#like what is the propaganda? that black ppl exist?????

[1eos]

its weird seeing how politicized being black is. white right wingers shitting and pissing over the gta teaser bc its a bunch of black ppl in it and saying 'ohh gta has gone woke' is fucking crazy. like huh? the series that has been.........criticized.....by a lot of left leaning ppl is going woke.......? the game that been had women and black ppl in it like this reactionary shit is so random. all of these right wingers hate gta anyways bc you can shoot cops 😭😭😭😭😭 what the fuck are you mad abt anyways?

[blackfilmmakers]

Hello! I was wondering if it was Okay to ask for some tips on how to write a black horror antagonist respectfully? I’m a horror author and I realized that my horror villains are not very diverse, but I’m afraid of falling into stereotypes.

Things to consider when making a Black Horror Antagonist:

-Who is the protagonist in relation to this Black antagonist? Is it a White kid? A group of people with fairer skin compared to the Black antagonist? If you aim to make diverse stories, you can't just make the antagonists poc and call it a day. Society already use the narrative that Black ppl are out to terrorize White neighborhoods with malicious intent, to justify killing us. Birth of a Nation glorified the Klan so well(cinema-wise) it literally brought back the Klan. We also have this ongoing rise of anti-Haitian crimes(AntiBlackness overall) because some White woman wanted to make a meme of Haitians eating cats

-If they are a magical antagonist, is the magic they used based on Black or Brown cultures that are already demonized enough? The recent rise of anti-haitian propaganda does stem from the stereotype that Haitians practice cannibalism for their "satanic" ritualsm. Which the word, "cannibal" was a slur that refers to islanders apparently. Anyways you can have your magical Black antagonist, but if they start writing in vodun symbols and wear feather headdresses, reconsider that it's just "if it's a vague Black/Brown religion it's automatically scary"

-What is their personality like? Are they cunning and creative and clever? Or are they a simple-minded beast? In The Promised Neverland we see two caretakers(they are antagonists): Isabella and Krone. Isabella is a fair-skinned woman who is presented as intelligent and cunning with her villainy. Whereas Krone's villainy depicts her as a monstrous beast. We already have enough Black antagonists that are essentially the main villain's attack dog, with very little focus on their motivations. If you wanted to write about a monster/beast that has no intelligence you could always write that instead. But if you have a Black human being, well humans can be written in so many different ways, do use that opportunity

-Consider whether or not your Black Horror antagonists are ableist narratives. Ableism is already a problem in horror stories already. But when it comes to Black neurodivergent/disabled people, you have to be extra careful with that. Sonya Massey's disability (and aave) made those cops murder her because at the end of the day, she's a Black woman they didn't bother to hear out, and needed an excuse to shoot her. What you write as a "scary" trait for your Black antagonist, could support ableist narratives that disabilities/neurodivergency are inherently dangerous

-Colorism can be an issue here as well. Even if you do have a Black protagonist, are they someone who is lighter than the villain? Dark=/=Inherently Bad, and Light=/=Inherently Good

-Horror is all about exploring a fear (societal or individual). So this is when you have to ask yourself, what do you fear? What do you think your readers' fears are when they read about this Black villain character? You can't control your readers' perception, sure, but fiction doesn't exist in a vacuum. It can challenge societal expectations or support them. So with all the points I listed down above and whatever points I didn't say, this could all attribute to the "horrors" or the "thing you need to fear" in the story. Do your readers find the Black antagonist scary because they are a well written antagonist with proper motivations? Or are they conditioned to see Black people as scary?

-In terms of how these characters speak or their motivations, that I have to advise getting several Black beta readers(that aren't just your friends) to have review your work. If your character is a disabled Black person, get a disabled Black reader. If they are Jamaican character, get a Jamaican reader. Hell, ask these readers if they even find your Black villain intimidating or compelling.

All in all, if you write about a Black character you really need to write them as you do for your White characters. The problem I think most nonblack writers have with this advice though is that they read that as "write Black characters as White(the default)". That won't work. You always have to consider a Black character's Blackness and how that interacts with the world you created

@/writingwithcolor and @/creatingblackcharacters would probably have more input

TLDR: Make the final girl a darkskinned Black woman

[the-shipper-center]

*. ! MY DNI LIST 🌟

Disclaimer !! DNI lists are made so you can know what kinda of people i don't want following me or even trying to befriend me. I know I can't control who is gonna rb, see, or like my posts all the time, but I can block ppl who follow/dm me. DNI lists are not up to debate or discussion. I will not reply to ppl starting arguments about what they think is wrong about my DNI. My DNI is hella long, and i'm proud of that 🌟 Note: it may have some typos.

!! DNI IF YOU ... 🪻

Queerphobe:

— Hold beliefs that are queerphobic.

— Support conversion therapy or believe in the pathologization of queer identities.

— Attack people’s pronouns( is against xeno/neutral/neo or graphic pronouns).

— Radical feminism (radfem) and trans-exclusionary radical feminism (TERF), transmed(A person who believes that medically-diagnosed gender dysphoria or medical transition are essential traits of being transgender), transcum(A person who believes that gender dysphoria is an essential trait to being transgender).

— Deny the validity of xenogender identities or believe that only neurodivergent individuals can be xenogender.

— If you deny trans individuals access to gender-affirming care, whether medical, psychological, or social.

Racist and xenophobic:

— Support or spread white supremacy, neo-Nazism, anti-Black, anti-Asian, anti-Indigenous, anti-Latino, or ethnic nationalism.

— Use racial slurs, mock ethnic traditions, or engage in cultural appropriation.

— Deny the existence of systemic racism or dismissed movements like Black Lives Matter.

— Has xenophobic beliefs against immigrants or foreign cultures.

— Advocate for fascism, Nazism, or far-right extremism.

— Promote harmful conspiracy theories that demonize marginalized communities.

— Engage in or support political violence against minorities or dissenters.

— Spread antisemitic conspiracy theories or rhetoric.

— Support Zionism or justify actions that harm Palestinian people.

— Defend Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or promote Russian propaganda.

— Support Israeli policies that lead to the oppression of Palestinians.

MAP/NoMAPs:

— Support MAPs, NoMAPs, Zoopride, or any notion that minors and animals can give consent to sexual interactions or relationships.

— Deny that paraphilic individuals can seek recovery or that their paraphilias might harm others.

— Anti-para that believe that paraphilics should be "killed" or harmed.

