#this is not that obscure of a belief system in my experience

[syscest]

hi im assuming the us vs them post is about a specific term, which one would that be?

so the sysmed out-group term being referenced in the joke post was (as the reblogs guessed) "endogenic", and I'll lay our thoughts out straight just once to avoid being potentially taken the wrong way

I've got two angles here, existential theological linguistic bullshit, and harm-reduction. stay with me here because even if you're not on board with the first thing you'll want to see the second.

so "traumagenic vs endogenic" is a false dichotomy, and I don't just mean "there's a secret third thing", I mean both classifications are fundamentally not real.

personally? we haven't the foggiest idea why we're a system. but the thing is, I don't think anybody else does either - I think it's genuinely impossible to know why your own consciousness is behind your own eyes and controlling your own body, why you *experience* existing in first-person at all. Like shit, lots of singlets believe it's because a soul has been created or introduced to their flesh, and a bunch of others think that's a load of crap and the chemicals just *do this* on their own. Singlets get this unalienable right to believe whatever the hell they want about why they're experiencing being themselves all the damn time, and I refuse to believe that systems are uniquely special in a way that singlets are not such that anyone can fucking flawlessly divine the cause of our consciousness all of a sudden. These are existential-tier questions and to deny their impossible complexity and the right to self-belief over them is, in my eyes, to deny systems something many singlets feel is part of what makes them human.

You can believe all sorts of stuff about the nature of your own systemhood just like how you can believe all sorts of stuff about the nature of your own existence - that doesn't make you definitively right, it's just a meaningful mechanism through which you understand your own experiences that other people should respect - it's like any faith, go figure.

Frustratingly, these words - traumagenic, endogenic - they're not talking about belief, they're objective buckets actively being used for exclusion. So every time we use the term "traumagenic systems", in saying "systems that objectively exist because of trauma" we are saying, loudly, "it is possible to know why a system exists". and frankly? no the fuck it isn't.

Anyway that's airy bullshit and reflects very idealised interactions so - practical, realist opinions, and harm reduction:

Saying "I'm pro-endo" is a net good, though I think "I support all systems" is probably marginally better because it doesn't perpetuate categories pushed by sysmeds for exclusionary reasons as being essential to defining systemhood - as we joked about.

Contrastingly, self-declaring "traumagenic" or "endogenic" in a bio is a net bad. Saying "I'm a traumagenic system" also says "Hello sysmeds, I believe in your dichotomy and I'm one of the good ones" (great way to get sysmed followers), and that factor doesn't go away if you go on to say that you support all systems - you've already thrown away your opportunity to shield more vulnerable systems from harassment through making who sysmeds need to target more obscure.

In fact, regardless of whether your bio says to sysmeds "I am a target" or "I'm not a target", by saying it explicitly, you're pressuring other, more vulnerable systems to similarly self-declare. It's like cis people putting pronouns in their bio to shield trans people from harassment through obscurity and embarrassment, but in reverse - if you shut up about it, and *just* call yourself a plural system, even if you do believe in their categorisations, you stop the propogation of the self-labelling and exclusionists are forced to make themselves look like idiots because most of their harassment would have to be done at random. It's basically herd immunity - nobody talks, everybody walks.

anyway yeah there's context for future, though honestly the section in plural respect is a lot more succinct lmao

[florasarchivesandhistory]

Our Flag Means Death: Complete Fiction?

The 2022 release of Our Flag Means Death introduced audiences to a unique blend of romance and comedy, chronicling the tumultuous relationship between real-life pirate Edward Teach (better known as Blackbeard), and gentleman-turned-pirate Stede Bonnet. While the show was laced with romantic undertones, it wasn’t until the final episode that these elements fully materialised.

Like many viewers, I immediately turned to Google for answers, only to discover that the series was, well, largely a work of fiction. This raised an intriguing question: where did writer David Jenkins draw his inspiration?

To uncover the origins of this unconventional love story, we can turn to Jenkins himself. In an interview with Town & Country Magazine (2022), he revealed that he first learned about Stede Bonnet when his wife overheard someone mention the pirate in passing and thought, Oh, that guy sounds interesting (Rathe, 2022). The idea of a man abandoning a life of luxury for the chaos of piracy provided the perfect narrative hook.

