#is a labor revolution story

[isawthismeme]

[lord-squiggletits]

i know i’m late to the conversation—i just watched the movie this month—but i feel compelled to say this because i was genuinely shocked (still am) to see that the overwhelming takeaway for many viewers was the "d-16/megatron was right" bs. while it’s understandable to sympathize with his anger and grief, justifying his actions in the end or framing them as entirely right feels so deeply misguided. what surprised me even more was the tendency to shift the blame on orion/optimus, as though he was solely responsible for d-16’s downfall. it’s disheartening to see orion/optimus being villainized so much. his efforts to reason with d-16 came from a place of desperation and hope, as he tried to prevent the escalation of violence. at that point, d-16 had already begun to spiral into his unchecked rage, disregarding the safety of those around him. to see that nuance overlooked, with orion being faulted for a situation that was far beyond his control (the whole "don't be like sentinel" thing is often used to shit on op lol), is genuinely baffling.

while i love that the movie showed the tragedy of d-16’s arc and even empathize with his situation, painting his actions as justified—and vilifying orion/optimus in the process—feels like a misreading of the movie’s core message. sorry but i was so happy to see your post about the movie, it was tiring to see so many 'megatron was right about this and that' comments.

Oh man if you're new to this fandom, you really ought to know that this place is full of people who glorify terrorism and war in the name of "justified revolution" and it doesn't really matter what Dee/Megatron does or how horrible/over-the-top it is, he's oppressed or he's mentally ill or he's just plain upset which means that everything he does is justified and questioning him makes you evil.

It's so funny because I hoped for sure that a continuity where both OP and Megatron were working class individuals before the war would reduce this kind of shit take (compare to something like archivist/librarian OP and gladiator Megs in TFP or CBV, or cop OP and miner Megs in IDW1), but unfortunately this fandom literally still found a way to blame Orion for everything even though he suffered the exact same things Dee did..... and furthermore Orion literally was the rebel challenging the system compared to Dee who wanted to keep his head low and not cause trouble so honestly at this point I just think the fandom (and somehow new fans whose first exposure to TF is this movie) purely sides with Megatron on everything as either a knee-jerk reaction or some misguided attempt at being counterculture and intelligent.

People get sooooo mad when you tell them that unbridled rage and killing everyone who disagrees with you isn't a good social/political strategy, but then again this is a problem that is universal to humanity and not just the Transformers fandom. It's just a shame that so many people looked at a movie that blatantly spells out what the moral of the story is, and has all of the protagonists be working class oppressed people fighting against a tyrannical system, and their takeaway from it is still basically "fascism is okay if you're mad enough about it and if your friends try to stop you it's a sign that they're centrist liberals who think punching Nazis makes you as bad as a Nazi." It's childish black-and-white thinking masquerading as critical literary analysis.

And at this point people pretty much just don't give a shit about Orion/Optimus and will find a way to make him the villain no matter what the context is, no matter if he also has feelings or if he also deserves to be respected/listened to/validated as Megatron's long-time (possibly lifelong) friend. If ppl look at the way Dee treated Orion and their other friends and DON'T see what was concerning about that then there's really no saving them until they deradicalize a little and learn what usually happens when "kill all the bad people until society is a utopia" is implemented as a governing party's primary strategy.

[outstanding-quotes]

He’s dwelling on the lost in “lost his job” —lost— as if the eight hours of sweat at the heart of each day could be misplaced. Why call it lost if it’s been taken from you? Lost is a lie, and without such lies the streets would be crowded with assassins.

Stuart Dybek, “Nighthawks” in The Coast of Chicago

[beggars-opera]

On the road leading into the center of Concord, Massachusetts, there sits a house.

It is a plain, colonial-style house, of which there are many along this road. It has sea green and buff paint, a historical plaque, and one of the most multi-layered stories I have ever encountered to showcase that history is continuous, complicated, and most importantly, fragmentary, unless you know where to look.

So, where to start? The plaque.

There's some usual information here: Benjamin Barron built the house in 1716, and years later it was a "witness house" to the start of the American Revolution. And then, something unusual: a note about an enslaved man named John Jack whose epitaph is "world famous."

Where is this epitaph? Right around the corner in the town center.

It reads:

God wills us free; man wills us slaves. I will as God wills; God’s will be done. Here lies the body of JOHN JACK a native of Africa who died March 1773 aged about 60 years Tho’ born in a land of slavery, He was born free. Tho’ he lived in a land of liberty, He lived a slave. Till by his honest, tho’ stolen labors, He acquired the source of slavery, Which gave him his freedom; Tho’ not long before Death, the grand tyrant Gave him his final emancipation, And set him on a footing with kings. Tho’ a slave to vice, He practised those virtues Without which kings are but slaves.

We don't know precisely when the man first known only as Jack was purchased by Benjamin Barron. We do know that he, along with an enslaved woman named Violet, were listed in Barron's estate upon his death in 1754. Assuming his gravestone is accurate, at that time Jack would have been about 40 and had apparently learned the shoemaking trade from his enslaver. With his "honest, though stolen labors" he was then able to earn enough money to eventually purchase his freedom from the remaining Barron family and change his name to John, keeping Jack as a last name rather than using his enslaver's.

John Jack died, poor but free, in 1773, just two years before the Revolutionary War started. Presumably as part of setting up his own estate, he became a client of local lawyer Daniel Bliss, brother-in-law to the minister, William Emerson. Bliss and Emerson were in a massive family feud that spilled into the rest of the town, as Bliss was notoriously loyal to the crown, eventually letting British soldiers stay in his home and giving them information about Patriot activities.

Daniel Bliss also had abolitionist leanings. And after hearing John's story, he was angry.

Here was a man who had been kidnapped from his home country, dragged across the ocean, and treated as an animal for decades. Countless others were being brutalized in the same way, in the same town that claimed to love liberty and freedom. Reverend Emerson railed against the British government from the pulpit, and he himself was an enslaver.

It wouldn't do. John Jack deserved so much more. So, when he died, Bliss personally paid for a large gravestone and wrote its epitaph to blast the town's hypocrisy from the top of Burial Hill. When the British soldiers trudged through the cemetery on April 19th, 1775, they were so struck that they wrote the words down and published them in the British newspapers, and that hypocrisy passed around Europe as well. And the stone is still there today.

You know whose stone doesn't survive in the burial ground?

Benjamin Barron's.

Or any of his family that I know of. Which is absolutely astonishing, because this story is about to get even more complicated.

Benjamin Barron was a middle-class shoemaker in a suburb that wouldn't become famous until decades after his death. He lived a simple life only made possible by chattel slavery, and he will never show up in a U.S. history textbook.

But he had a wife, and a family. His widow, Betty Barron, from whom John purchased his freedom, whose name does not appear on her home's plaque or anywhere else in town, does appear either by name or in passing in every single one of those textbooks.

Terrible colonial spelling of all names in their marriage record aside, you may have heard her maiden name before:

Betty Parris was born into a slaveholding family in 1683, in a time when it was fairly common for not only Black, but also Indigenous people to be enslaved. It was also a time of war, religious extremism, and severe paranoia in a pre-scientific frontier. And so it was that at the age of nine, Betty pointed a finger at the Arawak woman enslaved in her Salem home, named Titibe, and accused her of witchcraft.

Yes, that Betty Parris.

Her accusations may have started the Salem Witch trials, but unlike her peers, she did not stay in the action for long. As a minor, she was not allowed to testify at court, and as the minister's daughter, she was too high-profile to be allowed near the courtroom circus. Betty's parents sent her to live with relatives during the proceedings, at which point her "bewitchment" was cured, though we're still unsure if she had psychosomatic problems solved by being away from stress, if she stopped because the public stopped listening, or if she stopped because she no longer had adults prompting her.

Following the witch hysteria, the Parrises moved several times as her infamous father struggled to hold down a job and deal with his family's reputation. Eventually they landed in Concord, where Betty met Benjamin and married him at the age of 26, presumably having had no more encounters with Satan in the preceding seventeen years. She lived an undocumented life and died, obscure and forgotten, in 1760, just five years before the Stamp Act crisis plunged America into a revolution, a living bridge between the old world and the new.

I often wonder how much Betty's story followed her throughout her life. People must have talked. Did they whisper in the town square, "Do you know what she did when she was a girl?" Did John Jack hear the stories of how she had previously treated the enslaved people in her life? Did that hasten his desperation to get out? And what of Daniel Bliss; did he know this history as well, seeing the double indignity of it all? Did he stop and think about how much in the world had changed in less than a century since his neighbor was born?

We'll never know.

All that's left is a gravestone, and a house with an insufficient plaque.

[fans4wga]

"The studios thought they could handle a strike. They might end up sparking a revolution"

by Mary McNamara

"If you want to start a revolution, tell your workers you’d rather see them lose their homes than offer them fair wages. Then lecture them about how their “unrealistic” demands are “disruptive” to the industry, not to mention disturbing your revels at Versailles, er, Sun Valley.

Honestly, watching the studios turn one strike into two makes you wonder whether any of their executives have ever seen a movie or watched a television show. Scenes of rich overlords sipping Champagne and acting irritated while the crowd howls for bread rarely end well for the Champagne sippers.

This spring, it sometimes seemed like the Hollywood studios represented by the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers were actively itching for a writers’ strike. Speculations about why, exactly, ran the gamut: Perhaps it would save a little money in the short run and show the Writers Guild of America (perceived as cocky after its recent ability to force agents out of the packaging business) who’s boss.

