie and will fully admit that i am SENSITIVE lmao and there are some jokes in standup sets that i will straight up 😐 during bc i cannot separate the words from intent sometimes but im not going to say bill burr is a rape apologist or whatever because i sit and watch my silly lil 'offensive' robot chicken episodes without batting an eye. the problem with humor is that there will always be a faction that makes certain people uncomfortable. and that's okay!!!! not all of us (me included) need to watch cumtown or red scare because we will not find it funny!!! there's one drag queen who's yt videos my boyfriend cant watch bc he thinks she comes across mean even though i think the jokes hit!!!!

and to your second point i agreeeee like im black and grew up in a p white area so obviously people have said some SHIT to me, but that means you have to learn how to distinguish between someone being intentionally racist or someone being ignorant. i think matty says shit he thinks is funny because he's trying to be funny but the jokes themselves don't hit and just come across as....bizarre? rude??? multiple -ists???? but then he tries to explain himself and people (strangers to him) are either like 'fuck u this isnt sincere' or are just like 'but youre still wrong and horrible' and he just gets frustrated and deletes his socials in a lil baby fit gjlragjaglgj. and not to be a white apologist lmao BUT i kinda do understand why people turn to that 'anti-woke ideology' bc if every time i said something with poor phrasing and someone i didn't know called me a racist n*zi i'd probs go ape shit too.

there are real, actual n*zis like in real life who are actually trying to hurt people and people are pulling out all of their big gun ultra-bad labels for some scrawny boy band dude???? like what are we supposed to call the actual n*zis???????? like i l i t e r a l l y have seen a neo-n*zi rally down the street from my HOUSE and thats fucking TERRIFYING and they're just snatching up more people because of all of the culture wars bullshit

[but like to note im not saying that people need to be forgiving and understanding every time someone says something that pisses them off. some people need to be yelled at!!! they need to know they are wrong!!!! people should just be aware of the impact their words have. matty's words have made A LOT of people straight up hate him, but at the same time, some people have probably seen matty get called a n*zi and are now like 👀 bc the bar to being considered h*tler seems kinda low.]

anyway tl;dr racism is a spectrum, words have meaning, and we don't know these people. but if matty really is a racist and im wrong then i hope he chokes!!!

ALSO i am an adult and am not in the business of defending other adults so like im not gonna argue with someone if they think matty is racist. i am not doing dirty hit pr for FREE

[wvldorf]

Like you pointed out I think so many clubs are almost exclusively brands (looking at you PSG) that they'd be cynical enough to roll with it to some extent and straight up give the player a nice, heartwarming slap in the back to show they're not outright discriminating, but likely would try to dissociate themselves or discourage the player from actively being an advocate in a way that directly impacts their brand. Their biggest interest would be to keep a semblance of status quo that somewhat gives the player a feeling of living his truth, but not being progressive enough as to piss off their target audience, which is predominantly the white, racist, homophobic part of society. Basically smile and wave, but never directly threaten the toxic masculine fragility. It'd def be a marketing and PR limbo tho but i could see this happening.

god im so sorry i havent seen this ask sooner. but yeah exactly. they’d be publicly supporting it if they didnt have a choice but wouldnt expressively be the ones advocating such actions. im happy clubs are taking actions supporting queer communities within their fanbases though. i’m obviously biased thinking about that arsenal tweet yesterday but im sure they’re not the only ones doing it. its just nice to see clubs with enough significance to be examples on an international scale to strictly condemn homophobic actions. i think we might have a chance of seeing it getting better with time and hopefully less conservative people in charge of clubs/federations as well as more diverse communities starting to be prominent (if not greater part) in fanbases which was maybe not the case years ago will allow stances to evolve overtime. but yes i just truly hope it’ll only get better onwards and the faster the better tbh because we’re basically talking basic human rights and respect of private life which shouldnt be out of reach even for athletes or public figures.