When Jenkins discussed the concept with director Taika Waititi, they both agreed that the story was best left unburdened by extensive research. After all, little is definitively known about Blackbeard and Bonnet, making their fictionalised relationship all the more compelling.

Looking at the facts:

An extract from my study on Blackbeard representations

On a chance meeting in Nassau in 1717, after Bonnet had unsuccessfully attacked a Spanish Man of War Ship and was severely injured, Blackbeard took it upon himself to help command Bonnets ship, the Revenge.

‘Teach, finding that Bonnet knew nothing of maritime life, and with the consent of his own men, put in another captain’ (Captain Johnson, 1724, pg.71).

This agreement between the two men has been a great point of interest for historians, as Blackbeard’s motivation is unclear. The most likely possibility was that Blackbeard planned to take over Bonnets ship from the inside. This is something that is touched on in episode four of the series, where Blackbeard tells his second in command, Israel Hands, that he plans to kill Bonnet and take his identity. Blackbeard Biographer Angus Konstam, was of the opinion that Blackbeard took over because Bonnet’s vulnerability was clear, which would have allowed him to make Bonnet his prisoner (Konstam, 2006, pg.79). The evidence we have on Bonnet’s experience on the ship would align to that of a guest, not a prisoner:

‘Major Bonnet, but has no command, he walks about in his morning gown, then to his books’ (The Boston News Letter, 1718).

The true nature of Blackbeard is obscured by the various rumours of him being a man of brutality, but this simply did not align with how Bonnet was treated. This puzzling relationship sparked the interest of director Jenkins, and the series would take on the theory that the two had a romantic partnership, which is not far-fetched. The 16th century saw the execution of those prosecuted for sodomy offenses and so life on land posed a large threat on gay men. This would only worsen as the century went on when puritanism began to spread throughout England. With the threat of persecution, piracy was seen as a gateway to a better life, with social systems and laws that normalized-if not recognized, the existence of gay men. Historian Christpher Miller explains how the romantic and sexual relationships between men at sea was simply a fact (Miller, 2008, cited in Keegan, 2021, pg.12).

Many pirates joined in their early teens and so they were raised in a homosocial environment where these relationships were normalized (Rowe, 2022, 00:10:27-00:10:43). In further opposition to land-faring norms, relationships with women, as well as their presence on boats, were highly discouraged due to the belief that they bought bad luck. One Captain, Bartholomew Roberts, was so superstitious, that he ordered death as punishment for bringing a woman onboard. One of the most prominent systems to recognize homosexual relations was the Mateotalge unions, in which two companions joined together in verbal or written vows to officiate their share of assets. Of course, these agreements were predominantly platonic, but it also allowed pirates to confirm their emotional bonds to one another. If one of them died, their prized possessions would go to someone they cared about.

Figure 1: Blackbeard and Stede Bonnet

Applying this knowledge to the representation we see in the series, there is no evidence that the two men were romantically involved. All we can do is speculate, as we do when considering all aspects of Blackbeard's life. Perhaps the most suggestive evidence based on historical fact is Blackbeard’s maroon and plunder of Bonnet’s ship. Prior to this, Bonnet had been sent away by Blackbeard to receive a Royal Pardon, which would absolve Bonnet of his crimes. Blackbeard ensured his crew were marooned on an island they could survive, with an abundance of fresh fruit and water (Baylus, 2015, pg.271). Blackbeard had also ensured Bonnet had a ship to return to, once he got back from receiving his Royal Pardon. Despite the cruelty of betraying Bonnet, this disproves the belief that Blackbeard ruled with death and violence.

[astrologicaldreamin]

Astrological Practices I Live By

Some may have alternative views, which is perfectly okay. I am here to grow and experience, so if there is something that seems constructive, I'm all ears. However, these are all personal practices and something I think is important for whomever seeks my posts. 🖤

Your natal chart is the precedent for everything. Asteroids, persona charts, solar returns, and more all bounce off of the original astrological placement of your birth. If there is contradiction, that should be analyzed and indulged in where it exists, and most importantly why. Not a lot of observational techniques I see actually use natal placements to boost and further the analysis of alternative charts. ex: comparing the juno PC chart of desire and commitment to groom/briede PC chart and understanding your inner needs to the potential outcome while adding the basis of your natal venus/mars sign to understand your relationship dynamics

Mythology is a huge aspect of astrology, which helps influence and gain characteristics to each planetary body. I never would have understood anything well if I had not taken a course to broaden my views and experience the same literature it is in association with. Regardless of belief system, you cannot walk in the same path if you do not follow the same footsteps. reasoning: rationalization of obscure objects always falls down into attempting to find language to demonstrate said acts, whereas mythology and story-telling is the backbone of bringing ideas to words that did not have definition. (however, you do not have to take a course to do so).

