#most people are blind to the violence of legitimate violence

[ryukisgod]

Violence is the one true authority from which all other authorities are derived. It’s men who wield violence. Women who blame women for the way men treat women (step 5) think that by getting in men’s good graces they’ll be safe and able to manipulate men into being nicer to (some) women. Little do they know proximity to power IS NOT POWER

One way feminism gets discredited (in six easy steps)

Step 1: Women take any step forward (or even just hint they might be able to) towards class consciousness, legal, economic or societal rights

Step 2: Men invent a caricature of feminist women designed to hit the nerves of women’s most deep seated values under patriarchy: beauty, kindness, empathy, inclusivity, motherhood, wifehood.

Step 3: Sensing that these caricatures are being used to discredit feminists, many women, who haven’t yet grasped the severity of men’s disdain towards women and who haven’t deconstructed their own patriarchal values, conclude that these caricatures are in fact observations of certain members within feminism.

Step 4: Believing “bad” members of her group to be the reason for these caricatures to exist (with the men only observing and naming these women), these women water down their politics and demeanour to men to prove that they are virtuous women, their feminism becomes focused on meeting men’s standards because they believe that men are the best judges of a women’s rights groups’ merits (After all, if feminists weren’t doing something wrong then men would be happy to give us our rights)

Step 5: Feminists who refuse to make a song and dance over proving themselves to be nice feminists are accused of alienating potential allies and being the reason men still haven’t supported women.

Step 6: Profit. The women’s movement spends its time trying to be palatable to men while cannibalising feminists who seek to actually destroy the patriarchy.

There is no such thing as a bitch, feminazi, karen or terf. These are patriarchal inventions designed to discredit and split our movement.

[do-you-ship-it-polls]

You do realize misandry is not abuse right? The women who abused your friend might have been misandrist too but it has nothing to do with it. And misandrists don’t specifically believe than men can’t be abused. Again, this might have been the case for the women around your friend, but it has nothing to do with it.

Misandry is a legitimate answer to men’s domination and violence. Misandry does not harm men. It does not put them in danger, it does not oppress them, it does not prevent them to access to certain rights, etc. Most of the time misandrists just avoid being around men when they can. They just don’t become friends with them or date them, and that’s not even true for all misandrists.

Literally explain to me how misandry is a problem. What does it to do men that it so unbearable? I genuinely don’t get it. Misogyny kills every day, misandry didn’t do a single victim.

I’m not the same person who asked you the previous question btw, but I was baffled by your response as well

So.. you're telling me.. a man being belittled and having his trauma downplayed because he's a man has nothing to do with it being socially acceptable to hate men? It doesn't cause harm when men are falsely accussed of rape because they are men in an attempt to ruin their life? It's not harmful when man-hating radfems tell trans men that they're misogynistic and betraying women by transitioning to male???

And please note how I never threaten the fact that misogyny exists or try to claim that misandry is worse. But people are so fast to believe that if misandry (hatred against men) exists, then misogyny (hatred against women) can't exist. Like why do people freak out at the thought that hatred against men is a real thing and a problem? Has blind hatred ever done anyone good?

I probably shouldn't bring up such personal experiences with misandry, but sometimes it feels like the only way to prove a point, but it doesn't even work since people don't listen. People refuse to believe that men could ever be hurt by what women say to them, because every man is a rapist and a pedophile and a misogynistic wife beater just itching for the day they give in and do something bad. ...Like, no, most men are normal and the world doesn't benefit from you thinking they should all kill themselves.

I genuinely don't understand why that's such a difficult thing for some people to grasp. Yes, misogyny is incredibly bad and all over the world there are problems of varying severity that women specifically face. The focus should be on helping women and combating misogyny, because as you say, women are hurt far more.

But I'm so genuinely confused on why it makes people piss themselves and cry when someone says that it's bad to hate all men so passionately. You're not being as progressive as you think.

[awkwardandeccentric]

I wonder if the reason why Stolas is so blind to the class dynamic between him and Blitz is because he doesn’t feel like he benefits from it.

Work with me here. I’m not saying it’s true. I’m saying this may be how he feels.

You know those white people that say that they can’t have white privilege because they’re struggling to pay the rent? Maybe Stolas has a mindset something similar to that.

When you think royalty, you think strength and power. Stolas has neither. In terms of raw physical strength, Stolas is weaker among the Goetia. With his looks, he’s lanky and thin. “I’m so glad I don’t have to pretend to want to fuck his scrawny, twig ass.” (Stella I hate you so much). We know as the audience that it takes an insurmountable amount of strength to survive, umm, let’s see, let me check the list: missing mother, neglectful father, extreme isolation as a child, being a closeted gay man, an arranged marriage, marital rape, domestic violence, and being a teen father.

Yeah, I would have offed myself at number five.

But to Stolas, having to take SSRIs and having mental health issues is something he most likely is deeply ashamed of. Something he thinks of as a weakness.

In terms of power, he’s never had any power to control his own life. From the moment he was born, his destiny was written for him, no deviation allowed. “It is expected an oath by blood to hold the tome and the starlight passes overhead fuels all the skills I've honed. I am a guardian, a watcher of these ancient rites.” He has no power over who or when or if he commits himself to one person for the rest of his very, very long life. He has no power over Stella to make her stop abusing him. He has no power over his own brain to make him stop being suicidal.

In his mind, the idea that he benefits at all from his station is ludicrous. ‘Where is this privilege?’ He’s probably thinking to himself. ‘I don’t even get to choose who I marry, when I have children, what job I have, who I get to love, whether I make friends, how I can express my emotions, nothing. I choose nothing.’

