#while i think it is important to support victims and that we should

[captainfairygodmother]

Great, just the news we needed in 2024.

[stars-obsession-pit]

Hello! Can do a chapter fic off this fic prompt Danny phantom x dc: https://www.tumblr.com/corkinavoid/767516270934556672/dpxdc-legal-power?source=share

This isn’t a one-to-one recreation of that dialogue but it’s based on that as a framework/premise

Batman dropped down into the room behind a pair of figures—a teenage boy and a slumped adult—letting his landing create an audible thump to alert them of his presence.

If the teen noticed, he didn’t react. Even as Bruce approached, he continued to stare impassively at the wheezing figure on the ground, an old wooden bat with flaking green paint on its side loosely held in his right hand. Bruce had already suspected who the figure would be since he arrived, but seeing the Joker so broken was still bizarre. No laughing, no schemes. He didn’t even seem to be attempting to escape his binds, just… lying there, almost as if pinned in place.

Bruce paused a step behind the teen. “I don’t know what the Joker did to you, but this isn’t the right way to go about this.”

The teen scoffed, and Bruce felt a painful lurch in his chest as he was reminded oh so strongly of his son Jason. “And what, let him go kill more people?”

“I know he deserves to face justice, but not like this. Everyone deserves a right to fair trial. No one person should be judge, jury, and executioner.”

The teen turned to look at him with glowing green eyes, and Batman felt himself freeze. He had faced gods before, yet even using that as a comparison felt like an understatement. The boy’s eyes belonged to someone far older than his teenage form implied, and they radiated power. Inevitability.

When the teen—no, the entity—spoke again, his words carried an unearthly echo. “Perhaps, but I’m not acting for just myself.” He paused, glanced down at the Joker, then asked almost conversationally, “Do you know how many people he’s killed?”

Another pause, but before Bruce could even try to answer, the entity continued, “Eight hundred and fifty-six. He’s ended the lives of eight hundred and fifty-six human souls. I can tell you about every single one, if you want. About who they were, what their dreams were before he killed them. About the pain they felt at his hands.”

He punctuated the word ‘pain’ by raising up the wooden bat in his hands and ramming its end down onto the Joker’s arm. He let out a wheeze, muffled by the gag in his mouth.

“I have a duty to my people. I am the King of the In-Between and of all the souls that pass through it—even ones whose stays were as brief as his. I am the rightful arbiter of his fate. And with that power, I sentence him to death.”

He raised the bat again, adjusting his grip so he’d hit with the side rather than the end this time, then paused and let out a chuckle. “Of course, just because it’s based on some justice doesn’t mean I can’t have a bit of fun with it too.” He swung the bat down, slamming it into the Joker’s side, then hooked it under the clown’s torso and flicked him up through the air to slam into the wall. “We all really hate this guy.”

With the entity’s attention fully turned away from him as he sauntered towards the Joker’s slumped figure, Bruce could finally unfreeze himself.

Even if the Ghost King did have the right to pass judgement on Joker, Bruce still couldn’t let torture go on like this. He wouldn’t win a direct fight, but he could hopefully at least grab the Joker and bring him over to the police. Carefully, he reached for some of the smoke bombs and batarangs on his belt and readied his grapple. He’d have to do this very, very fast.

But before he could move, another figure entered the scene. Red Hood, emerging from the shadows on the far side of the room, an unexpected bit of a pep to his step.

“Nice to see someone else who gets that that bastard needs to die. But if I may make a suggestion, how ‘bout you use a crowbar instead of that old bat? It’d be a bit more… fitting.”

[star-ocean-peahen]

After watching Cinderella (the original animated movie, which was my favorite as a child), it strikes me how it solves many common problems people have with this fairy tale. Like:

Why did they try to identify the mystery girl using her shoe size? Because the bullheaded king's only clue to her identity was the shoe the Grand Duke picked up off the steps.

Why didn't the prince recognize her by her face? Because his father wouldn't involve him in the process at all, and wasn't the one going around trying to find her.

Why did the prince want to marry a lady he only met that night? Because his father was going to force him to marry someone, and he genuinely liked this woman.

Why did Cinderella want to marry a man she only met that night? Because marriage was her best and most secure way to freedom. Fucked up, but you can't say it's unrealistic for the setting of a fairy tale. She also genuinely liked him.

If they're using the slipper to find her, wouldn't it be more sensible to search for the person with the other slipper? Yes. The King is purposefully nonsensical and the Duke is purposefully terrified enough of him to carry out his orders to the letter. Furthermore, they end up doing that in the end anyway, because the Duke's glass slipper is shattered, and Cinderella brings out the one she has to prove her identity.

Why didn't the stepmother and stepsisters recognize Cinderella at the ball? Because they were dancing too far away, and then left the party to dance in private, which was possible because the King wanted very badly for his son to hit it off with someone and tried to arrange the best conditions for that to happen.

Why didn't Cinderella save herself? Because in real life, abuse victims should not have to shoulder that responsibility, and usually can't. In real life, you need and deserve an external support system. Asking for help, in this kind of situation, is very important. She is saved by others because she is loved. Because she is not alone. Because she has friends who love her, and want her to be happy and safe and free. Because in real life, people who want to help someone who is suffering are like the mice. We can't pull out miracle solutions, but we can provide companionship and if we're in the right place at the right time, we can help the person find a better life.

Why didn't the fairy godmother save Cinderella from her abusive household, or try to help her sooner? Because she's magic, and magic can't solve your problems. Quote: "Like all dreams, well, I'm afraid it can't last forever." This (and Cinderella's dream of going to the ball) is a metaphor for pleasurable things in bad circumstances. An ice cream won't get rid of your depression, but it will provide you with momentary happiness to bolster you, as well as the reminder that happiness in general is still possible for you. Cinderella doesn't want to go to the ball so she can get away from her stepmother and stepsisters, or so she can meet someone to marry and leave with. She wants to go to the ball to remind herself that she can still have things she wants. That her desires matter. This is important because the movie does a very good job of illustrating Lady Tremaine's subtle abuse tactics, all of which invisibly press the message that Cinderella doesn't matter. While going to the ball and fulfilling her dreams may not be a victory in the material sense, it is still a victory against Lady Tremaine's efforts.

Why is Cinderella's choice to be kind and obedient framed as a good thing, when you are not obligated to be kind to your abuser? This one walks a very fine line, but I think the movie still makes it make sense. Lady Tremaine never acknowledges her cruelty. She always frames her punishments of Cinderella as Cinderella's fault. Cinderella is interrupting, Cinderella is shirking her duties, Cinderella is playing vicious practical jokes. Cinderella is still a member of the family, of course she can go to the ball, provided she meet these impossible conditions. Lady Tremaine's tactics are designed to make Cinderella feel like she must always be in the wrong and her stepmother must always be in the right. If Cinderella calls her stepmother out on her cruelty, or attempts to fight back, Lady Tremaine can frame that as Cinderella being ungrateful, cruel, broken, evil, etc. If Cinderella responds to her stepmother's cruelty defiantly (in the way she's justified to), she's not taking control out of Lady Tremaine's hands. Disobedience can be spun back into her stepmother's control. She wants Cinderella to be angry and sad and show how much she's hurting. So since Cinderella is adapting to her situation, she chooses to be kind. Not only because she naturally wants to be and it's part of her personality, but because it is a form of defiance in its own way, and it allows her to keep a reminder of her agency and value. Her choice to be kind is her chance to keep her own narrative alive: she is not obeying because her stepmother wants her to and she has to do what her stepmother does, but because she wants to. It's a small distinction, but one that makes all the difference in terms of keeping her hope and identity. (Fuck, I wrote a whole paragraph about how this doesn't mean you can't be angry at people who hurt you or that you need to be kind to deserve help, and then deleted it by accident. Uh. Try again.) Expressing anger and pain is an important part of regaining autonomy and healing. Although it is commendable to be kind while you are suffering, it is NOT required for you to get help or be worthy of help. If Cinderella's recovery was explored beyond "happily ever after" she would need to let herself be angry and sad to heal. Cinderella is not only kind because it comes naturally to her, but because it's her defense against the abuse she's suffering. Everyone's story and experiences are different, and one does not invalidate the other.

