#what a transparently racist thing to say

[babsaros]

wow this is fucking heinous

[virtue-boy]

I love blocking hysterical gen X Americans who clearly have never opened the Wikipedia for another country but have every congressperson memorized and post about how Biden is doing praxis and that leaders making their positions clear to the voting and tax paying public would be "performative posting". And like, shaming people who I guess embarrassed themselves by daring to openly express their demands and desperation instead of just sitting back and hallucinating that their outwardly hostile overlords were secretly doing everything they wanted behind the scenes while literally saying the exact opposite. Good lord just wear your target rainbow socks and watch your sitcoms and sit in your suburban house and pat yourself on the back for being actually the best citizen of all because you recognize that citizens actually have no place in political speech or culture and have no right to make any type of demand over our gracious benevolent philosopher statescraft kings.

[olderthannetfic]

Something I need white people to stop doing in fandom: assuming anyone who is writing villain-centric fic is white. I'm black. I'm allowed to explore villains' backstories, psychology, etc. if I like. It doesn't render me white. I know, some people are just trying to shit on women so they throw "white" in front of the word women before they say "writing about villains is some white women shit". I know some people are just mad anyone writes about villains at all. For them, calling it a straight or white or straight and white woman thing is a way of not saying what they're actually thinking, which is that no one should do it.

But I would respect people a lot more if they just said what they meant. Just say you hate something. Don't assign a race or gender or orientation to what you hate. Say what you mean. Yeah, you'll get less fawning reblogs. You'll also be significantly less transparent and pathetic to actual black people reading your post.

This goes double for when someone is talking about a black villain. I can humanize him and give him a backstory instead of the ??? canon gave him. I can humanize him. And you know what? I like it when someone does that and they're white. If a white person humanizes a flat black character and sympathizes with them and treats them like a person, that's good, actually! Yes, even if it's the dreaded straight white woman of myth and legend doing it. Especially if it's her, even. I want to live in a world where a straight white woman pours her heart into writing a black man. I like that a lot. That means she's moved past the racist idea of scary black men and is viewing us as people.

Is it supposed to be woke or progressive to tell white women not to humanize others? Bc if so, my follow-up question is simple: how?

--

I always feel so bad for the black girls in fandom who are into... like... Reylo or Phantom/Christine or some bog standard problematic het like that. The amount of shit they get, man...

(It happens with lots of other things, obviously. I've just personally witnessed some truly reprehensible incidents involving shippers of those.)

[fairuzfan]

I think like there's such a transparent lack of sympathy for Palestinians that you start to care about October 7th and you don't even question what life was like for Gazans before October 7th like you guys are so racist you only cared about gaza and hamas when you got affected or you FEEL like you got affected in some cases. Like you never had the same level of outrage or anger towards 'israel' that you do hamas despite the siege lasting for 15+ years and Palestinians regularly lost their lives and jobs and futures and were imprisoned on literal terrorism charges for donating to Palestinians. Online isn't everything I didn't talk about Palestine on this blog much but I'm so so exhausted after more than 6 months of being online seeing news of massacres after massacre and then zionists on here and on Twitter and Instagram and threads (???? Why is threads even relevant????) talking about how BDS sucks and how they hate hamas and how they think Palestinians are overreacting and lying about their death tolls or trying to link antisemitism to Palestinians as an intrinsic value they hold or something the Free Palestine movement is about. I even feel guilty for saying this because what's that compared to experiencing those terrible things like being starved and killed firsthand but like idk. Some of you are just so cruel. None of you willing to see you have a direct impact to how Palestinians are being treated in Gaza. Idk it's just bugging me more than usual tonight.

[notaplaceofhonour]

Understanding Alex Jones’s place in the Bush-era anti-war scene would do the left a lot of good in understanding (and not repeating) similar mistakes that the current anti-war scene is making today.

For those who aren’t old enough to remember, there was actually a time when Alex Jones had a decent amount of goodwill on the far left. He was obviously always a lunatic conspiracy theorist, and most everyday people saw him as such, but there was a significant enough portion of the anti-war left that liked him, that actually promoted InfoWars, appeared on AJ’s show, and linked arms with him at anti-war protests.

