#when will you people be radicalized into taking action? when will you start giving a shit?

[lisaswallowswhat]

hey so this is actually not what OP was saying at all!

yes, to become a white supremacist you need to have begun with some underlying prejudice at the very least, nobody denies that. however, there is no denying that the party of white supremacists has an archetype they prey on.

nobody is claiming bob bryar would’ve been a perfect man if he got help, not a single person! additionally, nobody is saying he was a good person. what people are saying is that there is a studied and proven correlation between mental illness in white men and the white supremacist idealism, which is true and fully factual, and that if he had gotten the help he clearly needed- if you take a single look at any of his social media -there is a chance that instead of projecting his hatred, he could’ve been on the better side of things and unpacked that, and put it to rest.

obviously, he is dead. we will never know if that outcome is viable. but to say there is NO correlation between those two things is ignorant and wrong. nobody is trying to say bob bryar is more of a victim of the ideology than the marginalized people who saw his hate being spewed, because that is untrue. nobody is trying to excuse his actions on the basis of his mental illness- he was a bad person. but we can definitely come at this critically from multiple angles, and we as a society need to start caring about these things if we want to stop them.

if you don’t want to listen to the people who are talking about how radicalization like this occurs, to the people like me who have seen somewhat normal people get transformed into hate-spewing conservatives because nobody helped them, then you don’t actually give a shit about victims of their hate, and you don’t give a shit about stopping it. you only care about squealing and crying about it when it happens to you. and it’s gonna keep happening to you if you don’t open your eyes.

TLDR; bob bryar was a bad person, but his death speaks on a horrible and unsightly phenomenon that we should be talking about more as a society if we want this divide to end.

All I have to say regarding Bob Bryar’s death:

Bob Bryar’s rightwing spiraling was likely due to the fact that he needed psychiatric help and did not receive any. It’s kinda fucked up that he was dead close to a month and nobody noticed. He contributed greatly to meaningful, life-changing works of art, and will always be remembered for this.

However, his racism and other -phobic statements hurt a lot of vulnerable people, and neither his mental health struggles nor his work with My Chemical Romance excuse any of his bigotry. His words were especially heinous given that he was part of a subculture which claims to value diversity and the protection of marginalized groups.

We can/should acknowledge it is sad Bob Bryar did not receive the help he clearly needed, especially within a community which centers itself around mental health activism, but also can/should acknowledge that it was not this community’s responsibility to de-radicalize, and especially not to forgive, Bob Bryar. It is perfectly reasonable for people to both think there is a degree of sadness to his loss, and simultaneously condemn him for his actions.

[burnin0akleaves]

So Israel started carpet bombing the site they said would be a safe zone for civilians with more than a million Palestinians inside of it, during Superbowl so people would be distracted. The Superbowl that had a Zionist propoganda ad in the middle of it.

I'm going to say it again, slower, so everyone really lets it sink in. Israel ran a propoganda ad victimizing themselves while they were butchering hundreds of civilians at the same time, one of the most horrific nights for Gaza in the last 5 months.

Not only that, the president of the United fucking States of America who is a direct sponsor of this genocide tweeted a meme during the slaughter. Do you realize how fucking nightmarish and dystopian everything I just said is?

Americans, it's time you use those guns for something good. No I am not kidding.

[gacorley]

There’s some common threads I see in the anti-voting posts going around, and I feel like I need to discuss some of them. Let’s start with the biggest one:

Voting to punish evil. I see lots of variations of this. Biden is supporting Israel, therefore we can’t vote for him. Is there any viable candidate who would stop the genocide? I don’t think the anti voting crowd actually cares. They are appealing to moral feelings rather than political strategy, because strategically, you have to realize that voting is not going to change foreign policy, and that change has to be pushed by other means. It’ll probably be something in the long haul.

Democrats should run someone else. First of all, this is a shit strategy. You don’t primary your president in the second term unless your party is falling apart. This may come from people from countries where replacing the head of government is easier, but the POTUS is the de facto party head. Also, going to the lack of thought to the goal — do you know someone willing to primary Biden and able to win who would do the things you want?

Biden hasn’t done anything anyway. This is just a way to bat away pro arguments. There’s plenty of lists of progress on lots of things. Student loans, insulin price caps, regulations, anti-trust.

Putting the entire Palestinian genocide on Biden. I’m not saying there’s not culpability there, but understand that the entire US government is in support of Israel, on both sides. It was a miracle we got a handful of Senators to call for investigations. We should cut off aid, absolutely. Who’s running to do that? And keep in mind that Israel chose to engage. US officials would have liked a more limited response, not out of care for Palestinians, but because they know from experience that it will come back to bite Israel in the form of newly radicalized Hamas recruits.

Liberals just have no hope for change. This is a new one. Just some idea that people are stuck in a rut and that’s the reason the two party system exists. The two party system is a mathematical consequence of the way we vote. There is reason to hope for change. The change, though, whatever means you choose, will take decades. Keep working at it. The hope is not that this election will fundamentally change things. The hope is that many small political actions over the years will push things forward.

Funnily enough, I haven’t seen a whole lot of third party promotion, just lots of this rhetoric aiming to punish. When voting, ask yourself:

Is this problem I have with this candidate something that the other candidate would be better on?

Are there other political actions I can take that will help?

What things can change with a different President or Congress, and what needs to be pursued by other means?

Withholding your vote as a punishment isn’t really going to help. Biden doesn’t know who you are or why you are not voting for him, and there is no one with a chance of winning that will do everything you want. But you have other means. Protest, organize, donate, build up alternatives, advocate for a different system.

Vote to give yourself space and get a little bit. Do other things to keep things moving.

[essycogany]

Rare But Not So Rare Sonic Moments

Sonic Swooning Over Amy

So, Sonic’s been kind of the driving force of Sonamy recently. Let’s analyze that.

I’ll show Sonic having feelings for Amy in almost every media aside from Fleetway and the two cartoons she isn’t in. I’ll also present the “whys” in more detail then just “Amy calmed down.” While that’s part of it, I’d like to add my own can of worms. And possible headcanons too. Bear in mind I never grew up with Sonic, so forgive my mixed opinions.

While I love Amy having a crush on Sonic like the energetic sugarplum she is, nowadays Sonic’s oddly been the drive of their dynamic. Any examples of it beforehand? Let’s look outside of the games first.

Sonic X

This Sonic takes more time to himself. He’s introverted, so his feelings for her isn’t displayed as obviously as the others. In fact, most people think he didn’t like her in this show because of how much he runs away. He even manipulated her by flirting in one episode. In my opinion this show has Sonic running away from Amy more often than not. Hot take: Sonic and Amy never had a real conversation either. They don’t…talk like they do now. Unless you count,

“Oh, Sonic I love you!” “Ah! C’mon, Amy. Knock it off!” No, it wasn’t constant but still common.

From my point of view, the conversations were short lived to none existent. It was the same in the earlier games too. Compared to how they talked to other characters or now, you might be able to notice. At least until Sonic And The Black Night were he talks to both The Lady Of The Lake and Amy. The two would also have visual gags of Sonic getting aggressively hugged by Amy. Or Amy falling on her face while trying. Aside from one moment in Sonic Riders where Sonic put Amy in danger, it wasn’t good or bad. Just cartoony for lack of a better term.

Maybe I’m just insane. You decided.

Anyhow, their dynamic in X is clearly built on actions. Like Amy giving Sonic a seashell bracelet and Sonic giving her a rose. Those little things. While I do prefer them being able to hold longer conversations, I don’t mind how X handles them. But let’s get to Sonic’s crush. I assume in Sonic X Sonic is conflicted. He’ll run away from Amy or try to pull from her on most occasions and others Sonic would constantly hold onto her when he doesn’t have to. For a long period on time no less. Amy’s the same way. One moment she’d be head over heels and other she’s bashful. Goes to show how young they were I guess. I have no clue as to why Sonic liked her back because there wasn’t much to go off of. Except the bracelet moment or her general kindness like feeding him one time. She was a bit much to him and most characters back then.

It’s possible Sonic just liked her and that was it, but I’d imagine due to all of the hand holding and small reciprocated gestures were enough to convey something was there. Straight forward and simple like the show itself. I headcanon this Sonamy being where the boyfriend gets dragged into a relationship and is fine with it. This version of Sonic’s attraction seems to be chaotic pink hedgehogs apparently.

Sonic Boom

Should I even explain it? Might as well because not only do I have something different to say, but these two haven’t been brought up much. Sonic and Amy’s romance mostly is played for laughs. Not saying their love for each other means less because of that, but the humor is the main reason they exist. Much like why in the main canon they started out the way they did. Regardless, I’ll dive deeper into Boom!Sonic’s affection for Amy to the best of my ability.

Boom!Sonic is egotistical, so whenever he thinks Amy’s crushing on someone else, it bothers him. Apparently he’s the only one she’s allowed to like. No “Radical Speedsters” or “Celebrities” can take her attention away from him. Like in Sonic X he tries to keep his crush to a minimum. Even though both him and Amy are terrible at it.

The moment in “Fortress Of Squalitude” a episode where everyone is a bit rude to Amy, close to the end Sonic says, “We may have a hard time saying it Amy. But…well you know.” Then she responds with, “Yeah, I know.” It’s such a sweet moment. Not as powerful as most moments with them but for Boom it’s very nice. Sonic and the others still value her as part of the team, but it’s Sonic who expresses it out loud. Goes to show how much he cares about her for even attempting to open up in this instance. Didn’t even have to finish the sentence. Amy understood perfectly. I also noticed how much he tries his best to impress her. When he needs to returned her book back, finds her hammer in Archie, (Vector did it in the show and Sonic got jealous) shows off randomly or dreams about her, and stopped racing to get her some eggs in one episode.

The funny thing about this Sonic is how much of a people pleaser he can be. Especially since the towns people are very spoiled and ungrateful. He wants to be needed and that’s possibly why he goes out of his way to do special things for Amy like go out on picnics, implied dates, and comforts her. She’s very take charge in Boom and Sonic has no problem calling her out when he needs to. Much like Amy in the show and games. Sonic will even put effort into doing things he doesn’t feel like doing for her. How honorable of him. Sure, sometimes he tries to make her jealous and isn’t perfect, but he tries. I believe Sonic likes Amy because again like Sonic X Boom isn’t canon, so more outright reciprocated feelings are allowed in this case. Not to mention the dude likes being shipped with her in the show. Which is a win in my book.

Sonic enjoys bugging Amy much like a playful boyfriend. He probably admires her leadership, but I’m saying this by observation. It could be for anything. Maybe he thinks she’s cute when she’s mad and finds her temper amusing. It could also be for her stubbornness. Some people like each other because of how much they can relate to their partner and in Sonic Boom’s case they’re two cuts of the same cloth. Although still different, due to the show’s theme, they carry the same condescending, slightly self centered, hotheaded, stubborn, and humorous traits. But they’re still good hedgehogs with a heart of gold and usually makes reasonable decisions. Not to mention they’re both equally shy about their crushes. In Sonic Boom, Sonic and Amy is that married couple who doesn’t get along much, but when they do you’ll understand why they stay together.

Reboot Archie Sonic

I haven’t read the comics (unless you count watching a few dubs and internet reviews) but I’ll give my limited thoughts. Luckily there’s not much to say. Although most people believe it was unintentional, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch that someone from Archie thought it was a fun idea to have Sonic crush on somone in this reboot. Maybe it’s unintentional but it doesn’t seem that way.

I’m basically using this part of the post to ramble about how Reboot Archie’s Sonic still manages to be a casanova. He’s like a mixture of his old self and how he is in the games. That’s also why he acts the way he does around Amy. Could it also possibly mean he’s meant to like her canonically too? Reboot Archie did have to follow a more accurate way of writing Sonic after all. Anyways, let’s run down the list of Game!Sonic if he was allowed to be down bad for Amy like they’re already dating. Which is how I view this continuity. It’s basically if Boom and X had a weird fusion and this version of Sonic’s crush was the result. Except here he manages to be more bold and upfront. He knows what he’s doing. Here’s a run down.

