#we don't know what modern words they would have used to describe themselves so we can't just assume

[menacingpolkamusic]

"Female Husbands" is called that because not all of those people were definitively trans. But the book is open to trans interpretation of their lives, which is more than we can say for most reporting about historical masc individuals assigned female at birth.

I think a big reason trans men do not appear in media as often as other queer identities, as well as historical erasure to a point, is because it goes against many women's experience with challenging bigotry. I cannot tell you how many pieces of media exist with "girl dresses as boy to get Privilege or Respect she wasn't given before, but has to reveal she is A Woman by the end as she has to prove women can do The Thing TM too and it's more 'honest' to her identity'". With a lot of trans masc/man historical figures there is constant fighting over whether it was really a women fighting the patriarchy and not a guy struggling with being trans. There is a book about "female husbands and the women that love them" for Christ's sake. We are constantly interpreted as on the border of being super hurt/proactive women for the sake of that class's conscience, and anything else is "taking away" from women's more important issues, supposedly. I'm just tired of all afab people having trouble with their identity being funneled into the "women good, patriarchy/men bad" pipeline or else. It feels like me talking about being a man, even in a trans context, is unacceptable because it *might affect a women at some point

[mikkeneko]

Have been pondering, following the latest round of "But why don't authors LIKE it when we leave unsolicited concrit on their stuff? :|a Don't they want to IMPROVE?" discourse:

How do fan authors improve? Because it's not, by and large, through concrit. Some authors have never gotten any kind of concrit, and still improve. I've gotten some in the past, and it definitely was not helpful towards improving my growth as an author. Some authors never have a beta, and yet they still improve.

So. If not through a workshop devoted to the process, or a classroom style series of lectures, or a dedicated editor, how do authors improve over time?

I would say, based on my 20+ years of experience and observation, that improvement as a writer comes in three ways: Practice shaped by self-observation, practice shaped by non-critical feedback as positive reinforcement, and observation of other authors.

Fandom has always been a space where people of different ages and skill levels interact. How it works, generally, is that a new author comes into the scene and presents their work. Readers -- some of whom are authors themselves -- will leave feedback praising the parts they like. Writers will then adjust their style on the next piece geared towards eliciting more of the things that readers said they like. However, in a vacuum, they won't necessarily know what to adjust towards, or what new things to try that they aren't already trying.

But at the same time, these young authors are usually (though not always) reading works by more experienced authors in the fandom. They can see, based on popularity stats and feedback left by others, what people like. If they want more of that attention themselves -- or, just generally, if they want to be part of the community -- they will adjust their works to incorporate more of the parts they perceive as successful with the audience.

They will also -- the more they read, and the more they write -- come to internalize an understanding (often, not even a conscious understanding) of the moving parts that go into a story, of what makes the work work. How to pace a scene, a chapter, or a longer work. How the characters talk, and how different characters talk in ways that distinguish their voices. What sort of language works well to describe an action scene, and what is confusing and uncertain. What words are sexy and what words will jar you right out of the mood. They will pick up these tools by observation, and hone them through practice.

The down side of this, of course, is that sometimes the authors they are observing and imitating may have... less than ideal writing habits themselves. Certain tropes, flanderization, headcanons divorced from the original canon, or various other things can become endemic in a fandom due to this -- but also much simpler and more straightforward writing quirks. (The infamous oh is an example of these.) Sometimes things that I won't necessarily say are bad, I will just observe that they are not correct.

And this is how you got an entire generation of fanfic writers using strong endings on verbs that, in modern English, take the weak ending.

[hadesoftheladies]

"you are killing a baby"

i am killing a fetus, not an infant. an egg is not a chicken. potential is not actuality.

"you are murdering an innocent."

it doesn't matter who is innocent. a hungry lion may be innocent in wanting to eat me only because it is hungry and may not have the cognitive capacities to exercise something like restraint or conscience. that does not mean i should not defend myself from harm. it is still self-defense. all animals are expected to protect themselves first and foremost. you are just so used to the idea that women (especially mothers) are supposed to sacrifice their lives for their children in order to be good people--like they aren't human beings with self-preservation instincts.

harm equals anything that threatens the life or health of a person and pregnancy does both.

"your body was meant/designed to do this"

miscarriages are as natural as pregnancies. why do you think the placenta exists? pregnancy sickness? the female body can grow a person, yet also has resistance mechanisms for a pregnancy.

also, just because i have genes that make me a good runner doesn't mean i have to become a marathoner. like think for a second.

"what will the father think?"

women don't owe men or society themselves. i know that's very hard for you to grasp but there's no time like the present to start. there is no ethical way to make a woman a commodity or government assigned asset for reproduction or sex.

"the baby is conscious"

so is the lion in the hypothetical. also, that's debatable. also, what are your thoughts on veganism? since you care so much about the suffering of conscious beings (that is beings with selves)

"but animals aren't humans. they don't deserve the same rights as humans because of their lower cognitive capacities"

great. now apply this ethic to babies and mentally disabled people and then try to explain to me why that has to be different without mentioning how you feel or your religion. :)

"a baby has more potential than an animal."

okay, and why does that potential automatically mean better or more valuable? higher cognitive capacities haven't stopped wars and mass murders have they? (and i would argue that bringing a child into a violent world increases their chance of becoming unhealthy or complicit persons, so you can almost know what the character of your child will be like for certain based on where you're raising them).

"a baby has a soul"

there are two kinds of dualisms within christianity: thomistic and cartesian. cartesian dualism has gone out of fashion even amongst christian theologians and philosophers.

Substance dualism, or Cartesian dualism, most famously defended by René Descartes, argues that there are two kinds of foundation: mental and physical. Descartes states that the mental can exist outside of the body, and the body cannot think.

'Thomistic substance dualism' (TSD) centers around two beliefs: 1) the rational soul is an immaterial substance, and 2) this immaterial substance is the human person.

aside from the fact that both of these philosophies are rife with problems, I think thomistic dualism is the stronger of the two. the rational soul is, in a way, a word for the self.

regardless, both of these describe a self as a soul. so i'm just going to define a self.

The psychology of self is the study of either the cognitive and affective representation of one's identity or the subject of experience. The earliest formulation of the self in modern psychology forms the distinction between two elements I and me. The self as I, is the subjective knower. While, the self as Me, is the subject that is known.

a self is a centralized consciousness with their own memories, introspection and reflections. we know through neuroscience, psychology, behavioural science and sociology that a person or self is formed via experiences (where memories and impressions are gathered, how people learn), language and socialization (economy, history, family, culture) and possibly some genetic expressions (although i think this is more about capacity than actualization).

this is why things like dementia or alzheimer's are so scary and difficult. when a person loses memories, they lose aspects of themselves. when a person changes their environment, they also become different people (even while maintaining some similarities with their past selves).

this is mirrored in popular media, characters that lose their memories lose versions of themselves. this is also why, when you look at stories that feature a multiverse, the same character becomes a different person in different lives. in short, you are not born a person. you become one, and although your self remains singular and centralized (even with age), that self still changes. both the self and the people around the self create the self.

this is also why socially isolated individuals devolve and become mindless or sick (and even have reduced lifespan). certain higher human capacities like "conscience" or "empathy" can be socialized out of a human being, as well. i'd even go so far as to say that children begin conceptualizing themselves as individuals only when they begin to sense the presence of other human beings. they cannot conceptualize their own identity without the presence of other people. they probably don't know they are a self until they recognize other people and then realize they themselves are also people, and people are individuals.

legally a person is:

. . . an entity that the law recognises as having its own distinct personality. This usually means one that is able to act in its own right, and capable of possessing legal rights and liabilities, including individuals (or "natural persons") and corporate organisations.

my point is, how can a fetus with virtually no experiences (which born animals have), no language or skill (learned) to introspect or reflect (or abstract), possibly have a self? when they are not exposed to the outside world? certainly they have the capacity to develop a self, but as established earlier on, potential is not actuality. so legally and psychologically, a fetus is very likely not a person.

but we do not need this to be true to justify abortion regardless, because an innocent person is still causing harm, whether directly or indirectly. so the woman/girl has every right to resist.

