#like if i were a choclatiere (however u spell it) who worked hard developing my skills and achieving perfection

[grecoromanyaoi]

and another thing that drives me insane! when ppl look at the successes n existence of marginalized and racialized ppl and the stories were telling and call them 'the (marginalized) version of (successful white/cishet/western/etc person or story). like idk i think calling someone 'the chinese amaury guichon' or 'the indigenous greta thunberg' or 'black einstein' (which. einstein was a jew in early 20th century europe, he was not seen as "white" by his society but thats another post) or calling a story 'like a gay (famous story)' is rly weird. why do u assume cishet white westerners are the only model for talent and success? why do u assume cishet white western stories are the model for good storytelling? idk these ppl r important and artistic and activists in their own right, as their own individuals that should be applauded and celebrated for their works, not as a tool to compare to cishet white westerners. why cant u just say 'this is a young indigenous climate activist that should b famous/listened to'. why do u have to compare her to a white westerner. i think maybe we should try and stop looking for chinese amaury guichons and indigenous greta thubergs and black einsteins and writing feminist retellings and 'this but theyre gay' and pulling bridgertonesque raceswappings (not to b confused w racially blind casting) but rather celebrate marginalized n racialized ppl in their fields as their own ppl, n celebrate existing stories that were already abt marginalized ppl and write new ones. idk