Bonus round for answers that aren't part of the movie:

Why didn't Cinderella run away? Where would she go? Genuinely, in hundreds-of-years-ago France, where would she go if she snuck out of the window with a change of clothes? With her step-family, she's miserable and abused, but she's fed, clothed, and in no danger of dying or being taken advantage of by anyone other than her stepmother and stepsisters. Even if she escapes and manages to find financial security, her stepmother might be able to find her and get her back.

Why didn't Cinderella burn the house down with them inside it/slit their throats in the night/poison their food/etc.? Because that's a revenge fantasy, and this story is a fantasy about being saved. There's nothing wrong with making Cinderella into a revenge fantasy. That's perfectly fine, as long as you acknowledge that the other type of fantasy is also a valid interpretation. (I mean, the original fairy tale features the stepsisters getting their feet mutilated and all three of them getting their eyes pecked out, so go for it.)

Why isn't Cinderella more proactive in general? Because she's a child who has been abused for the back half of her life, who has had to be focused on survival because. you know. she's an abused kid.

How did she dance in glass slippers? Gotta agree with you there man, that's weird.

[abandonedandforgottentimes]

Many of the younger ccs speaking up about Wilbur's manipulation is INCREDIBLY concerning, and I don't think they'll be the last. I think it's also a big indication that it happened to Tommy too, and that he'll take a while to respond. People demanding an immediate response need to remember that he was likely a victim of it too, he just may not have been aware of it.

I mean, Wilbur's ADMITTED he relied on Tommy for his mental health when he was still a minor. That is NOT something adults should ever do and it has always been odd to me. It also makes it very hard for the minor involved to leave the friendship, since they see themselves as responsible for the older person. I don't think I need to really go into how unhealthy that sort of thing is, it isn't an uncommon occurrence and lot of people will have a better explanation than me. But it is something to keep in mind, that Tommy may feel responsible or have been groomed to excuse the behavior.

The library stream is another example of the manipulation, and I'm surprised no one is talking about it. Tommy literally talked about how uncomfortable he was at Wilbur's house. It was cold, he had no blanket, he didn't want to keep staying there, he would rather be out in public at night in a strange place. Then Wilbur just shows up out of nowhere and tells Tommy he's misremembering/being dramatic and pretty much shuts him up, gets him to stop talking shit about him. Everyone's exasperation with Tommy in the situation (being a minor alone and uncomfortable and uncertain of what to do, far from home with nowhere to go), helped Wilbur pull Tommy back in and convince him to go back to his house, especially since it was passed off as Wilbur being caring.

It was obvious to me during the stream that Tommy was telling the truth and Wilbur was the one lying, but I figured he was just being defensive because he didn't want all that online. Now we know that he had a LOT more to hide about his living situation that he didn't want being spilled, and manipulators/abusers don't tend to like it when someone goes and starts talking about the truth. They want to downplay it as much as possible, and Wilbur showing up in person to shut Tommy up and make fun of him for not wanting to stay with him, make it more lighthearted, is incredibly telling and I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone point that out.

There are so many other things I found odd throughout the years that finally have a proper explanation to them, but that's just a few examples. I'm not going to get too much further into it. Wilbur isn't who we should be focusing on, I just needed to get that out to move on from it.

I do think pointing out that Tommy has openly been manipulated is important because it may cause him to take a while to respond openly to all this while he processes. If Wilbur treated so many of his ex-friends badly it's safe to assume he did it to all of them, and we need to give everyone involved time to stop and think about the situation. A lot of people want Tommy to respond immediately, but he will need time to do that and it's only fair we give him the space to do that properly.

I also think it is so, so incredible that Shelby has given so many people the space and bravery to come forward. I believe there will be more people speaking up soon, they just need time. Support her and other victims!

[mehrfh]

Some thoughts, until next time!

It will be a while before I come back to Tumblr but I should be thankful to that Instagram reel of Jinmao that introduced me to this masterclass in storytelling....I devoured the source material and loved everything about the anime...As the second season wraps up with end of an important arc and end of certain characters we will either not see for the foreseeable future or will be relegated to the periphery, next few arcs are about some new characters and some of the characters in two seasons getting more screen space than they had (read Lahan and Rikuson)....I had some thoughts and I am going to share them until next time, this will be kind of my last long post for now...

Friendship, Betrayal, Uncertainty and Fate's gamble...

For me, despite the clamour of last few episodes, these bonds meant friendship and I will be leaving thoughts accordingly... And I will not try to make it about Shisui only (I have spoken enough on her)....These two were MaoMao's some of the most precious of bonds...Shisui and Xiaolan gave MaoMao space to be herself without any obstacle of her upsetting a superior, she did not have to care about her station in front of these two... Moreover, they accepted her for her talents and quirks...They were truly precious, safe and non-judgmental like a friendship is supposed to be....So the hurt was piercing when it all came crashing down....

A friend's betrayal and another friend's loss cut a soul like MaoMao deep because the love was deep... Xiaolan and Shisui had made MaoMao realise she had a support system to rely on and they were in this together, for such bonds to meet such uncertain ends where MaoMao is not even sure if she will ever see them again (Shisui because we know and Xiaolan given she never knows the address of where she went)...Fate was cruel to these three, more so for Shisui, as she was pushed to the brink...I hope their innocent revelries had not met such a twisted end...

Kindness as an Eternal Principle

I cannot put in words how much this scene moved me...Jinshi, for me showed a glimpse of a really noble ruler knowing his subjects too well, given the way he gently broke news of children surviving to Suirei...And Suirei, my precious one, suffered like hell and to see her finally getting some good news was such a moving and relieving scene...To know that she was initially represented as a cold-cutting character, her unraveling as an abuse victim and her beautiful bond with Shisui was so deeply moving.....I love how one main thing common between Jinshi and MaoMao remains their kindness for other people 's suffering...The way it makes them understand even most dangerous of people (narratively speaking)...This moment is perfect encapsulation of Jinshi's kindness as he is literally dealing with a former assassin who made a very dangerous attempt on his life and was involved in various other fatal incidents at the rear palace! There is a reason I put him on a pedestal!

:)

Love as Poetry in War and Peace...