[cursedvibes]

ive been thinking lately of tengen's and kenjaku's techniques being two sides of the same coin.. both of them using others' bodies to prolong their lives. this is kind of word vomit and aimless, but it makes me think about that one dialogue between mahito and kenjaku about techniques dictating their worlds... both of their goals are kind of similar too, though where tengen seeks the upholding of foundation, kenjaku seeks to unravel it. these two have so much unexplored drama. what are your thoughts ?

Oh yes there are absolutely dichotomies between their techniques, their immortality and how they use the bodies of others! So when we look at Tengen's immortality for example, it's something constant. She ages and she will eventually evolve, but her life is something immutable that will go on without her actively doing anything to uphold it. Kenjaku on the other hand has a much more fragile immortality you could say. It's tied to their current vessels and likely they would die with their vessels if they don't change again. Meaning, they have to do something to keep living, it involves their active involvement. They couldn't just lock themselves in a tree for a couple hundred years and come out as if nothing happened. They have to maintain their vessel and interact with others to keep living.

Similarly with how they use their vessels and how they react to change. When Kenjaku changes bodies they take in other people's memories, their cursed energy and to an extent their life. Of course they still hold onto their own identity, but they still use who this person was before and learn something from their experiences like how they used Geto's memories to trick Gojo or take his CT and improve upon it. Or how they take Noritoshi's resistance to the Death Painting blood with them even long after he's dead, similar to saving Kaori's CT. Or with EdoKen, they adjusted their way of living to what the body is physically capable of. If the vessel is weak, it makes Kenjaku weaker too.

Tengen on the other hand uses her vessels to resist change. Physically speaking, the Star Plasma Vessels are a reflection of her. She describes it literally as merging with herself. Riko might've had her own little life and Tengen let her have some fun, but when the merger happens, she is still just a fragment of Tengen that loses any individuality and whose experiences have no impact on Tengen. She can't even hear their voices. They might as well not exist anymore because to her they have entirely become part of her and actually were never anything more than that.

She uses the vessels to reaffirm herself and desperately turn back time to go back to what she used to be and uphold the status quo. No ambiguity, no new possibilities with what she could become, she's just sticking to what she knows. We know that all sorcerers who take over a vessel gain their memories (a little different in Kenjaku's case, since they are the only person who uses dead bodies) and usually use their memories to orient themselves better in modern times. Tengen however doesn't seem to learn anything from her vessels. Even with a vessel that's still alive like Yuki, she only really sees her as a petulant child and doesn't take her words and anger all that serious. For a long time she apparently didn't even allow her to come close to talk to her. She is on some level curious about the SPVs, what they might be saying about her, but in the end they all get dismissed because she is older and more experienced and wiser and knows it better. Same way she treats Kenjaku honestly. Not that Kenjaku is like altruistic in how they perceive their vessel's, but they are more involved than her and gain more from them than just a meatsuit.

[the-perfect-wagnerite-again]

Can you please explain what stuff like "safe horny" is? What do you consider to be "healthy," if you can describe the subject as such, sexuality? I'm not trying to make a gotcha or own, I genuinely am curious as to what that means.

My take on healthy sexuality is deeply influenced by my Kantianism. We humans are unique in that we are simultaneously phenomenal objects and free subjects, and the categorical imperative impels us to treat all subjects as ends in themselves. Sexual desire is an immensely complex phenomenon, and at its core is the base animal instinct for copulation and sexual satisfaction. But the mere slaking of lust is beneath us; it doesn't satisfy, because we are more than just flesh.

Over and above sexual lust is sexual desire, a metaphysical search for the subjecthood of the Other that we sense in our beloved. We know that our subjectivity is the vector through which experience is possible, and so we exist not so much IN the world as on its edge, looking out from the first-person perspective, the state that allows us to utter the word "I" and have it mean something. In the beloved is a recognition of the self reflected back, a not-self in full possession of that same subjectivity, and it is the total knowledge of this alien subjecthood that sexual desire seeks to possess. Why do we get lost in the eyes of our beloved? We don't see the eye as an organ of sight, but as a window to the self. In the eyes, we see a self-possessed "I" looking back at us, which is why the gaze from the beloved has been such a powerful anchor for artists, poets, and musicians throughout the ages. This singular drive for knowledge of the subject is also why it would be insane to suggest to a man in love to trade his wife for a newer or more attractive one. The man in love isn't interested in women writ large, no matter how attractive they might be: his desire is concentrated and focused upon a singular, solitary subject for whom he seeks total knowledge.

In light of this, marriage is now understood as a redemption of the human biological drive for sexual satisfaction. In much the same way we redeem our biological need for nutrition through the cultural apparatus of cooking, meal-taking, and communion, through romance, courtship, and marriage we take the base human drive for sexual possession and uplift it to its apex as pure subjectivity.

What happens when we decouple this connection between the subject and sexual desire? What happens when we shift our understanding of sex as an exercise of epistemology to a mere conjugation of body parts? The relation falls away from that of "I to I" and becomes an "it to it" relation, objects colliding in a world of objects. The true danger of pornography, the sexual revolution, and modern sexual ethics is that they obliterate the subject in the sexual act, and reduce them to the status of object, a body with sexual organs that can be manipulated in the act of intercourse. In this new paradigm, there is no motivation for knowledge of the other, there is only self-satisfaction. The beloved vanishes and in its stead are objects to be consumed through dating apps, pornography, advertising, and menu-mentality approaches to romance as a "marketplace." The only barrier is consent, so any moral castigations beyond that are seen as backwards, oppressive, and reactionary.

Where consent is the only necessary factor for any sexual encounter of any kind or in any circumstance, male sexuality becomes unshackled from the duties and obligations that previously bound it into healthy service to femininity and family. It is once again predatory, as it would be in a state of nature, because we've cast aside our redeeming institutions of romance and courtship as regressive relics of a patriarchal past. "Safe horny" is a refuge for men to express desire without being seen as predatory, which is why we've seen such a dramatic increase in men expressing desires for dominant women and aggressive matriarchal sexual archetypes, in which relation they couldn't possibly be seen as agents themselves. This is a symptom of the larger sexual dysfunction of modernity.

[fel0ny-01]

I HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING I HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING!!!!!! STATE OF GRACE (TV) IS SO GHOST SOAP CODED. LET ME EXPLAIN. (I will delve deeply into this! Forgive me! Read at your own discretion lmfao)

So “State of Grace” is about falling in love, and the power that falling in love can hold; especially how it can change a person’s views on others and themselves. It holds the deeper and spiritual meaning of what love means, right? Now at its core, the song is about growth, change and redemption. Now that sounds familiar to me, especially in how Ghost/Soap is portrayed in fan-made creations (Fuck you Activison!)

I’m gonna delve into some lyrics really quick that scream Ghostsoap to me. They will be in bold.

“I'm walking fast through the traffic lights

Busy streets and busy lives

And all we know is touch and go”

All they know is touch and go. As a noun, it applies to them. Come back from missions, get debriefed, go back and do more missions again. Touch and Go, as simple as that. They both do it, they’ve been doing it for a while.

Now as an adjective, they would also only know touch and go. For Ghost, this could apply to his relationships. People die when they know him, when they love him. It’s possible they will stay, but very uncertain. In a lot of fanon, Soap doesn’t have this problem. However, if we look at canon, it’s implied in Modern Warfare 3, that he doesn’t have any family to go back to. So it’s all touch and go for them.

