#the only answer i can find to this is make the religion more palatable to new people? | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

delusion-of-negation · 3 years ago

Text

top 10 (ish) ridiculous or annoying FAQs:

(click at your own discretion)

1) "kids today rely on others to do everything"

ah yes, damn those participation trophies! if it wasn't for them my hands wouldn't be fucked, and I wouldn't need people to write for me. but seriously, stop reading boomer comics, and go outside to meet some actual young people.

2) "sus that a non-american says mom"

yeah, because it's clearly the superior version, and I'm not too patriotic to concede a defeat.

3) "sweaty, the victims of abuse by catholics are real people, stop appropriating their pain just because you want to hate catholics; plus teachers abuse people just as often anyway"

so firstly, I don't hate anybody. and secondly, regarding the fact that victims really do exist, [insert "of course I know him, he's me" meme here]; although I don't often talk much about the abuse I went through or what my religious beliefs are. but, more importantly, statements like "survivors are people" can be phrased like "some people are survivors", and when you're unable to act according to the latter (like when you don't even consider that somebody might be one) then you display a failure to recognise the former - you're projecting; a survivor can't be appropriating their own pain, but you can be appropriating it to silence one. and thirdly, teachers do abuse - the problem isn't and has never been purely religion, rather that abuse is often done by somebody in a position of trust, power, and familiarity; and that the lack of a global minimum enables totally legal abuse on top of the illegal stuff. people with access and respect have more opportunity to abuse than those without, and that goes for teachers too. but, once again, you can be appropriating the pain of survivors to deflect and silence people. please remember this before you say that shit.

4) "get help/therapy"

way ahead of you - years ahead of you. but it's not magic - people who say this often act as if you'll start behaving differently overnight. not only are some things simply beyond the ability of talking therapy to completely rectify, it also takes time and has to be selective. you've got to pick your priorities, and that's definitely not whatever ship or joke you're mad at me about today. therapy is a slow, arduous process that can't guarantee results - it isn't "anti-recovery" to recognise that, it's honesty. while I've been in therapy for a long time, it is not necessarily going to change whatever you don't like about me - whether that's because it can't, because my focus now is on more important or urgent things, or because I don't want to change that.

5a) "tell your family you ship incest, see how that goes; normal people find it disgusting"

actually, some know, and they're fine with it. in fact, one prefers sibling pairings in fiction to all other dynamics because, to paraphrase, "it's a deeper level of messed up co-dependence". so unfortunately for you, my remaining family (by which I mean those not dead or cut out of my life after abuse and so forth) actually are able to distinguish between fiction and reality. plus, my reasoning for caring if they find it gross or not pertains only to recommending books and such - their opinions do not dictate my tastes.

5b) "don't sexualise/appropriate incestuous abuse" and "I bet you enjoyed being raped" and other attempts to upset me over 5a

firstly, as I've already said here, survivors can't be appropriating ourselves. in addition, you're not owed people's history or trauma - it's not okay to require people's personal information, or else you'll send anon hate and accusations of appropriation. secondly, I'm not sexualising our abuse (not just because I write horror, and so a lot of my writing is intended to be creepy, not sexy); these stories aren't about us, they're not us at all. entire dynamics/people (fictional or otherwise) aren't all going to be applicable to us or identical to us, just because they have something in common with us; they're not us and they're not accountable to us. thirdly, the fact that people send this stuff (attempting to trigger people's trauma over ships) is so much more worrying to me than somebody making our communal imaginary friends kiss. you're trying to hurt people. and finally, to the "I bet you enjoyed it" crowd (if you're at all serious): do you think you'd enjoy being in a real zombie apocalypse, alone, afraid, and really at risk of being eaten alive? a fictional scenario does not feel remotely the same as a real one. this isn't rocket science - things that look like you aren't you; fiction isn't reality; don't send anon hate. (edit: comparable "just leave me alone, I'm not hurting anyone" sentiments for yandere stuff, and anything else you decide I'm naughty for.)

6) "you'll be sent off to do manual labour once your communist revolution happens"

while I don't know why people think that I'm a communist, a dictatorial regime probably isn't going to want me to do manual labour. they're more likely to just shoot me; I'm useless and a liability. call me crazy, but something tells me that "ah yes, we shall give ze deranged cripple ze power tools" isn't the communist position.

7a) "they/them can't be singular pronouns"

yes they can, and they're used as such in both shakespeare and the bible. but you don't have to say this - I'm also okay with he/him, so you could've just used those and chilled out. also, do I look like somebody who views the rules of grammar as fully immutable and imperative?

7b) "enbies/aros/pan/etc aren't valid"

do you really think that you're going to change any hearts or minds by putting that in my ask box or under my funny maymays? chill out, it's not worth the effort - you could be planning a party (in minecraft) and having fun instead. it isn't worth my time to rant at everybody who's saying something isn't valid, updating how I'm explaining it as my opinions grow and general discourse around it evolves; I'm just who I am, somebody else is who they are - why bicker in presumptuous ways about if that's enough? it ultimately is valid, in my opinion, but that isn't an invitation to keep demanding that I debate. (edit: old posts of mine probably don't phrase things incredibly, on this or anything... I tried.)

8) "what are your politics?"

my politics are informed first and foremost by the knowledge that I'm not cut out to be some kind of leader - I don't want to be the guy who tells everyone else what to do, I just offer what seem to me like valid criticisms of how we are doing things now, and general pointers on the values and ethics that I would prefer to move towards. things like individual freedom, taking the most pacifist route where possible, trying not to give excessive power to small groups of people (governments or corporations), helping those in need even when they're not palatable, and letting me suck loads of dicks. but please refrain from decreeing me something - there's not enough information in what I said, so you'll just be filling in the blanks with assumptions. (edit: workplace democracy seems cool to me; benefits are good; fair fines and taxes; and the "sperm makes you loopy" saga: 1, 2, 3, and 4.)

9) "you're a narcissist"

no, I don't meet the diagnostic criteria. joking on the internet that you're hot doesn't make a person a narcissist. the fact that I've chosen to keep my actual self-esteem issues to myself is not proof that they don't exist - you're just not entitled to that information about me. but it's also not narcissism to really like how you look. (edit: don't throw labels around carelessly too.)

10a) "kin list?"

the fabric of the universe, a zombie, dionysus, maned wolf/arctic fox hybrid, a comedian, big gay, big rock, ambiguously partial insincerity. (edit: kin list may or may not be incomplete.)

10b) "kin isn't valid/that's just being insane"

haven't we established that I'm deranged, and that sending stuff like this on anon is simply a waste of your precious time? besides, I do not care if it's invalid or insane - it's fun, I'm happy. (edit: see 7b for my opinion on sending me yet another ask with "that's invalid" in it; I'm not in the mood to discuss the nature of validity.)

bonus: "it gets better" and "trigger list?"

as I've said before, things just don't always get better for everyone - sometimes things can't be cured or even treated, sometimes they kill you; in some cases it could get better if not for a blockade or lack of time. the world is messy. it needs to be more normalised to reassure or comfort people without relying on saying that their issue will get better or be cured. it does suck to be this ill, but it also sucks to be made out to be a lazy pessimist, just because I have the audacity to not play along. and as for the trigger list, I don't like providing people with an easily accessed list of ways to hurt my feelings or harm me - upsetting me is supposed to be challenging, and thus rewarding. if you want a cheat sheet then you're out of luck, I'm afraid.

bonus #2: "FAQ stands for frequently asked questions, it doesn't need that s at the end!"

yeah, I know, I just enjoy chaos and disarray.

bonus #3 (edit): "what are your disabilities and how exactly are they incurable and/or deadly?"

again, I don't tell the internet everything about me, especially when it poses a risk, especially not as an easily accessible list for you to refer back to whenever you feel inclined to hurt my feelings. that is understandably a sore subject. (edit: that includes physical health issues btw.)

bonus #4 (edit): "so we shouldn't be critical?"

if it wasn't clear from my answer about politics or my post in general, you can have opinions about things, and you can voice that. it's just not realistic to exist at extremes: to think that you alone should dictate what exists in fiction, or to think that people shouldn't be expressing disdain or criticism of any calibur. say how you feel about things, that's fine, but it's also fine if people find that they don't value your input. plus we're all flawed, we can all be hypocritical from time to time, we all get bitchy, and we all make mistakes, or even knowingly fuck things up. that's important to keep in mind, whether we're talking about the one being criticised or the one doing the criticising - poor choices of words, imperfect tone, or contradictory ideas are inevitably going to happen occasionally.

congrats on reaching the end! if you have, at any point, said one of these to me, you owe a hug to your nearest loved one (once it's safe).

edit: might add more links/bonus points in the future when I think of things, but it's late now. (sorry for links where prior notes in the thread have my old url, that may get a tad confusing; also, not all links are my blog or my op, since it is to illustrate points/vibes, not to self-promo.)

#don't take life too seriously #nobody gets out alive anyway #tw abuse mention #tw csa mention #tw incest mention #tw for any tws I missed #idk why I did this

15 notes · View notes

chibimyumi · 4 years ago

Note

Hi there! So I've been meaning to ask this for a while after realizing it, but don't O!Ciel's, Doll's, Alois', and Lizzy's color schemes kind of reveal their past and future a tad bit? I've know Alois outfits are bold yet kind of gothic colors like violet emerald green black and brown which all in the world of art are color forms of different emotions depending how you work with them, green being envy or disgusted but he hides it with royal purple, black means wounded which are his shorts & tie

Dear Blackbutlerfandomnerddomain,

While colour symbolism is popular, I personally don’t think the colours in Kuroshitsuji’s costumes are supposed to deliver any meaning other than aesthetic value. Especially with O!Ciel and Lizzie we can say with some certainty colour symbolism is not within the intention, because they change clothes in every single illustration, and every time they wear different colours. Yes, these characters do have tones they tend to wear, but that’s how real people dress themselves too. Somebody who likes calm colours is slightly less likely to have a rainbow assortment of neon, for example.

This is simply the way I understand Yana’s style, there’s not really ONE correct answer here. So feel free to read as much into the colours as it pleases you. But as I personally see it, Yana’s style of using symbolism tends to rely on objects rather than colours. Allow me to briefly analyse two artworks to illustrate what I mean and how I came to my understanding.

Case One

One of the most famous artworks is the front illustration of the second illustration book. Many colours including green, red, blue, white, gold are all present here.

One could make arguments for the black and white of the Earl’s attire being symbolism, but this meaning is quickly overshadowed by the ravens emerging from the Escher patterns. Red is the most eye-catching colour in this illustration. One might say O!Ciel’s gloves being red means to symbolise his hands being blood-dyed, or his shoes red because he walks a bloody path... but then how do we explain the inside of the drape or Sebastian’s waistcoat?

The setting is a place that appears to be a type of greenhouse; a place built to maximise the function of sunlight. And yet, while the illustration seems to suggest it is daytime, the sun is failing miserably in face of the heavy clouds. Rather than painting the sky ominous red or just dark, Yana uses the unsuccessful sun to set a mood or convey symbolism. “Is the white light against the dark clouds not also a type of colour symbolism?” Yes, it may be, but then one should also ask the question: "why choose a greenhouse then, and not any other setting that could have conveyed the light/dark contrast?”

Case two

Another famous piece is this 2014 artwork. The overall tone is gloomy and is mostly lacking in colours. Though held back in terms of colour, there is a lot to be unpacked here!

The first thing that catches the eye is indeed the overwhelmingly sombre palate of this illustration. Black can symbolise many things, but when 70% of the illustration is black, one could say this illustration is either incompetent in conveying symbolism in it being over-saturated with “meaning”, or that the black is merely here to set a tone.

Instead, we can see white lilies in O!Ciel’s hair as well as one stem carried by Sebas. Rather than colour symbolism, Japan has a long history of flower-symbolism (花言葉・Hanakotoba), and Yana herself is big fan of this style. When Western culture was introduced to Japan, black and white lilies were accepted as symbols for death.

The composition of the artwork leads the eye from the bottom left corner to the top right. This guides our vision to the empty plate at the top of the table, where a bright white saucer lies with a conspicuous bit of red sauce.

Red might symbolise blood here, and it is befitting. But more importantly we also need to consider this choice from an artist’s point of view. How many different colours of edible sauces are there? There’s chocolate sauce and other dark sauces, but that would just blend in with the rest of the illustration. Yellowy sauce is certainly a thing, but that’d be overpowered by the golden details. So red is the only bright colour that would make the empty saucer pop out. The Empty saucer has a fork placed diagonally on top, meaning that somebody had consumed food and is now finished. Rather than the colour of red, I think it is the now-empty saucer that is supposed to symbolise Sebastian’s goal of consuming his master.

Next to the saucer is the skeleton of a bird; presumably a crow judging from the size. Skeletons universally symbolise death, but it has nothing to do with the colour.

In Japanese native culture the topic of ‘death’ is big taboo. In older Japanese buildings for example, the 4th floor would often be skipped because ‘4′ (四・shi) is a homophone of death (死・shi).

In the past when Buddhism was introduced, the Japanese embraced this religion with open arms because finally there was something else that would deal with ‘death’ while native culture could stay in its comfort-zone. It was a bit like: “we do we... Hey, Buddhism, can you take care of that thing we’re too afraid of for us? Thanks dude!” Since the introduction of Buddhism, images of skeletons came to not just mean ‘death’, but more specifically ‘impermanence’ (無常・mujou). Impermanence is one of the core teachings in Buddhism, reminding humanity that everything will eventually come to an end, be it good or bad. With Buddhism introduced, skeletons were no longer only associated with pure fear, but instead gained an additional meaning of acceptance of change and the cycle of nature.

The origins of the meaning of skeletons have blurred through the years, many Japanese people probably don’t even know why things evoke certain meanings in them (just like in other cultures, I presume). But fact remains that though still macabre, in Japan a skeleton is now assumed to symbolise the naturalness of death.

That the skeleton of the bird is preserved in a glass dome is interesting. Glass domes’ function is primarily display. Out of all things, Yana chose to specifically display the symbol of impermanence and death, meaning that within this artwork that skeleton is the key object of display. In human subjectivity death is finite and fearsome. To a demon like Sebastian however (from whose perspective we view this artwork as he’s the only one awake here), he probably views death more akin to the way Buddhism views it; as just impermanence. I am NOT saying that Sebastian subscribes to a Buddhist philosophy, but I am saying that he must view death a lot more neutrally than most humans do.

Most Japanese people are not raised consciously religiously, but everyone is always influenced to some extent, Yana included. And therefore it is no surprise that Yana might have been inspired by the neutral view towards death (for at least Sebastian), even if she might not know where this inspiration comes from.

The casualness of ‘death’ in this illustration is further indicated by the coffin that is set up as a dining table. There is no respect, no ceremony, objects are scattered on top and around. The message is rather straightforward so I shall waste no more time explaining the obvious here. But I do wish to point out how this gives further evidence for how the meanings of this illustration should be considered from Sebas’ perspective, just like the crow’s skeleton as explained above. What is finite to us, is just a fact of nature to Sebas.

Conclusion

Yana has created many illustrations. Not all include symbolism, but the more elaborate pieces are usually packed with them. Of course I have only analysed two illustrations, and I would not blame anyone for calling this post insufficient evidence. But... I could just go on and on forever, and I need to draw a line somewhere, right? What I can say with confidence however, is that if you were to grab any artwork by Yana and see it for yourself, rather than colour, item symbolism is stronger.

Also, the way Yana uses colour is just not very symbolism heavy; she has a much stronger tendency to use colours purely aesthetically. Take any of the inside covers of this series, and one would quickly find out there really is no pattern to be found here.

In a nutshell, Yana’s colouring style is mostly aesthetic and used to set a tone for her illustrations. What carries the symbolism instead is in the objects.