— Pro contact of any kind.

— Believe that paraphilias are just harmless kinks, ignoring the need for recovery when they are causing harm.

— People who use terms like "cp," "cheese pizza," "kiddie corn," etc, when referring to CSEM.

Misogyny or sexist:

— Disrespect people for their gender and if you perpetuate harmful stereotypes about gender roles—such as believing women should solely fulfill domestic responsibilities or that non-binary individuals are invalid.

— Support or excuse rape culture and dismiss the prevalence of gender-based violence. If you believe that victims are somehow responsible for the violence inflicted upon them or if you make jokes about sexual assault.

— Deny the existence of trans individuals or refuse to accept them as their identified gender. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge the identities of trans individuals or insists on misgendering them is not welcome here.

— Spread harmful myths about trans individuals, such as calling trans people “predators”. If you hold the belief that victims of harassment or assault are responsible for the actions taken against them based on their behavior, clothing, or choices, you are perpetuating harmful narratives that silence victims and protect perpetrators.

— If you believe that certain traits or behaviors should be confined to specific gender(such as associating emotional expression with weakness in men or suggesting that ambition is unbecoming in women).

— If you promote toxic masculinity, it refers to cultural norms that encourage men to be aggressive, unemotional, and dominant while discouraging vulnerability and compassion. If you believe that men should conform to rigid standards of masculinity that harm not only women but also men themselves, you are contributing to a harmful environment that perpetuates violence and emotional repression.

In Kink:

— Shame others for their kinks or sexual preferences. Everyone has the right to explore their sexuality without judgment, as long as it involves consenting adults.

— If you are an adult who interacts with or attempts to involve minors in kink-related activities or discussions, you are crossing an ethical and moral line.

— Think that kink should not be in pride.

— Advocate for the normalization of kink in inappropriate spaces. Respecting boundaries is key; discussing kink should happen in contexts where all participants are consenting adults and comfortable with the topic.

In Fandom & Others:

— If You harras people over fiction.

— If you think that AO3 should be censored.

— If you mock or invalidate individuals who engage in reality shifting.

— If you invalidate or attack those who identify as alterhuman(individuals who feel a connection to non-human identities or experience their identities in non-human ways) such as Therian, otherkin, dollkins and more.

— If you actively express disdain or negativity towards the furry community.

— If you engage in shipping real individuals, such as celebrities or public figures, especially in ways that invade their privacy or misrepresent their relationships. It's okay if they publicly expressed that they are okay with it.

— If you think that it is valid to identify as "kin" of real individuals, such as celebrities or historical figures. Additionally, claiming kinship with deities, gods, or religious figures(such as Jesus).

— If you enforce strict criteria on who can be considered a part of a fandom or who can engage in certain shipping practices.

— Mock or ridicule individuals for their interests or passions.

— Mock people's boundaries.

— If you can't tell the difference between real life and fiction.

— If you propagate stereotypes that characterize fandom members as obsessive, socially awkward, or harmful, you contribute to the stigma surrounding fandom culture.

— If you target individuals who identify as lolicons, shotacons, or lolishos by calling them pedophiles. Not all individuals who enjoy or engage in lolisho content condone real-life harm against minors.

— If you express disdain for self-shippers.

— If you harass or belittle self-shippers who have s/os that are characters fictionals minors, animals, or with incestuous dynamics.

— Pro/neutral about AI.

[priceforrottenjudgement]

Ive seen a lot of bitching about hotd in the tag, which surprised me bc there was none of this two weeks ago and now all these ppl are acting like season 2 sucks and its badly written and its rewriting the books and bla bla. This surprised me, so i did a little snooping

Like. First off, isnt grrm consulting them this time? I know he was doing it for s1 and im sure i read he was doing s2 too. I cant say anything about bad writing, tbh i havent examined it that closely bc nothing about pacing or dialogue has bothered me enough to spend time thinking about it.

The "its not like the book!!!" Thing really bothers me though bc have you read the book? Lmao im not so sure bc some of the stuff you complain about is so weird, also how did you miss that fire & blood has deeply unreliable narrators? It literally says gyldayn is an unreliable narrator on the Wikipedia, hes taking a bunch of biased sources and kind of patches the history of house targaryen together. If you had read the book, youd KNOW that it isnt a definitive chronicle and stuff was likely altered, embellished and left out. Some of the alterations make sense, because why would some maester know about these ppls private lives. Fire and blood is full of propaganda, rumours and bias. Also the stuff that WAS changed isnt really that deep? I really like the change to the rhaenicent dynamic (ill come back to this, theres a reason ppl seem to hate this change lmao), i dont care about maelor and the nettes changes dont bother me that much? (Some ppl are convinced rhaena will get the ENTIRE nettles storyline. Which would indeed suck cough cough, but i dont think thats where theyre going at all lmao)

So i took a look at some of the other opinions of ppl who really really HATE s2 and, WOOOOOOWWWWW,there sure is a lot of homophobia on the yuri Website huh? All of a sudden it makes sense why these ppl popped up 2 weeks ago huh? (And why theyre so bitchy about the changes to alicents character not being a wicked stepmother but more of an... almost lover) Wow, what a fucking pathetic reason to be a hater. Awww nooooooooo this female character is kissing women noooo, theyre ruined!! Even though the relationship was kind of maybe sort of a little implied in the book. (Granted the book talks about a close relationship between rhaenyra, mysaria and DAMON, but see above for rumours and inaccuracies) Also there are a lot of ppl who were genuinely Team green (i did not realise those ppl existed unironically, gonna be honest) who are mad that Team green is portrayed more negatively than Team black and apparently thats unfair. Yeah, idk what to say about that, do you always expect to opposing sides of a fictional conflict to be treated the same and to be equally good and justified? Granted, the "pick a side" Marketing was dumb and encouraged this sort of thinking, but those two teams are not equal lol you can still like the characters even though theyre cheaters, usurpers and Bad ppl.

If you had genuinely read and UNDERSTOOD the books and that theyre full of propaganda you would understand why SOME PPL are either portrayed more positively or more negatively in the show than they were in the book. Just consider WHO was writing the history for one sec.

Yeah, rant over, this was just too ridiculous not to get off my chest.

Like yeah, you can criticise some of the changes and the simple fact that 8 ep seasons are SHIT for building a plot, but considering some ppl call an ep "filler" just because nobody got roasted by a dragon, maybe we dont deserve 20 ep seasons with a slow building of plot and tension anymore....