And honestly? He’s not right…but he’s also not wrong.

There is something deeply fucked up about how the system has taken a cute, happy bird just excited to learn about his future on his birthday and chewed him up before spitting him out into a severely depressed alcoholic with C-PTSD and recovering from an assassination attempt.

It’s not that he doesn’t benefit from his status compared to other demons. He does. He has servants and can get an appointment for a hospital visit at any time and he’s welcome in any club he goes to and he’s never had to worry about whether he’ll have a roof over his head or food on the table. But compared to the standards set by the people around him? The idea is laughable. Offensive. Where is this privilege? He’s not seeing it.

And like the white people who claim that they can’t have white privilege because they struggle to pay the rent, we want to pull our hair out and scream because “holy shit how can you be this stupid?!”

But they have legitimate complaints about a system that chewed them up and spit them out. And so does Stolas.

[nono-bunny]

Here's something to consider: Do you think Bryke were kicked out of Netflix's LA ATLA because they were toxic during the whole set? I saw an article on Instagram saying they were fired because they were unproductive, hard to deal with, and were rude most of the time. I sincerely BELIEVE that this is what happened to cause them to leave, because of how you heard all of Mike's jerk ramblings on things (Zutara) and how he and Bryan were praised for the show. I'm thinking Bryke couldn't handle the criticism and Netflix wanted something different to the story but still wanted to keep the story of Avatar intact. Which makes you think...what could make Bryke so adamant about not wanting to change anything? Was it scenes, moments...relationships? Ever since the trailer came out, everything looks fantastic. So WHAT could be so different that made Bryke act like the way they did?

Something to think about. ;)

Thank you for the ask, some interesting points here!

So first of all, I haven't really been active on Instagram since they killed the chronological feed a couple of years ago, so I obviously have no clue what the article you're talking about is and how true it is, but. Yeah, I'd believe that lol, wouldn't be in any way out of character for what I've heard of them and for the rep they've built up over the years

As much as the guests on the podcast are constantly talking about how good at managing the show they were, you also get a very real sense of how rigid they actually are in terms of listening to other people's ideas when they go against their initial ones, even if they would make the show better. Something that really stood out to me is how many times other people are credited for all of the best parts of the show- Zuko's arc being great had nothing to do with them, Iroh's personality was different from what they initially wanted, Toph being a blind girl rather than a huge dudebro (I don't remember if he was also blind or not but like. Regardless they weren't the ones to come up with the Toph we know and love at all)... All of these are things that they've basically admitted to be changes proposed by other people, which they initially resisted. Like!!! They legitimately cannot take the credit for the show's best parts, because they're shit writers- but they have a massive ego because they've been constantly getting praise for shit they didn't do for years. Genuinely they sound like nightmares to work with!!! The cavalier way they dismiss people all the fucking time whenever they disagree with them is just. Really weird for show creators imo, and the way they keep milking the franchise even though they've long since run out of any good ideas- or, really, the ability to execute them in a way that works... Those two fuckers barely worked on anything else worth remembering/noting, so they just keep coming back to the thing that worked once and wondering why they can't get it to work again- and the answer is that they were never the reason why it worked, and they refuse to accept that

As much as I love the original show, it's also incredibly flawed and imo needed many many changes to be deserving of the perfect image it seems to have, and like? I'm genuinely hoping that the changes Netflix make are along those lines rather than like... Sensationalizing it with gratuitous violence or whatever. Zutara would be great, obviously, but... Yeah mostly I just don't want Kataang, and like. I'm being 100% serious when I say that I'm gonna wait for other people to watch the show first so I know if it happens or not, because if it does- I'm just not gonna bother with it.

[darklinaforever]

Greens stans to me : The Darkling / Darklina and Kylo Ren - Ben Solo / Reylo = sick shit / violence against women ! You think these characters are hot, so you turn a blind eye to what they do !

Also, still greens stans to me : Aegon II and Aemond (both rapists) = depth, complex, complicated and interesting characters in someone's perception.

Me, the one apparently displaying hypocrisy and stupidity :

(I should point out, however, that these things were said to me by exactly the same person. It’s really crazy ! 😂)

Once again, Aemond is interesting (for me) in his writing angle in terms of Daemon's foil / dark reflection. But is he deep ? Is he complex ? Is he complicated ? I do not think so ! This guy is characterized as a little demon from birth, until the end of his life !

And Aegon isn't even one of the 4 things !

He's just a lazy person, in addition to an alcoholic rapist and pedophile, who enjoy watching their illegitimate children fight in an arena.

The aspect of him originally not wanting the throne and being forced out of it by pressure from Criston Cole and fear of Rhaenyra attacking / killing him and his siblings is just a positive propaganda bullshit reported by Maester Eustace, pro greens !

The proof being that Aegon II is subsequently reported to completely enjoy being in power, in fact not letting anyone influence him in his decisions, and rejecting Rhaenyra's peace proposal guaranteeing his own survival as well as that of his brothers and sisters if he recognized her as a legitimate queen, while insulting her as a whore afterwards...

(But then, if people find that Aegon II is an interesting villain in one way or another, good for them ! I do not claim to have the holy word about the love that one can have or not have for a villain. All tastes are in nature. Perhaps the depth of his pathos and monstrosity can be interesting and fascinating on a certain level ? But for me, the way he's written doesn't grab me at all and I can't really see anything interesting about him... On the other hand, I think I'm speaking completely objectively when I say that Aegon II from Fire and Blood, is not deep, complex and complicated. Sorry not sorry)

And don't tell me that Rhaenyra was lying and probably still would have killed them, because nothing in the text of Fire and Blood implies that she could harm her brothers and sisters before the war officially begins after Lucerys death. In fact, Rhaenyra is so merciful that she will let Alicent survive (the woman responsible for most of her suffering and her usurpation) once she has her in her hands, as a tribute to her father Viserys, even though Alicent was originally to be executed along with Otto under the terms of her peace proposal to Aegon II according to my memories. So it would surprise me a lot if Rhaenyra would have had her half brothers and sisters killed after giving her word.

