#like there's generally no ethical consumption under capitalism

[brettdoesdiscourse]

Just by the way. Always be wary around people who say, "it's the boss' job to pay you a fair wage" when discussing tipping.

Because while this is absolutely true, it's usually not coming from a good place.

People who say this very often don't mean, "it's the boss' job to pay you a fair wage and they aren't, so I'm boycotting supporting businesses that exploit their workers."

A lot of people who say this actually mean, "it's the boss' job to pay you a fair wage and they aren't, but I'm going to continue using this service and not tip because it's not my problem that your job is exploiting you."

Always be wary around people who say, "it's the boss' job to pay you a fair wage" because a lot of times, they're just using it to make themselves feel better about their choices.

[mexfeld]

I think I genuinely might hate online leftism.

[batsarebetterthanpeople]

Ok I think one thing we need to start asking ourselves before we start talking about politics is "is this pragmatic or dogmatic?" Pragmatic things are achievable goals that will bring about some sort of tangible change. Dogmatic is demanding people behave a certain way or they're a bad person who needs to be condemned, or doing some big thing that won't work because of your conscience or something like that.

Let's have some examples: a general strike: a general strike is an attempt to halt all economic activity by withholding labor, usually for some sort of goal. A pragmatic approach to a general strike would be having several different labor organizations coordinating all to go on strike at the same time in order to fulfill certain demands. A dogmatic approach to a general strike would be calling for a strike on social media a week before it happens with no backing from any labor orgs and demanding people use their limited sick days and PTO rather than walking out with the support of their coworkers and cyber bullying people who question the efficacy of a strike without organized labor.

A boycott: a pragmatic approach to a boycott is targeting one or a few companies that everyone can avoid purchasing from in order to achieve a specific goal. Boycotting the companies that BDS has called for is a good example of this because BDS has the reach to coordinate what could be a critical mass of people. A dogmatic approach to boycotting is demanding that people boycott any organization doing something bad. Spoiler alert there is no ethical consumption under capitalism but people still need to eat. If I hear you yelling at people about McDonald's and then see you with that Sabra Hummus it's on sight.

Protest: a pragmatic approach is organizing a large group of people or many small groups of people in the same city to march for a cause. A dogmatic approach is that one guy counter protesting pride who is there by himself every single year telling us all we'll burn in hell.

And so on and so forth. If you want to make a difference you need people and you're not gonna get people the way you're acting.

[penisblast7000]

I know the phrase "[scene or quote] from [thing you like] changed my life forever" has mostly become a funny ha ha thing to say about your blorbos and your shows and the such, but the part in Dungeon Meshi about how eating is the privilege of the living radically changed my view on nutrition, ethical consumption of animal products under capitalism and life in general. I'm not joking even a little bit

[quartercirclejab]

generally speaking, i'm not really on-board with Remake's attempts to reframe the Shinra vs Avalanche conflict as some kind of "both sides have a point" thing. i do think there's some interesting narrative points to be made in exploring the idea that for average citizens of Midgar, it's not possible to engage with society in any meaningful way without becoming part of the system that's oppressing them (ie no ethical consumption under capitalism), and that Avalanche's efforts to engage in direct action are going to harm their friends and neighbors right alongside Shinra's leadership

but it does feel awful to me that the early parts of Remake are using Tifa to make this point, and doing so primarily in this "see???? shinra is people too" bootlicker kind of way

Tifa, of everyone in Avalanche we've met up to this point, should have fewer reservations than most about the work we're engaging in. if i'm being 100% honest, writing her as the one who's having second thoughts and voices this weirdly centrist "I don't want anyone to get hurt" attitude feels like an attempt to sand down her edges and make her more palatable as one of the main female leads of the game. taking away Tifa's righteous and justified anger makes her seem like a character with weaker convictions, and that's completely unfair to her

if anyone in Avalanche should have this opinion, shouldn't it be Jessie? in both Remake and the OG, she's wracked with guilt over the destruction her bomb caused, and goes out of her way to specify that it did way more damage than she intended. Remake also introduces us to her parents, Shinra employees and beneficiaries of plate living, as well as Jessie's ambitions to be a theater actress. now, granted, the industrial accident that left her father bedridden is given as her reasoning for joining up with Avalanche, but it's not as extreme as the reasons the others have, and at the end of the day, she and her family are still living pretty well. shouldn't she be the one whose heart isn't really in it?