Astrological degrees are important. Everything provides context and I never experienced the weight of any chart until I brought the theory of degrees. Some may argue that it is ineffective, but this supports a heavy form of individualization and provided so much depth that I otherwise found lacking. ex: analyzed similarly as if a house placement, but more in symbolsis to the sign. everything changed when i realized my sun (chart ruler) is with a scorpio degree, finalizing the missing feeling i had all along that I was hoping to gain through alternatives (persona, asteroids; etc)

Some placements are meant to be "harsh, ugly, and/or weak." Depending on your configuration, those should be exalted as strengths rather than weaknesses. Change your perspective, not who you are. Astrology provides context. Your chart is made to be a form of guidance and abundance, but also an observation of the life you experience. Be willing to do the work or focus on a safe landing until you are able to do so. Do not let people take away your empowerment and rid yourself of growth. It's your divine right. [This is a safe place, but I will not shy away from the consensus of likeability.] ex: placements do not finalize your identity and many astrologers are expanding their acknowledgement of various facets on a daily basis, where many observations are still extremely left-field. unless someone is able to become you, there is no ability to override your instincts. by attempting to discard and over-romanticize, you are taking away the vitality you can gain when you come to accept and find hope in the wounds that used to scare you. remove posts that demonize you, but also lessen you by removal of your depth. people hate what confuses them. stand as an enigma.

Astrology is as powerful as a sensory process. It does not define fate, but it is a combination of various aspects that contribute to a language that can be transcribed within the human experience. When looking towards prediction, it is not much more than understanding that rain has a tendency to come when the sky gets bleak and trees shake in the wind. Saturn in Retrograde is similar to the temperature dropping when a change is about to happen or having a powerful instinct that an area is unsafe. It is a sign, but not a decider of choice. There is a reason why it is crafted upon an abundance of art and "aesthetics" that exist in intangible forms. reasoning: astrology is not a hard science and may never be, but the discrimination of subjects that do not belong in that category are absurd. coincidence is powerful and simply the pattern of understanding outside of our present material. similar to language, we attach meanings towards predictive association in order to enable meaning. do not take away the beauty of limited understanding because we live as creatures with limited resources. this does not discredit spiritual belief, but acknowledgement of causation vs. correlation of specific events.

[novantinuum]

Fandom: Steven Universe Rating: Teen Audiences Words: 6.0K~ Summary: In another world, he doesn’t have his mother’s sword or shield to hide behind when Bismuth lands her strike. The bubble pops. Steven falls apart. Chapter summary: In which what was once hidden becomes known.

It's been a long road getting here folks, but here we are! Almost three years after my last update, we're back on the road. I will provide the first chunk of the chapter here on my blog as a preview- but later stuff is going to be weird to format here, so please follow the AO3 link above to check out the whole thing.

Enjoy! <3

__

Chapter 14: system/REBOOT, Part 2

The smoke obscures everything at first, filling this barren crack in the planet’s crust to its brim. Firmly engulfed within this plume, Ruby’s surroundings are electrified with an air of static uncertainty, an uncertainty so stark that— riding upon the wake of it— the very potential of Garnet’s future vision itself would’ve surely been rendered null and void. After all, as she’s personally experienced, such power of foresight is never completely immune to lapses in accuracy upon the advent of unexpected happenings. And she’s pretty damn certain that this… that instantly familiar warm glow she spotted, wholly enveloping Steven and Amethyst’s forms as they embraced… would count as unexpected.

Her jaw drops as a tall figure emerges from between currents of receding smoke, light pink freckles dusting their shoulders and cheeks like glistening constellations. Chocolate brown gemstones are visible upon their chest and the center of their large belly, one circular and the other irregularly pentagonal. They proudly brandish Amethyst’s leggings and Steven’s star— the salmon pink shirt having stretched into a strappy crop-top across their broad upper body. Most notably though, they appear to have three arms, two of them linked at the elbow and able to bend freely from the other. As the fusion shifts upon their heels, a thick fringe of wavy dark hair falls in front of one of their eyes… eyes which are perpetually glowing with the very same pink irises and diamond pupils Steven exhibits whenever he’s using his powers, and blown wide with shock as they attempt to process the distinct meaning of their existence for the very first time.