You would think Love is not there, you may bite, argue, apply vague and poorly defined filters and parameters, call people on their side every kind of name but no matter what you do or say, some stories are bound by Poetry of their time...Kind of Love that doesn't betray you at the altar of politics, kind of Love where reverence by someone is like getting a second chance at living... Love that is whispered in the air, it straddles in subtle moments...Love that grows, and fulfills... It doesn't need noise, or fireworks, to register....Love that nurtures and waits for other with incredible patience...Love that becomes yearning, angst and even anger but not betrayal, never betrayal...

Love as Reverence, as Poetry, Love as between Moon and Earth...

Bereave the Past

But Future is smiling!

Lastly, What is the Cost of Politics?

Everything....

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Conspiratorialism as a material phenomenon

I'll be in TUCSON, AZ from November 8-10: I'm the GUEST OF HONOR at the TUSCON SCIENCE FICTION CONVENTION.

I think it behooves us to be a little skeptical of stories about AI driving people to believe wrong things and commit ugly actions. Not that I like the AI slop that is filling up our social media, but when we look at the ways that AI is harming us, slop is pretty low on the list.

The real AI harms come from the actual things that AI companies sell AI to do. There's the AI gun-detector gadgets that the credulous Mayor Eric Adams put in NYC subways, which led to 2,749 invasive searches and turned up zero guns:

https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/nycs-subway-weapons-detector-pilot-program-ends/

Any time AI is used to predict crime – predictive policing, bail determinations, Child Protective Services red flags – they magnify the biases already present in these systems, and, even worse, they give this bias the veneer of scientific neutrality. This process is called "empiricism-washing," and you know you're experiencing it when you hear some variation on "it's just math, math can't be racist":

https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/23/cryptocidal-maniacs/#phrenology

When AI is used to replace customer service representatives, it systematically defrauds customers, while providing an "accountability sink" that allows the company to disclaim responsibility for the thefts:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/23/maximal-plausibility/#reverse-centaurs

When AI is used to perform high-velocity "decision support" that is supposed to inform a "human in the loop," it quickly overwhelms its human overseer, who takes on the role of "moral crumple zone," pressing the "OK" button as fast as they can. This is bad enough when the sacrificial victim is a human overseeing, say, proctoring software that accuses remote students of cheating on their tests:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/16/unauthorized-paper/#cheating-anticheat

But it's potentially lethal when the AI is a transcription engine that doctors have to use to feed notes to a data-hungry electronic health record system that is optimized to commit health insurance fraud by seeking out pretenses to "upcode" a patient's treatment. Those AIs are prone to inventing things the doctor never said, inserting them into the record that the doctor is supposed to review, but remember, the only reason the AI is there at all is that the doctor is being asked to do so much paperwork that they don't have time to treat their patients:

https://apnews.com/article/ai-artificial-intelligence-health-business-90020cdf5fa16c79ca2e5b6c4c9bbb14

My point is that "worrying about AI" is a zero-sum game. When we train our fire on the stuff that isn't important to the AI stock swindlers' business-plans (like creating AI slop), we should remember that the AI companies could halt all of that activity and not lose a dime in revenue. By contrast, when we focus on AI applications that do the most direct harm – policing, health, security, customer service – we also focus on the AI applications that make the most money and drive the most investment.

AI hasn't attracted hundreds of billions in investment capital because investors love AI slop. All the money pouring into the system – from investors, from customers, from easily gulled big-city mayors – is chasing things that AI is objectively very bad at and those things also cause much more harm than AI slop. If you want to be a good AI critic, you should devote the majority of your focus to these applications. Sure, they're not as visually arresting, but discrediting them is financially arresting, and that's what really matters.

All that said: AI slop is real, there is a lot of it, and just because it doesn't warrant priority over the stuff AI companies actually sell, it still has cultural significance and is worth considering.

AI slop has turned Facebook into an anaerobic lagoon of botshit, just the laziest, grossest engagement bait, much of it the product of rise-and-grind spammers who avidly consume get rich quick "courses" and then churn out a torrent of "shrimp Jesus" and fake chainsaw sculptures:

https://www.404media.co/email/1cdf7620-2e2f-4450-9cd9-e041f4f0c27f/

For poor engagement farmers in the global south chasing the fractional pennies that Facebook shells out for successful clickbait, the actual content of the slop is beside the point. These spammers aren't necessarily tuned into the psyche of the wealthy-world Facebook users who represent Meta's top monetization subjects. They're just trying everything and doubling down on anything that moves the needle, A/B splitting their way into weird, hyper-optimized, grotesque crap:

https://www.404media.co/facebook-is-being-overrun-with-stolen-ai-generated-images-that-people-think-are-real/

In other words, Facebook's AI spammers are laying out a banquet of arbitrary possibilities, like the letters on a Ouija board, and the Facebook users' clicks and engagement are a collective ideomotor response, moving the algorithm's planchette to the options that tug hardest at our collective delights (or, more often, disgusts).

So, rather than thinking of AI spammers as creating the ideological and aesthetic trends that drive millions of confused Facebook users into condemning, praising, and arguing about surreal botshit, it's more true to say that spammers are discovering these trends within their subjects' collective yearnings and terrors, and then refining them by exploring endlessly ramified variations in search of unsuspected niches.

(If you know anything about AI, this may remind you of something: a Generative Adversarial Network, in which one bot creates variations on a theme, and another bot ranks how closely the variations approach some ideal. In this case, the spammers are the generators and the Facebook users they evince reactions from are the discriminators)

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

I got to thinking about this today while reading User Mag, Taylor Lorenz's superb newsletter, and her reporting on a new AI slop trend, "My neighbor’s ridiculous reason for egging my car":

https://www.usermag.co/p/my-neighbors-ridiculous-reason-for

The "egging my car" slop consists of endless variations on a story in which the poster (generally a figure of sympathy, canonically a single mother of newborn twins) complains that her awful neighbor threw dozens of eggs at her car to punish her for parking in a way that blocked his elaborate Hallowe'en display. The text is accompanied by an AI-generated image showing a modest family car that has been absolutely plastered with broken eggs, dozens upon dozens of them.

According to Lorenz, variations on this slop are topping very large Facebook discussion forums totalling millions of users, like "Movie Character…,USA Story, Volleyball Women, Top Trends, Love Style, and God Bless." These posts link to SEO sites laden with programmatic advertising.

The funnel goes:

i. Create outrage and hence broad reach;

ii, A small percentage of those who see the post will click through to the SEO site;

iii. A small fraction of those users will click a low-quality ad;

iv. The ad will pay homeopathic sub-pennies to the spammer.

The revenue per user on this kind of scam is next to nothing, so it only works if it can get very broad reach, which is why the spam is so designed for engagement maximization. The more discussion a post generates, the more users Facebook recommends it to.

These are very effective engagement bait. Almost all AI slop gets some free engagement in the form of arguments between users who don't know they're commenting an AI scam and people hectoring them for falling for the scam. This is like the free square in the middle of a bingo card.

Beyond that, there's multivalent outrage: some users are furious about food wastage; others about the poor, victimized "mother" (some users are furious about both). Not only do users get to voice their fury at both of these imaginary sins, they can also argue with one another about whether, say, food wastage even matters when compared to the petty-minded aggression of the "perpetrator." These discussions also offer lots of opportunity for violent fantasies about the bad guy getting a comeuppance, offers to travel to the imaginary AI-generated suburb to dole out a beating, etc. All in all, the spammers behind this tedious fiction have really figured out how to rope in all kinds of users' attention.