[nrilliree]

https://www.tumblr.com/bietrofastimoff23/751832082143182848/in-the-books-the-loyalty-of-the-greens-to-each?source=share

The greens being faithful, one to the other is a joke ?

Aemond didn't even try to save his mother Alicent.

And it's bullshit that Aegon II took the throne to protect his family. Literally it's pro greens propaganda bullshit to beautify Aegon by Eustace.

And as if Helaena had a real influence on Aegon II... Please...

Also... let us admire this great disillusionment in comments :

The disrespect to team green always irks me. Like, yes, they aren't great people. Neither are team black. That's the point people, keep up! And some insane toxic fans need to realize that removing one of the best qualities of TG is in fact bias to make TB look better. The show did them so dirty. We barely got any decent moments of tg, even the coronation was shit, Helaena never got crowned and it got trashed by Rhaenys🤦🏽‍♀️ @bietrofastimoff23 And the endless comments of 'TB won bc Rhaenyra's blood sat on the throne in the end.' Bro did you even read the books? The point is that no one wins, that's barely a victory. It all shows how one thing and a lot of repressed emotions caused a family to tear itself apart so badly that it never recovered. Some ppl need to understand that characters exist for a reason, and that removing their real personalities and qualities removes their depth.

No. The point of dancing is not that everyone is bad and there is no real winner. And there's a reason why the whole Green line died and Rhaenyra didn't. The usurpers were karmically punished. Also... I need to explain to these people what war means ? The blacks armies won against those of the greens. So the blacks won the war. It's quite simple, isn't it ?! Bunch of idiots.

And yes, characters are generally created for a specific narrative reason. And the telling of this story is not that everyone is equal. The Greens are the antagonists and the Blacks are the protagonists. That all.

Also, just because bad guys love members of their family doesn't necessarily mean they are deep. It has nothing to do. A villain can still be quite cartoonish and still love someone. And the Greens are really shallow villains in general. Their actions are literally motivated by greed for power and misogyny.

Yeah, what loyalty :D In the series: Aegon bully Aemond, Aemond is ready to usurp Aegon, Aegon wanted to flee the country abandoning his family, no one remembers Daeron, Otto is ready to be a pimp once again and sell Alicent for a few ships, and Alicent betrayed Marry Helaena to her rapist-drunk brother so that she won't have a better life than her… What a loyal, loving family <3! What is also added in the book is that Aemond completely ignored his mother and sister and did not even consider for a moment going to save them.

With such loyal supporters, you don't need enemies :D

And seriously, for me it's all very simple: Are you the official heir? Did they swear loyalty to you as heir? Were you taught how to govern? You are the heir. Were you crowned stealthily, under duress, and against the law set by the king? You are a usurper.

[reilleclan-blog]

I know no one is really gonna care when I post this but that's ok,

So "Cyberpunk 2077" is a pretty fun game, it's complex, and focuses a lot on existence, "who are u" and "who do u want to change into" also correct me if I'm wrong, the UNIVERSE OF CYBERPUNK 2077 THE GAME, is based off of our society's reality but "different"

So in this game, gender is what it is a "social construct" ppl dress how they want. Even change their looks from skin to their ankles. There are no boundaries when it comes to expressing one's self. There's no "racism" or "homophobia" b/c the society of 'Cyberpunk 2077' doesn't care for it in their universe.

So those two out ten trillion white supremacy ideals have been cast aside. But what about the pollution, climate change, and poverty, and oh yeah the abusive law enforcement. That's ALL STILL THERE. So why does a game talking about fascism, and breaking down gender and homophobia, still have audiences STILL be homophobic or racist to the people part of the cyberpunk fandom.

Cyberpunk would be called "Woke propaganda" to others. But why is it so hard for ppl to just let others express the way they want/are. I started posting on Reddit and joining different forums regarding Cyberpunk b/c this has been the most fun game I've played in 4 years. I join the forum it's ppl mad at other Cyberpunk enjoyers for being gay or even liking black characters like River and Panam.(there was literally a mod made to make Panam white)

I think this is just the poison of triple A gaming, it's just so frustrating cause no matter where I go I'm never "fully accepted"👏🏾 and the racism and isms on Reddit is so normalized. I guess it's my fault maybe I should take a break from social medias but that won't change the fact that racism is everywhere I go. When I'm online, watching a movie, watching anime it's always there. Even in my own head cause surprise surprise internalized racism is a thing.

My point is, ppl really missed the point of Cyberpunk. Why is it always like that idk. Like a show will make a commentary on our society and ppl will be like "haha edgy, I agree" lol idk. Makes me think of Rick and Morty as well, cause it wasn't fully "incelly"

I guess that also comes down to ppls' able to think for themselves. And be able to see past "propaganda" but i realized years ago that not many ppl can critically think for themselves. But if a game so popularly loved can cast out harmful shit like racism and homophobia, why can't we do that in our "society" so we can focus on the real threat which is "white supremacy"(white supremacy comes in many forms btw, ppl that deny racism is also part of the many forms that white supremacy takes)

-

This has been on my mind cause ppl really be hating black ppl 24/7 so unwarranted. And non black ppl will tell us "racism doesn't exist" while gaslighting us when we can't even wear our own hairstyles at jobs or in our schools. Cause it is deemed "unprofessional"

[babydrummer]

i just. idk. this just sprung to mind. blame black history month

i think it's fascinating how me and my boyfriend have two totally different.. 'perspectives' (??) on oppression, especially regarding industrialization. perspective isn't the right word but i'm using it anyway because i can't think of anything else.

this was kinda informed by me playing rdr2 again, but as a black person, i've always seen the growth of cities and the industrialization of america as... not a good thing, not at all, but like... a sign of progress. yk? the development of a black urban culture, not defined by slavery. i'm not african, i have little ties to the slave stories one hears in history class. my parents immigrated to america. when i think of 'my' past i think of jazz and speakeasies and rock n' roll and, admittedly, the capitalist propaganda of 'pulling yourself up by the bootstraps.'

capitalism did affect black culture very deeply, and that's not a good thing. but it's not the point here. the point is that, urbanization, industrialization, factory work, the like, while not GOOD things in the slightest, it feels like home to me.