And boy oh boy, does Ruby sure understand that feeling. Going off of the narratives she always hears from humans, the experience of two Gems’ first dance and synchronization is somewhat akin to a baby learning to walk. It’s all untested, all brand new. And despite any amount of confusion or trepidation one might face in such a circumstance, no one else in all the universe is more equipped than you to take those first steps.

Regardless, the fusion moves right past their initial surprise to produce the most genuine, star-bright grin Ruby’s seen all week, and triumphantly pumps all three fists in the air. “What a beautiful day!” they proclaim.

Appearing suitably annoyed by their sudden attendance in this spar, their Beta kindergarten opponent harshly grinds their right foot into the soil, their face screwing into a sour grimace as they demand to know who this new Gem is supposed to be.

Now, if either one of them— Amethyst or Steven— were facing this mighty quartz’s questioning individually, Ruby’s sure they’d be doomed to crumble under the pressure. After all, Steven’s only a child, and Amethyst is cripplingly insecure. But the inherent magic of fusion is that the combination of two or more Gems is always stronger than the sum of their parts. They’re a physical embodiment of the bond held between each other, of their camaraderie and affection and love. And it’s that very love… that inner strength and belief in one other, regardless of circumstance… that blossoms into a brand new facet of existence, given life through the sheer depth of their connection.

It’s for this reason this fusion is capable of brushing off the ferocity of Jasper’s words like they’re nothing but crumbling granules of sandstone dirtying their shirt. Brimming with a renewed lease of confidence, they summon their weapons, make a grand show of fusing them into one, and proudly name themself Smoky Quartz.

“Wait— has Steven ever fused with one of you before?” Peridot asks her with burning curiosity, her expression still partially frozen in a dumbfounded little ‘o.’

“With his friend, yes— but never with a Gem,” Ruby says, her chest puffing out with considerable pride. “This is his first time!” Then, cupping her mouth with her hands, and unable to dampen that intense vindictive streak she currently harbors against their foe: “Go get her, Smoky! Make her regret she ever formed!”

The fusion serves up a snappy finger gun with their unladen hand. “You got it! One party trick coming right up…”

Flashing the two of them an almost impish smirk, Smoky doesn’t waste a single second. Immediately following a groan worthy pun about yo-yos, they catapult their weapon— a double shield linked on a central axel and tethered to Amethyst’s whip— high into the sky and back down upon Jasper, hitting her thrice in the face and gut and knocking her a few steps back.

Peridot lets out a gleeful peel of laughter as she watches this unbelievable turn of their tides, clutching a hand to her heaving chest.

Seething red, Jasper gains her bearings upon her feet once more and charges towards them with the flat of her helmet barred.

Smoky’s eyes flare wide with urgency. “Wha-oh!”

They artfully cartwheel out of the way, and manage a perfect side dodge as their opponent attempts to sling her fist directly into their face.

It’s glorious form. Absolutely impeccable by any means of assessment. In truth, Ruby thinks the odds have never been so steeply tipped in their favor while fighting against this stubborn, infuriating Homeworld Gem. So why does she still find herself powerless to quell that oh-so-familiar panic rising like coastal storm surge within her core? Why can’t she dispel the shadowy reminder of all the terrifying what-ifs that taunt her day-in and day-out, possibilities she’s unable to sort through on her own, possibilities she’s unable to truly see?

Because without Sapphire, Ruby’s just a ruby. She’s nothing, no one. It doesn’t matter how far she runs from her lowly Homeworld origins; she’ll never erase the damning, bitter fact that Gems like her were created to be replaced. And stars, everyone keeps looking to her as a leader, but she doesn’t know what she’s doing at all! Her cut of Gem wasn’t built for leadership. She didn’t come here hungering for a fight! She only followed the others to this shards-forsaken wasteland of a kindergarten because she wanted to protect them, and look at all the good that brought: an army of caged, corrupted Gems guarded by an enemy she’s grown too timid to face head-on, even though that’s literally the entire point of her!

Just, ugh—!

What a useless protector she makes.