Of course, the spammers don't get much from this. There isn't such a thing as an "attention economy." You can't use attention as a unit of account, a medium of exchange or a store of value. Attention – like everything else that you can't build an economy upon, such as cryptocurrency – must be converted to money before it has economic significance. Hence that tooth-achingly trite high-tech neologism, "monetization."

The monetization of attention is very poor, but AI is heavily subsidized or even free (for now), so the largest venture capital and private equity funds in the world are spending billions in public pension money and rich peoples' savings into CO2 plumes, GPUs, and botshit so that a bunch of hustle-culture weirdos in the Pacific Rim can make a few dollars by tricking people into clicking through engagement bait slop – twice.

The slop isn't the point of this, but the slop does have the useful function of making the collective ideomotor response visible and thus providing a peek into our hopes and fears. What does the "egging my car" slop say about the things that we're thinking about?

Lorenz cites Jamie Cohen, a media scholar at CUNY Queens, who points out that subtext of this slop is "fear and distrust in people about their neighbors." Cohen predicts that "the next trend, is going to be stranger and more violent.”

This feels right to me. The corollary of mistrusting your neighbors, of course, is trusting only yourself and your family. Or, as Margaret Thatcher liked to say, "There is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families."

We are living in the tail end of a 40 year experiment in structuring our world as though "there is no such thing as society." We've gutted our welfare net, shut down or privatized public services, all but abolished solidaristic institutions like unions.

This isn't mere aesthetics: an atomized society is far more hospitable to extreme wealth inequality than one in which we are all in it together. When your power comes from being a "wise consumer" who "votes with your wallet," then all you can do about the climate emergency is buy a different kind of car – you can't build the public transit system that will make cars obsolete.

When you "vote with your wallet" all you can do about animal cruelty and habitat loss is eat less meat. When you "vote with your wallet" all you can do about high drug prices is "shop around for a bargain." When you vote with your wallet, all you can do when your bank forecloses on your home is "choose your next lender more carefully."

Most importantly, when you vote with your wallet, you cast a ballot in an election that the people with the thickest wallets always win. No wonder those people have spent so long teaching us that we can't trust our neighbors, that there is no such thing as society, that we can't have nice things. That there is no alternative.

The commercial surveillance industry really wants you to believe that they're good at convincing people of things, because that's a good way to sell advertising. But claims of mind-control are pretty goddamned improbable – everyone who ever claimed to have managed the trick was lying, from Rasputin to MK-ULTRA:

https://pluralistic.net/HowToDestroySurveillanceCapitalism

Rather than seeing these platforms as convincing people of things, we should understand them as discovering and reinforcing the ideology that people have been driven to by material conditions. Platforms like Facebook show us to one another, let us form groups that can imperfectly fill in for the solidarity we're desperate for after 40 years of "no such thing as society."

The most interesting thing about "egging my car" slop is that it reveals that so many of us are convinced of two contradictory things: first, that everyone else is a monster who will turn on you for the pettiest of reasons; and second, that we're all the kind of people who would stick up for the victims of those monsters.

Tor Books as just published two new, free LITTLE BROTHER stories: VIGILANT, about creepy surveillance in distance education; and SPILL, about oil pipelines and indigenous landback.

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/2024/10/29/hobbesian-slop/#cui-bono

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

[cecizilla1]

Before someone sends a pipe bomb to my house, is it really that horrible and controversial to say that Jimmy was just as much of a victim failed by the same disgusting system as everyone else? While support from loved ones is important, he needed actual resources. We don’t know anything about him beyond that he was struggling, so all we can assume is that he couldn’t hold down a job that was definitely due to his severe mental health issues. There’s nothing wrong with being an advocate for a friend, but it’s incredibly irresponsible to put someone you know is unstable into a literal inescapable environment for MONTHS with people who don’t know what they’re getting into and ripping him away from the possibility of actual helpful resources like intense therapy, psychiatric counseling, and rehabilitation. This man needed to be surrounded by professional and community support systems, not a friend who dismisses everything he does because how is that productive at all? So many people are avoiding this conversation because they believe they’re dismissing what he did by being empathetic in that way and it drives me up the fucking wall.

Although I’m not an obsessive, violent, sociopathic narcissist, it’s painful just dealing with being bipolar, past suicidal deviation, and comparing myself to my best friends who have accomplished way more than me while I’ve been struggling to fill out even one job application. The capitalist system we live in grinds us down to our bones that if we can’t climb up the social ladder, that if we can’t pick ourselves up from our lowest alone, we aren’t worth shit and are weak—which leads to people like Jimmy lashing out on everything and everyone to gain some sense of superiority.

As someone who is extremely passionate about how capitalism has completely obliterated what it means to be in a caring community because of its intrinsic suffocating individualism, its exploitation of the lower class, and how we are chained down to an unforgiving inherent debt for our whole lives, I just find it childish that so many people avoid thinking about this aspect of his character or completely override him from the story all together.

As much as I LOATH him, I can’t help but wonder what could’ve happened if he did get the help he needed before Curly roped him into PE. While it unfortunately blew up in Anya and Curly’s face because they were taken advantage of, is it that fucking horrible to believe that someone can grow and change if given the chance (as long as they obviously don’t hurt you in the process)? It’s the same reason why the prison system—especially the American prison industrial complex—should be abolished because how the fuck is locking someone up for the rest of their lives going to do anything for anybody in the long run? Obviously he needed to be brought to legal justice, but I believe that we should start at the core of why he is the way he is, what will be effective for everybody in the long run, and the possibility of him being reintroduced into society once he gets his mf shit together before people start pulling him this way and that (with boundaries ofc.) I’m a victim of sexual assault and emotional abuse myself, but I don’t want that person to rot behind bars. I just want to heal and move on. I don’t want revenge, I want closure. I want to be able to face that person and know that they won’t hurt anybody else if I am to believe that I myself can grow beyond what happened.

I know that many other creators have expressed the same sentiments already, but I needed to get that off my chest too.

Anyways, this game means so much to me because it touches on societal issues that I care about. Fuck capitalism and may everyone be free from this hell.

[drdemonprince]

ok fine cis men aren't the bad gender it's all men and we're all exactly like that anon who admitted to having abused women even if we don't know it. are you fucking happy now? is this the solidarity you want us to feel with cis men, that we're all just as mich rapists and murderers of women as they are? you have some fucking nerve to be throwing vague jabs while calling an admitted abuser "brave"

Normally I don't platform asks like these, but I'm moved by the genuineness of your emotional reaction here. I think you're hurting, and you've been hurt, and that the belief that abuse and violence are located within one gendered group (to which you don't belong) has felt like a way of organizing your world that has helped you make sense of things, and given you guidelines for how to act and whom to trust that have helped keep you safe. I think a lot of assault survivors feel that way when they're not cis men and their attackers were cis men.