First of all, THIS. No joke, more of these interactions would send me to the moon. I would explain why but the panel speaks for itself.

Sonic says, “I was worried about you.” Which he hasn’t admitted to her before this to my knowledge. He states this by giving her a side hug. Along with other out of nowhere physical affection and flirting. Not to single out Sonally fans. Sonic and Sally clearly have a close connection people appreciate and I respect that. In any case, Sonic and Amy in Reboot Archie also matches energies so much. They’re both clearly running off the same brain cell. You’d think they were together. They’d be a chaotic couple that’ll do the most outlandish things and somehow manage to survive them. After willfully risking their lives they’d do it again because being normal and safe is boring. I promise you, this version of Sonamy would be a huge force to be reckoned with.

-I’d also like to mention my friend Salty showed an example of Sonic being jealous of Knuckles coming with Amy on a mission and it’s brilliant. Dude gets all bratty about it too. Archie!Sonic does not play around. The post in question.

Sonic Prime

Already talked about this in another post, but I want to mention it again. Prime!Sonic is the most sensitive version of the character, so it’s no surprise he displays his admiration for Amy freely and out loud.

This moment says enough on its own. Sonic’s like this throughout the entirety of Prime and even changes the tone of his voice when speaking to or about her. It’s so authentic and adorable and makes him stand out against other variants.

Amy’s crush on Sonic in Prime is up to interpretation, but I don’t think she likes him in that way personally. Like other characters, Amy tends to be done with Sonic’s childishness. Guess she thinks he’s probably too immature to be boyfriend material whether she has feelings or not. Sonic on the other hand, acts how you wouldn’t expect. I personally see him as his own interpretation, so I’m fine with it. If he wants to have goo-goo eyes for Amy in Prime, it’s cool.

Prime!Sonic has it bad and I wouldn’t be shocked if he’d be the one wanting to go out on dates. Maybe he’d cook dinner for her sense he cooks in the show. I’d imagine Amy declining at first, but does it after his constant begging. They’d be swapped version of most emotional to least emotional. Prime!Amy would be a girlfriend who feels more like a parent than a partner.

Unleashed/Black Night

No one can bring up Sonic Unleashed without the lovely Amy meeting the Werehog scene. I love how Sonic didn’t like Amy hugging him, but right after she left he solemnly mopes around for probably the first and last time. He’s never in any game slowly moped around disappointedly before. Proving he only has certain reactions when it comes to Amy Rose. At least in some continuities. Unleashed gives you a choice to go on a date with Amy or not. Then the next game Sonic Team followed through with it, but ended up having Amy mad at Sonic for missing it. At least Sonic tried. Not to mention his reaction to The Lady Of The Lake and him flirting is fun to watch.

See how Sonic still likes her back but it isn’t because she’s “calmed down?” She’s still the same excitable love strucked Amy. There must be something more to it. Other than the obvious answer with Sonic Team wanting to do something with the pear. I have no idea why but having multiple hints even in the past must’ve been done for the fun of it. “We created this love interest but then railed back to Sonic not reciprocating her feeling. But we still want to market them as a couple in some way.” This franchise never cease to confuse me.

Amy encouraging Sonic in one of the cutscenes could’ve been where he started liking her back. Not in the way he does now, but he admired her none stop compassion and might’ve wanted to return the favor. “Eh, she’s sweet. Maybe a date won’t be so bad.” The fact he went out of his way to get her a chilidog and flirted with a different version of her should tell you enough. Of course it would take a while before anything else happened. 

IDW/Sonic Frontiers

Yeah, after issue 2, Sonic’s never felt the need to run from Amy. From the comics to Sonic Frontiers there’s a lot of moments of Sonic being somewhat emotionally candid. Not by much, but close. I believe Amy’s the reason for that in a way. Sonic’s not afraid to hang out with her anymore. He even hugs her back on some occasions. “Ames” was a nickname from fanfics and Boom which became canon over time and he occasionally calls her that.

Sonic wishes to share an umbrella and spend more time with her. He also gets excited to see her more often. It’s like Reboot Archie but slightly toned down. At least up until the hard to trigger lines from Sonic Frontiers. The same game where he outright admits to being worried about Amy and smiles back at her with a Coco looking between the two. Then he supports Amy’s decision to leave etc. We all know where we are now.

Crazy how the more you look into this franchise the more tiny details you notice. It’s also crazy how much Sonic’s been into the love interest he originally was already supposed to love. To me, Sonic had a crush on Amy in Unleashed but fell in love with her in IDW. What makes Sonamy gripping though is how unique it is compared to most romantic relationships. Leaves it to be more entertaining whenever something unexpected happenes. It keeps you engaged.

Why Sonic Crushes On Amy?

1. Amy doesn’t want to slow him down. Obviously because of IDW issue 2’s love confession with Amy saying “I can’t change you. I don’t want to change you.” Amy joins Sonic and he includes her more often because of that. His speed is no match for her persistence anyways.

2. She shows compassion and love for those around her. Not just to Sonic, but everyone. She’s the definition of soft hearted. Even for people Sonic and his friends would be weary about. Think about now in the recent comics and games where Sonic’s trying it out. I do think it should be more of Amy’s thing then Sonic’s but it just goes to show how much she probably inspired him. Who knows? Even in the past he had respect Amy for her tenderheartedness.

3. Amy’s energy matches Sonic’s. Though sometimes she can be overly enthusiastic compared to him. Even before now, Amy’s always been adventurous and that’s probably something Sonic liked from the start. Not in a romantic way, but in a respectful way. If he were to have a partner he’d need someone to keep him grounded and be on the same level. No exceptions.

4. Her loyalty. No matter what Sonic does (including times she disagrees) she’s one of Sonic’s most loyalist companions. Obviously other characters are too, but Amy has her being a long time childhood friend/Sonic 06 and Unleashed going for her. 06 for trusting Sonic over Silver and Unleashed for still loving Sonic despite his transformation. Heck, before she knew who the Werehog was she wasn’t disgusted. Amy’s commendable for that.

From all these points here physical attraction isn’t included. What I like about both characters is their crushes don’t stem to how they look. Though it is worth mentioning Sonic has called Amy “Radiant” in TMOSTH, but that’s probably the closest we’ll ever get to an outright physical compliment. From Sonic at least.

- Side note thanks to @saltynsassy31 again, Sonic and Amy’s dynamic can be summed up as not a relationship but rather a situationship. Yes, it’s a real word. What does it mean? Basically two friends who has crushes on each other but doesn’t do anything about it. Just a fun detail for you guys.

Why Did Sonic Run From Amy In The Past?

I’ll make this quick, but the reason Sonic ran from Amy wasn’t because he didn’t like her. On the contrary. Sonic always could’ve ran at his normal speed to get away from her. Sonic’s the fastest thing alive. Why would he let someone he “didn’t like” catch up to him? I personally think he enjoyed the thrill of the chase. It’s why I believe he misses it nowadays. Though I do understand Sonic didn’t often treat Amy like a friend. Not in a way I can understand at least. Not that I think their relationship was bad, but from what I’ve seen, it was more told then shown due to Sonic and the gang not including her on missions. Amy normally had to catch up with them which was a running gag. Especially in SA2. It might be why some prefere her in stuff like Reboot Archie, Boom, IDW, and Frontiers. Because Amy’s friends includes her on adventures now. At least in my opinion. Correct me if I missed anything.

Final Headcanon

Since Sonic in the games has been the one to push the Sonic side of Sonamy much more then Amy does for herself, I’d like to think in most cases (especially as their dynamic grows) Sonic would start carrying other versions of him traits like trying to mess with her.

He’d want to get her to chase him more often and Amy would probably ask once or twice, “What’s going on and why are you acting weird?” He’d definitely play it off as him fooling around. Sonic doesn’t know much about romance, but he does know what Amy likes. Maybe he’d ask her out or go on a bunch of traveling missions. Anything to get her to pay attention to him again. After all, there’s been examples of the guy feeling ignored by her in and out of canon. It’s possible.

-There’s also a consistent detail where Sonic’s finally ready to open up but has to deal with Amy doing her own thing. Or when he’s face with different variants of her, he’s flirtatious with them. For the fastest thing alive, he has terrible timing when it comes to making his mind up.

Conclusion

Welp, there you have it, darlings. Examples of Sonic crushing on Amy more than some would think. It’s a Sonic character analysis and Sonamy post all in one. I know there’s more, but I think this gathers examples from the actual content.

Stay Creative! 💜

[literaila]

Do u think gojo is a good partner in a typical family? P.s I really like all the nuances you've added to all the characters but I was just wondering ur pov on this

gojo is not perfect—despite what he claims—but he is intelligent, and he cares. he cares maybe a little bit too much, sometimes.

and sure, he sprung two kids on you when you were freshly graduated and he hadn’t spoken to you in the six months prior—but that’s because he trusts you. it’s because if there’s someone he knows will be there, even ghosted, it’s you.

plus he was only eighteen so give him a break.

but gojo is prone to growth. he always has been.

when he was a kid and people watched him become an anomaly—the kind of sorcerer that they couldn’t teach, simply because they would never understand. or when he was a second year at jujutsu high and he changed radically. in an instant. because that’s who he is—that’s who he’s always been.

gojo doesn’t do well with change, and maybe that’s why it’s so drawn to him.

but he started out just annoying you, and a couple months in, he began to care about you.

and then he admired you, and trusted you, and wanted you to be there with him while he navigated a newfound responsibility—and gojo hates change, but if you’re there to change with him then who is he to argue?

yes, he’s too quick, he’s too insensitive, he jokes too much and he struggles to let anyone in—maybe because he doesn’t want to be misunderstood, or maybe because he’s protective.

but you’ve never been the type to turn away from a struggle, and you do understand him. in a way that gojo can’t even comprehend—for nine years, at least.

and before he was even your boyfriend, or your husband, he was a good partner.

gojo might not understand humanity, or simple morals, but he’s always had that intrinsic need to take care of you. to protect you from harm, and find a way to reassure himself that you’re not going to leave too—that he’s not going to give you any reason to leave.

so what if he takes at least seven years to kiss you?

so what if you’re twenty five when he finally admits that he’s in love with you after knowing you for almost a decade?

you’re the one that taught him that actions speak louder than words, anyway.

and gojo might be good at lots of things. he might be a natural at everything he’s ever tried.

but being in love doesn’t come naturally. it isn’t something you can control, something you can cater to.

being in love is about growing.

and if it comes to you, gojo is willing to grow until he dies.

he’ll learn how to communicate better. he’ll learn the fine line between amusing you and pissing you off (though, that one takes more practice). he learns how to soothe you when you’re upset, how to pick out dinner for you when he’s out with megumi, how to buy you birthday presents.

he learns what your favorite color is and wears it whenever he wants to make you blink. he learns what your favorite flowers are and keeps them on the counter at all times.

and most importantly, he learns how you interact with everyone. he recognizes the sound of your voice, and can guess what you’re going to say when one of the kids is in trouble.

gojo will learn how to lean on you eventually, but you’ll just have to give him some time.

and would it really be so bad to teach him how love? to learn with him?

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Inkjump Linkdump

For the rest of May, my bestselling solarpunk utopian novel THE LOST CAUSE (2023) is available as a $2.99, DRM-free ebook!

It's the start of a long weekend and I've found myself with a backlog of links, so it's time for another linkdump – the eighteenth in the (occasional) series. Here's the previous installments:

https://pluralistic.net/tag/linkdump/

Kicking off this week's backlog is a piece of epic lawyer-snark, which is something I always love, but what makes this snark total catnip for me is that it's snark about copyfraud: false copyright claims made to censor online speech. Yes please and a second portion, thank you very much!

