#start-where-i-end

[vergess]

Choosing you as the most likely to give a honest and detailed answer. Feel free to delete, however.

When people are calling Israel a colony, what do they mean? The way I understand that word, a colony is land, controlled by some other country that's elsewhere and run by citizens of that country. That doesn't seem to be the case here, since most Israel citizens are only citizens of Israel, not something else, and there's no "main" country they're representing and can return to. Or are people using "colony" metaphorically here?

Before Tumblr mobs me - I don't like Israel and don't support it.

Israel began as a British colony of Palestine in the post WW1 era, around 1920. The people responsible for the genocide are almost entirely of European origin who were moved to Palestine after WW2 (in the 1940s and 1950s) to avoid returning to the homelands where they'd been given up to the nazis by their neighbors.

Today, however, the bulk of the colonization effort is managed by the US military industrial complex.

Now, there are many other people living in Israel, of many faiths and many ethnicities. The Israeli people, be they Jews or otherwise, are also not fans of the genocide, in much the same way the American people are not fans of US genocides.

But the israeli government exists almost entirely as a puppet for US and European colonial goals, and has done since the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin in the 90s.

Prior to that, there was a brief period wherein the rightfully elected leaders of Israel sought peace in the region after throwing off the shackles of British colonialism, which again founded the country and only "ended" (on paper) in the 1950s.

Israel has been a colonial effort for about 2/3s of the century it has existed, including today.

Now, this is a simplified explanation, of course. For example, although it was was a colonial effort, the "return" of Jews to their "homeland" was also a refugee effort, and a repatriation effort.

Jews never really "stopped" being indigenous to the levant even in diaspora. This is extremely obvious if you've ever lived in a Jewish neighborhood, but may come as a shock to a lot of people used to thinking of the assimilated mask Jews wear in Christian societies as our "true" selves.

My family were nondiasporic Jews until me, which I gather is an... unusual perspective that many people don't see often. You'll have to take me at my word, I think, because it's difficult to explain. But Jews never actually "became white" the way people so desperately want to believe. Some jews learned to pass for white, yes, but that isn't the same thing.

Jews, even the Ashkenazim (the "white european" ones) have a right to return home the same as anyone. And not just because I'm a fan of open borders.

But here's the deal.

Mizrahim (Jews who remained in the middle east rather than living in diaspora) are literally treated as inferior, as "arabs" (a colonial term) regardless of religion or ethnicity. To be a Jew is not enough. You have to be the right kind. This is true of other Jews of Colour in Israel as well, often to an even greater extreme, as any Ethiopian Jew in Israel damned well knows.

This also... well, I've talked about it a bit before, but this summary is also casting a very cruel light on the concept of Jewish citizenship being automatically granted in the case of Jewish descent. Which isn't fair of me at all.

In a world without all the goddamned genocide, having a reduced immigration process for the children of emigrants is perfectly fucking common and normal and many countries do it, including the US.

And this also doesn't touch upon the critical political reality that Israel exists as a place for bigots to throw their jews away instead of straight up killing us.

So, okay, this got away from me.

Basically, Israel as a state is a colony of the US (today) and UK (historic), which is armed almost entirely by the US, and which attacks targets the US deems "of interest." The fact that the colony is populated by repatriated indigenous peoples doesn't really change that.

If anything, it deepens the horror, because many of the Jews involved in the genocide against Palestine genuinely (and fairly) believe that this is the last place on earth where a Jewish person can reasonably expect religious safety. Genuinely, and fairly, believe that it's a choice between "the genocide of all Jews globally or the elimination of a single '''Arab''' city."

They're wrong, but not irrational.

In a way, the existence of global antisemitism is the justification that fuels the ongoing palestinian genocide.

Though in practical terms, it is "fueled" by US weapons. The US wants to own Israel and use it as a launching off point for US violence in the region, without the US having to take the blame.

"See? It's all just poor, innocent Israel defending itself*!"