“We are alone with our changing minds

Being in the military (or even in childhood), they experience traumatic events that a regular human being would never experience. And usually it’s very unheard of in the military to talk about emotional feelings, you are required to keep that away professionally.

We fall in love 'til it hurts or bleeds, or fades in time”

Relationships come with a lot of hurt. As always. But the words used here (Hurts, Bleeds or fades in time) really strike me as words that would and could be used to describe the relationships the boys have experienced, whether for both, it would be Graves’ betrayal, or for Ghost, Losing Roach.

“And I never (never)

Saw you coming

And I’ll never (never)

Be the same”

This just applies to the general relationship. We see when Soap and Ghost meet after a couple of years, Ghost seems pretty annoyed that he’s working with the sergeant again, but God he didn’t expect to get so close with him that he felt like he had changed from spending time with him. Physically, he did see him coming, but the way Soap wormed his way into Ghost’s heart? He never saw that coming.

“You come around and the armor falls

Pierce the room like a cannonball

Now all we know is don't let go”

THIS. THIS LADIES AND GENTLETHEM. THIS IS THE LINE. I feel as though this is definitely from Ghost’s perspective. When he’s with recruits, or allies, or anyone else other than Soap, he is stone cold, walls up, no banter. But when Soap, the armour (I love this!) falls, whether it’s the battle armour, or the emotional armour; he lets go when he’s around Soap.

The phrase, “pierce the room like a cannonball” really just makes me laugh because it brings out Soap’s inner destructiveness, but also how explosive he was getting into Ghost’s heart. It even works with how he most definitely lights up the room when he walks in, piercing it.

“ALL WE KNOW IS DONT LET GO” they’ve progressed in their relationship, it’s getting to the point where neither can even think about losing the other. That they’d rather die than lose the other person. They knew touch and go before, that was all they did know, but that uncertain feeling has been replaced with a sense of belonging to the other, now all the know is don’t let go.

“We are alone, just you and me

Up in your room and our slates are clean

Just twin fire signs, four blue eyes”

I’d like to think Ghost and Soap spend their spare time in each others spaces, basking in the warmth of the other. I know in a lot of fics, they either go in theirs or the others rooms, because it’s safe there. When they are together and alone, their slates are clean. They are just Johnny and Soap, not the insane murder machines that kill, get shot and get hurt. They are just two boys in love, adoring eachother. Twin fire signs.

“So you were never a saint

And I've loved in shades of wrong”

FROTHING AT THE MOUTH. THIS IS IT. This could be from either of their perspectives, but I do see it as more of a Soap line. Ghost thinks he’s this awful, unredeemable killer who doesn’t deserve anything good, and Soap recognises he’s done bad things (and so has he) but Soap loves in shades of wrong. He knows they’ve both done bad things, but he never wanted anything less than him, anything less than Simon. Anything less than the brutal killing machine he sees himself as.

“We learn to live with the pain

Mosaic broken hearts”

Whether it’s learning to live with the pain of losing people, seeing unimaginable things, or having traumatic things happen to them, they learn to live with it all. They learn to accept their “mosaic broken hearts” even if they don’t accept their own, but the others.

“But this love is brave and wild”

I love this one, because it feels like it captures the explosive nature of their relationship. Their love is brave, they go out on missions where they could lose the other, but they would also kill for the other. They know anything could happen, but yet they still continue to love. And the wild part just screams Johnny, his explosiveness, his willingness to put his love and trust into Ghost, who returns it with much enthusiasm.

“This is a state of grace”

The phrase “State of Grace” means “a condition of being free from sin”. And this just hits different. Soap and Ghost are ‘sinners’. They have committed several sins in the eyes of religion, they have done awful things, they have committed war crimes for god sake!

But their love strips that all away. Their love is a state of Grace, it’s a condition of being free from sin. When they are in love, all their sins, mistakes, they are all gone. When they are together, they are almost like angels. Their love rebuilds through their fractures, and redeems them.

“This is the worthwhile fight”

Lots of fights don’t feel worthwhile to Ghost, he doesn’t feel like some battles are worth fighting for. He feels like they are just doing them out of pure pity, he feels that a lot of the time. But this time, this fight for love and life with Johnny is so worthwhile to him. It’s something he isn’t doing out of pity, or out of command, he is doing it because it’s worthwhile to him.

“These are the hands of fate

You're my Achilles heel”

Ghost’s hands end lives. With the flick of his wrist he can snap someone’s neck, he can do it without hesitation. His hands decide fate. But Soap is his Achilles heel. Soap could sway him from doing some of the things he does out of habit, that’s how much influence he has on him. He would do anything for his Johnny, even if that means giving up the world.

“This is the golden age of something good and right and real”

Finally, thank fuck, finally, they both have something that’s positive for once. Not war, not death, not pain. Something just for them, something that’s good, and right, and real. They both feel it for each other eternally. It feels right, everything slots together so nice, like a jigsaw.

“And I never (never)

Saw you coming

And I'll never (so you were never a saint)

(And I've loved in shades of wrong)

Be the same (we learn to live with the pain)

(Mosaic broken hearts)

(But this love is brave and wild)”

This bit is more technical on the production side, but it really hits me in the heart. To me, it’s like they are reminiscing over the start of their relationship. Ghost saying he will bever be the same, and Soap reassuring Ghost saying that he loves him regardless of what he’s done. That he’s allowed to have this one thing. That they are both allowed to have this.

[caradoulasupport]

Matrescence - becoming a mother, no ‘bouncing back’ required

Becoming a mother for the first time is a great transition in your life, a rite-of-passage. And not only the first time, but for each time that you become a mother you transition again into a new version of yourself. Each transition is just as significant as the one before. In Western cultures, the focus is largely on the baby that has been born, however the mother is also born each time she gives birth, and this "becoming a mother" piece has largely been left out of our culture entirely. In the same way that we nurture and care for a new baby, we would really do well to remember that the new mother also needs to be nurtured and cared for during this transition.

This critical transition period is Matrescence, and was first coined by an American anthropologist in 1973, Dana Raphael. And although this was first written about in the 1970’s the concept of matrescence has gone completely unacknowledged and unexplored in the medical community, until very recently. There is still so little known about the psychological and physiological effects of becoming a mother - how it affects the brain, the endocrine system, cognition, immunity, the psyche, the microbiome, the sense of self. At a time when a woman is going through a significant rite of passage and is going through massive changes in her physical state, her status within her wider group, her emotional life, her focus, her own identity and in her relationships with everyone around her, she is expected to transition through this stage with ease.

As the author of the recently published book "Matrescence", Lucy Jones, has alluded to - each time that I write the word "matrescence" a red squiggly line immediately appears below it as if to say - this is not real, it doesn't mean anything, it's made up! But it is very real, and the only way to make it even more real is to bring more and more awareness to it, to speak about it to everyone you know. Maybe people will use the argument that they don't want to scare new mothers with horror stories, or that everyone has to go through it for themselves. But there is a huge difference between scaremongering a new mother and presenting her with a term and an explanation for how she is very likely feeling anyway. And if women were to even grow up hearing about this normal transition that happens on entering motherhood, have evidence based information on how it affects your thoughts and emotions, your hormones, your relationships, your sense of self - how much better would they go on to cope with the reality of motherhood if it happens for them? Instead of getting completely side-swiped by a wave of unknowing, of being lost and totally adrift in what we have come to understand as modern motherhood.