This starts with the Cola Corporation, a radical LA-based design store that makes lefty t-shirts, stickers and the like. Cola made a t-shirt that remixed the LA Lakers logo to read "Fuck the LAPD." In response, the LAPD's private foundation sent a nonsense copyright takedown letter. Cola's lawyer, Mike Dunford, sent them a chef's-kiss-perfect reply, just two words long: "LOL, no":

https://www.techdirt.com/2024/04/19/apparel-company-gives-perfect-response-to-lapds-nonsense-ip-threat-letter-over-fuck-the-lapd-shirt/

But that's not the lawyer snark I'm writing about today. Dunford also sent a letter to IMG Worldwide, whose lawyers sent the initial threat, demanding an explanation for this outrageous threat, which was – as the physicists say – "not even wrong":

https://www.loweringthebar.net/2024/05/lol-no-explained.html

Every part of the legal threat is dissected here, with lavish, caustic footnotes, mercilessly picking apart the legal defects, including legally actionable copyfraud under DMCA 512(f), which provides for penalties for wrongful copyright threats. To my delight, Dunford cited Lenz here, which is the infamous "Dancing Baby" case that EFF successfully litigated on behalf of Stephanie Lenz, whose video of her adorable (then-)toddler dancing to a few seconds of Prince's "Let's Go Crazy" was censored by Universal Music Group:

https://www.eff.org/cases/lenz-v-universal

Dunford's towering rage is leavened with incredulous demands for explanations: how on Earth could a lawyer knowingly send such a defective, illegal threat? Why shouldn't Dunford seek recovery of his costs from IMG and its client, the LA Police Foundation, for such lawless bullying? It is a sparkling – incandescent, even! – piece of lawyerly writing. If only all legal correspondence was this entertaining! Every 1L should study this.

Meanwhile, Cola has sold out of everything, thanks to that viral "LOL, no." initial response letter. They're taking orders for their next resupply, shipping on June 1. Gotta love that Streisand Effect!

https://www.thecolacorporation.com/

I'm generally skeptical of political activism that takes the form of buying things or refusing to do so. "Voting with your wallet" is a pretty difficult trick to pull off. After all, the people with the thickest wallets get the most votes, and generally, the monopoly party wins. But as the Cola Company's example shows, there's times when shopping can be a political act.

But that's because it's a collective act. Lots of us went and bought stuff from Cola, to send a message to the LAPD about legal bullying. That kind of collective action is hard to pull off, especially when it comes to purchase-decisions. Often, this kind of thing descends into a kind of parody of political action, where you substitute shopping for ideology. This is where Matt Bors's Mr Gotcha comes in: "ooh, you want to make things better, but you bought a product from a tainted company, I guess you're not really sincere, gotcha!"

https://thenib.com/mister-gotcha/

There's a great example of this in Zephyr Teachout's brilliant 2020 book Break 'Em Up: if you miss the pro-union demonstration at the Amazon warehouse because you spent two hours driving around looking for an indie stationer to buy the cardboard to make your protest sign rather than buying it from Amazon, Amazon wins:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/07/29/break-em-up/#break-em-up

So yeah, I'm pretty skeptical of consumerism as a framework for political activism. It's very hard to pull off an effective boycott, especially of a monopolist. But if you can pull it off, well…

Canada is one of the most monopoly-friendly countries in the world. Hell, the Competition Act doesn't even have an "abuse of dominance" standard! That's like a criminal code that doesn't have a section prohibiting "murder." (The Trudeau government has promised to fix this.)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-an-overhauled-competition-act-will-light-a-fire-in-the-stolid-world-of/

There's stiff competition for Most Guillotineable Canadian Billionaire. There's the entire Irving family, who basically own the province of New Bruinswick:

https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/dynasties-2-the-irvings/

There's Ted Rogers, the trumpy billionaire telecoms monopolist, whose serial acquire-and-loot approach to media has devastated Canadian TV and publishing:

https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/canadaland-725-the-rogers-family-compact/

But then there's Galen Fucking Weston, the nepobaby who inherited the family grocery business (including Loblaw), bought out all his competitors (including Shopper's Drug Mart), and then engaged in a criminal price-fixing conspiracy to rig the price of bread, the most Les-Miz-ass crime imaginable:

https://www.blogto.com/eat_drink/2023/06/what-should-happened-galen-weston-price-fixing/

Weston has made himself the face of the family business, appearing in TV ads in a cardigan to deliver dead-eyed avuncular paeans to his sprawling empire, even as he colludes with competitors to rig the price of his workers' wages:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-12/a-supermarket-billionaire-steps-into-trouble-over-pandemic-wages

For Canadians, Weston is the face of greedflation, the man whose nickle-and-diming knows no shame. This is the man who decided that the discount on nearly-spoiled produce would be slashed from 50% to 30%, who racked up record profits even as his prices skyrocketed.

It's impossible to overstate how loathed Galen Weston is at this moment. There's a very good episode of the excellent new podcast Lately, hosted by Canadian competition expert Vass Bednar and Katrina Onstad that gives you a sense of the national outrage:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/podcasts/lately/article-boycotting-the-loblawpoly/

All of this has led to a national boycott of Loblaw, kicked off by members of the r/loblawsisoutofcontrol, and it's working. Writing for Jacobin, Jeremy Appel gives us a snapshot of a nation in revolt:

https://jacobin.com/2024/05/loblaw-grocery-price-gouge-boycott/

Appel points out the boycott's problems – there's lots of places, particularly in the north, where Loblaw's is the only game in town, or where the sole competitor is the equally odious Walmart. But he also talks about the beneficial effect the boycott is having for independent grocers and co-ops who deal more fairly with their suppliers and their customers.

He also platforms the boycott's call for a national system of price controls on certain staples. This is something that neoliberal economists despise, and it's always fun to watch them lose their minds when the subject is raised. Meanwhile, economists like Isabella M Weber continue to publish careful research explaining how and why price controls can work, and represent our best weapon against "seller's inflation":

https://scholarworks.umass.edu/econ_workingpaper/343/

Antimonopoly sentiment is having a minute, obviously, and the news comes at you fast. This week, the DoJ filed a lawsuit to break up Ticketmaster/Live Nation, one of the country's most notorious monopolists, who have aroused the ire of every kind of fan, but especially the Swifties (don't fuck with Swifties). In announcing the suit, DoJ Antitrust Division boss Jonathan Kanter coined the term "Ticketmaster tax" to describe the junk fees that Ticketmaster uses to pick all our pockets.

In response, Ticketmaster has mobilized its own Loblaw-like shill army, who insist that all the anti-monopoly activism is misguided populism, and "anti-business." In his BIG newsletter, Matt Stoller tears these claims apart, and provides one of the clearest explanations of how Ticketmaster rips us all off that I've ever seen, leaning heavily on Ticketmaster's own statements to their investors and the business-press:

https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/antitrust-enforcers-to-break-up-ticketmaster

Ticketmaster has a complicated "flywheel" that it uses to corner the market on live events, mixing low-margin businesses that are deliberately kept unprofitable (to prevent competitors from gaining a foothold) in order to capture the high-margin businesses that are its real prize. All this complexity can make your eyes glaze over, and that's to Ticketmaster's benefit, keeping normies from looking too closely at how this bizarre self-licking ice-cream cone really works.

But for industry insiders, those workings are all too clear. When Rebecca Giblin and I were working on our book Chokepoint Capitalism, we talked to insiders from every corner of the entertainment-industrial complex, and there was always at least one expert who'd go on record about the scams inside everything from news monopolies to streaming video to publishing and the record industry:

https://chokepointcapitalism.com/

The sole exception was Ticketmaster/Live Nation. When we talked to club owners, promoters and other victims of TM's scam, they universally refused to go on the record. They were palpably terrified of retaliation from Ticketmaster's enforcers. They acted like mafia informants seeking witness protection. Not without reason, mind you: back when the TM monopoly was just getting started, Pearl Jam – then one of the most powerful acts in American music – took a stand against them. Ticketmaster destroyed them. That was when TM was a mere hatchling, with a bare fraction of the terrifying power it wields today.

TM is a great example of the problem with boycotts. If a club or an act refuses to work with TM/LN, they're destroyed. If a fan refuses to buy tickets from TM or see a Live Nation show, they basically can't go to any shows. The TM monopoly isn't a problem of bad individual choices – it's a systemic problem that needs a systemic response.

That's what makes antitrust responses so timely. Federal enforcers have wide-ranging powers, and can seek remedies that consumerism can never attain – there's no way a boycott could result in a breakup of Ticketmaster/Live Nation, but a DoJ lawsuit can absolutely get there.

Every federal agency has wide-ranging antimonopoly powers at its disposal. These are laid out very well in Tim Wu's 2020 White House Executive Order on competition, which identifies 72 ways the agencies can act against monopoly without having to wait for Congress:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/08/13/post-bork-era/#manne-down

But of course, the majority of antimonopoly power is vested in the FTC, the agency created to police corporate power. Section 5 of the FTC Act grants the agency the power to act to prevent "unfair and deceptive methods of competition":

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/10/the-courage-to-govern/#whos-in-charge

This clause has lain largely dormant since the Reagan era, but FTC chair Lina Khan has revived it, using it to create muscular privacy rights for Americans, and to ban noncompete agreements that bind American workers to dead-end jobs:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/25/capri-v-tapestry/#aiming-at-dollars-not-men

The FTC's power to ban activity because it's "unfair and deceptive" is exciting, because it promises American internet users a way to solve their problems beyond copyright law. Copyright law is basically the only law that survived the digital transition, even as privacy, labor and consumer protection rights went into hibernation. The last time Congress gave us a federal consumer privacy law was 1988, and it's a law that bans video store clerks from telling the newspapers which VHS cassettes you rented:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Privacy_Protection_Act

That's left internet users desperately trying to contort copyright to solve every problem they have – like someone trying to build a house using nothing but chainsaw. For example, I once found someone impersonating me on a dating site, luring strangers into private spaces. Alarmed, I contacted the dating site, who told me that their only fix for this was for me to file a copyright claim against the impersonator to make them remove the profile photo. Now, that photo was Creative Commons licensed, so any takedown notice would have been a "LOL, no." grade act of copyfraud:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/21/the-internets-original-sin/

The unsuitability of copyright for solving complex labor and privacy problems hasn't stopped people who experience these problems from trying to use copyright to solve them. They've got nothing else, after all.

That's why everyone who's worried about the absolutely legitimate and urgent concerns over AI and labor and privacy has latched onto copyright as the best tool for resolving these questions, despite copyright's total unsuitability for this purpose, and the strong likelihood that this will make these problems worse:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/13/spooky-action-at-a-close-up/#invisible-hand

Enter FTC Chair Lina Khan, who has just announced that her agency will be reviewing AI model training as an "unfair and deceptive method of competition":

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/4682461-ftc-chair-ai-models-could-violate-antitrust-laws/

If the agency can establish this fact, they will have sweeping powers to craft rules prohibiting the destructive and unfair uses of AI, without endangering beneficial activities like scraping, mathematical analysis, and the creation of automated systems that help with everything from adding archival metadata to exonerating wrongly convicted people rotting in prison:

https://hrdag.org/tech-notes/large-language-models-IPNO.html

I love this so much. Khan's announcement accomplishes the seemingly impossible: affirming that there are real problems and insisting that we employ tactics that can actually fix those problems, rather than just doing something because inaction is so frustrating.

That's something we could use a lot more of, especially in platform regulation. The other big tech news about Big Tech last week was the progress of a bill that would repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act at the end of 2025, without any plans to replace it with something else.

Section 230 is the most maligned, least understood internet law, and that's saying something:

https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/

Its critics wrongly accuse the law – which makes internet users liable for bad speech acts, not the platforms that carry that speech – of being a gift to Big Tech. That's totally wrong. Without Section 230, platforms could be named to lawsuits arising from their users' actions. We know how that would play out.

