#prove to each other that your country oppresses people better

[pinkfey]

there’s this interesting (🤨) sort of oppression olympics ⚡️ lightning round ⚡️going on between americans and europeans online and all i think should be said about that is that if you’re a white european (especially if ur lgbtq) u need to speak and listen to even just one ☝️ person of color to broaden your perspective and if ur a white american like me we need to ensure we aren’t using the suffering of black and brown people as a gotcha and are actually doing something other than arguing online to win a faux competition of moral superiority which is just our covert way of boosting the collective white ego. okay that’s all.

[dracanboys]

all i ever do is ramble about ff7 on here. but i have another ramble that's just a cleaned up discord ramble <3 thanks ever crisis for fucking me up again

anybody else insane about the fact that shinra is continuously shown to prey on literal children or the otherwise less fortunate in general and makes them complicit in horrific acts of crime and colonization under guises of unity or abuse so horrific that it's inconceivable to imagine doing otherwise? anyone else insane about how shinra constantly pits the 'lesser men' against each other to avoid any sort of rebellion against them?

sephiroth, unable to see the kids fighting for their island as simple children because he is one too and does not see why that's so messed up. children are not innocent, untouchable beings - they are capable being hurt and hurting in return, of being a weapon just like he is. they are no different than any man. it's kill or be killed, in his own words. angeal, who grew up poor, constantly clinging to his ideals of honor because it's all he has, becoming a soldier (in his eyes, unaware of shinra's involvement with him) to make money to help repay his family - and given his actions towards others, likely to help people in his situation too. zack being a starry eyed wannabe hero, cloud being an ostracized small town country boy trying to prove himself, etc. etc. glenn, a full grown adult who desperately needs money for his family's survival, is the first person to go "this is wrong, i can't do this" only after participating in the slaughter of an entire people. anybody else want to SCREAM about how shinra takes these otherwise kindhearted people and sinks their claws in them so hard they are fully complicit+active in normalized horrific acts. does anybody else think about how barret and yuffie are actually extremely important characters within the narrative as survivors of the other side of shinra's - and by extension, those who work for them - horrific actions that are often downplayed/ignored/etc.

it just makes me so sad when people ignore What shinra is actually doing, boil down wutai to a big joke, woobify cloud or zack, and so on. i am not trying to say your innocent baby cloud strife a definitively bad man by saying he willingly joined a company that's committing atrocities, im saying it's an important part of his character (especially considering how he grows!) and serves the worldbuilding of ff7 of how deeply rooted shinra's ideals are within the world. in universe its insanely normalized to be nasty against anything that's against shinra. shinra's hold is so deep that even barret gets upset at the idea that he's aligned with wutai because of shinra's propaganda despite us knowing firsthand (through knowledge we'd only get as a player) wutai hasn't done jack shit to deserve that reputation because all its ever done was try to fight back. yuffie is like that for a reason. she's a child who has passively witnessed, and at least directly witnessed once (you know, the mission zack was on) violence towards her home and her people, and is trying to cope with it and take things into her own hands the only way a sixteen year old like her knows how. it's tragic! and many people ignore the 'fan favorites' active participation or complicity in, even though it serves their character and the narrative better.

to drive in the point, the downfall of shinra isn't even due to rebellion of those it has hurt through oppression/conquering. it was set in motion way before that due to a connected web of relationships relating to personal actions done to a small group of people. that's so fucked! not in a "bad writing" way, but just in a realistic-world fucked up way! its not "evil company gets whats coming to it from Rebellion by the Good Guys!" its "evil company gets fucked over because it fucked over some specific people on a personal level and that sets other things in motion." even with our main gang of 'heroes', OG makes a point of a lot of our casts motivations being more on a personal level and that Saving The World/Fucking Over Shinra just happens to be a side-consequence of that.

i love ff7 so much and i wish people would stop trying to sanitize or woobify the darker aspects of it when they serve such an important part of the narrative... anyway tldr

[licorice-and-rum]

please write your rant about male domestic abuse victims

Okay, I'll do this but fair warning, I might include some kind of parallels to the Depp vs Heard trial(s) because my mind functions better if I have some kind of real-life or fictional literature to support me through the development of my thoughts, so if you believe Amber Heard for some reason, you might not like what I have to say. Also, please if you're gonna comment, be gentle and polite, I'm always open to new (well-based) points of view and I promise I'm open to an honest conversation with anyone who is kind <3

Observation: I will use Domestic Violence (DV) as a broad term throughout this but know that I refer mostly to Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) here. The difference between the two is that DV can happen between members of the same nuclear family (between brothers, partners, or child and parents) while IPV happens only between romantic partners.

The reason I don't use DV especially is because abuse against boys (by parents, sisters, etc.) also falls under this category and then it's a whole other discussion about the socialization of children and teenagers, the social minority they represent and how that's a whole new discussion (that I'd be happy to extend in another post actually if there are any other people interested).

To begin with, we have to understand some things: we don't have exact data about male victims of domestic abuse, not only because it's severely under-reported but also because many reports are not even filed because the lines for escaping domestic violence (police, shelters, phone lines, etcetera.) attend only women and girls, or demonstrate a clear bias towards those victims. Plus, as it happens with women as well, abuse doesn't present just physically, but also emotionally and psychologically.

However, just to give you all an idea, in the UK, for example, it's estimated that almost 20% of domestic violence reports were from men in the last two years (2022-23), according to ManKind Initiative. In the US, according to The Tech Report, almost 45% of men believe they were victims of abusive relationships in their lives. In Australia, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, 38% of victims of violence in the country were men, 64% being DV-related.

Now, there is a reason for this, and this is called patriarchy. Patriarchy is the concept of one of the pillars of how our society is built, and it means the subjugation of one binary gender (female) by another binary gender (male) - although this definition is more for this essay's purpose than accurate for an academic study for example. It's important to note that gender violence presents itself against women institutionally (through proper institutions, such as the legal system, for example, or a company's hierarchy) and structurally (it's in the roots of our society culturally and thus, infecting everything else).

According to The Patriarchs, journalist Angela Saini's latest book, the Patriarchy is something tricky to explore even for our earlier academics, such as Engels, for example, because it presents itself in many different ways. For example, it changes its characterization according to culture, environmental needs, History, and other factors. Still, the important thing is that it has various different aspects in the areas it's present.

What I want to explore goes a little bit further: I want to understand how the oppression of women affects men because, unlike many other kinds of oppression, gender-related violence affects their enforcers (men) as well as their victims (women). Now, I am not saying this violence is equal to each other: violence against women permeates our societies' very core, it's ingrained in our institutions, in our culture. But on an interpersonal level, gender violence affects men and women both.

Men are pressured into "being a man" (a white person doesn't have to prove they're white in the same sense or with the same intensity as a man has to prove his man-ness), they're molded to become people in disconnection to their own emotions, they're encouraged to be violent or at least not to be "emotional", to the point of not even noticing when they're suffering some kind of violence or from a mental disorder, for example.

This plays a significant role in how we view abuse when perpetrated by women against men but it's not all we need to observe when talking about male DV victims.

Another matter I'd like to point out is the way we view feminine violence: in the Introduction of her best-seller, Lady Killers, Tori Telfer talks about how violence committed by women is often put under one of three categories: the mysticism, the sexualization, or the banalization. That is, socially, we have a habit of thinking about violence perpetrated by women as either mythological, sexy, or just plain silly, and therefore dumb and/or laughable.

Telfer's examples throughout the book are great and I recommend the book for more insight, but to me, three cases stick out to follow as examples:

How the first woman serial killer we have Historical records of, Elizabeth Ridgeway, was killed for being a witch (mysticism);

How Nannie Doss, an old lady who fit all the 50s housewife stereotypes and killed men with poison in her cakes, had her intelligence belittled by people trying to paint her as insane despite many psychiatrical reports of her being exceptionally clever, how she was labeled by the media as "Arsenic Nannie" (banalization)

And finally, how women who perpetrate violence are often sexualized, such as Raya and Sakina, from the beginning of 20th-century Egypt, who were tied closely to the criminal underworld of their neighborhood and who actually developed a method of killing four people with little blood and avoiding messes; or Lizzie Halliday, who was labeled "the worst woman on earth" with clear implications of her ugliness; or at last, Erzsébet Báthory, known more popularly as Countess Dracula despite having been a lot crueler than the name leads you to believe; they were all sexualized one way or another, their crimes fitting their appearances rather than their acts.

What I mean to point out by that is that feminine violence is something we as a society have a tendency to downplay to a dangerous level. Part of that is a result of downplaying violence as a whole, doesn't matter the perpetrator, but a big part of it is because we see violence as a men's trait. Culturally, violence is a characteristic we attribute to men while women are "even-tempered", motherly, nurturing, and delicate.

Those are the traits of femininity. Violence is not something we easily attribute to women, while men can be only violent, domineering, "warriors".

Now, intimate partner violence (IPV) against males and perpetrated by women is significantly overlooked and under-researched. Hell, there was a real and huge doubt whether men could be r*ped at the beginning of the 2000s, and even now there are people who still don't see how men can be sexually abused.

What we do know about IPV is that, according to this article, women and men have roughly the same rate of occurrences of physical abuse against their partners, and in most of the non-reciprocal violent relationships, women were mostly the perpetrators, although it is true that the more violent abuse occurrences are mostly perpetrated by men:

"Archer Reference Archer5 attempted to resolve two competing hypotheses about partner violence, either that it involves a considerable degree of mutual combat or that it generally involves male perpetrators and female victims. His meta-analysis of 82 studies of gender differences in physical aggression between heterosexual partners showed that men were more likely to inflict an injury; 62% of those injured by a partner were women, but men still accounted for a substantial minority of those injured. However, women were slightly more likely than men to use one or more act of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently. Younger aged couples showed more female-perpetrated aggression."

Again, that's not to say that violence committed against women in our patriarchal society is in any way equivalent to what men suffer as victims of IPV because that's not true. Violence against women is in every corner of our culture, it's in the roots of our society, and violence against men is not as institutional or structural as acts of violence perpetrated against men.

But I have to criticize how we view (or maybe it's best to say how little we view, or even consider) male victims of DV when we're talking about the matter because not only we are then perpetrating patriarchal beliefs that continue to harm us, we're also portraying women as being inherently and perpetually victims of violence, always in a place of perceived inferiority (although I need to point out there is nothing inferior about suffering violence) while men fall under the category of always the perpetrators of that violence.

That's undeniably harmful because it generates a dangerous generalization in individual cases, such as Johnny Depp, for example. Many of the people I saw defending Heard seemed to not comprehend that only because Johnny Depp was in a place of societal power in relation to AH (because he was, as an older, richer man) that wasn't enough of a reason to believe he was guilty of what she accused him of. Just because generally we might rightly point out a systemic oppression of women by men, it doesn't mean that we should apply those principles to individual cases, especially when we don't have access to concrete evidence and in high-profile cases such as Depp v Heard.

Now, after all of that, I need to point out a personal opinion of mine and bear in mind I don't have anything to base myself here so feel free to criticize it if you disagree (just remember to be nice, please): all of these facts make me ask myself how many of those cases of IPV were labeled as "mutual" (because there's actually a pretty fierce discussion on the matter of whether or not mutual abuse exists from what I could find, and mostly of academic research seem to understand that mutual abuse does exist) are actually mutual and not - in case of heterosexual relationships - emotional manipulation on the perpetrator's side.

And that leads me to ask myself how many of the false reports made by women against their male partners (which are the minority of reported DV cases, let's be clear here) were labeled as mutual because the men "fought back"? How many men who were victims of emotional manipulation didn't stay in those relationships or settle cases because of the threat of their female partners reporting them back from abuse as well?

And amongst those people, how many men did actually something that could be considered violent against their partner (talking now about emotional and psychological abuse, excluding the physical aspect for now) in an act of self-defense or instinctual nastiness as a defense mechanism against something that hurt them?

Having been a reactive victim in an emotionally abusive relationship myself, I can say with some ease that I said things that I know for sure truly hurt my abuser, I know I said things in the last days of our relationship that I would never say to other people if I wasn't so defensive right out the beginning of our latest interactions. But I refuse to fall into the trap of believing myself to be an equally abusive part of that relationship because I also know I did the work to try and better our relationship, I know because my other relationships are healthy and close and emotionally vulnerable and the whole circus.

So what I do have to ask myself is that in those IPV cases in heterosexual relationships where our first reaction is to classify them as mutual abuse or something like that... what do we expect from our male victims of IPV? What does the perfect male victim of IPV look like? Is it reasonable for us to expect men not to defend themselves at all because they're generally stronger than women?