The sense of social isolation that can stem from women being ashamed of what they are experiencing and not realising it is actually normal can even trigger feelings of postnatal depression. There are such complicated feelings that can co-exist - having a sense of worry, disappointment, guilt, competition, frustration, anger or even fear alongside the joy of new motherhood. And it is now thought, according to reproductive psychiatrist Alexandra Sacks, who has reintroduced the concept of matrescence in a New York Times article in 2017, that just even knowing that and being aware of what matrescence is can prevent women from getting ill. If you can watch the TED talk given by Alexandra Sacks in 2018 describing matrescence, it will astonish you.

Talking about matrescence and all the parts of motherhood- including the parts that may carry shame for us - is the only way to help mothers feel less stigmatised and more normal in all aspects of becoming a mother. Of course experiencing matrescence without a support network, and without understanding the complexity of what is happening in your brain as a new mother only adds to feelings of not being enough, not being a “good” mother and a sense of failure that can lead to a diagnosis of postnatal depression.

But the question is how much of maternal mental illness is biological and how much is an understandable response to the design of modern parenthood?

One way to claim back the rite-of-passage of motherhood is to surrender to it, embrace every part of it and honour the transition that you have gone through as a mother and as parents. Planning for this postpartum period and putting the framework in place that allows you to be nurtured as the mother is fundamental to the process of matrescence. It is time to honour this monumental transition and enter into motherhood empowered, nurtured and with the confidence that the changes that are happening are normal and expected.

[angryducktimemachine]

I saw a post about how older characters (in fanfics etc) would not necessarily know terms or similar stuff regarding queerness the same way someone closer to my age would. And of course I gotta talk about my OCs now because I think it's very interesting and actually something I have thought about before, with characters who'd either because of their age/the time they lived or because of their setting not necessarily describe themselves the way I do for them.

Biggest example is probably Annie, who I think would eventually apply the label bisexual to herself if we get closer to the modern day (and she comes to terms with her feelings for Helena) although not tell anyone. But her gender is a very different thing because I absolutely do think that if she were born and grew up in today's times that'd she'd be more willing to embrace the fact that she's not cis, where as actual Annie would struggle a lot more with those terms and wouldn't really seek it out either but just continue existing as herself, just because of the person he is.

And I actually think that something similar is true for Friederick just in terms of labels. I think that in our world and with our resources he'd absolutely identify as trans and aroace but I don't know if he'd use those terms in his actual story, not necessarily even because they don't exist but because he's not someone who'd interact much with it by the nature of his character and also story line so far.

The REAL fun one here is Matthäus because not even I know how/what he'd call himself in today's words. And for him I think there's multiple factors, it's both the general world he's living in but it's also the fact that ... I think in his own words he'd go something like "I don't need to concern myself with such human terms.".

Anyways that's my morning ramble.

[peachie-kittie]

So.

I have thoughts.

Sex and gender and transphobia.

Cw for talks of like- biological sex, in case that would cause dysphoria for anybody. The practice of shaving. Transphobia. TERF talk. Keep yourselves safe. 💕 also jsyk I will be speaking from a western, cis standpoint. PLEASE don't take my word anywhere near the final say.

Also, I'm not sure if this is quite a debate post - I don't doubt it may cause discourse if it blows up. Just me sharing thoughts on shit.

God I don't know where to start??? I guess the easiest part would be giving a brief overview of the goal of terf ideology for anyone who doesn't know like- the basic basics.

The simplest terms I can define it as is the belief that gender is totally made up (understandable) and the current patriarchal uses gender standards to uphold harmful standards (specifically for women) and it should be totally dismantled, along with the systems that support it, so men and women are on equal playing fields.

Neat take. Don't hate it. Dare I say it - sounds progressive.

Something to note before continuing on - terfs say they do not "see" gender. Since they believe gender is completely made up, they choose to see things strictly in regards to sex.

I'm not stating this is a good or bad thing yet - just making note of it. The reason why, I feel, a lot of the arguments go nowhere is because terfs and non-terfs usually have this crucial divide in thinking where one see themselves as gender-blind while the other acknowledges it. Like- terfs will acknowledge gender the same way you might acknowledge a bird flying overhead. Ranging from mild (if not uninterested) amusement, to apathy, or even disgust if you hate birds (or in terfs case, gender as a concept). Sorry if that's a weird comparison it's the first one that came to mind

Okay. That aside.

With this, we can start to understand their viewpoint. Since terfs only "see" sex, and there in society, there are two main sexes considered - male and female - one is the oppressor class of the patriarchy (male) and one is the oppressed class, the victims (female).

Another aside here - this is more a theory than anything, but I believe most terfs see misogyny as strictly hating women. A lot of people I know personally, however, would define it more as the hatred of "feminine" actions/things/labels. Since the female body is feminized (WHICH I DON'T THINK IS A GOOD THING, I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY), anyone with female anatomy falls under that in current society.

Okay, before continuing on any further, I wanna define some things - like. A common right-wing argument in general is "how can gender both be intrinsic and a social influence at the same time??"

So here. My personal understanding of these things.

Gender: Someone's natural lean towards what may be considered fem, masc, and/or androgynous labels/actions/presentation in modern society. In this specific definition, I'm leaning towards labels as gender expression is labeled two paragraphs down. Fluidity in identity varies from person-to-person, and SOME peoples' identities MAY be influenced by outside sources, although it seems uncommon. (Often relating to xenogenders, which is not the primary focus here).

Biological sex: The biological traits you are born with - most frequently, these traits are vulva, breasts, and a uterus + ovaries for AFAB bodies and testes + a penis for AMAB bodies. In my opinion, sex should be COMPLETELY NEUTRAL. Being of one sex doesn't make you inherently more feminine/masculine than someone else.

Gender expression/presentation: This is a tricky subject. The easiest way to describe it is someone's external presentation of their "gender" - whether it "contradicts" the label they've chosen or goes with it! It is not a requirement for someone to dress/act the way their gender's lean is "supposed too" (HEAVY QUOTES THERE) for them to be valid!

Gender/sex roles: The (often harmful) expectations set upon us as people by higher society - and admittedly, the patriarchy quite frequently - to act in the way our sex determines we do to be a "successful man/woman". I gave two parts here as I believe there is good in separating the two.

Sex roles - Any stereotype that can be attributed to reproduction, sexual habits, libido, and "roles" during the act.

Gender roles - Anything that isn't those things, for the most part. Of course, there is some overlap - "boys will be boys" can be used both in the context of boys being called "natural roughhousers" when getting into a fight in elementary school and when a teenage guy sexually harrasses a peer - but it isn't always one in the same.

Another thing I wanna make clear now is how I feel about gender and gender labels and just- things being considered feminine and masculine and androgynous.

I do not believe that it is inherently bad for certain things to be labeled certain ways. With the exception of the human sexes, because those are just bodies we were born into, I do not think it is inherently harmful for certain products or words to have a gendered leaning.

With that said, since gender and gender expression vary widely, we should allow room for multiple interpretations of the word. For example, what I would consider a generally satisfactory description of the word woman below:

"A term most frequently used by those who prefer/don't mind feminine gender expression, although it doesn't exclude those who prefer gnc or masculine expressions"

And vice versa for the word "man".

And for non-binary identities, it would be something alone the lines of "a label used by those who prefer either a mix of multiple gender expressions or wish to totally disconnect; this varies widely, and some may present traditionally masc/fem for a plethora of reasons"

Also, to any terfs who may be happen to be reading this post: surprised you're all the way down here - if it isn't obvious I don't believe that woman = female. Leaving it at that.

Anyway.

So. What was- all of that??? Why did I type all that bullshit out???

So, let's just start with the idea that started this whole fucking post:

A post that essentially said terf ideology boils down to terfs think they know you better than you do.

And like- I can't really disagree but there is some fucked up nuance there. Like, yknow when someone you don't usually like makes a good point?? That's what terf beliefs can feel like - especially if you don't have the mind to really pick apart what's being said.