As someone who has experienced a ton of sexual predation at the hands of cis women, cis men, and even other trans people, I don't feel the same way. There is no "bad gender" I can chalk up my abuse to. I find there are no easy means of categorizing entire people as abuser or as victim either -- I have known so, so many people who have occupied both roles depending upon the power they wielded and the social context of the moment. Hell, one cis lesbian that I knew who was infamous in her community for raping trans men would always tell her victims that her acts were those of "trauma recovery," of her "reclaiming" her power after men had stolen it away.

Even she, I don't think, is irredeemable or ontologically evil.

I'm an abolitionist. That's a core value through which a lot of my political action and beliefs flow. If you're not on board with the project of abolitionism, you'll find much to object to here, and most of your objections are things I will refuse to entertain, because I do not believe human beings are disposable no matter what they do, and I don't believe that anyone should have the authority to deem another human being as disposable.

An abolitionist politics is incompatible with the idea that some people or some groups are inherently bad. It's incompatible with the belief that abuse and violence comes from evil. It's a worldview that holds that people do harm because of social structures and networks of power that must be destroyed -- systems like the patriarchy, cissexism, anti-Blackness, ableism, capitalism, and more. And I think one of the ways that we conquer such oppressive systems is by raising the consciousness of all the people trapped under it -- so that we can topple it together. I want trans men and cis men alike to realize they have some skin in the game.

You don't have to associate with the men you don't want to associate with. If, because of repeated abuses at the hands of men, you can't ever trust them, well, those are your feelings, that's your life, that is your business. But when your personal feelings of safety are used as a justification for developing and promoting a worldview with transphobic, transmisogynistic implications, I'm gonna talk shit about that on my stupid little blog. And I'm gonna continue conducting my life in the way I feel I should.

And for me, that means forging common ground between trans men and cis men, and pushing both groups to take women's concerns seriously (especially trans women's concerns) and to stop centering themselves in feminist dialogue. There's a place for both trans men and cis men in the gender revolution, but we gotta do a lot of work on ourselves to stop getting in the way. It's work I'm emotionally equipped to do and find rewarding, and it's fine if you don't. There are lots of other people who need support that you can focus your energies on -- other survivors of abuse and assault that you perhaps find it easier to relate to. That's important work too, and I wish you well in doing it. Just make sure you're not excluding trans women in that work or I'll continue to be annoying about it on my stupid little blog.

[watermelonlicker]

i cackle at how antis echo chamber “louis hates larries” as if that’s so moving oh wow 1. most of it is pr drivel slobbering down his mouth and 2. even if there is truth to it and he doesn’t like that we know too much—being silent is something i can’t do. this is bigger than louis.

this is knowledge and knowledge is safety. knowledge is how you become aware of situations so you don’t fall victim to them and end up controlled by a tyrant like simon FOUL. knowledge is what louis & harry didn’t have as preyed upon CHILDREN that were eaten alive. bcos of that lack of knowledge (FOR ME) larry is more than a ship. it is a goddamn lifestyle (and no asshole) not in the way that it’s a cult, but in the way it literally teaches you the horrors of life and how to navigate those horrors and find power in community.

do you really think the larries didn’t play a factor (A FACTOR NOT EVERY FUCKING FACTOR READING COMPREHENSION) where harry felt safe enough to be more open and explore himself after 1d? do you think larries were not the backbone for louis while he was in that slave contract for 5 years after 1d? and no i’m not crediting solos bcos most of y’all believe the bullshit.

LARRIES are one of the FEW fandoms to recognize, dissect, and expose the insidious shit that goes on bts in the music industry. call us sleuths, detectives, free journalists whatever the fuck i’m sure they’ll teach a class on us one day about the dedication & power a fandom can wield and how those who are threatened by that power use gaslighting and bullying tactics to silence it. larry is not a conspiracy. it is the fucking truth in your blind eyes that your comfort and privilege won’t allow you to see. it wasn’t too long ago the general public thought britney spear’s fans were crazy for noticing shit was off with her FOR YEARS, but despite all the bullying they never gave up and the free britney movement happened. MANY of the people who joined the movement were og deniers btw but again people only join when it’s comfortable or brings clout.

and JEEBUS britney was the biggest fucking pop star in THE WORLD and yet she was being heavily controlled and abused and it was so unfathomable to you? so many of you were so fucking suprised but HOW? HOW WERE YOU SURPRISED??? you thought her breakdown was for shits and giggles? you thought she shaved her head and smashed a window bcos she was having a good time? but let me not even get started on how GROTESQUELY some of you treat addicts and then you fucks will say “ok so it happened to her but that doesn’t apply to your conspiracy loser blah blah” ok brainwashed fool—it is literally a copy of a copy of a copy, a p a t t e r n, a vicious cycle, A SYSTEM. what makes you think if the biggest pop star in the world wasn’t exempt the biggest boy band in the world was? the biggest boy band who again were manipulated and groomed as CHILDREN by the devil himself. and simon never hid he was the devil btw. when you have knowledge and life experience (god forbid trauma) these people can never hide who they are but so many of you still close your eyes to them?

like omfg supporting larry is so simple??! it is fighting for QUEER JUSTICE and QUEER LOVE and making space for queer artists to be themselves openly and not have their love be the thing weaponized against them to destroy them. queer artists should NEVER have to choose between their souls and their dreams. NEVER. THAT is why i became a larrie in 2012, am a larrie now, and will always be a larry truther. their relationship status and the decisions they make i might disagree with is irrelevant to this. the history is what’s important.

[tchtokyo]

141's Princess (Someone is flirting with Kyle?)

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

Soap can vouche for the following information, as someone that befriended Gaz the moment he laid eyes on him and who knows almost every deep secret.

Kyle Gaz Garrick doesn't know when people are flirting with him.

Soap knows that this is a fact, an historical one at that, because the scott was victim of such condition. It took soap saying directly that he was flriting with Gaz for 1) the man understand the situation 2) for gaz to flirt back. After that, he found out that Gaz is very good at flirting and amazing at dirty talking.

Anyways, it's more like Gaz thinks that people won't flirt with him from the start, like he knows he's not like soap, funny and sociable, he's quieter likes alone time and prefers to be in the background. Gaz became a source of quiet for soap when he needed, a silent support for Price in anxious times, and a sleep partner for Ghost when his insomnia was at it's worse. Gaz was a pillar in their little relationship and someone they treasure any time they can.

No one flirts with Gaz, and so the 141 didn't even phantom that such thing would happen, they were secure - not only because of Gaz lack of flirt detector, but because gaz was their little treasure - that no kind of that action was needed.

On this day, soap was baffled. He was siting next to price in the mess hall, food eaten just waiting for the older man to finish, they were with gaz but the man had something to do so he left early. He looked towards the entrance of the mess, squinted his eyes and-

Was that someone flirting with Gaz?

Soap was the person with the most knowledge of flirting, so he was not mistaken in his hypothesis. No, that was a man ready to use all his cards on the oblivious and polite sergeant that was his Gaz.

"Hey, Cap" Soap nudge the olders arm, making him almost choke on his food, that earned him a glare from Price, but that wasn't important "sorry! But someone is flirting with your baby" Soap said while pointing to the entrance.

"Wha-" Price looked at the entrance and there, lo and behold, a visiting sergeant that price should really know the name but doesn't remember, is standing way too close to his baby (yes, Kyle is always gonna be his baby) with a smirk, dark eyes and hands way too touchy, trying to flirt with Gaz the best he could. However, Gaz was just standing there, hands to himself polite smile that did not reach his eyes "he doesn't even realize that he's flirting with him."