[ranmagender]

ive never been vehemently against ai, frankly my love of open culture sort of clashes with being 100% against it, as does my disdain for copyright in general. more concerning to me is the mass amount of energy consumption and the lack of consent in the scraping for training data.

that and im generally against whatever tech bros are into at every moment. can genAI be ethical? i mean sure it can but things like chatGPT i dont think are just from like i said, environmental and consent factors alone.

frankly im just sick of techbros acting like its like one step away from sentience and anyone who doesnt love it draining power grids is just hindering progress

i get it, no ethical consumption under capitalism and what not but thats my like main problem with it. if creators had to opt in and give consent to have their work be used in datasets i think that would be fine and there are some ai models that do that

[the-cat-and-the-birdie]

hello! I really liked your character analysis, especially Hobie and the interactions with Diane (she´s very groovy and beautiful n.n) so, I wanted to ask you if you think Hobie could make good friends with someone with a symbiote and the symbiote itself, my spidersona (symbiotesona?) is one of those. I know there´s some story between Hobie and symbiotes in his universe but I couldn't find the comics where it is explained.

You're amazing and keep going!

Oh absolutely!

Especially for Hobie - He has a symbiote dog!

Hobie is accepting of everyone (he's the best I love him) even symbiotes!!

In his universe, V.E.N.O.M was used in his universe as a weapon for President Osborn's police force - but I think Hobie would see the underlying greed and cruelty of the cops as the problem, and not the symbiote.

If anything I think he'd really respect your sona -

Cause that takes a lot of mental fortitude, and moral and strength in general so he'd be like 'That's fucking metal.'

If there's side effects, or conflict between your sona and the symbiote - I think he'd always want to help, and would like, speak to them as separate people lol

He knows that sharing the same body doesn't make them the same person, and that your sona was full person before the symbiote, so he would see them as a Duo - like two partners in crime.

He'd be really careful about his music playing and volume cause he wouldn't want to hurt your sona, so he would always give a heads-up.

Diane would be SO interested - and she'd probably have to think about SO MUCH, get prepared for a lot of questions!

Diane is pretty clever - but a little naive, so she'd be solidly in the 'All Aliens Come in Peace.' Star Trek started in 1966 - so Diane basically grew up with it around.

A symbiote is something alien, so it can't be murderous and evil - even if it eats people. It's not from here!! Don't be mean to them!!!

If your symbiote eats people, or needs meat, Diane would..honestly not be that freaked out. She'd have to think about it.

"So, Do you eat people on your planet?"

"Well, I guess that's not too bad. I mean..some people have a pet pig, some people eat pig, some do both. So it's like..the same, right? Not that you see humans as pets, you know -"

If humans can not snap and eat their pets and stuff, maybe this symbiote knows food from friends like them! If anything, Diane would be upset if people rushed to judge your sona OR the symbiote.

Her defense : "They didn't ask to come to this planet!" or Hobie's favorite -

"Why are you shaming them! They're not the only immoral ones. There is no ethical consumption under capitalism!!"

Hobie knows she is just repeating something she heard him say one time - and that is NOT what that phrase means, but he thinks its funny, so he lets her say it.

The three (four - actually) could have so much fun!

Hobie would probably get them hearing protectors so they can hang out backstage without getting hurt.

And y'all can deck it out with cool stickers and punk marker graffiti!

And although beef and stuff probably doesn't compare, Diane would still try making stuff like beef tartare, koi soi, or other raw meat dishes, just to see if they like 'em!

She LOVES sushi, so sashimi is a must to try - She'd want everyone to feel included at the potluck - it's only right, nobody leaves hungry!!!!

[Also thank you so much for the sweet words!!! I know I take literally forever to go through my inbox (it takes me very very long and im gonna point at adhd) but these things really brighten my day and give me the inspiration to keep sharing. It means a lot, thank you!!]

[pokytoad]

Okay yeah "no ethical consumption under capitalism" but its also worth noting that like,, as hopeless as climate activism is for the general population,, not littering and not contributing to actively detrimental companies, etc, can help your LOCAL environment. Something I've learned as a Certified Conservationist is that focusing on your local area is MASSIVELY more beneficial than getting nihilistic about the entire globe. Small changes make big impacts.

Reusable straws won't save the turtles, but keeping plastic litter off the streets will help your local environment heal.

[joannerowling]

What does death of the author mean exactly?!?!?

To put it briefly, "Death of the Author" is an essay by literary theorist Roland Barthes, published first (in French and English - simultaneously, not as a coincidence) in 1967. It belongs to post-modernism in that it aims to deconstruct an idea: the idea that a text should be analysed and interpreted through its author's life. Barthes argued that literature transcends its author's (intended or subconscious) meaning, that there are as many interpretations of a text as there are readers, each equal in worth, and that the very act of reading is part of creating.

