thepeacockangel

[thepeacockangel]

I think the proliferation of the rifled gun barrel and the invention of the revolving magazine and the development of feminism as a political movement are connected in a materialist sense.

[thepeacockangel]

I hate this fuckin' country

That would be true regardless of election results

[thepeacockangel]

I hate TV

It's too much commitment. I refuse to binge watch anything nowadays.

Also I will not watch movies made in like... the last 20 years, because honestly, I do not want to think about the present when I am trying to relax.

[thepeacockangel]

One of The Weirdest Things About Getting Older

Is you come to realize, that people having sex can be cute. Like you get to a certain age (and if you're someone lucky enough to have your attraction pattern age with you) you can see a pair of good lookin' youngin's goin' at it, and aside from "Hm, not sure I wanna be seeing that" you pretty much just feel like "AWWWWWW, that's adorable". Like it's not sexy, not even remotely, but you are happy for em.

People who are old enough to fuck and have it not be fucked up are now cute the way puppies are cute.

[thepeacockangel]

The result of a fun game I invented called "How much secret bonus hair can I hide in my actual hair"

[thepeacockangel]

Same, why couldn't they have taken fucking Rowling and left Storm?

[thepeacockangel]

the thing is people think that the primary force behind stuff like sexually objectifying women is cishet men's own sexual arousal. but misogyny is really just catching a ride on feelings of sexual attraction and can still function perfectly fine without it.

as an example. a friend of my family (white cis gay upperclass gay man) was at a party at my aunt's house. at one point she was bending over a railing to take a photo, and he jokingly kept staring at her ass and going "still gay!" now whether or not my aunt was fine with this, idk. but I think it serves as an example of how cis gay men can participate in sexual objectification even without personally sexually benefitting from it. the function of sexually objectifying a woman is to gain patriarchal credit, and anyone can do that– including cis women! the point is re-affirming the roles of women and men (women are objects that sexual things are done to by men and this is funny because they are also people who can be humiliated).

my point here is partially to show how anyone can participate in misogyny but it's also that the idea that misogyny naturally stems from male sexuality is wrong and harmful. the patriarchy may cater to cishet men's desires in some ways, but its not RUN on cishet men's desires. i think also of a study (which i still can't find) that found that non-consensual sex was less pleasurable for the perpetrators than sex with someone fully willing and into it. the demonization of desire and arousal especially as it relates to people perceived as male is unnecessary.

[thepeacockangel]

I think the situation with the grieving person sort of works that way for reasons beyond the religious/non-religious difference.

I think it has more to do with the fact that to refuse a gift or favour is considered rude, even if the gift is hideous and you hate it, or the person is terrible at the offered favour.

Imagine the situation reversed, a non-religious person comforting a religious one.

The religious person believes for whatever reason their loved one may be or is experiencing horrific suffering in the afterlife.

If the non-religious person says "at least their suffering is over" I'm pretty sure it would create confrontation and be a faux-pas for the religious person to be like "You know I don't believe that."

I know I just restating the point of that post but respecting religious freedom will sometimes require you to respect someone's belief that religious beliefs are categorically untrue, and there are a lot of people who are unable to handle this, and even more people who think they agree with this but haven't really grappled with what it means.

[thepeacockangel]

I've Got Big Baals

[thepeacockangel]

Do you ever like read the writings of someone who's like-- really genuinely having a psychological problem

and you kind of feel like your own grasp on sanity has been damaged by it?

Yeah-- I just read somethin' real fucked

[thepeacockangel]

One of The Things That Makes Hitchcock's Misogyny Particularly Vile

Is like-- in a lot of his films, you see that he understands that women are fully human, capable of thought and meaningful feeling, and complexity, and he still fucking treats them like that, because he wanted what he wanted and to Hitchcock in real life no one mattered but Hitchcock. Like if Hitchcock had been gay he would have treated his male stars the same way.

Roman Polanski clearly doesn't view women as people. He's like practically a zoosadist in his view of women. Polanski never could be gay because needs to be attracted to a group he can fully other and treat as inherently inferior.

His thing is also vile and terrible, but in a different way.

Not sure which is worse.

[thepeacockangel]

The endless consumption of plastic gewgaws for a tiny and diminishing hit of dopamine is a symptom of a system that is failing us.

Our desires are shaped by capitalism, and I am not saying "everyone needs to wear a grey sack, comrade" things should be beautiful, durable and functional, but like... we do not need merch. We do not need collectables, we need human connection, leisure and safety.

[thepeacockangel]

"Let people enjoy things"

No. It is an op. It is there to soothe you into complacency and prevent you from getting bored enough to riot.

[thepeacockangel]

a lot of the people you guys are calling narcissists could easily be replaced with the word “asshole”

[thepeacockangel]

Sometimes I'm Like a Crossdresser With Nerd Shit

Sometimes I purge and am like "I'm never coming back to this cringe nonsense"

[thepeacockangel]

We keep what we have only by giving it away.

Is an AAism, and like... it's true of being miserable too sometimes.

[thepeacockangel]

I'm Seeing A Lot of Commentary On "Unschooling"

And as someone who went to a radical "unschooling center" and was homeschooled growing up-- this is definitely not how this is supposed to work. You're supposed to foster a bond with your kids, read to them, get them interested enough in reading to get them to want to learn to read, and then help them learn with the materials they're interested in. Allowing the children's interests to shape the curriculum. Classes are supposed to be AVAILABLE without coercion. I turned out really well, I'm a lifelong reader, a passionate researcher, and I learned very much what I love and what I don't. I think this idea of unschooling is such an utter betrayal of the very radical, very cool idea I grew up with. The idea I grew up with was essentially that children are naturally curious, and that you can engage with them as an active partner in the learning process, and the idea you have to force them to sit there unhappily rather than finding ways to get them interested is a bad way to teach. One thing that helped me with subjects that were difficult or otherwise boring for me, was my dad (who homeschooled me before the unschooling center), was also not naturally gifted in those areas, and learning about them together and trying to work how they worked with my dad (who is a passionately curious man) to build a real understanding of concepts tailored to our particular weird brains, rather than any kind of punishing rote learning. We'd discuss ways of thinking about math problems, and ways of thinking about the process of for example long division or fractions that are still useful to me to this day. It also felt good because he felt school had not taught him these things well as he had dyscalculia growing up in the 1960s and so the concepts just didn't go in fully the first time, and so working to get a full understanding of them together, really made a difference for me.

I think the most difficult thing was adapting to circumstances where I had to complete any kind of busy work, or had authority figures I couldn't negotiate with, and rules I didn't think made sense.

I feel like the rage-bait tiktoks and what seems to be getting called "unschooling" now are radically different from the Anarchist rooted and deeply practical form of education I experienced.

Also in like 2003 they had a special presentation of trans people and how they're good and fine, and even books on trans bodies there, and like-- I'm sorry, but that was cool as hell.

Howard Zinn was a text they fuckin' gave us. That shit was incredible.