*(entirely with US weapons and often on US orders, often with weapons given to Israel rather than purchased, solely to further destabilize a religiously and financially significant region and furthermore to instill a sense of fear of Israel's neighbors and gratitude to the US)

For another example of a colony-of-the-repatriated, you can check out the history of civil war in Liberia, after the US just dumped a bunch of freed slaves there instead of killing them. Unsurprisingly, it went fucking Badly. However, because Liberia was not considered a "valuable" colony, less study tends to be done into the complexities of that.

Or, I mean, there's always "the life history of Osama Bin Laden" which is kind of like a one man speedrun of what the US is doing with all of Israel.

Support: Patreon - Paypal - Venmo - Ko-Fi - CashApp

[bramble-klawe]

Please, don't say "harmful paras", a paraphilia is an attraction, not an action, so it's not a good way to put what you mean.

i understand. thank you for your input ^w^

so should I use just "paraphilias" instead?

[lottieurl]

hyperfixations are so scary like yeah this could be a month long thing or i might be thinking of it everyday seven months from now. no way to tell

[walkerrenee]

sometimes i randomly remember how insane maggie stiefvater was for making ronan lynch—a man that can create reality—a man of god, when he himself is a god of a man. then to take this man and have him be not only in love with, but a literal soulmate of a man named adam. parrish. adam parrish. who, mind you, lives above ronan's very own place of worship. and is the namesake of the first of mankind that the bible says god made from the literal dust of the ground (adam parrish: comes from nothing, hair "dusty" in color) and appoints him to care for the garden of eden (adam parrish: sacrifices himself to ronan's sentient forest). then has adam viewing ronan as a god and ronan saying "maybe he dreamt (created)" adam???? like who just fucking writes that and goes about their life?

[l-just-want-to-see]

pjo/hoo/toa + the cycle

The Lightning Thief / Growing Sideways, Noah Kahan / Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan, Ilya Repin + Saturn Devouring His Son, Goya + Saturn, Rubens / The Blood of Olympus / The Family Jewels, MARINA / The Last Olympian / The Sea of Monsters / The Family Jewels / Orestes Pursued by the Furies, Bouguereau / The Hidden Oracle / Apollo and Marsyas, Manfredi / In The Blood, John Mayer / The Sea of Monsters / The Combat of Ares and Athena, Jacques Louis David / The Family Jewels / Mark of Athena / The Combat of Ares and Athena / The Lightning Thief / Family Line, Conan Gray / Cronos and Rhea, Schinkel / The Lightning Thief / The Blood of Olympus / In The Blood / The Last Olympian / Chronos and His Child, Romanelli / Desireé Dellagiacomo / The Lightning Thief / Family Line / The Fallen Angel, Alexandre Cabanel + The Last Day of Pompeii, Bryullov / The Blood of Olympus / The Outcast, Botticelli / Glass, Irony and God, Anna Carson / House of Hades / Family Line / The Last Olympian / The Lament for Icarus, Herbert Draper + Sacrifice of Iphigenia, Roman School + Minerva and Arachne, Houasse + Venus Induces Helen to Fall in Love with Paris, Kauffmann / The Last Olympian / Hadestown / The Lightning Thief / apple, Charli xcx / The Last Olympian / I Would Leave Me If I Could, Halsey / The Sea of Monsters / ? / LET YOUR DAD DIE ENERGY DRINK, Lavery and Corrigan / The Last Olympian / Eat Your Young, Hozier / The Last Olympian / Orpheus and the Bacchantes, Lazzarini / The Blood of Olympus / Susan Smith, wych elm / Orpheus and the Bacchantes / The Burning Maze / ? / The Tyrant’s Tomb / Perseus Freeing Andromeda, Veronese / Abduction of Psyche, Bouguereau + Bacchus and Ariadne, Van Loo / The Tower of Nero / The Tower of Nero / The Tower of Nero

[yujateaandpi]

Thought Fiddlestan was a purely comedic ship for a while but now I get it, I see the light. It’s about a man who nurtures and cares for others to the point of heartbreak meeting a man who doesn’t remember what it’s like for anyone to care about him. It’s about them being warm together around the absence of someone they both love. It’s about Fiddleford’s innate domesticity comforting a man whose deepest desire was to come home. It’s about falling in love with the same face again but in a new context that heals your past trauma. It’s about Stan’s unbridled affection finally validating someone who desperately needed the recognition. It’s also about very funny old man yaoi.