Of course, I'm not advocating here that any kind of violence against your partner is okay because they're abusing you to any gender - self-defense has explicit rules to be applied for that exact reason. I'm simply pointing out that maybe we're diving into dangerous territory, or being overly zealous, considering mutual abuse at the maximum, or not believing men at all on the other side of the spectrum, when we're presented with a heterosexual case of IPV where the female was clearly or almost undoubtedly violent throughout the relationship.

That's the many reasons I can think to question people when they are presented with a case of DV of a woman committing abuse against their male partner. Because as much as women are socially oppressed, our biases in regard to gender affect our views of both men and women and can be really dangerous when generally applied to individual cases.

So yeah, I'm not thrilled with our critical skills when it comes to male victims of abuse, loves.

Not at all.

(if you're gonna answer, remember to be nice!)

[writingonesdreams]

Did I lose something by saying what I wanted? By saying the truth?

To be fair, I was so confident in my friendships and my choice of these people, in knowing each other for years, in being connected through our writing, that I was sure no one could fairly doubt I valued human lives and would spit any kind of discrimination based on immutable trait in the face.

So I wasn't expecting my years long friends I spend hours everyday reading the work of, turning against me with accusations of being racist and neo nazi and who knows what kind of phobe, just cause certain people looking to be angry with the world, picked me as their target.

Well, I'm a known and big writeblr with many followers. I guess I was standing out too much.

I'm sorry about ever saying sorry. I wasn't sorry, when I apologized, I felt disgusted with it, but I was still in that pitiful state of wanting to keep some friendships I loved more than I respected my dignity. Well, I learned my lesson. 1) It didn't help. Right after the apology the mob came after me to explain why it wasn't enough, why I could never make up for it, and why I should apologise more. 2) I didn't keep those stupid friendships after all. 3) No one stood up for me outside of DMs, which I kinda get, who would want to be targeted by a mob? Next time I will collect people who agree with me, true allies to the cause, who will support me through it publically as well.

Anyway, no use apologising for something you aren't and didn't do, just because someone made it up and is trying to convince you of it.

So what did I lose?

Illusions of friendship (it's ridiculous how much that person sings about friendship when she didn't manage to be a true friend when it counted)

Convenient services and friendly connections that could have worked if we just didn't know who the other was. (Well I knew. I knew for a long time. I accommodated, I adjusted, I wanted to be accepting and tolerant. Well the other party refused to be tolerant of me and my opinions. If you want to go with "with us or against us" kind of black and white mentality, then bye bye).

My belief in connecting through writing. I thought I understood and read into people's souls by reading their work. I'm a deeply analytical and intelligent person. I feel confident saying I knew my friends real well from their stories. Turns out I knew them a little better than they knew themselves. And a lot more than they are comfortable facing. Well. I'm done with people with lack of self-awareness.

The idealized picture of people I had. Some people are just so deep in their nonsensical ideology and religion of the woke that they can't fathom there are whole countries that have predominantly white population. Or that Europe doesn't care about race as America does. Or that someone might not agree with oppression hierarchies. Or that you shouldn't be writing xyz representation to score points to prove you are a good person. Or that your physical traits aren't your defining characteristics and you shouldn't introduce them as such.

Looking back at this fight I picked, this anon I gave voice to, these friends that I spend hours on everyday...I see that I won.

I won

I won, because at the end, my lovely intelligent eloquent friend I valued very much, was out of arguments, and could only muster personal attacks and declaration of intolerance towards anyone who she disagrees with. In doing so, she lost all my respect.

I won, because the friend whose writing I love so much, turned out to be fully indoctrinated into a very racist ideology that says all white people are racist from birth, from culture and unintentionally spread racism around them. That says that non-white people are less capable of achieving happiness. Bleh. She has good intentions, but wow, I'm so sorry for her.

I won, because I lost friends from similar countries as me, who feel ashamed of being white. Because they are so afraid to lose their standing as good allies to people with entitlement issues. People who only see their worth as writers and people through representation of marginalized communities they don't belong to, and therefore feel obligated to serve.

I won, became I lost people who feel like the world ownes them something just for exiting. Who feel like the demands of having to work for a living instead of gaming and writing out their fantasies are unfair and oppressive. Who would rather accept socialist dictatorships then be responsible for their own happiness in freedom.

I won, because I lost a ton of friends that weren't real. It gave me a lot of energy and space to find new friendships and let other more worthwhile people, mindsets and thoughts into my life. People who deserve me. I'm real sorry for your loss and for wasting my time on you. 

So here I'm in the open. Their goal was to shut me up. I won't. Their goal was to make me afraid with their language and theories. I don't agree with them, I oppose them. I will laugh at them as they deserve.

It didn't show me what kind of unfit audience it is here, so I will be looking for a new blogging platform anyway. But I'm grateful for what the community gave me and that it allowed me to meet some truly wonderful friends.

For that one friend for every 10 fake ones, I say thanks.

[idkimnotreal]

i once saw someone claiming on twitter that jesting is a social test to assure whether someone is sure of themselves or not (the logic being that if someone allows a joke at their expense, and jokes at their own expense, that they know they have nothing to lose because they already know their worth).

i struggled for a while to connect this to racism and xenophobia. if that is true, and i agree with it, shouldn't racism and xenophobia be okay even with the victims of those "jokes"?

i think the point is power. racism and xenophobia are not okay because mocking and jesting is a social play. it's done among equals. it comes from someone who is equal to you testing your worth to see if you are equal to them. if you accept the jest, you are equal to them.

but when it comes from someone who assumes they are superior to you (and often yields more collective power), and who expects you to assume you are inferior to them, then it's not jesting at all. it's nothing more than a power play; a hidden threat in the form of a harmless joke. this is why racists can't push their idea that all jokes are valid no matter how much they try. because they're not joking, and they know it.

it seems to make sense now.

(to quote slavoj zizek. if jesting is done among a serbian and a black american, for instance, and they joke about each other's races, I'm not sure if this is racism, because serbians are not oppressing black americans, and serbian americans are hardly a thing. it's different than a white american making the same joke or other arguably socially privileged groups in america)

this happens in brazil specifically regarding xenophobia. xenophobia against peoples of the northeastern states in brazil is widely frowned upon in most of the country, though it's somewhat of a common sense in certain parts of southern brazil (to think less of northeastern peoples). the northeast is brazil's least developed and least white region (and the south is brazil's whitest region and was its most developed until a decade ago). in recent years, there has been an effort, especially online, to convert part of this hatred into celebration of northeastern cultures, which has been successful among younger brazilians and urban brazilians. BUT, in contrast, the south is taking the fall for it. shitting on southern culture is now accepted, and we're supposed to think that's okay.

now, i sometimes feel bad when people shit on my culture, because i'm from the south and i think we have a lot to offer and it's not like we are not oppressed in different ways, but i understand where it's coming from and i also understand that it's not our place to complain. if we are all that we say we are, then it should be simple to just let the jests go. because we know we're better than it. getting upset proves that the south is not what certain people say it is. it's coming from a place of righteousness - to right things wrong, to shift the balance to something neutral, where all jests are accepted. we can't be exempt from jesting if we are to build a harmonious society, but we also can't keep jesting about the weak. so we let the weak jest about the strong until the weak are no longer weak and the strong are no longer strong. because no one jested about the south before; it was the pinnacle of brazilian culture after all.

but i think we should just grow up and accept we're not perfect, and thus automatically accept that people can jest about us, up until that point where they no longer have feelings of resentment and no one thinks jesting about the south (or whites or other certain groups) is undoable.

[natewriteslol]

The Wonders of Magic Pt. 1

Non magical!Twisted Boys x Witch!Reader

A/N: This has been sitting in my brain for a while since I have Little Witch Academia brainrot and I love snooty rich boys asdfljsfaj

Characters: Keep reading to find out!!

Warnings: Language and Y/N goes by she/her pronouns 

Summary: Dealing with magical adventures and society deeming magic as “flashy but worthless” doesn’t deter Y/N L/N from reaching her goal of becoming a powerful witch. However, what will she do when she has to find a way to stop the selling Calypso Academy? 

~~~

All your life you had dreamed of being a witch, however there was a slight problem. You weren't a magic user.

And as magic use had started to become more oppressed and scarce, magic schools were starting to open their doors to all walks of life. Making the most elite schools fall to their knees.

Either you lose your elite status or fall into debt.

So this was good opportunity for you, you managed to make it into one of the most renowned magic schools in the country, Calypso Academy. But it wasn't all peaches and cream, you weren't exactly accepted among your peers. Your family weren't magic users, nor were they wealthy. Yet you still pursued magic, there was a fire burning in your heart that just drew you in all your life. And you couldn't let your dream go just because of some mean girls. But this is the story of how you met some of your greatest obstacles.

 ~~~

It was the night of the great Ball, Calypso academy was having it's 350th anniversary. And you unlucky for you, you still didn’t know how to ride a broom since you were learning from the ground up. 

So there you were, by yourself, in one of the open fields of your campus. Trying to make this broom fly. 

And in your flight teacher Ms. Flint’s words, “If the broom doesn’t leave the ground, you can’t step a foot in the ball.” And so far, your feet have been stuck on the ground.

You felt horrible. I mean, what witch doesn’t know how to fly a broom? And while you were incredibly dejected

 from your failures, you knew you couldn’t just let it go. 

‘The trick it to be determined, yet feel as light as a feather. Be one with the broom’ your manifestation teacher, Mrs. Fairi had softly advised. You had to do this for for her, she already put so much faith in you, she would be so disappointed if she didn’t see you at the ball. 

“Nubes Volant ro!” You casted, pushing your leg to lift. Expecting your legs to come back down and for your shoes to hit the softness of the grass... but it never came.

You opened your eyes and there you were, suspended in air. 

Your excitement was indescribable, but you needed to be skilled enough to meet the requirements for Ms. Flint. So you tried and tried again, and while a little shaky you still managed to fly and do a stable landing! 

“I did it! Screw everyone in this academy who doubted me!” You  squealed a little loud, doing a little dance. You heard  footsteps and chuckling, but you brushed it off as some of your classmates. Too excited to care, you grabbed your things and ran off to show Ms. Flint.   But there was one problem, the entire point of this celebration was to both celebrate the anniversary but... it was begging as well. It was no secret that Calypso was losing money to pay taxes, but they were being pressured to give it all up. So to persuade the buyers, they had invited their son's to be enriched in witch culture and tradition. To prove them wrong and show that magic has value. However the students of the academy weren't aware of the true intentions behind the invites of the son's of these rich men. Many whispered in the halls about the upcoming ceremony. Talking about how handsome the young men attending were. But the day of the party was finally here! The banquet was absolutely incredible with 25 foot tables of food on both sides of the ballroom. Crystal chandeliers with floating candles illuminating and creating a heavenly golden light. And the great ancient tapestries that surrounded the room. There was no way that anything could mess up your night. 

But then, you heard a shout from a classmate in the crowd. "The nobles sons! They're here!" You stopped stuffing your face for a moment. Everyone cleared the way for the grand wooden doors as they opened, a red carpet elegantly draping the piece of floor it laid on. Designer shoes clicked as they touched the ground. Every girl eyes followed as they walked, you snuck past some trying to get a glimpse of their features. They were five of them being escorted by one older gentleman, all incredibly handsome young men. One had a bright smile that was genuine and waving at some of the girls in the crowd. While the other had a smirk not paying anyone any mind, as if he was calculating something. One held a solemn expression, yet was incredibly poised and graceful. The last two however wore scowls, one that showed he most definitely didn’t want to be here while the other just looked strict. 

They sat down in their seats in the front table that awaited them. Each seat was just as fancy as a king’s throne, with gold embellishments and velvet seats. 