"Cap, please, I told him his ass was a dessert that I wanted to taste and he said thank you, I had to tell him I was trying to flirt with him."

Price shrugs "that settles it. GAZ, COME HERE." Price called out to the sergeant, who politely excused himself from the other man to the table.

"Yes, sir?" Gaz asked sitting on the chair next to the captain, who then pulled him flush against his side.

"I was just saving you from the excessive flirting over there."

Gaz made a confused sound "flirting? Sergeant Williams wasn't flirting with me."

Both Price and Soap blinked once, twice at him, disbelief written all over their faces "aye, Gaz, kitty, you telling me that you think he was being nice out of his own violation and not chasing that ass?"

"Jesus Soap not everyone is as horny as you. And yes he was being nice, he was asking some questions about our training method and how we teach the rookies."

Price raised a brow "and the smirk, lip licking, lidded eyes, hands on your arms didn't give it away?"

"What? Soap was and is like that too! He might have been a very touchy person!"

"Gaz I was trying to get into your pants, and I'm still actively doing that"

Gaz huff and stood "you are being ridiculous! He's just being friendly! Besides he probably wants Soap and not me! Anyways, I have to go, see you on movie night in Price's room."

"We gonna have a movie night?"

"NOW WE WILL!" Gaz answered back already out of the mess hall.

Price and Soap sat there for a while, reliving that interaction that left them hopeless and amazed. Sometimes, it didn't settle on them that Gaz was oblivious to an unreachable level, but when this kind of things happened they realized all over again and celebrate their milestones because how did they snatched such oblvious prick as their boyfriend?

"That was interesting."

"Ye know what's gonna be interesting?" Soap asked, standing from his chair. Price tilted his head in answer and the scott continued "when Ghost sees that dude flirting with Gaz."

Ah. That. They forgot about that.

[followerofmercy]

Oh my God I just realized the reason Arlecchino is Like That is because she's never known a parental figure as anything but an antagonist. Essay incoming:

I saw some really good analysis pointing out that Crucabena's existence was almost certainly a retcon for the Knave/Director of the House of Hearth's unforgivable behavior, and I agree. Nobody's ages make any sense without having to do a mental contortionist act and there was a distinct vibe of the Chasm Hearthlings being particularly brutal.

(That is part of why I don't usually get into super long-running stories. There will inevitably be some half baked ideas that you have to introduce early on for foreshadowing, but then the rest of the story moves in a way where there's a better option, and then you have to find a way to make the new idea work with the groundwork already laid. Personally, I think a footnote saying "We changed our minds - this is the edited version" is perfectly acceptable. A story is a conversation between the audience and author but whatever)

ANYWAY! It feels so fucking weird saying this because while I'm on the "they should be Worse, Actually" train 99% of the time, this is that 1% where I think Arlecchino being on the very very light side of morally gray makes for a way more interesting story than if they had've kept her true to the original idea.

I love evil women more than the next guy but I think the continued operation of the House of Hearth being a spit in the face to the Fontainian government and the Fatui and the idea of how a 'normal' family should look - because none of these kids are normal and that has directly led to their abuse - and that being a good thing is. Idk. Refreshing? I think it's a much more powerful message that Arlecchino was the only goddamn person that actually got results trying to do something about all these abused children. She is actually doing some incredible work in a terrible situation. In a world where these kids’ options are “being trafficked” and “Fatui pawns,” I think “Independent child soldiers operating under the Fatui banner but staying true to themselves” is a pretty damn good alternative. 

It’s also important that the rest of society’s lack of care is directly responsible for the continued existence of the House of Hearth as it is. I mean fuck’s sake, Fontaine has a community of people living in the SEWER. If there was a public orphanage that wasn’t operated by predators, I’m sure most children would be there instead! But no. Nobody wants these kids. And, God forbid Wriothesley decided to do something about being sold. The victim blaming is off the charts. There is no way for Arlecchino to operate peacefully within the existing system, so she made her own. 

So the actual point of this essay: It’s everywhere in Arlecchino’s story, dialogue and actions that she wants her children to support each other, but because of how Crucabena raised her, she can’t really envision herself as part of that family (even if she actually is part of it and the majority of the kids love her dearly.) A parent is something to be feared, eventually killed, and removed from the path of their successor. Everyone likes to highlight little Perurere asking if it’s normal for biological mothers and daughters to argue. On some level I think she knows it’s wrong, but still. Literally all she’s ever seen is a parent as an obstacle to overcome. None of the children in her care had good parents and, if they did, the parents are dead. 

(Also hot take that Crucabena probably thought extremely highly of Arlecchino and gave her special treatment. She felt that Clervie was holding her actual favorite daughter back. I imagine Arlecchino also has very complicated feelings in Crucabena’s role in raising her to be as strong as she is while also being an objective monster, but that’s a topic for another time.) 

Even Arlecchino’s constellation talks about her being alone while instructing her children to care for one another. That separation ties into her being outwardly contradictory about rules. In her story quest, she spends the majority of it aware that her children are disobeying her, but as long as she doesn’t catch them, she can’t rightfully punish them now can she? Now excuse her while she makes herself scarce so they can get up to their mischief. She lip services - and by that I mean lies - about the importance of rules. She Actively Encourages her children to disobey her so long as they do it smart, which is a way to teach them how to circumvent the unjust laws of Fontaine and the Fatui without getting caught. If her kids fuck up bad enough she’ll “punish” them before they get actually killed by something worse than her, and if they successfully trick her (with her blessing), then there’s a good chance they’ll live. (Or, yk, if they wanna leave she’ll let them asldfj) 

So, again, I'll keep preaching that Arlecchino's whole MO is that she is setting herself up as an antagonist for her children, and her children's allies, to test themselves against. She actively encourages rebellion against her, unfair rules, the system, the Fatui, Fontaine, etc, because that's how she survived her own upbringing and the only way she knows for her family to protect themselves. She is keenly aware that she is Not Gentle, Not Fair (even if I do neglect that part in my own writing), and that there probably is a better way to do things. That’s why she wants Lyney specifically to succeed her. She cannot envision a perfect Hearth with her in it because she is the Parent, and historically, Parents are obstacles to be removed. 

Arlecchino’s greatest wish as the King of the House of Hearth is to be dethroned, and I think that is WAY more interesting than the abusive, violent tyrant Hoyo teased at first.

[creatingblackcharacters]

Heya so I'm a Hispanic (non-Black) writer and artist who has been using art as a way to make political statements throughout college, now that I've graduated I plan on making some stories or art projects that I'll self publish as kind of a side thing, or perhaps just a local thing idk.

I generally write stories focusing on my experiences but as I've found they've been well-recieved I'd like to branch out a bit and write some stories to help bring attention to issues that I've witnessed but haven't been subjected to, one being racism against black people in punk/alternative spaces.

My goal is to kind of just create characters and/or narratives that help raise awareness about it, but I don't exactly want to sound as if I'm talking over Black people who have been directly affected as I'm just a witness and not a victim of it. My sociologist friends say that these are good things to write about as supportive narratives can bring in support to actual people, or at the very least help people introspect on their own behavior, or feel encouraged to speak out about their experiencesof discrimination. While I feel like technically any support is good support, I'm admittedly a bit divided as one one hand writing about these things could help, I also don't know exactly if it's like something I have a place in talking about as a non-Black person.