but then; my boyfriend's perspective. he's part native, and he sees the growth of cities as, essentially, a blight on native land. which, like. yeah. he's right. objectively. he sees the wild rolling hills of america and thinks of a time where it wasn't tainted by industrialization. which, again. like yeah. he's right.

and it's... the only word i can use is 'bizarre?'

my boyfriend dreams of reconnecting with his homeland, finding out where, exactly, he’s from, and of rural life. he’s a horse boy, what can i say. i’m not exactly sure what tribe he’s from— neither does he, due to the aforementioned colonialism.

and it's just. it's so strange, to look at the same picture of the wide open south, and for him to long for a culture stolen from him, and for me to hope to never return to it. it's strange for me to look at old american cities and to think back with pride that my people managed to survive the racism that did exist and to turn into what we have today, while my boyfriend only sees a homeland crushed under the weight of american imperialism.

so what's the point to this essay? i don't know! i don't know. i was literally playing through rdr2 and every time i see saint denis i see... evolution, and while he fucking hates that city. this idea/essay/whatever just occurred to me while i was thinking about it.

i hope to god this piece doesn't make it sound like i'm attacking native people, because trust me, im NOT. i just think its so fascinating how, although our oppression comes from the same place, we both see it's ... 'resolution'(?) so, SO differently.

anyway black ppl + native ppl r literally skipping off into the sunset together. btw

[soullessjack]

will probably delete later bc this website’s post-point aim is so low it pisses on the poor and im fucking tired But as someone with a special interest in media literacy/media tropes/propaganda (conjoined interests if you will) it is very odd and strange that so many ppl are still arguing that fiction is entirely separate from reality as if they’re two different dimensions or something. And what’s even stranger is that so many also believe that representation is important in media even tho .. representation is like the biggest example of fiction affecting and being important to reality—next to propaganda, of course, which also runs with representation as a form of intentional misrepresentation with intents to target someone. the thing is. And a LOT of y’all are not going to like this. but fiction does inherently have bearing on reality, because it is a reflection of reality created by real people. fiction cannot exist without reality as a baseline. We use fiction to represent ourselves, our world, and we use it to explore all aspects of possibilities of what we could be, what we can’t be, what we shouldn’t be, etc. we explore our own extinction, our greed, our impact on the world, by telling stories. Every culture on the planet has stories that shape it, that become mythologies and theologies and religions and traditions. Are those suddenly not important just because they’re fiction?

What about propaganda? Propaganda itself is also a form of fiction. Propaganda posters depicting racial caricatures and animalized “enemies” are just paintings, just drawings with just-words on canvases and paper. Stereotypes of Black ‘thugs’ and greedy Jews in books are “just words,” but they’re not. The Red Scare was always depicted as a faceless anonymous enemy, an iceberg on our ship, a red shadow, a buzzard eating bones, and yet it had half of the states convinced that someone they knew was secretly a commie with the same intense paranoia as if they had leprosy. Are we supposed to shrug off the still-prevalent effects they had on the world just because they’re fictional? Just pretend that stereotypes or racist beliefs or commie paranoia don’t exist anymore, since they were perpetuated with fictionalizations?

Fiction doesn’t just affect reality, either. It reflects reality. It shapes reality, and that in itself continues to shape more and more fiction, which then shapes reality over and over again. Books like 1984 and TKAM stand as examples of the past, of where our reality once stood, of what we used to value and believe and what used to be trendy and fashionable and desirable. Even books that are pure fantasy have undeniable elements of reality in them, either by way of the author’s bias or as a commentary (WHICH IS YET ANOTHER FUCKING EXAMPLE. IF FICTION DIDN’T AFFECT REALITY THERE WOULD BE NO SUCH THING AS SOCIAL COMMENTARY IN MEDIA). Fantasy Racism is fictional, but it’s still racism, and it still reflects one of the most horrific ongoing aspects of our reality. What we create is undeniably a reflection of ourselves and what we value, what we’re afraid of, what we see in our world and lives, what we want out of life but can’t get.

No, writing about dark topics doesn’t mean you’re a bad person or inherently an advocate for them. George Orwell wrote the poster child for a fascist dystopian society and he was a fucking socialist and it was a fucking warning of what we could become. “Fiction doesn’t affect reality,” and yet it’s been used for centuries to deconstruct real world ideologies and values and standards. It’s how we understand the world. The Greek and Egyptian Gods existed to help us understand the weather. Zeus is lightning, thunderstorms were his incurred wrath. Apollo is the sun and his daily task of bringing light to the world on his chariot is the sun rising and setting. If fiction didn’t affect reality, then the Sesame Street writers wouldn’t have been concerned about the potential message Mr. Snuffleupagus would send to kids and kids cartoons wouldn’t be utilized to introduce children to heavier topics or help kids feel represented and just kids media in general stands as an example of fiction again affecting and being important to reality because it quite literally shapes children’s perception of reality as they are developing and

it’s 6am im fucking tired im over caffeinated my ribs have been fuckjng sore all day goodnight you get the idea . Or I fucking hope you do. Because Every day I open this app and see the stupidest shit ever and I am fucking tired of it

[magnoliamyrrh]

like truly i find this americans generation insistance on this stupid idea that sex trafficking and talking about trafficking is conspiratorial propaganda so fucking gross and offensive and uncaring. bc its all satanist worshipping baby eating illuminati cults far right propaganda blah blah blah

neverminddd how this shit is offensive to hear as someone whose been through it, nevermind being from the balkans because the western europeans hold the exact same brainrot when it comes to us and our issues. american has a huge trafficking issue. absolutely huge. hell even our romanian women get trafficked to this place. california, south in particular, is one of the top states for trafficking if not the top, so idk what the fuck all these california ppl are running their mouth abt all these years (privilege)

and you know whose most impacted by sex trafficking in america, predictebly? women of colour. indigenous women and girls (high poverty rates in reservations, high rate of depression, alcholism, suicidality etc, racism, skrinking reservations etc. included in this issue the high rates of girls and women going missing and/or being killed on/near reservations), south america women and their children who may be trafficked at any point before they reach america, but also at the american border while they try to cross as some cayotes are sex traffickers (and bc of the poverty many immigrants and undocumented immigrants experience, as well as the lack of cultural knowledge making them even more vulnerable). Black women and girls from what i know are statistically hardest hit by the sex trafficking thing, some studies say at the same level as Indigenous women (40% of total both) because god knows this country hasn't dealt them enough hardship already; here all the same sort of factors are at play as in previous cases. The economically and racially disadvantaged, which live in a system which seeks to keep them down in a million ways and to exploit them continously, are hit hardest. Racial fetishization and degradion from johns and pimps also plays into this. All this is combined with the fact that bc its women and girls of colour, often police and media and society dont want to give a single shit - these cases and issues and this suffering goes unnoticed, unacknowledged, uncarwd for

Here's the thing. if this generation cared, theyd KNOW just how many trafficking cases come to light in california, in america. they would Know that every time they come out, many times many of the girls or women or both are of colour. They would Know that indigenous women are going missing at terrifying rates. they would know that most sex trafficking victims & (child) prostitutes are of colour. theyd know that most times when i see cases of american ex-prostitutes being assaulted or killed, theyre of colour. Many are white american girls as well, who also, big surprise, tend to come from the lower classes, the foster system, homelessness, abusive families, or other disadvantaged and vulnerable positions.