[kiara-cruz-sunken-place-thoughts]

Blog Assignment #1 - Kiara Cruz

This excerpt is 536 words 

In the first two weeks of this class, not only have I allowed myself to absorb what Black Horror means, but I’ve garnered a sense of empathy relative to underlying and deeper messages the film entails. As a first generation Latina, I have grown up surrounded by several separate instances of micro aggressions seeping into my average day of life. The discrepancies of experience between a minority in an open space full of people who look distinct from you is truly daunting. 

I wanted to take this class to learn more about the metaphor of the Sunken Place and how Black Horror has evolved to empower navigating the truth revolving around racist behaviors. With that being said, the movie, “Get Out,” and our discussion surrounding themes and subliminal messages creates an important impact that I find important in modern media. Specifically, instances like the micro aggressions Chris’ character faces throughout the entire film makes one actually cringe hearing them said. With this being my 4th time watching the film, I had noticed new things that I hadn’t noticed before; this goes to show how intricate and purposeful the film is. During the “so-called” party, where Rose’s Dad calls Chris over to meet some of his friends, one guy asks, “Do you feel there are more advantages or disadvantages with the African American experience today?” It felt strange hearing that because although I’ve seen this scene before, it felt as if I completely missed it the first 3 times under the lens of analysis. Knowing that each white character at the party is scoping out Chris on whether they want his vessel or not shows the audience that it’s more than a physical liking, but also a desire to fill out nuanced needs and desires: his eyes, being hip, being a “trend”. This understanding  showcases an underlying social reality behind being a minority. The theme of isolation also coincides with Chris not only feeling as if no one understands him, yet also looking around and accepting no one looks like him. 

Psychologically, it’s a hard thing to endure because you start to question your identity. Black Horror is an awakening to how cruel our outside world can be and has been. Even with the ending of “Get Out,” hearing there’s an existing alternate ending left me shocked. When the police door swung open and seeing “AIRPORT” written across, I felt my body become less tense as I knew Chris wouldn’t face the normalized and expected reality of our society. Then, watching the alternate ending on YouTube I saw the truth behind what would’ve happened in that scene. Black people are sent to prison for far less than what Chris went through and the justice system fails them each time. Knowing that Jordan Peele wanted to stray away from typical endings for black people, coming from non-black directors, proves the aesthetics of Black Horror. Directors are always quick to make black people go to jail, die, or worse. That hopeful moment and relief at the end of the film, “Get Out” isn’t always the case. I really believe that this film was an important turning point in Black Horror and how racism can be portrayed in creative, yet dark ways.

[assenavlp]

Oprah and AI

I watched this primetime ABC propaganda sh¡tshow so you all don't have to.

AI AND THE FUTURE OF US AN OPRAH WINFREY SPECIAL

I hadn't heard or seen any press for this show, and just happened to see the listing as I was trying to find something to watch, a few nights ago, but I wasn't sure if I really wanted to watch it or not - lol - so I scheduled it to record, just in case. Finally bit the bullet, yesterday.

The recording caught the last bit of a political ad, before the show began. It warned that "Biden & Harris want to force you to buy an electric car". LMAO And awayyyy we go…

The show (and segment one, of five) cynically begins with a group of everymen/women expressing confusion, doubt, ambivalence, and suspicion. All the better to commence giving you the soft sell, my dears…

THE AGENDA

Oprah: "I was Bedazzled, Fascinated, Curious, and also Concerned. But there is no doubt, it is Here."

She began by breezing through a very basic timeline of the notion and progress of AI, over the last 70 years, and promised, a couple of times, that the show would be "not so technical".

It should be noted that in this hour and four minute-long programme, at no time do they speak of the mass theft of art, music, or literary works (let alone personal data and images shared on social media). 'Cuz who cares about them highfalutin artistic types? Gatekeeping snobs and weirdos, man. 'Ah don't know anything about art, but Ah know what Ah like.' They don't even touch on the issue of likeness theft. They do speak of it, in regards to fraud, later on, but not in regards to creative works, for which there was that whole actor's strike. I see you going to the SAG Awards, Ms. Winfrey. [Buh Gok!] Nor do they speak on the mass of false advertising. They also don't get into the massively detrimental environmental impact. Shocking.