Again, this is merely how I personally read Yana’s illustrations and an elaboration of how I came to this reading. There is not one correct answer to read illustrations, because art is subjective in its core. So if the colours do mean more to you than they do to me, please do enjoy doing so by all means ^^

#Kuroshitsuji #Black Butler #Art #Illustration #art analysis #analysis #I did study art for a bit and it shaped the way I look at art #but the core lesson of art analysis class is that art is always subjective #ALWAYS #symbolism

59 notes · View notes

clearlydeplorable · 4 years ago

Text

To the Leftists:

If you are a liberal who can’t stand Trump, and cannot possibly fathom why anyone would ever vote for him, let me fill you in.

It’s not that we love Donald Trump so much. It’s that we can’t stand you.

And we will do whatever it takes — even if that means electing a rude, obnoxious, unpredictable, narcissist (your words not ours) to the office of President of the United States — because the thing we find more dangerous to this nation than Donald Trump is YOU.

How is that possible you might ask?

Well, you have done everything in your power to destroy our country.

From tearing down the police, to tearing down our history, to tearing down our borders.

From systematically destroying our schools and brainwashing our kids into believing socialism is the answer to anything (despite being an unmitigated failure everywhere), while demonizing religion and faith, and glorifying abortion, violence, and thug culture.

From calling us racists every time we expect everyone of any skin color to follow our laws equally to gaslighting us about 52 genders, polyamory, grown men in dresses sharing public locker rooms with little girls, and normalize the sexualization of young children, you simultaneously ridicule us for having the audacity to wish someone a “Merry Christmas” or hang a flag on the 4th of July, stand for the national anthem, or (horror of horrors) don a MAGA hat in public.

So much for your “tolerance.”

(See why we think you are just hypocrites??)

We’re also not interested in the fact that you think you can unilaterally decide that 250 years of the right-to-bear-arms against a tyrannical or ineffective government should be abolished because you can’t get the violence in the cities you manage under control. That free-speech should be tossed out the window, and that those who disagree with your opinions are fair game for public harassment or doxing. That spoiled children with nose-rings and tats who still live off their parent’s dime should be allowed to destroy cities and peoples livelihoods without repercussions. That chaos, and lawlessness, and disrespect for authority should be the norm.

This is your agenda. And you wonder why we find you more dangerous than Donald Trump?

Your narrative is a constant drone of oppressor/oppressed race-baiting intended to divide the country in as many ways as you possibly can. You love to sell “victim-hood” to people of color every chance you get because it’s such an easy sell, compared to actually teaching people to stand on their own two feet and take personal responsibility for their own lives and their own communities and their own futures. But you won’t do that, you will never do that, because then you will lose control over people of color. They might actually start thinking for themselves, God forbid!

This is why we will vote for Donald Trump.

Not because he is the most charming character on the block.

Not because he is the most polite politician to have ever graced the oval office.

Not because he is the most palatable choice, or because we love his moral character or because the man never lies, but because we are sick to death of you and all of the destructive crap you are doing to this once beautiful and relatively safe country.

Your ineffective and completely dysfunctional liberal “leadership”(?) has literally destroyed our most beautiful cities, our public education system, and done it’s damndest to rip faith out of people’s lives.

However bad Donald Trump may be, and he is far from perfect, every day we look at you and feel that no matter what Donald Trump says or does there is no possible way he could be any worse for our country than you people are.

We are sick to death of your stupid, destructive, ignorant, and intolerant behavior and beliefs — parading as “wokeness.” We are beyond sick of your hypocrisy and B.S.

We are fed up with your disrespectful divisiveness and constant unrelenting harping and whining and complaining (while you live in the most privileged nation in the world), while making literally zero contributions of anything positive to our society. Your entire focus is on ripping things down, never ever building anything up. Think about that as there is something fundamentally very wrong in the psychology of people who choose destruction as their primary modus operandi.

When Donald J Trump is reelected, don’t blame us, look in the mirror and blame yourselves.

Because you are the ones that are responsible for the rise of Donald Trump. You are the ones who have created this "monster" that you so despise, by your very actions. By your refusal to respect your fellow Americans, and the things that are important to us.

You have made fun of the “fly-over states,” the people who “cling to their guns and religion,” the middle class factory workers and coal miners and underprivileged rural populations that you dismissively call “yahoos” and “deplorables.” You have mocked our faith and our religion. You have mocked our values and our patriotism. You have trampled our flag and insulted our veterans and treated our first responders with contempt and hatred.

You have made environmentalism your religion, while trashing every city you have taken responsibility for. You scream from the rooftops about “global warming” and a “green new deal” while allowing tens of thousands of homeless people to cover your streets in literal sh!t and garbage and needles and plastic waste without doing a single thing to help them or solve the environmental crisis your failed social policies are creating. But we’re supposed to put YOU in charge of the environment while gutting our entire economy to institute this plan when you can’t even clean up a single city??

You complain — endlessly — yet have failed to solve a single social problem anywhere. In fact, all you have done is create more of them.

We’ve had enough. We are tired of quietly sitting by and being the “silent” majority. So don’t be surprised when the day comes when we finally respond. And trust me it’s coming, sooner than you might think. And also trust me when I say it won’t be pretty. Get ready.

When Donald Trump is reelected it will be because you and your “comrades” have chosen to trash the police, harass law-abiding citizens, and go on rampages destroying public property that we have all paid for and you have zero respect for.

When Donald Trump is reelected it will be because we are sick of your complete and utter nonsense and destruction. How does it feel to know that half of this country finds you FAR more despicable than Donald J. Trump, the man you consider to be the anti-Christ?

Let that sink in.

We consider you to be more despicable, more dangerous, more stupid, and more narcissistic than Donald Trump. Maybe allow yourself a few seconds of self-reflection to let that sink in. This election isn’t about Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden.

This is about Donald Trump vs YOU.

So if on the morning of November 4 (or more likely January 19, by the time the Supreme Court will weigh in on the mail-in ballot fiasco that we are headed towards), and Donald J. Trump is reelected?

The only people you have to blame is the left-wing media drones and yourselves.

You did this.

We don't believe in Wealth Distribution, we work hard for our money, and if anyone else wants to make more, they can too.We don't believe illegals should be taking American's jobs. We don't think everyone should get free this, free that.

3 notes · View notes

diveronarpg · 5 years ago

Photo

Congratulations, NAY! You’ve been accepted for the role of LAVINIA. Admin Minnie: I’ve always thought Lillian was one of the trickier characters to fully grasp, because it’d be so easy to turn her into an outline of a person and not the whole vivid picture. But you, Nay, have won me over completely. You have such a knack for characterization and nailed Lillian’s voice, that balance she strikes between light and power. The interview portion was my absolute favorite part — I loved the way you brought her to life and the way you showed us the inner workings of her mind, heart and soul. I’m so, so glad to put Lillian into your talented hands! Please read over the checklist and send in your blog within 24 hours.

WELCOME TO THE MOB.

OUT OF CHARACTER

Alias | nay

Age | twenty-two

Preferred Pronouns | she / her

Activity Level | i find it cruelly ironic that i asked for time away from the roleplay community to try to make sense of my chaotic life, and a couple of weeks later, the world imploded and now we’re all quarantined. somehow, i’ve got my shit together-ish. and i really sorely need the light that is the DV fam in these trying times, however, so. 8/10, i’d say?

Timezone | gmt+5

How did you find the rp? | i sold my soul to it some time ago~

Current/Past RP Accounts | never RP’ed a day in my life, what’re you talking about?

IN CHARACTER

Character | LAVINIA / lillian wen

What drew you to this character? | titus adronicus isn’t exactly the darkest of shakespeare’s works, but the storyline of lavinia in particular happens to be one that has always been brutally impactful to me. there is this absolutely fascinating dichotomy lavinia depicts through her journey in the play, one between honor & freedom, that keeps me up at night sometimes. and when it comes to lillian, that struggle feels embedded in her story just the same. regardless, i don’t know that it’s possible to not be drawn to lillian wen.

there’s a multitude of aspects that keeps me inescapably besotted with her — the foundation upon which she blossomed from child, to girl, to the woman she is; an aura of a true, chatoyant aesthete; a plot arc of sexual assault survival, used as a steppingstone towards advocacy… but most of all, i think what won out was the soul she’s got, and all the light it bleeds. there is a line in her biography that reads: “belief was a powerful thing in the wen household.” i’ve thought about that line for daaaays, honestly. it was that line that really got me with her, because i could already see it in my head: she was raised by two women—artistic, emotional, intellectual, opinionated women—and they taught her belief as a religion. she was raised to know it was the most useful weapon she could ever have in an admittedly dastardly world; faith, in herself & in the power of light, and hope, and living in one’s truth. to be raised that way, and make what she has of herself, to wind up in a loveless, strategic marriage and part of a mob? she is such an intriguing character, with such insurmountable potential for growth.

there is something about lillian’s devout optimism, which doesn’t deserve to be mistaken for naiveté, & a faith in humanity that bolsters me, reminding me a fair amount of the sweetness i’ve always adored in juliana, and how there is more than one way to be a fighter, which is exactly what lillian is. but i also think that aspect in a discordant war-time setting would be so god damn cool to play with, because it prompts questions: how far does being good get you? is anything really in black & white? what does a limit feel like? what could you break open to let the light in? i’d love a chance to find answers through an unravelling of her story.

What is a future plot idea you have in mind for the character? |

NOTE: here’s the ever-present disclaimer that these are all merely ideas, subject to discussion & changes, able to be altered in collaboration with other characters.

{ 1 } GILDED CAGE — a corrupt, mob-allegiant District Attorney for a fiancé; there is no question that it is to a man of power her mothers have intertwined her future, seeing protection for the daughter who is their whole world in the bloodbath tainting the city that is their home. to cassian bhatt, lillian is a nothing more than an accessory. of course, she had never been raised to be a girl who emptily dreamt of an ideal love, not when there was the whole universe to fall in love with, and no end to the every day magic the people it brimmed with had to offer. but a loveless marriage? lillian has never been one to tell lies, only ever to hone an innate ability to make the truth as palatable as possible, and her prospective bond feels like one. would she still go through with it? would she ever be able to say no to two women who never let her want for anything a day in her life?

⋯ cassian is the most obvious plot for her story, so i wanted to tackle him, first & foremost. i’m almost sure that lillian won’t seal the deal; she’s come too far in life to only come so far, and wind up with a man she feels nothing at all for. however, i was reading through cassian’s biography, too, and i would be lying if i said i couldn’t see potential for lillian to both either love, or something to cause friction in their dynamic, even if it isn’t a necessarily pleasant sort. currently, i know that lillian refuses to do more than hollowly tolerate him, purely because he has been forced upon her, and her general distrust of men in the wake of her assault makes her anything but open to him. can we really deny that he’s a smart, capable, clever man, though? there could be spark. it could turn to a catalyst for growth in multiple ways, positive & negative, and i am dying to explore the many different ways their story could unfold.

{ 2 } WHAT IS LOVE? — what if she does marry cassian bhatt? it is a possibility, after all. with the capulets, she has found a voice. she has a platform, she has causes she believes in & actively fights for, and a marriage wouldn’t bar lillian from any of that, nor would it keep her from being the precocious, curious creature that she is. and what if, after that’s done, she falls in love with someone? with her mothers never having been married, lillian never considered romantic love & legally-binding commitment to go hand-in-hand, but that does not mean it couldn’t. it doesn’t mean she couldn’t fall in love with a person she might, one day, want to be with. would she cross that line, if it came down to it? would cassian let her? would the capulets object to it, considering it is her relationship with him that has drug lillian into their fold?

⋯ this is more a subplot to the last than it is a standalone arc, but roll with it. lillian is, in a way that is one of my absolute favourite things about her, a delicious enigma of a woman. i don’t believe there is anything she couldn’t turn and look at from another side. and at the same time? i feel that she is a person who takes notions of integrity, and promises, very seriously. she is a woman of her word, at the end of the day. what would it take to blur her lines? you don’t choose who you fall in love with. you don’t choose when it happens, or how it happens. what you control is your actions, and lillian has both always believed that, and demonstrated it. so, what would she choose, in such a circumstance?

{ 3 } BEST LAID PLANS — she met cosimo capulet whilst on cassian’s arm, and it was over a glass of rosé, the man talked to her about her charity-work. he told her of the origins of the capulets’ particular brand of business: the robin hood reminiscent legacy initiated by one lucius capulet, of the revolution they had begun with, giving back to the impoverished lillian fought for as well. her mothers never would have understood how the good girl they had raised could level with a mob-boss, but lillian has, and it is how she has ended up a consultant to the capulets. but how far is she willing to integrate herself with their cause? how much of the necessary violence of a war can she truly stomach?

⋯ i told you: a dichotomy between honor & freedom. it feels like the crux of lillian’s story to me. i’ve got very strong headcanons in mind for the relationship she’s got with the capulets, purely because i would like for her relationship with them to stand on its own, as opposed to being more so reliant on the relationship her fiancé has with them. the fact that the capulets have given her a voice means a great deal to lillian, definitely more than she ever could have expected it to, and i would like to see that graciousness she’s developed drive her to make choices she might question under the lens of her own honor-code afterwards. you know me, i’m a sucker for internal conflict to drive character development, and i need it with lillian, for sure.

Are you comfortable with killing off your character? | honestly? i don’t think i could stomach lillian dying.

IN-DEPTH

♦ IN-CHARACTER INTERVIEW:

NOTE: out of caution, i’d like to precede this portion with trigger warnings for sexual assault mention and ptsd

“benvenuti!”

she is already greeting you before she’s quite done opening the door. welcome, is what must remind you that you are, in fact, a stranger in her house. the warmth the curve of her mouth radiates is one that seeps in through your pores; it is not easy to remember that this is the first time you’ve met signora lillian wen. you’ve heard it before: like the sun, she is hard to look at, yet her warmth is undeniable.

“come in,” she invites, and the silken slip-dress she’s donned seems to ripple like peach-hued water when she sweeps her arm, waiting for you to step over the threshold and stand beside her, so she might match you, footstep-for-footstep.

— What is your favorite place in Verona?

“that’s such a deliciously difficult question,” lillian enthuses, beaming, despite her brows that furrow in thought over it. favourite, after all, is no small word; she must ponder it, then, for she does so like to mean the things she says. “ – you know, i don’t know that i’ve only the one,” is what she settles on, pouring out the lemonde she’s fixed up a pitcher of herself just now. the smell of the mint leaves she’s peppered it with infuses itself in the house, and she can’t help but breathe it in, deeply, satisfied.

“so much of this city is so very dear to me. i cannot give you a favourite between them all, not when they’ve their own charms, and my own memories attached to them,” she slides over a glass to you, ice cubes merrily tinkling within, “but i will tell you that the oldest shall always be the home i grew up in. it was more snug than this, perhaps, yes, but my mothers made sure it brimmed with all that feeds the human soul. there isn’t a memory under that roof that does not make my heart ache with nostalgia, which, really, is the heart’s way of telling you it was worth it. don’t you agree?”

lillian clicks her tongue against the roof of her mouth, a sound of regret that does not match the soft radiance of her mouth.

“humble beginnings, hmm?”

— What does your typical day look like?

the living-room is far from lacking pieces of furniture, all of them as comfortable to sit in as they are to look at. you know this, because she has suggested you try each out to settle on a preference, and you’ve done it. it is only once your stomach hurts from laughter incited from such childish wonderfulness that you realise: she has broken the ice.

lillian herself sprawls out on a chaise lounge by the window, tipped on her side with her legs curled underneath herself. she looks like a mermaid. her words sound lyrical when her laughter laces them: “ah, always the same, and also never as well.”

the sip of lemonade is delicate, brief, though she tips the glass for a second, fuller mouthful when you’re sure she can’t possibly have swallowed the first that quickly. never mind –

“i like to start my day rising with the sun,” she tells you. “my absolute favourite thing about living by myself is the luxury of not having to speak at all until i wish to do so – which, of course, doesn’t take too long at all, for i might be my own fondest companion. i like to prepare my own breakfast, after; eat outside, if i want, though i rather rebelliously might crawl back into bed with a tray when i feel particularly blue. i never stay under the covers for too long, however. i simply can’t. there’s too much to do. so, i dress myself up in whatever ensemble feels the most myself that day, and set off to find another way to save the world.”

her nose crinkles when she grins. you cannot help grinning back, can you?