In the comments of the post I mentioned I saw a lot of things from terfs that essentially said:

"Not really lol we just want people to critically examine their thoughts and the structures around them"

And therein lies the interesting, progressive part. I won't lie - it is crucial that we do encourage meta-cognition (I believe that's the term, anyhow). Analyzing the reason why we believe things, why we want certain things, and why we are the way we are is DEEPLY important, especially in a society where values are often shallow and/or patriarchal in nature.

Hell, dare I say, I believe it's important that people introspect upon their feelings regarding things like femininity, masculinity, and androgynous expressions as there are tight standards to them that deserve to be broken out of. Moreover. those who abide by traditional roles willingly should be cautious as to not accidentally shame others who may differ from said expression.

But then the issue is, how much introspection is necessary?? What is the goalpost??

Speaking from the perspective of someone with OCD - sometimes things or people just...are. There isn't always some secret underlying disease, motive, or influence. Like, literally, gonna be real, you know how with intrusive thoughts they're just Fucking Thoughts™? I think some aspects of identity are Like That™. We don't need to nail every reason we have for doing or feeling a certain way.

And even if there is, that doesn't inherently make the person bad or like- invalid. Like, example: people who prefer women without a lot body hair may have gotten that preference from society, sure, but if they are actively fighting against natural beauty-standards and don't shame women for NOT shaving, then it's not a fucking issue.

Let me say that again

An individual having a preference that was influenced and/or that happens to line up with societal expectations (whether or not it has the potential to cause harm) does not matter if-

They are AWARE that said preference may have been instilled in them/CAN be harmful, not WILL BE.

If said preference has been harmful, they are careful not to push it on others and (preferrably) are actively fighting AGAINST THE NORMALIZATION OF SAID HARM. Like, going back to the shaving thing - shaving itself isn't fun per se, and ofc it can cause the occasional nick or ingrown hair. But other than that, the act of shaving isn't the issue - it's the glamorization/idealization of the hairless female body. But I feel like, in an alternate world where the female body wasn't sexualized, the preference wouldn't be an issue or talking point at all. Of course theoreticals can only go so far, but still - individuals having a preference isn't harmful in itself unless they are PUSHING IT ON OTHERS.

And that, if in a relationship with someone, they will not try to manipulate or be shitty towards the person if they don't shave. And if they do shave, good foe both of 'em!

I remember this one kind of late too but like- I think about another post I saw where a terf went on a whole rant about how like, everytime a woman shaves and another woman sees, it's essentially that woman contributing to The Patriarchy™ and turning against women to hurt them, which??? Like I understand there is a lot of nuance but the general takeaway is woahhhhh you're saying that women who shave can't wear short clothes or the endorsing the patriarchy. Kinda sounds shitty if I'm being real - like, I get that individuals contribute and all but there's only so much you CANT contribute to such stereotypes in the west. There are so fucking many.

Point is that a lot of terf arguments, while progressive in theory, often do kind of have this "I know you better than you do yourself" air to them and they hide it well underneath the disguise of "meta-cognitive thinking".

How this relates to trans individuals should be obvious - it's essentially the belief of "I actually know what labels you ARE/ehat you PREFER you're just acting otherwise for x/y/z reasons"

For trans masc people, it often boils down to "you want the power of your oppressors". Which...oh boy. Like, again, understand the logic - but I don't think other people who have lived the percieved-woman-experience (esp. if they're transitioned in late teens/adult years, when they've probably had years of BS under their belt) would want to do actively hurt women. And that's not to mention the idea that it strips autonomy away from trans masc folk about their own minds. Of course, with younger trans masc folk, I do believe it is important that we do take some precaution - I'm not saying we misgender or deadname if they have chosen a new name/pronouns-

DO NOT DO THAT. IT WON'T DO ANYTHING EXCEPT STRIP AWAY THEIR AUTONOMY WHICH WE'VE ESTABLISHED IS NOT FUCKING GOOD FOR THEM.

But just discuss why they feel the way they do. It's a very fine balancing act and one that deserves a conversation, but not one that I feel super qualified to talk much about in-depth. I just know that misgendering snd desdnaming a young teen (no matter if they turn out cis or trans) is not. cool.

And as for trans fem folk?? Oh boy. The rhetoric is "entitled men want access to female spaces to harm them".

So lemme say this-

Do we earnestly believe in a society like this, where the Patriarchy™ (that thing terfs love to talk about) is super strict about the pigeonholes men have to be in to fulfill the role of being a True Man™ would allow for trans women to safely be in a male space? In a society that encourages blithely ignorant harassment at best and excuses (sometimes exual) violence at worst, do you earnestly believe a trans woman (unless they are still in the closet socially/dressed in abmasculine way that makes them look cis) could enter and exit a male restroom or locker room with guaranteed safety??

I'll give you a hint; the answer is no. And before someone leaves a remark about explaining they may just be cross-dressing or doing drag, don't forget that those practices are also being criminalized.

Not to mention the very real argument of "woman's spaces" not exactly like - fucking guarded. Unless it's a prison, psych ward, or shelter, but then those require more conversation!! Bathrooms arguably would be better guarded if they could be bigger with sinks in each stall! And the thing is-

No matter the sex or gender of somebody, you can always take them to court if they assault you. And before I hear some shit about "male privelege", I want to remind you that trans people are, in general, subject to higher rates of violence than cis people. I think to trans woman to court would not only work out in the cis woman's favor, but also end up becoming a big hit that ends up in another terf list of the shitty people who happened to be trans women.

I have so much more I wanna say but this is already a million years long. I might make a few more posts bc I've been ruminating (OCD's a cunt but at least I get times to think things through, like the terfs like) on this shit. And yknow what??

Trans rights babey!!!

Have a good day - and to my trans siblings, friends, and my lover if you happen to read all this shit-

Stay safe. You deserve to be happy. 💕🪷🏳️‍⚧️

[megamijadeheart]

Ohpe closed the chat. They considered closing the whole browser, but there were other people in the program they didn't want to cut off contact from.

Not that they would be great company at the moment anyway.

One of the old ladies had used a term that is generally frowned upon in modern usage. Not maliciously. Out of joy of feeling a kinship. And others tried to let her know that she was understood, but maybe needed to find a new word to describe her meaning that didn't misuse a religious concept from a marginalized culture.

That might have been fine. She was grateful to be informed.

That might have been the end of it.

Except one of the chat members suggested as an alternate, a term from a fandom culture that the old lady was only aware of in vague context that were sexually charged.

The old lady felt the need to defend herself, because she was not interested in sexual or kink adjacent discussion, and in defending herself cited her age, the fact that the world had changed, expressed her discomfort, and asked for people to be understanding and patient with her. I understood her meaning. She didn't mean harm, she just needed some space to recalibrate in the revelation that she had been unintentionally harmful.

No one likes to learn that they have been unintentionally harmful.

Unfortunately in her defensiveness, she lumped lgbtq+ personhood descriptors in with the concept of innately sexual things she would rather not be exposed to. Which is very much news adjacent in the othering and decriminalizing of gay and trans individuals.

Ohpe had known this lady for years. She had never been hateful, just awkwardly antiquated. There were definitely things she could be doing to keep up with the evolving discourse of microagressive linguistics.

They didn't blame the person who pointed out that her defensive statement made them uncomfortable. It made Ohpe uncomfortable too.

But, now the old lady was feeling persecuted and even more defensive. When Ohpe left, some members were offering to explain further why her words made people uncomfortable. But they had still had to leave because they could feel the visceral indignation of "how am I the bad guy?" Because people don't like being wrong.

People don't like finding out that they are capable of doing harm by accident. Or carelessness.

People get invested in the idea that they are "a good person" and need to defend the idea of their personal goodness in the face of evidence to the contrary.

"Good" people don't like knowing that they can do harm without malice.