Tumblr users, having generally not read the original essay (if they have heard of Barthes at all), tend to interpret the words "Death of the Author" as: "i don't like this writer, but i can pretend they didn't write this book i like, because it doesn't matter who wrote a book anyways, the Author is Dead", with a dash of "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" and other such t-shirt slogans. The dumbest understand it as: "i will symbolically kill the Author i dislike by writing very bad fanfiction."

[nkjemisin]

Things in my ask box #2

Got a new one for the “questions that might catch the poster some flak” bin. The poster asks, “What were you thinking when you wrote ‘The Ones Who Stay and Fight?’“ There was more to the question, but that’s what it boils down to (and I did clarify with the ask-er that this is what they wanted to know most).

I don’t generally like to discuss readers’ interpretations of my stories. Art is subjective, and what one person loves another might loathe, sometimes for the exact same reasons. Also, half the time I don’t even know what I’m doing; sometimes I don’t notice a theme in my work until years later when a reviewer mentions it, or I re-read it long after publication. My mind works in mysterious ways, even to me. But since you asked what I was thinking and not to confirm/deny a particular interpretation, I’ll try to explain.

(First, for those who haven’t read it, Ursula K. Le Guin’s “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” is her most famous short story, and probably one of the most famous short stories in the world. There’s a whole subgenre of responses to it, because it provokes such powerful reactions in readers, and I’m no exception. [I’m a huge fan of Le Guin, if you didn’t know from me screaming about her to anyone who would listen for like 10 years now.] If you haven’t read the story, you should; it’s probably available somewhere online. There are a million ways to interpret the story, and if you poke around for reviews or lit crit analyses you’ll find feminist readings, anti-capitalist readings, mythopoeic/folklorist readings, and more. My story does not make sense if you haven’t read her story; it functions solely in conversation with Le Guin’s. Think of it as fanfic, if that helps.)

I’m not a literary scholar and I don’t pretend to be, but I’ve always leaned into the anti-capitalist reading of “Omelas.” Anybody who’s reading this in the developed world is already living in Omelas. Every time we buy a pair of Nikes, we’re contributing to sweatshops, child labor, migration crises, pollution... our own version of the abused child locked in a cellar. No ethical consumption under capitalism. Also, I lean anti-capitalist with “Omelas” because I think often of this quote by Le Guin:

“We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.”

Bad. Ass. I want to be her when I grow up.

That said, when I decided to respond to this as a writer -- by writing back to it -- I was more interested in anti-racist readings of Omelas. Those interpretations don’t seem to be as popular, but at the time I wrote my story, I was trying to process the absolute bombardment of open racism and every other kind of bigotry that seemed to be metastasizing in the wake of Trump’s election. I pondered the world that these people seemed to want:  a world of war and endless suffering, doomed to end in extinction for us all (tho some believe Jesus or Jeff Bezos will whisk them away before things get too bad). I wondered what it would take to come back from that world, if we went down that path but managed to survive as a species. So to my mind, Omelas works well as a metaphor for conservatives’ (and fascists’) endless fantasies of the world that was, in which everything was wonderful before the “corruptions” of liberalism destroyed it -- corruptions like equality, diversity, intellectualism, religious freedom, and democracy. This is the “again” that the “make America great...” people embrace -- a “better” world that never existed. We all know that in the 1950s, there were plenty of kids in cellars, worse than today: BIPOC kids, queer kids, disabled kids, poor kids. If America’s wealthy and powerful get what they want, they will get to live in a utopian fantasy; the rest of us go in the cellar.

The society these people want is one that further-codifies the idea that some people are lesser. Some people aren’t as fully people, basically, and therefore don’t deserve rights, basic necessities, compassion, or life. Therefore I decided to make my “utopia” (scare quotes because, like Omelas, Um-Helat really isn’t) an anti-bigoted society, which has instead chosen to codify the idea that no one is lesser. Instead of its happiness depending on limited oppression, I wanted my “utopia” to depend on limited suppression of that insidious idea.

Suppression is no better than oppression, by the way. We’re used to oppression, so maybe it doesn’t seem so bad... to some. But both ways of maintaining these not-quite-utopias require harm to be done to some for the benefit of others. Omelas chose to limit the harm to a random child, and to a lesser degree to all its citizens, who must morally compromise themselves in order to enjoy their lives. Um-Helat chooses to limit the harm to those who’ve internalized some people are lesser -- the intolerant, per Karl Popper’s paradox of tolerance -- and to the “social workers,” who must morally compromise themselves in order for the other citizens of Um-Helat to thrive. I was also playing with the idea that there’s nowhere to walk away to. Imperialism and capitalism have made pretty much the whole world Omelas, in real life. So how does any society grapple with its own complicity with evil? Omelas is better off than our own world, and Um-Helat, because people can walk away, there.