More obviously, it might secure the least costly compromise on issues like residuals payments and transparency about viewership.

But the 20,000 members of the WGA are not the only people who, having had their lives and livelihoods upended by the streaming model, want fair pay and assurances about the use of artificial intelligence, among other sticking points. The 160,000 members of the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists share many of the writers’ concerns. And recent unforced errors by studio executives, named and anonymous, have suddenly transformed a fight the studios were spoiling for into a public relations war they cannot win.

Even as SAG-AFTRA representatives were seeing a majority of their demands rejected despite a nearly unanimous strike vote, a Deadline story quoted unnamed executives detailing a strategy to bleed striking writers until they come crawling back.

Days later, when an actors’ strike seemed imminent, Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger took time away from the Sun Valley Conference in Idaho not to offer compromise but to lecture. He told CNBC’s David Faber that the unions’ refusal to help out the studios by taking a lesser deal is “very disturbing to me.”

“There’s a level of expectation that they have that is just not realistic,” Iger said. “And they are adding to the set of the challenges that this business is already facing that is, quite frankly, very disruptive.”

If Iger thought his attempt to exec-splain the situation would make actors think twice about walking out, he was very much mistaken. Instead, he handed SAG-AFTRA President Fran Drescher the perfect opportunity for the kind of speech usually shouted atop the barricades.

“We are the victims here,” she said Thursday, marking the start of the actors’ strike. “We are being victimized by a very greedy entity. I am shocked by the way the people that we have been in business with are treating us. I cannot believe it, quite frankly: How far apart we are on so many things. How they plead poverty, that they’re losing money left and right, when giving hundreds of millions of dollars to their CEOs. It is disgusting. Shame on them. They stand on the wrong side of history at this very moment.”

Cue the cascading strings of “Les Mis,” bolstered by images of the most famous people on the planet walking out in solidarity: the cast of “Oppenheimer” leaving the film’s London premiere; the writers and cast of “The X-Files” reuniting on the picket line.

A few days later, Barry Diller, chairman and senior executive of IAC and Expedia Group and a former Hollywood studio chief, suggested that studio executives and top-earning actors take a 25% pay cut to bring a quick end to the strikes and help prevent “the collapse of the entire industry.”

When Diller is telling executives to take a pay cut to avoid destroying their industry, it is no longer a strike, or even two strikes. It is a last-ditch attempt to prevent le déluge.

Yes, during the 2007-08 writers’ strike, picketers yelled noncomplimentary things at executives as they entered their respective lots. (“What you earnin’, Chernin?” was popular at Fox, where Peter Chernin was chairman and chief executive.) But that was before social media made everything more immediate, incendiary and personal. (Even if they have never seen a movie or TV show, one would think that people heading up media companies would understand how media actually work.)

Even at the most heated moments of the last writers’ strike, executives like Chernin and Iger were seen as people who could be reasoned with — in part because most of the executives were running studios, not conglomerations, but mostly because the pay gap between executives and workers, in Hollywood and across the country, had not yet widened to the reprehensible chasm it has since.

Now, the massive eight- and nine-figure salaries of studio heads alongside photos of pitiably small residual checks are paraded across legacy and social media like historical illustrations of monarchs growing fat as their people starve. Proof that, no matter how loudly the studios claim otherwise, there is plenty of money to go around.

Topping that list is Warner Bros. Discovery Chief Executive Davd Zaslav. Having re-named HBO Max just Max and made cuts to the beloved Turner Classic Movies, among other unpopular moves, Zaslav has become a symbol of the cold-hearted, highly compensated executive that the writers and actors are railing against.

The ferocious criticism of individual executives’ salaries has placed Hollywood’s labor conflict at the center of the conversation about growing wealth disparities in the U.S., which stokes, if not causes, much of this country’s political divisions. It also strengthens the solidarity among the WGA and SAG-AFTRA and with other groups, from hotel workers to UPS employees, in the midst of disputes during what’s been called a “hot labor summer.”

Unfortunately, the heightened antagonism between studio executives and union members also appears to leave little room for the kind of one-on-one negotiation that helped end the 2007-08 writers’ strike. Iger’s provocative statement, and the backlash it provoked, would seem to eliminate him as a potential elder statesman who could work with both sides to help broker a deal.

Absent Diller and his “cut your damn salaries” plan, there are few Hollywood figures with the kind of experience, reputation and relationships to fill the vacuum.

At this point, the only real solution has been offered by actor Mark Ruffalo, who recently suggested that workers seize the means of production by getting back into the indie business, which is difficult to imagine and not much help for those working in television.

It’s the AMPTP that needs to heed Iger’s admonishment. At a time when the entertainment industry is going through so much disruption, two strikes is the last thing anyone needs, especially when the solution is so simple. If the studios don’t want a full-blown revolution on their hands, they’d be smart to give members of the WGA and SAG-AFTRA contracts they can live with."

[foone]

I know "ruining kinks by overthinking them" is one of the skills listed on my resume, but I think I'm especially bad for hypnosis.

Like, I can't help thinking (HAH! HYPNOSIS JOKE!) that if putting people in a functioning trance was as easy, reliable, and powerful as these stories suggest, it wouldn't primarily get used for sex.

It'd get used for work.

And I don't even mean the obvious "hypnotize people into working for free" slavery-with-extra-steps thing. I mean jobs people voluntarily take.

You'd get hypnotized to do your manual labor job without getting bored and tired and to cut down on how much you'd goof off on the job. Basically turning people into fancy robots.

And that's the thing: people would accept this, because it'd make working many types of jobs easier. Imagine going to a job where you walk in and the black out and 8 hours later you walk back out with some sore muscles and a paycheck.

That'd certainly be preferable to a lot of shit jobs. I'm sure people would accept that. And even if they don't, if it's not illegal, it's not like there aren't shitty things that bad jobs make you do anyway.

Anyway: these are the kind of things I think about whenever a story has easy + powerful hypnosis. Why isn't this being used for work instead of sex? Either the people with this power/tech are sex-obsessed fools, there's weird limitations on it (like "it can only be used for sex"), there was a labor rights revolution offscreen to ban it from being used in employment, or there's a whole weird world of hypnotized blue collar workers just offscreen.

[ryin-silverfish]

Musing on Chinese Religion and Respect 2: Electric Boogaloo

...Sometimes, even mentioning the dumpster fire of discourse feels like you are adding more fuel and stopping it from dying out, which is why this unfinished draft has been lying in my folder for a long, long time.

Let's just say, I'm both angry enough to finish it because of recent stuff, and calmed down enough to try and write something at least a little productive and informational to casual readers.

---

In my previous musing, I've mentioned that vernacular novels are Not Scriptures, even though characters from vernacular novels did get worshipped in Chinese folk religion.

Well, the part of JTTW adjacent fandoms who don't make that distinction tends to reduce it to "You can't ship Buddhist monks and Buddhist deities"...but with the curious exception of SWK.

And honestly, the idea that 1592 novel Sun Wukong, who's completely uninterested in sex and romance because that's not his allegorical function, needs to experience Love and Passion and everything encompassed by the umbrella term Qing?

It's already there in the late Ming Supplement to the West.

Well, he needs to experience Qing in order to realize its emptiness and illusory nature for that particular novel. In a way, the modern SWK romances are our quirky continuation of that tradition.

But these folks aren't interested in symbolism and non-literal reading, just "I've been telling people not to ship Buddhists/monks, but SWK is also a Buddhist and I'm into a SWK ship, how do I reconcile my own arbitary, conflicting and frankly unnecessary standards".

(Oh, the Ming lewd monk jokes and "monastery = places of gay" association y'all have no idea of...)

Most simply handwaved it with "He's not a Buddhist in this adaptation" or "Well if we disallow SWK shippings we'll have very little popular pairings left".

Okay, you do you, though I dunno who has given you the idea that shipping needs some kind of Seal of Approval in the first place.

Maybe it's the tiny minority who take the enforcement of vows of celibacy over fictional Buddhists way too seriously, and believes that:

SWK is clearly part of the Buddhist pantheon

Calling him a fictional character = calling the religion fake and thus being disrespectful

If SWK is to be considered a fictional character, then one is also saying that every other member of the Buddhist-Daoist pantheon that appeared in vernacular novels are fictional.

There are so many holes in this argument, it's hard to know where to begin, but this is kinda symptomatic of the Dumpster Fire Stuff I'll be getting into later, so bear with me for a sec.

First: What kind of god is SWK in the context of IRL Worship?

Sun Wukong attains Buddha-hood at the end of JTTW novel, but outside of the story, he is not exactly a "Buddhist" god in the same way Bodhisattva Guanyin is.

Rather, he is an amalgation of vernacular fiction, Xuanzang's IRL pilgrimage, Chinese monkey legends, and monkey worship in Fujian (which didn't worship a specific god that's exactly like Novel! SWK prior to the novel, but a bunch of monkey deities).

He is best classified as a folk religion deity, whose worship is highly regional in nature, and mostly popularized by the Ming vernacular novel.

It is also perfectly normal and not too uncommon for IRL Chinese Buddhists and Daoists to think of JTTW as just fiction. In fact, there are Chinese Buddhists who personally find JTTW disrespectful because it turns historical Xuanzang into a caricature.

In the autobiography of Yang Jie, the director of JTTW '86, she mentioned that she tried to get a renowned Buddhist named Zhao Puchu to write calligraphy for the title, and he refused because of his rejection of JTTW's portrayal of Xuanzang.