Do you have any tips about writing about that sort of thing without coming across as preachy? Or alternatively do you think its inherently preachy by telling these stories as a non-Black person about discrimination against Black people? Especially if the protagonist of these story's were to be a black person, it's not like I can say anything from my personal experience.

My goal isn't to draw attention to myself but rather to sort of act as a middle man to help garner attention to and support for Black people in my communities that are affected by these things.

*sigh* I can see you tried with the capitals so I'll let it slide.

I think part of it here is that if you're not confident in standing on whatever it is you want to say, don't do it. Because calling out antiblackness and supporting Black people very often comes with backlash that many artists (especially on here, Jesus) fear due to the loss of potential income and/or support. People that liked you for your prior work may very well turn face as soon as you speak on antiblackness in a way that either makes them uncomfortable or even reveals their complicity. But it would be wild of you to try to make an important political statement to support these stories, then waffle and take it down once the pressure starts. So... Don't be surprised!

I think a way to avoid that- and to avoid speaking over Black voices- is by actually involving yourself in the Black community. Do you have Black sociologist friends? Any Black punk/alternative friends? Do you support Black punk artists around you who do political art? Have you studied and promoted their work? Have you done anything else to help this community?

Funny enough, this brings to mind how we can tell who is performative and who isn't. Because you can make art saying "oh I care about this particular issue in the Black community and want to bring attention to it", but if there are no Black voices around you and none of us know who you are, it's going to be like... Who is this person? Are they anybody's friend? Why are they using our struggle for art clout? It's going to be harder for us to believe your intentions if you treat our struggle like a sample in a petri dish to show folks and not like the people around you.

And if you don't know anything about what you're talking about, but still want to help, then maybe rather than creating narratives, you can just boost the Black voices that already did! They already exist! You can be just as helpful boosting Black voices, and frankly everyone should be!

But that's me 🙌🏾

[tenroses07]

My final thoughts on the neil gaiman allegations;

Do I believe the women?: Yes. While I do find it still a bit odd that there’s missing context, I think that’s a fault of the podcast and not the fault of the women. I hope that they come forward to more reputable news sources and give their stories fully soon.

Do I think this is a right wing conspiracy: Yes and no. I do not think all of this is one big lie, but I do think the journalism here is clearly biased and I do not think these women’s stories would’ve been aired if they (the journalists) did not believe there would be any political gain. I do believe that it could be possible that tortoise media is trying to slander those who have worked with him. I do not blame the women for this.

Do I still wish to see more proof?: Of course. I think it’s possible to believe victims while also still wishing to see more proof. It’s important to be critical still, but once again this does not mean that it’s okay to say these women are lying because you haven’t seen proof.

Do I think any fandoms for media he created should interact with him again?: No. He clearly has a record of abusing his position of power, and I do not think any fans should interact with him again for the sake of their own safety. This includes on any social media. If he returns to being online, don’t send asks or react to them. Don’t return power to him.

Do I think anyone who was worked with him is obligated to come out with their reactions immediately?: No. It’s entirely possible the news hasn’t made it to them yet. It’s also entirely possible that they could be still processing things after working personally with him. If we as fans are shocked in disgusted, then imagine how those who have worked with him feel. Do not condemn them for speaking out immediately, they have lives too.

Do I think you can still watch his shows?: I feel mixed about this personally. I think it’s a better idea to 🏴‍☠️, but I also understand he is not the only person who worked on these shows. 🏴‍☠️ing affects more than him, so personally I don’t see a problem with watching his shows as long as you condemn him.

Do I think you can still read his books: Yes, but it’s a bit different here. I do not think people should be buying his books now. If you want to own them, buy second hand. If you don’t mind reading online, then 🏴‍☠️. I wouldn’t really recommend checking them out at a library as that still does give him support since the library could decide to purchase more of his books.

Do I think you can enjoy media he’s worked on or created without supporting him as person?: 1000%. His actions and alleged perversions do not translate into any of his work from what I’ve seen. I think it is 100% possible to separate him from his media in this case, especially with Good Omens and his shows.

Do I think you should burn/trash your books or media by him?: I don’t see a point, but I understand why someone may want to do this. Everyone is angry and upset, and if you want nothing to do with his works anymore that’s 100% valid. I just personally don’t see a point since they’ve already been purchased, and unless you bought them recently and can return them, you’re not taking any money away from him. If you don’t want to keep his books anymore, I’d suggest donating them to a thrift store or a library.

Edit: I wanted to add a section here about the relationships he had with these women since I didn’t really mentioned it before, so here (TW FOR SA);

While the relationships themselves were consensual for the most part (besides the two allegations of SA) I still do not think they were right to be had. The power imbalance and age gaps are gross. They’re not illegal, but morally they’re incorrect in my opinion. I know one of these women was a fan of his, and I believe he took advantage of that. And im also pretty sure he was 40 years older than her at the time. That’s gross.

As for neil’s current response as featured in the article, I don’t think he’s telling the truth. He admits to having relationships with those women, which adds to fact that I believe he’s not a good person for having those relationships already where he clearly was the one in power. The false memories claim could have some nuance to it (it’s possible that it could be something that happens to that woman without it being stated on medical records) but I personally believe it’s an excuse on his end, true or not.

Of course, continue to be kind to each other online. Don’t berate those who are upset and confused, and don’t berate the victims either. For those who believe it’s still all a lie, you have no reason to believe he wouldn’t be capable of any of this. You don’t know him. He doesn’t know you. I urge you to rethink everything about this situation and take some time to process it on your own. Denying everything is not the way to go about this.

I believe that’s everything I have to say. If you read all this, I appreciate this. If you think my wording is odd in some places or if it seems I said something I didn’t mean, please let me know. I’m writing this all on a bit of whim so I can put my thoughts out there instead of keeping it all inside. Thanks again, and stay safe

[buckybarnesss]

if there is one president who i think deserves to come back to beat the shit out of the current regime and it's not theodore roosevelt (a valid choice though).

but no. in my opinion it's ulysses s grant.

the man has been slandered to hell and back for over a century by neo-confederates that seek to romanticize the antebellum south and have perpetuated the lost cause myth.

the current administration is dishonoring and dismantling this man's legacy and what he gave to the country.

the general that defeated the confederacy

established yellow stone national park in 1872 which would be 30 years before teddy roosevelt became president

established the department of justice to carry out the enforcements acts of 1870 and 1871. they're commonly known as the ku klux klan acts. effectively destroying that iteration of the klan and it wouldn't emerge again until the 1920s

supported the 15th amendment which was ratified early in his administration. the amendment that prevents the denial of a citizen's vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

he sent federal troops to the american south during reconstruction to protect the newly freed slaves and their rights.

established the civil service commission which was meant to counter the patronage issues by hiring based on merit.'

on a more personal level grant was probably one of the better individuals to hold the office of the president despite his flaws and mistakes. compared to recent events the corruption that occurred during his administration seem almost quaint.

