#like actual religions aren't even this strict when it comes to this stuff

[planefood]

This is just a thing I see on my internet romps every now and then but it drives me crazy for no reason, bare with me. Why do people draw lines in the sand about different kinds of therians lol? Who cares if someone woke up and decided that they're wolf therian or something when you decided unconsciously you were a wolf therian instead. Why do people fight about whether or not someone can choose to be therian, its the most silly gatekeeping I see. And don't come at me saying "well theres this label for chosen therians because they're not actual therians like me" you guys... made these terms up in the first place it literally doesn't matter. There is absolutely zero difference between a chosen therian and a not chosen therian and you can't convince me otherwise. How would a self proclaimed "real" therian know that they didn't just choose to be therian one day, there's absolutely no way you can know that for sure.

Every time I become curious about a subculture there's always some ridiculous gatekeeping, even objectums seem to fight over silly bullshit.

[cromulentenough]

Coldest take ever: the backlash against political atheism was partly because Jews are often stereotyped as atheists, and lots of hardcore lefties will defend Hamas to the death. To a lesser extent the backlash against atheism was also when woke people started getting influenced by Afrocentrism and Indigenismo, which never worked with anti-clerical atheism the way it worked with the elitist strains of Marxism.

i think you're overcomplicating it. i don't remember political atheists being pro judaism either. and the backlash seemed the type to say 'actually judaism and islam are great, when you talk about religion you actually mean christianity sweaty :)'. From what i remember the political atheist attitude to I/P wasn't really to think of israel as the more atheist side (while secular jews are a thing i don't think that was really a stereotype about israel?), it was more 'look at I/P, it shows how religion causes war, if it weren't for religion I/P would be solved'. Which is giving a bit too much importance to religion there but then you get the overcorrection of people going 'actually religion doesn't matter at ALL and believing that god will send you to hell for x and heaven for y has no effect on your behaviour at all :) religion is just set dressing and has no effect on geopolitics'.

the US (and in particular bush/ republicans) and its allies are at war with a bunch of muslim countries and the whole war on terror thing were certainly a massive part of it, and I/P does contribute to that a bit, but i think afghanistan/ iraq played a bigger role. IMO its more about 'my opponent says islam is bad, my opponent is wrong about everything, so islam actually has nothing wrong with it'. It's an enemy of my enemy is my friend thing.

and like, the fundie republican reasons to dislike muslims WERE stupid a lot of the time! most muslims aren't even particularly religious or extremist the same way most christians aren't, fundie muslims and fundie christians agree on a ton of things, if it weren't for the war on terror stuff i could easily have seen muslims being a big republican bloc when it comes to socially conservative stuff (especially like, LGBT issues and even abortion even if islam isn't as strict on it as catholicism). Similar to how if the republicans weren't weirdly racist about a lot of stuff i could see a lot more religious black people being republican. which might tie into your thing about afrocentrism, i don't know.