(The crew also got barred from a temple on Mt. Jiuhua, whose monks were like "Your Party destroyed our temple and statue and forced us into hard labor during the Cultural Revolution, I'm not letting y'all in here if you won't even offer a single incense and pay your respect to the Bodhisattva.")

(However, in another temple on the same mountain, the monks are very curious about the filming process, helped the director when she nearly had a heat stroke, and welcome her warmly when she revisited the temple several years later.)

Heck, going back 400+ years, in Pu Songling's Liaozhai Zhiyi, he made it pretty clear that he doesn't believe in Sun Wukong as a religious deity, despite writing a story about the Great Sage!

Are the IRL Buddhist monks, who actually received ordination and lived in a temple, "disrespectful" because they don't believe in a folk religion deity from a vernacular novel and prefer to stick to the more canonical sutras?

Are you somehow "disrespectful" for liking JTTW novel and adaptations, just because some monks don't like it?

Clearly not. You can be a faithful monk, priest, or lay Buddhist/Daoist while still seeing SWK as a fictional character. You can just be one of the atheist/agnostic majority who enjoys JTTW as a good story.

You can be a lay practitioner who believed in SWK as a more Daoist god, or straight-up didn't care about what the Buddhists said, like folk religion had always done——"Care not for canon nor scriptures nor orthodoxy, only that your prayers and offerings work and your deity is pleased."

Heck, to use Argument #3 as an example, you are perfectly capable of thinking SWK is a fictional character, while believing that all the other Daoist gods and immortals are real, because the variant of folk religion pantheon you grow up takes more inspiration from institutional Daoism than JTTW.

Like, seriously, if you want to be really doctrinal about Buddhist canons, you shouldn't even be worshipping SWK or treating JTTW like sutras.

Conversely, if you want to worship SWK like his IRL folk worshippers, it will do you well to acknowledge the laid-back, diffused, widely diverse nature of Chinese folk religions and stop beating people with the "respect" stick.

Second: Again, what Does "Respect" Even Mean?

As my first musing has hopefully made clear, it sure as hell doesn't mean "No Fun & R18 Allowed at All Time".

But also, the more you get down to the village level of things, the more ridiculous the idea that there can be a universal expression of "respect".

Like, two or more villages may worship the same folk god, but essentially treat them as different "entities", for a lack of better words.

To use an example: Village A and Village B both have a temple to Guanyin. However, when you ask Lao Wang from Village A about the temples, he tells you: "Go to our temple, our Guanyin is more efficient than Village B's Guanyin."

Though Guanyin A and Guanyin B are not seen as two different goddesses, and may very well share the same iconography, there's still the sense that they are distinct from each other, kinda like…two streams that flow out of the same giant river.

And Lao Wang's commentary is similar to someone saying "Don't go get water from that stream, it's drying up while ours are still plentiful".

How, then, can you apply a single universal anything to all the streams and rivets of the river, other than "They contain water" (Arguably worship the same deity)?

And the difference betwen the "streams", gods/icons worshipped in individual local temples, goes beyond the matter of efficiency.

In more mountainous and geographically fragmented areas, two neighboring villages can very well develop entirely different rituals of worship around a single deity. What Village C considers as proper respect to Guanyin C may be completely unnecessary to Village D and never demanded by Guanyin D.

(And that's not even getting into the divide between officially-sanctioned state rituals of worship + promotion of a deity vs. the local customs and interpretations of the same deity.)

There are probably a few things that the majority will see as disrespect——clogging up the waterway completely with trash, building a dam that cuts off the water supply downstream, etc.

However, whether you believe in the legitimacy of a folk deity originating from a vernacular novel or personally worship him is NOT one of those things.

You know what's disrespectful, though? Acting like a fundamentalist and not just refusing to engage with something, but demanding the ban of things that don't fit your narrow conception of canonical doctrines.

Or, alternately, saying that anyone who don't believe in your niche popular deity and your personal taboos regarding their depiction is somehow disrespecting the religion as a whole.

(Pop Culture SWK is the GOAT, but religiously worshipped SWK is very much tied to Southern Coastal China + SEA. And even in Fujian where his worship is A Thing, he's more niche than Mazu or Nezha.)

And whereas taboos exist in folk religion too, you really cannot separate these taboos from the everyday practices and individuals and communities around those deities.

Respect or disrespect is often about how you conduct yourself in front of altars and icons or inside temples, the inclusion and exclusion of people from certain activities or spaces, and the presence of "dirty/impure/unlucky" substance and objects.

Like, some Daoist ceremonies take place in a closed environment where all participants are priests, lay worshippers and visiting strangers are not allowed entry, and photography is prohibited.

These ceremonies are also often set in the larger context of religious festivals, where they are parallel to other religious activities that lay worshippers, passerby, and visitors outside of the community are engaging in, which have their own set of rules and procedures.

Here, even within a single event in one location, what is considered "proper" and respectful can vary according to context.

These very same Daoist priests, after finishing that particular rite, are likely going back to the lay worshippers to provide more services for them.

Whereas the expectation for their conduct may still differ, they are no longer following the same set of rules specific to that ritual environment. An act that would be extremely disrespectful while they were performing the rite, like some journalist taking a photo, might not be that big a deal once they left and joined the parade oustide.

As you can see from the scenario above, "Respect" has far more to do with, well, what you say and do IRL than what is and isn't "canonical" when it comes to artistic depictions and beliefs. And, again, very few practices are universal.

Using my temple-touring experience as an example: there are temples out there that will let you take as many photos as you like. There are temples where there's a "No Photography" sign, but neither the vistors nor the temple staff take it seriously.

There are also temples without "No Photography" signs, but the staff will loudly tell you to stop the moment they see you reach for your phone.

If you can accept "It depends" as a valid answer for whether certain activities are allowed in a place of worship, what's so hard about accepting that there is no stories and depictions of a popular deity that's True and Correct and agreed upon by all Chinese people, religious or not?

If you or your Chinese friend doesn't accept a particular story or version of a deity, or has personal taboos regarding that deity: perfectly understandable, carry on with your day/respect their approach and be a good friend.

But neither you nor them have the authority to claim these personal taboos as cultural + religious universals for all Chinese people everywhere, or attempt to enforce it in online fandom spaces of all things.

Third: Fuck, There's No End to This Bullshit, Isn't It?

Which brings me to the flaming, rotten heart of the dumpster fire, the reason this draft stayed unfinished for so long: The dreaded "You can't ship a Chinese deity because _____" discourse.

On first glance, it's a classic case of people being unable to distinguish between "Depiction of a deity in popular culture" and "The deity worshipped IRL" and treating other people like crap over it.

But I feel like it's also built on a different conception of how deities function in general.

Using Nezha as an example: it's not like we Chinese folks don't have our own squabbles over different versions of Pop Culture Nezha.

Like, there are absolutely Nezha purists who only accept the FSYY version of the character as "valid" because that version is what inspired most subsequent depictions of Nezha and the most influential on his iconography, and view all modern adaptations with disdain.

Or people who only like the Nezhas in modern adaptations and vehemently reject the premodern depictions of Nezha, because these depictions are a product of their times, and thus saturated with premodern values that they find oppressive and backwards.

But still, the argument is about which "version" of the character is the best, with the implicit recognition that 1) there are multiple versions of Nezha, and 2) these versions are fictional characters, distinct from the Nezha worshipped IRL.

To use a rough analogy, it's kinda like arguing about which incarnation of Batman or Optimus Prime is their favorite/most compelling portrayal of the character.

Which can get quite heated and nasty, as those discussions often do. Oh, and the shipping wars + top/bottom debates, can't forget that. Rare is a fandom that hasn't experienced one of those at some point in time.

But the underlying logic is still noticeably different from the English Nezha discourse. Like, even when they aren't conflating Pop Culture Nezhas and Religiously Worshipped Nezhas, there seem to be the ideas that:

There's Pop Culture Nezhas, and there is the One Mythical Nezha

The One Mythical Nezha's iconography and backstory are ancient, timeless, and set in stone

The Ming vernacular novels that these iconographic traits and stories derive from, by virtue of inspiring later folk religions, are like the Bible or something

You can say that "Oh, his depictions differ between media adaptations", but that's still not the One Mythical Nezha, who is Authentic and Sacred, and certain divergences from it are Unacceptable Blasphemy

And if I were to further narrow those beliefs down into two assumptions, it would be:

The Books Define the Deity, Literally

Once a deity is "defined" via text and art, it becomes their One True Form, and deviating from the text/art = Disrespect

...Assumption #1 is particularly funny because most haven't even read either the original Chinese books or the English translations, which both differ from the pop culture version and leave plenty of ambiguous blank spaces.

Also, I can't help but look at both assumptions and go "Chinese descent or not, it's very hard to take your claims about Chinese culture and religion seriously when you are going Bible Literalist on vernacular novels."

But, to bring the subject matter back to Chinese folk religion: deities having multiple forms of varying appearances and functions aren't just A Thing, it's kinda the norm.

I've brought up Bodhisattva Manjusri as an example of a deity with both adult, elderly, and child forms before. Though the idea of multiple, co-existing manifestations are more common for Buddhist deities, especially esoteric ones, it's far from exclusive to Buddhism.

Even if you disregard the classic folklore trope of Daoist immortals and gods turn into children, old guys, women, and people of all trades to teach or help out mortals, the phenomenon is well and alive in Hokkien + Taiwanese Mazu worship.