Without the momentum that his Bush-era popularity gave him, Jones would not have become a recognizable or relevant media figure like he did. The model InfoWars pioneered, which helped pave the way for the entire far right griftosphere that sprang up around it—from Breitbart to OAN & the Epoch Times to the sea of smaller Q-fluencers—owes its success in part to this diagonal reach across political lines. The extreme right wing conspiracy theory platform that has all but consumed the GOP would not have been able to gain nearly as much of a foothold if it were not for the years of work InfoWars & outlets like it did to normalize it in the Bush years.

Obviously I am not going so far as to say “The Left Is Solely Responsible For Alex Jones™️”. But much of the anti-war/anti-government left absolutely participated in helping him rise to prominence. They were willing to jump in bed with Jones without paying attention to his work or else were willing to turn a blind eye to who Jones was, all because he was saying things that were convenient to their cause. It didn’t matter that he was a rightwing or grade-A bigot; he opposed the US government & the war.

And I’m fully aware that there’s a common refrain among a lot of that “I used to listen to InfoWars” section of the left that would push back against this and say, “well, yeah, Jones is obviously a fascist now, but back then he wasn’t like that; he was kooky back then, sure, but the pre-Sandy Hook, pre-Gay Frogs Jones wasn’t nearly as bigoted or rightwing as the ‘Hillary For Prison’ Trump-era Jones became”.

To that I say, no, that’s bullshit. If you actually go back and listen to his show from back then… holy shit. He was homophobic as fuck. He was racist as fuck. The entire NWO/Globalist framework that he hangs all his other conspiracy theories on is built around antisemitic tropes from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion he regularly hosted & promoted explicit antisemites like his pastor Texe Marrs, who openly espoused that Jews (often named as such) controlled the world politically, financially, and religiously through Zionism, a global banking cartel, and Communism. In some ways, Jones was even more transparent then than he is now.

“Okay, but what does this have to do with the current anti-war movement?” I hear you say. “I never fell for Alex Jones; I’ve always hated that guy.”

To begin with, you should be on the lookout for the internal biases and lack of vetting that lead the left to tolerate Jones in the first place, whether you think you’re liable to or not (arguably, it is all that much more important when you think you aren’t, because you are never more susceptible than when you think you aren’t). But unfortunately much of the anti-war left of today has been making the same mistake, just with different people and organizations.

Take for instance Jackson Hinkle, a tradcath & self-described “MAGA Communist”, who has gotten a lot of traction with the leftwing anti-Zionist crowd (and I would be remiss not to mention, has also been a guest on InfoWars). Or take another AJ, the media outlet Al Jazeera, which says a lot of things that are attractive to the left out one side of its mouth while spewing a bunch of rightwing theocratic garbage out the other, much like Bush-era InfoWars did. Take PSL/ANSWER (Pro-Putin Pro-Assad Pro-Xi atrocity denialists & conspiracy theorists) are one of the most common fixtures of the current protest movement, regularly advertised as organizers by other prominent organizations like JVP & SJP. A lot of people on the left have been embracing figures and organizations that espouse Khazar Theory, Deicide, Media Control, and Blood Libels not at all dissimilar to the accusations you could hear from Jones and his pastor friend Texe Marrs, with the same figleaf of “anti-Zionism” that Marrs frequently used himself.

Whether by sheer ignorance or willfully turning a blind eye, the left keeps making the same mistake of tolerating & even embracing figures & organizations with similarly noxious politics & conspiracy thinking now that was made with Bush-era InfoWars. We need to do better. We need to learn from the past so we can stop repeating its mistakes.

[kanekocribs]

KANEKO'S CRIB NOTES LXVI: A RACIST (?) METAPHOR FOR VENGEANCE

I'll be honest with you all, we're running out of cribs. Who knows what the landscape will look like next year. Only one thing is for sure: Kaneko's bare, spooky carcass will be on full display at least once more by our fine friends at Colopl.

LEPRECHAUN: An often controversial design because "why is an Irish fairy clad in a Union Jack boot, isn't that a bit insensitive to Ireland? "; however, Eirikr puts that argument to rest with an exhaustive look into the design's context. And yeah, Leprechaun's "scandalous" boot is clearly cribbed from the one used by the Spice Girls' Geri Halliwell.