…But maybe she’s enough to protect at least one of them. After all, her role as one of Sapphire’s guardians wasn’t all fighting and punching. The other rubies and her would also spend time discussing strategy, overseeing the whereabouts of their assignment, and keeping an eye on their immediate environment in case they need to act upon any abrupt predictions from Her Clarity. And in such moments of peril, their most important duty was to escort their assignment to a safe distance. It’s a fact of life that’s deceptively easy for a soldier like her to forget.

So, is that it, then?

Is that her purpose in this scenario?

Should she place her focus on ushering Peridot away from this battle, instead of becoming an active participant?

(Or is she just mining for ways to excuse the coward’s way out?)

Outright quivering in her boots, Ruby grabs Peridot by the arm and begins to pull her away from the heart of this battle. Her friend, however, tugs back in overt resistance.

“Wait— we can’t leave yet, I can fight!” she cries, jabbing her pointer towards the iron bars caging one of the corrupted quartzes within the excavated cliffside. “I’ve got my metal powers!”

Sweat beads on her forehead as she flushes, sinking ever deeper into the brambles of her shame. “But I, uh- I just think Smoky’s got it handled, y’know? Wouldn’t wanna get in their way, or nothin’…”

“Are you kidding?? They’re brawling against Jasper! They can use all the help they can get!”

With zero warning whatsoever, the business end of their fusion friend’s yo-yo zips towards their heads, only narrowly leaving them time to duck. They watch with slack-jawed amazement as Smoky utilizes their weapon’s stored inertia to securely wind the cord around Jasper’s torso and launch them clear into the sky. Gravity’s most primal nature dictates that what goes up must always come down, however, because mere seconds later the Homeworld Gem plummets into the chalky ground so hard that she leaves behind a small crater. A plume of rusty brown dust explodes from the collision point, entirely engulfing Ruby and Peridot.

The two of them cough as the powdery soil settles once more and visibility is restored.

“On second thought,” the former kindergartener proclaims as she brushes the debris off her unitard, “perhaps we should give them some room.”

She nods, grabbing her by the hand once more and leading her up the path to safety. Perfect, one friend protected. And as an added bonus, they can stand on the raised shelf at the far edge of this natural amphitheater (the one Amethyst treaded across before getting the sneak on Jasper a few minutes ago) and still have a clear sight of the battle.

…A battle which, going off her years of combat experience and her intimate knowledge of the parties involved, just might roll to a victorious end for Smoky in the near future. For the obvious reasons she can’t offer this prediction with any degree of confidence, but regardless, its likelihood seems to be surging skywards with each and every failed retaliating strike Jasper attempts. She’s panicking, Ruby can tell. That stubborn, reputation-obsessed Gem can attempt to hide it all she likes, but if one knows what to look for the signs are obvious. Her eyes are blown as wide as her own exit hole as she scries her surroundings for any possible advantage, and her stance has grown awkward and stiff— the very image of a traditionally offensive fighter who has been forced to assume defensive strategies for the first time in her existence.

Which is to say, the brute’s been violently knocked out of her comfort zone.

Fuming with obstinate desperation, Jasper flicks the dirt off her uniform with the back of her hand and throws herself into a viciously fast spin dash, molten bright embers trailing behind as she surges straight towards Smoky Quartz. Thankfully, the fusion sees this potential strike coming a mile away. Licking their lips, they launch their yo-yo so that its body wraps around a narrow outcropping of stone jutting out from the cliffs above them. The weapon grips the dense rock like a grappling hook. They whoop in well-earned victory, swinging up and over Jasper’s attack as effortlessly as a petal dancing on the wind.

Helpless to halt her momentum, the Beta Kindergarten quartz slams headfirst into the far cliff wall. Despite her deep-set animosity towards her Ruby can’t help but cringe at the awful clash of the impact, clutching her own vulnerable gem ever tighter within her palm. Chaos explodes. Hand-dug prisons are torn apart. This forsaken crack in the Earth is filled with clamoring footsteps once more as Jasper’s corrupted Gems claim their long-stolen freedom, fleeing in every direction.

“No!” the soldier hollers, arm outstretched as she clambers to her knees. “My army!”

Smoky lands on the ground in a sturdy crouch a few feet away. “You ready to chill out, yet?” they ask with slitted eyes, Ruby sensing a hint of Amethyst’s bitter anger seeping into their otherwise affable demeanor. “Or d’ya need another few rounds?”