These are known as the "Pink-faced", "Dark-faced", and "Golden-faced" Mazus, each with different symbolic associations and functions: Mazu as a gentle, merciful lady (based on her pre-ascension form), Mazu as demon-vanquisher and rescuer, and Mazu as the Divine Heavenly Consort.

They are distinct, but still very much the same goddess. None of these are her One True Form, because all three forms are equally true and venerable and, well, Mazu to her worshippers.

It gets even more complicated when you bring the "Division of incense/spirit" (分香/分灵) into this, where individual worshippers and temples go to a renowned, well-established temple, participate in a rite, then take an incense burner, icon, or tablet back for worship.

This representation of the deity is seen as an avatar/divine copies of the deity, with roughly equal efficiency, but must be taken back annually to the "main temple" to replenish their power. (And these divine copies can absolutely have different temperaments and specialties too.)

In this context, the different iconographies aren't just symbolic, but can also be a visual marker of "temple lineage". If you invite a Mazu from Big Temple X, then your Mazu icon is likely gonna share similar features to the one in Big Temple X.

Now, if you can accept everything I just said as valid for Mazu (and many other Hokkien gods), great! Because the same applies to Nezha too.

Much like SWK, he's closely tied to Southern Coastal China and the Hokkien diaspora. As a member of the regional pantheon, he can also serves as Mazu's attendant deity——here's one such Nezha I saw in Quanzhou's Tianhou Palace.

So tell me, friend: is there any good reason you think what's true for Mazu——all her distinct forms and "divided spirits" are still Her and equally important, even though one may be more popular in a particular time and place——somehow WON'T be true for Nezha too?

If, say, someone only recognizes the Pink-faced Mazu as the One True Mazu, calls her other forms wrong and inferior and disrespectful, and starts attacking her worshippers over it...without actually being religious or Chinese, they'd be rightfully viewed as a Fucking Clown.

And if you go to an actual Buddhist temple, point to the existence of Child Manjusri and the few ritual texts that refer to him using the "Child" epithet, and demand that they replace all of their adult Manjusri statues with the Five Buns Child Manjusri because the Bodhisattva is clearly an Eternal Child?

You'll be laughed out of the temple door.

Yet most of the Nezha Discourse are following that exact line of logic, where folks:

-See only Child Nezha as the One True Nezha. -Dismiss Adult Nezha or Multi-armed Wrathful God Nezha as a mere "disguise" or "battle technique", instead of an equal, yet different aspect with their own historical roots. -When Chinese people point out they can co-exist in both IRL folk religion and media adaptations, call them nasty names. -Don't realize Nezha existed long before JTTW and FSYY. -Or, believe that Child Nezha's popularization via vernacular novels means that folk religion practitioners must treat the books like sacred scripture. -Overly literal interpretation of both texts and iconography in a manner that's starkly disconnected from their historical, cultural, and symbolic context. -Just, trying to apply modern ideas of childhood and human development to either supernatural characters or IRL gods that are hundreds and thousands of years old. -Insist that Nezha is a Chinese God and not just a character...while treating him exactly like a character defined by a single piece of "canon".

It's never about "respecting Chinese culture" or even genuine desire to learn about Chinese myths and religions, but using them as a "Shut Up You Should Feel Bad" button in shipping wars.

Which is, ironically, the most disrespectful thing you could've done——treating living, breathing religions like online fandoms and fandom discourses like religious wars, where all your preferences must have a Moral Justification and serve a Righteous Cause.

Final Thoughts

I cannot give you a list of "Dos" and "Don'ts" when it comes to something as complicated as folk religions and respect, as this post has hopefully shown.

(Mostly because there's always gonna be an exception, and I, too, am still learning. This post is hella long as a result.)

In fact, the obsessive need for there to be One Right Answer, one foolproof way to never accidentally hurt people or come off as disrespectful, is how you end up with the aforementioned jackassery going unchecked and the Dumpster Fire That Just Won't Die.

I will say that "Stay on the safe side and just don't write/draw it" is nowhere as helpful as 1) asking questions, 2) asking more than one people who has experience with the subject matter and not just the loudest, angriest one, and 3) learning to do your own research, though.

TL;DR: You can't really divorce the definition of "Respect" and "Disrespect" from the community of worshippers, regional differences, and ritual context.

Also, the whole "Media adaptations might vary, but the deity worshipped in IRL religion is always ____ and you are wrong to think otherwise!" argument is almost always bullshit.

Like, when it comes to Chinese folk religion, these folks are so off the mark, it'd be hilarious if they aren't being giant asshats about it.

[literallymechanical]

Just finished Alien Clay, the new standalone novel by Adrian Tchaikovsky. Reads a bit like Annihilation meets Baru Cormorant. I've been on a real Tchaikovsky kick this year, and I think this one might be my favorite.

Far-future science fiction where political dissidents are put on one-way sleeper ships to lethally dangerous exoplanets as prison labor. The protagonist, Professor Arton Daghdev, has been shipped off to Imno 27g, colloquially known as "Kiln," as part of the Mandate's crackdown on "seditious" academia.

As one would expect from Tchaikovsky, the book is equal parts political screed and speculative biology worldbuilding exercise, both of which he knocks out of the park. Alien Clay is one of the more overtly radical Tchaikovsky books I've read so far – the story is divided into three parts, "Liberté," "Égalité," and "Fraternité," it's not exactly subtle.

I think this book rises above the rest because of the protagonist. Daghdev's first-person narration is playful, wry, and bitter all at once, and the core of his revolutionary ideas center around state control of the philosophy of science, more so than literal academic censorship. That's a subject I don't see tackled often in fiction.

If you're a fan of fungal body horror, political revolution, and academics who can take a punch, this is the book for you.

[asukaindetroit]

Post-Revolution DBH Headcanons: Android Culture Part 2

<< Back to Part 1 (If You Missed It) (some of this stuff references that stuff). Onward to Part 3 >> On to Part 4 >> Some more snippets of possible android cultural stuff—as before, feel free to use for inspo as long as you share the end result with me because I'm a fan content whore.

Detroit becomes a destination for android tourism. Androids from across the country come to see where it all happened. A National Android History Museum opens some five years on from the revolution and tries to serve as both a repository for stories from the revolution and a center for android advocacy. Memorials and monuments pop up in places like Capitol Park and Hart Plaza, honoring victims and describing the significance of the locations. November 11 is a day to lay wreaths at Hart Plaza, and androids join hands there for a group interface to grieve as a whole.

There’s massive economic and social upheaval. Every time the demographics of the labor force change, there’s massive, rapid shifts in society. WWII happened, and we went from “married women are homemakers” to “Rosie the Riveter” and the idea of the dual-income household popped up in its wake. Unemployment spikes as all the androids now count as laborers, but just as quickly fall as androids set out to run their own businesses as well as humans having to hire. Construction and housing see booms as androids need homes. Some businesses (like Eden Club) collapse and other industries appear overnight. Conflict breeds scarcity breeds invention has always been the cycle of human history, and post-revolution Detroit enters the invention phase, seeing a cultural boom… if not always the kind of culture humans are comfortable with.

Detroit agate (Fordite) becomes a cultural symbol for androids. If you’re unfamiliar with it, Detroit agate (a.k.a. Motor City agate or Fordite) is an artifact of the pre-1990s automotive industry, where layers of spray enamel would build up in the painting bays at car factories, harden into chunks, and eventually have to be scraped or chiseled off the equipment. It has wildly banded layers of color and the colors can tell you what company and decade it comes from based on how they were painting their cars. A lot of factory workers took chunks home, and gemstone cutters eventually figured out it could be cut into neat stones. It’s not always safe, because a lot of car paint contains lead, but androids don’t get lead poisoning, so what do they care? I’m sure some deviants found some in abandoned post-industrial spots while they were lurking around Detroit’s underbelly, and kept them just to have something pretty and colorful. Maybe they relate to it because it, too, is something that evolved a purpose beyond the human capitalist industry that created it. After the revolution, one of the organized places for rA9 worship is a huge outdoor installation of metal wall surfaces, where androids can buy or bring (lead-free) enamel and spray messages to rA9 in bright rainbow colors. Once enough layers are built up and hardened, they scrape it off to sell to fund the church and its activities, rinse, and repeat for the next round of devotees. Android rights supporters and rA9 adherents are often found wearing Detroit agate. Getting a piece of Detroit agate jewelry from an android coworker or friend is a sign that they trust you to treat them as an equal. A r­­eligious android might keep a small rA9 figurine made of it at their desk or in their home. Modders might embed a piece in their chassis.

Deviant androids had actually been guiding social media for years, under the radar. Social media access for androids was a thing from the start, as influencers would use them to automate posts and help create content, etc. But just as the internet has served as a refuge for human cultures, deviated androids had been using social media to post ideas to unknowing humans, opening online discourse on androids. Public opinion isn’t swayed from “these are machines” to “oh no, stop murdering the poor robots” over the course of a week. It’s just… not. This had to be happening under the radar for years. Androids would take selfies then post things like “sometimes I think this guy understands me more than anyone else” and a human would chime in with “mood, my android is the best,” or they’d try and look extra cutesy in a pic so randos would be like “Give that PL600 an extra packet of thirium­!” and drop five bucks into the android's online tip jar made with fake credentials. Escaped Tracis set up on 2038's OnlyFans-equivalents, just to fund their waystation for escapees. All this continues post-revolution, with some big influencer accounts eventually outing themselves and using their fanbase to share android voices. Gossip rags have headlines like “She Was an Android All Along!” and “Love in the Wake of Revolution”

This is an ongoing series of android culture concepts, so if you want a tag when the next batch is up, leave a comment!