Meta admits scraping every adult Australian’s public post to train AI, no opt-out https://www.diyphotography.net/meta-admits-scraping-every-adult-australians-public-post-to-train-ai-no-opt-out/

Without further ado, the woman who brought us all such greats [chuckle] as Dr. Phil, Dr. Oz, and the book, "A Million Little Pieces", now brings (to the general public) the so-called Effective Altruist*, OpenAI CEO, Sam Altman.

At about 7 minutes in, in the most earnest, pandering tone, he says, "the most important thing that will happen here is, everyone in the world will be able to create at a level that is still hard for us to imagine. This is gonna be an enabler of human ability to create, to flourish, to make new things, to create new companies and services like we've never seen, and we want eeeeverybody to get to do that, not just the white dudes", as he stares directly at Oprah. LOL

Oh, the sweet, sweet 'democratization of art', you bad, bad, racist and ableist anti-AI folks. [rolling eyes]

Of course they allow him to express concern as he pays lip service to safety and regulations, as fellow sociopaths Elon, Jeff, and Mark, all grace our screens, and he speaks of regularly working with the Executive Branch. Mm hmmm. The folks who love their corporate donors. Okay. Go on.

Oprah: "How do we know we can trust you?"

Sam: "The bar on this is clearly extremely high, um, the best thing that we can do is to put this technology in the hands of people, talk about what it is capable of, what it's not, what we think is gonna come, what we think might come, give our best advice about how society should decide to use this. Um, say when we think it's important to not release something, which we also might get wrong, and build up that trust over time. But it is clear that this is going to be a very impactful technology, and I think a lot of scrutiny is thus super warranted."

Oprah: "I actually saw a headline, that said you were the most powerful, and perhaps most dangerous man on the planet, and I'm wondering how that sits with you."

Sam (holding back tears - really): "I…. It's definitely strange to hear you say that. It doesn't… I don't feel like the most powerful person or anything even close to that, uh, like I feel the opportunity, the responsibility in a positive way to get to nudge this in a direction that I think can be really good for people. And that is, like, that's like a serious… exciting, somewhat nerve-racking thing, um, but it's something that I feel very deeply, and I, and I, and I, and I realise how I'll never get to touch anything this important again."

We really needed some violins, here.

Oprah goes on to express her "concern" over the "nefarious" ways some have already used the technology, but then goes on to gush how "calllm" and "relatablllle" he is, and thus, "it seems like everything is okay"…. And he, in turn, replies that he doesn't want to give anyone "a false sense of security", that "there will be bad, too", and that they'll "mitigate, as much as we can" [whewwww, lol] acknowledging full well that "this technology will be misused"… Then he quickly slips in another one for everyone's AI-Bro Bingo card: "like every technology before it…"

Oh, how they love that canard.

*Effective Altruism: letting billionaires amass their fortunes, untaxed and unregulated, so that they can 'benefit' society the way THEY, alone, see fit. Yeah, no.

Then there's a commercial break and they bring back the common folks, for segment two, gushing about their kids using AI to "draw" (yeah, no) dinosaurs, and using the simplified AI filters on TikTok (See? Folks are already using AI, no biggie, lol), using it to generate 'reference' material for sermons, but "never" actually using the raw product (no, of coooourse not), and their fears, shock of all shocks, are slowly being allayed. Apprehensions of "how it will eat you alive" now gone, by "talking to it". Who could have seen this miraculous reversal coming? LOL

HOLY S*** (Their asterisks, not mine.)

Next on the docket is Marques Brownlee, YouTube tech-expert, displaying the exponential improvement of fake videos, in just the past year - of course to Oprah's shock and disbelief - explaining how they're generated by referencing millions of photos. He did explain that "there really isn't any good set of rules" despite some embedding watermarks or meta data so that those who know how to look deeper will know it's fake. i.e. maybe 5% of the people looking at this crap, and at the moment, those folks can tell just by looking anyway.