Ohpe really wished it had ended with the lady thanking people for the heads up. They really wish she hadn't tried to explain or justify her mistakes. Because that was what became hurtful.

It was okay to just say "oh, I didn't know that, thanks for letting me know," and then ignore the goading of someone making themself feel superior by pointing out that they thought it was common knowledge by now.

Knowledge didn't just show up fully formed. It had to be shared. Sometimes it took longer to reach some people than others. If someone got the news late, that didn't make them a bad person. If someone got the news early, that didn't make them morally superior to the person living under a rock.

The only moral judgment, Ohpe felt, was if someone learned that a way of speaking was harmful and deside it didn't matter enough to bother changing. Because that became intentionally perpetuated harm. But people still need time to retrain themselves.

Ohpe sighed and rolled out of their chair to lay on the floor. They would probably end up leaving the server again. Some of the people there were wonderful, but Ohpe just don't have the resilience in the face of everything else– in face of the multiple instances of colonial genocide, and the crush of oligarchical capitalism– going on in the world.

In the darkness, alone in their room, they muttered: "Can we maybe just... Not be dicks to each other?"

It sounded so easy in concept. But people were never easy. They were all fragile little blobs of selfish feelings. And some people defended themselves by making certain that they through the first punch

And some people defended themselves by pulling far enough back from everyone that they could never get hit.

Neither was healthy. But both were so very human.

[lotusmi]

https://at.tumblr.com/lotusmi/httpsattumblrcomlotusmihttpsattumblrcomponde/60vd44eb37cr

okay I know all that I said was really long, first I'm so sorry you went through that, I have been through something SO similar to what you described you went through and I know how hard that must be/must have been.

Secondly, I don't know if all these people realize everything works with the law of assumption, literally everything, their assumptions that this exists or that exists only exist in their reality because they believe in it/assume it. I am also so tired of them claiming everything is "witchcraft" when there are religions WAYYY older than those practices, way older than Christianity, that they get most of their source material from....zodiac signs for example, modernized zodiac signs originate from Mali in Africa, the law of attraction, chakras, auras etc all are from, what is considered the oldest religion in the world, Hinduism which goes 1,000s (3,000 plus years) of years ago in India.

There was once a version of myself that would spiral and doubt but like another anon said, I'm proud of the fact that these things no longer affect me so much that I spiral, it just makes me more thankful for the law of assumption because I know damn well, I'm getting everything without having to struggle to get it while they can be bitter. The reason I got so mad in that is not just because of the cult comments, but because before the law of assumption I used to be into that stuff, Tarot reading, witchcraft stuff, I'd defend it even after being in law of assumption because I hated how much they were judged by Christians but bruh, what the hell are they doing?? Suddenly they are becoming exactly what they hated??? the misunderstanding and judging, the accusations of having evil intentions, the constant insults, what is all this hypocritical shit. They then talk about victim blaming, I've only seen ONE person in this community say stupid shit like that and immediately after they deactivated or their account got deleted, NO ONE in this community victim blames, most of us ARE victims, we know damn well when someone says they went through traumatic shit, MANY bloggers are so damn sweet to them, even coming across other blogs just to tell the anons it's not their fault. From what I've seen, regardless of all the shitty things that have happened in this community. victim blaming is NEVER allowed here.

Also honestly, if someone is gonna call a group of people minding their business doing what they want, something, don't use words with as much weight as "cult," because all you're doing is sounding so damn stupid to people who have not only studied that shit but experienced it too, they need to stop trying to sound smart and like they finally "cracked the manifesting community's code," all they're doing is embarrassing themselves, and all those idiots agreeing with them, the anons, I'm sure tried law of assumption and gave up because they did stupid shit and then took their frustrations out on bloggers or they feed into these people's misunderstandings of the law thinking we are all crazy or in some cult when if they just did some research, maybe they'd realize, we aren't crazy/in a cult at all.

Anyway, I just had some more to say, I hope I didn't upset you last time and I hope I didn't do it this time, I'm so sorry if I did.

love you lotus, thank you for listening to me and even sharing that memory you had, once again, I'm sorry you went through that love <3

you are right!!!! ty for sharing your opinion, i agree with u 💗

[starryflix]

An idea of the future

You know, the future has always quite scared me. I think because so much happened across the years it has become rather difficult to look out and plan ahead for a few years because I am so used to life throwing me a curveball every once so often. Now that I am 20 I think I finally am seeing something ahead of me that is somewhat steady. Steady and achievable.

I think the most interesting thing is that across the couple of months and the new environments I have found myself in people keep giving me the exact same idea as I personally have of my future. And it is rather interesting to see how close me and my best friend can get to each other's idea of the future without ever really talking about it in the first place. We tend to be on one line a lot regardless even if we haven't seen each other for a long while we still manage to have the same incentives and same ways of parroting.

It was good to talk to them about the future and ridiculously heartwarming and important to me to hear that they see themselves in my future as much as I see me in theirs. That hasn't always been the case for me and it was a silent reassurance that no matter what we will stay friends. Modern technology helps a lot but they also said that if I were to emigrate they'd send me letters with little trinkets they find everywhere that remind them of me and I'd send them back dried flowers and small stones found on a beach together with the letter.

I think that the one thing I have heard the most about what people envision me to do is to become a writer, and if that doesn't sustain me enough I'd have a teaching job on the side. They also all tell me I'd live in a small town, close to nature.

And I very much agree.

Me and my best friend tend to speak in colours and in nature scenes, people have certain feels and we communicate those by means of colours and scenes. I have synaesthesia when it comes to feelings and colours and by extent people have colours. Renn has always been ridiculously good at figuring out my feelings when I couldn't put them into words and described them as colours. I think it might partially be the fact we are both neurodivergent.

I am going off in many tangents, the tl;dr of this story is that while I have always been rather scared of making plans for the future or dreaming of a fantasy that is perhaps not within reach this is more and more seeming like a clear and achievable picture and I am just simply not used to that. Like I am not to so many things that maybe should feel normal. Although I think my entire generation is quite cautious when it comes to a future mainly because of all the ways the world has been going.

I think I'd like escaping to a small cottage on top of a cliffside, a small town not too far away and a lighthouse shining in the distance with a dog and two cats. Writing books, teaching kids and perhaps accidentally taking a few with problems under my wing. It seems like it is something I was always meant to do. So maybe.

One thing is abundantly getting clearer; I don't think I want to stay in the Netherlands. It's too busy here, too full, too crowded with the impending doom of rising sea levels on top of it. My dad told me not to be too pessimistic but I have trouble seeing my future in this rushed country with nearly 18 million people. It just doesn't suit me.

I hope my health issues just won't get in the way of being able to emigrate.

I'd likely end up in a Celtic country regardless, always had a weird affinity for them.

The scene I would be or would be living in would be described somewhere along these lines:

okay so, imagine a slightly unruly sea, it's windy but not cold, a morning fresh around dawn, too dark to actually be considered light but the stars have gone away. It's a somewhat secluded beach, small patch of meadow with deers on one side that changes slowly into dense woods and rocky and grey cliffs on the other side, the rocks the kind people climb on. The sand is leaning towards a white-ish colour and there's a very small pier where you can sit and stick your feet in the water. It's quite the way from the small town however the lighthouse is close by and the outline visible within the dark grey air. On top of the cliffs stands a small dark wooden cottage, cluttered with creative stuff and books everywhere, a half handwritten letter with some dried flowers on the desk. Paintings drying beside the kitchen sink. Besides the desk stands a shelf that displays a variety of mismatched trinkets; all send to me by best friend. There's an old wooden chair outside on the porch, a golden retriever dog and two cats lazing about. Dawn but one after a night fuelled with insomnia, a sleepy and calm morning.