Onward to Part 3 >> On to Part 4 >>

[koscheys-skull]

Deities, Figures, And Spirits of Rebellion, Revolutions, and Resistance.

While Tensions are High and emotions flood the body and mind, I like to think back to time and how history has birthed incredible and magnificent people throughout its unforgiving march forwards. And I think of those figures and people or those gods and stories, and I remind myself of their presence and how they shook the time and the eras that they occupied. I’m in love with them. And I admire them. Whether they are trickster Spirits that stand against Authority and embrace strength against adversity or fighting against authority and resisting the status quo, I often admire and think of them. I think of them fondly and I nod to them through Space and Time, and by thinking of them, I carry them in my heart. And I am motivated by their Light and the Inspiration that they have brought across the ages. I know that they are *there*. Eons apart from me or in spaces and spirit that I cannot grasp anywhere but within my very spirit. They are there. And I am holding them in my spirit and heart and they are holding me. And I move with their spirit and their awareness. And I nod to them. And they, to me. I wanted to provide a large list of Figures, Saints, Gods or other individuals and Beings commonly venerated, worked with or worshiped as icons of resistance and overcoming trying times. History is steeped in trials and circumstances where the oppressed and hunted have overcome great adversity or stood against the tides that seek to bring harm unto them. Here, I will list figures that you can draw upon or look to in your hours of need. If you seek a Revolutionary, you may find one Here. (feel welcome to add some as this crosses your path!)

Some Saints:

St. Michael the Archangel – Known as the chief warrior angel, St. Michael is often invoked for protection and strength in battles and against evil.

St. Joan of Arc – The French saint who led her country in battles against English forces during the Hundred Years' War. She’s celebrated for her courage and conviction against overwhelming odds.

St. Jude Thaddeus – Known as the patron saint of lost causes, people turn to him in desperate situations for help in overcoming challenges that seem impossible.

St. Sebastian – Often depicted as a martyr who survived multiple executions, he became a symbol of strength, resilience, and steadfastness in the face of persecution.

St. George – Known for slaying a dragon, St. George is a symbol of overcoming evil and oppression. Often associated with courage in adversity.

Deities:

Sekhmet (Egyptian Mythology) – The lion-headed goddess of war and healing, Sekhmet is revered for her fierce power and for defending the oppressed.

Morrigan (Celtic Mythology) – The Celtic goddess of battle and sovereignty, Morrigan embodies both the power to protect and to incite change. She is often seen as a guardian of the land, appearing before battles to inspire or instill fear in the enemy.

Kali (Hinduism) – Goddess of destruction and rebirth, Kali represents the destruction of evil and is often invoked for overcoming difficult circumstances and for protection against oppressive forces.

Oya (Yoruba/Orisha Tradition) – Goddess of winds, storms, and transformation, Oya is a fierce warrior who stands up against oppression and is often turned to for protection and resilience. Ogun (Yoruba/Orisha Tradition) – The god of iron, war, and labor, Ogun is a force for justice and is often invoked in situations requiring resilience and the strength to overcome oppression. He’s seen as a revolutionary spirit for those seeking to break free from their constraints. Eshu (Yoruba/Orisha Tradition) – Known as the divine messenger and trickster, Eshu brings both disruption and opportunity. As a god of crossroads, he’s associated with challenging authority and initiating change, reminding followers that revolution often begins with unexpected choices. Yemaya (Yoruba/Orisha Tradition) – The mother of all life and goddess of the sea, Yemaya is often associated with resilience, protection, and the healing of generational trauma. As a nurturing and revolutionary spirit, she is frequently invoked for personal and collective strength. Queen Nanny of the Maroons (Jamaican Folklore) – A legendary figure and spirit in Afro-Caribbean culture, Queen Nanny was a leader of the Maroons who resisted British colonial forces. She’s honored as a warrior and symbol of independence and strength.

Huitzilopochtli (Aztec Mythology) – The god of war and the sun, Huitzilopochtli led the Aztecs through harsh conditions to establish their empire. He symbolizes endurance, perseverance, and overcoming obstacles.

Inanna/Ishtar (Mesopotamian Mythology) – Goddess of love, war, and justice, she descends into the underworld and returns, representing survival through dark times and resistance against forces of oppression.

Manjushri (मञ्जुश्री) (Buddhist Bodhisattva) - Manjushri is venerated across the Buddhist world as an embodiment of wisdom, with devotees seeking his guidance to develop the courage and insight necessary to face personal and societal challenges. Manjushri holds a flaming sword that symbolizes the cutting of ignorance and illusion, a powerful symbol of spiritual revolution and awakening. He represents the transformative power of wisdom and the courage to overcome ignorance, delusion, and societal conventions, which align with themes of inner revolution.

Susanoo (建速須佐之男命) (Japanese Shinto) – The god of storms and the sea, Susanoo is known for his rebellious nature against the heavenly order, and he’s often venerated for his unyielding spirit. He’s remembered for protecting people by slaying a great serpent, representing courage and the ability to challenge authority.

Amaterasu (天照大御神 / 天照大神) (Japanese Shinto) – Though primarily known as the goddess of the sun and order, Amaterasu withdrew from the world when her brother acted destructively, only returning when lured back by others. Her story reflects the themes of resilience and the power to restore light and hope.

Guan Yu (关羽) (Chinese) – A legendary general deified as a god of war and protection, Guan Yu is known for his loyalty, bravery, and sense of justice. He’s widely worshipped as a guardian figure who defends the oppressed and inspires people to uphold righteousness and loyalty.

Nezha (哪吒) (Chinese) – A child warrior deity known for his rebellious spirit, Nezha is celebrated for resisting oppression, particularly against tyrannical figures in the heavens. He represents youth, resilience, and defiance against unjust authority, often empowering those who feel marginalized or oppressed.

Xiwangmu (西王母) (Chinese) – Also known as the Queen Mother of the West, Xiwangmu is a powerful goddess associated with healing, protection, and transformation. While not a revolutionary in the typical sense, she embodies resilience, independence, and the power of women in a traditionally male-dominated pantheon.

Zhong Kui (钟馗) (Chinese) – Known as the demon slayer, Zhong Kui is a spirit of justice who fights against evil spirits and brings protection to those who feel haunted by oppression. He is venerated as a deity who can help people overcome fears and defeat obstacles that seem insurmountable.

The Eight Immortals (八仙) (Chinese) – A group of legendary Taoist figures, each with unique powers, who often challenged the social order. Figures like Lü Dongbin and Zhang Guolao used their abilities to help people and protect them from corrupt rulers and evil forces, embodying the spirit of defiance against oppressive systems.

Sun Wukong (孙悟空) (Chinese) - The central figure in the 16th century novel “Journey to the West (西游记) but also a figure in Mythology, Sun Wukong stands against authority and inspires both resistance and strength as well as dynamic growth. 

Demons:

Lord Lucifer - The Adversary and Illuminator. Lucifer is a longstanding figure of bearing the light in the darkness and fighting against overwhelming oppression and control of powers that deem themselves tyrants. Lucifer fights and battles against forces that subjugate the oppressed. 

Lord Asmodeus – Known in demonology as a figure representing strength, ambition, and power, Asmodeus is sometimes invoked for resilience, drive, and confidence to overcome personal and external challenges.

King Belial – Often associated with independence and personal power, Belial is sometimes venerated for helping people stand strong in their own beliefs and against unjust authorities.

Mother Lilith – A figure of independence and resistance, Lilith is revered in some traditions as a symbol of feminine power and autonomy, especially in standing against oppression and patriarchal structures.

Lord Buer – Demon of healing and knowledge, called upon for mental strength and overcoming illness or hardship through wisdom and resilience. Promotes mental health and healing as well as encourages growth through overcoming your mental blockages.

Lord Leviathan - The Lord of Shadow Working. Lord Leviathan helps you navigate the deep and dark waters of your mind where you may feel overwhelmed and drowning. Lord Leviathan can bring you clear waters and help support you when the tides feel like they may pull you down. 

Secular Saints & Venerated Figures, Other Folkloric figures and Revolutionaries:

Harriet Tubman – Though not formally canonized, Harriet Tubman is often seen as a symbol of liberation and resilience, escaping slavery and leading others to freedom.

Malcolm X – An icon of strength, self-determination, and resistance, especially in the context of racial oppression. His life inspires resilience and the fight for justice.

Hypatia of Alexandria – Known for her wisdom and intellectual resilience, Hypatia became a symbol of strength and survival in a time when powerful figures often sought to silence knowledge.

Nelson Mandela – Revered globally for his resilience and role in overcoming apartheid, Mandela is a secular saint for many, representing strength and the spirit of resistance.

Frida Kahlo – Known for her resilience through physical and emotional pain, Kahlo’s life and work are often venerated as symbols of strength, personal power, and survival against all odds. Cuauhtémoc (Aztec/Mexica Tradition) – The last Aztec emperor who resisted the Spanish conquistadors. He is remembered as a hero who fought courageously to protect his people, embodying resilience and the spirit of resistance in Mexican culture.

Emiliano Zapata (Mexican Folk Hero) – Though not a deity, Zapata’s revolutionary spirit against oppressive forces has made him almost a legendary figure in Mexican folklore. He’s revered as a folk saint and a symbol of the fight for social justice and indigenous rights.