Back in 2018, Congress took a big chunk out of 230 when they passed SESTA/FOSTA, a law that makes platforms liable for any sex trafficking that is facilitated by their platforms. Now, this may sound like a narrowly targeted, beneficial law that aims at a deplorable, unconscionable crime. But here's how it played out: the platforms decided that it was too much trouble to distinguish sex trafficking from any sex-work, including consensual sex work and adjacent activities. The result? Consensual sex-work became infinitely more dangerous and precarious, while trafficking was largely unaffected:

https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-385.pdf

Eliminating 230 would be incredibly reckless under any circumstances, but after the SESTA/FOSTA experience, it's unforgivable. The Big Tech platforms will greet this development by indiscriminately wiping out any kind of controversial speech from marginalized groups (think #MeToo or Black Lives Matter). Meanwhile, the rich and powerful will get a new tool – far more powerful than copyfraud – to make inconvenient speech disappear. The war-criminals, rapists, murderers and rip-off artists who currently make do with bogus copyright claims to "manage their reputations" will be able to use pretextual legal threats to make their critics just disappear:

https://www.qurium.org/forensics/dark-ops-undercovered-episode-i-eliminalia/

In a post-230 world, Cola Corporation's lawyers wouldn't get a chance to reply to the LAPD's bullying lawyers – those lawyers would send their letter to Cola's hosting provider, who would weigh the possibility of being named in a lawsuit against the small-dollar monthly payment they get from Cola, and poof, no more Cola. The legal bullies could do the same for Cola's email provider, their payment processor, their anti-DoS provider.

This week on EFF's Deeplinks blog, I published a piece making the connection between abolishing Section 230 and reinforcing Big Tech monopolies:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/05/wanna-make-big-tech-monopolies-even-worse-kill-section-230

The Big Tech platforms really do suck, and the solution to their systemic, persistent moderation failures won't come from making them liable for users' speech. The platforms have correctly assessed that they alone have the legal and moderation staff to do the kinds of mass-deletions of controversial speech that could survive a post-230 world. That's why tech billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg love the idea of getting rid of 230:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/03/facebooks-pitch-congress-section-230-me-not-thee

But for small tech providers – individuals, co-ops, nonprofits and startups that host fediverse servers, standalone group chats and BBSes – a post-230 world is a mass-extinction event. Ever had a friend demand that you take sides in an interpersonal dispute ("if you invite her to the party, I'm not coming!").

Imagine if your refusal to take sides in a dispute among your friends – and their friends, and their friends – could result in you being named to a suit that could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to settle:

https://www.engine.is/news/primer/section230costs

It's one thing to hope for a more humane internet run by people who want to make hospitable forums for online communities to form. It's another to ask them to take on an uninsurable risk that could result in the loss of their home, their retirement account, and their life's savings.

A post-230 world is one in which Big Tech must delete first and ask questions later. Yes, Big Tech platforms have many sins to answer for, but making them jointly liable for their users' speech will flush out treasure-hunters seeking a quick settlement and a quick buck.

Again, this isn't speculative – it's inevitable. Consider FTX: yes, the disgraced cryptocurrency exchange was a festering hive of fraud – but there's no way that fraud added up to the 23.6 quintillion dollars in claims that have been laid against it:

https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/US-v-SBF-Alameda-Research-Victim-Impact-Statement-3-20-2024.pdf

Without 230, Big Tech will shut down anything controversial – and small tech will disappear. It's the worst of all possible worlds, a gift to tech monopolists and the bullies and crooks who have turned our online communities into shooting galleries.

One of the reasons I love working for EFF is our ability to propose technologically informed, sound policy solutions to the very real problems that tech creates, such as our work on interoperability as a way to make it easier for users to escape Big Tech:

https://www.eff.org/interoperablefacebook

Every year, EFF recognizes the best, bravest and brightest contributors to a better internet and a better technological future, with our annual EFF Awards. Nominations just opened for this year's awards – if you know someone who fits the bill, here's the form:

https://www.eff.org/nominations-open-2024-eff-awards

It's nearly time for me to sign off on this weekend's linkdump. For one thing, I have to vacate my backyard hammock, because we've got contractors who need to access the side of the house to install our brand new heat-pump (one of two things I'm purchasing with my last lump-sum book advance – the other is corrective cataract surgery that will give me lifelong, perfect vision).

I've been lusting after a heat-pump for years, and they just keep getting better – though you might not know it, thanks to the fossil-fuel industry disinfo campaign that insists that these unbelievably cool gadgets don't work. This week in Wired, Matt Simon offers a comprehensive debunking of this nonsense, and on the way, explains the nearly magical technology that allows a heat pump to heat a midwestern home in the dead of winter:

https://www.wired.com/story/myth-heat-pumps-cold-weather-freezing-subzero/

As heat pumps become more common, their applications will continue to proliferate. On Bloomberg, Feargus O'Sullivan describes one such application: the Japanese yokushitsu kansouki – a sealed bathroom with its own heat-pump that can perfectly dry all your clothes while you're out at work:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-22/laundry-lessons-from-japanese-bathroom-technology

This is amazing stuff – it uses less energy than a clothes-dryer, leaves your clothes wrinkle-free, prevents the rapid deterioration caused by high heat and mechanical agitation, and prevents the microfiber pollution that lowers our air-quality.

This is the most solarpunk thing I've read all week, and it makes me insanely jealous of Japanese people. The second-most solarpunk thing I've read this week came from The New Republic, where Aaron Regunberg and Donald Braman discuss the possibility of using civil asset forfeiture laws – lately expanded to farcical levels by the Supreme Court in Culley – to force the fossil fuel industry to pay for the energy transition:

https://newrepublic.com/article/181721/fossil-fuels-civil-forefeiture-pipeline-climate

They point out that the fossil fuel industry has committed a string of undisputed crimes, including fraud, and that the Supremes' new standard for asset forfeiture could comfortably accommodate state AGs and other enforcers who seek billions from Big Oil on this basis. Of course, Big Oil has more resources to fight civil asset forfeiture than the median disputant in these cases ("a low- or moderate-income person of color [with] a suspected connection to drugs"). But it's an exciting idea!

All right, the heat-pump guys really need me to vacate the hammock, so here's one last quickie for you: Barath Raghavan and Bruce Schneier's new paper, "Seeing Like a Data Structure":

https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/seeing-data-structure

This is a masterful riff on James C Scott's classic Seeing Like a State, and it describes how digitalization forces us into computable categories, and counts the real costs of doing so. It's a gnarly and thoughtful piece, and it's been on my mind continuously since Schneier sent it to me yesterday. Something suitably chewy for you to masticate over the long weekend!

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/25/anthology/#lol-no

[bonefall]

(dif anon) So is Ashfur grooming Shadowsight a plotline you would keep/rework in BB? I'm not so keen on the way canon used it to retcon his epilepsy, but I do think a plotline examining how clerics can be vulnerable to abuse from StarClan spirits is kinda compelling

Shadowsight's epilepsy is staying in BB, the Erins can try and take it away again over my dead body

Yes, that's staying and BB!StarClan was reworked with unfairness in mind.

This time around, I'm considering the idea that Ashfur didn't work completely alone. After the events of Squirrelflight’s Horror, Silverpelt's divisons are starting to crackle the stars.

Skystar and the other more traditional spirits are losing patience with the peace that Fire Alone brings, and the ways that the code has been bent.

They feel that honor is being lost in their descendants.

Even angels disrespect the collective; see how Skypelt has its own heaven? With a demon in its midst? There is blasphemy even in the skies.

Firestar and the more modern pantheon are ferociously defensive of the choices of the living. StarClan exists for them; not the other way around.

Meanwhile, Mousefur has gone missing. Others start to blink out, too. This is causing panic... and Ashfur keeps it quiet that he's the only one who knows where they've gone.

The angels that plan action probably were a small group to begin with, radical spirits. Skystar and Ashfur are two of them, and Ash is the "youngest." So when he comes down to the mortal plane and betrays them, very few other angels knew what had happened.

(I might even have a few angels be doing the various supernatural things in that first book, but slowly, Ashfur is wittling down their numbers until it's just him.)

I'm still working out specifics, but the other angels that Ashfur has consumed are giving him a massive power boost. He can use this to jump between planes freely, and he's able to do some whacky things like weave dreams and pull nightmares out of the Dark Forest.

The most important unique power he has, which he can do ALL on his own once he's absorbed enough starpower, is blast Shadowpaw with a bolt of lightning. The electric current runs through Shadowpaw's brand new scar, giving him a connection to StarClan like he's a little radio tower.

Thing is... when StarClan is blocked off, the only signal he receives is Ashfur's.

So, Shadowpaw.

From the time he was very young, Shadowkit has had an unhealthy relationship to life and death

He watched a lot of cats die before he was old enough to really understand it, and the only one who came back was Heartstar.

His epilepsy was so severe it would have been terminal. He was prepared to die as a kit.

Tawnypelt took him to the Tribe to learn more about treatments, bringing back a method of refining chamomile to manage the convulsions.

When people come back from death, it was to serve "a purpose."

He feels like he needs to be special, like he needs to find the great meaning in his life. The reason why he's still here.

In BB, there can be guardian angels. Cats you knew in life who decide to watch out for you in the afterlife. Moleflight is Jayfeather's, Shrewface is Squirrelflight’s. Ashfur poses as Shadowpaw's.

THAT is how I plan to address my criticism. Ashfur DOES build a very personal, trusting relationship with Shadowpaw, pretending to be the one who's here to give him the destiny he craves. Pretending like he's someone looking out for him.

I actually LIKE how desperate the situation was in-canon and I want to stress how none of this was Shadow's fault, so I also plan to keep that they had very little choice. Shadowpaw trusts his angel completely, and Ashfur coaches him on saying all the right things.

The older Clerics are suspicious, but... what else can they do?

Also, instead of framing this all as something Shadowpaw needs to "atone" for, I'm going to make certain cats unfairly scapegoat him for bringing the Impostor into the forest. Shadowpaw himself agrees with them, blaming himself, but he has to learn it wasn't his fault.

He DIDN'T let anyone down by failing to live up to great expectations, and there's no way he could have known that Ashfur was using him. This never happened before, he always made the choice he thought was right and tried to make up for harm done, and he's not responsible for what his abuser made him do.

I actually want to have him figure out some of this by talking to DF demons, towards the end. Cats faaaar more responsible for what they did in life than him.

Ravenwing in particular, who was also mislead by a rogue StarClan spirit, but... ultimately decided that if StarClan was right in their judgement.

He was told (by Birchface, but he still doesn't know who it was in particular) to make three kittens unsafe by revealing their parentage. His choice killed three innocent children, and lead to the Queen’s Rights.

And StarClan was furious that he'd ever believe they'd want something so CRUEL.

And even if they DID want something so cruel... "Then they wouldn't have been ancestors worth following. And that's why I believe it's right that I'm here."

As a Cleric, he had authority on their behalf. And if they would misuse it through him, he wishes he could have just given it right back.

And Shadowsight's lightbulb goes Ding!

The very last thing Ashfur does in TBC, when the jig is up and he's about to be killed by the Lights in the Mist and a bunch of Demons who have come to defend their home, is swallow a Founder-- Skystar.

He takes the level of a true god, and reaches a nearly undefeatable level of power. Instead of black water, he's so large, malicious, and has a gravitational pull so massive it starts destroying the afterlife. It shatters the purgatory (Meadow of Young Stars) into floating cosmic fragments, and Heaven and Hell are set to collide.

Shadowsight confronts Ashfur, politely explaining that he's, well... done a lot of thinking, and, he doesn't really want what he gave him. "You can, uh, have this back!"