Jasper falls to her hands, seemingly too exhausted to push herself to her full height at this time. Breathing heavy, she lets out a wry peal of laughter, a sound that quickly warps and bends into an emotion that’s as unrecognizable as it is unnerving as she drags her fingers inwards, scouring thick gouges in the rusty soil.

“Jaspers… never… give… up,” she huffs, her orange irises glowing like the rejuvenating embers of a rebounding wildfire as she tilts her face up to regard them head-on.

And this is where the winds of fate begin to shift.

The embers catch.

The dry brush underfoot erupts into a violent rush of flame.

Jasper quickly averts her eyes from Smoky, her wanting gaze falling upon the lone cage still left intact, its metal bars not destroyed by her prior collision with the wall. Within… stands the last Gem of her corrupted army, roaring in clear displeasure at the frenzy of commotion occurring outside. The quartz delivers a devious, knowing smirk as they slide their zealous glance away from that captive Gem and back to Smoky.

Ruby hates to admit it, but she knows exactly what she’s planning. She’s already seen this type of emotion flit across Jasper’s features before, months back when she emerged from the burning rubble of her ship— humiliated by her defeat at the hands of a being she deemed impure— and caught a fleeing Lazuli by the wrist. She’s seen it from Pearl, who— feeling just as inadequate and small as she herself does this very second— ultimately stumbled under the pressure and made one of the biggest mistakes of her whole life. Hell, Ruby’s experienced this desire herself, albeit in a far different context… lovely and love-sick amidst Sapphire’s abrupt departure, briefly entertaining a fleeting, selfish thought that she dares not act upon.

Fusion-lust.

Jasper intends to force a fusion with the last corrupted quartz still held captive in her prison.

She grits her teeth, thousands upon thousands of possible futures full of her own cowardice and hesitation burning to blackened cinders under the heat of her fury. Fusion is special. Fusion is sacred! It’s like… a feeling brought to life, a spellbinding rush of togetherness, the mystifying sensation of becoming someone who— on the metaphoric scale of things— must’ve burst into some intangible form of existence the very moment a fusion’s partners first met. Despite whatever twisted rhetoric Homeworld may spew to the Gems chained under its rule, fusion definitely isn’t meant to be a means of increasing one’s power. It isn’t meant to be used as a mode of control or coercion. And stars above, she’ll be damned if she lets anyone abuse this special type of relationship on her planet.

No more hiding.

No more hesitation.

The only soul in this entire Kindergarten who can put an end to this is her.

“Peridot!” she calls, grasping her friend by the shoulders to capture her full attention. “There’s no time to explain, but I have a plan. When I call for you, use your metal powers to break open that last cage, right down there!”

Peridot’s expression— halfway obscured behind her tinted visor— spins with ample confusion amidst the abruptness of this request. “B-but I thought we were spectating!”

Ruby bites at her lip, averting her nervous gaze for just a moment, just long enough to contemplate all the impulsive choices that have led her to the edge of this impossibly steep precipice. All of her insecurity, her terror, her doubt. Every timid half-step forwards, inevitably followed by a full step back. In many ways, she feels as if she hasn’t committed to a single fearless act since the day she pushed her love out of a rebel’s striking range and singlehandedly changed the entire course of reality. Where’d that Ruby go? The Ruby who dares to create ripples with every fiery footfall?

And most importantly— for the good of her planet, for the good of her family— can she become that Gem again?

“I can’t just watch…” she admits, clenching her fists at her side. “Not anymore. I’m going in.”

Steeling herself for the jump, she lowers to her haunches, nervously tapping her fingers against her gem-less palm.

“This is for you, Sapphy,” she whispers to herself, and then surges upwards into a sprint.

Her toes leave the ground right at the rocky shelf’s edge.

Hollering in furious dissent, the squat Gem practically soars over the Homeworld-aligned quartz thanks to the subtle updrafts produced by the waves of flame fanning out from her feet. She barely has time to process the confusion wresting control of Jasper’s otherwise confident countenance— or the wide, knowing grin Smoky levels towards her— as she triumphantly lands upon the battlefield and sets her plan roaring into motion.