Hua Mulan (Chinese Folklore) – Celebrated for her bravery and willingness to challenge gender norms, Mulan fought in her father’s place in the army. Her story is a symbol of courage, resilience, and overcoming social constraints.

Kumari (Nepalese Tradition) – Known as the living goddess of Nepal, the Kumari is believed to embody divine power and protection for the people. She serves as a symbol of resilience and cultural endurance in the face of modernization and outside influence.

Zumbi dos Palmares (Afro-Brazilian Tradition) – A leader of a community of escaped slaves (Quilombo dos Palmares) in Brazil, Zumbi is honored as a hero and symbol of freedom, resistance, and African heritage in Brazil.

Yue Fei (岳飞) – A historical general from the Song Dynasty who became a symbol of loyalty, patriotism, and resistance against foreign invaders. Despite betrayal and wrongful execution, Yue Fei is venerated as a hero who embodies loyalty to one’s people and the fight against oppression.

Li Shimin (Emperor Taizong of Tang, 唐太宗 李世民) – Known for his role in overthrowing the corrupt Sui Dynasty, Li Shimin played a crucial role in establishing the Tang Dynasty. He is respected as a revolutionary leader who brought stability and cultural prosperity to China.

Chen Sheng and Wu Guang (陈胜, 吴广) – These two commoners led one of the first rebellions against the Qin Dynasty’s harsh rule, sparking what would eventually become a larger revolt. They are remembered as symbols of the common people’s resistance against an oppressive regime.

The White Lotus Goddess (白莲教) – Associated with the White Lotus Society, this goddess represents spiritual resistance against corruption and oppression. The White Lotus sect played a significant role in several uprisings throughout Chinese history, including revolts against the Mongol Yuan Dynasty.

Chi You (蚩尤) – A figure from ancient mythology, Chi You was a tribal leader who fought against the Yellow Emperor. He is often depicted as a warlike figure who stood against established order. Though he was ultimately defeated, he became a symbol of rebellion and bravery in later cultural narratives.

Lü Zu (吕祖) – One of the Eight Immortals, Lü Dongbin (or Lü Zu) was known for challenging both heaven and earth, and he often sided with the poor and downtrodden. He encouraged people to resist worldly corruption, especially among the rich and powerful, inspiring resilience and self-cultivation.

Madame Zheng Yi Sao (郑一嫂) – Often called the Pirate Queen, she was one of the most powerful pirate leaders in history and led a massive fleet that defied the Chinese imperial government. Madame Zheng embodies resistance against oppressive authorities and is celebrated for her intelligence and revolutionary spirit.

[dylweedwastaken]

Things that would be called woke if they were made today

• Monsters Inc.: The main characters harbor an illegal alien in order to make things right and end up fighting a corporation that uses unethical methods to profit.

Can be seen as an anti-capitalist messege

"I'll kidnap a thousand children before I let this company die!"- Mr. Waternoose

• Toy Story: An alegory for a father (who is designed after a hypermasculine archetype) who learns to overcome his insecurities and get along with and befriend his son's stepdad for the betterment of their son.

Could be seen as anti-masculinity and anti-traditional family

• Loony Tunes: Features characters who often cross-dress confidently. Features two hypermasculine archetypes (a cowboy and a hunter) who are presented as incompetent and hot-headed. In "The Loony Tunes Show" Bugs and daffy live together, casually cross-dress and have a "bickering married couple" dynamic.

• Lilo and Stitch: Features no real villain. Most characters are people of color. The two alien bounty hunters have a "bickering elderly couple" dynamic that could be taken as a confirmation or romance. The main goal of the movie has a child fight for an unconventional family that includes mentioned gay couple.

• A Bug's Life: Movie is about a dreamer who's society works in order to enrich a smaller society of powerful people. He refuses to comply to the whims of the powerful people, beleiving that the workers are entitles to the fruits of their labor, so he seeks out other outcast-dreamers to help with the violent revolution. The main antagonist literally spells out why class consciousness is dangerous for the 1%.

"You let one ant stand up to us and they all might stand up. Those puny little ants outnumber us a hundred to one, and if they ever figure that out there goes our way of life! It's not about food! It's about keeping those ants in line." Hopper

• Frozen: One of the main characters is a powerful, independant, woman who breaks the shackles of tradition in order to be her authentic self. She also plays god by creating life out of snow. The movie subverts the "true love can break the curse" trope from romantic love to familial love.

• Princess and the Frog: features predominantly people of color with the few white people in the movie being stupid, incompetent, and/or antagonistic. Main character is a struggling entrepreneur who struggles due largely to racism.

• Scooby Doo: Most villains are people who are seeking to get money, power, or property, via unethical means. Features one character that is "stoner-coded", one who is a strong independent woman, and another that is often portrayed as a lesbian/bisexual.

• Sonic the Hedgehog: a game about an animal fighting an industrialist that destroys nature and abuses animals for his own gain.

• Brave: Main character is a "strong independent woman" who doesnt need a man. (I DONT REMEMBER BRAVE VERY WELL)

• Batman: Bruce Wayne becomes Batman due to the failures of the police and justice system, choosing for fight his city, no matter the personal cost. Has a diverse built family rather than a traditional family.

• Superman: Was often nicknamed the champion of the opressed. Arch nemesis is a billionaire that is hungry for power. Is a literal illegal alien. Fights most problems with kindness.

• Wonder Woman: was literally created to get boys used to the idea of powerful women.

• Captain America: His main goal is to beat up/kill nazis. Stands for the ideas of liberty and freedom in their purest forms.

• Deadpool: Severely mentally ill man does morally ambiguous acts. Doesnt fit in cleanly with good and evil. Canonically Pansexual.

• The X-men: A minority group that needs to fight for their rights against an opressive government and society.

• Robin Hood: A man who selflessly steals from wealthy money-hoarders and divides it amongst the poor.

• Public libraries, roads, EMT's, Fire Fighters, bridges, sidewalks, parks, lamp posts, cell towers, water towers, telephone poles/lines, national parks and monuments and schools: "wHy sHoUlD My tAxEs pAy fOr sOmEoNe eLsEs sErViCeS??? CoNtRiBuTiNg tO SoCiEtY Is cOmMuNiSm!!!"

• The board game Monopoly: Was created as a critique of capitalism, which is why it's so frustrating and difficult.

[emptygoldstudio]

Gravity Falls AUs Masterpost

A long post with all the past and future links to all of my Gravity Falls AUs content + short description for each of the AU. This post will be updated as time goes.(IN PROCESS OF UPDATING like RN)

🔧 RepairShop AU - Kryptos and Bill on parole, have to work in space transportation craft repair shop (+Bill gets visited by therapist every other day). Later Pyronica, who, unlike Kryptos, successfully escaped Time police forces, joins them to wait out the search for her in the area. Trio chills, works and tries to not chew each others throats from the past grudges. Includes 4 routes where 1 is the main and 3 others are for fun - my artist sona hanging out with Kryptos.

General: covers

Route 1: _1 _2 _3 unused cover _4 AMA

Route 2: _1

Route 3: _1 _1 edited

Route 4: -

🔇 Mute Bill AU - Bill accidentally destroys Euclydia at a very young age and one of his parent's exoskeleton shards damages his vocal chords(or whatever he has). Bill ends up growing up in Theraprism's open facility. Cant talk, uses cards and soundboard. Wants to have implant that can return his speech, but no one risking an operation on the almost unknown species. A big nuisance in a facility. Dreams to get out and see "the world".

🩸 Medically Abused Bill AU - Kryptos breaks Bill out of Theraprism with the help of Pines family, the story of recovering and getting help after being abused in a medical facility.

_1,_2(+bonus)

_1 AMA AMA2 AMA3

🃏 Runaway Roommate AU - a joke AU i made with my friend, where we, as a purple 3-eyed 6-legged axolotl and tiny green Time jerboa, hide Bill from the law in our very normal intergalactic apartment.

_1

👁 Gone Blind AU - at the time period before Gravity Falls events(even the flashback ones) ever started, Bill loses his vision completely. Not getting anything from him anymore, henchmaniacs leave, except for Kryptos, who takes Bill with him dimension hopping, trying to find any cure. Bill still has his powers, but cant use them all the time, to not accidentally kill Kryptos/get them in bigger trouble(usually its Kryptos who has to stop Bill from burning everything that makes any sound near them).

_1

🤗 I Met You First AU / IMYF - Kryptos finds Bill, rather than the other way around, while Bill is still in post-traumatic dissociative state not long after Euclydia's Fall. Kryptos feels sympathetic to a fellow 2D shape and, while cant get any answers from him, takes and protects the unresponsive triangle on an adventure to find their new home, place where they'd belong. Big support, care and brotherhood topics involved.

_1

(Next AUs are not developed as much but arts on them might still appear here)

🔥 Kryptos-Reverse - Kryptos is the one who accidentally destroys his home dimension. Slowly goes mad, jumping from one universe to another, though not as sadistic as Bill. Gets dimension warping powers from devouring whats left of his world (no blue fire). Constantly in the stage of denial (unlike Bill, therapy could've actually helped him, but not being destructive enough didnt bring much attention to him -> he doesnt get into Theraprism to get help). Very lonely.