[chez-cinnamon]

Girl dad Kinger? How about girl dad Caine?

I gotta draw them interacting more, I live for their slow burn found father/daughter dynamic,,,,,,,,,

[aria-allium]

katsuki financially backing the development of the support gear that allowed izuku to be a hero again... him reaching out his hand to izuku once the support gear's complete and telling him to "come on!" bc he knows the one thing izuku wanted to be was a hero... i moved

[euniexenoblade]

Ok, I will say the implied part out loud. If patriarchy exists, men benefit from it. And if trans men are men (they are), they therefore should benefit from it. However, systemic transphobia blocks access to this. If you think this is wrong, then you are saying trans men aren't men.

And, once again, if you think a trans woman saying this equates a terf utilizing violence to harm trans women, you are being a misogynist. We have seen this kind of behavior millions of times before in reddit mra threads and the like, I am not joking or exaggerating. You are making a false equivalence and being misogynistic.

Do these weirdos think that when terfs talk about "males" they're talking about trans men? When a terf talks about males, they are exclusively talking about trans women. They are misgendering us as means to deny us our womanhood. "Trans men are men and have male privilege" does not have remotely the same violence. There's no misgendering in it. Trans men are men.

This just annoys me cuz the two examples are absolutely nothing alike, and they both are not bio essentialist. Even if you think trans men are denied access of male privilege, the statement that trans men benefit from patriarchy has no violence to it, no misgendering, it truly has no fangs. It's just a statement about trans men being men and likely having male privilege. It's not bio essentialist cuz it genders trans men how they identify.

The former is incredibly violent, misgendering, and is bio essentialist.

Is this person trying to say "TIMs are males" is about trans men? Cuz it's not. Is this person trying to say trans men actually aren't men? Cuz they are. Is this person trying to claim that trans women on Tumblr dot com saying "trans men are men, therefore they benefit from patriarchy" is the same as a hate group, that has a tangible real world grip on society, and is oppressing the trans community, saying "trans women are male?" God I hope not.

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

A procession of confessions.

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[egophiliac]

just thinking about hair and faces

[vergess]

One of the reasons why I feel safe asking you uncomfortable questions in general is because while you're one of the angriest and most short tempered people I follow, I never saw you cross the line into bigotry (including less recognized types of bigotry, like ageism). Which is something other big accounts that get involved in political discourse do all the time. There are so many otherwise informative posts I saw that I couldn't engage with productively because the person would put in something like "these terminally online brain rotten people need to touch grass" or "theyfabs crying white woman tears" or something similar.

Ah, thank you for this!! I have a lot of rage in my little body, but I try hard not to let it spill onto people who are just doing their best. There's no reason to involve, like, the entirety of AFAB trans people just because one white person is crying crocodile tears for attention, for example.

Though, I know there are places left that I could improve; I try to warn people for example that I'm pretty free handed with mild forms of ableism like calling someone "an ignorant shitfaced twat who needs to shut up and read a book."

But yeah, there's something really, really exhausting about seeing what is otherwise a great post, and you can't engage with it because like... right at the end, the author reveals that they think all trans men have White Woman Privilege or they've forgotten hourebound cripples use the internet too and our ability to "go touch grass" is somewhat hampered by not being able to get out of bed without an assistant.