It’s entirely possible that I failed to do what I tried to do with this story -- first because I tried to do so much. “Omelas” is a deceptively simple argument with deep, complex points being made; my attempt to answer had to cover a lot of territory. Second because Le Guin was a master of the short form, while I’m pretty much a dabbler, and third because this was also my first time trying pastiche, and it probably shows. But I believe in shooting my literary shot, hit or miss, and I’m glad that I did. It turned out better than I expected.

So that’s what I was thinking. ☺️

[charmanderxerneas]

can people get it thru their heads that you can like fnaf while hating scott cawthon? Imo its not fucking immoral to like fnaf like it is with harry potter or some shit

Like. Yes scott is a republican who gets money from fnaf, thats not good that money is going to republican candidates

but first of all like. theres no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism (as much as i hate it: i assume at least some of my money is going to republicans from buying at certain stores or restaurants or something). You cannot exist without at least SOME of your money going towards that, it sucks.

and he at least claims to love all his fans regardless of gender or race or sexuality (does not excuse his donations or mean hes a good person) but at least its better than like. jkr who has antisemitic and racism BAKED into her series lore and who actively spouts anti trans hatespeech. if you play fnaf at freddys its not like. shoving republican ideas down your throat. and hes letting steel wool and just other people in general the series now, stepping down from it (though of course hes still behind the scenes, his story so his lore goes).

i just. ugh you can like something flawed with a flawed creator 😭 its okay. its not as bad as something awful like harry potter and theres usually Some flaw behind every creator yknow? all that said i dont like scott. dont get me wrong, im not defending him. i Dont Like Scott. but grahhh makes me mad that i cant enjoy fnaf in peace without people crying at me about it

(i am trans dont fucking come at me about that shit. i just needed to rant)

[hsvh-hp]

Hi! Thanks for all the responses -- I hadn't realized how many chapters I'd gotten through since your last round until I saw the emails lmao

I was wondering, in regards to this:

And omg, I totally feel you on being a trans person in the HP fandom. It's very weird how my tumblr dash is set up. I have mutuals still from old fandoms who are queer, and I feel so ostracized from them at times when they toe the line of 'anybody in the HP fandom supports JKR, you're a bad person if you're still engaging with it'. I'll spare you the essay on why I disagree with that, but oddly the safest place I feel on the internet as a trans person is in the HP fandom. Which is weird at face value, I suppose, given what JKR is doing, but we really are separate from her. I've yet to see substantial evidence that fandom, which is infamous for generating zero revenue, is floating trans peoples' demise. It's just a thought crime, I guess.

if you would, perhaps, not spare me the essay? lol

I feel the same sort of ostracization which is especially frustrating when I am in such "thought crimes are fake!" circles, and I'm interested in your perspective, if you want to give it!

Sure, I’ll offer my perspective on it! This is probably best broken down into bullet points:

1. JKR was already a billionaire before she came out as a TERF.

There is nothing in the world that will change this status. Even if every single person currently engaging with her various IPs immediately dropped them, JKR would still have a billion plus dollars to drop on anti-trans movements and whatever. A billion dollars is immensely difficult to picture. The easiest way is to think like this: if you make $50,000 a year, the equivalent of her dropping $75,000 the other day is you spending $3.75. How often do you spend 0.0075% of your income and give it any thought? JKR’s wealth is not directly tied to ‘levels of fandom engagement’.

Which leads to…

2. Boycotts don’t work.

Sorry. They don’t. Not against someone this politically powerful. If they did, the flood of people out of the HP fandom in 2020 would have had a measurable effect. What did have a measurable effect? People not going to watch the Fantastic Beast movies (because they were hot trash lmao). Not giving JKR any more money works in the sense that it cripples her future projects, but it has zero effect on what’s already in her purse.

Also, think of boycotts this way: wasn’t it hilarious watching conservatives try to boycott the Barbie movie, Nike, Bud Light, and whatever else they’ve systematically locked on to? But so then why do progressives/the left/whoever think it’s going to work the other way? Like with Hogwarts Legacy? Just don’t interact with the media, dude. And if you do, pirate it.

3. Fandom is not mainstream. I have never seen any data to substantiate that participating in a fandom directly correlates to dollars for the IP. Copyright literally prevents that from happening. To bring up to popular saying, “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism”, fandom exists outside of capitalism—for me, at least, as a fan fiction writer. This is a hobby to me. I have never seen a red cent for any of the hours of work I’ve put into my fics.