Except despite how damn woke this generation is and how everyone loves to pay lip service to "listen to marginalized women blah blah" "intersectionality blah blah blah" no one wants to give a shit about the whole damn sexual slavery issue this country has. and in fact they want to pretend it barely exists at all, the fabrication of republicans with their pizza gate. or they want to pretend it doesnt exist at all bc you see some well off onlyfans model said sex work is empowering and like most sex workers choose it so like you see like, its all good like, stop shaming sex workers like, stop, like, being so putitanical. jfccc

this. isnt feminism, its not intersectional feminism, its not any sort of feminism. its not any sort of woke or progressive or caring. this. its having the privilege of denying the uncomfortable reality which just so happens to hit societies most marginalized and vulnerable women and girls in one of the most horrifying ways. pretending like its conspirational propaganda is such a gross way to talk about this because outside of the general ignorance, it adds a layer of outright denying the severity of the pain and suffering at hand, on top of the sex work bullshit being pulled. wtf

[radical-aurin-care]

(long reply incoming, tl;dr at the end)

Hitler had books and research on sexual health, intersex and trans issues burned (including the magnus hirschfeld institute). since this was before digitalisation, a lot of knowledge was irreversibly destroyed - which was the purpose. the purpose was to create a world in which queer ppl don't exist by destroying evidence of our existence as well as by destroying words and concepts that allow us to talk about it.

the books were also burned publicly as a propaganda tactic, as a threat to the targeted groups and their supporters as well as to forge unity between the bigots/fascists. it often involved other property destruction, dispossession and violence against the owners of the books or libraries, or scapegoats.

it was part of the same ideology and strategy that put queer and "deviant" or "asocial" (for example sex workers) ppl in concentration camps alongside religious and ethnic minorites, communists, anarchists and other political opponents.

other topics that got burned or banned were about minorities, resistance and alternatives to fascism. this is also why certain types of art and music, especially Black music like jazz and swing (at the time) were banned, burned, criminalised and blamed for the downfall of civilisation (which they equated to fascism).

they even mocked "jewish physics" and refused to acknowledge fundamental physical realities because Jews were the forerunners of that research.

cishet white citizens like sophie and hans scholl were executed simply for distributing leaflets, nothing more. (my school was named after them)

currently there are book bans in certain states of the usa, mainly targeting queer, trans and feminist issues (as well as antiracist books? sorry not super well versed on usa internal issues).

and like under historical german fascism, this too goes along with laws and propaganda and huge public outcries demonising queer ppl and other minorities and making laws that threaten lives and inciting hate crimes and allowing fascists to get away with literal murder.

recently I've felt as though rich tech bros are, in part, flooding the internet with AI generated nonsense because the powerful really, really do not like the masses to have access to accurate information. bit off topic maybe, idk.

another important category of "destroying knowledge" that may or may not include literal book burning is when people are forbidden from speaking or teaching their languages or practicing their culture or religion. this is usually part of colonialism and genocide, often with the goal of either forcefully assimilating a group or pretending they died out or never existed in the first place.

fascists love to hate on cultural diversity and they target languages and even dialects and try to create a false sense of unity by forcing uniformity. for example my grandmother was beaten in school if she spoke her dialect/minority language instead of standard german. it was mocked as a backwards peasant dialect that was doomed to die out. this is what fascists did to "their own people", they're much crueler to groups they target as outsiders.

TL;DR: book burning is bad if it is a tool of oppression, if it goes hand in hand with hate crimes or discriminatory laws or attempts to erase knowledge (typically of marginalised groups) or rewrite history.

not every act of destroying a book (especially not mass printed ones) falls into this category.

on the other hand, especially in the digital age, destroying knowledge and running hate campaigns against entire groups can look different but have the same goals. think censorship, spreading fake news, campaigns to silence ppl, troll campaigns, laws that force queer ppl into the closet, etc.

Not expalining WHY bookburning is bad and WHAT books were targeted has left us with Bookworm uwu girlies treating any art project or act involving destorying/modifying any random ass mass printed novel as if it was a crime against humanity

[dukeofankh]

I mean, it's not good habit for the public to treat ppl as guilty of crimes before a trial. In the case of Luigi, the public has a positive view on him so it's fine, but there is a pattern of mob-mentality; vigilante civilians stalking and attacking ppl who are assumed guilty. Especially in the past decade, plenty of ppl accused of crimes have committed suicide.

It's also really difficult for juries to be completely unaware of the guilty-narrative when it's repeated online everywhere, and this inevitably affects their verdict, regardless of the trial. Luigi is fine, he's not negatively affected by all this. But I think the post you responded to is pointed out the pattern of the public wholeheartedly believing police BEFORE a trial.

Yeah, like, I understand the *general* case against parroting police narratives. But like...we do not live our lives in a bland, statistically average soup of broad general truisms. This is a specific case, and you are noting yourself that people being pretty sure that Luigi did it is hardly the same as believing a random black man was "no angel".

Someone saying that people shouldn't discuss the ramifications of this trial and who it's alleged perpetrator is just because it is generally true that police can lie and it's bad to assume guilt without a trial, is very inexpertly trying to apply established ACAB knowledge to bear on a truly wild outlier. This is the spiders georg of murder cases. Something does not have to be true of the Luigi Mangione case to be true of most other murder cases. Something does not stop being true of most other murder cases because it's not true of Luigi Mangione.