HOMO GORLEO: There are two things to say about Metaphor's human designs. The first is that most seem to be inspired by the works of Dutch artist Hieronymus Bosch, like Gorleo here, which iterates on a figure found on the center panel of Bosch's The Garden of Earthly Delights triptych.

HOMO AVADES: The second thing we can say about the Metaphor humans is that we're frustrated by the lack of transparency regarding who designed them. One would assume that would be Shigenori Soejima, but Atlus has been less than forthright about something so apparently obvious. For the time being, we'll just have to credit them to "Studio Zero Art Team." Avades itself is at least more clearly adapted from the central figure of the the right panel of Bosch's Garden.

NYAMI NYAMI: We've made light of Doi in the past for over-relying on Wikipedia as a source for things, and, hey, it happened again for Vengeance's Nyami Nyami, this time an image of a wood carving of the deity used on the JP Wikipedia page that Doi clearly saw while researching and used as a reference, not that we're faulting him for it!

AMABIE: A design actually borne out of Atlus piggybacking on a Japanese Amabie meme during the Covid-19 pandemic, Doi's Amabie is based on a 19th century woodblock print that's the genesis for virtually all modern depictions of her.

[laikabu]

I think what fundamentally tips me off abt the shuro discourses is that there's this common sentiment of "marcille should get pissed and chew shuro out for "chasing" falin/being mean to laios, give shuro what he deserves" which is just hilariously transparent on how self-righteous and projecting the ppl saying these things are bc it is so clearly not actually abt what falin and laios want. Yknow, a big theme in dunmeshi! I'd forgive ppl for not knowing abt the extra, but falin outright says she needs to make decisions and take stands for HERSELF and she amicably turns shuro's proposal down, which he accepts. She's not being preyed on or being taken advantage of and so she doesn't need some defense against what is very much an imaginary offense to make shuro look bad. And laios does the same! Laios beats shuro up and they come out with their grievances on the table and all honesty there, and they are explicitly on good terms by the end! The siblings clearly like him and see value in their relationships with him despite any conflict they had. That literally should be the end of it.

(Also, not a fan abt the way white fans want to write off the micro aggressions and "forgive" laios for something they have no room saying anything abt! Acting like it's impossible for him to be racist when there's a bonus comic of him (and falin) outright talking abt "savage" people on his hometown's mountains that were "barbarians" they killed onsight! Given this manga's emphasis on cultural disconnect you'd think we'd be smarter abt this!)

exactly LOL throughout the whole manga the touden siblings treated shuro with kindness and respect even after the big fight, so i'm really confused about the hostility towards him?💀

i noticed that in the anime, kabru doesn't actually give his name out at all, and all instances of laios saying kabru's name correctly were scrubbed, so i'm curious if this has anything to do with changing the "kapru" joke somehow since they did consult kui in changing small scenes. i guess we'll find out tomorrow.

[underanothername]

I don't understand.

I just don't get it. And I'm only one of millions, possibly billions of people around the world who are saying the same thing. How? Why? Is this real? What sort of insanity is overtaking the US, that the majority of people are willing to elect someone this depraved to represent them? How can anyone look at an openly corrupt, racist, misogynistic, ego-tripping hedonist who unashamedly - no, proudly - spreads lies and hatred, and say, yep, that's the one I want to lead us into the future?

I'm... I'm struggling for words. I'm physically nauseated. And I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but my God, I had to say something, to express my utter disbelief and disillusionment. I knew that the US has many, many faults, most of them papered over by a massive military budget and an excellent propaganda machine. Still, for much of history the country that proclaims itself the 'leader of the free world' has at least paid lip service to the concepts of freedom and unity that it was founded upon, and, though many mistakes have been made, striven for betterment. This, however? This is the majority of voting Americans openly choosing greed over charity, hatred over fellowship, corruption over transparency, lies over truth, hysteria over reason, and oppression over freedom. This is Americans deliberately closing their eyes to reality, and blindly believing the inane rantings and outright bullshit spouted by a man that by all factual accounts seems unworthy to lead a litter collection squad let alone a country.