— What has been your biggest mistake thus far?

unbidden, lillian’s mind whirls so quickly, her thoughts slip from her fingers like water. and she is back there, in that room, with that man. that man who smiled when she walked into the room. who smiled when he motioned her to costumery that felt divine to touch, silken & decadent. who smiled when he called her a vision. who smiled when he held her down, while she begged, when he left her on the ground.

believing that smile, she thinks.

“ ––– signora?” you ask, tone tender, for she looks so fragile when she is still.

as if a button has been pushed, lillian seems to snap out of it – appears to back to life. there is an apology in her smile, and it feels like a shadow. the shadow darkens her words: “to call one the biggest seems like tempting fate, doesn’t it?” she wonders aloud. “such as when one says things can’t possibly get any worse, and right then, the universe shows you how wrong you were about that?”

— What has been the most difficult task asked of you?

cassian bhatt. the syllables of his name sit at the tip of her tongue, burning, and lillian cannot say them. she cannot betray her mothers so. she knows, already, the looks on their faces would ache more—inevitably, unbearably more—than that of letting her jaw clench, and teeth grind, to keep that truth inside, until she swallows it down.

there can be more than one truth, lillian knows. she reminds herself: once, twice, three times. and then, over the rim of her glass, she smiles a smile she can mean. “that isn’t a mindset i agree with,” she states, “if you believe it is the most difficult, it might feel near impossible, might it not? that just won’t do. forget most difficult–” she sweeps it away with a wave of her hand, like a makeshift broom-limb, “–let’s only say we’ve all got our challenges, and we aren’t the most enthusiastic to rise to all of them.”

she breathes a laugh, then. “my maman likes to remind me; mind over matter, petit fleur. i can hear it in my head already!”

— What are your thoughts on the war between the Capulets and the Montagues?

lillian’s brows crawl up her forehead. she looks so perplexed, you can’t help but wonder if you accidentally said a word wrong. her home is easy to relax inside, involuntarily, and the possibility would not be unfounded. she explains it herself, all the same, when she asks: “is it a war?”

it is difficult to discern whether the question is rhetorical or not. her head cants, and she answers it herself, “h.g. wells once wrote: if we don’t end war, war will end us.” her sip is pensive, now. “i believe that, truly. there are no winners; only those who are left in the wake of one. and so, i can only hope that is not what this is.”

her eyes are kind. “don’t you?”

♦ EXTRAS:

✴ pinterest → here;

✴ tag → here.

#accepted #accepted: lavinia

7 notes · View notes

tanstaaflaos · 4 years ago

Text

A rant from Trump supporters

The following is a cut and paste from someone I know on Facebook. In short, they don’t particularly like Trump but like liberals and progressive ideas even less. They justify their vote for Trump as giving a finger to liberals and the media, rather than supporting Trump. In short, a very selfish and short-sighted mentality that is unfortunately prevalent in today’s world. These folks will continue to vote against their own interests if it means they can “win” while sticking it to the liberals. Here’s the rant:

🛑 STOP! 🛑 EVERYONE SHOULD READ THIS ⬇️ If you are a liberal who can’t stand Trump, and cannot possibly fathom why anyone would ever vote for him, let me fill you in. It’s not that we love Donald Trump so much. It’s that we can’t stand you. And we will do whatever it takes — even if that means electing a rude, obnoxious, unpredictable, narcissist (your words not ours) to the office of President of the United States — because the thing we find more dangerous to this nation than Donald Trump is YOU. How is that possible you might ask? Well, you have done everything in your power to destroy our country. From tearing down the police, to tearing down our history, to tearing down our borders. From systematically destroying our schools and brainwashing our kids into believing socialism is the answer to anything (despite being an unmitigated failure everywhere), while demonizing religion and faith, and glorifying abortion, violence, and thug culture. From calling us racists every time we expect everyone of any skin color to follow our laws equally, to telling us that our “tolerance” of lifestyles we don’t agree with isn’t nearly enough — no we must “celebrate” any lifestyle choice or gender option (forget science) you throw our direction or you think it’s fine to calls us homophobic or some other degrading slur you decide is okay to call us — ironically all while lecturing us on hate speech. While you gaslight us about 52 genders, polyamory, grown men in dresses sharing public locker rooms with little girls, and normalize the sexualization of young children, you simultaneously ridicule us for having the audacity to wish someone a “Merry Christmas” or hang a flag on the 4th of July, stand for the national anthem, or (horror of horrors) don a MAGA hat in public. So much for your “tolerance.” (See why we think you are just hypocrites??) We’re also not interested in the fact that you think you can unilaterally decide that 250 years of the right-to-bear-arms against a tyrannical or ineffective government should be abolished because you can’t get the violence in the cities you manage under control. That free-speech should be tossed out the window, and that those who disagree with your opinions are fair game for public harassment or doxing. That spoiled children with nose-rings and tats who still live off their parent’s dime should be allowed to destroy cities and peoples livelihoods without repercussions. That chaos, and lawlessness, and disrespect for authority should be the norm. This is your agenda. And you wonder why we find you more dangerous than Donald Trump? Your narrative is a constant drone of oppressor/oppressed race-baiting intended to divide the country in as many ways as you possibly can. You love to sell “victim-hood” to people of color every chance you get because it’s such an easy sell, compared to actually teaching people to stand on their own two feet and take personal responsibility for their own lives and their own communities and their own futures. But you won’t do that, you will never do that, because then you will lose control over people of color. They might actually start thinking for themselves, God forbid! This is why we will vote for Donald Trump. Not because he is the most charming character on the block. Not because he is the most polite politician to have ever graced the oval office. Not because he is the most palatable choice, or because we love his moral character or because the man never lies, but because we are sick to death of you and all of the destructive crap you are doing to this once beautiful and relatively safe country. Your ineffective and completely dysfunctional liberal “leadership”(?) has literally destroyed our most beautiful cities, our public education system, and done it’s damndest to rip faith out of people’s lives. However bad Donald Trump may be, and he is far from perfect, every day we look at you and feel that no matter what Donald Trump says or does there is no possible way he could be any worse for our country than you people are. We are sick to death of your stupid, destructive, ignorant, and intolerant behavior and beliefs — parading as “wokeness.” We are beyond sick of your hypocrisy and B.S. We are fed up with your disrespectful divisiveness and constant unrelenting harping and whining and complaining (while you live in the most privileged nation in the world), while making literally zero contributions of anything positive to our society. Your entire focus is on ripping things down, never ever building anything up. Think about that as there is something fundamentally very wrong in the psychology of people who choose destruction as their primary modus operandi. When Donald J Trump is reelected, don’t blame us, look in the mirror and blame yourselves. Because you are the ones that are responsible for the rise of Donald Trump. You are the ones who have created this "monster" that you so despise, by your very actions. By your refusal to respect your fellow Americans, and the things that are important to us. You have made fun of the “fly-over states,” the people who “cling to their guns and religion,” the middle class factory workers and coal miners and underprivileged rural populations that you dismissively call “yahoos” and “deplorables.” You have mocked our faith and our religion. You have mocked our values and our patriotism. You have trampled our flag and insulted our veterans and treated our first responders with contempt and hatred. You have made environmentalism your religion, while trashing every city you have taken responsibility for. You scream from the rooftops about “global warming” and a “green new deal” while allowing tens of thousands of homeless people to cover your streets in literal sh!t and garbage and needles and plastic waste without doing a single thing to help them or solve the environmental crisis your failed social policies are creating. But we’re supposed to put YOU in charge of the environment while gutting our entire economy to institute this plan when you can’t even clean up a single city?? You complain — endlessly — yet have failed to solve a single social problem anywhere. In fact, all you have done is create more of them. We’ve had enough. We are tired of quietly sitting by and being the “silent” majority. So don’t be surprised when the day comes when we finally respond. And trust me it’s coming, sooner than you might think. And also trust me when I say it won’t be pretty. Get ready. When Donald Trump is reelected it will be because you and your “comrades” have chosen to trash the police, harass law-abiding citizens, and go on rampages destroying public property that we have all paid for and you have zero respect for. When Donald Trump is reelected it will be because we are sick of your complete and utter nonsense and destruction. How does it feel to know that half of this country finds you FAR more despicable than Donald J. Trump, the man you consider to be the anti-Christ? Let that sink in. We consider you to be more despicable, more dangerous, more stupid, and more narcissistic than Donald Trump. Maybe allow yourself a few seconds of self-reflection to let that sink in. This election isn’t about Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden. This is about Donald Trump vs YOU. So if on the morning of November 4 (or more likely January 19, by the time the Supreme Court will weigh in on the mail-in ballot fiasco that we are headed towards), and Donald J. Trump is reelected? The only people you have to blame is the left-wing media drones and yourselves. You did this. Yep you. I copied and shared this and if you give a shit about your country then you should too.