And blasts the lightning from his scar right back at him, like a chain, holding the screeching eldrich horror in place. Every ally he's made, here in the DF, come down from StarClan, and as Lights in the Mist, jump to his side. They can't hold down Ashfur, but they can hold SHADOWSIGHT

While they're all supporting him, Bristlefrost sees the one chance to get rid of him, once and for all. A clear shot. She bolts, pounces, and SHOOTS right into Ashfur like a falling star, knocking them both off the edge of the heaven he destroyed, burning up in orbit with a monster a hundred times her size.

And after that, Shadowsight has to go home and live with this.

He gave up the very connection that made him so special, and now he has to go back to being a Cleric without StarClan.

but the other Clerics accept this. They have to. They were all complicit in the choices that allowed the Impostor to rise.

What Shadowsight learns is... everyone was part of this. From those who made the follies with him, to the supporters and rebels against the impostor, to those who helped him realize his worth, to Bristlefrost who ultimately killed Ashfur.

He is valuable because living is valuable.

Everyone, and everything, matters. All cats have a role to play, and he was never alone.

I want to close him out in BB!TBC on a tea scene that parallels the various points in his life. Others used to prepare his chamomile treatments FOR him, in careful doses, because it is a very serious medicine. Now, at the end, he's the one brewing it.

A fully fledged Cleric, who realizes he's never been alone. Cats who love him were around him the whole time, making his medicine, and they'll love him even after he's given up his powerful gift. So now he's at the stage in his life where HE can make that medicine, share his wisdom with others, and find fulfillment in the skills he's acquired over a hard life brightening.

[heytherecentaurs]

It’s hard to have a nuanced and level-headed compassionate reaction when people are actively trying to kill you. Whatever the Rat Grinders were before they aren’t that now.

(Discourse beneath the cut.)

I think conversation about what the rat grinders deserve is reasonable. They were manipulated and exploited. Maybe they deserve redemption. But why should it fall to the bad kids to give it to them? Also just because you’ve been manipulated doesn’t mean you’re less responsible for your actions. Teens radicalized by the far right are still responsible for their actions. “I was manipulated” isn’t a great defence for murder. Also everything about the Rat Grinders comes from a place of privilege and a belief they are owed something. They made the choices and bought into the ideology because of their sense of entitlement and this really common insidious belief I see on the far right of denying they have privilege and viewing themselves as some kind of oppressed class.

I interpret the rage and fanaticism as an analog for radicalization. The death of the people they once were and the rebirth of fanatics. It started out small, making choice after choice until it reached a point of no return. The Rat Grinders gave away pieces of themselves until they were new people. An ideology didn’t make them hateful spiteful self-entitled people. They accepted the ideology that fit their personality. Does who they were make them owed redemption? Obviously saying no was an option. Lucy said no; she healed the rats. She tried to follow KLCK but reached a breaking point. Have they ever shown remorse? Has there been any indication that they ever wanted to turn back from the path that led them to their conflict with The Bad Kids? Doesn’t seem like it. Where in this story has Kipperlilly been anything more than Kyle Rittenhouse with a blonde ponytail?

If they are to be redeemed, who they are now needs to be destroyed. Another death is required. And it should not be up to the bad kids, a group of teens to see that the rat grinders are deradicalized. Somewhere some reasonable adults need to take responsibility and control over things and deal with the situation. The bad kids may be able to fight to save the world but they don’t have degrees in therapy or any kind of deprogramming knowledge that’s gonna stop the rat grinders from killing them and Elmville along with them.

I like the rat grinders as villains but they are villains in a D&D game. And just because you may find them sympathetic doesn’t mean they automatically deserve redemption. It just makes their deaths tragic and avoidable and that’s fine. A lot of people die tragic avoidable deaths because of their own character flaws and because they trusted the wrong people. That’s allowed to be the case. They can be tragic and still die. Hell they can be tragic and still deserve to die narratively.

[drdemonprince]

Hello! You have opened a fascinating door into kink communities I didn't even know existed. Thanks for that. I was describing some of your steamworks adventures to my partner, who works as a Disease Intervention Specialist (aka DIS, a government healthcare worker who administers free/low-cost STD testing and then attempts to track down and notify+test the recent sexual partners of any infected individuals). (He brings some INSANE stories home from work and gets to give sex ed talks at the local Christian college using a model penis that actually ejaculates--but I digress.) He was horrified by the hypothetical situation where an infected person could have blindfolded sex with an unknown number of nameless strangers. It's hard enough trying to track down partners when the patient only knew them by their Grindr username. How do you have safe sex in these situations? Some STDs can be transmitted via skin-to-skin contact even with a condom. Do venues like steamworks enforce any rules around testing/protection/etc.?

If your partner is 'horrified' by the actual sex lives of the populations he ostensibly serves I think he needs to read more from harm reductionist thinkers and queer activists from a variety of past eras and work on processing his feelings of judgement to ensure it doesn't impact his actions in that line of work.

The books and Melancholia and Moralism, Saving Our Own Lives, and Beyond Shame: Reclaiming the Abandoned History of Radical Gay Sexuality are good places to start.

If you're having anonymous or blindfolded sex in cruising spaces, one route of managing risks is to assume that every person there could be infected with STIs you do not have and to plan accordingly. Vaccines, condoms, PreP, testing, and education are just some of the tools at one's disposal, and one should always be cognizant of the risks that one is consenting to. Steamworks has sexual health educators and testers present within their space regularly, but they don't gatekeep based on serostatus, health status, drug regimen or use of protection -- doing so wouldn't be feasible and would be problematic on multiple grounds.

I don't believe the goal of a public health initiative or a life well lived is to eliminate all risk, or to regard the presence of any infection in any human body as unacceptable, but rather to empower people to make informed decisions about the level of risk they are comfortable confronting, or that is worth the numerous benefits to them.

Personally, I was in far greater danger when I didn't have access to such spaces. Cruising spaces make negotiating sexual consent far safer than privately dating and hooking up with someone, and Steamworks are vitally important queer community spaces, and for me are well worth the trade off. No one should have any illusions about this ever being an experience that they can eliminate all risk from, rather they should anticipate it and plan for it.

I think "safe sex" is an unhelpful framework to pursue because it is so binary and can't ever be guaranteed. What does safety mean? Which types of exposures do we consider to be "unsafe"? Am I unsafe if I encounter another person who, like me, has had a cold sore before, like 80% of the population? Or someone who has a strain of HPV I am vaccinated against? What about if I have an encounter with somebody with a cold? I'm "safer" being fucked by an HIV positive person who is undetectable and wearing a condom than I am having barrier free sex with a long term partner who cheats. I can't even know I'm taking a risk in the latter case; at Steamworks, I'm assuming my risk level to be on the high end and planning accordingly.

I understand that testing and tracing are important parts of public health for our populations. It was vitally important when monkeypox broke out. Maybe Steamworks should collect member emails and alert them if there was a reported transmission on a night that they visited. Though even then, there are some negative public health implications to dozens of people panicking. But there is no means of eliminating all risk entirely or tracing all human sexual behavior and I would be myself pretty horrified if there was.

[viburnt]

MORE BAKUGOU 🗣️🗣️🗣️

pretty pls

Wasn't sure what kind of Bakugo you wanted so...

CONTENT WARNING: Possessive and stalker behavior, bullying, rumors and gaslighting, seclusion, sexual themes, abuse. Dead dove, do not eat!

Bully! Bakugo and his outcast darling

You never quite understood why you didn't fit among your classmates, an odd look splashing their faces whenever you tried to engage with them. 'Maybe it's all my imagination,' you'd tell yourself in an effort to explain such behavior. Perhaps, you were just being dramatic.

You weren't.

People do avoid you, and not particularly because you've done something wrong. It's because of him. This bully carefully crafts an intricate web of lies and rumors, slowly but surely intoxicating people's minds; it's so easy to believe someone like him! His confidence and reputation making his word almost a truth. Doesn't take long for your classmates to form a distorted opinion of you.

Bakugo is the kind of bully that allows the roots of his obsession to go deep, his grasp creeping and filling every crack and crevice of your life. He wants to give you no option, no chances for you to escape him; Bully! Bakugo wants to be the only thing you can have, the only thing you need.

It starts with small things, whispered words into the hallways that reached the right people: slut, idiot, dumb... all kinds of names and crazy gossip stories eating your classmate's brains like worms to an apple. A new reputation for you, the sweet and stupidly unaware darling that you are.

You notice the uncomfortable ambience, the changes in the atmosphere, how people stop talking when you're around. It makes you feel scared, dreadful, and Bully! Bakugo is always there to bask on the worrisome frown your face has. He loves to play pretend, act as if your presence was bothersome and he's only pitying you, "reluctantly" giving you a shoulder to cry on.

The blond follows you around to see the results of his hard work, grinning with pride whenever you start having a mental breakdown in the bathroom or at the library. And he's always there to offer his company, in his own twisted way...

"Tch, you're so fucking annoying. Stop crying already, dammit!" "Have a fucking tissue and stop bothering me." "Fine, you can fucking cry in my shoulder..."

Bully! Bakugo loves fucking with your mind; the same hand that ruthlessly tears you bit by bit, feeds you copious amounts of sugar to keep you wrapped around his pinky finger. He enjoys making you doubt yourself, your choices, your everything... Always reminding how much of a waste of time you are, making you think you should be grarteful that he's even speaking to you.

"They don't like you," He says, "Why would they like a crybaby? I barely can stand you."

"Tch, stop crying already, I don't like that!" "S-sorry, I-I'll try to stop the tears."

Bully! Bakugo who likes pushing you around to do things you would never! If he wants you to do something (no matter the nature of the action), he'll first try to plant the idea and bother you with it over and over, and then, when you try to say no... "Tch, come on, don't be a fucking bore!" "I'm your only friend, aren't I?" "You'd be so lonely without me, can at least do this for me."

Master of guilt tripping.

Do I think he'd leave some sort of mark on you to scare others away? Yes. He already managed to wreck what little good reputation you could have, but he wants people to know that you're his property! It's very probable that he buys a piece of jewelry for your ears (earrings if you have or maybe piercings), or go for a more radical mark like a tattoo or scar. No, silly, you don't have a saying here!

He adores how desperate you look! Seriously, the fucker has a thing for making you cry, calling you the absolute worse in ways that your poor brain can't grasp. This Bakugo also enjoys baby talking to you, there's something about it that makes him feel in control (not to mention that the little leap of joy you do when he's slightly sweet to you makes his dick hard.)

Next stage for him is keeping you secluded. Trust me, he already did a fantastic murdering your social life, but now he takes it further. Oh, you wanna go to that school? Keep dreaming, you'll be by his side where he can have you at his heart's content. No, silly, you can't go anywhere without him; yes, he'll have his hand on the back of your neck everywhere. And don't think of making small talk with any friendly strangers! He'll chew you out for it.

This Bakugo doesn't normally go for his sexual desires with you, he is rather content with having a dumb little pet he can kick whenever he feels like. The topic is not exempt though, he'll have his leg between yours just to make you pathetically grind on it. If he feels particularly lustful, he'll spit on your face as he pushes you against the wall, having his way with groping and squeezing and-

"Curve your fucking back, pet! Fuck- Your stupid cunt is always ridiculously tight."

Overall a different kind of manipulator; compared to Stalker/Possessive! Izuku, this version of Bakugo has a different motto: wreck it down and build it to your fucking liking.

[saintsenara]

❤, 💛, and 💜 please!

thank you very much for the ask, anon!

which character do you think is the most egregiously mischaracterized by the fandom?

having seen the state of my inbox, this isn't the only time this one will come up...

so let's start strong by going for... albus dumbledore.

i find dumbledore bashing incredibly boring - not because dumbledore is a character i think of as morally spotless, but because the way he's criticised in certain areas of this fandom becomes dull by virtue of never actually engaging with interesting critiques of his character and decisions.

dumbledore is not some machiavellian evil genius - the entire point of deathly hallows is that the omniscient vibe that he projects in the first six books isn't actually omniscience at all, and it always irks me to see authors miss this, and ascribe to malice what is clearly human fallibility. nor is dumbledore intentionally or egregiously manipulative or cruel. and nor is there something "wrong" with him.