I'm mostly just glad "brain worms" stopped being a popular insult, given how horrific the actuality of neural parasites is. I hated the like 2 years where that was popular and you just had to accept that a large portion of the world thinks dying in one of the most gruesome ways imaginable is a fun treat to wish on strangers lol

Anyway!! Thank you for this! I will continue doing my best, and I want to say thank you to you as well:

I dropped out of para-related discourse years ago; it got way too toxic for me to handle. I'm glad there are still people out there being fucking sensible about things like prevention, group support, etc.

Keep fighting the good fight!!

[maybe-a-gatto-or-a-catto]

hold on I'll make this my personality for 3 months

[riggsink]

@star-sparkler I humbly offer this comic of August, she is light itself and perfect in every way

[bibxrbie]

"Luke Skywalker isn’t like the old Jedi. He saves Vader with his attachments!”

Wrong!

Luke Skywalker, at the end of Return of the Jedi, after his confrontation with the Emperor drags Darth Vader through the destructing Death Star. He’s desperate, knuckles white under the heavy weight of his father’s body, a little boy dragging his dad to safety. He sets Vader down for a moment, to catch his breath or maybe to get a better grip. He goes to grab Vader again, but Vader, uncomfortable and in pain, asks Luke to take off the mask. He wants to see Luke through his eyes instead of the eyes Palpatine built for him. Luke refuses, says that removing the mask is a sure way for Vader to die. Luke doesn’t want Vader dead, he wants Vader alive. Not to hold him accountable for his many evil acts, but for the same reason why Luke Skywalker can’t kill Darth Vader; Vader is his father and Luke loves him.

And yet, after a moment, Luke removes Vader’s mask. He doesn’t want to, he hesitates, but he removes the mask with enough slowness to allow Vader to take it back. In that moment, Luke sets aside his desire for Vader in his life, sets aside his desire to see him live, and sets aside his entire mission, the reason he was even on the Death Star in the place. In his compassion for his father, Luke stays with Vader until he dies. It is this moment where we see him be the best damn Jedi he can be. I’d even argue that this moment is the greatest example of non-attached love we see. Because Luke lets Vader go! He lets his father die, and in some ways, by removing the mask, he too kills Vader, he stays with him until his last moment, gives him the kindness of granting his last wish and finally chooses Vader.

And Luke doesn’t have to do this. If Luke Skywalker’s love for his father was an attachment, he would ignore Vader and continue dragging him to the escape pod, put his desire for a father as his central focus and ignore Vader’s wants and discomfort. Maybe he would even save him. But he doesn’t. Instead, he watches as Vader dies.

He builds a Jedi burial for his father and watches it burn the remnants of Vader and Anakin Skywalker away. He mourns Vader, he mourns what they could’ve had as father and son, considers what ifs and maybe-if-I-did-this. Vader/ Anakin is released from his mortal body, from his ‘crude matter’ and Luke lets him go. He says one final goodbye to Anakin. Then, he joins Leia, Han, Chewie, Lando, and the rest of the Rebels and celebrates their victory. He lives in the present and celebrates what he has instead of what he lost.

Luke Skywalker is THE Jedi. Everything about Luke Skywalker serves as the foundational cornerstone of the Jedi, everything about the Jedi as a culture and philosophy is reflected in his character. Luke’s desire for the New Jedi Order isn’t to throw away the values of the old Order, but to vitalise them, breathe life back into dying lungs, and rebuild a path that people set out on their way to destroy. (Yes, his Order is different from the Old, but that’s because it has to be. He doesn’t have the resources or the safety of the Old Order.) The philosophies of the Jedi are difficult and they aren’t for everyone, and like the perfect Jedi that Luke is, he struggles and stumbles and sometimes he even rejects it. But, no matter how far he falls, it is a way of life he chooses again and again and again. It is a way of life that welcomes him back each time

[potato-lord-but-not]

Noel seems to be the one comforting people pretty often, I think he deserves a quick menty b (and some comfort from his boyfriends)

woagh ourthur comic be upon ye

Arthur probably spent 20 minutes trying to get this man to finally break for the night