In any case, the Greens really come from another dimension...

[stargirlsbraincontent]

Congo

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) harbours deep wounds that the world often overlooks. In recent years, the country has been plagued by a complex web of conflict, corruption, and human rights abuses that continue to devastate its people.

Conflict and Instability:

Congo's tumultuous history of conflict is rooted in a struggle for power, control over vast mineral resources, and ethnic tensions. Armed groups, often backed by neighboring countries or international interests, have fueled decades of violence, leaving communities shattered and displaced. The ongoing conflict has led to widespread poverty, malnutrition, and lack of access to basic healthcare and education.

The Disturbing Use of Rape:

One of the most harrowing aspects of the Congolese conflict is the systematic use of rape as a weapon of war. Women, men, and children alike have been subjected to brutal sexual violence perpetrated by armed groups, soldiers, and even civilians. This horrific tactic inflicts profound physical and psychological trauma, tearing apart the social fabric of communities. While women and girls bear the brunt of this violence, experiencing it on a larger scale and more systematically, men and boys are also targeted, facing similar horrors that result in stigma, ostracisation, and enduring health challenges, including HIV/AIDS and reproductive complications.

Humanitarian Crisis and International Response:

The humanitarian crisis in Congo remains dire, with millions in need of assistance. Humanitarian organizations struggle to provide essential aid and protection in the face of ongoing violence and logistical challenges. International efforts to mediate the conflict and support peacebuilding initiatives have had limited success, as underlying issues of governance, corruption, and economic exploitation persist.

Calls for Action:

As global citizens, we cannot turn a blind eye to the suffering in Congo. We must amplify the voices of those affected, advocate for justice and accountability for perpetrators of violence, and support grassroots efforts to promote peace and reconciliation. Addressing the root causes of conflict, including economic inequalities and political instability, is crucial to fostering sustainable change and rebuilding communities.

Conclusion:

Congo's story is a painful reminder of the human cost of conflict and the urgent need for collective action to protect human rights and promote peace worldwide. By raising awareness, supporting humanitarian efforts, and demanding accountability, we can contribute to a future where the people of Congo can live in dignity, free from fear and violence.

Let us stand in solidarity with the resilient people of Congo and work together towards a brighter and more peaceful future.

Here are some ways you can help and donate to support relief efforts in Congo. Times are tough for many right now, but even small contributions can make a big difference. If you’re unable to donate, simply sharing these resources and spreading awareness can also help.

International Rescue Committee (IRC): Provides emergency aid, healthcare, and protection services to displaced people in Congo. Donation Link: IRC Donation Page

Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders): Offers medical care and humanitarian assistance to people affected by the conflict in Congo. Donation Link: MSF Donation Page

GoFundMe Campaigns: Search for verified campaigns specifically supporting relief efforts in Congo on platforms like GoFundMe.

Local NGOs: Support local organisations and NGOs actively providing aid and support on the ground in Congo. Research reputable organisations through platforms like Charity Navigator or GuideStar to ensure your donations are impactful and legitimate.

[nerianasims]

The Root of All Cruelty? by Paul Bloom

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/27/the-root-of-all-cruelty

Opening in a private window works. But here are some excerpts:

"The thesis that viewing others as objects or animals enables our very worst conduct would seem to explain a great deal. Yet there’s reason to think that it’s almost the opposite of the truth.

At some European soccer games, fans make monkey noises at African players and throw bananas at them. Describing Africans as monkeys is a common racist trope, and might seem like yet another example of dehumanization. But plainly these fans don’t really think the players are monkeys; the whole point of their behavior is to disorient and humiliate. To believe that such taunts are effective is to assume that their targets would be ashamed to be thought of that way—which implies that, at some level, you think of them as people after all.

Consider what happened after Hitler annexed Austria, in 1938...

The Jews who were forced to scrub the streets—not to mention those subjected to far worse degradations—were not thought of as lacking human emotions. Indeed, if the Jews had been thought to be indifferent to their treatment, there would have been nothing to watch here; the crowd had gathered because it wanted to see them suffer. The logic of such brutality is the logic of metaphor: to assert a likeness between two different things holds power only in the light of that difference. The sadism of treating human beings like vermin lies precisely in the recognition that they are not.

What about violence more generally? Some evolutionary psychologists and economists explain assault, rape, and murder as rational actions, benefitting the perpetrator or the perpetrator’s genes. No doubt some violence—and a reputation for being willing and able to engage in violence—can serve a useful purpose, particularly in more brutal environments. On the other hand, much violent behavior can be seen as evidence of a loss of control. It’s Criminology 101 that many crimes are committed under the influence of drugs and alcohol, and that people who assault, rape, and murder show less impulse control in other aspects of their lives as well. In the heat of passion, the moral enormity of the violent action loses its purchase.