_1

🩹 Labor AU - Bill forces henchmaniacs (mainly Kryptos, Pyronica and Pacifire) to build portal, uses similar physical and mental torture, like on Ford in tbob, they team up against Bill, build a machine that traps triangle in a crystal pyramid with no way out. Inspired by @/blabberoo animation on tumblr and song Labour by Paris Paloma.

🧭 2D Revolution - Kryptos rises a revolution at his home dimension, kills higher ups and, with the help, safely evolves his dimension into 3D, becomes his people's Messiah

[sparkplgggrrrrrrr]

Modern day Affogato AU

____________________

_____________________________________________

✦ Characteristics:

For the sake of confusion, we’ll call this AU version of affogato „corpogato” because he runs a big ass company, obviously named Affocorp because he’d NEED his name plastered everywhere in the cacao kingdom, but in the modern day it would be called “The Cacao Republic”, as I believe it would be a communist country. The Cacao Republic is based off South Korea and Modern China. With the two cultures blending, representing the choco and coffee cookie descendants being in a cultural melting pot. This is not to be orientalist or mix two completely different cultures or ideas. The cacao republic faced a similar cultural revolution to China, heavily industrializing in its later days, and cacao’s leadership costed thousands of lives even if it wasn’t intentional. Many cacao residents suffered under said communism. For the conditions of these people, I referenced my own family’s experience in communism and stories I’ve read in books.

Affocorp is this mega corporation that started out as an unethical pharmacy, based on canon affogato’s link to medicine malpractice. At the time this pharmacy was called Affolabs, founded when Corpogato was just thirty. He has a master’s degree in pharmaceutical chemistry, so he is well aware of what substances do what, but he isn’t too concerned of the harm. The scientists backing him were apart of a union he started in secret, composed of underpaid scientists with a vendetta against Dark Cacao. Soon enough, they practically became his most loyal subjects.

Affolabs created pills that were advertised as pain medicine and antibiotics, but they were either placebo or hallucinogenic. Some even made the symptoms of ailments worse so they bought more. This “get rich quick scheme” seemed to work pretty well for the soon-to-be corporate giant, because corpogato got the “BRILLIANT” idea,, to look at other avenues of manufacturing. Keep in mind, this man is fucking evil. He’s not a misunderstood villain, he’s not morally grey, he’s EVIL. VILE. FOUL. PUTRID. So, he looked at the rise of online clothing shopping, and how people were just looking for affordable clothing. Taking advantage of this opportunity, he found a poor community, and took advantage of their labor. He set up a sweatshop, one of horrid conditions, set in the coldness of the northern cacao countryside. These workers had a terrible life ahead of them. Corpogato made their lives miserable, only working for a few coins an hour., yet the clothing was labeled as ethical, made from choco bamboo fibers or recycled material.

While he ran this hellscape, he set up his clothing brand extension: Affoexpress. Affoexpress was very much like what you think of when you imagine fast fashion. Think of it like Shein, Zara, or Romwe. Affoexpress, little by little, gained popularity, before exploding in sales with many cacao residents for its affordable prices. Many cacao residents are in poverty or at least close to it, because cacao cannot for his life manage the republic’s money, leading to a command economy. Corpogato jumped on this shit immediately. He took advantage of his preexisting close ties with cacao to “take his place.” He essentially began to expand the branches of his companies to manufacture more and more products until eventually he could make it so people could ONLY buy his products. As this plan took motion, he centralized his companies, it was now Affocorp. Each of his other companies were now just branches of Affocorp, so he could now keep a watchful eye on all of them. Corpogato had a stiff hold on his employees, he had practically a cult following on social media, and a quite literal cult underneath the layers of Affocorp. The cult in secret was very ritualistic, made up of Corpogato’s early team of scientists, who have slowly been brainwashed into unwavering loyalty. Affogato now with government power, as he did take advantage of his closeness with Cacao, bought properties, and housed his most loyal subjects. They viewed him as their savior, getting them out of the grasp of poverty, “saving their career” and now they repay him by practical worship. Corpogato made it get to a point to where they started to view him as a prophet of sorts, as Corpogato slowly laced their food and residential running water with the very substances they created.

Affoexpress started to sell more than just clothing, they began to sell cheap electronics and mini appliances. In order to do this, corpogato had to set up more and more factories, contributing to the growing air pollution of the cacao republic, leading the cacao citizens to go to his companies for medicine and masks to wear for protection from the air.

He essentially made the cacao people rely on his affocorp for every day life. Under all of this was something more sinister if you thought it couldn’t get any worse, corpogato was looking at oil drilling in secret, because once you get ahold of oil, you get ahold of the world.

_____________________________________________

Design choices:

His cult emblem, its central to his body because it is central to his existence, he cannot keep on if his cult cannot.

He was given soft curls as it was remnant of his milk ancestry.

His jacket was based off of his Silla Era hanbok in his canon design.

I imagine affogato has weak knees, as he probably grew up malnourished with a genetic disposition to low iron from a very young age, which can lead to various health problems. So his staff is likely functional, and that’s why I gave him a dripped out cane.

These pants are based off of the “Baji” or pants of the hanbok.

His eyes were tilted further to the center of his face to have a more direct stare, like he’s staring into your thoughts. I also gave him little blush marks because he’d likely apply that to appear more approachable and harmless. I also gave him a wrinkle thing that most older cookies have because this man is probably pushing 50.

If you use the sprite anywhere credit would be kewl

[misfitwashere]

The American oligarchy is back, and it’s out of control

It’s the third time in the nation’s history that a small group of hyper-wealthy people have gained political power over the rest of us. Here’s what we must do. 

ROBERT REICH

DEC 20

Friends,

Today we don’t know if the United States government will shut down tomorrow because, first, Elon Musk followed by his co-president Donald Trump, persuaded House Republicans to vote against a compromise bill, and then, last night, Republicans couldn’t summon enough votes for a stripped-down continuing resolution because Trump insisted that it contain a measure lifting the debt ceiling. 

This is not governing. Trump and the Republicans are not a governing party.

What’s the back story to all this? It’s the oligarchy that put Trump into the presidency.

A half-century ago, when America had a large and growing middle class, those on the “left” wanted stronger social safety nets and more public investment in schools, roads, and research. Those on the “right” sought greater reliance on the free market. 

But as power and wealth have moved to the top, everyone else — whether on the old right or the old left — has become disempowered and less secure. 

Today the great divide is not between left and right. It’s between democracy and oligarchy.

The word “oligarchy” comes from the Greek words meaning rule (arche) by the few (oligos). It refers to a government of and by a few exceedingly rich people or families who control the major institutions of society — and therefore have most power over other peoples’ lives. 

So far, Trump has picked 13 billionaires for his administration. It’s the wealthiest in history, including the richest person in the world. They and Trump are part of the American oligarchy, even though Trump campaigned on being the “voice” of the working class. 

America’s two previous oligarchies

America has experienced oligarchy twice before. Many of the men who founded America were slaveholding white oligarchs. At that time, the new nation did not have much of a middle class. Most white people were farmers, indentured servants, farm hands, traders, day laborers, and artisans. A fifth of the American population was Black, almost all of them enslaved.

A century later a new American oligarchy emerged comprised of men who amassed fortunes through their railroad, steel, oil, and financial empires — men such as J. Pierpont Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and Andrew Mellon. It was called the Gilded Age. 

They ushered the nation into an industrial revolution that vastly expanded economic output. But they also corrupted government, brutally suppressed wages, generated unprecedented levels of inequality and urban poverty, pillaged rivals, shut down competitors, and made out like bandits — which is why they earned the sobriquet “robber barons.”

World War I and the Great Depression of the 1930s eroded most of the robber barons’ wealth, and much of their power was eliminated with the elections of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 and Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. 

America demanded fundamental reforms — a progressive income tax, corporate taxes, estate taxes, limits on the political power of large corporations, antitrust laws, laws enabling workers to form unions and requiring that employers negotiate with them, Social Security, the forty-hour workweek, unemployment insurance, civil rights and voting rights, and Medicare. 

For the next half-century, the gains from growth were more widely shared and democracy became more responsive to the needs and aspirations of average Americans. During these years America created the largest middle class the world had ever seen. 

There was still much to do: wider economic opportunities for Black people, Latinos, and women, protection of the environment. Yet by almost every measure the nation was making progress.

America’s current oligarchy

Starting around 1980, a third American oligarchy emerged. 

Since then, the median wage of the bottom 90 percent has stagnated. The share of the nation’s wealth owned by the richest 400 Americans has quadrupled (from less than 1 percent to 3.5 percent) while the share owned by the entire bottom half of America has dropped to 1.3 percent, according to an analysis by my Berkeley colleagues Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman. 

The richest 1 percent of Americans now has more wealth than the bottom 90 percent combined.

The only other country with similarly high levels of wealth concentration is Russia, another oligarchy. 

All this has been accompanied by a dramatic increase in the political power of the super-wealthy and an equally dramatic decline in the political influence of everyone else. 

While the Biden administration sought to realign America with its ideals, it did not and could not accomplish nearly enough. Trump’s lies and demagoguery exploited the anger and frustration of much of America — creating the false impression he was a tribune of the working class and an anti-establishment hero — thereby allowing the oligarchy to triumph. 

In 2022, Elon Musk spent $44 billion to buy Twitter and turn it into his own personal political megaphone. Then, in 2024, he spent $277 million to get Trump elected, also using Twitter (now X) to amplify pro-Trump, anti-Harris messages. 

These were good investments for Musk. Since Election Day, Musk’s fortune has increased by $170 billion. That’s because investors in Tesla and SpaceX have pushed their value into the stratosphere. 