[the closest i've come recently to throwing my laptop at the wall was seeing a nonsensical post proposing that one of the reasons why it's fine to think of him as a villain is that he has anti-social personality disorder. not because i think it's inappropriate to assign diagnoses to fictional characters, but because i think if you do wish to do that you should attempt to know what you're talking about... and (evidently quite poorly) reading the wikipedia summary of an extremely complex disorder is not that.]

dumbledore is a wartime paramilitary leader - and wartime leaders have to make extraordinarily complex decisions, often ones which result in harm befalling their soldiers. the series is generally fairly weak on the realities of war - since its genre conventions require it to end with all being well - but what it shows of dumbledore's tactics is one area in which it shines.

and it also gives us plenty of meat if we want to emphasise the ways in which he's inadmirable.

dumbledore is a creature of stasis - he holds radical views, but he does nothing to actually advance them in society [this is a man who is at the heart of the establishment for half a century, who does nothing with that power to dismantle the oppressive social structures which drive wizarding politics and prop up blood-supremacy], and he also has a tendency to adopt a "wait and see" approach in situations where intervention would be obviously more appropriate. dumbledore is a hypocrite - he’s happy to be depended on by fudge, he is appalled that fudge might depend on lucius malfoy. dumbledore lives in an ivory tower, and clearly has little interest in the ways poverty, violence, and isolation affect people. dumbledore projects his shame and self-loathing onto others in a way which is detrimental to their own happiness. and so on.

all of these flaws have a tangible impact on the arc of the series - and dumbledore's failure to take meaningful action to prevent either voldemort or snape's radicalisation is something i think he can be genuinely criticised for - but they can't be taken in isolation. dumbledore fucks up because he's just one man - and the character flaws which cause him to fuck up also contribute to many of his most admirable traits: his mercy; his courage; his steadfastness; and his faith.

and it's so much more interesting than reducing him to a one-note caricature of evil!

what is a popular ship you just can't get behind, and why?

dramione, because i have a very low tolerance for both fanon!hermione and fanon!draco.

i think it could be done interestingly... i've just never seen it.

which character is way hotter than everyone else seems to think?

which got two more shoutouts:

arthur and molly weasley.

they both clearly fuck - and the lack of respect they receive for this in the fandom is because of the tiresome association of sex with youth and [one, very narrow, view of] beauty [hence why characters like snape often become mysteriously hot when they're being written in romantic pairings...], meaning that both of them being middle-aged, arthur balding, and molly being fat means that the fact that they're clearly obsessed with each other never gets the attention it deserves.

[idylls-of-the-divine-romance]

So @prosphoramuncher asked me to write about why I say the make-up industry is demonic.

Gladly hehehe.

So this idea is rooted pretty firmly in the Book of the Revelation and so first thing to understand is I am an idealist: I do not believe it is just for the first century, or just for the last one; nor do I think the historicist perspective makes much sense either. But rather I believe the Book of Revelation is using symbols and archetypal language to talk about the spiritual meaning and significance of the rise and falls of powers in the world. It is about the ongoing cosmic conflict between God and the forces of darkness.

That said, there are some radical idealists (*agressively side eyes Brian*) that reduce the symbols to just being internal and about personal sin and whatnot. I do not hold to this and refer to this as "abstracting". It's taking "the Cup of God's Wrath" from Jeremiah and making it about hell when you die instead of about God allowing his people to be trampled by Babylon. That's dangerous, don't do that.

With all that out of the way, let's start talking about the beast.

There are 2 Beasts in the Revelation are the Beast from the Sea and the Beast from the Land.

The Beast from the Sea is a state or human kingdom that is in opposition to God and conquers through violence. So yes the Roman Empire. But also Greece and Persia and Babylon and Assyria and Egypt and etc etc etc. The British Empire, Germany, The United States, I mean just look for a military power in history or in modern times that has set itself in opposition to God and his will. Spoilers: it's just almost if not all of them.

The second one, the Beast from the Land, is an economic machine that exalts it's power as divine, looking like God but having the voice of the Adversary. It exists for the purpose of promoting the authority of the military state and for performing great signs. It is a liar and a deceiver that denies the kingship of the Anointed One (anti-Christ, "against the anointed one"). It demands that people worship the nation-state or be killed and ordains that all people must give their allegiance via their thoughts and actions.

Both are powered by the Dragon, who is the Serpent of Old (Genesis 3) who is called both "the Slanderer" and "the Adversary", who is the deceiver of the whole world but is defeated by the death of the Lamb.

So, I mean, do I even need to spell it out?

The make up industry, at least in modern times, is an industry that sustains itself through exploiting the insecurities of young women.

That's demonic. That is freaking demonic it is literally a servant of the Beast from the Land are you even kidding me!?

Now, I wish to make something quite clear: I am

Not saying that the people at the heads of make-up industries are worshiping with demons. I am not a charismatic for goodness' sake.

I am also not saying that by buying and wearing make-up that you are opening yourself to demons. Again: I am not a charismatic T-T. My little sister wears make up, not because she's insecure, but because she's a little kid who likes to play dress up all the time lol.

What I am saying is this: that we, as the Church, the Body and Bride of the Lamb, can NOT blindly support such industries without even thinking about it. Taking the Mark of the Beast is not getting a freaking vaccine or a chip implant; it is when we thoughtlessly contribute to, benefit from, and refuse to even become aware of these systems of oppression and violence.

So, to anyone reading this, young or old, man or woman, whatever: if you like make up keep wearing it. But if you think you need make up, do not wear it. You are being taken advantage of not only by an industry but also by the Adversary who wishes to destroy your body and your mind. Do not let anyone feed on your insecurities. You are a human image of God, do not let anyone tell you otherwise.

Keep fighting Babylon, family. Till His kingdom comes.

[ofmdsalt]

i really enjoyed con and taika’s implied backstory/headcanons for izzy and ed’s past and how they met at kids, grew up together etc etc and i was always really bummed that we never get a flashback to see that.

then I saw the fandom discourse and it’s sheer unerring devotion to misread every single one of Izzy’s relationships & interactions in the worst possible faith, and I’m pretty sure that if we’d gotten that flashback in canon, the gentlebeardies would say some shit like “it’s so clear now that Izzy groomed Ed from the beginning” because that is level of media illiteracy we are at.

hey op! if you have any links to where con and taika have talked about their backstories for there characters, i'd love to check them out and see what they said!

the one part on Taika's take on Ed and Izzy's relationship is him saying to Con that they were like Jesus and Judas Iscariot from the musical Jesus Christ Superstar and i for one find this imagery very interesting! indulge me for a moment here.

many people raised within a Christian context and/or society all likely know of the story of Jesus and Judas. Judas, as one of the original 12 disciples, being the one to eventually betray Jesus and lead the Romans to him in the Garden of Gethsemane all for 30 pieces of silver. the guilt of this leads Judas into killing himself. the interpretation of his character is predominantly about how bad he is. how evil he is. how he is responsible for Jesus' death and it's largely simplified his character. i prefer more modern interpretations of him, and i think Jesus Christ Superstar made him a much more nuanced character than say others media have done (Mel Gibson's fairly antisemitic Passion of the Christ comes to mind when it sort of also supports the over-simplification of Judas' role in Jesus crucifixion)

but this is all to say the interpretation i like the most comes from the understanding of Judas being more concerned and hesitant about Jesus when he started kicking up more attention. more attention directed at them. like clearly Judas was comfortable with what Jesus was saying and preaching. he stuck around long enough to be called a disciple, but the moment those words turned into actions? when Jesus started flipping tables in the temple? when he started miraculously healing and calling people back from the dead? well, now, hang on, Teacher. all this noise will draw the ire of the Romans. is that what we want? is that what you are calling us to do? what if they come and jail us? what if they kill us? Jesus' radicalism in a time of oppression may have scared those too willing to keep their head down. consume some radical materials on the side, but otherwise not stick their necks out too far out of fear they would get themselves killed. i mean, Peter likewise denied ever knowing Jesus for fear that he would be crucified too.

but even after all that, Jesus was killed. murdered by the state for his beliefs. perhaps Judas didn't think they would take it that far. that he wouldn't be made a message, but he was. and it's that grief that pushed Judas into committing suicide

going back to the parallels of Ed and Izzy, it's easy to see where Taika would get this inspiration. Jesus Christ Superstar starts with Judas warning Jesus against Mary Magdalene because accepting a prostitute would go against his teachings. Izzy is frustrated by Ed's growing fascination with Stede because it goes against his teachings of keeping pets on board, and Izzy tries to get Ed to see how Stede is nothing more than a pet project to Ed. and pets are not allowed.

i can see Izzy's frustration with Ed's changing path of being more "why would you give up the image of Blackbeard when that fearsome reputation has kept you and your crew safe for all this time? why would you give it up to be this gentleman? to be this fish out of water?" just as Judas might wonder why Jesus is as outspoken as he is. why draw more attention to yourself? why make yourself a deliberate target in this way? why why why?

Judas does what he thinks is best in the moment and so does Izzy, but Izzy doesn't let Ed go to his doom. he pays his bail and tries to show him why it's dangerous for people like them to give up on the things that have kept them safe. even if those ways of being are no longer required. the world has changed, is changing, and they should change with it.

it's a tragedy what they have become. too used to the pain and violence that has become a reality for them to even see that there is another way of existing.

all we can do now is speculate on how Ed and Izzy came to meet and how they came to be friends. how they came to be what they are. i think there's a lot of potential for people to play around with who they were, how they rose to infamy, and how they ultimately destroyed each other. it was mutual self-destruction and it's frustrating to see how certain other fans try to over simplify the relationship. either by removing Ed's agency entirely to say that it was all Izzy's doing, despite how they also assert that Izzy is actually a terrible planner and has never done anything successful in his life ever.

im sure David and co had more plans for Ed and Stede flashbacks as they did throughout s1. it would've been interesting to see how Ed took on the name Blackbeard. where he started. where it all came together because we all know how it fell apart

[stitching-in-time]

Voyager rewatch s3 ep6: Remember

I love B'Elanna episodes, and this is one of her best. There's so much good material for B'Elanna here, and Roxann Dawson gives a fantastically nuanced and hearfelt performance, playing both her and the character of Korenna in this one.

This is probably one of the best episodes of the whole series in terms of directly, confrontationally taking on a relevant social issue, in the way that the original series did in the 60s. The absolutely terrifying thing about it is how much more revelant it's gotten since it first aired, and it just shows how important Star Trek is in terms of saying things that no other show would talk about, or would even be allowed to talk about, in today's political climate.

It starts off nice and normal, with some aliens, the Enarans, visiting Voyager and helping them make some improvements in engineering. B'Elanna is working with two of the scientists, who have been there for a few days, and who she has a good rapport with. We get a little scene with B'Elanna being Harry's wingman with the younger scientist, who likes him (B'Elanna and Harry are such cute bffs!!! I love it!!!) and then B'Elanna goes back to her quarters, where she goes to sleep and has a very racy dream, and has to be woken up from it the next morning because she missed the start of her duty shift. She then tells her other bff Chakotay all about her racy dream, and he's all like 'get it girl, I won't telll anybody you were late for work because of your sex dream, I got you fam.' (Because on Star Trek, people just tell their friends about their sex dreams, or the sexy candle ghosts they inherit, whatever. Nobody has any boundaries on a starship, I guess! lol)

But she keeps having the dreams, and in them she seems to be experiencing someone else's life. Eventually the dreams break through when she's awake, and when she collapses in the corridor, they realize their telepathic alien visitors must be behind it somehow, but they deny intentionally doing anything.