But “Virtuous Violence: Hurting and Killing to Create, Sustain, End, and Honor Social Relationships” (Cambridge), by the anthropologist Alan Fiske and the psychologist Tage Rai, argues that these standard accounts often have it backward. In many instances, violence is neither a cold-blooded solution to a problem nor a failure of inhibition; most of all, it doesn’t entail a blindness to moral considerations. On the contrary, morality is often a motivating force: “People are impelled to violence when they feel that to regulate certain social relationships, imposing suffering or death is necessary, natural, legitimate, desirable, condoned, admired, and ethically gratifying.” Obvious examples include suicide bombings, honor killings, and the torture of prisoners during war, but Fiske and Rai extend the list to gang fights and violence toward intimate partners. For Fiske and Rai, actions like these often reflect the desire to do the right thing, to exact just vengeance, or to teach someone a lesson. There’s a profound continuity between such acts and the punishments that—in the name of requital, deterrence, or discipline—the criminal-justice system lawfully imposes. Moral violence, whether reflected in legal sanctions, the killing of enemy soldiers in war, or punishing someone for an ethical transgression, is motivated by the recognition that its victim is a moral agent, someone fully human.

In the fiercely argued and timely study “Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny” (Oxford), the philosopher Kate Manne makes a consonant argument about sexual violence. “The idea of rapists as monsters exonerates by caricature,” she writes, urging us to recognize “the banality of misogyny,” the disturbing possibility that “people may know full well that those they treat in brutally degrading and inhuman ways are fellow human beings, underneath a more or less thin veneer of false consciousness.”...

If the worst acts of cruelty aren’t propelled by dehumanization, not all dehumanization is accompanied by cruelty. Manne points out that there’s nothing wrong with a surgeon viewing her patients as mere bodies when they’re on the operating table; in fact, it’s important for doctors not to have certain natural reactions—anger, moral disgust, sexual desire—when examining patients. The philosopher Martha C. Nussbaum has given the example of using your sleeping partner’s stomach as a pillow when lying in bed, and goes on to explore the more fraught case of objectification during sexual intercourse, suggesting that there’s nothing inherently wrong about this so long as it is consensual and restricted to the bedroom...

As a philosopher, Manne grounds her arguments in more technical literature, and at one point she emphasizes the connection between her position and the Oxford philosopher P. F. Strawson’s theory of “reactive attitudes.�� Strawson argued that, when we’re dealing with another person as a person, we can’t help experiencing such attitudes as admiration and gratitude, resentment and blame. You generally don’t feel this way toward rocks or rodents. Acknowledging the humanity of another, then, has its risks, and these are neatly summarized by Manne, who notes that seeing someone as a person makes it possible for that person to be a true friend or beloved spouse, but it also makes it possible for people to be “an intelligible rival, enemy, usurper, insubordinate, betrayer, etc.”...

Certainly, Pitzer’s description of various concentration camps contains so many examples of cruelty and degradation that it’s impossible to see them as a mere failure to acknowledge the humanity of their victims. As the scholar of warfare Johannes Lang has observed of the Nazi death camps, “What might look like the dehumanization of the other is instead a way to exert power over another human.”

The limitations of the dehumanization thesis are hardly good news. There has always been something optimistic about the idea that our worst acts of inhumanity are based on confusion. It suggests that we could make the world better simply by having a clearer grasp of reality—by deactivating those brain implants, or their ideological equivalent. The truth may be harder to accept: that our best and our worst tendencies arise precisely from seeing others as human."

[most-tragic-character-tournament]

It's a lot, but OP please read this to the end. I need to say my piece. What upsets me most about the polls is all the people threatening violence, who were legitimately triggered, cussing, and angry in the tags, and all the insults towards "a kids show" and the fans, like, that's already an argument I hear in the Pokemon fandom, but they still have more leeway. Anyone can enjoy any media they like. Even myths, famously written in old english, are a pain in the butt to read and decipher. It's not much different for us. We analyze things too. We can find tragedies and parallels too. Everything that exists in this world came from something real. Our love for it isn't a lack of intelligence, it's not a lack of maturity. If anything, there's some serious common ground with the overarching question of pre-destiny and choice. On parentage and what that means for you. In doing what is right, difficult, and merciful over what everyone would expect of you. There are a lot of kids in the fandom, yes. But there's a lot of young adults too, who have put in a lot of sincere heart in developing the issues and characters, and analyzing them. Ninjago is special for a lot of reasons. The writers have deeply connected it to the fans with their inclusion, and it's a memorial to those who passed away. I have friends for whom Ninjago played a huge part in major transitions in their lives, who have found many deep connections in the show. It's set them on the path to their future careers. And if with this loss in the polls, should that be your final stance, everything we are be spit upon and laughed at be increased three-fold, when Ninjago fans have not been violent like that, all the tags I've been reading every few minutes this past week have only talked about the silliness of it all, or talked about it in a manner that was silly in tumblr spirit, or voted in counter to the outrage. If Antigone wins, then win. But you cannot deny us. Do not reject humanity, for the same zealous heart that beats in you, beats in us. Tragedy lies in the splinter of the blind man's eye, whose narrow view cannot see the bigger picture that there is more of and to his brethren that what is seen. We exist! We are here! We are alive! We think and feel, cogito ergo sum. sentio ergo sum. We are not an amalgamation of what you've decided of us. And yet, you wish to bury everything we are with the same hands and hearts that buried Antigone, by the simple act of disdain. You repeat these stories, and cannot see that you do. Our love is not beneath yours. Do not deny us. Can we not shake hands at dawn and be at peace? Don't admonish us should victory be your favor. There lies no error for one who had loved with all their heart. There is no losing in having loved at all.

………….wow.

[the-ellia-west]

TCOT Character Intro 3

(Mostly Neutral Characters Edition!)