And I can probably guarantee that no one has stumbled upon Harry Potter through me, lol. They didn’t read one of my fics and go, ‘you know, I should check out what source material this is coming from’. Harry Potter is so well-known that there’s no way they came in blind.

Also, the TERF discourse is very much an online thing. I work retail irl and I’ve had conversations with customers who’ll say “you know, I really don’t get all this hubbub against trans people” but are too boomer to be anything more than tangentially aware that Harry Potter is a Thing. Like, ‘oh yeah, my kids read those books when they were coming out, but I never bothered’. One of my employees bought a set of the HP books because they were on a wicked deal at Costco, and when we were discussing it I told her that while I still enjoyed HP, I wasn’t comfortable giving JKR more money because she’s extremely transphobic and donates a lot of money to anti-trans causes. My employee was horrified and said that had she known that, she wouldn’t have bought the books. Lots of people just don’t know!

Which takes me to…

4. This type of online activism isn’t effective.

I’m talking specifically about being anti-Harry Potter or anti-JKR. Falling into those two categories does not automatically make you pro-trans. This was pretty blatantly obvious back when the books were being burned for promoting witchcraft. As far as fighting for trans peoples’ rights, screaming until you’re blue in the face about how anybody who engages with Harry Potter is a traitor and JKR BAD is wasting time better spent doing something productive - something that could actually benefit trans people rather than…I don’t know…virtue signalling that their blog or twitter account is a safe space?

5. I personally do not feel welcomed or vouched for by these people.

Listen, I’m going to break myself down into all my stupid little categories. I’m trans. Autistic. Intersex. Aromantic. Asexual. Basically, all the things that people love to try and cast out of the queer community, whether that means they’re trying to split LGBTQIA+ at the T or Q.

The anti-Harry Potter stuff, as far as attacking the fandom, feels like the latest strain of purity politics to me. As I’ve laid out above, abandoning HP will not right the wrongs of JKR in any measurable or tangible way. Boycotts don’t work. Fandom does not feed JKR’s coffers, and destroying the fandom will not cripple her. There are trans people inside the HP fandom, and what of us? Are we traitors? Are we not ‘really’ trans, because obviously we don’t care about the current political climate? Are we just confused and need to be enlightened as to what harm we’re doing? Where have I heard this rhetoric before?

One small thing, tangentially related:

6. I don’t care what JKR says about how engaging with Harry Potter tells her about who her ‘supporters’ are.

Seriously? She’s a lying dirtbag, and I’m just supposed to take her word on this? This is the one thing she just so happens to be right about?

When she started spouting TERF shit, I was really saddened by the writers who, upon leaving the fandom, also deleted their works in protest. Seeing as the majority of the HP fandom is queer, I’m sure that JKR was very pleased with the amount of queer media erasure that occurred. Why did we do that for her?

7. I believe JKR actually seethes and malds over the prospect of her fandom being queer and producing queer content.

As a writer, there’s a special kind of pain that comes from someone not quite interpreting your work the way you would have wanted them to. What do you think JKR’s first reaction was when she first learned about the Harry/Draco ship? The Draco/Hermione ship? If she didn’t live in a stone castle, I bet she would’ve punched a hole in the wall.

So, yeah. Transing and gaying all of her characters is a pretty nice way to get to her in a way that she can’t legally or financially retaliate. Every time she screams ‘WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE?!’ at the queer people in her fandom, a trans person’s crops are watered.

8. The HP setting is very welcoming to trans people.

Potions exist that can change your body. Enough said.

That the Harry Potter books never really says anything specifically about trans people (NOTE: obviously JKR’s prejudices even back then showed through, but this isn’t about that) leaves the question on the table. Obviously trans people exist in the Harry Potter setting, because they exist everywhere. So, how did they never get any page time?

Well, who says they didn’t? In a setting where potions exist to change your body, trans people are just…people. I don’t even think that they would have a marginalized identity because gender dysphoria would be something very easily treated. Think of it like someone who takes medication for blood pressure. They need the medication, it’s life-saving, and while there isn’t a magical pill to ‘cure’ high blood pressure, it can be managed. The magical world revels in being strange. Why would being trans, while being considered strange here in the ‘Muggle’ world, be anything other than normal there? Why can’t it be?

And then there are Metamorphmagi. People who can literally change themselves at will! If that isn’t a trans person’s dream, I don’t know what is. I would personally love the option of being the biggest, hairiest dude with a dick so big an erection would make me black out, and then ultra femme and delicate the next.