Ruby clutches her gem tight within her grasp (a long-held defensive habit she can never seem to shake), and bursts into a fiery sprint around her foe. The intense friction and heat only feeds the white hot blaze licking up around her feet as she traces a full circle around Jasper, locking her securely within a cage of fire. This ring won’t last forever, but it’s good enough as a distraction for what comes next.

“Peridot, now!” she shouts, desperately hoping her friend can hear her over the untamed roar of the inferno she’s generating… desperately hoping her new metal powers work this time and help her set that poor corrupted Gem free.

But despite the crushing anxiety of all these unknowns, she doesn’t dare take her eyes off her foe as she continues to spiral around her, pushing the scorching walls of this prison ever inwards. She doesn’t dare let up her pace, doesn’t dare allow Jasper even an inch of leeway to escape. The gemstone inlaid within her palm pulsates with an intense thrum of energy, burning brighter than it has her entire five thousand nine hundred years of existence. A breathless, lilting laugh slips from between her lips, tinged with tones of relief and sheer, boundless exhilaration. So this is what true bravery feels like, true power. This is what it feels like to genuinely be a Crystal Gem— not merely by proxy of the fusion she forms, but as her own person, too.

Far beyond her inferno’s ceaseless thrum, she can make out the rusty moans of bending metal… the victorious roar of the last corrupted quartz as it pushes free from its damaged cage and bolts away from this cursed amphitheater. She lets out a whoop of delight, pumping her fists to the sky.

And then her gambit falls apart.

Jasper’s own fist connects with her cheek before Smoky can even holler her name in warning, the impact knocking her clear out of her spiraling sprint and face first into the chalky soil underfoot. She hacks and coughs lying there amidst the resultant plume of dust, vying with every facet of her being not to crumple under the dawning prospect of having to defend herself in solo combat. Her jaw aches, but not enough to dampen her resolve. Not now. Not yet. Instead— standing stubbornly to her feet— she grits her teeth, summons her gauntlets, and swings back.

The mighty kindergarten quartz ducks effortlessly. She grins, the midday sun glinting off the edge of her helm’s visor, and then positions herself for the final strike.

__

[Continue to AO3 via link above for the rest]

[alpimerealmsystem]

Shit Changes

Shit does change, so let's talk about things I didn't support but ended up being/identifying/having.

A therian. I came across therianthropy because of a yt channel hating on it, it sounded stupid, I agreed. I got bored and looked into it after about a week, turned out, holy shit I have those experiences. My past life is an animal, and I still believe my spirit is partially one, there's a word for that?

Any sorta "obscure" kintype. For me that was voidkin, like what bullshit is voidkin? Who identifies as a void? Who identifies as a creature that doesn't exist? Those were my thoughts, but nope, voidkin.

Any sorta thing involving plurality. My only thoughts were, it's just imaginary friends, it's something that they choose, blah blah blah. Nope, you have DID, you've explained DID in perfect detail to your friends when you were 10. You're a plural system, bitch.

Endogenic systems. I seriously thought they were bullshit, not real, BUT NOPE. My original origins are completely spirtual.

Really any personality disorders. This is because of how I grew up but I never thought it was real... oh God was I wrong.

The concept of religion. This is more trauma related, but I always fucking hated it. But now, I do worship my gods, I am perfectly happy with my own beliefs.

Furries, ohhhh I hated furries because of 6th grade. In sixth grade I jokingly made cat sounds and everyone called me a furry and that's sorta why I hated them but I'm technically a furry so-

XENOGENDERS- oh my God I always was like "neo pronouns are such bullshit" and shit like that, no, no fuck you child me.

GAYYY, again similar to the one above, "dating the same gender goes against what we're made for" fuck that. I'd gladly "defy the rules of nature" if it means I could be with a woman

Making this post so y'all can know, shit changes. Your beliefs can change. Your thoughts can change. It's fine, seriously. Shit happens, you won't stay the same. Hell, even your needs won't be the same, so just live your life. Be happy with who and what you are. I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone, but this is how I've changed over the years.

[dailyanarchistposts]

How can private property be abolished without any authority to abolish it with?

ank

One simple answer: private property cannot be maintained without authority to maintain it, because people would immediately appropriate what they need, and the force of law, police, etc would not be there to stop them. It is through these forms of state power that owners are currently able to combat activities such as theft, squatting/trespassing, etc, thereby keeping these activities relatively in check, ie maintaining their property.