Then Oprah plays at being the everyman, too, by expressing real concern, especially after he demonstrates a voice generator with his own voice, but of course, she gives him the opportunity to allay those fears; going back down the well-worn 'we've seen this before with new technology' trail that every tech-bro loves to travel, including Sam, in the previous segment. Am I sensing a pattern?

Marques: "I'll say I've seen this story before. Cars, in general, went through this; smartphones, of course, went through this; computers went through this; the Internet went through this; where at their very formative years, they're really, really confusing and potentially amazing but potentially horrible, and eventually, you know, humans sort themselves out, to lay the rules down in a way that we can actually trust that will be better than it is bad. So I've seen this story before and I'm hoping it plays out the way it's played out before."

Oh, that makes me feel so much better, because this all-encompassing technology is absolutely no different than any other technological advance we've seen throughout all of recorded history. No, not at all. [cough]

Next up are Tristan Harris, Technology Ethicist, and Aza Raskin, creator of the Infinite Scroll, talking about the incredible speed of the tech, the ills of "social media addiction, doom-scrolling, and polarization", and how he, Aza, "learned the hard way" that his "good intentions as an inventor just wasn't enough". Ya don't say. He did challenge the aforementioned "every tech" narrative by pointing out that the various problems of cars (eg. seatbelts) took decades to resolve. Of course he doesn't mention that cars, even still, are killing us every day, from their planned obsolescent over-production and resultant waste, to the continued fossil fuel dependency and pollution (or all the rare earth mineral mining devastation that electric alternatives will incur)….

Aza: "Once AI can do anything, people start to use it to do everything."

Tristan: "That's what's so confusing about AI, is it's going to give us all these benefits at the same time that it's undermining the foundations that we depend on, and you can't separate the promise from the peril, so I think instead of getting caught up in the question, "is AI gonna be good or is it gonna be bad", it's about, "is it happening at a pace that our society can respond appropriately."

Oprah: "But guys, it's here. It's why I started this programme by saying it is here."

Tristan: "Open AI's stated goal is to be able to build systems of AI that are even smarter than humans because there's trillions of dollars to be made on the other side…."

Oprah: "What do you want to see happen, now?"

Tristan: "OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, they need to be held accountable for the harms that they would create so that they're all incentivized to pull back, and go at the pace that they can help society be prepared and not be overwhelmed."

Oprah: "And who is holding them accountable?"

Tristan: "We need laws."

HA!

Back with some more everyfolks, segment three begins with the spectre of real life scams and the harm they cause.

BAD GUYS

FBI director Christopher Wray is trundled out to talk more about deepfakes and scams, and ch¡ldp0rn and sext0rt¡on using faked images.

Oprah: "Do you think we have the laws or regulations in place, now, to keep Americans safe from all that's coming, all the AI threats?"

Christopher: "I would probably leave legislating to the legislators, but what I will tell you from an FBI director's perspective, um, is that this is a type of technology that we see manifesting itself in more and more situations, more and more types of crimes, more and more types of threats, uh, and there's a degree to which, overall, our laws haven't kept pace with the technology."

Oprah: "Does that frustrate you?"

Christopher: "Sure, yeah, sure. What I worry about is the day, which is coming, it's not here but it's coming faster than we would like, where those, um, elite bad guys will find AI sophisticated enough to take their game to a-whole-nother level."

Oprah: "And the elite bad guys are doing what?"

Christopher: "So the elite bad guys are the ones, you know, for example, conducting the most sophisticated cyber intrusions. To me no country, no country represents a broader, more severe, more comprehensive threat to American innovation, American ideas, to our Economic Security, and ultimately our national security, than the Chinese government. China has a bigger hacking programme, already, than that of every major nation combined, and has stolen more of Americans' personal and corporate data than every nation, big or small combined. The scale of the threat is significant. If you took the FBI's programme, and just said forget Russia, forget Iran, just do nothing but China, the Chinese government's hacking programme, they would outnumber us 50 to 1.

Oprah: "We've got an election coming. Do you think this election cycle will be compromised by disinformation?"