I'm just... Yeah, I'm out of words. To the Americans who retain common sense and decency and who don't deserve this outcome: good luck and God bless. Here's hoping the US is still recognisable in four years.

[sparkanonymous]

Let's get one thing out of the way; I messed up.

If you want to go more in-depth, read this post. If you don't want to, here's the jist of the situation: For the last year - I think - I have been coloring Raj's skin tone lighter. This is completely and utterly my fault.

I'm not going to make any excuses, in fear that it will give others an excuse for their own deplorable actions. Though I don't see myself as a racist person, this is still an example of colorism, and I can't stand by it.

Total Drama is something I hold dear in my heart, and Raj is one of my favorite characters in the entire series. The fact I did him this dirty makes me never want to draw him again.

I'm so sorry. All I can do is apologize, and that's definitely not good enough. I will do better in the future. I don't want anything like this to happen again, and I won't let it happen again.

There is nothing I can say that'll fix this situation. I have disappointed myself and hurt an entire community of people. I hope I can eventually make up for my mistakes, but I know that isn't possible in a short amount of time.

I don't expect this to be taken lightly; it shouldn't be. If this is the last I see of some of you, I hope you take care.

The rest of this post directly responds to parts of thesicklycowboy's post.

○■○■○

For this portion, I have also edited Raj's hair to be the correct color. (I didn't know where else to put this part, sorry.)

I won't be responding to everything, as I do think the post was well-spoken and something that certainly needs to be said, just parts that I felt I should respond to.

Blue is for them, and red is for me.

"So when you were addressing this and saying "it's color theory" excuse why did you not show your earlier pieces of Raj as well? The ones with far darker hair and deeper skin tones? You only referenced all the ones after after the lightening had begun."

As mentioned before, I don't know when the lightening began. The pieces I grabbed for comparisons were the ones that I could actively get the flats for. A lot of my previous pieces have been deleted from my iPad after being moved to my laptop for storage reasons. While you can tell that Raj is darker in my oldest TDI posts, I wouldn't have been able to color grab the original skin color to compare it to the others, which is why I added ones that I could find the flats of directly off of my page. I do wish I had gotten the flats for the oldest ones, but I can't really do anything about that now.

"The beginning of your ask responses is blatantly false and you contradict yourself at the end? So why keep that whole schpiel at all?"

Here is the part that they are referring to: "I didn't? I think he just looks lighter because of the filters I used on top of it."

I left this in for transparency because I genuinely thought that that was actually the case. But it wasn't. This is why I added, "Looking into the color issue..." I wanted to double check the claim because it very well could have been an issue. And it was.

... "And not yet another piece that is still super light."

Okay. I think I might know what the problem is here in particular. I add texture overlays (the layers with the filter of 'Sl' - Soft Light) to give my pieces... y'know, texture. The layer color I use is usually an off-white. I do this in all of my pieces because I thought it might help with keeping my work safe from AI, and because I like the paper-like look that it gives my art. I didn't put it over the entire piece because the background already has a ton of texture.

The one above is at 50%, and the one below it is at 30% for both Raj and Bowie.

Here is the same piece with the texture overlays turned off:

(Left is w/o the overlays, Right is w/ the overlays)

I don't want this argument to seem like I'm lessening my actions. This is the only thing that I think I have the right to stand up for. Texture is something I most likely won't take out of my work, though I may replace the texture overlays with something that is more full proof against AI, like those AI-disturbance layers that Ibis Paint has.

None of my actions were excusable, but I felt this needed to be explained.

Other than that, though, I don't know what else I could possibly do to fix the piece, considering I have fixed Raj's skin tone in this piece.

○■○■○

The rest of the post is not something I feel the need to respond directly to. I do think you should go and read the original post criticizing me and decide what you want to do in this matter.

This was not a "silly mistake." What I have done is genuinely messed up. I'm not going to run from this situation and say that I was ever justified in my actions. Because I never was.

I can only hope to be given the chance to amend this situation with future works, whenever that might be. I will most likely not continue to talk about this unless asked to. Idk what else I could possibly say that wouldn't make this situation worse. I am the guilty party, and the only thing I can do is learn from this and do better in the future, which I will.