Last on this point, Harry never notes anyone specifically trans in the text (NOTE: touching on things like the physical descriptions of Rita Skeeter and Marge Dursley, JKR tends to do the ugly=bad person thing. Although she describes Rita and Marge as mannish in appearance, they aren’t trans characters. They’re women that JKR wants to frame as bad people. Like I said above, this is JKR’s prejudice showing through). If Harry never notes anyone as specifically trans, that probably means that it’s impossible to tell at face value. The same as blood pressure medication, to return to that analogy. How do you know someone is on them? They tell you. You see the pill bottle and happen to know what that medication is for. They complain about side effects. They complain about the symptoms that led them going to the doctor in the first place.

9. Queer HP fandom content can potentially be how a Harry Potter fan realizes that they’re queer (or that queer people are just regular folks).

Hey, the first one happened to me!

If someone comes into the Harry Potter fandom unaware of JKR’s politics - maybe they were gifted the books for their birthday or happened to catch the movies on TV - it’s good actually that this person doesn’t fall right into an echo chamber of JKR’s politics. I’ll be happily here to correct her record in a way that isn’t shaming or policing them.

Anyway, I think that’s everything lol. To summarize:

- The HP Fandom is a neutral setting. Engaging with it doesn’t help JKR, and not engaging with it doesn’t help trans people. Just don’t spend money on official HP merch.

- If you want to be a pro-trans activist or trans political ally, please just ignore JKR and put all your focus on the real world.

- There are trans people in the HP fandom who are left feeling awkward and uncomfortable due to virtue signalling.

- Generating queer HP content is good, actually.

[bread-and-roses-too]

I've talked before about how, while there's no ethical consumption under capitalism, there is standout UNethical consumption that should be avoided so here are some tips I use as someone with a general vendetta against Amazon:

use the shopping tab on google instead of going straight to amazon when you want to buy something.

[image ID: an image of a google search for "cool lamps". The cursor is hovering over the second tab to the right under the search bar, which is labeled "shopping".]

this will allow you to look through a variety of sellers that sell the item you're looking for. You can also sort by seller, price, condition, and other factors using this feature.

look everywhere else first. I pretty much only click on Amazon when I've exhausted all of the other options on the shopping tab.

The Better Business Bureau is your friend. Some non-Amazon websites can be sketchy as hell. If the business is based in the U.S., Mexico, or Canada, the BBB is basically the mother of all review sites. If you suspect a company is suppressing negative reviews, or if they don't post them at all, check with the BBB to see if the business has a page and if people have complained.

You can also look up "is [website] a scam". This is a bit jankier and less official but it does work. Usually if a website is conning people out of their money someone has posted to somewhere complaining about it.

Choose smaller sellers if applicable.

[image ID: an image of a white origami-style ceiling light made to look like a lapu lapu or grouper fish. the seller is VasiliLights on Etsy, and the price is $243.18 and shipping is $34.29].

Obviously if you're looking for a specific item it's probably only sold on a certain store's website, but if you're looking for unique pieces, it's actually fairly fulfilling to buy from a smaller seller. When you buy from places like Ebay and Etsy, or from smaller websites owned by the seller, you're handing most of that money over to a real person like you who will go and spend it on things they want and need. Sellers are also genuinely happy and grateful when something sells, my mom has been a seller on Ebay for years and she still gets excited when she makes a sale.

If an Etsy seller has a personal website, buy from there instead. This is more of an anti-corporation tip than a specific anti-Amazon tip.

[Image ID: a screenshot of the Etsy shop page for neurodelightful that also displays the address for their website, neurodelightful.com].

Sites like Etsy still take big fees from their sellers which can make business more challenging and result in sellers not being paid properly for their work. Personal sites help reduce this so sellers will often promote them on their shop page. If you like your money to go into the hands of real people and not corporations, buy from their personal website instead.

Take notice when artists advertise their shops here on Tumblr. It can be easy to school by someone asking for money but a lot of people on here sell genuinely amazing art. @/cypric-rat-hyperfixation, @/dappermouth, @/pangur-and-grim, @/pidgie-core, @/ultrainfinitepit, and @/pikaole are just a few people I can think of who sell their art and it's usually cheaper than buying the same mass produced painting that everyone has in their house.

Switch out your Amazon wishlist for a Throne wishlist. One of my biggest pet peeves about leaving amazon was no longer having a wishlist to display on social media that people could actually buy from. Throne filled that role for me. Copy a link for the item you want, click "add gift", paste the link, adjust the price if needed, and bam, now anyone can but it for you. You can even set up crowdfunding for items costing over $10. It's also sex worker friendly and allows you to have NSFW items on your list if you choose!