Like, if schools still exist at that point, people are going to learn about this case in history class when you are in your old age. This is like, Reichstag Fire level huge. This case is going to define and alter the discussion of class and institutional violence for years to come. We have to be able to talk about it. Which is why a lot of work is being done by the American political and legal establishment to put a chill on people expressing support for Mangione.

Also...this attack happened because the shooter wants us to talk about it. I don't know if I'm allowed to use any of the details that have come out about the case without being accused of parroting NYPD propaganda, but like--the details that have come out are very clearly meant to be as attention grabbing as possible. Not talking about the case is, frankly, what the institutions clearly want, in clear opposition to the way that the attack was carried out, which was intentionally incendiary and symbolic and attention-grabbing.

As you are pointing out, most of the time people are mad about this, it's because people are assuming someone did it and they hate them for it. The widespread bipartisan support for him is truly unique, and trying to cram this into typical narratives is foolish both from traditional news media and from these voices on the left. An occasional "this is all alleged, obviously" is fully sufficient. Like, this is full blown vigilante political violence against American corporate power, not from a country outside its borders which has been the victim of American Imperialism, but from within. And people are happy about it. That. Is. Fucking. Crazy.

People are not going to, and shouldn't, just sit quiet and wait for the trial to finish up.

[disaster-j]

i'm so glad nuch beat the 'government mouthpiece' allegations cause people were starting to piss me off, i saw some being straight up hostile towards her character for simply stating legal facts?? idk if these ppl have just a very black/white view of the world or want to seem like such revolutionaries (i'm literally a socialist btw) cause firstly, there needs to be someone to counter gram's(gang's) points or otherwise we would just be in a pointless bubble, her and gram's arguments perfectly show complexity of these issues and how the problem is a systemic one!! and secondly, people like her exist? and it's not like she's this zealous government supporter she's mostly just pointing out how the law allows all of these things to happen and thus the conclusion for viewers is 'well, then the law is flawed and punishment is administered arbitrarily' which is exactly one of the main points of the show...

You get it! The point of her character isn’t to parrot propaganda, it’s to highlight how grave injustices occur with the help of the law and not despite it. Her playing devil’s advocate for Gram is extremely important because it allows for in-depth discussions into these topics. If Gram said x thing is wrong and everyone just agreed then there would be no discussion of why it is wrong, why it keeps happening or what should be done to make it stop. She’s not taking the side of the oppressor, she’s being pragmatic and pointing out that just thinking something is bad is not enough, as future lawyers they must learn how the law is manipulated and how to manipulate it themselves in order to make it work for the common people.

I attended an interesting webinar today where they discussed how the law interprets the term “natural” wrt matters of sex and sexuality and the speakers pointed out how the law is intentionally ambiguous. It is written not as hard facts but as something to be interpreted by individuals. As law students it is their job to figure out how to interpret the law in their own favour. What Nuch does is point out how Gram fails to justify his interpretation in a way that would be acceptable in a court of law. He can say it is wrong all he wants but if he wants people to listen to him and take his side he needs to have a stronger argument with substantial evidence backing him up. Otherwise the revolution stops with him. As someone pursuing law he cannot simply disagree with it, he must know how to fix it as well.

Nuch is a great character and her input is very important not just to the narrative but also to the audience’s understanding of the issues. Calling her a “government mouthpiece” is belittling the importance of healthy debate and discussions in revolutionary media.

[autumnrory]

"then once i started seeing some posts that got into the issues with peggy’s character post endgame, that was mentioned and it’s like oh yeah that really was on her, she was in charge, she made that choice even if it’s not explicitly said" -> YUP. i saw ppl say it was just misogynist stuckes complaining. No, it's because ENDGAME ITSELF SHOWED US THAT SHE WORKED AT A QUASI-FASCISTIC BLACK SITE W ZOLA *RIGHT THERE* IN THE 70s (also it's harder to stomach intelligence agency propaganda these days).

ppl calling ANY criticism of a woman (real or not) misogynistic really does not help when trying to call out actual instances of misogyny skjdfjs i hate it y’all there are valid criticisms especially in this case

like i said in my post i’d never seen people talk about it before and like a lot of my views on peggy and her relationship with steve were based on the way like most fanfiction i’ve read framed it (that hydra infiltrating shield was something terrible that happened to her organization, not something that she caused and that she and steve had a Grand And Tragic Love Story, not just. crushes on each other)

but the thing is reading all that fanfiction isn’t a thing that applies to a lot of fans so i don’t know how THEY buy into these narratives because it’s not really what marvel was telling us. sure, we were reminded multiple times over the years of peggy’s existence, but the word love was never used, not that it HAD to be, but the only instance was agent carter, which was also as stupid as endgame saying it but at least agent carter was like, following the loss of steve so you could understand overdramatizing things and her calling him the love of her life, even though he wasn’t a love at all lmao. like post catfa, and even catfa itself, the mcu does not go on about this Tragic Romance, it’s like barely touched on that steve and peggy had this almost relationship, really, until endgame hits you over the head with it, so they can justify their bad ending. so why do fans believe it makes sense??? literally everything that makes peggy and steve’s relationship a bigger deal than it was is fanon, the mcu itself didn’t really do that. it’s why at the time i thought steve/sharon was so much weirder bc i bought into this from all the fic i read and now i’m like......yeah, idt they needed to write peggy and sharon as related to begin with, BUT it’s not actually that icky bc he and peggy didn’t date, she really kinda was “just a woman he kissed one time” no offense lmao

and re: peggy bringing in zola and how fic frames it like, “oh man how terrible” as if she isn’t responsible, i have to wonder if the mcu would’ve delved into any sort of blame if we’d gotten an actual cap 3 that followed up with the events of catws, i mean probably not, especially not by 2016 bc wasn’t that around the time disney bought marvel and like.......everything went downhill. i mean i know these superhero movies were always gonna have a certain narrative about the military and intelligence agencies but it sure seems to have gotten worse when disney came on

idk i’m rambling but yeah like, i do get how a lot of fans don’t acknowledge peggy’s flaws bc i myself hadn’t thought about any of it before or seen any of the discourse surrounding her character, really, but it’s just kind of like, like you said, they just think it’s stuckies being misogynistic or whatever, but once you see the conversation being had, how can you just brush it off and act like she can’t be criticized, she brought zola in, *steve voice* peggy, you CHOSE to do that, it’s literally her fault hydra took over lmao

[1greenameba]

Also , let's not pretend that homophobia is somenthing that was only done by communist governaments ...