just to round it out

he deeply loved his wife julia and their children

had experienced poverty multiple times in his life

wrote his memoir while dying of throat cancer to ensure his family had money after his passing (he'd been the victim of a ponzi scheme)

he was a horse girl

put in the work to redeem himself for issuing order number 11 which expelled jews from his military district due to involvement in cotton speculation. he later admitted his action was hasty and the rescinding of the order was well deserved. (here's a link to the wiki page that goes into more detail)

he also provided this banger of a speech at the annual reunion of the army of the tennessee in des moines, iowa in 1875:

some selected quotes:

"in a republic like ours, where the citizen is the sovereign, and the official the servant, where no power is exercised except by the will of the people, it is important that the sovereign—the people—should possess intelligence. the free school is the promotor of that intelligence which is to preserve us as a free nation"

and

"If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be mason and dixon’s, but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition, and ignorance on the other"

and

"let us all labor to add all needful guarantees for the more perfect security of free thought, free speech and a free press, pure morals, unfettered religious sentiments and of equal rights and privileges to all men, irrespective of nationality, color or religion."

and also

"leave the matter of religion to the family circle, the church, and the private school, supported entirely by private contribution. keep the church and state forever separate"

in conclusion i think ulysses s grant should come back and beat the shit out of donald trump.

[fellshish]

warning: small rant incoming, neil talk, no graphic SA talk though

“good omens fans only care about their blorbos, how can you even think about your show right now when there are real victims” WE’VE known for months, and WE spent months pressuring amazon to either kick neil off the production or not produce s3 at all!!! WE did that!!!!! so don’t tell us we don’t care about victims or about women’s safety when we put effort into doing something that ACTUALLY helps keep people safe.

“there is no ethical way to enjoy his work. this is just too important.” obviously, we should all avoid giving financial support to neil wherever we can. and i understand that people want to see him punished, but who ACTUALLY benefits from all of us abandoning this show and our fan communities? who? do his victims know or care that there are still good omens fans out there? or is this just a demand for virtue signalling, to show everyone WE’RE one of the good ones by burning all our books and quitting our favorite shows cold turkey?

“you’ll find new things to care about” yknow, i did that the last time something i loved turned out to be created by a terrible person. it left a massive hole in my heart for years. i wasn’t the same. nothing made me equally as happy. until i found good omens, ironically enough. so what do i do? keep cyclically punishing myself for daring to love things while not knowing their creators are bad people?

no one benefits from my misery. me giving up on something i love, something that was co-created by so many people, has zero effect on that monster. nor does it do anything to help his victims. all it does is make me unhappy.

as a final note, from personal experience, i’m willing to bet at least half of these people love something that was created by someone awful, and find a way to rationalize it to themselves because THEIR situation is somehow very different.

sorry for the rant. i hope you’re feeling better! 💕

💜 glad you got this out of your system. i think people will have a really hard time finding an unproblematic piece of art with a morally perfect creator. i hope we’ve long abandoned that type of (self) policing

[thedeepmiracleperfection]

As most are already aware, Neil Gaiman has been accused of sexual assault by two women. The nature of this news is horrific in and of itself. Assault is a disgusting and abhorrent crime, no matter who it is committed by, and the victims deserve healing, peace, and justice, regardless of public awareness of the crime. It is already extremely difficult for victims to come forward about their abuse in the most normal of circumstances. If you add on the fact that the abuser in question is a well-loved public figure, then I imagine that these women are going through one of the most difficult periods of their lives at the moment. I wish them safety, and I sincerely hope that they are well supported during this time.

There has been some discussion on whether talking about the affects this news has had on the fandom is insensitive to the victims. I believe some people feel that Good Omens fans have been too quick to focus on the ramifications for the show rather than the affects the public allegations will have on the victims themselves. While I do think there is a conversation to be had there, I want to remind everyone that fandom is the reason this case is relevant to so many of us in the first place.

Before I go further, I will make it clear that I believe and support the victims. Like I said above, even if this was a random case of assault between completely average individuals, the crime would still be disgusting, and the victims would still be deserving of support. The abuser in this case being a public figure doesn't change that. However, the fact that the abuser in question is the creator of the very pieces of media that this fandom centers around is the only reason many of us know about it. Unless you are personally involved with any of the people in this case, chances are the only reason you know about this case in particular, is because the abuser involved has a direct affect on the media we consume. That is not to say that this case is only important because the abuser involved is high-profile. It is important because it is a crime and should not have happened. I would feel the same about any case of sexual assault I knew about. I'm just saying that the reason we know about it to begin with is because of fandom involvement. For most of us, the fandom is the only connection through which this case is at all relevant in our lives. I truly believe we would be concerned about any sexual assault we were made aware of, but the level of disruption this case has caused within this online space is a direct consequence of the notoriety of the specific person involved.

All of this is to say, I resent the messages others have been spreading, saying things like, "if two people have been assaulted and the only thing you're talking about is your fave show then you're heartless and disgusting." Babygirl the only reason I even know about any of this is because of my fave show! The show is the connection through which this news is relevant to me. And the same is true whether you know Neil Gaiman from this show or any of his other works. This case is public because he is public, and he is public because we consume his works. It's only natural that I'm going to want to discuss the direct consequences it will have in my life. Like, if I received news that my dentist had assaulted two women, my first thoughts would be in sympathy for the women and in hoping that my dentist had been brought to justice. But then my very next thought would be "But now I have cavities that need to be filled, and no dentist, How will this situation affect me personally?" Like! I don't think it is inherently cruel to wonder how the actions of another person will affect our own lives. It is a bit fucking silly to complain that we are taking too much about our faves on the "talking too much about your faves" webbed site. The reason we are here in this community in the first place is because we have an invested passion in this particular media. I don't think it is cruel to be concerned on some level about the future of this community. And the fandom wondering about the effects on the fandom doesn't mean that we don't care about the victims involved. Two things can be true at the same time.

I think it is important to remember that this fandom has had a profound effect on many people's lives. Some people rely on this community to make a living selling art and merch. Others rely on it as the only form of connection and belonging they have. For me personally, the characters of Crowley and Aziraphale have been greatly influential on my queer identity and journey of self discovery. Fuck's sake people have gotten married because of this show! It has a huge place in many of our lives. It is not selfish to want to discuss how and in what way that might change!

Also important to remember: what people post online is not the entirety of their opinions. I have many thoughts and feelings regarding this situation that don't make it onto tumblr.com because I am a whole ass person outside of what I post. It can be tempting to say that blogs which post only about how the show will be affected by Gaiman's actions are only concerned about the show. But that is just because that is what is publicly available online. You do not know what private thoughts and conversations people have had on the matter. This is the Good Omens fandom, we're going to talk about how this news affects the Good Omens fandom. If that upsets or disgusts you, you need to be responsible and leave this online space for another. That's not even broaching the subject on whether or not we can morally continue consuming this media, which is a whole other discussion with heated opinions on both sides. I'm talking about the people who think it is wrong to be focused on Good Omens at all during this time.

Like I said before, I truly feel that we as a fandom would be concerned over any case of sexual assault we were made aware of. It's just that this particular one has an influence on our community, therefore there is more discussion surrounding it. We can absolutely support the victims while also discussing how to move forward as a fandom. The two are not mutually exclusive, and to suggest otherwise is not helpful to any meaningful discussion.