Finally, understand that there are just some things you won't be able to find elsewhere. Don't beat yourself up for buying a non-essential item from Amazon once in a blue moon. Amazon is a massive overarching corporation that can be extremely hard to avoid especially if you need to shop for things at cheaper prices. The overall goal is to reduce the money given to them and increase the money given to other sellers to send a message that our favor with Amazon is waning and they need to change things to win it back.

[latentspaceofficial]

2025 expectations; year in review

dense read alert! working on that srry a core memory for me is this artwork (on EDMS?)

set to the K?D remix of The Chainsmokers - Young can't find the video anymore, but it was definitely a staple of me as a person. a snapshot into who i was at the time. i was many things i hated, but in the same breath things i miss. i still had quite a lot of joy, innocence, and wanderlust. i think a lot of people did at the time. for some, riding on the coat-tails of a post-worlds era in electronic music. i won't deny that the real world has real problems that need addressing. laudable causes worthy of our time and care. but in some ways, we have lost ourselves from peeping the horrors

i remember having just moved out during the pandemic, no hardcore job yet, just a childish dream, new found freedom, and some money i had saved up. i remember eating very cheaply and being horrified as i realized how many people died or suffered so that i could eat cheap rice and salt to go do my teaching or programming. there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. that much will always ring true. good god the horrors i woke up to. the ever present suffering and misery of others was not something my mind let me put back into the bottle. i think it changed me and a lot of other people by becoming a generational centerpointe. a rallying cry for change. only to have recently realized that change is not so easy. maybe even that we've been making change more difficult for ourselves. that in our passion, we've burned too hot and burned out. i'm not saying social changes aren't possible. i'm saying that many were already monumental tasks. nothing accomplishable by one person alone. there have been far more organized efforts in the past to make these changes with varying success. but our generation is one of the worst at getting absolutely anything done in general. then when there have been and always will be detractors from within that will sabotage our own causes, how can we ever hope to accomplish these feats of social progress? not by force. not with a stick. with a soft voice, a gentle tug on the arm, and a good listening ear. not everyone shares your beliefs. not everyone shares mine. you cannot ostracize the people you hate. what will that bring but more hatred? more dehumanization? we need to have the empathy to hear out the plights of others. offer first how you can help them. don't wait for a reward. if you need a reward, your intention was always propagandizing. if you treat other humans with love and respect, without considering if they deserve it, then congratulations, you're setting fertile soil for character growth! if you treat someone like a human being, they will likely treat you kindly back. we are simple creatures with very complex social dynamics. that must be remembered. "showing them why their wrong" is a strategy. this is not a war. truly, the leopards will eat your face. but most people are humans, not this effigy. going into the new administration, know this... and, it isn't just for the us crowd. the people you hate will always hate you back. the people you love, may not always love you back. but what do you have to lose by feeding your hungry neighbor? or offering to vc or hold someone's hand in a rough time? do these things not just because these people fit your moral alignments. do this because you're invested in them growing and being cared for as a person, more than you're invested in them following your belief system. because, spoiler, i'm an atheist, even if that sounded like a bunch of religious teaching stuffs. but here's the secret, that's because these are tried and true social norms that pre-date many points of growth in society. we didn't grow because people died, we grew because people changed. people cleaned themselves up, filtered their experiences and their opinions, and passed them on to their children. not everything humanity has done has been right. but we're still a young species. we're still learning what works and what was maybe bad. at the end of the day, the belief that i should exist and have rights and all that fun stuff, is no more right than the worst person you can imagine. the universe will crush you and mold you in the most horrifyingly incomprehensible ways. not because it believes in your or doesn't. the universe is indifferent and the life on this earth is just trying to survive. animals do not live in fear like us and animals do not have morals. but we are not animals. we are not leopards. we are humans.

(cont. in next post)

[mermaid886]

Hi, this is not a criticism, but I was wondering something.

Many people, especially on here, completely boycott the franchise because of JKR. Now, while I personally don't agree with the sentiment that you have to stop liking or talking about HP all together (nor with the often-expressed "Well ackshually HP was always had" sentiment), I do understand the request to not generate any new revenue for JKR by buying merch or watching the movies/the new series through subscription services.

Personally, I'm not interested in the new series because everything I've heard so far about it is raising too many red flags in terms of how close to my own image of the verse it'll be, or if it will be good at all. It's feels too soon, too. However, I can fully understand people being interested in it.

Anyway, my question to you: how do balance this issue, and have you gotten a lot of backlash here on tumblr from people with the initially described views?