1 note · View note

punkscowardschampions · 4 years ago

Text

Saint & Leilani

Saint: So, how many people with my surname have found their way into your inbox today? Leilani: few Saint: I hope those few have behaved and not been too taxing on your typing fingers or your patience Leilani: you're making it sound more fun & scandalous than it came close to Saint: That would be an odd but not unentirely precedented way to welcome you for us Saint: I'm just more than aware how...much, shall we be polite and say, some of them can be, even at the best of times Leilani: 😅 Leilani: are you forgetting which one of you I live with? Saint: 😅 Saint: I am in no way doubting your ability to cope with it, or previous experience doing so, just apologizing for the times you don't feel like being so gracious about their...persistence Leilani: thanks, I think? Leilani: the sentence was a mouthful to digest but I detected some sweetness in it Saint: I'm happy to apologize for my taste as well Saint: and will try to be more palatable Leilani: coming thick & fast but still smooth with it, that's impressive Saint: I'll accept that I'm potentially being much of a muchness with some of the more well-meaning but over-the-top members of my family, if that's what you're saying Saint: but admittedly, I'll struggle to hear I'm on par with certain ones who best remain nameless until I get more of a gage for your tolerance of their particular brand of care 😅 Leilani: I'm not saying much, personally, until I work out how much of this welcome wagon is genuinely what you'd like to say vs what you feel like you must Leilani: to make up for the rest or walk on eggshells in case I crack up Saint: Well, I haven't been instructed to talk to you, if that's what you mean Saint: and without a doubt, I have no idea how I would ideally like to broach this subject, because I have literally no firsthand experience Saint: I imagine that must be frustrating, is it? Leilani: it can be coming from you but not coming from you, if you know what I mean Leilani: deep in there, maybe you've got a whole other convo you'd love to be having Saint: I'm receptive to any conversation you'd like to have Saint: well, almost any, I'm sure Leilani: you & everybody else Leilani: the talk about me is non-stop Saint: We wouldn't have to talk about you Saint: I don't have any particular bias towards the subject of you, though it would be bad manners to ask you no questions about yourself, I can refrain if you have, like I said and assumed, had enough for a while Leilani: it's good manners if I'm in no mood to answer questions about me Leilani: but it'd be my bad to tell you to shush & end this convo just like that Saint: As you've saved me from the mortal sin of impoliteness with your rhetoric there, I'll save you from having to do so and can leave it there Leilani: take a turn in the hot seat, see how you feel about it Leilani: prep if I haven't saved you from 👿🔥 Saint: I'm not inclined to believe the creator would be that unforgiving, but that's what Catholicism will do for your morals, I suppose Saint: Fire away, as it were 🔥 Leilani: you're a catholic? Saint: Culturally, definitely Saint: I'm not sure my commitment to the church is such I can claim myself as fully saved, yet Leilani: mine goes as far as loving the 1st Eid for its treats & ignoring the sacrifices of the 2nd, can't call it commitment Saint: I don't think you're alone in that philosophy and approach Saint: but I don't necessarily think that's terrible at all, as long as you're finding some joy and fulfilment from religion- that is certainly a huge tenant of all the ones I've heard of, so it can only be a positive Leilani: how my friends celebrate 🎄🎁🎅 shows me I'm not Leilani: party > church Saint: Precisely, commercialism argument aside Saint: any promotion of togetherness, community and goodwill, what could be the issue? Leilani: the issue is in the confusion Leilani: people thinking it's something its not Saint: There's plenty issue around 🎄🎁🎅 but no more than most anything in our society today Leilani: if you're trying to take issue with something on any level, you'll find a way Saint: Don't you think problems should be solved? Leilani: if it can Leilani: big if Saint: Of course Saint: I think the if only makes the pursuit of more vital, I don't find it to be invalidating Leilani: sure but some questions aren't if or but ones Saint: Such as? Leilani: if I said, you're the fittest member of this family, let's go out, your answer would be no, becos you are a member of this family, it doesn't matter if you add I would if I wasn't Leilani: the answer's still no Saint: No, my answer would be that there's truly only one absolute in this life Saint: that I know of Saint: there are laws, ethics, morality and codes of conduct in all societies, sure Saint: but nothing is certain Leilani: birth & death are certain Leilani: one brought you here, the other me Saint: I was thinking about death Saint: birth is luck, usually, it's a little different Leilani: 🤔 Leilani: accepted Saint: We can differ on perspectives there, it's fine 😃 Saint: in fact, the father would probably want to put forth an argument for the opposite, now I think about it Saint: worse Catholic than I thought Leilani: I was thinking that 🤰 = birth, the certainty part being you don't get to stay in but you know Saint: I see what you mean Saint: anyone that is here is a certainty Saint: think we're going into Schroedinger territory there, I respect it Leilani: 🙀📦 Saint: 👍 Saint: who am I to say that whatever people are before and after they're people here can't debate philosophy Leilani: these are bigger questions than I expected Saint: And I wasn't meant to even ask how you were Saint: 🤐 Saint: go on Leilani: I've got a headache now 😅 Saint: Oh dear Saint: That's the first time that's happened, I would assure you but that sounds like a losing battle and another knock for my ego Leilani: your ego wants to take it as brush off, retro as hell Leilani: but I don't get questions that deep posed around me is all Saint: Retro...God, just don't take my 'deep' questions as a sign of pretension or I'm getting more tragic by the second! Leilani: it's okay I'm not a downtrodden wifey from back in the day, we're in an era where I can just tell you no Saint: and we're all the better for it Saint: though I don't think I've asked you any question where you'd be directly answerable to me 🤔 Saint: giving me a little too much credit for the universe and it's many questions there Leilani: I don't want your ego to end this convo black & blue Saint: That's very kind of you Saint: but my ability to take criticism could be compared to your ability to cope with Grace, just so we're clear Leilani: Grace isn't hard to cope with Leilani: I like her Saint: I'm glad to hear that, it would be really hard if you didn't Saint: harder, than it is, of course Saint: don't think I'm bashing her really, as I said, they all mean well, I can just imagine that relentless good intentions and meaningful conversations to be had would get very exhausting very fast Leilani: everything's happened fast Leilani: they're all playing catch up to the unexpected Saint: But you're the important one here Saint: most, although I was adding that to try and take the pressure off but clearly that's easier said than done Leilani: this is where I add something about pressure creating 💎 Saint: I don't loathe the sentiment but does it make you feel any better? Leilani: no Saint: then I wouldn't worry Saint: and I doubt there's anything hugely meaningful I can do to make you feel better in an impactful, big way Saint: but if you think of anything on a smaller scale that you would like Saint: don't hesistate to ask Leilani: will you introduce me to everyone in a retro way? Leilani: 🗨 & 🤝 Saint: That I can do Saint: The upsides to this family being as large as it is is that you're never short of functions to hijack for whatever purpose you may need Saint: and you won't have to worry about being centre of attention unless it's your birth, wedding or death Saint: even then, people have their own agendas Leilani: no pressure or as close as Leilani: when's the next? Saint: Exactly Saint: [literally whatever and whenever we want, offer a selection to show your point lol] Leilani: [picks the one where she can serve the best lewk because gotta make an impression regardless especially when you're nervous] Leilani: it's a date Saint: That it is Saint: if you'd rather show up with another kid, I'm happy to come pick you up from Grace's Saint: up to you, of course Leilani: pick me up 🚗 Leilani: I have no idea how Grace is allowed on the road Saint: 😅 Saint: I suppose they reckon the amount of potholes, we're all playing a dangerous game at the mercy of the council Leilani: 🙏 by god's grace like Saint: Seems that's all that's left in the budget 🙄 Leilani: 😅😅 Saint: I think you're in my sister's year Saint: Venus, that is Leilani: what should I think about it? Saint: You know you hypothesized that I was the fittest member of this family? Leilani: it's too late to drop the bomb that I should've asked her to pick me up Saint: She'll need a lift as much as you Saint: but meaning, she'd have taken DEEP offence to that assertion Saint: the headache would be realer Leilani: oops Leilani: & yikes Saint: again, not here on a smear campaign Saint: but I'd be doing you a disservice if I pretended she's universally easy to get on with Saint: perhaps you'll take to each other though Leilani: I'm not easy to get on with atm Leilani: but I do get a free pass Saint: You're doing fine Saint: unless this is your attempt at belligerence, in which case, sorry 😬 Leilani: attempting nothing but no pressure face to face intros Leilani: how could you forget already? Saint: 🤦 forgive me? Leilani: 💅 Leilani: hold on, I'll ask myself what my god would do Leilani: ... Leilani: yeah sure Saint: 😅 Saint: I was hoping distraction only fell under bad manners, not sin Leilani: it depends how you're distracting me Saint: What I offered would depend on how 😇/😈 you preferred your distractions Leilani: if I don't have both on offer how can I possibly choose? Saint: That's completely fair, actually Leilani: I know Leilani: so don't be unfair Saint: Wouldn't dream of it Leilani: is there anyone else you'd like to warn me about, while you're being fair? Leilani: or anyone I should run into the arms of like 🤗🤗? Saint: Warn would be extreme Saint: I don't think anyone is that bad Saint: I would have to know you better personally to say who I think you'd really click with, but there's plenty of us, I'm sure you will with someone Leilani: indulge me in the drama of it, St Leilani: 🤦😅 Saint: Oh, right Saint: you want the gossip of it all so you also have prior information on them coming into the conversations Saint: let me think then Leilani: I miss when my friends wanted to talk about that stuff Leilani: instead of me & my feelings Saint: That makes sense Saint: maybe you and Vee will get on then Saint: there's just a lot of drama to get into Saint: your head and inbox would be rocked Leilani: I've got time Leilani: & my head's already a mess Saint: Okay then Saint: bear with me if my typing speed gets retro Leilani: 😄 Saint: [just methodically go through all that is messed up with the fam nbd] Leilani: holy hell Leilani: I know I asked for that but did I though? Leilani: where have I come to live Leilani: 👋🚕 Saint: Yes Saint: sorry Leilani: hold on I need to just ✈️ Leilani: I thought my mum's relationship history was crazy Saint: It is what it is Saint: we all still manage fine Leilani: by the grace of god again, or whatever other means necessary Saint: Maybe Saint: I don't think it's all that dire now Leilani: maybe when I've come though all the stages of grief I'll be able to let you know what I think Saint: Look forward to it Leilani: I did make it sound really hot Saint: 😏 Saint: we're not all messed up, thank you Leilani: I'm used to being that half of the convo Leilani: you do you Saint: How are you messed up then? Leilani: other than having no parents now? Saint: Yeah Leilani: I'm not doing this right Leilani: any of it Saint: What aren't you doing right? Leilani: I miss her but like she's gone on holiday or a work course Leilani: not like she's never coming back Saint: Well, what's the first stage of grieving Saint: you feel like you aren't missing her hard enough, but if you were out of denial already, you'd actually be taking it way too fast Saint: be rude, right? Saint: Think of it like that Leilani: my rudeness is worse, wanting to hang out with my friends how I did before Leilani: care about 👗👠💄 Saint: Your entire world has been turned upside down Saint: of course you're craving normality Saint: I'm not just saying all this to appease you Saint: you're a kid that just lost her mum Saint: I literally do not believe there's any way you could get through this that would be wrong, or would reflect poorly on you Leilani: she needs to walk back in & badmouth all her worst clients Leilani: she can't be lost Saint: I'm so sorry Saint: that it's so unfair Leilani: unfair was when my dad stopped sending money & letters after going back home for what he said would be a few months Leilani: this is Leilani: I don't even know Saint: How old were you? Leilani: does it make a difference? Saint: Did it? Leilani: I'd just started school, so financially, yeah Saint: Do you know what he's doing now, like, where he is? Leilani: no Leilani: my mum said he had another family there Leilani: someone he was actually married to Saint: Right Saint: that was a cowardly thing for him to do Saint: the minimum would've been financial support Leilani: sadly I can't get it backdated Leilani: imagine Leilani: 👗👠💄 Saint: I'd have to look into it Saint: but probably not Saint: very hard to enforce at any rate Leilani: & taking food out of his other children's mouths, assuming he has some others Saint: Yeah Saint: but you can't be held responsible for his life choices Leilani: neither can they then Saint: I meant it'd be his problem to worry about and solve Saint: but I can understand not wanting to literally steal candy from a baby, as it were Leilani: I haven't been his problem for years, I'm Grace's now Leilani: this family's with all their existing crazy Saint: Okay, getting in contact with your dad for reparations isn't the first step Leilani: it's a mis-step Leilani: he fell off the earth, I'm not following him Saint: Okay Saint: so, what would you be doing with your friends today, if things were normal? Leilani: 🛍 Saint: So, I'll give you both options Saint: I can drive you to your friends, or whatever 🛍 you go to with them Saint: or you can come 🛍 with me Leilani: you can take me Leilani: they don't know how to act now that I'm 💣💥 Saint: they probably think they're giving you time Saint: but really, they're asking for it Saint: at least, that's how I see it Saint: maybe next weekend, or the next Saint: but we can go for now Leilani: it's okay, I wouldn't deal any better if the roles were reversed Leilani: it's not their bad that there's nothing to say or do Saint: You're very fair Saint: not to detract from how much of a 💣💥 you feel Leilani: you're flattering me like I'm not a 💣💥 Leilani: I don't know what that says about you Saint: It's honesty, not flattery Saint: The situation is a 💣💥 Saint: I've seen people handle significantly worse, that's all Leilani: it feels nice, honesty doesn't usually Saint: that's a resounding endorsement Saint: probably a bit too smug to put on a poster or LinkedIn but still, I appreciate it Leilani: you know what I mean, honesty is usually like that 💅 isn't the one or you need braces, child Saint: I think people purposefully conflate being honest with being rude Saint: but you can weaponize anything if you're that sort of person Leilani: yeah ☕ Saint: There's plenty of that sort at church Leilani: & the salon Saint: I've spent less time there myself but I imagine they're much of a muchness Saint: 👵 they all love me, obviously but father is a perfect case study for diplomacy Leilani: it's a type of church for some people Leilani: they take it as serious as a religion Saint: Hair and beauty has always been important Leilani: they just like being able to see results, there's no guarantee when you pray Saint: I'd argue there's no guarantee you get the result you wanted Saint: perhaps even less than 🙏 Saint: maybe you get what you need, not what you want Leilani: 😅😅 Leilani: maybe not for 👵 if they're trying to look 👩 Saint: it highlights the limitations of communication Saint: you think you've asked concisely for one thing, and you end up with something that's nothing like that at all Leilani: I swear I did see my mum work some genuine miracles, that said Saint: It is without a doubt impressive what can be achieved Leilani: what do you want to be? Saint: I want to work for the government Leilani: we haven't been talking that long but that has come through Saint: Is there any particular way you'd like me to take that honesty? Leilani: as a compliment? Leilani: I think Saint: 😅 I think I can manage that then Leilani: I'll tell you what I used to want to be when I was a child, that's weirder Saint: Not admitting it's weird, but go on Saint: I'm intrigued Leilani: clues: Leilani: 🦷💉🥛😁 Leilani: 🚫🍬🍭🍫 Saint: Okay, question, just the one Saint: did you want to be rich or did you just really care about oral hygiene? Leilani: I wanted to make people pretty like my mum, I suppose was the thought process Leilani: & 😁 = happy Saint: So it's even more adorable than I first thought Saint: you don't want to be a dentist anymore? Leilani: the reality is way more gory than I knew then Saint: That's enough to give me a headache Leilani: I need a job with no blood or pus Leilani: even typing that made me feel weird Saint: 😖 Saint: Subject change Saint: are you going to buy anything today? Leilani: do I need to dress to impress your family or just myself? Saint: do you want me to invite my family out shopping with us? Leilani: you do have a lot of sisters Leilani: but you know I meant do I need a new outfit for this meet & greet you're taking me to of the entire extended clan Saint: Oh, gotcha Saint: dress for yourself, of course Saint: unless dressing to impress makes you feel more at ease, in which case, go for that and you won't be alone Leilani: it can't hurt Saint: No, there we go then 😊 Saint: though you can still do the aimless browsing I know 🛍 trips are really about, of course Leilani: are you looking to dress up too? Saint: I like to look presentable Leilani: oh good becos if it was just me, Grace & your sister that'd be a statement Saint: 😅 Saint: don't worry, it won't be Leilani: I'll do my happy dentist 😁 then Leilani: as I'm thrilled Saint: I'm just as 😁 to hear that Leilani: I'll try not to turn it into a frown with excessive browsing Leilani: no promises Saint: I've got a lot of sisters, as you said Saint: I'm sure I'll cope Leilani: which one's your favourite? Saint: which sister? 😂 Saint: I'm not sure there's a diplomatic way to answer that Leilani: answer it honestly, I can promise not to slide in to share the news Saint: Well, Jay is older and we didn't meet her until she was a kid so that combined with her personality makes her the most chilled out now Saint: Vee is younger but still close enough that we were kids together, so that makes her prime annoying younger sister category Saint: then the twins are that much younger that they get to be removed from that, and I have more of that protective older brother in me Leilani: Okay so Jay's your fave Leilani: what's your brother like? Saint: No, I didn't say that Saint: but she wasn't here in the beginning and she's grown up and gone now, it's easy to have less negatives to say about her Leilani: how old were you when you met? Saint: I was about 3 when we found out about her Saint: but the process took a while because she had a dad that raised her and still wanted to even though she wasn't his like he thought Saint: I think I was about 8 when she moved in and spent most of her time with us Leilani: that must have been such a weird time Saint: it was Saint: Vee was born around the time we found out about her so Saint: that was a trial too Leilani: your parents have had a LOT going on Saint: Yes, it seems to be their forte Leilani: your brother then Saint: he's younger too, so again, protective Saint: probably because we're outnumbered too Leilani: an if question Leilani: if you had to give me one of them, as an only child, which one would you give me? Saint: 😂 an odd request but okay, let me 🤔 Saint: Probably Sekh Saint: from the short conversation we've had, you have things in common, that would work well 🛍👠💄👗 Leilani: you're gonna separate the twins? very disney channel Saint: It was either lump them in together there and offend them, or separate and acknowledge that they're separate people Saint: they'll understand 😅 Leilani: 😅 Leilani: safer if I ask Grace for a pet instead Saint: Sure that she'd be down for that Saint: 🐰🐹🐱🐶🐠? Leilani: 🤔 Saint: That is a big decision Saint: best to take your time, decide how much effort you wanna put in to day to day care Leilani: 🐱 or 🏠🐰 Saint: Cute Saint: got any names or do you need to see it before assigning one Leilani: it feels fairer to meet them 1st Saint: 👍 Saint: we can go to the nearest pet shop/shelter if you'd like Leilani: adopt don't shop, St Leilani: or else 👿🔥 Saint: Indeed 😏 Saint: but you know most shops rescue their animals now anyway Saint: except fish...but I don't know how we're morally meant to feel about breeding fish? Leilani: we won't buy any, be on the safe & 😇 side Saint: It's your day Saint: I wouldn't try to bring you down to 👿🔥 levels Leilani: thanks, I have only just moved in Saint: Definitely not my intention with this conversation, or any going forward Leilani: that comes through too Saint: Is that a compliment? Leilani: I don't know if you're 😁 or not to be a good & polite boy Saint: Why would I want to be anything less 😇? Leilani: becos of your name maybe Saint: Subverting expectations Saint: I'd argue people expect the opposite from me though, regardless of my first name Leilani: in your case pressure makes 😇 Saint: 🤞 I hope so Leilani: I'll subvert expectations for us both Saint: Is that your new plan? Leilani: I don't really have one Leilani: other than the 🛍 Saint: Well, you have time Leilani: yeah, it's the keyword that's getting thrown around most atm Saint: It's not provably true but it's most likely the case Leilani: & it'll fill an awkward silence Saint: I can clearly talk enough for the both of us Saint: it doesn't need to be awkward Leilani: this isn't, but remember how we ref-ed that you weren't the only McKenna in my 💬📱 Saint: Right Saint: is there anything you'd like me to do, beyond the formal introductions Saint: politely suggest some people give it some time, perhaps? Leilani: use the time thing against them, I like it 😅 Saint: Only fair 🙂 Saint: consider it done Leilani: we're back into retro hubby & wifey territory Saint: You think? Leilani: it's very defence squad but I'm not 😤 Saint: I'm not helping you because you're a girl and I'm a boy Saint: just because I have the ability to Leilani: I know, you're coming across capable Saint: I'd like to think so Saint: but bragging about it would not be 😇 nor helpful Leilani: I've got your back in hyping you up a 😇 amount Saint: That's sweet Saint: I promise my ego is not that fragile that I need you to but it's still nice Leilani: I'd like to think I am Leilani: that it's not all doom & gloom in me, but maybe time will have to tell, annoyingly Saint: It shows Saint: honestly Saint: you aren't what's happened to you, even if that is all you can think about right now, or feel it's all you're meant to, or are allowed to, whatever Leilani: whether or not I'm her death, I was her life Leilani: there's credit for how she raised me, I mean Saint: Definitely Saint: I don't know you yet, but I would like to get to know you, from what I've seen Saint: I won't throw out proud for her but, you know Saint: I would be in her position Leilani: I don't know what to say Leilani: that feels above nice to hear Saint: I'm almost certain she would want you to know that, at the very least Leilani: yeah, she would Leilani: she wasn't too humble for a brag Saint: 😅 Saint: you should continue that tradition then Leilani: you'll regret saying that when I make you take 10000000000000s of pictures of me posing in different 👗 Saint: 😏 I'll have to buy myself something expensive to cope, I'm sure Leilani: ⌚️ so you can keep an eye on the time Saint: I have an uncharacteristically free day today Saint: my time is yours Leilani: what are we waiting for? come get me Saint: That's what I was waiting for Saint: I'll be with you shortly Leilani: consent given Saint: 👍

1 note · View note

sigmaleph · 5 years ago

Text

but the real reason is...

When I was a child and learning about why democracy is great, the reasons given would be stuff like "it's fair!" or "if we ask everyone, we're more likely to get the right answer!". There's nothing wrong with telling children that, but if you asked me now I'd say things like "regularly changing who is in power prevents violent revolutions" and "politicians want to stay in power and the fact they might get voted out gives them non-zero reason to care about popular opinion". It seems likely that someone finds these reasons just as naïve as the earlier ones, I'm certainly nothing like an expert of why and how political systems work. (And of course, many people answer 'Why does democracy work?' with 'It doesn't'.)