It was a cookie cut scene, they were made for this life of luxury.

~~~

It was an hour into the ceremony, showcasing tricks and theatrical dances from every witch culture from around the globe. But it was almost as though nothing was satisfying them, besides the one with white hair. While he adorned a smile, there was something behind his eyes, as though he was doing some critical thinking. 

Nothing was enough for them. 

But it was toward the end and the noble’s sons were promised a tour. Every witch in the school was made to study up on knowledge of the campus. So that if you were the “lucky winner” you wouldn’t look like a complete fool. 

As you snacked on your chocolate filled croissant, Ms. Flint with her booming voice had called everyone’s attention to the center of the stage. Raising her wand, a split of golden light had displayed random names. 

Knowing your luck, you knew you wouldn’t be picked. I mean this was probably a tactic to get people to study the school’s magical history. It did work, as if there was a slight chance you were chosen you wouldn’t want to make a fool out of yourself in front of people like you usually did. But, Principal Hendrix wouldn’t be so irresponsible as to let a random student represent the school, right? 

Exactly. But even then, you sure did feel sorry for whoever was to give the tour-

“Y/N L/N!”

...

Remember what you said about shitty luck? 

Shocked was an understatement. Even though you had your two best and only friends Silva and Miete patting you on the back telling you congrats and to do your best, the hammering of your heart was too heavy for you to handle. 

Whispers broke out for a moment, a lot of girls were incredibly disappointed but cleared the way for you to go up the stairs and talk to Ms. Flint and Principal Hendrix. 

“Good job, Y/N. Now if you wouldn’t mind, please give these young men a tour of Calypso, would you?” Principle Hendrix said gently with a smile.

“Ha, ha, of course! But surely there’s been a mistake, I mean Lydia could probably recite the information without having to read a single book-” 

“No way, L/N. You were chosen, now do the tour please, the latest you can be back is at 9pm,” Ms. Flint replied, cutting you off sharply. 

“You’re an incredibly charismatic student, Y/N. Just keep them entertained,” Principle Hendrix whispered as you walked toward the table.

Be charismatic, not awkward! Got it!

“Alrighty then! Who’s ready for a tour?” you said, almost giving finger guns as a mechanism. 

“Oh, I am!” 

“Yes,  I’ve been wanting to see the range of this property in person.”

“Yes, I would like to get this over with. I have an appointment tomorrow and I would not like to miss it.”

Other than that, all you received was a nod and an eye roll. But it’s better not to pry and ask for more from them. 

Each getting out of their seats, you walked outside. Hearing cheers from the crowd and the occasional “Vil! I love you!” which made you a little embarrassed. 

Feeling the night breeze and seeing the stars poke through calmed you down slightly, it was 7:45 and all you had to do was blabber at them about the school until 9. 

Easy task, Y/N. Easy!

~~~

Once you got outside, the tour had been running smoothly for only a couple of minutes. But you couldn’t help but feel as though they started scanning you, as if they saw you from somewhere. Until unfortunately, the sunshine of the group’s lightbulb had went off. 

“Oh! You’re the girl with the broomstick towards the front of the school! You looked so happy practicing.” 

“There must be a mistake-”

“Are you sure? If so then I guess you have a doppelganger” the boy with glasses teased. 

“Didn’t you say, ��Screw everyone at this academy’?” the short, red head questioned, persecuting your behavior. 

“Well some people here aren’t exactly the nicest. It was just an excitement of the moment thing, sorry,” You said, trying to get Mr. Non-Rule Breaker off your back. 

~~~

So... you had accidently overshared about your adventures on campus. 

It had all started when one of the boys looked shocked that the ancient Willow tree was thriving and looking beautiful as ever. When he looked at it from pictures given to him, it was completely lifeless and grey. 

“This tree, it looks completely different? It’s been sickly for years! How is this possible?” He asked, as his main piece of evidence the white haired boy gave to his father to buy this property was foiled. 

“Oh, that was me. They had willow worms in the roots that were ready to hatch and I accidently brought them out,” you said, a little prideful, yet it was quickly stomped out.

“That is highly irresponsible, you should’ve had a professional complete that task, not an inexperienced student,” the red haired boy scoffed, it seemed as though he didn’t respect this school at all. Yet the boy with grey hair and glasses paid him no mind, still incredibly astonished, but it was quickly wiped from his face and replaced with a somewhat of a sour look. As though you beat him at some game he was playing.

“...Interesting. I never knew magic could do something of that caliber,” he remarked,  pushing up his glasses. 

“Magic is incredibly useful, Mr...” 

Shit. You didn’t get their names...

“My apologies, I didn’t catch your guy’s names,” you said, placing a hand behind your head. 

You had never in your life seen a group of people get so surprised, besides the other white haired boy, who was happy to tell you his name. 

“I’m Kalim, Kalim-Al-Asim!” he said, shaking your hand with a vigor, “It’s a little funny that you don’t know who we are, but I like that about you!” 

How was it funny? You’ve never seen these people in your entire life? The blonde man was especially offended as you glanced at him for his name. 

“Vil Schoenheit. Actor, singer, dancer, beauty influenc-” 

“Hmmm, Vil I can’t help but feel that you’re angry at Ms. L/N for not knowing who you are,” the boy with glasses remarked before taking your hand, “Azul Ashengrotto, it’s a pleasure to meet you.” 

“I’m Riddle Rosehearts,” the short red-haired boy said.

“...Leona Kingscholar.” 

“Alright, I’m glad I got your names! Let’s get a move on! I have got to show you some more stuff!” you said before moving along, gaining more confidence as you talked to them. 

Maybe this tour wasn’t so bad after all!

~~~

Coming up:

“How did you not know who the noble’s sons are?!” Miette yelled, but her soft voice wasn’t exactly giving the shocking boom to emphasize her feelings.

“I’m sorry! Everything was completely fine after that, if this whole tour was such a big deal then I would’ve studied them more instead of the school,” you said, completely pooped out from last night. 

So much pressure on you made you very tired out, and all of these new details coming out made you feel even more guilty for your half-assed tour. 

[tonya-the-chicken]

It's honestly so fucked up

Ukraine is not a NATO member, Ukraine is not an EU member, Ukrainians weren't even recognized as an independent nation by westerners not so long ago aka we literally were told "isn't Ukraine just a part of Russia anyway" and now they treat us a little better so everyone is like "oh so you are a part of the west, fuck you then". Oh cool so we are not suffering enough for you, after all, you are "uncivilised" and we are "relatively civilized" which means we are mortal enemies. This is a definition of oppression Olympics when people dedicate more time to proving someone's suffering matters less instead of showing solidarity or at a bare minimum shutting the fuck up. And what is worse, many Ukrainians when being attacked like this don't know what to do but try to justify why they receive more attention when obviously they don't have to prove anything. Of course, we do deserve the attention! And the same way, all people suffering from wars do! It's not Ukraine's problem that western countries don't pay enough attention to you, it's western countries' problems. We are not responsible for Germany, the USA or Poland! So stop thinking we are

It's ok to be frustrated because of westerners but it's not ok to be a rude bitch to people suffering from literal genocide. And yes we are using social media and we see all your bullshit. Don't forget social media is a public space

Also, I've seen Russian bots and paid people doing "what about Palestine/Syria" so, please double-check who you are following and reblog from even if the post has a lot of likes (literally saw a Russian propagandist with 2 thousand retweets please). It's obvious to me who benefits from clashing us against each other (spoiler alert: not Syrians and not Palestinians)

[gay-robotss]

I’m gonna need the progressive Christian and the “they’re not real Christian’s!” crowd to start realizing that the call is coming from inside the house and do something about it. And by do something, I do NOT mean point fingers and argue who is technically theologically correct or hurl no-true-Scotsman arguments at each other like you’ve been doing for years. I mean put your fucking stake in the ground, confront your fellow Christians IN PERSON, and start taking action. Because Christian extremists in this country are doing exactly that and have been doing exactly that for decades. And this is where it’s gotten us.

I promise you that telling people who are oppressed by your religion that the people who hurt us “weren’t real Christians” does not help us in any way. They only thing it does is make you feel better about yourself by absolving yourself of the guilt of being associated with them and giving you an excuse to do absolutely nothing to make change for the better. To put things in your language, you’re no better than Pontius Pilate washing his hands of the crucifixion of Jesus.

I guarantee you that there is someone in your church who is suffering. I 100% guarantee it. And not because of “sin” or the weight of the world or some shit. It’s because they’re queer, or a woman, or black, and they’re watching Christians in your church and across the country call for their rights to be stripped away. And they’re watching you, oh righteous progressive Christian, sit there and let it happen because of your own perceived moral superiority absolving you of any responsibility to get involved.

Start organizing in your church. Start talking to people. Start verbally confronting the bigots in your church, I guarantee you they’re there. Talk to your pastor. Confront your pastor. Don’t go to church? Organize with other Christians in your area and take an actual, real, tangible stand that has real, tangible value. Your Instagram info graphics are not enough anymore. You’re a part of the religious majority in the country, and you need to start taking advantage of that. Because right now, you’re not really any better to me than the Christofascists taking over this goddamn country. Because to me it seems like you’d be happy to sit and watch it happen as long as people know that you’re not one of them! As long as you squeeze in that little “they’re not really Christians”, you’ve done enough!

I’d love for you to prove me wrong. This is your rude awakening. Now do something about it.

[itsnothingofinterest]

So with the end supposedly approaching (relatively speaking), people have started giving some thought as to who the final threat is really going to be; Tomura Shigaraki or All For One. It’ll definitely be one of them, they’re the strongest and most established villains by a mile; but both have their own reasons for people to think they’ll be the “final boss” of the series. And far be it from me to keep my opinion to myself; I really think it’s going to be Tomura.

I’m not sure if that’s some level of controversial among the fans hoping for Shigaraki’s redemption, as I do believe the alternative’s gotten a lot of traction lately. Because understand that I’m still expecting his redemption too, and don’t expect his hypothetical final boss status to really prevent that. (Practically nothing can, it’s as much a guaranteed outcome at this point as Deku getting his sixth bonus quirk.) Realistically, the only difference would be if he & Deku then team up to fight the evil potato head, or to...just start fixing stuff I guess.

On that note, the eventual redemption is actually one of the reasons I think he’s the better choice. Almost every point of comparison between the two villain I can think of makes Tomura seem like the better choice, actually...with maybe one or two exceptions. So I wanted to go over all those points of comparison & everything they’ve got going for them as endgame villains and why the comperrisons overall seem to favour Tomura as the final boss.

1. Someone who was defeated to the power of just one man

For one, just looking at pure power levels, AFO’s just not as threatening as Tomura; and there’s not really a way to bridge that gap.

Like, Tomura’s obviously more of a threat personally; he’s got the stronger body that was scientifically enhanced, and only he has Decay on top of the AFO quirk and the collection that came with it. It is just a fact that right now, Tomura is far more powerful. And before anyone thinks that AFO could become an equal threat by just taking over & fighting in his body; that’s not true because, along with just more combat experience that doesn’t rely on an arsenal of quirks, Tomura also has that Shimura trick where you remember your origin and become super bad ass. You know, the trick that All Might used to beat AFO in Kamino. In other words, the most dangerous individual in the series right now is the AFO!Tomura body with specifically Tomura in control.

And as long as the slight edge in mentality in Tomura’s favour exists, there’s not really a way to bridge that gap and have AFO take Tomura’s place as the biggest potential threat. Restore or enhance AFO’s original body? That’s just catching it up with AFO in Tomura’s body, which is still behind Tomura in Tomura’s body. Have AFO boost Tomura’s body with him in control? It would still be better with Tomura in control. There’s no scenario where Tomura isn’t the most powerful character in BNHA.

(Well, except maybe AFO weakening him by, say, stripping him of his quirks; but if he has to make things easier for the heroes to become the most powerful, I think that kind of proves my point anyway.)

But one person can only be so dangerous, so lets talk followers. Tomura has a close knit group of friends & allies on top of a vast army super loyal to him specifically that reaches a six digit figure, and AFO...just doesn’t. And I’ll get back to this later; but I don’t think he wants one either. He sticks to just a handful of people useful to him and what’s left of his Nomu. And while maybe that is the better way for him to accomplish his own personal goals, it’s simply not as threatening as the force which Hawks thought could’ve conquered the country if the heroes hadn’t struck first.

Tomura is a country ending threat, who in the right circumstances could fight literally all of the heroes with a chance of winning, and AFO simply isn’t.

2. His own little world

And to return to what I was talking about earlier, I’m not sure he really cares to be either. Like, people say he wants to conquer everything, and I imagine he’d think regaining lots of money & power would be great down the line; but evidence seems to suggest he doesn’t really care much for the country as a whole or any of the major themes being discussed by the actual main characters at the moment.

I mean if he did, he’d probably have rescued the PLF, that army capable of competing with all of hero society. And he probably wouldn’t have told ~10,000 dangerous and powerful villains indebted to him for their freedom to just run amok while he keeps contact with only the ones useful for his personal goals. And he definitively wouldn’t be laying low & sleeping through his enemies lowest moment & giving them a month to recover, also in service to those personal goals. That activity seems to imply those personal goals matter a whole lot more to him than societal conquest.