Meanwhile, the dreams go from being fun and romantic to more and more serious. Korenna, the woman whose life B'Elanna is experiencing, is torn between her lover, who comes from a culture outside her society's mainstream, and her father, who's part of the ruling class that oppresses her lovers people. We learn the love affair is clandestine because his people are subject to curfews, and ID checkpoints, and forced deportations. Korenna starts out sweet and innocent and sympathetic to his people, but as he tells her more of what's really going on, she doesn't want to believe that her father could be involved in something so terrible. Her father uses every manipulation tactic to justify his actions, and preys on his daughter's fears to win her over to his side. It's an absolutely devastating scene. Watching her descent into radicalization is horrifying and tragic, and all too familar a sight in our real world of alt-right conspiracy theories- chillingly, the things her father says are the same right-wing talking points we see today on the news.

B'Elanna eventually learns the memories belong to Jora Mirell, the older scientist she was working with, who regretted what she'd done, and wanted someone who would care and understand to know what her society had tried so hard to scrub from their history. When she dies, B'Elanna interupts the farewell party for the Enarans, and confronts their leader for the cover up of the genocide his people perpetrated. He denies and makes excuses, the other Enarans don't want to believe it, and the Voyager crew looks uncomfortable, and suggests that she shouldn't say it in the middle of the party. But B'Elanna's not anywhere in the vicinity of fucking around, and she says it all right there, where everyone can hear it.

Later, Captain Janeway tells B'Elanna she believes her, but that Voyager can't interfere with another society, and they must let the Enarans go, and leave them to do what they will, even if it means burying the knowledge again. B'Elanna is still distraught and outraged that no one will acknowledge what happened, and that no justice will be done. But Janeway tells her to go talk to the younger scientist she worked with before she leaves. B'Elanna does, and appeals to her to open her mind and think about what she told them. The Enaran woman agrees to telepathically link with B'Elanna so she can experience Jora Mirell's memories and see what happened for herself. The last shot is of her in the first memory, in Korenna's place, just like B'Elanna was. We're left with the hope that now that someone on their planet had the courage to look the truth in the eye, maybe their society can acknowlege it, and change for the better.

This whole story just hits so hard in light of current events. Are there Israeli parents, right now, telling their children the same things the father in this episode told his daughter, to justify their govenment's genocide against the Palestinians? Somewhere, on some news network, right now, I guarantee there's a right-wing pundit making the same speech the father makes in the town square in this episode, telling his followers how immigrants, or trans people, are dangerous, and undermining our society, and must be controlled or exterminated, for our safety. It's happened so many times in the US, and around the world, and then they say it was for the best, or that it didn't happen at all, so that when they do it again, they can claim that they would never, that it could never happen, don't be ridiculous, we're not evil, what we're doing is right, and for your own good. It makes me want to scream with rage, and I teared up watching B'Elanna march into that party full of complacent people, and speak truth to power, and force them to confront their own complicity in the evil system they benefit from. B'Elanna was and is such an important character to me, because here was a female character who was allowed to express her rage, and the audience was allowed, and even encouraged (some of the time at least), to sympathize with her. I hate when they try to write off her anger as being 'just Klingon things lol' because that is absolutely not what it is, at all. It's the anger of someone who's been marginalized, who's seen injustice, and won't fucking stand for it anymore, anywhere. Who knows everyone deserves better, and will fucking fight for it, whenever, wherever. I love that this episode lets us see that, and that in this story, her outrage is what drives the first steps for these people to start down the path to healing and change. The Enarans are telepathic, so Korenna choosing B'Elanna to relive her experiences wasn't just because she was there. She must have felt that B'Elanna was the person who would feel it the most deeply and fight hardest for what was right.

This episode makes me sad and angry, but it's supposed to. In a country where people are trying to ban teaching our history in our schools, an episode like this is more important than ever. Maybe in some state where schools aren't allowed to teach children about slavery, or the holocaust, or the genocide of Native Americans, or any queer history, maybe some kid will see this Star Trek episode, because their conservative parents think it's just a show about spaceships. And maybe this story will stick with them when their parents try to tell them that it's okay to hate one group of people or another. Maybe they'll hear their parents echoing a villain's words, and they'll start to consider that maybe their parents are wrong. And maybe they'll start to think critically enough to resist the poison of bigotry and break free one day. All it takes is one person to start questioning, and that's how things start to change.

I'm sure there's someone out there who doesn't like this episode, who could find plot holes, or something to criticize, but not me. That's not what's important to me here. This story is what Star Trek is about, at it's core. It's anti-fascist, anti-racist, it's about challenging and dismantling systems of oppression. Since 1966, it's been there to say something hopeful for all us who believe humanity can do better, and I'm profoundly grateful to have it.

Tl;dr: A hard-hitting episode that explores how easily even good people can become indoctrinated to bigoted, xenophobic ideas, and which shows us how even one person standing up and looking it in the eye can make a difference. Absolutely top notch, essential Star Trek viewing.

[annymation]

Any extra little facts you’d like to share about KOW? Any references you hadn’t see people mention or details you’re really proud of?

OOOOH BOY LETS GO!

YOU’VE UNLEASHED MY DESIRE TO GUSH OVER COOL STUFF IN MY STORY!!!

1. The Seven Teens Each Represent a Planet in The Solar System

Okay so this wasn’t planned initially but it was an AWESOME coincidence that I realized thanks to @uva124 making an association with Asha’s personality and the symbolism behind Saturn

Asha is someone who perseveres through adversity.

All planets have symbolisms like these, and some of them fit surprisingly well with the other 7 teens, allow me to show you:

Dahlia- Jupiter

Jupiter: Known as the planet of wisdom and expansion, Jupiter's influence extends to leadership potential and visionary thinking. A favourable Jupiter placement in the birth chart signifies optimism, generosity, and a broad-minded approach to leadership.

Dahlia is the leader of the group, besides Asha.

Gabo- Mars

This planet shares its name with the Roman god of war, so it's all about aggression, survival, and animal instinct. On the positive side, Mars helps us take action and act assertively. On the negative side, Mars can lead us into impulsive behavior.

Gabo is the most aggressive

Simon- Pluto

On the lighter side, Pluto is associated with renewal and rebirth. It represents endings and new beginnings, as well as spiritual growth and rebirth. Negative expression of Pluto is an obsessive desire for power and control and general destructiveness. A positive expression is the ability and desire to transform.

Simon went through a transformation through the story as he learned to trust himself and his friends more, and let go of his loyalty to the king. Also Pluto is no longer considered a planet, he’s the odd one out, the same way Simon is the only one who gave away his wish

Bazeema- Venus

The planet of love, romance, money, beauty, and art, your natal Venus speaks to the way you express your desires, your passions, what you value, and how you relate to and experience pleasure. It also influences how you socialize, relate to, and attract others.

This one is more so how Bazeema is very pretty and feminine in nature

Hal- Mercury

Mercury represents the principles of communication, mentality, thinking patterns, rationality/reasoning, adaptability and variability.

Hal is the one who encouraged Aster to communicate his feelings to Asha, also when they’re all getting to the castle with flying objects Asha drew, Hal was using shoes with wings on them, like Hermes, the God that represents Mercury… THAT REFERENCE IS A COINCIDENCE AS I ONLY HAD THIS IDEA TO REPRESENT EACH ONE OF THEM AS PLANETS AFTER WRITING THE WHOLE STORY LIKE- HOW?!?

Dario- Neptune

In astrology, Neptune is associated with the collective consciousness, idealism, dreams/fantasy, projections, undoing/dissolution of the status quo, evolutions, artistry, empathy, and illusion/confusion/vagueness on the way to discovering universal truths.

Dario is the most empathetic of the group and shows through his physical contact, although sometimes he can be a bit confused on what’s going on

Safi- Uranus

Uranus, the planet of sudden and unexpected changes, rules freedom and originality. In society, it rules radical ideas and people, as well as revolutionary events that upset established structures.

Safi was the one who figured out the King’s weakness was his staff, he pretty tilted the odds in their favor, giving a flame of hope to their revolution… Also he’s always sneezing like he has a cold, and Uranus is the coldest planet in the solar system so I think that’s funny.

All of this plus Asha representing Saturn gives us a pretty neat connection to astrology in this story that is ALL ABOUT astrology, stars and stuff.

Magnifico represents the sun and Amaya represents the moon, as it’s hinted in their designs by @uva124

So expect when we start designing the 7 teens they’ll have some hints to the planets they’re connected with, subtle hints of course, which will make designing them all the more fun!

2. Aster Little Catchphrase Before He Sings

So that was an idea I had since early on when writing KOW, I wanted to imply the best way Aster can express himself is through music, which builds up to At All Cost where, to me at least, the lyrics feel like someone trying their best to express their feelings but not quite sure how to, so the words and emotions all come out in a beautiful mess that is those lyrics

Now, the phrase he said in my first draft (that y’all read here on Tumblr) was “So I’ll try to explain in the best way I know how” but that phrase always felt weird to me, so in Ao3 recently I edited it to “I’ll explain my own way” WHICH FLOWS OFF THE TONGUE SO MUCH BETTER HOW DID I NOT THINK OF THIS BEFORE???

And it fits Aster so much better since their whole thing is that the stars doubt him, but he still believes in himself and tries to grant Asha’s wish his own way! Like come on it just WORKS!

3. References I like but not sure everyone caught

Asha in the very beginning mentioned she dreamed with a someone made of light, so one could say they… Met once upon a dream ;)

Asha running down the long stairs of the palace after learning the royals secrets gives me major Cinderella running at the strike of midnight vibes, I’m disappointed in myself for not making her lose her shoe mid running then coming back to pick it up

Asha referred to her mom as a fairy when she was little, and her mom had a cloak similar to the fairy godmother, which I think it makes the reference of the cloak cuter in my opinion

There’s a scene Amaya and Mag are having a discussion and she’s talking to him while looking at herself in the mirror, she’s looking at him THROUGH the mirror, get it??? THE EVIL QUEEN AND THE MIRROR! No need to literally turn him into the magic mirror to make that reference

And these are the ones I didn’t explicitly point out that I can remember from the top of my head, honestly wish there were more

[archivalofsins]

TL;DR- Milgram is testing gender biases but not in the way people would like to believe. It is unreasonable for people who seem to want Kotoko to be innocent again to tie the change in opinion around her to misogyny. I'm somewhat sympathetic to people who do enjoy Kotoko as a character because it seems like they're becoming increasingly more panicked by others not as devoted to the character as they believe themselves to be seeing past the veneer and viewing Kotoko's behavior for the outcomes it creates instead of the catharsis it gives.

Though I understand that labeling people interrogating her behavior or questioning it as misogyny can help these individuals feel better and more secure in their opinion. I think it ultimately does little to benefit the character or the fandom in the long term. Instead, I believe it gives people who enjoy the character in different ways a bad impression of what fans of her character are like. Something that will ultimately lead to more quiet parties in the fandom projecting their disdain for Kotoko's fans on the character and using her trial as a way to let out those frustrations about these bad faith interpretations.

Comparing Futa and Kotoko is reasonable to an extent but making that comparison and just checking it off as misogyny is silly and reductionist. I feel people who want Kotoko to be Innocent for whatever reason could have a genuine discussion around the two forms of radicalization that both characters discuss. Highlight how Kotoko is just as much of victim of her environment as Futa is and home in on her more personable traits to better highlight her understated good qualities.

I don't fully believe Kotoko is an irredeemable character but how her well intentioned more vocal fans discuss her really highlights how dangerous it is to follow these sorts of people without question and how easy this sort of thing is to fall into.

Other than that, let's get started.

For all intents and purposes what is about to follow this sentence is fully intended as a joke about previous events and nothing more,

"If I see one more rabid Kotoko Innocent voter comparing "actually" interrogating her actions to misogyny I may-"

In all seriousness though, people who claim to be fans of Kotoko's may want to find a better defense for her actions before her trial starts. Instead of you know doing what people claiming to be Mu's fans did- Ignoring the problem while digging their hills in deeper and deeper. Everyone literally saw how that turned out.