Robin Hanson and Bryan Caplan talk about how education isn't about learning. You might explicitly model yourself as going to university and learning things that make you better at a job (or just make you a well-rounded human being, or something), and maybe some learning is happening, but the actual value there is just proving to an employer that you are smart and conscientious. This view does not seem to be mainstream, either among educators or students. Are Hanson and Caplan right? How should I know?

theunitofcaring recently got some anons about circumcision, whether it should be illegal, and whether you should have a religious exemption. They were replying to an older post where she says she is in favour of a religious exemption, and a lot of people don't understand why religious exemptions exist. It's not that we think, as a general rule, "if your religion says you have to do something then we are going to let you". Modern society bans lots of things mandated by religion. It's a cost-benefit analysis of "if we ban circumcision, some religious groups are going to do it in secret or travel somewhere else where it is legal and enforcing the law even in those cases would mean babies would risk dying because their parents wouldn't take them to the hospital after an improperly performed circumcision". This cost-benefit analysis makes sense for some religious exemptions and not for others. But if you were a politician announcing a circumcision ban with an exemption for Orthodox Jews, you would probably say things about respecting religious sentiment and not about cost-benefit analyses.

Some people in Argentina have recently tried (unsuccessfully) to decriminalise abortion. One of the stated arguments of the pro-choice side is that the same number of abortions happens either way, but with decriminalisation they happen at hospitals and fewer people with unwanted pregnancies die. I am also pro-choice, but I don't think that argument is correct. I'm fairly sure you'd get more abortions if they were decriminalised, and I think that's acceptable anyway.

Society does not keep a big book of "Things we told you we were doing for one reason but we were doing for a different one", to give out to children once they are considered mature enough to understand. Partly because many of these aren't lies to children, they are lies to adults. Partly because sometimes, nobody knows what the real reason is.

What was going through the heads of ancient Athenians when they decided democracy was a good idea? What about the American Founding Fathers? What about the subsequent independence movements in the Americas, like the one that resulted in my country being a democracy and me reading books aimed at children about it? Did they think it was fair and just? Did they think a democratically elected ruler had some guarantees of competence, or a decision arrived at by popular vote was likely to be better? Did they think it was a good way to balance incentives or prevent revolutions? Was it just one thing they could sell to everyone else?

If education really does work how Hanson and Caplan view it, then it would seem this is not because people actually involved in making the decisions of how education works thought so. And I think part of this thesis is that we make bad decisions about how to spend money on education, because we have the wrong model in mind.

If everyone thinks religious exemptions happen because of a general principle that religious rules are important, they might either say "Hey, we need to add a bunch of new exceptions" or "Hey, actually, we don't think that's a good principle, let's get rid of them".

If you think abortion decriminalisation is only justified because it doesn't increase the total number of abortions, and then after carefully measuring it, it turns out it does, are you going to campaign to roll it back? And when I say that was never the reason, are you going to call me a hypocrite?

If you ask people around the town and everyone tells you that Chesterton's fence was just there to keep away Chesterton's bull, are you gonna tear it down now that the bull is dead? Has someone built anything else, knowing the fence was there?

It seems to me it is easier to look at things and observe there are hidden reasons than it is to find the real reasons. You can learn the lesson "there are lies to children" and decide, well, I came up with something that sounds appropriately cynical, and nobody is actually going to spell out the reasons for you, so how will you know if you got it wrong?

And you might, in all that, lose track that even if you found something cynical to say, and even if you think that sounds like what The People In Power would actually do, ultimately what you need to know is not the reasons anyone had but the reasons it actually works (and the ways in which it doesn't). But we don't keep track of that. Maybe because we never knew it. Maybe because working to figure it out would make it harder to sell the palatable lies.

[Original post]

#dreamwidth crosspost

73 notes · View notes

militant-holy-knight · 5 years ago

Text

My Very Belated Take on the Amazon Synod

As a Brazilian Catholic, how I feel about something that concerns my country and my faith.

So I am three months late to talk about something that happened literally last year in October, but health reasons prevented me from fully focusing on it. This is an topic that many friends have asked me to discuss regarding the Synod of Bishops for the Pan-Amazon region given that it’s located within my country Brazil, as well as pretty much all northern countries in South America (Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, etc.). It has been a very concerning and controversial topic among Catholics and if you want a short answer for what I think: the Synod is horribly misguided, seeks easy answers for complex situations and critics are right to be upset. I will elaborate why below and tried to be as nuanced as possible.

For the longest time, ordination of women was a topic advocated by several liberal movements in Catholicism for a variety of reasons, but in context of the Synod, it was to address the priesthood shortage within the Amazon region. This has been a problem for decades, and in Brazil in particular, part of a greater issue regarding the clergy being undisciplined and poorly trained even during the Imperial days when Catholicism was the state religion of my country. In addition, married men and lay people were also cogitated to become priests for the same reason.

It should be noted that this has been allowed in the Eastern Catholic Rite where married men are allowed to become priests, though they can’t marry again should their spouse dies. While my position on the ordination of women is very clear (it’s a nope), in theory it probably wouldn’t be such a big problem if at least married men could become priests, right? Well, it has been pointed out by Greek-Catholics that even this measure hasn’t helped the shortage of priests within their own rite, so it’s not an very practical solution to the problem in the Amazon.

Another big problem is the interaction with the natives and the focus on the environment because sometimes I wonder if the Vatican really understand the complexity of the situation regarding them. I’ve read the documents and I was frustrated at the misguided attempts at ecumenism towards a culture that is drastically different (for example, quoting Exodus 3:5 in context of the ground, i.e. the land being sacred to the natives too). Furthermore, they tend to view the natives’ unrest against encroaching farmers and landowners in black and white, when the reality is far more complicated and they are siding with the ones least willing to compromise. There is also the fact plenty of these tribes haven’t been contacted and are still vulnerable to common diseases we are immune to.

Now, the most controversial part the Synod is definitely the Pachamama idol, the pre-Colombia deity that used to be worshiped (and it still is) by many Latin American tribes. So for reference: I am not exactly a Traditionalist Catholic, I’m a pretty average Roman Catholic (i.e. I don’t mind Novus Ordus), but even then, the idols being displayed in the Vatican were completely unacceptable. Not even during my secular years in college I would have approved that. I would have probably criticized the two Austrian men who threw that idol in the Tiber in other circumstances (I would have argued it should have been kept as a museum piece - where it should have belong rather than being worshiped), but I was so livid that I really didn’t care and I applauded it.

There is a explanation to all of this: Pope Francis is very concerned with respecting people of other cultures and at the same time, he understands that there is a crisis in the church and wants to invite more people into it. As such, he is willing to compromise with them so they can enter on their terms instead of the Church’s. Hence, the Pachamama idol is incorporated into Catholicism in order to make it more palatable to natives. I know some people are going to use medieval examples where pagan deities were “identified” as Christian symbols in order to bring Europeans under Christendom in order to set up an precedent for this event, but honestly, it doesn’t cut it. To cut a long story short, the circumstances back then do not apply now and they didn’t affect the church as much as this whole debacle is doing.

So while I pretty much side with the critics on this situation, I do have to say an inconvenient truth: many have failed to provide a solution or at least an alternative to the Synod. Granted, this is an very difficult answer and probably beyond even the ability of Latin American countries to answer, but the responses I’ve gotten are really disheartening like “we should leave them alone because they are unimportant”, “forcing them to Catholicisim would be colonialism” (even though no one suggested that) or that simply the Synod shouldn’t have happened regardless of motivations or circumstances.

It’s very frustrating that Traditional Catholics don’t usually care about the problems of the World, but complain without doing anything about it in general. This illustrated by one advice I recall being given by Trads who strongly disagreed about Francis’ teachings: “wait”. We have to wait until he passes on and a new Pope takes place. I can understand that somewhat because it’s better to say nothing/do nothing than disobey him or not consider him a Pope, but still inaction is inaction.

A friend of mine said that fixing the church’s problem should take priority over evangelizing natives which is a position I find very agreeable. Why bring natives into the church while it’s in disarray - and even worse, unintentionally make them part of the problem? I could say the evangelization of Latin America was only possible because of Counter-Reformation institutions. Of course, some might say that evangelization is more important than reforming, but this is up to your personal opinion.

Missionary work is important for we are called to be fishers of men. I am not saying the Amazon Synod was malevolent or anything because it’s trying to address a problem that has been going on for a long time, which isn’t helped by outside factors like governments being incapable of protecting missionaries without infringing on the natives’ rights. The main problem is that the Synod is completely misguided in how it’s conducted.

I conclude by saying I wish I had an answer for this, but the Amazon Synod is actually more delicate than many detractors seem to believe. There are actual problems it intends to solve and I am not very opposed to some of it’s methods (in theory that is, in practice that is another story), but the Pachamama display made it all much harder to support. Which is all made more tragic.

What are your thoughts on the Synod? Give me your thoughts and what do you think it should have been done?

#Christianity #catholicism #Catholic #BR

9 notes · View notes

wisdomrays · 5 years ago

Text

OUR PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE: Part-2

Since the middle of the fifteenth century, there have been many attempts initiated toward developing this idealized system of thought. However, they have never been able to reach the desired objectives. Although this observation is open to contention in certain respects, in general it is true. The architects of Constitutional monarchy, from these to the latest workers of thought, many, whether sincere or not, have tried to find answers to this search and expectations in the collective conscience. However, some became entangled in the Tahafuts of Ibn Rushd and Imam Ghazali, some drowned and perished in the whirlpools of the French Revolution and Auguste Comte, while some were kept busy in the delirium and obsession of Durkheim. They were always active, but they have never taken into account the age in which they lived, and have either gone beyond fantasy or routed thousand-year-old national values into bewilderment by treating their whims and fancies as their god. I wish we could have overcome such vexations and negativities by now. How I wish we could overcome such contrariness and develop a system of thought and a national philosophy nurtured by our own sources!

Let me express this concisely; because the angles of feeling, perception, and interpretation of the natural phenomena are different, if we do not have a strong foundation of thought or a system of philosophy on which to build everything, our views will always be in contradiction and we will devour one another in a web of opposition and conflict. Tomorrow, as well as today, can be our property only by means of this strong method and system, and by means of a common manner or style, which all the generations will voluntarily share. If we do not have such unity in our thoughts, feelings, and manner of life, it will remain nothing but grandiose wishful thinking to talk about national unity and solidarity, both today and tomorrow. For in every system, national logic, thinking, reasoning, and the spiritual inspirations (waridat) are very important. To the extent that a system of thought arises from a nation's own mind, conscience, and world of emotions, can the unity of feelings, logic, and reasoning, and the ease of living together as a nation be realized. On the other hand, where a nation's feelings, thoughts, interpretations, and styles clash with one another, and where reasoning and rationality are in contradiction, actions and activities would yield no fruit, even though there are a great many of them taking place. In such cases, complete devastation is also likely to happen. In a society where such conflict and commotion of understanding and interpretation are experienced, every effort will continually clash and break with another, just like the waves of the sea, and by pouring into its own pool of inertia everything will keep on whirling in a vicious circle. There is some seen and unseen wisdom in the clash of the waves at sea, their breaking and their calming of one another. However, there is only stagnation, rot, disintegration, and self-annihilation in similar collisions and clashes if found within a society. In such a society, everyone seems to be a wolf at the other's door and every thought a project of death; and even if heavenly blessings shower continuously on that society, it will be like clothes under attack from moths; even historical values are subject to attack and becoming moth-eaten, the sacred is face to face with the danger of destruction; and they don't recieve loyalty from the old, nor chivalry from the young; the young people, whom we expect to become heroes, to be the dynamic power that will carry the standard of the bright future on their shoulders, instead swear at the flag and curse the history of their country, considering the future as the arena in which they will perform all their impetuousness and insanity. The old and the intelligentsia, who indulge in hair-raising heedlessness, act almost as the advocates of such decadence; in their expressions, writings, and TV shows they incite bohemianism in the spirit and devastate the understanding and discernment of people, as if they were pouring acid on them.

During such a period, the seats of science and knowledge are not able to evoke a love and thought of knowledge. Those who represent power and authority become the pawns of particular ideologies and devour one another; logic, reasoning, and inspiration are condemned to walk in the narrow aisles of enigmatic signs and expressions. In a society in which such contrariness and vexations develop, idleness, ambition and vanity replace thinking, life becomes nothing but a torture.

Our system of thought or philosophy of life, however, is related to not only the world of existence, but also to the realm of pre-existence, and to whatever is beyond existence. It also deals with all natural phenomena and things which lie beyond as a whole; it is vast enough to define the manner of our entire lives in continuity. It is with such a system that society, in its smallest particle, the individual, is able to realize the universal justice awaited on Earth and respond to all the expectations of humanity by stimulating individuals to act morally; in this way, society is fed with spirit, morality, virtue, and contemplation and thus reaches a state of being renewed as itself. Thus, our understanding of civilization and cultural richness becomes a desirable good, demanded, and sought after all over the world; we are therefore able to extend our helping hands to the rest of the world to present comfortably our ideals of humanity, our philosophy of morality, our understanding of virtue, and our acceptance and interpretation of justice. Again, as a result of having acquired such a level and position, like all the power sources of a state, administrative dynamics and social and economic principles will spring out from the people's own spirit and in this way society will save itself from all sorts of "dependence." So far, the tacit dependence which we have been carrying like a yoke around our necks due to our weaknesses and indebtedness, has paralyzed and caused inertia in our political, economic, and judicial systems, just as it did in our administrative system. In the past, our golden generations, who had once made Anatolia one of the most cultivated, prosperous countries of the world, developed and established their own administrative, political, and judicial systems out of the materials of their own spirit. They did not let any thinking, system, or understanding enter the institutions of the people, which were safeguarded like their homes, family pride, and good name, without having checked it by their own criteria and measures. Far from letting these in, even after they had struggled with nearly the entire world and experienced a temporary defeat, and even while they were retreating wounded and shaken, but ever hopeful, with faith, and with great zeal and desire, they tried to preserve their own origins, gathered around the consciousness of history, and held tightly to the dynamics to which they owe their existence-as expressed in a hadith, they "held (them) tightly between their teeth and their palate." Their heads were not bent down, but held high, their understanding, acceptance, and interpretation of the world and the Hereafter were sound and intact, and they advanced toward a fresh revival without pausing for a breath.

Today, when dawns follow new dawns, from the perspective of our own horizon of wisdom, if we are able to evaluate soundly and once more make use of the world in which we are now living, if we are able to interpret things and events well, if we are able to determine the basic materials of the inner structure of our own people, and if we are able to attach ourselves to the ideals that exist until eternity, we will always be like our glorious ancestors; we may even advance ahead of them. Indeed, why should the insightful generations not be in advance of those of the past; indeed of all generations? They will take the past, the present, and the future, putting them into perspective all at the same time, evaluating and making the best of them; they will take the traditions, culture, and historical dynamics of the society in which they live under their protection; they will interpret well the cycle of the recurrence of history in the direction of their own renewal.

It is important to recall, once again, that the first responsibility that falls to us is to make felt in the consciences of the generations the effects of pain, suffering, hardship, beliefs adopted and the cultures rooted in direct proportion to their weightiness. This will be done by developing in people the consciousness of history. If we can do this, after a few generations no one living in our land will think of looking for or finding any foreign source for our various institutions beyond our spiritual dynamics.

We will be bringing all the elements of our life tomorrow from the past. If we are able to blend them with the light of our religion and the rays of science and knowledge in the crucible of our culture, we will have prepared the glue of our eternity.

6 notes · View notes

rockofeye · 6 years ago

Note

How do you know if an offering for the ancestors is enough? Does knowing names and having a family tree give an advantage? What do you do with the food you make for ancestors? Throw it out? Give it to friends/living family? How do you stop feeling insecure about your connection with the ancestors and how you try to heal that? What do you do when you live in a colonised country and information on your people and their practices are scarce?

How do you know if an offering for the ancestors is enough?

That’s something you have to learn over time as you get to learn and listen to your ancestors. They communicate what they want and need, and if what you are giving them fits that. Generally, my guide is to give the best that I can offer at that time and let them know that this is the best I can offer, particularly if it is not what I usually give them.

Does knowing names and having a family tree give an advantage?