And what are those goals? Seemingly, taking over Tomura’s body so he can finally steal One For All. To what end, we’re not 100% sure of, but I believe it’s either a) a weird pride thing where he finally has control over his brother who’s rebelled against him for decades upon decades or b) an attempt at immortality as a sentient & transferable body-controlling quirk. Either way it’s some selfish personal thing he just gets others wrapped up in.

He’s incredibly disconnected from the greater themes and conflicts of the story. He seems to have no opinions on heroics besides how people are stupid for attempting them, and no opinion on society besides that it just naturally sucks. He’s mainly just a nuisance for the actual main characters. This self-important old man stuck in his own little world is supposed to be Deku’s final opponent?

Oh, and on that note-

3. Deku who?

We’re also talking about who’s going to be the final obstacle for Deku to face; and the problem with the being AFO is that...they don’t really have much to bounce off of with each other. You might be able to argue slight foil-ment, but they don’t really know each other, nor do they have any kind of connection to each other besides Deku having OFA so he’s AFO’s enemy by default.

(In fact their latest & 2nd convo, which came out as I was drafting this post out, kind of proves that with how AFO basically just shallowly made fun of him for trying to be a hero. That’s basically the extent of their antagonism.)

In fact, I’m like 80% sure this is a major reason for the Dad For One theory existing; just to give them some connection, something to talk about. Because otherwise AFO is just an evil guy known by people Deku knows/wants to save. He’s basically just another, more dangerous Overhaul; who Deku's already fought. And to AFO, Deku’s just another OFA holder acting all high & mighty; which we also already saw him face in the Kamino fight. So what little they do offer each other has already been done for both of them. And there’s nothing wrong with that for carrying a fight, I just wonder if that can really carry the final fight.

Compare that to Shigaraki, who foils Deku in ways so numerous & obvious it’s almost hard to talk about, such as: their position as successors, strategic thinkers, very similar origins, very similar core characters, team players, red shoes, they looked really similar as kids...just to name a few parallels. Contrasting AFO, there is a lot to work with here that would contributed to a good fight that’d double as a battle of ideologies. And admittedly, we know this because it already has, this is also something we’ve seen before; but there’s a lot more unexplored with their conflict, a lot left unsaid that we could see from them arguing their viewpoints. A lot more than from Deku & AFO anyway.

I mean for Pete’s sake; All Might & Shigaraki have more in common and more to talk about than Deku & AFO. That’s a major problem if those two are meant to carry the final battle; which is why I don’t think they are.

4. Just punch him

There’s also the fact that AFO doesn’t really challenge Deku in any real way; and I’m not just talking about how All Might solo-ing him (twice) should logically mean endgame Deku should also be able to solo him. I’m more talking about how...that’s kind of all he’d need to do. If you can just beat AFO up enough then...that’s it, threat over. Wrapped up in a neat little bow.

To compare, Shigaraki is the greatest threat the heroes have ever faced, the victim most in need of saving, and to top it off, he’s got the gall to be both of those things at once. What’s a hero supposed to do with that? That’s a serious question characters are going to have to think about when deciding how to deal with Shigaraki. His position is that of, not just the greatest challenge, but a set of the greatest challenges a hero could face. And that’s before you get into his side representing those oppressed by serious systemic issues that need to be addressed as well; quite possibly simultaneously.

No one needs to address systemic corruption or prejudice to beat AFO though. They just need to punch him real hard. The biggest challenge AFO presents the heroes is “how do we make sure this guy stops being a problem for good when neither our most secure prison, nor removing his head, did the job?”

(Personally, my answer is to have Tomura do it. Because unlike Deku, Tomura actually does have a proper antagonistic relationship with AFO, so he has reason to be the one to end him besides just being the protagonist. Plus he’s under no obligation not to kill, so there’s that.)

And like yeah, that does make AFO the easier guy to deal with, and thus write an ending around (to say nothing of how he's also the most satisfying person to see punched in the face); but does that really mean Horikoshi would want to use him instead of the more interesting option of Tomura? I mean I guess we can’t be sure, there is merit in writing the easy resolution; but I’d prefer the complex finale if I were in his shoes.

5. Horikoshi’s favourite

And lastly there’s just the issue of which of the two Horikoshi’s put more work into. Spoiler alert: it’s not the guy that spent like 200 chapters in jail being menacing every one in a while.

Tomura is by far the more developed between the two, having constantly evolved over the course of the series. And more than just as a character, as described above he’s been developed as the more threatening and challenging conflict for Deku while also reflecting him in a lot of important ways. We’ve seen the growth of his power & influence, we’ve gotten to know & understand his motives, we’ve seen how he’s been failed by heroes before. Everything about him has built him up as the ultimate villain, the most desperate victim, and overall greatest challenge for Deku and the story as a whole to face.

And AFO is...nearly one of those things. Which is pretty much what he was from his first appearance. He has not developed at all over the series, and from what we can tell from his flashbacks, he hasn’t developed at all over the past ~200 years either. (I’m half tempted to call him more inciting incident then character.) What we have with AFO, as far as a character and a villain goes, is pretty much what we’re getting until he’s done. And, well; if Tomura is a better villain & a better pick for final boss than he was then, that gap’s just going to keep growing.

Like, I doubt it really needs stating how Shigaraki is probably the character Horikoshi has put the most work into in the entire series. And a lot of that work, a lot of his development, has gone to the idea of him surpassing AFO or being a villain foil to Deku, who himself is mean to surpass All Might. For his roll to be usurped by the guy he’s meant to surpass just feels like it’s going against that. Like, it’d feel almost as wrong for his character and the story around him than it would for Deku is All Might got his powers back and took over for him as main protagonist. It just doesn’t feel right for Tomura not to be the final villain, is what I’m getting at.

6. ...One saving grace

Okay, but I will admit one thing AFO has going for him that I would be remiss not to bring up. Besides being the most hated character in a series that also has Endeavor in it, I mean. He’s got this one trait that makes him an effective antagonist to anyone in the series; his complete disregard to pretty much every major theme in the series.

I mean think about it; the major themes of Shigaraki’s circle all revolve around trying to fix the society that rejected them; but AFO believes Society just naturally sucks that way as part of human nature, so their cause is doomed. And the heroes’ major themes all revolve around how to become/what it means to be a hero; but AFO believes trying to do good in that society can’t really be done & also it’s ridiculous to believe comic books are real, so their cause is also doomed and they look stupid doing it. So despite not really interacting with anyone’s core conflict or goals in favour of wrapping them up in his own, he still manages a one-sided ideological opposition with nearly every major player in the series; and that’s not nothing.

But, and I completely understand that this is just a matter of opinion, that kind of just leaves him feeling to me like a good antagonist, not a good final antagonist. I’d still prefer it be Tomura even from this perspective, because he’s able to oppose the ideologies of his opponents on purpose & with proper ideologies of his own.

To summarize:

Shigaraki feels the better choice for final boss because he’s more threatening, more interesting, both as a person and as an opponent for Deku specifically, he’s far more directly tied into the themes of the story and their resolution, & he’s had far more set up. AFO is more hated, and his callous disregard for everything everyone else holds important is something I guess, but that’s pretty much all he’s got going for him in compression. I don’t know about you, but I know who I think would carry the conclusion to the series better.

But I also know this isn’t the most popular take among my villain fan colleagues right now. So if anyone disagrees, I welcome any civil discussion about these two & their viability as final boss.

[theravenclawrevolutionary]

i'm not a frev expert. and you seem to be approchable enough and to have read enough. i had a question, or kind of a question. i just. i think that if robespierre wasn't against all the deaths by guillotine, he wouldn't have written that quote about virtue and terror. maybe i'm getting you wrong, or i'm not understanding the sense of that quote. could you explain?

Oh dang. I'm kinda surprised that people think I have any real authority on the subject of the Frev since I'm not an actual historian or anything and I'm surprised people find me approachable but of course I'll try my best for you Anon! And if anyone else has a better interpretation or anything else to add please, go ahead. I'll also try my best to keep it in as simple language as I can. But I digress.

⚠ This post is quite long so be prepared for that ⚠

First of all, Robespierre has more than one quote talking about terror and virtue. I'm assuming that you're thinking of the one that goes, "Terror is only justice: prompt, severe and inflexible; it is then an emanation of virtue; it is less a distinct principle than a natural consequence of the general principle of democracy, applied to the most pressing wants of the country." since that is the most common one. However, if you're talking about the one that goes "Terror is only justice: prompt, severe and inflexible; it is then an emanation of virtue; it is less a distinct principle than a natural consequence of the general principle of democracy, applied to the most pressing wants of the country." Let me know and I'll write about that one. The former is definitely a quote that, in my experience studying the Frev, gets misinterpreted from what it was originally meant to say fairly often.

To start with, it's very important to know what connotation and definition the words 'virtue' and 'terror' had in revolution-era France. Modern-day definitions may not be the same ones that were used in the past. According to my research, which of course isn't infallible, virtue was used to refer to someone's disposition and the way it would lead them to choose good over evil whereas where terror was seen simply as great fear. At the time there was no connotation of our modern-day terrorism to associate with the word. Nowadays we associate terror with terrorism which brings to mind murder, mindless destruction, oppression, and unchecked authority in which someone's ideals are forced upon large groups of people. Because of this many people assume that this is what Robespierre had in mind when he referenced terror when really he meant to describe the use of intimidation tactics to seize power from those who oppressed the lower class people and the general fear that was felt by the commoners.

Essentially the Reign of Terror meant 'a time period where everyone felt a sh*t load of Fear over all the bad stuff happening at once while the regular people try to overthrow the oppressive ruling class with intimidation tactics.' It does not mean 'a time period where loads of people were purposely committing widespread acts of terrorism to push their agendas'. And really, it was the only way to give everyone the chance to get rid of the old government, the monarchy, and allow a fair democracy that would be beneficial to the future of France to be built.

Next, it's important to know the context in which this quote was originally said. The speech where Robespierre said it took place on Feb 5th (?) of 1794. By this point, the revolution has been well underway for several long years and, as I said, a lot of sucky things are happening at the same time. The republic was in a war with a massive part of Europe and they're kinda getting curb-stomped. The country is in a state of civil war between the people that still supported the monarchy and all the different groups that had different views of how the country should be run. France's economy was complete sh*t too, so all this really radicalized the people and made the whole revolution situation so much worse than it already was.

At the time there were two factions, so to say, in the National Convention that were hella pissed at each other and really at odds. the Hébertists (who, to make things easy, wanted to escalate the Terror, go on the offensive with the military, and the overthrow and replace some of the existing government structures at the time) and the Dantonists (who wanted to sorta get rid of the revolutionary government, negotiate for peace in the war, and chill out on the whole Terror thing). And remember that these groups of people were very loose and like people in today's politic didn't agree with every stance their 'faction' took.

By the time Max made this speech, which was addressing these two groups, the situation between them was escalated big time. The Hébertists, with their views of 'more terror all over! That'll help us win everything,' or 'terror without virtue,' were pushing for a system that would quickly prove fatal. By contrast, the Dantonists with their, 'we just need to kinda chill and things will work out,' way of thinking or 'virtue without terror', would only lead to them (and the rest of the country) getting walked over by everyone else.

Throughout the entire speech, a speech I haven't recently read all the way through, Max comes back to the idea of terror and virtue, stressing that both are necessary. What I think he meant to do was talk about how the revolution couldn't survive without both terror (fear and the aggression that causes it) and virtue (the choice of good over evil) being applied. He's trying to explain to both groups that a little bit of both ideals is the most beneficial way to go about things. In reality, it has nothing to do with whether he personally believed in or advocated the death penalty/ the use of the guillotine. Instead, Robespierre is emphasizing that at that particular moment in time doing what is right and good (virtue) will most likely end up causing some bad things that will make people afraid for a while (terror).

What Robespierre is not saying is that terror, and by extension the violence that is causing the terror is virtuous. There are several easy-to-find sources that prove his personal disapproval of the death penalty from a moral standpoint. As a young lawyer in his hometown in Arras, he became physically ill at the idea of having one of his clients sentenced to death, even though he was found guilty of the crime he was on trial for. He made a speech agreeing with the abolition of the death penalty on May 30th of 1791 (?) arguing that there is no place for the death penalty in a civilized society because the law needs to be a model of what is good. He attempted to save the lives of Georges Danton and Camille Desmoulins, two friends/coworkers that he is commonly charged with sending to their deaths when the opposite is actually true. Additionally, he did the same with other more controversial people including the king's sister of all people, Madame Elisabeth. Even when voting for the death of the king he reiterates his own opinion on the death penalty saying, "For myself, I abhor the penalty of death that your law so liberally imposes, and I have neither love nor hatred for the King; it is only the crimes that I hate…. It is with regret that I utter this baneful truth…Louis must die in order that our country may live." Though it conflicts with his personal views, Robespierre makes the decision based on the needs of France as a country, something that many politicians need to relearn how to do today.