Again, I am so sorry. I have fucked up, and I am prepared to take the consquences of my actions.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Brendan O’Neill

And yet there is something off, even something nauseating, in all the Western finger-wagging. It isn’t only Cameron. US president Joe Biden has also weighed in, saying he is ‘outraged’ by the killing of the aid workers. You can’t help but wonder whether he directed similar outrage at his own nation’s military when 37 Afghanis at a wedding party, mostly women and children, were killed by mistake in a US airstrike.

‘Stop killing Afghan civilians’, the then president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, said to the newly elected US president, Barack Obama. And who was Obama’s vice-president? Biden, of course. You would think a man whose own military has killed huge numbers of people in error would understand that these things happen, even if every decent person would rather they didn’t.

Vast numbers of civilians have been killed by accident by the US in recent years. At another wedding party in 2004, this time in Iraq, 11 women and 14 children were killed by American fire. Was there a ‘full, transparent explanation’ for that calamity?

Terrible accidents happen in war. That’s because war is hell. If you hate the war in Gaza, as you should, then you should aim your ire at Hamas, the virulently anti-Semitic terror group that started this war with its pogrom against the people of southern Israel on 7 October. The seven decent souls of World Central Kitchen would be alive today had Hamas not taken the decision to visit its racist barbarism on the Jewish State.

For once war starts, error becomes unavoidable. There are few wars in history – none, perhaps – in which innocents have not perished in the violent maelstrom. What is striking about Israel’s mistake is that it is not being treated as ‘friendly fire’ at all. Instead it is held up as proof of Israel’s evil, evidence of its malevolence.

[gatofresaaa]

look, guys, i know that farleigh isn't the main character in saltburn and is supporting cast at best, but truth is—i’d loved if they’d explored the queer and racial aspects of his character because there’s a lot of material there that they could’ve worked with. god, how i would’ve loved if they’d just given him five more minutes of screen time for that. but just like in the plot, no one really cares about farleigh, do they? because it’s not his story and it’s not his house.

but like- theres just so much to say about a queer and colored character in 2006-2007, y’know? at that point in time, being queer and colored was still seen as horrible and something to make fun of. and, like, farleigh is so extra, somewhat effeminate and just downright scandalously fashionable for an era where men were severely toxically masculine and wore double popped collars and relatively simple clothes. i’m sorry but… you’re telling me that nobody ever said anything about this man?

not only that, but he’s a black/mixed man in a predominately white university/space. i mean, huh? people were massively racist in 2006-2007, especially in places like britain (and you can’t tell me otherwise because we all know it’s true).

but, sure, let’s entertain the possibility that he might be in the closet, okay? yeah, whatever, i don’t care. but the doors are glass!! not even opaque glass or something like that, they’re plain see-through, transparent glass doors.

no one, NO ONE said anything? and he’s still popular as fuck just because he was felix’s cousin? people still talked shit about oliver at oxford even when he was felix’s friend but we never heard a single thing about farleigh. and that may be because he wasn’t given enough screen time for that, but it doesn’t matter.

what i’m trying to say is that they had so much material and they wasted it by not making the movie about him.

[aces-and-angels]

i love the self-reflection going on in regards to checking yourselves for your own internal biases and in the spirit of that- i want to address one last thing.

the FIRST step in taking accountability is admitting what you've done is wrong. fully and transparently. apologies are a commitment made to those who have been wronged that you'll do better. they need to explicitly showcase what was wrong and who needs to own up to their wrongdoings (if you know anyone who needs to, ofc). otherwise it's only an apology made to save face so you can feel better and move on. not for the people affected.

so as someone done wrong, hear me when i say this:

whitewashing any canonically poc character is racist. supporting content that whitewashes poc characters is racist. and if you genuinely want to take accountability, you'll need to admit this out loud. fully and transparently for everyone to see:

bryce lahela from open heart was whitewashed. bryce lahela is an indigenous hawaiian person. [insert your name here] endorsed/supported fanart that whitewashed bryce lahela by [insert what you did here].