Plus, from what it seems Kotoko may not be able to gaslight, gatekeep, girldictate her way out of this one and ignoring the ever growing signs of that isn't helpful in the long run.

I dislike Kotoko. I have done nothing to hide this. However, crying misogyny each time a woman's behavior is brought into question is in my opinion literally the definition of white woman tears. It does nothing to interrogate the underlying issues being brought up and the only purpose of using it is to lampshade the idea that something is amiss at all under the guise of discrimination taking place.

Men can be wrong, women can be wrong, nonbinary people can be wrong, intersex people can be wrong, demigender people can be wrong, agender people can be wrong, and genderfluid individuals can be wrong. Regardless of how one self-identifies based on gender, sexuality, ethnicity, nationality, or mental health wise everyone can be wrong, and everyone's actions can objectively be harmful.

No matter what people may say none of those characteristics is an excuse or justification for people causing harm. Crying gender discrimination is incredibly odd to me especially when taking the voting trends of Milgram into consideration. Milgram has specifically been testing these biases from the beginning. Something that has proven the opposite of this claim is true.

Saying things such as if X prisoner were male presenting instead of female or if X prisoner was female presenting instead of male, they'd be given more leniency is ultimately a weird back and forth talking point to me. Especially since we have a good amount of evidence to prove which statement is true and which one is not from the voting results along with the information Milgram has provided.

Because Milgram has done everything in its power to not only play on this bias but test it. From blatantly giving each of the prisoners a presentably opposite sex presenting counterpart,

To separating the prisoners into even groups of male presenting and female presenting. Even though the series canonically recognizes that there are more genders and have had characters make statements alluding to gender being a social construct.

So, if we look at the trial one results of each prisoner who has stated that someone who presents as the opposite gender as them is the most like their selves then we can see how gender has impacted the results,

In trial one Kazui did get a higher innocent verdict than Yuno but they were both Innocent/Forgiven. In comparison we can see despite being similar as they both stated they believed themselves to be Kotoko was Innocent/Forgiven by a large margin and Futa was Guilty/Unforgiven.

Then comparing Kotoko to the male she was expressly paired with is even worse.

Because as most know Mikoto had the largest Guilty/Unforgiven verdict of trial one. He was also beat up by Kotoko during his first trial interrogation for good reason. However, this goes into another gendered bias within Milgram. The only people Es has physically hit or have been hit during their interrogations are male or explicitly never referred to as female due to their age. Since the person he most recently hit was Amane who has been labeled as child by the not only the source material but the fandom at large.

No one has gone can't little girls do anything when it comes to Amane. No one has said can't we just support little girls being feral for Amane. At least not that I have seen. In fact people don't even like that certain individuals consider Amane's abuse when voting on her trial because they believe that either reduces her to just a victim (for some odd reason this was not an issue when taking Mu being bullied into consideration but is here) or is treating her like a child something she asked us not to do but Es speculated she wanted us to do within Amane's second voice drama.

Where's the justification of Amane's actions based on her gender, age, or the treatment she had to undergo like with Mu and Kotoko now? Because I'm not seeing anyone go as hard for her.

What makes this twenty something year old woman who to her own admission has never once faced persecution so special?

Sadly, children aren't considered to be men or women but just by the genderless term child. This means people don't have to think about complicated adult constructs when it comes to their rights. This conveniently leaves Amane out of this can't women/girls do anything because her story is about children rights. Something consistent Milgram voters have done a good job at highlighting a good deal of society doesn't believe children should have. Be it the right to make their own religious and medical decisions or taking agency over how they are treated by those older than them.

Milgram has gone out of its way to split the cast evenly between the most commonly recognized presented genders for a reason. It included characters of certain age ranges and stated or implied disabilities for a reason. Because when people are a certain age or have a certain diagnosis their gender and their thoughts on it cease to matter. They are only judged by their age or diagnosis. However, instead of talking about all these things people would rather use the social construct of gender for its most historically used weaponization of protecting the over privileged from taking accountability for their abuses.

The fact that people today still believe they can cry misogyny when it's simply convenient to them and that no one will go look at the evidence collected by the voting demographic that readily proves this to not be the case is wild to me.

This is why for me seeing people say if Kotoko were a man she'd have it easier is funny. One because Kotoko openly views femininity as a tool which she uses at her discretion so she's genderfluid or agender if anything. This is something she states in response to her first written interrogation questions. So, using the label woman as an excuse for her behavior is very Kotoko behavior of her fans but again just not actually helpful. Especially if I can just look back and go um that's not how Kotoko identifies all the time though and she alluded to so here.

Being genderfluid or agender does not make her any less of a woman of course. It just makes discussing her case based solely on her womanhood odd to me. Doing so ignores an extremely specific intricacy of the character that has been made known from the beginning. An intricacy I find to be a compelling and interesting aspect of her character. I could still judge her actions based on her womanhood but that's just not going to work to persuade me that she was right because I simply do not believe it's okay for anyone to get away with something based on their gender alone.

Recognizing her gender possibly being more fluid based upon her answer to the femininity question again doesn't change how I feel about Kotoko's behavior as a person. It's literally like cool gender I respect that your actions are still trash though.

Plus using her gender to compare her current circumstances to Futa's and saying there's a gender bias going on here is weird to me. Again, Futa was guilty trial one Kotoko was innocent. Futa has long term possibly permanent impairments due to the verdict he received. Something that was caused by Kotoko. Futa is a very tit for tat person and his first song displays through his lyrics that he used to stop after someone apologized while Kotoko's displays her mindset of an apology not being enough a mindset that Futa slowly develops into having over the course of Bring It On.

As displayed through this lyric,

"You won’t be forgiven, a coward, never!"

Milgram goes out of it's way to showcase how Futa and Kotoko are at different levels of radicalization. Alluding to the very real possibility that if Futa was affirmed during trial one he would be just as bad if not worse than Kotoko. Even Kotoko's answer in regard to him being the one she believes to be the most like her points this out.

"Though he’s also the person who resembles me the least."

She even spends most of trial one observing Futa and says this before his interrogation and trial.

20/09/18 (Futa’s First Trial)

Futa: Haa…… haa…… Ok……

Kotoko: What’s up, Futa. ……your breathing seems a bit uneven?

Futa: Huh!? I’m getting ready to fight. That guard is looking down on all of us……!

Kotoko: ……hmm. Is that so…… I’m looking forward to it. To seeing what your “justice” really is.

So, more than likely if Futa was voted Innocent alongside her he would've just ended up being indoctrinated by her instead. Since they both recognized the similarities, they had with one another but just wound up on opposite sides.

Also, Futa's verdict didn't change round two simply because he's a guy. It's because he made a reasonable case for himself that caused most of the audience to reflect upon their behavior as well as Futa's. Implying that it's just because Futa is a guy is not only demeaning to his characterization and the time people put into analyzing both his songs but-

Ignores the fact that people still believe his actions are unforgivable. Along with the fact, that a good deal that believe that actively defend/support Kotoko's behavior. Oh, yeah- And it blatantly ignores that the thing he was being persecuted for to begin with (the doxing) was slowly but surely proven not to be his fault at all. Something he'd been saying from the fucking beginning of trial two.

Futa: It wasn’t me. It wasn’t my fault. Like anyone would die from that normally! The one who spread it wasn’t me anyway.

In contrast to Mu where the idea of her being in the wrong was so heavily denied that once it was shown that she was many changed their opinion not because her actions were inexcusable but simply because they felt tricked. Even though as Milgram stated all the evidence of the prisoner's crimes were there to begin with if people were willing to look and many including myself tried to lighten knee-jerk reactions by bringing the possibility to attention before It's Not My Fault even released.

So, if Kotoko's defense is simply Mu's repackaged brand of God can't women do anything? Why would that be reasonable enough justification for the tangible damage we may be about to see Kotoko's actions cause. What if just like in Mu's case where we see her bullying her victim, we see Kotoko attacking those kids?

Will that defense of can't women do anything really be able to justify that sort of behavior? Well given Amane's tanking verdict being assigned female at birth may just be something the fandom considers a valid excuse for abusing children. I've seen so many people justify Amane's mother's behavior by saying she was indoctrinated too, it's hard to raise a child by oneself the father was always away, maybe she wasn't mentally well etc. Once again showing of that if a character is an adult woman, they're actions and the tangible harm they cause can be justified in a myriad of ways.

Unless they're Mahiru trial one and too conventionally feminine then the only way their behavior can be justified is if they're beat within an inch of their fucking life-

Mahiru's first trial was a case of god can't women do anything? This Is How To Be In Love With You was literally just her going around town and having fun we didn't even see anyone die and she got voted Guilty. For what because people found her personality clingy and obnoxious. Because she was far too traditionally feminine for people's liking. Yet, people want to cry misogyny for Kotoko.

The one who jumped Mahiru on very little information because it was solely based on a judgement Es made based on multiple assumptions that while not disproven were not all completely true.

Like she clearly wasn't a fucking stalker she knew this person and they were together that was clear from the fucking first song. Even during her second trial Mahiru didn't get the whole gendered excuse of can't women do anything as much as people are trying to force it on Kotoko. The focus was literally on her being injured to shit and getting harshly and hastily judged for literally just being hyper feminine.

Then the only way people could justify her actions in I Love You without taking that into consideration wasn't through engaging with her character fully and discussing her overly sheltered homelife mixed with a clear immense fear of abandonment and inadequacy which lead to unhealthy ways of seeking validation but by infantilizing her and calling her delusional. Something that if tied to her femininity would be inherently sexist.

Then we've been given an even greater example of the gender bias within the Milgram fandom through Yuno and Kazui during round two.

A situation that speaks for itself. Yuno says the person most like her is Kazui with no hesitation or doubt. Stating this about the both of them on her birthday,

"Haha, we both lie, don't we? The difference is the reason for lying. Kazui-san, you lie to protect yourself, because you're important to yourself. For me, no one is particularly important. That includes myself as well."

Bluntly stating that she lies but unlike Kazui who has a reason for her lies she has none. As Yuno has made clear from the beginning, there is no justification for her actions. She doesn't view them as good or bad but as things she just wanted to do. Which is why she's only gotten increasingly upset by the audience attaching justifications to her choices because to her that may just remove the weight of those things being her choices.

She doesn't wish to have these labels attached to her behavior or excuses being made for what she did. She'd much rather beg to be forgiven herself if it came to that than have people that know nothing about her make assertions about her life and reasoning.

Because what's important to Yuno is being true to herself and she doesn't have to care about anyone even herself to just do what she wants to do.

Q.04 What’s the origin of your name?

Haruka: Apparently my parents wanted a girl. It was decided on long before I was born.

Yuno: It means to be kind and true to myself. [TN: Literal meaning of the kanji 優 (yu) and 乃 (no) respectively which make up her name.]

Source: Rochisama

Instead of interacting with that more difficult to grasp part of her character people decided to simplify her once again. Because viewing characters one enjoys as just one thing is simple, it's fun. It's not challenging or messy. Because no one has to bother with those strange technicalities or hypocrisies. They can just sit back and enjoy themselves.

If things are simple, then everyone will have fun. If things are simple, then you won't have to be bothered. If things are simple, then people can still dream. If it's simple, then an apology can just solve everything. It it's simple then it can be put in a way anyway can understand and everyone will want to listen. If it's simple, then you can tell how your life is meant to be but most importantly if it's simple it can still feel good.

Life isn't simple, judging people isn't simple, punishing people isn't simple, looking at things for what they are isn't simple. Because the truth is objective it won't always feel good. Yet, looking away from it in order to spare one's own ego does nothing but allow people's self-induced ignorance the opportunity to grow into someone else's pain.