Marril - Antihero-

Male - 28yrs - A Snarky Assassin with Nothing Left to lose - He's lost, cursed, traumatized, and trying his best to get free of the shade's control at any cost Likes: Fruit, Candy, Sugar, Bright Colors, Weapons, Long hair, Freedom, Physical touch, Kind words Dislikes: Being Hit, The Shades, Being looked down on, Curses, His mother, People

Shyre - Idk how to classify her-

Female - 25yrs - A Kind-hearted Noblewoman - She's trying her best to be fair and unbiased to everyone and help as many people as she can Likes: Tea, Salty and savory foods, The sky, the ocean, colors, cultures, dresses, cats. Dislikes: Executions, sour food, swimming, heavy objects, feeling useless

Geon - All over the Place-

Male - 26yrs - A Blind Prince - He is very kind-hearted and quiet, hiding from his father and his brothers. Likes: Trissa, Damian, the color white, roses, buttered bread, spicy things, raspberries, stars, cold. Dislikes: His brothers, fire, sharp metal objects, screaming, bland food and drink

Damian - Mostly a Good Guy? Antihero maybe?-

Male - 34yrs - Geon's older brother - The only legitimate son of the king and Queen. But he very strongly refuses to become the next Roselite King. Likes: Geon, Good Wine, Roses, The color Red, playing the violin, fancy clothes. Dislikes: Damp things, dry air, the smell of salt, ocean waves, violence

Eryss - Definitely an Antihero of sorts-

Female - 52yrs - Viasaki's Mother Figure - A disabled Shade woman taken in as a caretaker by Viasaki since she was deemed useless for anything else. Likes: Being a caretaker, Viasaki, Helping people, Cherries, Sunrises, Sunsets Dislikes: Tias, The way the Shade's hierarchy works, The dark, Mute colors, death

Heryn - Side Character, but important-

Male - 34yrs - The Leader of Menim - An upbeat Caliskian man who tries his best to create a cultural home for Caliskians in Feyrama Likes: Smiling, Fruit, Fish, Flowers, His wife, His children, Sunny days, Helping people Dislikes: Injustice, Crimes, Most shades, Violence, Rain, High places

Honrul - Antihero/Antivillain/Sometimes Antagonist-

Male - 32yrs - A Major Black Market Smuggler - Honrul is a first-class criminal that the law enforcement of Feyrama has been looking for for years, but has never found. They don't even know what he looks like. Likes: Annoying people, Crimes, Being in charge, Wren, Money, Information, Flowers, The color green Dislikes: Marril, Shades, The Law, Nobles, Slavery, Walls, Threats, The word No

Wren - Honrul's Right Hand-

Female - 27yrs - An ex-noble - Wren is an ex-noblewoman who found freedom in the black market and decided to have some illegal fun before she got herself in trouble and ended up at Honrul's mercy, where he gave her a second chance. Likes: Messing with people, Violence, Threatening people, Sharp objects, money Dislikes: Nobles, Atlas in particular, Being threatened, the law, rules, fancy anything

If you thought this was interesting, please check out My In-progress Book: The Cursed One's Throne on my Blog ;] Starting Here

[graylinesspam]

I've been tumbling Shaak Ti around in my head like a rock trying to smooth out some characterization for her relationship with the clones.

I've seen many takes here about her having good motherly relationships with the cadets and then a lot about how her direct business like relationship with the Kaminoans who were actively abusing the clones and that making her complicite in their dehumanization and commodification.

And honestly I've decided that neither are really wrong. At least for the purposes of my fics.

One of the most important things for us to explore about the perspectives and personalities of the jedi during the clone wars era is that they are completely clouded and blinded by the dark side.

Shaak Ti as an inherently motherly and supportive person finding herself stuck in the middle of a war, actively traumatized by the violence and death in the first battle of Geonosis, decides that she cannot handle the battlefield. But she cannot avoid her duty to serve the Republic (yes I know) so she gets stationed on Kamino as the resident Jedi on call for all jedi purposes.

And she quickly wraps herself up in the job of caring for the clone cadets. As much as you can care for an untold number of children. And she personally witnesses very little of the physical abuse of the clones. And even a lot of the dehuminization she chalks up to the ugliness of war and very much intends on fixing after the war is over.

But there's that very real-world situation where one person finds themselves in a less-than-ideal position of authority and feels like they can't do enough good as an individual to fix the system so they try to do good from inside it. In little ways over time. And they're too blind and self absorbed to realize that literally walking away and refusing to participate would do less harm than they are now by legitimizing the clone's treatment as their resident legal owner.

So she ends up being a generally good if not broken and selfish person that participates passively in some truly terrible things.

I think that's so much more representative of the general failings if the jedi order and it's deep corruption by tying itself to a political power than it would be to say that Shaak doesn't care about the clones at all. Realistically people who care do more harm than people who don't.

And the emotional turmoil of someone making close connections with people they are actively hurting within an abusive system is narrative-rich. Not to mention relatable to real world situations. The clones truly seeing her as a friend and in many cases a maternal figure, that regularly participates in their barter and forced labor is so fucking tragic.

The layers of that abusive relationship. Of her memorizing clones names and being able to identify them later, after their deployments, and greeting them warmly, feeling pride in their accomplishments, and mourning their deaths, and continuing about her day training their replacements. The veil of greef and darkness pulling further over her perceptions as the war gets uglier and she can't bare to look at it.

And for her to be one of the warmest memories that those boys have.

It's fucking heartbreaking. And ugly and imperfect. And so real.

Anyways, that's how I'm writing it, just a heads up for those keeping up with Sleeping habits or ASOI.

(and I'm sure there are several layers of racial and classist symbolism that I am not at all qualified to pick apart.)