Long story short, he was not supporting the use of the guillotine with that quote, but rather trying to get two opposing factions to realize that both intimidation/fear and making sound, beneficial decisions would keep France on the right track to building a successful democracy for the people. Hopefully this helped and I explained it in a way that was easy for you to understand. If you ever have any more Frev related questions feel free to ask and I'll do my best to answer or I'll send you in the direction of someone else more knowledgeable if I don't know.

Also, can someone tell me if I did a good job of explaining this? I can never tell if things I write about the Frev make sense to me because I actually know exactly what I mean to say so everyone else kinda goes along with it or if I actually say helpful things of substance. Thanks guys! And if anyone else knows more about the subject or if I've made a mistake please help me out.

~Dara

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

Pro-variation vs. pro-selection culture

Evolution requires three things: some form of information that’s inheritable, some way to create variation from that information, and some way to select what information will be passed on to future generations. In biological evolution, of, course, we all know what these three things are: genes (information) can mutate (variation) -- well, it’s more complicated than just mutation, but this isn’t a biology lesson -- and those that are worse at surviving and reproducing themselves are of course naturally weeded out through cause and effect (selection). But other things -- art, culture, language, science, technology -- evolve as well, and they all need the same three things.

When it comes to variation and selection in things like culture and politics, there’s a sliding scale of which one people think is most important -- whether they’re more pro-variation, or pro-selection.

People on the pro-variation end of the spectrum tend to view diversity as a positive thing and selection as something that will take care of itself, or even something to be actively suspicious of because of its tendency to cause harm -- a rainbow queer community, an education system available to people of all cultures and economic backgrounds, country borders that are as open as practical, and embracing a diverse array of art make a community stronger, and things like gatekeeping, means testing and heirarchies on ‘what counts as art’ should be abandoned unless there’s a really good reason for the selective process to exist, in which case it’s grudgingly tolerated. To pro-variation people, exclusion and oppression within a community are threatening. Pro-variation people recognise that yes, you’re going to get some freeloading drains on resources and obvious money laundering schemes masquerading as terrible art and a few people pretending to be gay for a few years to look more interesting to their straight friends, and this is largely a non-issue, a perfectly acceptable price to pay for a diverse and fair world.

People on the pro-selection end of the scale tend to view selection as the main means of advancing or healing a society, and see diversity as something that will take care of itself and as something to be deeply suspicious of. Gatekeeping, unequal opportunities and financial heirarchies are needed to sort the what from the chaff and make sure everyone does their best (”capitalism breeds innovation”); initiatives to redress inequality and give minorities or poor people an ‘unfair’ advantage or make it easier for outsiders to enter the country should be abandoned unless there’s a really good reason for their existence, as they’re dragging down the ‘deserving’ and polluting the culture. To pro-selection people, contamination or invasion from outsiders is threatening. Pro-selection people recognise that yes, you’re going to lose some talented geniuses in sweatshops and stop some deserving people from achieving success and bully some LGBT people out of the community to face abuse and oppression alone, but this is largely a non-issue, a perfectly acceptable price to pay for an advanced and fair world.

“Oh, Derin, you’re just talking about left-wing vs. right-wing philosophies.” Sort of, but not really. It fits the stereotypes and common arguments to a T, but one can’t assume that all righties are pro-selection or all lefties are pro-variation. I have met pro-variation righties, although I’m not really sure how. And there are leftie TERFs out there, despite TERFism being an undeniably pro-selection philosophy. I find determining where people sit on the variation-to-selection scale to be a lot more useful for communication than left-to-right.

I say this because often I’ll see pro-selection and pro-variation people talking to each other, and notice that they’re having fundamentally different conversations. For example, let’s look at the issue of meritocracy. Most modern people would say that meritocracy is a good thing, but ’meritocracy’ means a fundamentally different thing to pro-selectionists than pro-variationists.

A pro-selectionist, when conceiving of meritocracy, tends to think in terms of, well, selection; devising a system where the strongest (those that excel in whatever the thinker thinks is important; innovation or determination or whatever) rise to the top and gain special privileges and power over others, that they can use to determine the rules and make life better for themselves and their children, elevating society as a side effect. To the pro-variationist, this is absolutely not a meritocracy. “You’ve built a system whereby those who don’t start out with more, those who are born poor or disabled or underprivileged in some way, have to work way harder and be lucky in order to get anywhere than those born lucky. People don’t get ahead on merit in this system because the playing field becomes drastically uneven after a couple of generations. This is not a meritocracy.”

A pro-variationist, on the other hand, would concentrate on making sure that everyone has a fair chance at exercising their skills and getting ahead. They’d focus on making sure that people had the space and security to exercise their skills and that, when it came to supporting the society to make that happen, those with more contributed more. To a pro-selectionist, this is absurd. “So those who have pulled ahead and succeeded are being penalised by having to give more? That’s the opposite of a meritocracy! That’s a system designed to drag the best down!”

I find this framework useful in explaining a lot of weird political quirks of certain subcultures. TERFs and tradwives, for example, are theoretically political opposites, but in practice their logic sounds almost identical to outsiders, sounding rather a lot like standard right-wing talking points and Fascism Lite. This is because they’re all using pro-selection arguments. To a pro-selectionist, the arguments of these groups look very different -- “we’re saying that X kind of people are good/virtuous/victims, and Y kind of people are bad/oppressors/sinners, which is the exact opposite of what the other group is saying!” To a pro-variationist, the fact that they are making literally the same argument makes them identical -- “you’re still putting people in your little ‘keep or cull’ boxes for exactly the same reasons, you just wrote different names on the boxes to keep or cull according to your personal taste.”

I think a lot of the things associated with right-wingers could be more accurately associated with people on the pro-selection end of the spectrum in general. It’s known, for example, that right-wingers tend to have a more sensitive disgust reflex and, as a consequence, be generally more xenophobic. You can see this in the way xenophobes talk of making room for outsiders; they talk of invasion, contamination, infection, hygeine, purity. LGBT exclusionists, lefties and righties, talk in the same sort of language. So do antis.

It’s also notable in the sorts of innocuous-seeming things that such people get really angry about. Right-wingers and authoritarians are known for their trend of an almost comical hatred of modern art. The idea that anything can be art, or that art can be measured on any level that isn’t strict complexity and realism of paint and sculpture, causes a surprising level of dislike in such groups. (See also arguments like ‘what is a video game’, ‘does this even count as a game’, althoughpeople thankfully seem to be bored of that now). Exclusionists are equally renowned for campaigns against inclusive terms like ‘queer’, and TERFs get obsessively nitpicky about people’s genitals to a really creepy degree and get very uncomfortable when you mention the ‘grey area’ in biological sex. This is normally assumed to be just dislike at people challenging their arguments, but I think it’s deeper. I think it’s like the modern art thing. Any kind of radical inclusivity is threatening to pro-selection thinkers, not because it’s a challenge to their rules and definitions -- they can have those arguments perfectly comfortably -- but because it is an attack on the very concept of meaning. “Words mean things! Groups exist! You can’t just... just get rid of groups and open up categories to include more people without putting them through a serious, rigorous proving ground first! You can’t just call anything you want to ‘art’, you can’t just call anyone outside cisheteronormative expectations part of the LGBT community, you can’t just call people men or women based on how they feel! That’s chaos! How can any progress be made if we just decide words don’t mean anything??”

(I also think this is a much-overlooked aspect of the same-sex marriage debate. Yes, most of that was garden-variety homophobia, but I’ve known a lot of people who were perfectly fine with ‘the gays having equal rights’, they just didn’t want it called marriage. To a pro-variationist, having the same legal language for partnerships regardless of the sex or gender of the participants is really important -- it’s a shield against future discrimination as the laws relating to either marriages or civil partnerships change over time. To a pro-selectionist, changing the definition of words related to fundamental cultural activities is a huge deal. “They’re eroding the very meaning of marriage! Chaos! How much more will the word change? Can people marry animals or cars next?!”)

As I said, this is a spectrum. I’ve met very few people who are on either extreme end -- even the most pro-equality liberal anarchist acknowledges that some standards of behaviour, community responses to inappropriate action and definitions of different communities do have to exist, to protect people, and the most hardocre fascist admits that there needs to be some measure of generating diversity to avoid stagnation and extinction. And people’s default reaction isn’t necessarily their position on all issues -- somebody who’s generally pro-variation might feel specifically threatened by immigration and think a strict proving ground for immigrants is necessary, or someone who is generally pro-selectionist might think that a robust social system is necessary because one’s economic status at birth has no bearing on one’s merit or value. But I’ve always found it to be a very useful general model.

[spasmsofthought]

rough waters (zuko x water tribe! reader)

Inspiration hit at like 3 am early this morning, but I didn’t get around to writing most of this until this evening. Technically, this can be categorized as a Part II to rituals. If you want more context to this pairing, read it first! 

If there’s anything off about how I wrote this situation, please message me your feedback so I can fix it! I want to be sensitive. 

I don’t know what it’s like to be a minority, or be a part of a group of people that has suffered destructive and violent oppression, since I’m white and American and have only lived in the US. I don’t know what it’s like to be a victim of prejudice, racism, misrepresentation or hurtful stereotyping because of the color of my skin or my background, or race. I took what my friends of color have spoken to me about when they have decided to open up to me and tried to honor their experiences and emotions and spaces in these words. I’m committed to be a safe space for them as I continue to educate myself in order to support them and fight for justice for them. 

If in any way shape or form, you do not feel that my writing reflected that, please let me know! I want to write an accurate representation in the small writings I present here in this blog. 

With all that said, I hope you all enjoy this piece! 

Like, comment, reblog! xo 

Next: Raw

-

While the Fire Nation palace was beautiful and ornate and architecturally captivating, staying cooped up inside had never been a virtue of yours. Especially considering your home growing up had been among the raging ocean and freezing snow. 

So, when you found yourself with a break in-between hefty meetings with lecture after lecture on what your life was going to look like as the future Fire Lade, you figured going out to explore the market was a good idea. 

Despite traveling back and forth from the Water Tribe to the Fire Nation before your engagement to Zuko, there had been little opportunity to spend much of your time among the common Fire Nation people. Your scarce time with Zuko, what with his duties and responsibilities, was spent in the safety of the Fire Nation palace feeding ducks or taking walks or exploring the library. 

It was obvious that to gain his people’s respect and trust as their new leader, and a leader that had recently ended the very supported and celebrated war his grandfather had started a hundred years ago, Zuko actually had to do his job. He was left time for little else. 

With the position of being securely part of his future, and the future of the country, freedom was granted to you on more occasions. Advisors had also pointed that it would be better for you to be spotted out and about every once and a while in order for people to see you and get the chance to interact with you. How could the people ever honor and respect you as their Fire Lady, especially one from another nation, if you remained so aloof and distant that they had to guess at almost every aspect of who you were? 

Thus, an adventure to the market was in order. 

A stall of fresh-looking fruit was the first to catch you eye after about half an hour of walking through the different sections of the city. You were walking down a branched path away from a main road, further away from the Palace than you had ever been before, when you saw it. 

When officials had offered you to participate in tours of the country before, they tended to stick to the places of nobility and wealth. This area looked less cleaned up and more familiar to you, a bit more like your previous home in the Water Tribe. Gone were stoned walkways and polished-up homes; you know walked cobbled streets and homes that seemed to be built with less care towards aesthetics and with more mind placed on structure and space equity. 

It wasn’t quiet like the upper villages that housed nobles and high-ranking government officials; it was beautifully less sterile. You keep your pace even, but it falters a bit as you see people from their doorways and windows watch you as you pass by. There are no smiles or friendly greetings. You try not to take it personally. You had been told from the beginning that here people choose to be reserved and stoic. Ahead of you, parents usher their children through their doorways and into their homes. 

They’re just shy and wary, Your head whispers to you. You’ve never been in this part of town before. 

You hear a soft echo of children’s laughter as the breeze ruffles your face, and you smile a bit as you stop in front of the fruit stall you eyed a few moments ago. You turn your eyes to examine the fruit that is laid out in categorized groupings. Apples, oranges, a few tomatoes, and fruit only specific to Fire Nation agriculture. 