[brotherhoodofwarlocks]

Reclaiming the word Warlock

Reclaiming the word Warlock

I personally never understood the whole issue over male Witches using the word Warlock to describe themselves. I personally like the term an I do not see anything wrong with using it whatsoever although their are some who may take offense to the use of the term. I believe that Witchcraft is not a one size fits all way of life and their are many ways to practice it regardless what you may read in most of the modern day books on The Craft. Keep in mind that A CRAFT IS NOT A RELIGION and you can practice the art of Witchcraft without the Gods or Goddesses and I know some who do.

If the word Warlock does mean oath breaker (which I do not think it does) Then the only oath I have broken is my connection with the Christian church and it's teaching because in my opinion their philosophy goes against nature were as I live in harmony with nature. For me the Gods and Goddess are representations of the forces of nature and they appear to us through what Jung called the archetypes of the collective unconscious. I do not believe in a heaven or a hell and if that makes me a traitor against Christian dogma then SO MOTE IT BE.

If woman can reclaim the word WITCH then men can reclaim the word WARLOCK. Why because it represents the male mysteries. My dad use to go hunting every year around deer season, he would disappear for about two weeks and at the time I didn't understand what he was doing but I did enjoy the food he would bring home after the hunt. Later on in life as I began to study Paganism/Witchcraft and the male mysteries, I began to understand that hunting and gathering is part of the male mysteries and if you think you are truly making a connection with nature by living in the big city and never going out to the woods you are sadly mistaken. Hunting is a big part of the male mysteries and it is something that I now embrace. I tried being a vegetarian at one point in my life but after I had a conversation with Ted Nugent I began to eat meat again (thanks Ted).

Note: I will have to tell you guys that story one day.

Most Wiccans hate the term Warlock and never use it which is fine with me because I see Wicca as just another form of Witchcraft and if they choose to not use it then it's their prerogative but their are those within the community that embrace the term.

Here's my definition of a Warlock

1. One who thinks for himself and challenges authority.

2. One who breaks away from traditional dogmas of the church and from dogma that are part of fundamentalist thinking. (That goes for Christians and the magical community as well.)

3. One who explores the male mysteries from Hunting to studying Martial Arts, it's all apart of making a connection with nature.

4. A Warlock is a male Witch

So in closing I believe that no one owns the copyright on the word WITCH or WARLOCK, if you are one or the other claim it, and think for yourself, don't bow down to the thought police because they are not looking out for your best interests anyway.

Love is the Law: Merlin

The Following is from an e-mail I received from MstrMacabre in regards to reclaiming the word Warlock. Enjoy

Hope everyone's Yule was grand!

I'm currently sending the following request to many in the Wiccan/Pagan Community in an effort to not only reclaim the term 'Warlock' for we 'Male Practitioners' (of which I must say has spread over the Internet like the proverbial wildfire these last few years) but also to dispel the rather blatant (in my personal opinion) misrepresented (for far too many years now) term of Warlock.

I present the following excerpts from an article I originally wrote a few years ago (as well as my other friends who have since reclaimed the term 'Warlock') in order to illustrate my point.

RECLAIMING THE WORD WARLOCK!

Much like the term "Wicca" which comes from the root term "Wicce" and means "to bend," or "to shape." NOT "The Wise" or "Wise Ones" that has been continuously circulated around the Metaphysical Community by many misinformed Wiccans and Neo-Pagans for years, the word Warlock has befallen the same gross misrepresentation.

Contrary to current popular belief, it does NOT mean an "Oath-Breaker" in "Scottish" as again many Neo-Pagans and Wiccan's love to tell you (which they get from the Old English and later Colonial Wytch Hunter's jargon) but in fact it is a derivative from the High German word "Ward-lokkur" (BTW...W is pronounced V in german) meaning "Spell-Caster" for Enchanter or Sorcerer, much the same as the German word "Hexen" which just means "Wytch" or the Old English "Wizard!" It is generally applied to a "Male Wytch" who practices some form of Magick usually in the Nature of Conjuration or Sorcery....thus, the reason for it's application as a definition for the Male gendered Witch in "Pop Culture" society today!

As "RuneWolf" says in his article "Warlock: The Other 'W-Word" of which ECHOS my own feelings on the matter...

"Matthew Sandow speculates that what we think of as Witchcraft might originally have involved both Male and Female Mysteries, and that much of what we think of as "Wicca" today descends predominantly from the Female Mysteries. The Male Mysteries, on the other hand, would have had more to do with hunting and warfare, and that the "War" in "Warlock" refers to just that - the Way of the Warrior and the arts of "battle-magic," as exemplified by the ulfhednar and berserkers. This only further enthralls me, as I consider myself to practice a "Warrior" Tradition of the Craft, and have long felt the need for a specific term for "Warrior Witch." Given the possible history of the word, "Warlock" seems to fit that bill quite nicely!

"Warlock" also has a somewhat darker connotation than the now-popular definition of "Witch," and that applies to me as well. The whole issue of what constitutes "Dark Paganism" has been addressed by better writers than I, and whilst I won't rehash any of it here, if you tend to dismiss Dark Paganism as an aberration, I suggest that you do a little research. After all, that's one of the first suggestions we make to Christians who try to inflict their stereotypes and misconceptions on us.

And finally, I have to admit to a little rebelliousness in choosing to be known as a Warlock. In many ways it's just my way of saying, "Go ahead - tell me I can't." My personal definition of "Warlock" could be summed up as "Male Witch - With Attitude." It has its own, in-your-face kind of mystique that I find endearing.

Many years ago, my teacher gave me some good advice, and that was to use anything in the practice of my Craft that helped me to "feel Witchier." Ironically, "Warlock" does that for me. " ---RuneWolf.

at April 26, 2009 

From: The Necroblogmicon a collection of essays written by MerlinRavenSong. Necroblogmicon Blog

[mystreamofselfconsciousness]

Today is definitely a day to return to this diary of sorts that I've kept around for only my own benefit. Today is a day where every single cell in my body wishes to leave this place. . . No matter how you define the "place". The city for sure, which (assuming the ridiculous issues that shouldn't be a problem to begin with are able to be overcome by the end of this week) will no longer be home within two weeks. The country 100%, where the majority of the population would apparently prefer a racist homophobic transphobic sexist rapist ableist everything different-ist CONVICTED FELON to a fucking colored woman. Where it has now, AGAIN, become dangerous to be anything other than a 50+ conservative Christian millionaire+ anti-science sexist white male. But the best option would be to leave this planet, this plane... Because it seems in this day and age there's no longer any safe haven. Every place is being infiltrated by those who are fuelled by hatred, who suddenly believe they are in the right and have grown in volume to be the loudest voice in the room. We've entered a time when the word Nazi is no longer used just in a historic context to describe a group that helped perpetuate the worst war the world had ever seen, but to describe modern groups and even modern first world leaders. Children are lauded as the ultimate goal, the future, a requirement that must be protected at all costs, the sole purpose of half the human race, the very best of us, so long as they are too few a number of cells to constitute a human life. Once those children have begun breathing Earth's atmosphere they are happily starved by cutting social programs like food stamps and school lunches, left in unfit care by an already underfunded and sure to be further cut social work and foster systems, and in the most horrific of cases forced to bear children WHILE STILL CHILDREN THEMSELVES (regardless of how they came to be with child) because unborn cells have more value than living females.

This is hell. While they plan their "mass deportations" there are millions wondering if we will soon be the country producing rather than taking in refugees. Family members are having to contemplate what they're willing to sacrifice if situations come to fruition, or if they get opportunities to leave that don't involve their relatives. Lists will begin circulating, again, of gynecologists who are willing to sign off on sterilization procedures without spousal consent or therapy or the million other hoops women are asked to jump through to be allowed to decide NOT to reproduce. These procedures will become harder to get not just because of the potential repercussions when the laws begin to encroach on these procedures as they have on miscarriages (considering they're already planning to make birth control itself more difficult to access), but because the waiting lists get so long for the few doctors who treat women like human beings with bodily autonomy.