[pinktwingirl]

Hamas actually does represent most of Palestinians in Gaza. They won the elections there, in recent events you can see videos of people cheering on viachles entering Gaza, carrying dead bodies of Israeli civilians and soldiers as well as giving out candy in celebration. This was posted on Arab social media btw, by private people. So it can’t be Israeli propaganda. The day I woke up and saw the war in the first few hours, Arab and Israeli twitter was literally flooded with these videos. Also if you watched some of these videos you will see a lot of the people crossing the border and attacking seem to not carry any weapons and are in civilian clothing. These are Gaza citizens which decided to join on their own accord to the massacre, meaning they are not employed by Hamas. Hamas actually went ahead and said they originally intended to only kidnap and fight men but non Hamas members joined and they were the ones who mostly harmed civilians. Which is probably not entirely true, but either way it shows a large civilian involvement and endorsement from Palestinians.

What do you think about this?

If you legitimately believe that most Palestinians are Islamic fundamentalists, then I don’t know what to tell you other than you’re wrong and also extremely racist. Palestinians are an extremely diverse group of people. There are Jewish and Christian Palestinians. The reason why many Palestinians are behind Hamas is because they see them as their only option of having any hope of freedom. What the fuck else are they supposed to do? Sit back and accept being murdered and terrorized while the rest of the world turns a blind eye? And don’t say peacefully protest because, newsflash, they’ve been doing that for decades and guess what? The IDF still killed them. Hamas only exists because of the Israeli occupation of Palestinians. That is the simple truth of the matter. What exactly are you trying to prove here? That all Palestinians are terrorists that deserve to die? That is textbook dehumanization as a justification for genocide. Keep in mind that 50% of the people living in Gaza are under the age of 18. They are literally CHILDREN. But sure, they clearly must all be Hamas operatives, so it’s ok to bomb them. /s

You are deflecting away from the cause of the problem because you don’t want to recognize that Israel and the western world is responsible for the violence that is happening right now. So many of y’all would’ve absolutely supported South African apartheid and it shows

[cadavertrolls]

Who’s the most cursed or biggest *ssh*le troll here.

Anon... do you want a fucking LIST? (CW for sexual violence, abuse, drug abuse, murder, etc etc past the cut. mun does not equal muse, the regular disclamers.) 

Ok first off with just the plain assholes just to get us started on a high note

Beanie is a con artist who seduces men and then robs them blind, extremely shamelessly.

Anthus is just... a cunt. He’s hard to be around, nasty to others because he’s afraid of people getting too close. Abrasive. He also robs people sometimes but not often.

Dira’ui is an entitled ex heir. EXTREMELY hemoist and a dick to everyone who he perceives as lower than him. He hates lowbloods and mutants with a passion, the only redeeming quality is that he’s depressed enough about not being a heir anymore that he doesn’t actually put effort into culling them if they do something wrong. 

Kyupid is a contract killer and is a general sadomasochist, he’s nice to you until he wants to do more to you and then he is extremely ruthless.

Misery will do just about anything to stay on top. She’s the reason Csiga is addicted to meth, the reason Anthus has drug problems, and why Daphne is hesitant to let her quads in on what her job actually entails which is creating and trafficking drugs for Misery.

Lawren can be decent sometimes however he has a habit of manipulating trolls and using them for sex, then promptly breaking their hearts or more likely just killing them. He does have a couple quads he is legitimately nice to and has no ulterior motives with but that's 5 or 6 relationships out of HUNDREDS.

The whole Damask line is fucked up in the head. Vitelo will torture you and kill you with his matesprite most likely, Velvex has a mind control ability he keeps a whole harem of trolls around with, and he will Also kill you 9/10, Vitium will kill you if you get in his way and will generally treat you like garbage otherwise if you don’t give him a reason not to.

Ghoore, surprise, also kills people! He treats his workers like his own children, sure, but outside of that he’s incredibly violent and possessive to the point he cut off his matesprite’s limbs for having the audacity to make friends. He met Svedka after he kidnapped him and fucked him up so bad he still works for Ghoore willingly after sweeps of not being in a relationship with him and being given the option to leave.

Cretel... Cretel. He is also violent and possessive and regularly kills his matesprite because it’s fun for him. He kills other people out of paranoia and also for funsies.

Bastillle. We know Bastille. We hate Bastille. Bastille is the reason Cretel is the way that he is. Nasty! Her descendant Suture, who i have yet to draw, is not much better.

Rotten will kill you, maul you, and eat you but he’s not malicious about it he’s just a feral animal basically.. he’s getting better. I think OVERALL he’s my most cursed troll because he’s absurd and does cursed shit all the time but at least it’s sorta haha funny.

Vicera is cursed, he has a literal dead husband. as in his husband is a corpse. He is also apart of the group of my trolls who enjoys the frequent torture and murder of others.

There are so many others that I cant list them all but i hope this gave you an idea of how fucked my cast is!

[xavier-elrose]

It turns out that most superheroes don't automatically know what, exactly, their power is. Heck, some of them don't even notice that they have powers, at least at first.

It turns out that most superheroes don't see a reflection of themselves, with their powers listed and described, upon the moment they first get their powers.

Really, it was just one power. But it was a doozy, and there were lots of details to know.

My power was Mirror.

I mirrored that which I wished to mirror. The first order of business was to mirror myself- something I did the moment I got my powers, and have been doing ever since. I found out, much later, that my particular power isn't actually that rare- no rarer than, say, fire or ice powers.

But people with my power are rare, because once they cease to mirror themselves, they cease to be at all.

Believe it or not, that's actually the less horrifying option. Given the human tendency to focus on the negative, someone who thoughtlessly reflected the world around them would be...horrifying.