You pick up a red apple to get a better look at it and don’t even notice the old lady sweeping the ground, positioned more in the shadows, until she speaks to you. 

“Those are expensive. And we don’t barter with foreign money.” 

Her voice sounds frail, but one look at her betrays what her voice implies. Her skin is weathered, and her eyes worn by time and emotions that aren’t able to be clearly deciphered. For a moment, you figure that the war had to have had an effect on everyone, even those who dwelt in the nation that benefited from it the most.  

“I’m sorry?” You ask, trying to get a sense of what she’s trying to get at. 

You’re wearing Fire Nation robes, rich in color but otherwise not gaudy, and to the latest style of what’s currently acceptable for ladies in the Capitol. There’s nothing off about how you’re dressed or presenting yourself. You even made sure to put your hair up properly, without your beads just this once. 

A show of solidarity, one Fire Sage said to you when they were leaving from the palace a few weeks ago and you had asked for some advice in how to move forward. 

“What’s there to not understand about what I said?” The old lady snaps at you, muscles recoiled with tension. “We don’t trade with foreign money.” 

The words are like acid to your stomach as the old lady looks directly in the eye. Her eyes drift down, and you inwardly curse; you forgot that you had on the betrothal necklace Zuko had given you just recently. Blue was not common in jewelry or as a color to wear in the Fire Nation, as you have come to know well.

The lady mumbles under her breath and begins sweeping the stall floor again, like she hasn’t even spoken, and you set the apple back down to its proper place among the others. She’s not even ashamed of her tone or at her lack of manners. It’s like she doesn’t even recognize who you are. 

It hits you: Maybe she doesn’t want to. 

There’s no point in explaining that you only carry Fire Nation money with you now; that all your Water Tribe coins are saved in a box that sits on your nightstand because you don’t know if you’ll ever use them again. You don’t know quite what to do with yourself. 

You’ve known that this country has suffered under at least a hundred years of nationalistic propaganda warding people away from associating with any other nation and promoting Fire Nation exceptionalism. You’d known there would be challenges to marrying the Fire Lord as someone from the Water Tribe, but maybe not that you’d have to struggle with changing an entire nation’s perception of your people and culture. That you’d have to prove to everyone here that you are just as equal as them. 

It’s obvious that the old lady is not going to speak to you again and wants nothing more to do with you. No one else is around for conversation or distraction either, so the choice to head back the way you came is an easy one. 

You’re turning away from the stand when you hear the old lady say something under her breath. At first, it doesn’t register as you walk away, but the further away you walk, the clearer the word becomes. 

“Savage.” 

It sends shivers up your spine and almost leaves you heaving in the middle of the street, but you refuse to cower to a word. Even if it is a word laced with a century, or more, of malice and hatred and prejudice. Your walk back to the Fire Nation palace is both long and short at the same time. 

- 

It is hours later when Zuko finds you at the edge of a pond, watching the turtle ducks swimming around in it and fishing for food. It is secluded and quiet, and he has a few spare minutes he can spend with you without worrying about his duties as Fire Lord. 

You don’t startle when he sits down next to you on the grass, but you are surprised he found a few minutes of escape from the constant responsibility and pressure that surrounds him. Usually it’s not until at least dinner time that he’s free.  

He moves one of his hands towards both of yours, signaling that he wants to split the loaf of bread you’re feeding to the turtle ducks with him. For a moment it feels almost satisfying to rip something in half. You hand him one chunk while you cradle the other. There are a few minutes of silence as it seems Zuko decompresses and you try to retrain your rage and hurt and sadness from your interaction with the old lady. 

Your mother always told you that keeping a calm face when everything is the opposite inside of you is like the ocean trying to be a wave when it’s actually a tsunami. You block the memory out and just try to enjoy the stillness and peace with Zuko. It’s not like he gets much time for either. 

“When I was younger, I threw a whole loaf of bread at a baby turtle duck and the mother bit me.” 

The thought feels a bit incomplete, like it’s bittersweet, but you don’t press him today. It’s better for him to talk halfway about memories than not talk about them at all with you. 

You chuff out a laugh but otherwise remain silent. You rip off a small piece of bread and softly throw it into the water. Soon the turtle ducks are swarming around each other for more, but you pace out the chunks enough for there to be some bread left a minute later. 

Zuko is tossing out a few chunks of his own as you begin to speak. 

“Some old lady called me a savage in the market today.” 

Again, silence greets you. But this time, it’s not about governmental officials rejecting your culture while designing the wedding ceremony. This time it’s about the fact that the person he is going to marry soon is being prejudiced against by the people he rules; the people you will also have a part in ruling in a small amount of time. 

“She didn’t exactly say it to my face,” You say angrily as you toss the big chunk into the pond, scattering the turtle ducks, and standing up. The fury can no longer be ignored. “But it wasn’t even what she said, Zuko.” 

Your growl at the same time as the tears well up and make their way down your cheeks. You’re tired of crying, but it’s one of the only ways your emotions are expressed. Zuko stays in his seated position as he watches you. Tenderness clouds his expression, but he’s also being observant.

As much as the Fire Nation teaches their people rigidity, your community, especially your parents, taught you that to deny yourself expression is to deny yourself freedom. Emotional expression is where your relationship struggles the most sometimes, due to the polar opposite cultural values and teachings. Silence in his, complete and full expression in yours. Sometimes it’s hard to find a balance. Moon and sun, right?

It’s in situations like these where Zuko really takes time to consider what he says. 

“It’s what everyone doesn’t say,” You say, swiping at your eyes, trying to make the cursed water on your face disappear. Anger feels better right now than grief. “It’s the looks and the silence about it all from those here who say they care. Like complicity is the same as advocating. Why should I suffer for the one-sided education people experienced at the hands of those who wished to destroy the world in the name of nationalism and supremacy? It’s not fair and it’s wrong and I shouldn’t have to be stereotyped because of the things other people said!” 

You huff as you throw your hands at the sky. There’s also a bit of a yell that comes out, and you’re thankful it’s only you and Zuko in this secluded part of the palace. You sigh as you make you way back down to sit next to Zuko. He glances at his hands before staring out at the water. 

“I wish I could say things will be different, but they probably won’t be for a long time,” His time as the Fire Lord has given him wisdom he wouldn’t have otherwise. Although discomfort stews in your stomach, you know he’s right. He’s suffered from this too, in different ways.

“I know,” You say back at him, laying a hand on his clothed forearm. A hundred years of war has left the Fire Nation’s own people divided and prejudiced, never mind the rest of the world. You had gone through your own journey of dismantling your own prejudice about the Fire Nation when Zuko joined you, Sokka, Katara, Toph, and Aang in order to defeat his father. 

“There is a long road of healing ahead of us, of me. I meant it when I said it the day of my coronation, and I still mean it now,” Your hand makes its way down to his, clasping it in a show of support. Zuko always means what he says. “There are changes I’m making, and while some of them are already being implemented, it’s going to take time for some of the others.” 

“I know,” You whisper again, leaning your head on Zuko’s shoulder as you both stare out at the water. It doesn’t feel like peace that settles in your stomach; it feels more temporary and elusive, perhaps because it’s a foreign feeling to you. 

It may not seem be solid, but you cling onto it for dear life. One of each of your hands is clasped together as you breath out slowly; the rage has settled now, but the pain seeps deep into your being. You know it’s going to be a while before it fades away into healing. 

“Someday things will be different.” Zuko’s tone is soft as he rests his head against your own. 

And you realize what is stirring in you: hope. Fragile and small, but still sitting there in your belly when all else seems bleak. It looks as if undoing it all will take more work than what it took to do all of it in the first place. 

But as you and Zuko sit together and stare out at the calm little pond, a little oasis of tranquility, you can’t help but think, hope, that maybe, someday, even if it’s far into the future, things will be different. 

[jeonjk0504]

Hi! I admire your open minded responses and ethics. You have said in some posts that you believe Taehyung and Jungkook are mutually attracted to each other but that they haven't confessed or consummated. (Please correct me if I got it wrong!) I was wondering why, in your opinion, Taehyung and Jungkook wouldn't just take the leap and be together after being on a journey of so many years? Is it your opinion that homophobic society is holding them back? Is it the risks to the band? They seem like two rich, empowered men to me. Taehyung seems like a very honest and authentic person. And Jungkook tweeted a drawing he made of a famous line from Love Simon. These guys would know that being in a committed same sex relationship is an option, right? I am not saying they could necessarily be open about it but I find the idea of them wanting it but not acting on it challenging.

It is a sentiment that I see in a lot of cis het female dominated spaces that revolve around queer men, or the idea of queer men. It's love, it's attraction, it's everything but the relationship. And the sex. It strikes me as a heteronormative overlay on what queer men can and can't do, as if the relationship is allowed to be sexual and romantic only in y'all's minds. It looks like shipping but it also looks like erasure.

Personally, I do not think that Taekook are together but I could be wrong. Anything is possible. I admire the way you stand up for what is right and role model that it is never ok to be a bully. What people consider 'harmless' is relative. I don't buy any 'ships' in BTS as purely aesthetic relationships. I am a gay person and can't take away my identity while seeing this content. Hovering between the space of 'they are real' and 'I just want them to be real' is a safe space for bloggers to be. But it isn't a great representation of genuine LGBTQ+people. A 25 yr old and a 23 year old aren't nuns.

You don't have to answer this question if you prefer not to, of course. I didn't mean to try to make you defend your interests. Your points of view are as valid as mine.

Hey anon!

Thanks a lot for your interesting questions! :)

My personal feeling of them being mutually attracted to one another but not being in a relationship, stems from the dynamic they have. But i got to say, i‘m never 100% sure. I don‘t think you can tell at the tip of their noses if people are in a relationship, because it‘s mostly based on „what would i say/do/act like in a relationship?“ and that can never be copied onto people, even less if you don‘t know them personally.

What makes me say that though is a mixture of reasons. The biggest of them is simple: their friendship. My personal impression is often, that they feel drawn to each other but they also have a good eye on their responsibilities and possibilities. This is less of something i can „prove“, it‘s simply a feeling i get based on various situations and how i see them act, none in specific. I also imagine to cross the line of friendship, might be a lot harder in a conservative country while being in this wide reaching spotlight in contrast to other spaces. And all the other things you took as an example, can add to that they don‘t have to though (the popularity, the band, the family, …).

Also when i say i get the impression it‘s unspoken, i refer to them talking about that attraction or establishing a mature understanding, i have never said they haven‘t acted on it. Their body language feels like they have, actually. To me at least.

I know they both support LGBTQIA Artists and Art. But supporting it and identifying with it are two different pair of shoes.

And while Taehyung seems very, let‘s say adventurous to me, he has always had a strong affinity to a self-image based on his father. Which might mean you can indulge in something for fun (same sex intimacy) but when it get’s serious (same sex relationships) it‘s better to follow conservative ideals, like a lot of oppressed or erased homosexuals in Homophobic countries do.

This is just a connection i keep thinking about though, not a fact. It‘s only a fact that he views his dad as a role-model, visually and also in the role that he performs. His strong wish for children supports that as well. And i‘m not saying it‘s impossible for same sex couples to start a family with children (at least not where i come from) but in SK it‘s sadly not an option as of now. They‘re neither allowed to marry, nor have a legal partnership which will definitely have an impact on how you approach relationships in any case.

And i keep questioning myself: would you share such a sensitive wish like having kids, knowing fully well that it‘s not an option while being in a serious same sex relationship? Or would you share it in the belief that laws will change in the future or you will („somehow“) end up with a woman to make it happen? It may be nitpicky of me to question that, but i see it as a possible indicator of Taehyung not being in a serious same sex relationship as of now, because i feel like his desire to have children in some way, has always been noticeably strong and if he shares his wishes in such a carefree way, maybe his wish is in no danger.

Btw i know a lot of TKer i talk to disagree with me on this and they don‘t think it has to mean anything! 😌 and to be fair: we have the same amount of possible indicators that speak in favor of a relationship. I feel like i‘m talking a lot about why i think they‘re not, rather in what way they could actually be… (very ironic, looking at my blog)

Jungkook on the other hand is a little romantic to me, but he seems very careful too not like someone who just takes the leap (i‘m not saying shy, pretty sure he got over that a few years ago for the most part..).

There is a lot more, but it would take up too much space to elaborate so i hope it‘s okay i only gave a small reason for now.