Christopher: "I fully expect to see, um, disinformation by foreign adversaries. We are finding, all too often, that something on social media that looks like Bill from Topeka or Mary from Dayton is actually, you know, some Russian or Chinese intelligence officer on the outskirts of Beijing or Moscow."

Don't worry about the homegrown stuff. [shhhh]

Oprah: "What should we be on the lookout for?"

Christopher: "All Americans should try to be, you know, more discerning consumers of information. It is incumbent on everyone in America to bring an intensified sense of focus and caution to the use of AI, and how AI can be used by bad guys against all of us, but not to panic I don't think this is a time for panic."

So, in sum: Chinese and Russian AI, baaaaad. [furrows brow] American AI, goooood. [thumbs up] Nothing to see, here!

Back to the everypeople, and the fear of job losses, immediately followed by the old 'but there will be newwww jobs' cliché, and then the folks who were suspicious but they looove it, now, and the folks who aren't worried because they're "irreplaceable".

HEALTH, EDUCATION & JOBS

Oh! Bill Gates! Quell surprise.

Microsoft's Hypocrisy on AI https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2024/09/microsoft-ai-oil-contracts/679804/

Long story short: medicine is going to be sooo much better. And education, too!

Bill: "We can see it's already working pretty well."

Oh, really?

Kids who use ChatGPT as a study assistant do worse on tests Researchers compare math progress of almost 1,000 high school students. https://www.popsci.com/technology/kids-who-use-chatgpt-as-a-study-assistant-do-worse-on-tests/

And robots can do the blue collar jobs, too! (Including fruit-picking, on all that farmland he's been buying up.) Yayyyy, replicants! [facepalm]

Oprah: "What are the jobs that you believe are going to be undisturbed? What skills are going to persist in these, in this new world?"

Bill: "Yeah, that's very hard to make a prediction. I mean there'll be aspects of creativity, there'll be aspects of appreciating, uh, people [said as if under duress, lol], you know, social work, the teacher really engaging that student in the rich way. Even then I can't guarantee that software won't eventually get good at that, but you know, for the next generation, the more human, the more engaged you are with other people [so, not artists], that is a skillset that is in such short supply, whether it's mental health or education, that we can never have enough of that."

I dread to imagine what his visions for future mental health services are.

Oprah: "I mean I've expressed several of my concerns, but do you have none, do you have no…"

Bill: "I have significant fears about the risks. This is the first technology that is happening faster than even the insiders expected."

Oprah: "It's happening faster than you guys thought?"

Bill: "Absolutely."

Oprah: "Do you think that your company, that, that Microsoft, and other companies that are gonna make a lot of money off of AI have an obligation to help us manage and navigate through this change?"

Bill: "Absolutely. The fact that there will have to be regulation, that the way we think about taxes will have to change quite a bit. If the companies are working with the government, then at least we can craft something that's, that's not just profit-driven."

Regulations that you and your lobbyists craft? [chortle]

Oprah: "But what did we miss with the Internet and social media that we can use to apply now, to this moment of AI?"

Bill: "Well, I, I would say, speaking for myself, personally, and, I think, many others, that we were a bit naïve."

Ya don't say.

Stephen Fry: Musk and Zuckerberg have 'polluted culture' ""I’m the chump who thought social media could change the world," he told his audience at the Digital Futures Institute." https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ceq5q3jlnz3o

Bill: "We thought the Internet, the availability of information would make us all a lot more factual. The fact that people would seek out kind of a niche of misinformation, we were a bit naïve."

Okay, then.

Back to the everyones… and what it is to be "human". HA! "As a religious person, one of the things that I reflect on is "be careful about comfort because too much comfort is actually going to make your life worse, not better, because it'll decrease your over all capacity." (An actual good point.)

IRREPLACEABLE HUMANS

The final guest, Marilynne Robinson, novelist, is the lone 'creative' on the show.