It can, if you want to speak to specific ancestors or call specific ancestors to work for you. It’s not necessary for ancestor work, though; a lot of people do not have an extensive family trees and have powerful ancestor practices.

What do you do with the food you make for ancestors? Throw it out? Give it to friends/living family?

I think that depends on the ancestors, the tradition a person is working from, and what the purpose of the feeding is for. Sometimes ancestral food can be eaten by living descendants after a period of time, sometimes the food for the dead should remain only for the dead, and sometimes consuming the food of the dead could be detrimental the general living-ness of the person eating it. Some food should be disposed of outside, or buried, or burned, or simply wrapped and placed in the trash. It all depends on your ancestors, the tradition you are working within, and your ancestors themselves.

How do you stop feeling insecure about your connection with the ancestors and how you try to heal that?

That’s kind of a fake it ‘til you make it thing. The only way to build confidence and connection is to just do it–build the practice, refine it so that it works for your and your ancestors, and do the work. Ancestral healing and healing in general is an active process, so it comes as a byproduct of getting your hands in the dirt, as it were, and doing it.

For someone who is feeling insecure about their ancestral connection, I would suggest giving where that insecurity is coming from some deep thought. Is it because they feel they are not doing enough? Does it seem like their ancestral practice is not as effective or deep as they judge someone else’s to be? Whatever the cause, the ancestor-descendant relationship is between those two parties only–ancestors and their descendant–so those are the only parties that matter. If someone feels they are not doing enough, maybe do something different. I tell clients and students often that comparison is the thief of joy, so if someone is using what other people are doing as a yardstick, they will always feel less than.

What do you do when you live in a colonised country and information on your people and their practices are scarce?

This is a complex question that I read in two different ways, so I’m going to answer both ‘translations’ of how I read it. If I am missing the point, please let me know.

If we are living on colonized territory (which, if we live in the US or in Canada, we are) and are looking for information on our ancestors who were colonizers (in one way or another) of the land we live on and their religious beliefs, there are things we can do to both to acknowledge the deep abuses committed by our ancestors and move forward as ethical ancestral practitioners on colonized territory.

I am grateful to have been taught to use land acknowledgement as part of centering Indigenous American history, voices, and land presence, and I utilize that in my ancestral practice to acknowledge how my ancestors benefited from the colonization of indigenous property and how I continue to benefit from living on colonized land. I don’t honor Indigenous Americans as part of ancestral practice since that is not my ancestral reality and I am not Indigenous, but I name the land my ancestors and I have benefited from because I would not be here if not for my ancestral presence there.

I firmly believe that being an ethical ancestral practitioner on colonized territory means working to address the trauma caused by ancestors, which means doing hands-on reparative work with our ancestors to interrupt the cycle of ancestral trauma continuing to repeat itself (ie, history repeating). That’s a long and committed process which is deserving of it’s own post, but it is something folks with any European ancestry should really be looking at.

If we are living on colonized territory and we are individuals who have had our cultural identities and practices compromised or suppressed by colonization, it must feel very frustrating and isolating not to have good sources of information or to be able to find connections to our ancestral cultures.

From here, answers sort of converge in terms of seeking out information on ancestors and their religious practices. While the advice can vary wildly based on individual situations, there are some very basic general stepping stones to finding information on ancestral practices and cultures:

Look for reading lists. Might sound obvious, but googling up ‘welch history reading list’ can give you places to start and books/articles with bibliographies to explore. Similarly, you can google specifically for decolonized resources on your ancestral culture or tradition. There’s a solid basic booklist for decolonized Indigenous American history here, and an expansive reading list on a decolonized look at African politics and political history, just for example.

Read critically. Utilize bibliographies and reading notes, and go to those publications and see if what the author wrote reflects/matches and what additional info is there. The wealth of information I have found from chasing down sources is HUGE.

Search for ‘folklore’. An immense amount of actual practice is persevered under the heading of folklore, which makes it more palatable and less threatening for majority culture. For example, dancing in Haitian Vodou is vital and central to ceremony, and ceremonial/temple dancing is classed as Haitian folkloric dance in the mainstream world. Lots of folklore illustrates about practices ancestors may have engaged in and reflects actual stuff that can be used as puzzle pieces.

Contact cultural centers and culture bearers. Even if there is no local surviving cultural group for your ancestral practice, someone somewhere knows something and they in turn will have their own network. Many Indigenous communities have connections across widespread areas, or have historical archives that can be accessed with permission. Cultural centers often have elders on staff or as contacts, and even areas that have tourist presence can refer back to the actual culture. Many cultural practices are tied to place or to specific Diaspora, and so reach out to those physical places and Diaspora centers for assistance.

These might be challenging conversations to have: ‘hi, my family is from Place and I don’t know anything about that, who could I talk to’ might be hard, *but* fruitful.

Learn the language the culture does ‘business’ in. While colonization insists the common language be English, most information about specific cultural practices will be in the majority language of the culture. Outsiders coming in to Haitian Vodou often complain that there is so little authentic material available to them, and yet they have not learned Haitian Kreyol or French, which is the majority language of Haiti and Haitians and the language that 95% of the materials written about the religion are written in. If we are looking for our ancestors and ancestral practices, learning the language they spoke and the language they spoke with their spirits can open a LOT of doors.

Look for culturally relevant events. Keep an eye on museum events, library talks, dance festivals, cultural festivals, etc. If you live near any big city, you are probably close to religious centers that serve specific cultural groups–many cultural groups who attend mainstream denomination churches also maintain cultural practices alongside their attendance, and you may meet folks there who are connected with ancestral things. These are places where you can meet culture bearers or folks who can connect you to actual culture bearers. My spiritual mother is an example of this–she travels and teaches extensively at universities in the US and internationally about Haitian Vodou and Vodou culture, and she is not the only culture bearer that does.

Ask your ancestors for guidance. The very first step in ancestral veneration is to welcome your ancestors home, and when you do so you are inviting their presence and influence into your life. You can ask them to open the way for you to reconnect with culture as they lived it and to put your feet on the right path to do so. They will answer in their time, which can be slow or can be fast. They are the key to learning about where you come from and who you are in that framework so, above all, lean on them.

I hope this answers your questions and is helpful. If I have misunderstood what you’re asking and you’re up for clarifying, I am happy to revise what I have offered to fit.

#ancestors #ancestral worship #Ancestral Veneration #cultural religion

28 notes · View notes

signetofworlds · 6 years ago

Text

The Rolling Tide (Yog-Sothoth)

(art by Satibalzane)

I was mesmerized by the rolling tide

I lay on that shore and gazed into the skies Like a shooting star, my dream was gone I made up my mind I don't want to wake up

-Markus Toivonen, “Celestial Bond”

On all worlds I have visited, the name of Yog-Sothoth is known within the hearts of the populace. Although few could utter it, every intelligent being implicitly understands the concept of a cosmic order, a binding force behind conceivable reality that sits so far beyond their science and rationale as to be incomprehensible but that remains undeniable in its omnipresence. This wholeness is the true name of my inscrutable master, with Yog-Sothoth being nothing more than a simple shorthand utilized by those possessing humanoid tongues and a (mostly) linear understanding of spacetime.

When choosing a religion (if they are even afforded the freedom to do so), most potential disciples will stress the idea of a personal relationship with their deity. They cling to the idea that Osiris or Asmodeus or whatever other strange and mighty being they throw their prayers at cares about their dedication, or at the very least appreciates their contribution. The Outer Gods do not operate in this way, do not trifle with the answering of prayers and observation of rites. Many a poor soul has deluded themself into thinking that their bloody sacrifices somehow matter to Cthulhu or Shub-Niggurath, and never once do I suspect that their beloved masters ever noticed.

One cannot help but ask, then, why we disciples of the Elder Mythos wield powers which can rival or even surpass the delivered-with-a-smile spells of more palatable divinities. As one who has tapped into Yog-Sothoth’s incredible abilities with relative frequency over the last few eons, the best answer I can provide is that beings of the Elder Mythos are powerful enough to exude tremendous divine magic without their noticing. Raw magical energies of obscene magnitude flow from the wake of an Outer God’s path, which is why so many who are exposed to these mind-boggling forces wind up with their minds very thoroughly boggled. When I call upon the complex and incredibly powerful esoterica that enables many of my miracles, I am little more than an ant carrying off crumbs which fall from a great multiversal picnic basket.

The divine magic of a being such as Yog-Sothoth is only powered by belief insofar as one’s personal discipline shapes these energies into a comprehensible form. Whereas most divine spellcasters see their devotion as a source of strength, to us it is a crucial limiter without which our minds would completely break. The immense strength of will one finds in disciples of the Outer Gods is what anchors us to earth, for without such filters of mental stamina we would all be reduced to hysteric babbling (a fate I have seen forced upon too many and that I would wish on nobody). The sagacity of most disciples ties them to immortal, but it keeps us disciples of the cosmos anchored to the mortal.

The question then arises as to why I, a reasonably sane individual by most accounts, would constantly risk losing myself when there are so many more benign gods out there willing to hand over power. The simple answer is that I’m too skeptical to pledge myself to a finite entity, a being that was born from something and will one day pass into nothingness. Even as a child, I could never muster a prayer to any god which the priests explained as having a plan for me, because that meant forcing my view of the universe to revolve around a being which was either finite or petty enough to be miffed if I didn’t do what its priests told me to. Harnessing of the Gate and Key’s power garners not the entity’s attention nor its respect, just as the forces of gravity and magnetism care nothing about how you use them. I approach divine magic much in the same manner that I approach arcane magic, utilizing understanding garnered through study in order to expand my perspective and capabilities within the universe, caring not for concepts such as good or bad but rather craving an empirical appraisal of what lies before me. This of course begs the question of why I would utilize divine magic at all, and my answer is that I am not one to waste perfectly functional reality-warping powers. Ever since my studies of the Dark Tapestry first produced a Sanctuary Spell, I’ve found great use in tapping these energies which even the most knowledgeable arcanists fail to manifest.

The biggest draw for the worship of Yog-Sothoth is none of these, however. What swells the entity’s congregation is the simple fact that once you learn of The Gate and Key’s existence, there is simply nowhere else you can sensibly turn. All other faiths are ruined for you, ruined by the fact that whatever god is slapping you on the back can’t hold a candle to the reality-defining force that is Yog-Sothoth. Disciples are drawn to power, even if that power can’t be bothered to acknowledge the planet you just sacrificed to get its attention.

Besides, taking an hour every morning to siphon a smidgen of eldritch might from an infinitely intelligent, infinitely powerful, infinitely-nonchalant-about-your-existence entity gives one some distinct perspective on your place in the universe.

Yog-Sothoth, The Gate and Key

Alignment

Pantheon

Outer Gods

Areas of Concern

Gates, Space, Time

Domains Darkness, Chaos, Evil, Knowledge, Travel, Void Subdomains Dark Tapestry, Exploration, Memory, Night, Portal, Stars, Thought Favored Weapon Dagger (which is to say that he doesn’t have one. Daggers are just convenient for sacrifices) Symbol Black spiral Sacred Animal(s) None Sacred Color(s) None Obedience Draw out a series of arcane symbols in ink, chalk, or blood while meditating upon the finite nature of your own existence (honestly, if you’ve gotten this far, it shouldn’t be too hard). Gain a +2 insight bonus on all knowledge checks.

Divine Gift The recipient learns of the perfect path to success in regards to one specific goal or task, gaining a +4 insight bonus on all d20 rolls made as part of trying to complete that goal for 1 day. (Note: This “Gift” is not usually the result of Yog-Sothoth taking a liking to you. Every time I or someone else has obtained this gift, it is a consequence of unleashing some particularly powerful and out-there form of magic tied to Spacetime. This is, also how the Signet of Worlds was created).

Boons - Deific Obedience

Evangelist

1: Temporal Initiate: Burst of Insight 3/day, Ally Across Time 2/day, Haste 1/day

2: Magical Insights (Su): The character learns a new spell of every level they are capable of casting, adding them to their spells known or to their source of prepared spells (such as a spellbook or familiar). These spells must be those on the character’s spell list.

3: Facet of the Eternal (Su): You gain a single feat as a bonus feat. You must meet the prerequisites for this feat, but may exchange it for another feat that you also meet the prerequisites for whenever you perform your obedience.

Exalted 1: Spacetime Insight: Hermean Potential 3/day, Twisted Space 2/day, Blink 1/day

2: Probability Mastery (Su): Whenever you roll % dice to determine the effects of a spell or class ability on yourself, you may roll twice and take whichever result you choose. 3: Traveler of the Gates (Su): As a move action, you may teleport up to your movement speed, or four times your movement speed as a full-round action. In addition, you may increase or decrease the size of any portals you create (such as those created through a Gate spell) by 50%. Sentinel 1: Mastery of Possibilities: True Strike 3/day, Mirror Image 2/day, Borrow Fortune 1/day

2: Forewarned is Forearmed (Su): You gain the uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge class features as a monk of your character level. In addition, you can always act in the surprise round even if you fail to make a Perception roll to notice a foe, but you are still considered flat-footed until you take an action. 3: Path to Victory (Su): You have learned to witness many possibilities at once, picking and choosing the ones which you feel will lead to your greatest success in combat. Once per round, you may reroll a single attack roll or damage roll and take the higher of the two results.

For Followers of Yog-Sothoth

Archetypes

Chronomancer (Wizard. It’s just good sense really)

Elder Mythos Cultists (Cleric, because some fools just can’t handle their unbelievable power)

Portal Seeker (Investigator) Secret Broker (Occultist)

Stargazer (Oracle) Feats

Dimensional Agility Dreamed Secrets

Eldritch Eye

Practiced Ritualist

Magic Items

Ring Gates Monsters Ancient Ones

Hounds of Tindalos

Khaei

Spawn of Yog-Sothoth

Tawil At-Umr Spells Akashic Form

Borrow Fortune

Borrowed Time

Burst of Insight

Gate

Haste

Slow

Time Stop

Time Stutter

Traits Arcane Researcher

Horrifying Mind

Lucid Dreamer

Two-World Magic

Unspeakable Bond

Unique Spell Rules

Clerics, Oracles, and Warpriests who have Yog-Sothoth as their patron add Burst of Insight to their spell list as a 1st-level spell, Haste and Slow as 3rd-level spells, and Akashic Form and Time Stop as 9th-level spells.