Like sorry for the whataboutism , but i am sick and tired of pepole digging up cold war propaganda that is 50 or 70 years old as if it's a new revelation that was never seen in the world and should be shown in classes because kids should know ,

And then yell and cry "WHATABOUTISM!" when you point out that the same and much worse is happening in western countries or by countries supported by the west .

Like you want me to tell you how things go ?

Anti communism is a normie mainstream ideology in wich kids get indoctrinated at school .

1984 and animal farm aren't criticism of governaments , they are propaganda that is mandatory reading at school .

There are whole chapters in school comparing the USSR and nazi germany as "totalitarian states" , as if the UK and france also didn't also have state howned media .

And as if nazi germany didn't take direct inspiration from US segregation laws and eugenicist ideology .

Like seriusly racial laws in the US where a lot more severe than racial laws in Nazi germany : if you had ONE grandparent who was african american or native in the US you where considered legally african american or native with all the legal consequences that it entailed .

In nazi germany you wouldn't be considered that given the same eritage ...

This shows three things :

1) races are a notion cooked up by burocrats who need to devide and conquer a nation and have basically no bearing on reality , they fully follow the whims of the papers they write

2) the horrors of nazism are continuations of what european countries did upon discovering the new world , and much like how modern democratic ideas came from the Haudenosaunee , Racism also came from there , and back into europe (our crimes towards the roma pepole have yet to be recovered for)

3) that whole section is a smokescreen made to pin the galliant western democracies against a foreign other ,

Ignoring stuff like how hitler was elected , and how churchill starved bangladesh and every elected US president committed genocide on indigenous and black pepole ,

These rarely talked about with the same obsession or the same gusto for details as supposed crimes by the ussr are (i had a substitute teacher who fully made stuff up he talked about this bar in wich they killed pepole in broad daylight , wich , yeah sure how many ppl got killed in this bar ? I am sure less than the pepole that where born and died in slavery )

Like sorry but if you're anticommunist you've been propagandized .

I heard all those notions and i know most of them are bs , and the true ones are either balloned out of proportion or repeated as if these guys tought the holodomor was the only famine in the history of the world

(grow up)

In conclusion i am sick and tired of pepole vomiting cold war propaganda uncritically ,

And then calling pepole who don't want to committ iconoclasty against long dead and buried states and heads of state (all the criticisms of stalin you are making today have been made by crushev 70 years ago . of course we know of them )

Brainwashed tankies , as if we are unaware of the echo chamber , And as if y'all aren't in one either .

Question it , ask yourself "why is there such fervor in demonizing a nation that hasn't existed for 30 years ?"

Why are these ideas still talked about today as if they where fresh ?

And why the pepole that keep pedaling them are all dinosaurs who show no problems with queerphobes and racists of all stripes ?

see this is why i know so many of yall are just being performatively supportive of palestine. you "support palestine" superficially but with any other resistance or radical movements you're all of a sudden senator mccarthy and it's the 1950s and you're screaming and crying about dictator totalitarian commies if you see a thomas sankara quote or something about che guevara. like you people are not fucking serious

[acti-veg]

hey! i hope you are doing well! so, i’m from latin américa and vegan. here’s a few indigenous groups who hunt animals for their meals, and every time i say im vegan some liberal be like: but this indigenous person i know eats meat and they respect the land etc etc!!!! or if i’m talking to an actual indigenous person they get so defensive all the time when i only mention i’m vegan and i’m like okay??? i condone the meat industry and i know that a lot of indigenous ppl buy meat at the supermarket as same as y’all so it depends a lot on the context for me. i don’t agree with hunting, but i know it’s a cultural thing and if i say this ppl are gonna think i’m prejudiced. the same goes here with some african religions that have animal sacrifice. you can’t criticize it bc it’s an african descended religion and black ppl suffer a lot of racism, and people look with disgust or make prejudice comments or are even violent when ppl say they practice african descended religions. it’s religious racism in fact. i’m black myself and i get it, but i don’t agree at all with the sacrifice thing. and i once said this and ppl looked at me like i was a racist monster. i know i’m ranting but one last thing about the indigenous ppl: where i live a lot of them are being murdered and hunted also bc of agribusiness so i always say that the meat industry is ALSO killing them bc plenty of their land ends up being land for cattle, owned by the white rich men who owns everything. i wanted to share all of this with you and know what’s your thoughts on this topic! how to respond to religious people who make sacrifices and all of this cultural speciesism? i’m sorry for the lengthy message. i hope it’s coherent

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences on this, it is valuable perspective.

Personally, I think that part of the problem in conversations surrounding indigenous issues and veganism is how much indigenous suffering is being tokenised and to some extent weaponised against vegans and in defence of eating animals. The fact that animal agriculture is one of the key threats to indigenous sovereignty and the most significant driver of deforestation is almost always conveniently overlooked, whereas the harm caused by plant products never is.

Many indigenous communities have a complex relationship with the meat industry, both knowing how much harm industrialised animal agriculture has caused them and simultaneously being dependent on it, or, just like everyone else, not knowing or not caring. Many indigenous people exist in consumer cultures, so of course are subject to the same propaganda that everyone else is. Similarly with practices like religious sacrifice and slaughter, you can recognise that it is a significant practice for the groups concerned and be sensitive about that, while also holding a personal moral objection to it. This is very different to subsistenance hunting communities, where killing animals is a necessity, but where cultural practices are concerned they are as open to critique as any other freely chosen behaviour. The key consideration is whose place it is to do critique, and who is best placed to be having these conversations.

My view has always been that indigenous cultural practices which cause harm to animals should be discussed and challenged by indigenous activists themselves, not outsiders. That work is already being done in many places, and there are indigenous people promoting veganism in their own spaces, which is wonderful to see. I just hope that outside of those spaces, the conversation surrounding indigenous issues and veganism just... grows up a bit, because right now, 99% of the time these issues are raised as little more than ammunition in poorly considered anti-vegan arguments.

[kouhaiofcolor]

2020's finally over. Can we not go into 2021 pacifying texturism w "It's just hair" tho?