Marilynne: "The impulse behind it seems to be to eliminate the human hand, the human eye in the making of the reality that we inhabit to the farthest extent possible. With the effect of, of, um, concentrating power in the sense of the control of this strange fantasy, uh, within very few people's hands and consolidating masses of capital, and masses of natural resources devoted to this very dubious project. It's just a human impulse to escape from its humanity, which is something that happens over and over again, historically. The impulse to say, uh, that there's nothing intrinsic about a human person, that cannot, in theory, be replicated by something that, frankly, works cheaper, works faster. I don't know why it is but it's part of our human lot to be uncomfortable with our humanity, and to mechanize it, you know, out of existence in some way. We're not enough in love with our own existence, and we're not enough in love with everyone else's existence, and I think that's very dangerous." [chef's kiss]

The same reason transhumanists are so obsessed with living longer and more artificially. They don't love - or respect - the time they have here. They want more, more, more.

Oprah: "What is the thing that concerns you the most?"

Marilynne: "I'm afraid that there will be so much investment of every kind into this project, that it will have its consequences before it really deserves them, and so there will be all kinds of cutting back on all kinds of employment and so on, anticipating this insurgence of, of AI, and then it will turn out that it's a, it's a bad project, you know, that it's more dangerous than it is valuable, and so on, and so we will have a disrupted economy on the one hand, and an unusable technology on the other."

Mic drop!

Oprah, ignoring the words of the preacher before the segment, persists…

Oprah: "But it's also going to, no question about it, it's going to make life a lot easier for a lot of people, so what's wrong with that?"

Marilynne: "American schools ask for a lot of written work from students, and that's a very good thing. It's an autonomy-creating exercise, you know. But what we don't do, we don't tell them that this is a discipline, like an athletic discipline that they have undertaken to strengthen themselves, not just to bring themselves over some arbitrary line of sufficiency."

Never mind the physical process of writing, learning cursive, etc., which too many deemed unnecessary, despite all the literature demonstrating otherwise.

Oprah: "That it's the discipline of doing the work and the thinking process."

Marilynne: "Exactly. And students say writing is difficult, which of course it is."

Oprah: "It is."

Marilynne: "But difficulty is the point."

Oprah: "And so if you were in charge of this whole AI movement, what would you be doing or what would you advise?"

Marilynne: "I would advise that it be used for, you know, the kind of research that produces drugs and immunizations and so on."

Sure. With MUCH oversight. But then again…

Revolution, interrupted One of the promises of machine learning was better drugs, faster. A decade in, AI has failed to live up to the hype https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-artificial-intelligence-drug-research-hype/

Marilynne: "I would, uh, I would make a fantastic library. I would use it very, very judiciously to replace work that is drudgery without the arrogance of replacing the work of people who, you know, who are of very great value, you know, just because they are the substance of our ordinary interactions with the world."

Oof. There's MY personal sticking point. "Eliminating the drudgery." She was careful to make a distinction but I fear that nuance will be lost on most of the people already sharing that hackneyed meme. Everyone wants a replicant to do the stuff they think they're above doing. Doesn't end well.

Oprah was still desperately trying to make the case, though, retreating to the same old "fear of the new" and "nostalgia" arguments, asking how this time is different. Sometimes I thought, maybe she's just playing Devil's Advocate, with some of these questions? It was interesting that she gave the final word to someone who had the most philosophical viewpoint. But nahhh. Marilynne then compared it to The Manhattan Project. HA! Another mic drop.

And then Oprah's final thoughts, on this peak Boomer TV:

"A special thank you to everyone who spoke with us, tonight. I hope that they have left you with a clearer picture of what is coming. Artificial intelligence is still beyond our control, and to a great extent our understanding, but it is here. We're going to be living with technology that can be our ally as well as our rival. It is something that no other generation has ever experienced. This moment requires a different level of alertness, awareness, about who we are, and where we're going, what's real, and what's not, what's artificial intelligence and what is human wisdom, authentic intelligence earned through study and experience. We are this planet's most adaptable creatures. We will adapt again but keep your eyes on what's real. The stakes for all of us could not…..