Inquisitors who have Yog-Sothoth as their patron (don’t ask how they enforce doctrine for a god apathetic to mortal worship) add Burst of Insight to their spell list as a 1st-level spell, and Haste and Slow as 3rd-level spells

Sorcerers and Wizards who worship Yog-Sothoth add Burst of Insight to their spell list as a 1st-level spell, Borrow Fortune as a 3rd-level spell, and Akashic Form and Major Mind Swap as 9th-level spells

Unique Summon Rules

Summon Monster IV: Khaei

Summon Monster VI: Hound of Tindalos

Summon Monster VII: Spawn of Yog-Sothoth

Ancient One CR 22/MR 2

Invincible Hundun XP 614,400 CE Large aberration (chaotic, extraplanar, mythic) Init +10; Senses blindsense 300 ft., detect law; Perception +36 DEFENSE AC 41, touch 23, flat-footed 35 (+8 deflection, +6 Dex, +18 natural, -1 size) hp 380 (27d8+259) Fort +18, Ref +23, Will +21, Second Save

Defensive Abilities block attacks, entropic mind, evasion, negative energy affinity, spacetime shifting; DR 15/epic, lawful and piercing; Immune aging effects, cold, disease, mind-affecting effects, petrification, poison; Resist acid 15, cold 15, electricity 15, fire 30, sonic 15; SR 34 OFFENSE Speed 60 ft.; air walk Melee unarmed strike +32/+32/+27/+27/+22/+22/+17 (4d8+12/19–20 plus 1d6 negative energy) Space 10 ft.; Reach 10 ft. Special Attacks befuddling strike (6/day, DC 29), punishing kick (6/day, DC 29), strange attractor Spell-Like Abilities (CL 21st; concentration +29) Constant—air walk, detect law At will—chaos hammer (DC 22), dimension door, enervation, greater dispel magic, mass inflict moderate wounds (DC 24), plane shift (DC 23) 3/day—quickened dimension door, disintegrate (DC 24), quickened mass inflict moderate wounds (DC 24), word of chaos (DC 25) 1/day—orb of the void (DC 26) STATISTICS Str 34, Dex 22, Con 29, Int 18, Wis 23, Cha 27 Base Atk +20; CMB +33; CMD 57 Feats Befuddling Strike, Blind-Fight, Combat Reflexes, Dimensional Agility, Dimensional Assault, Dimensional Dervish, Greater Blind-Fight, Improved Blind-Fight, Improved Critical (unarmed strike), Improved Initiative, Improved Unarmed Strike, Punishing Kick, Quicken Spell-Like Ability (dimension door), Quicken Spell-Like Ability (mass inflict moderate wounds), Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) Skills Acrobatics +36, Climb +30, Escape Artist +36, Intimidate +38, Knowledge (planes) +22, Perception +36, Sense Motive +27, Spellcraft +22, Stealth +32, Swim +30 Languages Abyssal, Aklo, Protean (can’t speak any languages); telepathy 300 ft. SQ faceless, no breath SPECIAL ABILITIES Entropic Mind (Ex) An ancient one’s mind is a maelstrom of utter chaos. An ancient one is immune to mind-affecting effects, and any creature that attempts to affect an ancient one with a mind-affecting effect gains 1d4 temporary negative levels (Will DC 31 negates) from entropic feedback. These negative levels disappear automatically after 8 hours. The save DC is Charisma-based. Faceless (Ex) An ancient one has no eyes, but detects infinitesimal gravitic distortions through its skin, gaining blindsense 300 feet. An ancient one is blind and deaf, and is immune to effects that depend on sight or hearing. It subsists on negative energy and doesn’t breathe, eat, or drink. Spacetime Shifting (Ex) Reality constantly reconfigures in the vicinity of an ancient one , correcting the paradoxes the creature’s existence in space and time generates. This causes all attacks against the ancient one to suffer a 20% miss chance, and grants the ancient one a deflection bonus to AC and a racial bonus on Reflex saves equal to its Charisma modifier. Strange Attractor (Sp) An ancient one can activate or deactivate the stafflike strange attractor it carries as a free action. While active, a strange attractor hovers in place, and the ancient one can mentally move it up to 60 feet through space as a move action, to a maximum range of 300 feet. If it enters a space with a creature, it stops moving for the round and that creature must attempt a DC 31 Will saving throw. The creature falls unconscious for 1 round if it fails this save, or is nauseated for 1 round if it succeeds. The space around an active strange attractor twists and warps, trapping creatures within its gravity well. This functions like repulsion but in reverse: creatures within 60 feet attempting to move away from it are prevented from doing so, wasting their move actions (Reflex DC 31 negates). Lawful creatures beginning their turn within 60 feet of an active strange attractor are nauseated for 1 round (Will DC 31 negates). Nausea caused by a strange attractor is a mind-affecting effect. Creatures with the chaotic subtype are immune to all effects of the strange attractor. The save DCs are Charisma-based. A strange attractor can’t be attacked or harmed by physical attacks, but disintegrate, mage’s disjunction, a sphere of annihilation, or a rod of cancellation affect it. A strange attractor’s touch AC is 18 (+8 deflection), and attacks against it suffer a 20% miss chance. If an ancient one’s strange attractor is destroyed, the ancient one can create a new one after 1d8 hours of uninterrupted meditation. If an ancient one is slain, its strange attractor disappears. Unarmed Strikes (Ex) An ancient one’s unarmed strikes deal 4d8 points of damage, and function as chaotic, magic, and adamantine weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. An ancient one can make a flurry of blows attack with its unarmed strikes as a 20th-level monk, without increasing its base attack bonus or taking the –2 penalty on attack rolls. This ability also grants the ancient one the befuddling strike rogue talent and the punishing kick hungry ghost monk class feature.

Mythic Feats

Dreamed Secrets (Mythic)

Profound and powerful magics invade your mind

Prerequisites: Dreamed Secrets

Benefits: Increase the number of spells learned from Dreamed Secrets by your tier. In addition, you automatically know the mythic version of any spells you learn with Dreamed Secrets, but casting these spells as mythic spells causes you to take 1d4 points of wisdom damage with no saving throw.

Eldritch Eye (Mythic)

You are attuned to strange energies that move all around you.

Prerequisites: Eldritch Eye

Benefits: Your Eldritch Eye lasts for as long as you desire rather than just one minute. In addition, you can spend a point of mythic power to gain the benefits of True Seeing for one round.

Practiced Ritualist (Mythic)

You handle forces far beyond your ken with aplomb

Prerequisite: Practiced Ritualist

Benefit: You gain a bonus equal to your mythic tier on skill checks to perform occult rituals, and on Intelligence checks to learn the method of casting an occult ritual. In addition, while performing an occult ritual, you may spend a point of mythic power to gain a +10 bonus on a single skill check made as part of the ritual.

NOTE:

This website uses trademarks and/or copyrights owned by Paizo Inc., which are used under Paizo’s Community Use Policy. We are expressly prohibited from charging you to use or access this content. This website is not published, endorsed, or specifically approved by Paizo Inc. For more information about Paizo’s Community Use Policy, please visit paizo.com/communityuse. For more information about Paizo Inc. and Paizo products, please visit paizo.com.

Like what you see here? Want more? Donate to my Patreon for more content in this vein.

#pathfinder #cthulhu #yog-sothoth #deity #golarion #lovecraft #cleric #mythic #feats #monsters

6 notes · View notes

scriptlgbt · 6 years ago

Text

This question was submitted due to length, and the answer I gave was much longer. So it’s going under a readmore!

Submitted by Tay [no url given].

Content includes these topics/ideas:

- sex/sexuality (including cultural perceptions of it re: the LGBT+ community - now and in more recent history) - marriage as a marker of when sex is ok (and talk about how this attitude has interacted with the community)

- concepts of virginity

Asked:

“Hi, there. I’m going to start off by saying that I am bi myself however I am ousted from every LGBT community I know in real life because I believe in sex after marriage, or if the couple is making plans for marriage. Where I am, over half of the straight community is the same way.

However, every LGBT community here I know in real life, well, most aren’t virgins, and those that were soon weren’t. Also pretty much all of them mention multiple sex partners as well. Therefore I’m pretty much on the outside of the community because they can’t even believe I could consider myself bi until after I experiment.

Therefore I figured I could write a story about the kind of experience I have had. But since I don’t truly know the community well, especially only local communities, I’m not sure if I really understand them.

Also, from reading things from LGBT communities online, I find that a lot of them say no one has to experiment to know your orientation, which is a complete 180 than what I’ve experienced locally. Perhaps I didn’t meet enough people in my community, but I am sure annoyed by the fact they insist that experimenting is required.

I have asked many of them if they had even been in a straight relationship, and when some of them say no, I respond with how do you know? They say they just do. The others who have said yes, realized something was wrong, and only later after experiencing with the same sex realized they were gay. As for the ones who are bi, like I am, all thought they were either straight or gay because they had already been having sexual relationships and then found out they were bi after experimenting with the other gender.

So therefore, I am looking for information that address this issue, preferably worldwide and people from all ages as well as to how prevalent, non existing, or hush hush this is.

Also, I’d like to mention that observing straight people and their attitudes to sex before marriage is sometimes because of religion. However, religion seems to have no effect on LGBT people, the attitudes towards sex before marriage is the same no matter how religious or non religious they are or even which religion.”

Answer:

First I want to say that it sucks that people have discounted your identity based on what you decide regarding your own body. What you’re describing is very much biphobia (or bimisia) and you shouldn’t be made to feel like you have to ‘prove’ who you are to anyone. Yourself knowing who you are, that’s enough. You are bi and nobody can take that from you. As for the community, I know what you are describing. Maybe it might help to tell you that you are part of the community no matter who you associate with or don’t associate with. Lots of folks feel like they don’t belong with folks who share their identities. That’s okay and totally normal. You aren’t obligated to be the same as the next bi person either. You’re still you, you’re still bi.

I know it feels alienating, and I know that this might not feel all that positive to hear. But part of what makes our community empowering to so many (ideally anyway - obviously this isn’t a universal thing) is that it is diverse as heck and in the best of cases (I’m not trying to say this actually happens even most of the time), we have each other’s backs. If you don’t want to have sex you’re still you.

With that said, I think you might want to know, a lot of (I’d argue most maybe, depending where you go) other people in the community don’t feel comfortable using the term “virgin” because it implies that someone is a different person somehow before and/or after sex. And that it’s something that can be taken, like someone is more of a person when they don’t have sex, or like they carry some kind of burden or something they want to get rid of. Neither of those ideas are really comfortable to have projected onto you without your consent. No matter who’s using it, the term usually carries some kind of good/bad judgement of someone else. But the fact of the matter is that everyone should feel empowered to make their own decisions with their bodies and sex lives. You aren’t more or less of a person, no matter what decision you make. (Also, I’m not going to get into this more, but there are survivors of some really horrible things who are triggered by this phrasing.)

This isn’t a judgement on you - I know it’s a big topic and not covered all that well by many people anymore. I could be wrong, or it might be who I hang around, but it feels like there was a lot of conversation on this around 2010 or so and it fizzled out in 2 years because people assumed everyone who was going to get it, already got it. (Which is ridiculous, especially because how diverse our ages, backgrounds are - you’d think we would want to be more welcoming for folks just entering the community to understand this stuff.)

And to be super clear, you’re totally welcome to self refer this way if you want! It is your body, it’s your identity, it’s your call. But there’s a lot of baggage with this term, so you might want to check with other people on how they feel before using that term. Some people might feel either more pressured to have sex (because of wanting to get rid of the term) or more pressured to avoid sex that they do want for fear of judgement.

Neither of those really inspires healthy consent practices.

To get back to the questions, I think what you’ve heard from people online (that experimenting is not required) is probably what’s believed by most community members who are actively at the forefront of these kinds of discussions, on a wider scale. Local communities vary a lot, and things like internet, language, community access, geography, culture, etc, will all make how people feel locally different. Some communities have had their traditional teachings about sex taken away and replaced with other teachings. There’s a lot of variety. Some communities have been forced to move forward or backward on some issues and differently on others.

The idea that experimenting is necessary is usually something people say only to people who are LGBT+, not people who are straight and cis. It’s because straight and cis are seen as the default. If you don’t need to prove that, then you shouldn’t need to prove that you’re different either. I think that this is pretty common sentiment, but I think the views of folks in the community are generally more skewed towards this in cities than rural, and it depends on the cities as well. (I’m also talking about my own perspective as a former rural person who moved to a city as an adult.) And what’s said online is a lot more in sync with what people in cities believe because there are more people to immediately jump in and say something than there is if you’re walking around a small hometown with friends who haven’t either had access to or desire to connect with folks with differing opinions.

There’s a kind of isolation and ruralism that divides communities in ways I think a lot of people don’t pick up on, even when it might seem obvious once you think about it.

Other stuff to look into, I think, would be how the AIDS crisis, marriage equality, and currently in the west; how representation in children’s cartoons and similar affected and currently affects discussions around these topics.

Marriage equality was always an issue (when/where it was an issue) but it was never the core of it. Throughout history, it’s more been about feeling normal as your whole self. Marriage equality was one aspect of that, but the biggest reason that movement really picked up more steam (in the west, during the 70s-10s) was because during the AIDS crisis, visitation rights for people on their deathbeds was far too often reserved for people legally considered to be family. This meant people who were married. A lot of people died alone.

The whole marital vs non-marital sex thing has kind of been a moot point in most places where marriage was illegal anyway.

I know there’s more to be said about how marriage equality has been just as much an issue of racial equality as economic class, and LGBT+ equality. Miscegenation laws, costs associated with marriage certificates and things like hiring someone like a notary(?) to ratify it legally is also a thing.

There’s also how things like ‘common law marriage’ recognition make marriage a bit more subjective in definition too, along with civil unions and other legally recognized partnerships.

During the AIDS crisis, and in desperation, there became this push by some for palatability to cis, straight lawmakers to validate marriage equality so that people could be with their partners when they died. There were people throwing each other under the bus this way and that, and a lot of pushback from people in the community about how they didn’t want to sacrifice who they were, who/how they loved, in order to be respected.

Somewhat relevant is this quote someone shared around the time George Michael died.

In 1998, [George] Michael released “Outside,” which flicked at his arrest six months earlier in a public bathroom and prompted his coming out. The video cheekily features him dressed as an LAPD officer. In 2005 he addressed his inclination to shine a light on uncomfortable issues, telling The Guardian, “Gay people in the media are doing what makes straight people comfortable, and automatically my response to that is to say I’m a dirty filthy f—er and if you can’t deal with it, you can’t deal with it.”

Source

Heteronormativity, and the forceful nature of it, pushed us to feel the need to divide each other by our sex lives. To divert blame and accountability for oppression inward to our own community. It was/is victim blaming.

In all that, there’s been a lot of polarization. It feels like it’s hard to find someone with a neutral view on sex on the whole in our communities because we’re constantly being put on the spot and expected to have a ~hot take~ and be constantly defending whatever we do or don’t do (or do for atypical reasons) with our bodies.

I don’t want to act like I’m better than anyone for feeling differently, and I completely understand where everyone is coming from and the reasons we succumb to the constant battles we’re being placed in against our true interests.

The reality of the matter, is that everybody has a different relationship with sexuality. Everyone has a different experience, or lack thereof (and that’s okay). Some are more similar or different amongst each other than others. There’s no universal “sex is healthy” or “sex is unhealthy” because it’s like everything else out there. There’s cases where it is either, neither, or both even just in one act. It’s okay to feel whatever you feel about it. We need more nuanced discussions about this stuff that actually accounts for the diversity of it all.

And if whatever you’re doing or not doing feels wrong to you somehow, I hope you feel empowered to work through what’s going on. But it’s not a problem to be really into sex or repulsed, or whatever you feel at a given moment. Every variation of this is healthy for somebody. As long as everybody is consenting, that’s what matters.

I know I’m not alone in feeling this way, but I definitely wouldn’t say that’s a universal sentiment, especially judging by the sheer mass of horrible and ignorant things people have said to me/about me as an asexual person who has a lot of sex. But that’s a tangent.

I’m not sure if this explicitly answers your questions, but I hope it helps provide some general things to consider within your writing. There’s pretty much never a full consensus within the LGBT+ community about anything. At most there’s common sentiment.

- mod nat

#mod nat #sexuality #marriage equality #AIDS crisis #sexualization #desexualization #common law marriage #biphobia #bimisia

20 notes · View notes

harryseyebrows · 6 years ago

Note

More parenting questions because we need specifics! Attachment parenting or cry it out? Baby wearing? Homemade baby food? Are any picky eaters? Do they introduce them to any religion? (I imagine Harry showing them all if anyone starts to ask questions) What stance will Jeff and Harry take on underage drinking or age of first cell phones? Who gives the birds and bees talk? Are they the cool house to hang out at for the teenagers? (Harry always has baked goods, Jeff has a killer vinyl collection)

i love you for this.

okay. so in terms of parenting style, it evolves from baby to baby. they had such a hard time getting pregnant with the twins that it makes them super protective once theyre born. harry is a bit more overbearing and neurotic, and not to say that jeff isnt just as scared and nervous, he’s just a bit more rational. they read the same books and know almost all of the same information, but when it comes down to it, harry often foregoes what most people and experts will tell you in favor of rushing down the hall if either twin so much as hiccups. jeff tries to reason with him and urge him to let them self soothe sometimes but its with very limited success. and jeff is kinda constantly battling with himself because he knows that harry is still spooked after the miscarriages (he is too) and when he forces harry to stay in the room and not run to them as soon as they cry, he sees how uncomfortable it makes harry, so he usually relents. however, harry relaxes over time. by the time the twins are around 6 months, he has other things to worry about, namely being pregnant again so soon, so he’s tired and cranky and swollen so letting the twins cry it out is sometimes the better option. he knows that he has a secure attachment with both twins and that they’re not lacking for anything, and that they’re both healthy and happy. with river, harry is significantly more relaxed, and by the time willow comes along, he and jeff are both old pros.