Idiocracy should not feel like a documentary. The handmaid's tale should not feel like a documentary. 1984 should not feel like a documentary. The matrix should not feel like a better alternative to our current reality. Refugeeism, death, and illegal immigration should not feel like better alternatives to normal life.

I don't know how we survive the next four years, and if project 2025 gets what it really wants, many more after that. I don't know how this country survives. I know that I want no part in that future.

I just don't yet know how I get out.

[bells-of-black-sunday]

✵ - Tar -> Robibi, modern

Muse Impressions | Accepting

Their first impression of your muse: "Shady. He's probably going to ask me to be a drug mule and shit... I really couldn't turn down the money right now. That's what people like him do best I guess, prey on the desperate. I really need something to pay the bills though, not like getting fired again looks good on a resume."

Current impression:    "I still don't know why he ever took a chance on me. Maybe it was my records or how I looked... I don't know, but I'm incredibly thankful for it. I'd probably be in a grave right now if not for him. He's like family to me."

Are they attracted to your muse?:   "He has a fiance, I'm hoping to propose to my boyfriend soon, so no."

Something they find frightening about your muse: "He literally tortures people. It doesn't even phase him. I know there's others around far scarier than him, but I fear getting on his bad side."

Something they find adorable about your muse:   "He pretends not to care, but he cares a lot actually. At least about the people he's close to."

Would my muse sacrifice themselves for yours?:   "That's literally my job. I take the bullets so he doesn't have to, doesn't happen nearly as often as you'd think."

Would my muse go on a date with yours?  platonic/romantic:   "We go on our lunch breaks together sometimes and work out together, I guess you could call that a platonic date."

One word my muse would use to describe yours:   "Interesting."

Would my muse slap yours if they could?:  "I feel like... three separate people would kill me if I did? Maybe one more I'm not thinking of."

Would my muse hug/kiss yours?: "Hug sure. I don't think he's into affection like that though."

[witchcraftandburialdirt]

✵ for modern and/or spirit blossom ( even though i know we haven't interacted a lot in the latter , i just think robibi is cute in that verse )

✧ ━━ 𝐒𝐄𝐍𝐃 ✵ 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐌𝐘 𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐀𝐍𝐒𝐖𝐄𝐑 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐅𝐎𝐋𝐋𝐎𝐖𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝙼𝙾𝙳𝙴𝚁𝙽 𝚅𝙴𝚁𝚂𝙴

THEIR FIRST IMPRESSION OF YOUR MUSE: ━━ "Not much of one, frankly. I saw a man who worked his way through sweat and tears to get to his position, and I respect that. Pushing through difficulties alone is hard enough but the industry he decided to enter is ruthless; I suppose I was curious about how ... It is rare for a man to be fueled with such passion."

CURRENT IMPRESSION: ━━ "Hm, it is not often I give compliments to anyone; but he is ... no, comforting is not the right word, what I feel around him is too eerie to be comforting. I do not like his uncanny ability to somehow know when things are bothering me - its aggravating. ... He is a very genuine man, but quiet enough in his enthusiasm that others feel compelled to follow him, fine leadership qualities. The type of man who, I imagine, would be trusted and beloved by those under his guidance; I'm sure many songs will be written in his honor when the sun sets on his life."

ARE THEY ATTRACTED TO YOUR MUSE?: ━━ "I have two very functioning eyes, and he's a clever mind. I could be."

SOMETHING THEY FIND FRIGHTENING ABOUT YOUR MUSE: ━━ "There is little I fear in men, but as I have said a hundred times before; my business is my own, and it perturbs me when my headspace is seemingly entered without permission nor warning. ... I am aware that it is not something he does on purpose or out of malice to make me nettled but, ugh."

SOMETHING THEY FIND ADORABLE ABOUT YOUR MUSE: ━━ "Ha! As though I did not just spend the past quarter hour insulting it. His stalwart heart has its own charms, and that more often than one would expect he is quite a cheeky little pup."

WOULD MY MUSE SACRIFICE THEMSELVES FOR YOURS?: ━━ "No, I value my life over all. As everyone should."

WOULD MY MUSE GO ON A DATE WITH YOURS? PLATONIC/ROMANTIC: ━━ " ... I don't know. Maybe? I would have to mull over it."

ONE WORD MY MUSE WOULD USE TO DESCRIBE YOURS: ━━ "Familiar."

WOULD MY MUSE SLAP YOURS IF THEY COULD?: ━━ "I fail to see a reason why I would ever need to? He isn't disrespectful nor malicious. Also I tend to avoid physical fights altogether."

WOULD MY MUSE HUG/KISS YOURS?: ━━ "That is entirely dependent on the future depth of our relationship. As of now I would prefer to abstain."

𝚂𝙿𝙸𝚁𝙸𝚃 𝙱𝙻𝙾𝚂𝚂𝙾𝙼

THEIR FIRST IMPRESSION OF YOUR MUSE: ━━ "I saw him wondering past the lakeside painted in the day's light, it was beautiful but ... I felt sadness from him. A deep loneliness that has stayed with him since before his arrival. My heart ached when I looked at him."

CURRENT IMPRESSION: ━━ "I've still been a bit too wayward to approach him with the intention of having a conversation, but he played music while I sang and did not flee when I came close. It is calming to be around him, I have been alone for so long that I had forgotten what is it like to be ... seen. It is a bit exposing but ... He feels warm."

ARE THEY ATTRACTED TO YOUR MUSE?: ━━ " ... " With an air of quiet vulnerability, his striking green eyes —bright like emeralds kissed by sunlight — shift away, betraying a shy pout which brings a flushing red to his cheeks. At least a little bit, yes.

SOMETHING THEY FIND FRIGHTENING ABOUT YOUR MUSE: ━━ "A dark terror lies within him, and I am not sure it can be slain with a blade."

SOMETHING THEY FIND ADORABLE ABOUT YOUR MUSE: ━━ "He whittles! I've seen the little figures he makes, like children's toys but ... ever tinier. I am sure he looks very focused when working on them; they are handled with such love. Love from a time long ago."

WOULD MY MUSE SACRIFICE THEMSELVES FOR YOURS?: ━━ "In what way ... ? I ... I am not able to answer that question yet."

WOULD MY MUSE GO ON A DATE WITH YOURS? PLATONIC/ROMANTIC: ━━ " ... W-Why are we asking these types of questions ...? "

ONE WORD MY MUSE WOULD USE TO DESCRIBE YOURS: ━━ "Tsuyu."

WOULD MY MUSE SLAP YOURS IF THEY COULD?: ━━ "I-I would not! Why would I want to strike him?"

WOULD MY MUSE HUG/KISS YOURS?: ━━ As the question hung in the air, time seemed to pause, and the spirit's verdant eyes widened in astonishment, shimmering like dew-kissed leaves in the dawn. It was clear he had not expected such a question, so much so that his lips fell agape and his cheeks were painted with the scarlet blooms he had only just ridden himself of. Thus, with a graceful sway, he rose to his feet, and brushed away the remnants of nature — tiny leaves that clung to the fabric of his flowing robes, as if reluctant to part with the wandering spirit. Robin spared a final, lingering glance towards his visitor before turning to embrace the soft kiss of the summer breeze; his silvery hair unraveling into wisps of clouds that sparkled as though caught in sunlight. And just as quickly as he appeared, within that ephemeral dance, he faded into the landscape - blending and weaving into the tapestry of trees and foliage, becoming naught but the rustling of leaves and the gentle murmur of the nearby creek.