Concerning your criticism on cishet spaces, they are of course valid and it‘s important to keep an eye on that and call out people who hurt the community. I don‘t feel comfortable with you associating me in that space though, because i doubt you actually know from what perspective i am sharing my opinions. I also use BTS neither for hetero nor LGBTQIA representation because i don‘t know what they identify as. It goes both ways. You might see it as hovering in a safe space, but for me that safe space is mostly there out of respect, not because i don‘t feel brave enough to take a stance.

I thank you for your respectful questions! :) it was interesting to reflect on why i view them the way i do. Please always feel free to share your opinions with me 🥰 have a nice day!!

[unadulteredunpopularopinions]

Is Simu Liu Racist? Era of distrust?

Simu Liu’s tweet from 2012: I thought I was at a NIcki Minaj concert for 20 minutes before I realized I was just watching a homeless man yell at a pigeon....

Before I start, this tweet was from 2012....9 whole years ago. People really must have the patience to literally scroll through decades of tweets just to find one thing they may not like.

Now, do I find his tweet to be racist?

No. There was nothing in the comment that had to do with ethnicity at all. You can’t equal criticism to racism every time you don’t like what someone says. At most, I just found the joke to be corny. But hey, everyone has a different type of humor. In lamens terms, he doesn’t like her music. That is fine. 

Everyone has a right to their own opinion. He doesn’t HAVE to like her music and he has the right to comment on his own page just like anyone else expresses their likes/dislikes online. He said nothing about her character, her as a person. He only commented on the music. This has nothing to do with ethnicity.

I know there is tension, higher than ever, within many ethnicities right now (the tension always existed but this recent violence/increase was sparked off by a buffoon in the white house making racists feel comfortable/bold when they have no repercussions). However, this specific incident is not due to racism.

If I were to strictly make this an issue between asian and black people (because racism is really a global issue/illness), racism against black people is prevalent in the asian community. However, racism against asian’s is also prevalent in the black community. Of course, not ALL of each community is racist, but there is systematic racism prevalent in both.

As a black woman, I get annoyed when people say black people can’t be racist because racism is systematic oppression meh meh meh meh. But, asian people are oppressed just as black people are. We have the history of slavery for hundreds of years and systematic oppression against black people in America. 

Most people don’t know, but many different ethnicities were also called the N-word and compared to gorillas when they came to America for a better life/the American Dream (I can’t handle the hypocrisy of hating immigrants when the english settlers/villains were immigrants themselves or rather hailed from immigrants). The word “gook” (no offense, I know many of us won’t know what that word is) literally means country. Koreans came to America, and obviously there were communication issues between people of two different countries. But the “americans” (really english settlers/villains used that word against them as a slur. Even though they were just trying to show happiness at being able to come to America.

Asians have historically been looked over in America. There have been a multitude of media that made fun of their accents, features and food over the years. America had also removed them from their homes, sold their homes and businesses, and put them in concentration camps due to the bombing on pearl harbor. (Again this is America treating Asian Americans bad for what Asian countries did when they are actually in fact....American.)

Now, we have Asian Americans being attacked because people are mad at covid-19 which Trump bitch ass increased the temperament of the racists and made it a “china”: issue. It makes me sick to my stomach when I see the news coverage. You have people literally attacking the elderly and women. Not that I agree with people attacking anyone because it literally does not solve anything, but why don’t these cowards ever try and step to someone that looks like Dwayne Johnson?? (and if you think someone is diseased...why enter their personal space??? This proves that these mfs are dumb as fuck,)

I hate when people who also hailed from immigrants in America tell other people (who are often actually had been born in America as well) to go back to their country...sure bitch as soon as you go back to yours then. You have no more right than anyone else. Check your misplaced entitlement. You have done nothing good and contributed nothing positive to this country. Sit your ass down. And shut your ass up.

[picsofsannyas]

Osho says. Hein Steff, there is nothing wrong in being homosexual.

BELOVED MASTER, I AM HOMOSEXUAL. I FEEL TERRIBLY OPPRESSED AND STRICKEN BY THE STIGMA OF HOMOSEXUALITY. IT SEEMS FALSE TO ME TO COME HERE TO FIND A WAY TO COME CLOSER TO MYSELF AND AT THE SAME TIME NOT TO HAVE THE COURAGE TO SHOW MYSELF THE WAY I AM. THEN I WANT TO RESIGN AND RETURN HOME SO THAT I DON'T HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT ANY LONGER. WHAT CAN I DO?

Hein Steff, there is nothing wrong in being homosexual. You need not feel guilty about it. One certainly has to go beyond sex, but that is as much applicable to heterosexuality as it is applicable to homosexuality. Heterosexuality or homosexuality are just styles of the same stupidity! You need not feel guilty.

In fact, looking at the population of the world, homosexuality should be supported. At least you will not be increasing the population of the world, you will not be loading the earth more. It is already loaded too much. Homosexuality should be valued, respected -- it is pure fun! Heterosexuality is dangerous. And what is wrong? If two persons are enjoying each other's bodies, nothing is wrong. It should be their concern; nobody else's business to interfere.

But the society is continuously interfering in everything; it does not leave anybody any privacy. It enters in your bedroom too. Your society is not a free society. It talks of freedom and democracy and all that rot, but it is pure slavery. It is a big prison. And your priests and your so-called God are all Peeping Toms. They are all looking into your private lives, what you are doing. It should be nobody's business.

What is wrong in loving a man or a woman? Two men can love each other, two women can love each other. Love is a value in itself. And fun should not be condemned. Life is already such a burden, such a drag, such a boredom. Leave at least something in life so people can feel a little less bored.

Here you need not feel afraid to show yourself the way you are. My whole approach is to help you to be the way you are because that is the only way to help you transcend it. Feel guilty and you will remain the same. Guilt never transforms anybody.

And homosexuality is such an innocent phenomenon. Why is it so much condemned? The reason is that if it is not condemned, the fear is that almost everybody will turn homosexual because every child has the tendency. Every child passes through the stage when he is homosexual. Every boy, every girl, passes through a time when boys like boys and girls like girls. The fear is that if many people turn homosexual -- and particularly in the past when the population was not big and every society wanted more numbers because numbers meant power.... To allow homosexuality was dangerous; it had to be condemned, absolutely condemned, so much so that in a few countries it is the greatest crime.

For example, in Ayatollah Khomeiniac's country, Iran, it is one of the greatest crimes. You can be imprisoned for your whole life or you can even be sentenced to death, just for being homosexual. It seems absolutely absurd, ridiculous, but in the past there was some reason in it. Every society wanted to be more powerful. It was a constant struggle -- a struggle between groups, struggle between tribes, struggle between clans -- the deciding factor was your number, how many you are. If people become homosexual, then the population will decrease; hence it has to be condemned as the greatest sin.

It may have some meaning if you think of the past, but in the present it is absolutely meaningless. In fact, the whole situation has become just the opposite: now heterosexuality is the danger; less numbers are needed. If humanity goes on growing this way, then we cannot support humanity, we cannot live any longer. By the end of this century the population will be so much, the poverty will be so much, that there seems to be no way out except a third world war which will kill almost everybody -- so that a few people can start the whole story again.

I have heard a story, a twenty-first century story: The third world war has happened, and a monkey is sitting on a rock taking a sunbath. A female monkey comes with an apple and gives the apple to the monkey. And the monkey says, "My God, are we going to start it all over again?"

Homosexuality is condemned because there is every possibility that if it is not condemned many more people will turn towards it. The inner tendency is there in every person. In fact, the person who is against it... the more he is against it, the more he has the tendency. Deep down, unconsciously, he knows it is there. To repress it he has to be very much against it; he feels disgusted by the very idea.

But nobody is telling HIM to become homosexual. If others feel attracted, then it is not your business to interfere or to condemn them. It is their freedom, and they are not doing any harm to anybody. It is a harmless game -- stupid, certainly, but not a sin. But as far as stupidity is concerned all sex is stupid, for the simple reason that it is a biological urge and you are not the master of it, you are just a victim.

And you need not be so much worried about it, Hein, because homosexuality has a very beautiful origin: it originated in the monasteries. It is something religious! The first homosexuals were monks and nuns -- Christians, Buddhists, Jainas; all great religions have contributed their share to it. It was bound to be so because there are monasteries even now in existence where no woman has ever entered.

In a Catholic monastery in Europe, Mount Athos, for one thousand years no woman has entered; not even a six-month-old girl has been allowed to enter in. What kind of people are living there? A six-month-old girl and they are afraid even of that! What can they do? But repressing sex creates fear, so the whole monastery is full of men; and homosexuality is a natural by-product if only boys are together or only girls are together.

Religious people have contributed greatly. Educationists have contributed greatly, because boys have to be educated separately. They have to reside in different hostels specially for them and girls have to stay aloof in separate hostels, in separate schools. If you put too many girls together they are bound to become lesbians, because when the sexual urge takes possession of them and they cannot find a boy, then anything is better than nothing.

In zoos even animals turn homosexual -- only in zoos, remember. In their wild state they don't become homosexual. There is no need -- females are available. But in a zoo, if females are not available, they become homosexual. A zoo is worth studying. I used to study zoos because the zoo gives you many indications about human society. The human society is a big zoo because everything has become so unnatural.

Go to a zoo and watch the animals and you will be able to see many things. They become homosexuals; they never become homosexuals in their wild stage. They are FORCED to become homosexuals. They go crazy, they become insane, mad. In wild states they never become insane. No animal ever becomes mad in his wild state; he remains sane. But his sanity needs a little freedom.

A lion has a big territory in his wild state, miles of territory, and he is the king of the whole territory. In a zoo he is in a small cage. If you go to the zoo you will see the lion walking up and down the cage, up and down, up and down, the whole day. It can drive anybody mad. He needs freedom, he needs a certain territory. In such a small space he is overcrowded. He becomes angry, enraged, violent.

Many diseases never happen in the wild. For example, no animal suffers from tuberculosis or cancer, but in a zoo animals suffer from tuberculosis and cancer. Strange! In the wild there are no medical facilities for them and in the zoo every kind of medical facility is available. Doctors are there to look after them, great doctors, doing something great! What they cannot take care of on their own -- cancer, tuberculosis -- doctors help them with. Animals become victims of illnesses which they have never known before.

Human society has been so much forced to live in unnatural circumstances -- and the monastery is one of the most unnatural circumstances. It is a zoo, a religious zoo! Homosexuality was born there, so you need not feel very bad about it. You are a religious person! And you have a great lineage of homosexuals....

If you look for homosexuals you will be surprised. Many poets, many authors, many painters, many musicians, many dancers, many great people, many creative people, were homosexuals. Many Nobel Prize winners have been homosexuals.

And don't be worried about enlightenment either, because at least one homosexual I know has become enlightened -- Socrates; he was a homosexual. And there are suspicions about Jesus. I cannot prove it, they are only suspicions -- because he always moved with the boys. Those twelve apostles... who knows? But if he was, nothing is wrong in it. Socrates was certainly a homosexual. Plato was, Aristotle was. Greeks are great people!

One American girl was going to marry a Greek. The mother was very much worried. She said, "Wait! If you can avoid this marriage...." The girl was mad. She said, "No. He looks so beautiful, just like a Greek god!" The mother said, "I know, but after only a few days you will know he is nothing but a goddamned Greek! And one thing more," the mother said, "if you marry this man then remember one thing: never turn your back towards him, never! Whatsoever happens sleep on your back the whole night!" The girl got married. She insisted, and soon she found the mother was right: the Greek god was nothing but a goddamned Greek! And she was also puzzled because he was always trying to tell her, "Why don't you turn over?" -- but she wouldn't turn over; she was also stubborn! After six months all efforts failed. The Greek said, "Listen. If you don't turn over you are not going to have children ever." Then the girl had to turn because she wanted children. The Greek played a logical trick.

Greeks have been homosexuals for centuries. All their great people have been homosexuals. So you need not worry -- you have a great history behind you! Walt Whitman was a homosexual -- one of the greatest poets of all the ages. There seems to be something in homosexuality that makes people creative, or creative people homosexuals. There is something in it and I can see the point. When you stop creating children, your creativity takes new turns, new dimensions. You create poetry, you create painting.

And the people who have been condemning homosexuality for ages are also condemning it for one more reason. As far as the man/woman relationship is concerned it is always on the rocks, because man cannot understand the mind of the woman, the woman cannot understand the mind of the man. They are poles apart. That is their attraction, but that is also their conflict, constant conflict. If homosexuality is allowed, accepted, the fear is that many people will settle into it because a man can understand another man more easily -- they have the same mind. And women can understand each other more easily -- they have the same mind.