But mirroring isn't an all-or-nothing thing. I can mirror myself, while also mirroring other things.

I can, for example, mirror the power and destructive potential of natural disasters.

Humans don't really think about the sheer force behind certain disasters. They think about the destruction, but rarely consider just how small a portion of the power of a storm goes to destroying. The vast majority is spent on less destructive things, not least of which is simply...being the storm.

I can bring a lot of raw power to disaster cleanup and relief. Power like that I can mirror with a fair bit of separation in time and space. Not that much, but...enough.

Being precise with it is harder, but less difficult than you might think. As I said, I don't have to just mirror one thing.

Remember what Mister Rogers said: look for the helpers. Always there are helpers, and always I can mirror them.

The mix is quite potent. My arrival at a disaster scene generally means that things are going to get better, and get better quickly.

It keeps me busy.

And that's enough reason, in and of itself. Really, it is. There's more to doing good than punching people. Really, a remarkably small portion of doing good involves punching people right in their dumb faces.

But there's another reason I don't partake in super fights.

Mirrors are blind. They don't see, they only reflect. And while I do still reflect myself...well, part of me is the mirror power. I have more than a little trouble seeing certain things.

Faces, for one. Not just faces, in fact. I can't really tell people apart at all. Mirrors are shallow, and something about my mind now just...doesn't engage with people at more than the most shallow level.

Not what they look like. My powers aren't quite that literal.

What they do.

And not in a long-term sense. Immediate actions, their consequences, their reverberations. People are what people do, and for me that's...unusually literal.

I'd be a terrifying force in combat. Mirroring your powers, your strength, your skill...with my own thrown in, as well. Reflecting attacks, illusory copies...you'd be fighting yourself with extra abilities. And that's assuming it's a duel. In a melee...I would automatically be the strongest combatant. Almost certainly by a wide margin.

But how do you tell a hero from a villain? The differences are almost always beyond the depth of my mirror-vision- motivations and goals and principles. Even when the line isn't normally blurry, it's beyond my ability to tell. Violence is violence, and I can't spot which I ought to oppose, and which I ought to support.

So instead I do the good I can do. And though I do understand that sometimes the greatest good legitimately does require violence...

Well, mirrors never lie. I'd never yet seen a super-fight where I could tell good from bad.

Maybe my power was telling me something.

You're a superhero who specializes exclusively in stopping disasters. The other heroes just don't understand why you need to remain neutral to the villains…

[awanderingcanadian]

Mazatlan: to go or to go?

We’re scheduled to be in Mazatlan in 2 weeks time. With the events of the past 24 hours, and the cycle of news, it’s tempting to cancel it right now. Here’s why we’re not panicking yet.

Firstly, you need to know a little bit about recent cartel/government history in Mexico before you jump ship. Historically, Mexican governments have aligned themselves with one cartel, turning a blind eye to their dealings in exchange for relative peace amongst them. This wasn’t the case when Calderon was president, (December 2006-November 2012), as he declared war on all the cartels resulting in extreme violence in Mexico, largely in the cities and borders where the cartels had strongholds. Since that experiment, (which I agreed with in principal, but saw it ripping apart the country and its legitimate economy), things have resorted to the old ways. If you don’t believe me, here’s a news article from March 30, 2020 of the current president Obrador, (known as AMLO to many), greeting El Chapo’s mother, and calling her “...a respectable old lady”: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-politics-el-chapo-idUSKBN21H31O

Less than 3 months later, he personally ordered the release of Ovidio Guzman, (the son of El Chapo...the same one arrested yesterday): https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-politics-el-chapo-idUSKBN23Q3AW

What does this mean now? It means, who knows if Obrador will release Guzman again, instantly calming down the region? Currently, Guzman is in maximum security, and Obrador says he won’t release him. If that’s the case, and Guzman is sent to the U.S., things will heat up considerably.

Secondly, when the trucker protest hit Ottawa, how many people cancelled trips to Montreal? I’m going to bet hardly any, yet Montreal and Ottawa are similar distances apart as Culiacán and Mazatlan. Of course the difference is that the truckers had no interest in disrupting Montreal: their ire was with the federal government. I do acknowledge the difference, yet on another comparison, Abbotsford, (about an hour’s drive from Vancouver), has had years of gang violence and shootings, yet no one cancels going to Vancouver, (or even Abbotsford), over it. You know what it’s really like when you’re on the ground, like I am with Vancouver and Abbotsford. I don’t know what it’s like in Sinaloa: the English speaking tourists on the news are panicked, but many don’t speak Spanish, and it’s always scary when your flight is cancelled, there’s the threat of violence, and you can’t understand the bulletins. We have friends there who say it’s fine...and it seems to be fine in their part of Mazatlan, but again who knows what will happen IF Guzman remains in custody?

When you live in Canada, (the 152nd safest country in the world, out of 162 ranked), going anywhere can seem scary. The US is headed in the wrong direction, from 42 last year, to 35 this year, while Mexico, (until yesterday), was going in the right direction, albeit it slightly, from 25 to 27, with some areas making up most of the danger. (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-dangerous-countries), yet many people still go to the U.S. when the data shows that the difference between safety in Mexico and the U.S. is actually negligible. Again, watch blanketing everyone, as I would contend the U.S. is more dangerous for some people than for others, as is Mexico.

I guess we, like everyone else, will watch and wait. This is a segment of a larger trip, so we can change our plans if needed. I will get information from my Mexican friends, my gringo friends on the ground there, and reliable news sources...in teacher language, I will triangulate my data and figure it out from there. 