and before y'all start with the "i want to protect people's privacy" or "allow people the opportunity to acknowledge it themselves"--

being vague in your apology does no one any favors. it gives people an out. a reason to believe that whatever it is you're saying sorry for doesn't involve them. if they genuinely are unaware, you saying it out loud point blank period will go a long way.

thank you for listening 🖤

[fiercynn]

you know what’s fucking wild? when @end-otw-racism’s first action started in may, they were incredibly clear that they had narrow and specific demands for the otw, and that their demands were commitments the otw had already made. if you need a refresher, here are their demands:

Harassment policies that can be regularly updated to address both on-site harassment and off-site coordinated harassment of AO3 users, with updated protocols for the Policy & Abuse Team to ensure consistent and informed resolutions of abuse claims

A content policy on abusive (extremely racist and extremely bigoted) content; by abusive, we are talking about fanworks that are intentionally used to spread hate and harassment, not those that accidentally invoke racist or other bigoted stereotypes

Hiring a Diversity Consultant within the next 3-6 months

Committing to a policy of transparency on this topic, with quarterly updates on the progress of these projects including challenges and their plan for overcoming those challenges. These quarterly updates should be published on OTW News page and newsletters, not solely discussed in Board meetings

and despite the fact that these were taken specifically from the otw’s own commitments, a lot of people immediately decided that this was an overreach on the campaign’s part. they fabricated supposed secret agendas that the campaign must have; they invoked slippery slope fallacies to say that this would lead to mass content removal for anything on ao3 that even skimmed the line of racism; they claimed to know who was leading the campaign and tried to discredit the campaign based on that, because they claimed that those people had larger agendas.

despite all of that, otw themselves came out reaffirming their commitment to these priorities. which is great, but that was not the end of the work, because those commitments were made by the existing board, which is about to turn over in the upcoming board elections. it's essential to hold the incoming board accountable to the previous board's commitments.

but when @end-otw-racism’s second action around otw board elections has continued to keep those specific, clear demands in their focus, they’re getting hounded for it from the other side: by people claiming that this analysis they did of the otw board candidates – in which eotwr made it clear that they were looking at whether the candidates talked about any of the eotwr demands or not – was racist for not counting the work asian candidates raised around reaching out to non-western and non-english speaking fans as fulfilling eotwr’s demands.

(which, let’s be clear, they don’t! issues around access for non-western and non-anglophone fans, around the way chinese and chinese diaspora volunteers have been mistreated by otw, around translation, are all worthy issues to be pushing on. eotwr has even uplifted some of them. but they are separate from eotwr's core demands.)

so first eotwr is overreaching and trying to bring down every fanwork that could be even slightly misconstrued as racist, even though they’ve always been clear about their narrow and specific goals…and now they’re racist for not addressing every form of racism, even though they’ve always been clear about their narrow and specific goals?

it is completely valid for eotwr to look at the board candidates’ platforms and say “they did not mention these things that we are looking for”, because the things that eotwr is looking for are commitments otw has already made. it is not eotwr picking out certain “keywords” that they’d like to see – they are looking at whether potential incoming board members are prioritizing those specific commitments and will uphold them. and otw has had those commitments for three years! this is not new stuff!

also, if you read that analysis again, eotwr is not even criticizing the candidates for not mentioning their demands! they are simply pointing out what we can glean about the candidates from their platforms and bios, because the platforms are the main information we have about the board candidates right now. eotwr has been incredibly clear that they want to talk to candidates and learn more about their priorities. they've also been clear in urging other people to come up with their own analyses of the board candidates, and they have in fact reblogged and uplifted other people’s perspectives on the candidates.

i cannot stress enough that we need more folks in this space to be pushing on anti-racism, and eotwr having a narrow scope is not a bad thing. there is endless work to be done, and others who disagree with eotwr’s tactics should start their own campaigns! eotwr literally only started like two months ago with a call to action. it’s very possible to emulate them and push for parallel priorities.

advocacy work also needs groups with different tactics and approaches. my day job is in climate change advocacy, and we do our most effect work when multiple organizations are representing different perspectives and pushing in different ways. i'd love to see that kind of advocacy ecosystem built up in fandom.

but right now, eotwr is the only campaign i know of trying to do large-scale anti-racism work around otw at all. and to actively push against the campaign because you think it’s racist to focus on specific goals and gently critique board candidates based only on those specific goals? is, i'm sorry, fucking ridiculous.