That's why homosexuals are called "gay" people. They are really gay! The heterosexuals look so sad. Whenever you see a couple you can immediately know whether they are married or not: if they are sad they are married, if they are looking dull and dead they are married. Marriage kills all joy for the simple reason that it creates so many conflicts. Hence all societies have condemned homosexuality, for the simple reason that if it is not condemned, what will happen to reproduction? In the past it had some meaning, but now it has no meaning.

Now the day has come when homosexuality CAN be accepted, should be accepted as a natural outlet of your sexual energies. I am not against it, I am not for it either. I am simply saying that if you have to live your sex you can choose your style, you are free to choose your style. If you decide to be stupid, at least you should be given the freedom to choose what kind of stupid you want to be! I give you total freedom.

My effort here is to help you to go beyond it, so if you are homosexual you have to go beyond homosexuality, if you are heterosexual you have to go beyond heterosexuality. And there are other people also who are neither, who are autoerotic, autosexual. They have to go beyond their autoeroticism. Man has to transcend sex, whatsoever kind of sex it is, because unless you go beyond your biology you will never know your soul. But meanwhile -- before you go beyond -- it is your freedom to be whatsoever you want to be.

You say, "I am homosexual. I feel terribly oppressed and stricken by the stigma of homosexuality."

There is no need to be "terribly oppressed." You must be accepting people's condemnation. Deep down somewhere you are also against it; otherwise, why feel oppressed? If people are against, let them be against! You need not declare to everybody that you are a homosexual. You need not move with a flag that you are a homosexual! You can remain a homosexual. Of course, you cannot hide it because your sex style changes your body language. The way the homosexual walks is totally different from the heterosexual; the way he talks is totally different. And he looks so gay, so happy!

So you will have to remain a little less happy, that's all. Don't look so happy, and walk a little more consciously, that's all. Don't feel oppressed and don't feel stricken by the stigma of homosexuality. That is all nonsense! And you say, "It seems false to me to come here to find a way to come closer to myself and at the same time not to have the courage to show myself the way I am."

What courage are you talking about? Here there is no question of courage. If you are homosexual you are homosexual! Here it does not need courage to declare it. Here you can write on your shirt, "I am homosexual." Nobody will take any notice of it. People will say, "So what?"

This is a totally different world. Here we accept all kinds of people: sane, insane, crazy -- we have no objection. Unless you start harming others we have no objection. And homosexuality is a harmless game, absolutely harmless. But you think that this is courageous that you are declaring that you are a homosexual. Here it is not; anywhere else it will be. And I will not suggest that you declare it anywhere else; there is no need. Why brag about it? Accept it silently, relax into it.

But you wanted to say it because it is boiling within you. Don't be worried what others say. Just look within yourself, what you are saying to your own homosexuality. You are not at ease with it. The society has corrupted you, contaminated you. The society has given you ideas. It has created a certain conscience in you and that conscience is pricking, continuously feeling hurt. Now you say, "Then I want to resign and return home so that I don't have to think about it any longer."

Just by going back home you will not be getting rid of it. Neither you will get rid of homosexuality nor will you get rid of the stigma or the feeling of being oppressed. You will have to drop your conscience that has been created by the society in you. You will have to understand yourself and clean yourself of all ideas imposed by others; only then will you be able to relax.

You ask me, "What can I do?"

Hein, don't make a problem out of it. Nothing has to be done about it. I don't tackle individual problems. My whole approach is that there are millions of diseases, but there is only one cure, and that cure is meditation.

You meditate -- homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual.... You meditate. You become more still and more silent. You create inner emptiness. You become more transparent, and then things will start changing. You will be able to see what you are doing to yourself. If it is right you will go on doing it with more joy, with more totality, with more intensity, with more passion. If it is wrong it will simply drop, just like dead leaves falling from a tree.

So I cannot suggest any specific method because to me all the problems are arising because we have become minds and we have forgotten that deep down there is a space within us which can be called no-mind. Entering that space, no-mind, will give you perspective, vision, clarity.

Meditate. Sit silently watching your thoughts -- homosexual, heterosexual, whatsoever they are, it doesn't matter. You watch, you become the witness. Slowly slowly, a distance will be created between you and your thoughts. And one day suddenly, the realization that you are not your mind. And that day a revolution has happened within you. After that day you will never be the same again. A transcendence has happened. After that, whatsoever you do is right; you can't do wrong then. And before that, whatsoever you do is wrong. So when I say I have nothing against homosexuality I am not supporting it, remember. I am not saying, "Be homosexual." I don't have anything against heterosexuality either, but I am not supporting heterosexuality. I am not supporting anything. These are all mind games -- and you have to go beyond all the games.

Your mind is created by the society.

Fifteen-year-old Bobby was running out of a theater where he had just seen a porno movie. The manager stopped him. "Why are you in such a hurry?" "My mother told me," said Bobby, "that if I ever looked at anything bad I would turn to stone -- and I have started!"

Two members of London's exclusive Explorers Club were discussing a mutual friend over large brandies and soda. "Well, I'll be damned," said the first old boy. "You say Parkhurst has gone to Africa and married an ape?" "Quite so, old man." There was a pause and the first clubman asked in a discreet tone, "A female ape, naturally?" "Of course," came the reply. "There is nothing queer about old Parkhurst."

The mind functions as an agent of the society within you. To go beyond mind is to go beyond society. To go beyond mind is to go beyond the whole history. To go beyond mind is to go beyond past. To go beyond mind is to enter into God. And then whatsoever happens is good, is virtue.

Osho.

The Dhammapada: The Way of the Buddha, Vol 10

Ch. 12. Question 3.

[a-student-out-of-time]

Let’s kick Mavedick!

You see? There it is. Violence: the universal language.

The only way your beliefs can stand up is by denying the real world: someone wants you gone.

...Look, if you brought me here to kill me-

And make you a martyr? Don’t be ridiculous.

...This...This doesn’t prove anything. You could be lying to me, just trying to gauge my reaction.

Just like I know you’ve been gaslighting Kana.

Oh? You still won’t accept she’s your sister?

That I can accept. What I won’t accept is you saying my Dad cheated on my Mom. 

What makes you want to believe in them so strongly? I thought they were hardly ever around for you.

That might be true, but I know them. My parents love each other. They’re good people, and I know they care about me. There’s no way my Dad would ever cheat on her, and there’s no way he’d abandon Kana.

So where did Kana come from then? Hm?

Why do you even care so much about her? You didn’t even know she existed a week ago.

I believe in them because I want to believe in them.

Interesting.

*He sits back in his chair*

Just out of curiosity, what are you intending? I don’t imagine you have it all planned out yet, but are you going to introduce Kana to your parents? Ask how she’s related to you?

You’re putting a lot of faith into something you have no proof of. For all you know, you’d be the one destroying your parents’ marriage by introducing them to Kana. Wouldn’t be the first time you and your friends screwed something up with your “good” intentions.

...

I didn’t brainwash them or hypnotize them, you know. Kanon, Damian, Yuki, Kana, Kizuna, they all came to this island because I offered them the chance. Your actions gave them that little nudge toward it.

And be real, Nanami-san. They were the ones you came for. You don’t really care much for the other people on this island, do you?

That’s...o-of course I do!

Do you know anyone else’s name?

...

It’s funny too, you know? You and Kasugano made that big spiel about how you were going to change all of Japan, but what have you done, really? You’ve saved maybe a handful of people, put a serial killer away and got another one killed.

Or did you quietly dispose of Genocider Syo alongside Otonokoji Kanade?

...

Ah. I see.

But be honest, now. Did you know them in a past life or something? Is that why you got rid of them quietly? Didn’t wanna make it a big deal?

Syo’s not part of this anymore. You don’t need to worry about it.

…So, this person slices up a bunch of guys, crucifies them and writes “Bloodbath fever” in their blood and you’re protecting their identity. But when someone like me or Otonokoji Kanade comes along, we’re irredeemable?

It’s not the same thing!

Jeez, no need to get angry. I’m just asking simple questions.

Maybe it’s just that you want to protect your friends?

…Why are you doing this?

What? It’s nothing to be ashamed of. I mean, realistically, the human brain can only handle a certain amount of information at a time.

Truth is, we all care about our own communities and our own groups more than we do the rest of the world. People will talk about what’s good for the world, but they can’t comprehend how big it is or what every single person out there needs or wants. Nor should they, really.

You wanna know what’s been happening out there in the world at large? Just earlier this month, people all over the world started protesting an Islamophobic movie. There were protest, riots, arson and even murders. I think the death toll’s over 50 and almost 700 people were injured.

And back in July, there was that guy in America who shot a movie theater, calling himself “The Joker.” Did you hear about that?

There was a plane crash in Pakistan that killed almost 300, the largest power outage in human history, the last member of a species of Tortoise died, a whole bunch of countries severing diplomatic ties with each other...

Not to mention the ongoing problems in so much of the world, like poverty, disease, war, corruption, oppression, crime and who knows what else. Yet here you all are, trying to be the big heroes for saving these people. These people you know just enough about for them to matter.

I assure you, these people are already safe. The end is coming soon, and this island’s gonna be one of the few safe places on the planet.

With you in charge?

Naturally. Who else?

Unlike most people out there, I actually understand how people operate. What they really need is a guiding voice, a handsome face and a gun to keep them in line. To keep them from killing each other.

Do you really think you’ll be saving anybody? Dragging them off this island when they clearly don’t want you to and throwing them into a furnace that’s about to be lit?

So what about their families?

Well, I’ve made arrangements for them as well. As long as certain conditions are met.

What conditions?

Let’s not worry about that. This isn’t about me, this is about you.

Do you really think you have what it takes to stop the end? You really think you can save anybody?

You’re not gonna trick me! I know what I’m doing is right!

Jeez, I ask simple questions and you flip out on me.

I’m sick of talking to you. I’m sick of hearing about all the pain you’ve caused these people. And I’m sick of this island.

Did you forget? They’re only here because of what you and your friends did.

I mean, did you give any thought to this before you joined up? Was this always about the world or just your friends?

...

____________________________________________________

Hajime, there’s no way you can solve this all by yourself, and I can’t let you knowing what I know now, especially not when you have a twisted ankle.

And there’s no way I can just let any of this happen to our friends. Not when there’s something I can do.

So I’m in. I’m gonna help you.

____________________________________________________

Did you ever think you were in a position when you could make any kind of choices you wanted?

____________________________________________________

Oh, are you flirting with my boyfriend, Nijiue-san?

N-Nanami-san! Umm, I…I- uh…n-no, not at all!

Aww, no need to get so embarrassed. I think it’s cute.

____________________________________________________

You all point the finger at me for breaking the law, but what about all the laws you’ve broken? All the other people whose lives you’ve impacted for your own plans?

____________________________________________________

Is everything clear on your end?

*In the Mall’s public announcement room, where both doors are held shut with chairs*

*Chiaki pulls her bluetooth away from the mic and puts it back on*

It all went through. I think everyone heard it.

Now I gotta hurry before security shows up!

____________________________________________________

Chiaki…everyone…

No. Please just…don’t, okay?

We all made our choices, and if this is what you all think is the best option, then okay, we’ll go through with it. I’m just really tired of talking about at this point.

What’s important is we still have a bunch of criminals running around on the streets that we need to catch. We need to get to that right away, and being angry and petty about this isn’t going to fix anything.

____________________________________________________

And even with your “good” intentions, haven’t you seen some terrible things?

____________________________________________________

I could’ve had so much, and I was so close this time! All I had to do was wait for Kotoko to hit puberty! Can you imagine what some people will pay for a sexy little bitch like that?! They offered 50,000 yen just for the pictures I sent them!

You sent them pictures of your own daughter…

Why not? I’m her father, I can decide what I want to do with her. She’s my responsibility.

____________________________________________________

What about all the horrible things happening in the world? You know they’re up in arms over my announcement, and some of them are calling for your heads. But it goes beyond just that: what about all the horrible things people have said and done to you?

____________________________________________________

I-I didn’t mean to cause any trouble, I just-

“Nobody wants you here, rich girl.”

“Aww look, it’s muffintop!”

“Pick up a real game for once.”

“Stop acting like you’re a real gamer, bitch.”

“What, you won’t look me in the eye? You think you’re better than us?”

“All you do is sit there playing that stupid game. You’re useless.”

____________________________________________________

...

You see now, don’t you?

There’s nothing worth saving, and you’re hardly the kind of person who could make a difference. Stop this pointless struggle, and just let the world die.