It was "just hair" until Black Women started exercising the freedom to discover the unique needs & maintenance beneficial to our hair. Then as soon as non black women got wind of it & the nerve to lurk on platforms the natural hair community was uprising thru, nowadays you've got all these non black women bandwagoning & hashtagging literally everything under the sun w/ this fake ass inclusiveness, advocacy, relatability & support for textured hair. Like all women have suffered oppression around wearing their real hair 😒. Like all races of women have been socially targeted in blatant discriminations against their hair texture, complexion, & how acceptable they are or are not together. I hate the "All Hair (Matters/Is Beautiful/Is 'Good Hair')" clout bc it talks over & totally overwrites the foundational issue around hair & toxic femininity that, at its misogynoir core, has always been that textured hair is unprofessional, unkempt, unmanageable, & ugly. Colorism also erases the initial creators of the movement — which were Monoracial Brown & Dark Skinned Black Women; put some respek onnat, period. Straight hair is not oppressed; wavy hair is not oppressed; all hair is not oppressed. Black hair is. This "all hair is good hair" bullshit is so monotonous & inconsiderate bc its almost like a passive aggressive refusal to acknowledge what antiblackness imposed on Black Women alone. None of you non black know what it's like in depth to be the descendants of a race of ppl who's features, traits & harmless existence have always been insulted, hated & envied by the whole world. Esp not all at once. That is something totally unique to us inflicted & imposed by everyone else since the beginning of time. So why be out here chasing clout under tags & movements & in spaces you are no real part of? Why wanna be a part of the Black Girl Experience that bad? Yall have identities in everything outside of us. Why vulture off of this like you even have reasons to be there? We were investing in ourselves & trying to teach generations of Monoracial Black People how to manage their hair texture & develop cathartic habits thru self care. Nb ppl ruined that.

Looser hair textures have omnipresent representation & acceptance all, over, the, world. There is no lack of being seen, romanticized or exemplified for having texture 1a-3b hair; esp on the prevalent basis around colorism we see regularly on social media & on tv. Yet what remains of the community as it stands is today the furthest thing from textured or Black at all. At this point we owe the decline (if not death) of the natural hair community to the parasitic latching of non black women, the infiltration of "pick me's" & antiblackness generally — but I still be feeling like even that's not direct enough. We're talking ab something authentic & wholesome for Monoracial Black Women created by us for us being straight up sabotaged by races of women the cause was totally irrelevant to & in regard of. Bc that's how cosmetic industries have been towards us for centuries. Bc we were always excluded & thought of least & last. By other women. By all other women; don't get it twisted. So we set out on figuring ourselves out. Doing research on our own. Incorporating self care & beneficial habits in our lives to nourish & feel better ab ourselves & disprove the racist shit non black cultures & ppl either ignorantly surmise, make up or project ab Black Girls. That includes Black Men too in case yall thought yall were safe. Yall are some of the most toxic & prevalent faces behind colorism, antiblackness & misogynoir among black ppl specifically.

But anyhow. At first a lot of the initiation of the vulturing in the nhc light skinned women were the face of. Esp w the clout around having 4c hair amongst the beige-est, most ambiguously or straight up non black individuals, good lord. Then it went mainstream for huwight ppl, whom enevitably invited themselves, & following were the masses of non black women looking to pillage for themselves while the community was being swallowed by the crowdedness & irrelevant content being put out there (specifically on YouTube, Twitter & Instagram) by "hair gurus" of the light skinned, biracial or non black texture 1a-3b variety. Hair gurus who literally may as well've fallen from the sky & met social media stardom overnight based on their hair texture & complexion alone they're so brand new. Hair gurus who aren't even in the community for legitimately informative reasons or purposes unionized in Blackness. They're whole natural hair niche be — as a favorite natural of mine put it — manipulating textured hair into a sort of submission to appear or behave like looser textures do. They'll swear by 'game changer' products they both mention & only use like once & insist you should invest in a $30 8oz. bottle of clarifying shampoo or a $35 cowash if you want your hair to behave & look like theirs. Again, mind you, these types of individuals casually claim having texture 4 hair when they're anything but, just for the attention it brings from both ppl who will gullibly follow their every word & who know what kind of scamming to look for & won't.

If it's "just hair", how come so many of you that are non black are riding the wave? If it's just hair, why have so many of you found refuge in using the hashtags & participating/contributing uninvited? How come so many ran to get a seat at the table w Black Women only to kick them to the side the more popular it became if its just hair? How come nobody was calling it natural hair before Black Women created the nhc & started growing their own? Why was there no natural hair community before Black Women coined it, reminder, for ourselves? If it's just hair, how come so many ran to youtube to begin w to start channels for their own non-textured journeys? If its just hair, why is the nhc so damn obsessed w defining curls & length than overall health & gradual growth? If its just hair, why are white girls anywhere near this? Yall are the most out of place of anyone, honestly. Even if you're curly. Why do light skinned girls get to both represent textured hair & "good hair"? How does that even make sense? Thats just putting monoracial black girls in isolated boxes they're not even allowed to be symbols of or in. If its just hair, why's it so unheard of to see the roles of Black female characters in just ab anything played by actual Black Women? If its just hair, why have so many non or partially Black women worked in ignorant succession to water down & essentially wash out the Monoracial Black Women vital to the community's relevance at all? I really do not get the involvement of non black women in this movement at all — esp when culturally you have no reason to call your hair natural. There are no & have never been prejudice notions around having or growing texture 1a-3b hair. There's nothing oppressive ab it, either. Yall have gotta stop w that. You've already made a mockery of something that was supposed to be beautiful by making yourselves comfortable in & hijacking our space itfp. Theres far too much misrepresentation of textured hair to keep up w now. This is why i say the nhc (as well as culture vulturing generally) has just become nbwoc copying white women copying light skinned women copying Black Women, bc the audacity is unreal.

Its not just hair tho. To those it applies to, yall proved that the minute Black Women started going public w their growth journeys. The minute conversations ab "shrinkage this & 4c that" broadened & went mainstream. Yall couldn't move all at once fast enough when you realized you weren't as special as you thought & had always been told — esp w melanin at its modern value. Now all yall either "natural", seeking black men for either casual sex or cultural infiltration via fetishised reproduction, certain you have texture 4 hair or know the best tips for a DIY silk press 🤭😂 yall can't sit w us. You don't belong here. I'm calling yall out on allll the bs around this "All Hair Matters" garbage, cus yall are now sputtering the same shit while literally wearing your own non black hair in black styles. Be consistent. Make some fucking sense. I don't wanna be part of this fake ass girl squad propaganda that says every other woman never looked at Black Women's hair like it was bottomest of the barrel, foh. We're not on the same team & yall know it.