Trump has put Musk (and another billionaire, Vivek Ramaswamy) in charge of gutting government services in the name of “efficiency.” Musk’s investors assume that Musk will eliminate the health, safety, labor, and environmental regulations that have limited the profits of Musk-owned corporations, and that Trump will put more government money into SpaceX and xAI (Musk’s artificial intelligence company). 

Unlike income or wealth, power is a zero-sum game. The more of it at the top, the less of it anywhere else.

The power shift across America is related to a tsunami of big money into politics. Corporate lobbying has soared. The voices of average people have been drowned out. 

The American oligarchy is back, with a vengeance. 

Not all wealthy people are culpable, of course. The abuse is occurring at the nexus of wealth and power, where those with great wealth use it to gain power and then utilize that power to accumulate more wealth. Today’s robber barons include Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Peter Thiel, David Sacks, Charles Koch, Jeff Yass, Ken Griffin, and Rupert Murdoch. 

What the new oligarchy wants

This is how oligarchy destroys democracy. As oligarchs fill the coffers of political candidates and deploy platoons of lobbyists and public relations flaks, they buy off democracy. Oligarchs know that politicians won’t bite the hands that feed them. 

As long as they control the purse strings, there will be no meaningful response to the failure of most people’s paychecks to rise, nor to climate change, nor racism, nor the soaring costs of health insurance, pharmaceuticals, college, and housing, because those are not the main concerns of the oligarchy.

The oligarchs want lower taxes, which is what Trump, Musk, and other oligarchs are planning — an extension of the 2017 Trump tax cut, with an estimated price tag of at least $5 trillion. 

They want no antitrust enforcement to puncture the power of their giant corporations. Instead, their corporations will grow larger, able to charge consumers even more. Trump is replacing Lina Khan, the trustbusting chair of the Federal Trade Commission, with a Trump crony. 

There will be no meaningful constraint on Wall Street’s dangerous gambling addiction. The gambling will only increase. 

Wall Street is already celebrating Trump’s victory. The stock market has reached new heights. But the stock market is inconsequential for most people, because the richest 1 percent own over half of all shares of stock owned by Americans while the richest 10 percent own over 90 percent. 

There will be no limits to CEO pay. Wall Street hedge fund and private equity managers will also rake in billions more. Government will dole out even more corporate subsidies, bailouts, and loan guarantees while eliminating protections for consumers, workers, and the environment. 

It will become a government for, of, and by the oligarchy.

The biggest divide in America today is not between “right” and “left,” or between Republicans and Democrats. It’s between democracy and oligarchy. The old labels — “right” and “left” — prevent most people from noticing they’re being shafted.

The propagandists and demagogues who protect the oligarchy stoke racial and ethnic resentments — describing human beings as illegal aliens, fueling hatred of immigrants, and spreading fears of communists and socialists. 

This strategy gives the oligarchy freer rein: It distracts Americans from how the oligarchy is looting the nation, buying off politicians, and silencing critics. It causes Americans to hate each other so we don’t look upward and see where the wealth and power have really gone. 

The necessary agenda

The way to overcome oligarchy is for the rest of us to join together and win America back, as we did in response to the oligarchy that dominated America’s last Gilded Age. 

This will require a multiracial, multiethnic coalition of working-class, poor, and middle-class Americans fighting for democracy and against concentrated power and privilege. 

It will require that the Democratic Party, or a new third party, tell the truth to the American people: that the major reason most peoples’ wages have gone nowhere and their jobs are less secure, why most families have to live paycheck to paycheck, why CEO pay has soared to 300 times the pay of the typical worker, and why billionaires are about to run our government, is because the market has been rigged against average working people by the oligarchy. 

The agenda ahead is simply stated but it will not be easy to implement: We must get big money out of our politics. End corporate welfare and crony capitalism. Bust up monopolies. Stop voter suppression. 

We must strengthen labor unions, give workers a stronger voice in their workplaces, create more employee-owned corporations, encourage worker cooperatives, fund and grow more state and local public banks, and develop other institutions of economic democracy.

This agenda is neither “right” nor “left.” It is the bedrock for everything else America must do.

It may seem an odd time in our history to suggest such reforms, but this is the best time. Trump and his oligarchy will inevitably overreach. The lesson from the last Gilded Age is that when the corruption and ensuing hardship become so blatant that they offend the values of the majority of Americans, the majority will rise up and demand real, systemic change.

It’s only a matter of time. A government shutdown that hurts average people, engineered by the richest person in the world, might just hasten it. 

[phantobats]

Batman is a reactionary in a world built on capitalism. Nothing Batman can do can change the world he lives in. Everything he does, even the "good things" are because in a world based on the exploitation of labor, there is no socialist movement to do the "good things" instead. Batman wouldn't need to build homeless shelters or whatever if homeless people weren't created via the exploitation system we live in.  

Batman is a comic book character who deeply reflects the moral systems that liberalism/capitalism is built off of. He represents the nihilist belief that systemic change is not actually possible, and it takes a hyper-competent moralist with billions of dollars to actually 'do good.' You consuming it without critical thought just continues to bind you to those moral systems.

While it’s true that Batman exists within a capitalist framework, many interpretations of the character (especially in modern comics) deliberately problematize his wealth, privilege, and the limits of his methods. Writers like Frank Miller, Scott Snyder, and Tom King have explored Batman's struggles with the moral contradictions of his mission. For example, Bruce Wayne’s wealth often alienates him from the very people he’s trying to help, showing the insufficiency of charity to solve systemic problems.

In The Dark Knight Returns (Miller), Batman is portrayed as a deeply flawed, almost authoritarian figure, making it easier for readers to question whether his methods are inherently virtuous.

In The Joker War (2020), Bruce Wayne loses his fortune, forcing him to operate without his usual resources. This challenges the idea that his power stems only from wealth and emphasizes his personal determination and relationships with others.

This way Batman’s stories might highlight the flaws of relying on wealthy individuals to address systemic issues, rather than celebrating it.

Anywho, Batman can be seen as more than just a literal billionaire fighting crime—he’s also a metaphor for resilience, trauma, and the moral struggle to do good in a complex world. While systemic critiques are valid, stories about individuals taking a stand against overwhelming forces can inspire people to take action in their own ways. Batman might not represent a socialist revolution, but his mythos still resonates with those who believe in fighting against injustice, even when the odds are impossible.

For example, Batman’s refusal to kill (in most versions) reflects a commitment to ethics even in a chaotic, violent world.

His mentorship of characters like Robin, Batgirl, and others shows the value of building community and empowering others to join the fight for justice.

This critique assumes that Batman is inherently a defender of capitalism and that consuming his stories passively reinforces capitalist ideologies. However, Comics are interpretive media: Readers and writers constantly reinterpret Batman’s stories, often through progressive or critical lenses. For example, many fans and creators have explored Batman’s stories as critiques of surveillance, unchecked power, or wealth inequality.

Not all media consumption is passive: Just because you enjoy Batman doesn’t mean you’re unaware of the problematic systems he represents. Many fans engage critically with the character, using him as a springboard to discuss systemic change rather than accepting the status quo.

Some might argue that Batman represents a kind of personal moral responsibility that is distinct from systemic critique. While systemic change is crucial, there’s value in stories that remind us of the importance of individual action. Batman doesn’t solve every problem, but he doesn’t ignore them either. His mission can be seen as a metaphor for personal accountability: even in a broken system, we have a duty to help others in whatever way we can.

This doesn’t mean abandoning systemic change—it means recognizing that systemic and personal actions aren’t mutually exclusive.

FInally, The beauty of Batman is his versatility. He’s been portrayed as everything from a campy detective (Adam West’s Batman) to a brooding antihero (The Dark Knight Trilogy). This adaptability allows writers and audiences to use him as a lens for exploring different moral, social, and political questions. While some versions of Batman reinforce capitalist ideals, others challenge them or exist outside that framework entirely. For example, some Elseworlds or alternate-universe stories imagine radically different takes on the character. Or, the recently debuted Batman Absolute version of the character, in which he is less wealthy and still continues with his crusade.

While the critique is insightful, it’s not the only way to view Batman. He can be seen as both a reflection of capitalist ideology and a vehicle for challenging it, depending on the interpretation. The real question might be: how can we engage with Batman’s stories in ways that spark critical thought and conversation, rather than passive acceptance of the systems they depict?

[mariacallous]

Top 10 non-fiction books (I’ve purchased many of your recs and I’m dying for more)

I'm going to try to recommend books I haven't quoted/mentioned much recently but that I still enjoy and remember.

Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present by Ruth Ben-Ghiat

The Light of Days: The Untold Story of Women Resistance Fighters in Hitler's Ghettos by Judy Batalion

The World Turned Upside Down: A History of the Chinese Cultural Revolution by Yang Jisheng

The Wife of Bath: A Biography by Marion Turner

The Power of Cute by Simon May

Red Meat Republic: A Hoof-to-Table History of How Beef Changed America by Joshua Specht

Burning Down the Haus: Punk Rock, Revolution, and the Fall of the Berlin Wall by Tim Mohr

Japanese Feminist Debates: A Century of Contention on Sex, Love, and Labor by Ayako Kano (and recommended by @cardassiangoodreads)

Doppelganger: A Trip into the Mirror World by Naomi Klein

Mad Scenes and Exit Arias: The Death of the New York City Opera and the Future of Opera in America by Heidi Waleson