[graysparrowao3]

Ramazith's Tower Post-Game Head Canon, Part 2

As before, reposted from Twitter/X fun discussion, this time regarding the legality and possibility of the trio keeping the tower after moving in. CW: Discussion of anti-tiefling racism in the context of BG3/D&D lore.

I feel like there may be wider lore I'm missing that could say otherwise… but my intuition is that taking over the tower "just like that" doesn't seem to be that much of a problem, at least, Lorroakan managed to get away with it pretty easily and he’s a transparent idiot.

I wonder if the problem long term for the trio is less about taking over the tower per se, and more about bigotry over who they are as people. They’re tieflings and refugees – some Baldurians couldn’t handle them getting food, never mind inclusion and opportunity.

Using wealth in the tower and rebuilt shop and making any plans regarding ownership, taxes, etc., Rolan would be shrewd enough to make it all work – though perhaps drowning in red tape and paperwork is one of those things that has him working exhausting late nights.

I can see the interaction of the two: Rolan finding out that Lorroakan managed to weasel his way around any bureaucracy, and having to both deal with the consequences of that as well as never being given the leniency and breaks that were afforded to the human.

Lorroakan wasn’t well liked and, yes, the Heroes of Baldur’s Gate helped in his demise, but I imagine there’s going to be some racist Aradin types harassing the front of the store for a bit, especially in the immediate aftermath as things rebuild and people look for scapegoats.

You’ve got the local populace who just lost loved ones and homes, and Rolan appears with suddenly more resources than he knows what to do with and one of the fanciest homes and businesses around. They aren’t going to care about him, his story, or anything else, they’re just going to be pissed at him getting "a handout".

Assuming Hero and Co are around, maybe that’s something they could help with, leveraging their power as a more central role in saving the city to publically endorse the new owner of the tower or do a “quest”, so to speak, to help him out regarding city politics & procedure.

I don’t think it would be easy, but I think the three would keep the properties and be successful in it. If nothing else, it’s a massive fuck you to Lorroakan and everyone that wanted them to fail, though of course it’s more than that also.

[transmutationisms]

I feel as though the issue w/ white supremacy is that even though it’s quite transparent on the internet a lot of the time it’s so deeply embedded in academia that it becomes impossible to progress or publish in certain disciplines if you’re not in contact with the right people who often espouse those beliefs :( I went to a prestigious institution and the classics department (and the history, and philosophy, etc.) was full of racist right-wingers! And the only way to progress was to get along with them. And then their research/ideas is what makes it into the mainstream so normal people who aren’t familiar with the discipline end up espousing these beliefs without realizing that they’re used to underpin racist rhetoric :( whole thing’s quite saddening

yeah this is one consequence of the patronage structure of academia. even if the faculty in your department were communists, the institution is not. the peer reviewers at journals and university publishers are not. the currents in the field are still going to be tilted toward respected, established names, who climbed the ladder in network with one another, promoting one another's work and ideas. academic publishing rewards novelty, but only within the accepted epistemological paradigm. if you want to say something that actually challenges the fundamental premises of the field / discipline / institution, you're fighting your mentors and superiors and employers every step of the way. and this affects every single field to be clear, from 'hard' sciences to humanities. this is how academic 'consensus' is produced. ofc there are many different factors that can determine which positions are accepted by those in power and established as the root of a discipline, but yea white supremacy and the defence of ruling class interests are pretty fucking major ones.

[olderthannetfic]

Thank you for calling what the Heartstopper author said racist. People need to understand that their morally superior stances are often based in being xenophobic. It IS racist to say queer content made by specific cultures are an erotic fetish. Not sure how or why so many “anti racist” zoomers think it’s okay to be racist against Asian people specifically. Our cultures are “backwards” to you them huh? It’s so transparent what they think of us but are dressing their disgust with what they don’t even understand to reassure themselves.

“I like this Asian art and story so I’m going to be influenced by it but my own perspective is morally superior so I can take what I want from these culture and “correct” them.

So you know. Colonialism. Of fucking queer art of all things. The irony tho.

--