BABY WEARING. if you think for one second that harry would not be ecstatic over the possibility of having his baby/babies strapped to him so he can walk around and show them off, even if its only at home and his only audience is the house plants, youre a CRAZY PERSON. harry loves a baby sling. jeff is less enthusiastic than harry but he’s still pretty psyched about it. even though when they take the twins out together, one baby per chest, they do look ridiculous. harry never gets tired of it, even after 4 kids. especially when theyre newborns. catch him doing laundry and dishes with his paisley printed baby scarf-sling on. DELIGHTFUL.

homemade baby food. they try it just for shits when the twins are able to start solids but its a very short-lived project. too much mess. too expensive. store bought it just fine for them lol

eli will eat whatever you put in front of him, but jude, harrys sweet, otherwise amicable little boy, is the one who goes through a phase where he proclaims ‘i dont like it’ to anything and everything. oddly enough, though, the things he will still eat are mostly healthy, like cubed fruit and baby carrots. however, he’s still a big fan of mac and cheese, but staunchly refuses to eat dino-shaped nuggets, to which eli usually looks at harry and jeff as if he’s saying ‘more for me, right?’ river is easy, too. a little human garbage disposal. harry has had to stop him from trying to eat a banana peel more than he’d like to admit. willow isnt quite as easy as river but she’s pretty close. all of the azoff children have very broad palates, thanks to harry and his adventurous cooking. jeff and harry also like to very very hands-on with the kids eating experiences -- they dedicate one night a week to having the kids help them with dinner. harry also likes to bake with them quite a bit. how many 4 years old do you know that have baked a lemon tart?

as far as religion goes, the kids are raised with ~blended religions ie jewish and christian (i did some research on it, and much like any other polarizing topic, there are a lot of people who claim that it has to be a hard left of right, one or the other, but if you dig a bit past the more sensationalized articles, you can find some info on people who were raised with two faiths and turned out just fine -- its finding a balance and respecting the holidays and traditions of both -- as well as explaining things just as you would if you were raising them with one faith. if given the room to explore both and come to their own decisions, it can actually be very valuable and healthy **also worth noting that i myself am not a religious person but i know its important to a lot of people). jeff and harry do their best to keep things clear and distinct but also make sure that the kids dont feel alienated or distant from either side. they dont force anything on them -- the kids are free to say no to certain things, and they both do their best to answer questions and such, so its not super strict, but more of a ‘its there if you want it’ type of situation. the kids also think its very special that they get to celebrate Hanukkah and christmas

as neurotic as harry was when they were little, once the kids are older, he’s the more lax one when it comes to certain things ie drinking, pot, tattoos, etc. he’s pro ‘if youre gonna drink id rather you do it in the house than at a party’ so when the boys are 18/19, they’re allowed to have a beer or a glass of wine if they want it, as long as harry takes their keys. he knows that if you make something super off limits, its gonna make it that much more tempting when he’s not around to say no. thats why when river is 6 and asks what beer tastes like, harry lets him have a super tiny sip and is amused when river spits it out immediately, but less amused when he spits it out back into the bottle. jeff is a bit more strict and would prefer that they dont do it at all, but he respects harrys policies and kinda grins and bears it.

jeff does the birds and the bees because harry is banned from talking about anything sex-related around the kids per their own request, simply because he’s super embarrassing and they hate it lmao sometimes he sits down and watches those shitty daytime talk shows, the one with the doctors as a panel, and he learns some random ass info about penile health and the next thing you know he’s bringing it up at breakfast only to be met with a chorus of ‘shut upppp dad, oh my GOD’ jeff is way more chill and easy to talk to, and the kids dont mind when he tells them because they can see that he’s just as uncomfortable as they are, eager to have it done and over with, as opposed to the theatrics they know theyd get with harry (probably some pseudo guidance counselor nonsense where he’d act placid and calm and stare at them with his laser beam focus, radiating ‘you can tell me anything’ vibes that would make them want to wither away. there’d be hand gestures and a condom demonstration with a banana, a lecture on embracing your sexuality but being careful and safe. NO THANKS, says all 4 kids)

and you are absolutely correct, other kids and teenagers seem to love going to the hazoff household, even though the actual hazoff kids dont know why. one of their dads is a complete goof (and totally embraces it) and the other is significantly more chill but also prone to being nerdy and embarrassing (harry tries to impress under the guise of being casual, whereas jeff is always ready to bust out naked baby pictures while simultaneously be the ~cool one). there are always cookies or some type of loaf cake on the counter and ready to be eaten, and jeff is always working on some new sound or projection system for movies. its just a really nice, open environment where anyone who steps into their house is accepted with open arms. unless they’re rude or mean. then harry is mildly passive aggressive but otherwise still civil. only once that person leaves does he mutter something about ‘well they weren’t very nice’

#hazoff abo #Anonymous

7 notes · View notes

skaldish · 3 years ago

Text

Ngl this is also a big reason why I don't use it. The word "Lokean" is extremely American. I've actually done a lot of research to figure out where it came from. While I still need my tracks to be verified fully, this is the history as I have it so far: In the 1970's, Odinism arrived in the United States. This is a Nazi-derived Volkish brand of Heathenry, and it was the only form of Heathenry that was circulated in the United States until recently. In those early years, a lot of research was still going into building the religion of Ásatrú, and debates surfaced over what to do with Loki. Eventually, the Volkisch decided to use Loki and his progeny to represent everything they deemed antithetical and oppositional to the "Aryan" identity. However, spewing blatant Nazi rhetoric negatively impacts Volkisch recruitment, so in order to make their stances palatable, Volkish heathens disguise many of their arguments behind "Reconstructionism." The Asatru stance on Loki is this: "Loki has no place-names in Scandinavia, which tells us he wasn't worshiped as a god. Therefore, it's neo-pagan revisionism to worship him now." This is a very common argument, and it's used to forbid people from hailing Loki at sumbel or including him in any typical service. This created a lot of discord within American Heathen organizations in the 90's and 00's, because—surprise!—they had members who worked with Loki. I'm not sure the specifics behind it, but the term "Lokean" seemed to rise out of this as a way to legitimize Loki-veneration—perhaps even to contrast the term "Odinist." Lokean authors and bloggers started publishing material on Loki, both online and in print. Now the term 'Lokean' is used to describe "someone who venerates Loki," and at times it can act as its own subdivision of Norse paganism. I wasn't in the thick of all this madness, but I learned about it secondhand from those who were, and what they went through was pure religious abuse. They treat the term "Lokean" as their solid ground and their way of fighting against the Volkish demonization of their deity. But my background is very different. I've never experienced any of this marginalization for myself, nor have I had to answer to Volkisch heathens in any propensity. For this reason, I find it more legitimizing to simply call myself Heathen. Loki is a heathen god to all of Scandinavia, and I prioritize Scandinavia's authority on Heathenry over anything the Volkisch Heathens have to say.* (I actually received a lot of backlash from Lokeans for this initially. They took this as a betrayal to their cause and erasure of the issues that persist in American Heathenry. There are a lot of other reasons why I don't use the term 'Lokean' for myself, but ignoring the issue is not the reason why.) --- *American Lokeans couldn't do this back in the day because global communication wasn't really a thing until now. You either had to fly to Europe (inaccessible for the average person), dig up a bunch of Norse history papers that could maybe perhaps give you some kind of clues about Heathen spirituality (also inaccessible to the average person), or learn from the people who were already doing these two things—Volkisch Heathens. If you were an American Heathen and wanted a community, you had to suck up to the Volkisch. So when it came to Loki contentions, people who worked with Loki were left with two choices: Leave, or self-advocate using literally any meager tool at their disposal. This seems to be the motivation behind the published works of Lokean writers, anyway.

Little bit of personal trivia, but fun fact: Despite the fact Loki is my patron, I actually don't identify as a Lokean. At least, not anymore. I used to back when Loki was the central focus of my practice, but over the years I switched to using "Heathen."

It's taken me a long time to really understand why I don't identify as a Lokean and a Heathen, or even as a "Lokean Heathen," and now I think I really know why—It's because my spirituality has always been centered around philosophies, not figures, and I don't feel comfortable using terms that suggest the latter.

#reblogs #sky treader

246 notes · View notes

thexerohour · 4 years ago

Text

Politically Agnostic is a Misnomer

ESSAY

October 23, 2020

by J. Slaughter

Someone recently asked me what I thought of the term “Politically Agnostic”. Initially, I thought to myself, “I think I addressed that in Episode 50 of The Xero Hour Podcast.

There’s a bunch of people like that, running around pretending to be neutral because they’re still at their default-liberal settings. I know of one guy like that in particular. He’s got an opinion on everything, but he likes to pretend that his opinions are neutral. He wants to make you believe that his thoughts are well balanced and non-biased. But here’s what he’s not telling you. He knows what opinions are most expedient to pronounce, but he doesn’t seem to believe those opinions. He knows how to coerce you into changing your opinions. He’s a grifter.

Most people are default-liberals (Center-Left), and the things that he says are just going to reinforce an acceptable liberal perspective, with a thin veneer of spirituality just to make it more palatable (and I have to say spirituality because Christianity isn’t a marketable term). Now my friend, he’s savvy to all that stuff. He’s a salesperson. He’s an entertainer and a presenter. But one thing he’s not is politically neutral. Everyone has a political standing. Everyone. Every. Single. Person. But, that’s something I’ll address later.

Right now, we need to look at this phrase, “Politically Agnostic”. Politically Agnostic is a marketing phrase, meaning, it’s made up. It’s not a real set of words that are meant to go together, so it’s not a phrase that people use. Politically Agnostic is something that was likely engineered to appeal to ‘spiritual’ people, or for use in SEO results.

I felt like my original assessment of the term politically agnostic was underdeveloped, and so I did a little bit of research just to see if my instincts were correct. I pulled up a few search results that date back quite a few years, but not much from recent times. After I read up on it a bit, I still feel like the phrase is something that was picked out of obscurity, because it would be good for marketing. However, the phrase should have a meaning. Words have meaning. And, with closer inspection, we can see that this is an odd combination of words indeed.

According to Merriam Webster (which has been recently exposed for changing the definitions of words arbitrarily, see “sexual preference”) the word agnostic means :

Definition of AGNOSTIC (noun)

1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly: one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

2: a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>

Here’s the thing I can’t wrap my head around. The second definition of agnostic is a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something. People are always trying to sell us on this idea when it comes to politics. It’s as if they are somehow “above it all” by remaining uninvolved. But in this case, inaction is the action. Agnosticism is a choice. Not to be confused with Indifference which is “the lack of difference or distinction between two or more things”, or in other words “ignorance”. There is a BIG distinction to be made between one’s Agnosticism and one’s Indifference.

When people are too fearful or too foolish to make the necessary sacrifices to commit; or are unwilling to change their true values and beliefs, then it becomes expedient for them to try and take the third approach. One that says they’re just not going to engage, as if that’s a wiser decision. It’s much easier to dismiss a political issue entirely than to face the cognitive dissonance of forming an opinion that disagrees with your actions. Why take the risk of offending some of your friends by taking a hard stance on some political issue when you can just pretend that it doesn’t matter. I mean, isn’t that what Jesus did? Well, no. I don’t think the Bible teaches anything like that sort of thinking or ideology.

Jesus never claimed to be politically indifferent or agnostic. When he was pressed on political issues, he exposed the categorical differences between his positioning and the positions that they were trying to impose on him. There’s a big difference between favoring one concept to the expense of another, and just pretending that the other concept doesn’t exist entirely.

So, when they asked “Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?” (an issue of affection and allegiance), Christ answered, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.” In this, He highlighted the categorical difference between spiritual affection and political duty. When they tried to provoke Jesus to anger by reporting that Pilate had killed some of the Galileans during their sacrificial worship (and probably sacrificing those men as well), he responded

“Suppose ye that these Galileans were sinners above all the Galileans because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.”

This was neither agnosticism nor indifference. Christ was quite committed to the message that he preached and I think that we ought to follow suit. The Bible doesn’t espouse political indifference, but quite the contrary:

Romans 13:1 “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities.

Therefore, the phrase agnostic reeks of ignorance and cowardice, in my opinion. If you’re ignorant then you should be willing to learn. You only refuse knowledge out of fear or foolishness. If you’re unwilling to learn, then we have to assume that you’re a either a fool or a coward. That covers both definitions of the word agnostic. Let’s move on to politics.

Definition of politics

1a: the art or science of government

b: the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy

c: the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government

2: political actions, practices, or policies

3a: political affairs or business

especially : competition between competing interest groups or individuals for power and leadership (as in a government)

b: political life especially as a principal activity or profession

c: political activities characterized by artful and often dishonest practices

4: the political opinions or sympathies of a person

Because neither I, nor most people that I know, are not directly involved with or employed in politics on a governmental level, including Church politics, we have to understand that the only definition that applies to us directly would be the fifth definition.

5a: the total complex of relations between people living in society

b: relations or conduct in a particular area of experience especially as seen or dealt with from a political point of view

This means that politics has more to do with relationships, personal experiences, and community. It’s how we deal with the issues that arise from within. Our political ideologies may be deeply factored into those relationships, and the ‘total complex of relations’, but at its root, it is the ideology that drives our actions. That’s why it’s important to understand where your thoughts come from, and where they lead.

Whether or not sexual predators should be allowed within a certain distance of a playground, or whether or not the government should allow churches to remain open during a Covid-19 pandemic, or whether or not an activist group should be able to compel a baker to participate in their festivities, against his religion, are all examples of politics. Not every conflict has to be adjudicated on a governmental level. This is why the Bible tells us to judge among ourselves, problems within the Church. But, I think it is the willingness among people to remain milquetoast about civil issues, that requires the government to intervene. Before the concept of MAGA, no one had an opinion about whether or not people should wear red hats (unless they really, really hated Limp Bizkit). Now, it’s a social issue. In many social conflicts, we ought to have thought out and set precedent, way before these things get to a governmental level.

The third and final part of this analysis is the perception of value that’s attached to the concept of Political Agnosticism. At its root, I think it’s probably closer to postmodernism. In the sense that things lose meaning or have no meaning at all. If something cannot be deemed important, then there’s no reason to form an opinion on it. I think this absolves one of his responsibility to engage in the world in a meaningful fashion. It absolves one all responsibility toward his brothers and sisters on a personal day-to-day level but elevates selfishness. Because we are born into families, and those families make up communities, I believe that man is meant to be a communal creature. Therefore politics is essential to our social makeup. You can’t have any hard perspectives or opinions on social matters without acknowledging that, the root of all social matters are, in nature, political.

What the left has done in today’s culture has been to change the meaning of politics to something that it doesn’t, while changing the meaning of the word social and applying the original meanings of politics and ethics. When words change in such a drastic and swift manner, they lose meaning. So on its face, political agnosticism is a word salad that truly has no real meaning. It would be better for one to be honest about their understanding, or lack thereof; to be honest about their interest, or lack thereof, without using this misnomer. You have an opinion, even if you don’t have all the facts. Just be honest.

As I said at the beginning of this essay, everyone has a political standing. It may simply be that you don’t know what that is or how to find out. It is very important and helpful to have a personal understanding of your thoughts and instincts on all matters social or political because they affect how you perceive and navigate the world. If you’re interested in finding out where you stand in general, try taking The Political Compass Test. You can find out where your own thoughts lie, and what major historical figures shared your point of view. You’ll even be able to print out a certificate of completion when you’re done (to share with all your friends). https://www.politicalcompass.org/

youtube

#politically agnostic #politics #agnostic #essay

0 notes