[hareofhrair]

As an ex-mormorn, I have a lot of sympathy for Ballerina Farms, and yeah it is definitely because I can see myself in her. I recognize the brainwashing she's been through, and I know I was inches from ending up where she is, but worse because I would also have been impoverished and disabled.

But, also speaking from my experience as an ex-mormon, I know exactly how vicious and dogmatic white women can be in upholding and promoting the very systems that are oppressing them.

I've talked a few times on this blog about how genuine fear doesn't excuse prejudice-- Just because a white woman is legitimately afraid of black men, that does not justify her treating them as inherently suspicious or calling the cops on them for just existing in the same space as her. Legitimate fear is in fact a major driver of prejudice.

So is legitimate suffering.

The women trapped in the mormon church (who make up a Not Inconsiderable segment of the trad wife influencer community for a reason) or in similarly oppressive evangelical christian communities, are suffering. They are brainwashed cult victims.

They are ALSO perpetrators of that same violence on others. Turns out, you can be both things! In fact, being hurt makes you MORE likely to lash out and hurt others, to develop maladaptive coping mechanisms, to shift the blame for your situation onto targets that confirm your pre existing cultural biases.

And when the culture that victimized you also gives you power and social privileged over whole swaths of other people? There are very little limits on just how much harm your trauma can do.

Being a victim does not make you inherently good.

Being a racist, misogynist, ect, doesn't protect you from being victimized.

So yeah, Ballarina Farms lady is a victim. It's normal to feel a degree of sympathy for how thoroughly indoctrinated she is, and the waste of her potential. But you also can't let that blind you to the very real harm she has done and continues to do.

No one put a gun to her head and forced her to become one of the leading propagandists for the very system that victimized her. She chose this. She continues to choose it every day.

She chooses it because it is more comfortable than confronting the fact that she's a victim of abuse, that the beliefs she's grown up with are wrong, that she is suffering and that there IS a way out, just not one she's willing to take.

She buries her own doubts and miserable regrets in a performance of spiritual satisfaction and lures more women into a trap that makes her gilded cage look like a palace.

Remember, she has it a LOT better than most women in this situation. She is extremely affluent, allowing her to present a fantasy version of the trad wife life where she can play pretend little house on the prairie while hiring others (probably black and brown women), to do the actual dirty work of keeping the house clean, taking care of the animals, looking after the kids, putting dinner on the table.

Most women who end up in her situation don't have that luxury. They also don't have highly successful social media careers that give them financial independence from their husbands.

Ballarina Farms could leave her husband right now, and she would be fine. She wouldn't end up on the street, she wouldn't have her children taken from her, she wouldn't be scrambling for work with zero experience or qualifications.

In short, Ballarina Farms could walk out of her cage at any time she chose to.

But the women who fall for her propaganda are trapped.

The radfems dismissing any critique of white feminism when it comes to criticizing how much attention and sympathy the Ballerina Farm controversy is receiving are so annoying. But then again, transphobes don't understand intersectionality 🤷🏻‍♀️

Is what happening to Ballerina Farm horrible? Yes, the tradwife life is inherently horrible becos they are part of a relationship dictated by patriarchal values and rigid gender roles. However, is it the worst thing to happen to women? No, there are other horrible things happening to women, esp Black and Brown women that yall are ignoring. It's giving Gabby Petito debate, it's giving Barbie Oscars controversy.

[antifainternational]

Republicans will be all like "save the children" but then turn a blind eye to the horrific abuse of children in ICE custody and throw their own LGBT children to the wolves by kicking them out to the Streets. 🐸☕

(content warning for discussion of child sexual abuse)

If right-wingers were actually concerned about saving children from sexual abuse, they'd be focusing their efforts on where most children are being sexually abused. The trouble for them is that the same institutions they actively participate in and/or support (e.g. their fellow right-wing extremists, the Southern Baptist Convention, CPB/ICE, the Catholic Church, Donald Trump, etc.) are regularly accused of the worst examples of systematic child sexual abuse, with the accusations coming from actual people making credible allegations, usually backed by substantive evidence. There are media reports from well-respected outlets; publicly-accessible court documents and hearing transcripts; and public statement made by some of the victims that anyone could find to verify the claims with just a little effort. But right-wingers don't actually care about child sexual abuse. They don't raise money for counselling and therapy for survivors of child sexual abuse (and as politicians they often block access or prevent funding for therapy for survivors). They don't support NGOs that do credible work fighting human trafficking. They actively work against providing the kinds of supports that are the most effective at preventing children from being sexually exploited to begin with. What they do instead is use terms like "groomers" and "paedophiles" to tar-and-feather any outgroup they want to portray as "the baddies" in an effort to rally their troops to attack a scapegoat - both to distract people from the actual problem and what could be done about it and to build their followings and encourage violence against those outgroups. Currently it's trans people that are being subjected to this abuse; previously it was Muslims, then LGBTQ+ people before them, and so on. We're not saying that child sexual abuse is not horrific and that the problem does not have to be addressed, obviously. But the way the right accuses any group they're currently scapegoating as "groomers" allows the institutions the right supports that are currently and have historically engaged in the systemic sexual abuse of children to get away with it and even continue the abuse and shelter abusers without accountability. It also does real harm to legitimate organizations doing legitimate work combatting child sex trafficking because it takes resources away from them and diminishes the credibility of the movement as a whole. It's a cynical weaponization of child sexual abuse to gain political points against the perceived "enemy du jour" for the far right. It is especially ironic that people holding this viewpoint would then use it to justify ostracizing and rendering their own LGBTQ+ children homeless, since doing so makes their own children extremely vulnerable to sexual exploitation and abuse. That's a long way to say that the right-wingers are disgusting hypocrites, but there you go!