And then the recording cuts out. [GUFFAW]

-30-

[jellibelli123]

This channel, ooooo!!! Fucking hell, they really went the route of Kerzgesagt in a nutshell whenever politics, specifically climate change, was a video topic. And my radar has been pinging alerts in recent videos up until this point where it went on full alert.

For those who dont know KIAN went under controversy having donors like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a foundation who has a history of publishing articles that benefit their investment interests, specifically the odd Carbon Catchers KIAN was promoting in any Climate change video as well as the typical "vote with your dollar, its your responsibility" kind of propaganda similar to the late 1900s early climate activism instead of giving real meaningful solutions LET ALONE POINTING THE BLAME ON THE ACTUAL PROBLEM MAKERS, the corporations.

That and the usual "gdp makes the world better" when its not entirely accurate let alone applicable to people who existed without gdp and lots of todays systemic problems like homelessness before getting fucking colonized and genocided, like the SikSika who Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is based off of before being edited to fit a hierarchical society because of death threats from racists. See this for more details about that specifically.

Back to the video in the image

Yeah that was this video, "Just take these three sentences as lenses and put them together to make a better world! Oh and go donate to provide real impact!" And nothing else.

Note i haven't checked who their donors are if they have any, I am pointing out that they sound 1-1 how kerzgesagt did.

But it gets worse!

Their source: Our World In Data which they basically just repeated a statement article from it's CEO (nonprofit my ass). Now in the beginning while my alarms were going off, I decided to dive into this site I've never heard about.

- I first looked at who made it, Oh oxford! Calmed me down a bit...

-oh hey who's this other guy. GCDL? Global Change Data Lab! Sounds like scientists same as Our World in Data! I take a look at them, a non profit. Ok, so who's their donors?..........well wouldn't you know it, but a primary donor is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation!! Panic

But OH IT GETS WORSE!!!!

Ignoring all that because people still do trust the B&MGF, I decide to hold these guys by their word. If they have everything statistics about the ENTIRE WORLD, surely they have stuff about Palestine?.... :3

...surely they would right?

......right???

WELL YES as a matter of fact!

Oh thank god!

Oh sweet summer child the only good thing I found was that it listed Palestine as a country, which shouldn't be a plus cause that's the bare minimum.....but a plus whatever.

Taking a deep dive into many of the graphs they have which are plentiful, I noticed the numbers...were low...and the graphs not going past the year 1950.........uh oh.

I decide to look for death graphs...found not a lot of bumps in coorilation to the many atrocities we've seen happening in real time...

Some graphs where it noted per 100,000 people, it was sometimes 10 deaths-1k deaths depending on what it was focusing on.

NOW TO THE WORST PART

I went ahead and focused on "Deaths in Interstate conflict based on where they occurred". Can you guess how much they had from the Nakba, allllll the way till now?

Nope, lower

Lowerrr

Not even close, here:

A whopping flatline...

Now surely I hear you say, I got something mixed up, scrolls a little bit

Surely I got my Intra mixed with my Inter, maybe I need to select the check marks on the side! Maybe oh maybe scrolls a little more

Oh! Gotcha there, you thought I was going to compare it to the wrong example graph for Ukraine right? Hahahahah-

.......still 80k deaths listed here too, just like in the example graph I definitely didn't almost accidentally use ahahahahahhhhhhhhhhhSILLY!!

But fr fr here's the actual graphs I almost compared incorrectly!

Note according to the site they only list something if it causes 25 deaths a year....the most that's listed on Palestine's graph is 2,287 total deaths in 2014. Not "notes about per 100k", total.

Note that Ukraine's number which I went back and hovered over the spike in 2022 when russia invaded, still shows 80k~ deaths total.

So...what gives?

Well that's just what happens when science gets boarded with Imperialism from corporations and governments; one of the oldest tales in the book of sciences history we are trying to undo today.

The data, can lie.

Always remember to ask who this benefits, my fellow leftists. Is it the people, or those in power?

Always look up opposing info where you can, especially if you are in the US...

Thank you for my ted talk that will more than likely not reach anyone but whatever! Life of a furry I guess lmao!

......anddontsaythegayfurryhactivistgroupLMAOOOO