(Something I also find at least a bit hypocritical because there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, and there are many franchises or big movies that have people attached to them that are highly problematic/engage in highly harmful behavior etc. Think Tom Cruise and Scientology, for example, who's not just a passive member like Elizabeth Moss but actively promotes a cult that has cost many people their lives and ruined countless of others. To me, that's actually even worse than any harm JKR has caused, and in terms of a pessimistic prospect of the future on par with each other, but I wouldn't tear people a new one for buying a movie ticket to see Top Gun.)

Hi there! Thanks for the ask, I don’t get many of these.

None of this is meant to be negative in any way, it is merely a response.

First, I think we need to discuss rights - that’s ultimately how I approach this.

I personally stand with JKR and that’s my right, as it is her right to have her own opinions.

However, it is also someone’s right to disagree with her opinions.

If someone feels they want to boycott HP, then they have the right to feel that way and to do so.

But, at no point does anyone on either side have any right to tell others how to spend their time and money, what interests to pursue, abandon, etc…..that’s where the problem often comes in.

I would also like to examine the notion that “many people” are boycotting HP. Sure, a lot of people on social media appear to be, but there happens to be large amounts of specific demographics that use social media, not the entire fandom as a whole. So, the folks posting on tumblr for example, is not necessarily representative of the entire fandom.

Also, I believe there are a lot of closet Potterheads. Folks who still fully and actively participate in fandom, buy merch etc. in the secrecy and privacy of their real lives, after they get done being keyboard warriors for the day.

Regardless, based on the franchise’s continued success, it’s apparent that the loud internet voices you see crying and protesting about HP as a whole are actually the few of the fandom, not the many.

You also have a great point about “ethical consumption under capitalism” - as this is as much of a fairytale as Hogwarts itself.

Ethical consumption under capitalism - you’re right, there is no such thing.

Own an apple product? You support slave labor.

Drive a Volkswagen? Congrats, you gave money to a company founded under the Nazi party.

As far as the new show goes, I think those who want to continue their boycott will do so, and that’s again, within their rights.

However, if Legacy’s selling success is any indication, there are many more people out there willing to *not* boycott versus boycott. (Current casting rumors aside…..)

I personally fully support your decision on the new series and so far declare it to be mine as well. To me, what HBO has planned does not seem to be in line with canon or my visual of the verse so I will most likely not watch either.

But no, surprisingly enough, while I have received some hate, I have not gotten the backlash I thought I would. I believe that is because there are many out there who share my views or at least appreciate my posts and are too afraid to openly voice their opinions for fear of going against the advertised hive mind.

Personally, I am too old and too tired to care anymore if someone does not like my opinions, haha.

Honestly, since I began taking stances on Tumblr, I’ve gained more followers on here and have also gained more subscribers on ao3.

Long story short: there’s more folks out there against cancel culture than you think. HP is no exception.

[samarashoot]

two long essay posts sitting in my likes rn. one is about ai art ethics and the other is about the fast-fashion-ization of crafting and i think they're kind of the same thing

i've recently gotten into crochet. i don't have a ton of money to spare on artisanal hand-dyed natural fiber yarns, so i've been using the cheap acrylic stuff. without doing any research i can fairly safely assume that everything i am using, in addition to shedding plastic microfibers into our waterstreams and bloodstreams, was made by exploited people in a hazardous factory setting because that is the state of most global manufacturing today. if i continue to buy that yarn, am i directly responsible for the ocean pollution and worker exploitation involved in its production? non-rhetorical question, i don't think there's a simple yes or no answer.

same thing with ai. personally i don't think there's any kind of inherent evil to using publicly hosted artwork as training data (so many of my favorite art practices – from collage to readymades to drag lipsync tracks to music sampling to being 14 and tracing my favorite manga panels – rely on "stealing" the work of other artists without permission). but even if ai image generators were fundamentally exploitative in their sourcing, would their usage by random everyday people be any more inherently evil than me using unethically sourced yarn for my crochet projects?

idk. i do personally feel put off by most ai art i see (including the dunes video that sparked a lot of this buzz among my mutuals) because i find it aesthetically uninteresting and i can't stand the nft tech bro types who seem to gravitate towards it, but i am working on separating my moral judgements and my aesthetic judgements, which is much easier said than done. yesterday i saw someone say "ai is gross and scary" which like yeah it is! but that doesn't make it inherently evil, it is simply a tool

i don't believe in corporate sanctioned copyright laws or the almighty power of intellectual property and originality, nor do i ascribe much importance to ill-defined concepts like "human creativity" (inb4 hello i am a professional ~traditional~ artist and art teacher). but also i don't like to lean too hard on "no ethical consumption under late capitalism" as an easy way out to just do whatever regardless of the consequences. whatever to do!