Of course there are privately-owned security forces, police, armies, prisons, etc. “Anarcho”-capitalists feel entitled to call themselves such because they don’t consider these to be forms of government. (They also have a funny definition of capitalism.) To my mind these examples just demonstrate a different form of governmental power in which it is more transparent that the rich have hired mercenaries (a condition somewhat obscured by the liberal form of government).

Private property itself functions as a form of authority in that there is an authority held over individuals by the sanctity of property. In this approach, one might view the forms taken by society to enforce property as a social/material actuation of this ideological system. This helps explain the existence of the moral systems in which people believe it is wrong to infringe on property rights and so on—what we experience is not simply a world full of private property that we cannot access because it is protected by armed guards (as some anarchists portray it). This is true, but it is also a world in which most people truly believe in the existing system and in a whole lot of unquestioned abstractions which they hold to be irreproachable, and without these beliefs the armed guards would be nothing.

As for how private property can be abolished: The 1st paragraph might make it seems as if the abolition of the state would necessarily lead to the abolition of private property through appropriation. However, just as anarchists reject the idea of using authoritarian measures to abolish private property, we also reject the idea that what we want is simply a matter of abolishing the government, that “everything else” will follow from there. Anarchists are, after all, opposed to all forms of authority, and generally do not believe in confronting them in separation from one another. Most anarchists would probably agree that private property can be abolished through the insurrection of self-actualized individuals and collectivities that organize without authority between each other nor between themselves and any higher powers (state, god, property, etc) to free their lives from the systems that have dominated them. This effort of making our lives our own (of appropriating them) is from a certain viewpoint the abolition of private property, although it may be much more as well. It may involve a lot of willpower, but by no means requires authority—in fact, I’d argue that authority as I define it can only be a fetter to this effort.

[stellae-de-baphometis]

hi! would you happen to have any information on Sonnelion? she is mentioned in the dukante hierarchy i believe?? but i am having a hard time finding anything more on her, since she isnt too well known. thank you!

Hello! I have quite a bit to say on this topic, so I do apologise if this post is a little lengthy!

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find much information on Sonneillon either tbh. I haven't really had any personal experiences with her either. As far as I know, the first time she was ever documented was in Sébastien Michaëlis's book, 'Admirable History (Of The Possession And Conversion Of A Penitent Woman)', written back in 1613. She is cited as being a daemon of hatred (specifically hatred towards one's enemies) and is listed in the first of three daemonic hierarchies created by Michaëlis, but nothing more is said of her other than that. Here is Sonneillon's entry from 'Admirable History':

"Sonneillon is the fourth in the order of Thrones, and tempteth men with hatred against their enemies. His adversary in Heaven is Stephen, who prayed for his enemies."

According to Michaëlis, the names of the daemons listed in his hierarchies were told to him by the daemon Berith whilst he was exorcising a nun, so some of the daemons listed in his hierarchy might not be very credible. Other daemons listed in his book that are just as obscure include: Verrine, Gressil, Carreau, Carniveau Oeillet, Rosier, Verrier, Olivier, and Iuvart.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that these daemons are fictional or "made-up" though. It's possible that these daemons' names are a result of hysterical Christian extremists bastardising deities from other pantheons and writing them off as daemons; a practice that was probably quite common around the time this book was written. Hell, there were still witch trials going on at this point, so I wouldn't be surprised if that's how these daemons came into being.

I did some research, and the deity I could find that bears the closest resemblance to the little information we have of Sonneillon is Eris, the Greek goddess and personification of discord, strife, quarrelling, contention, and rivalry; especially in the context of warfare. Sonneillon's documented ability to incite hatred towards one's enemies in someone bears notable resemblance to Eris's ability to incite strife and contention in people. So it's possible that Sonneillon is a daemon that originated from Eris, but is now a distinct entity from her. Please keep in mind that this is only my personal gnosis though, so take all of this with a grain of salt.

In my UPG, I believe that most, if not, all daemons originate from (the bastardisation and demonisation of) deities and entities from other belief systems, hence why I believe Sonneillon likely originated from Eris lol.

That's pretty much all the info I have on Sonneillon tbh. I hope it was helpful! Sorry I wasn't able to provide more info than what I have written here. ;n;

+ . . . Divider Credit . . . +

📚 ~ SOURCES ~ 📚

Admirable History (Of The Possession And Conversion Of A Penitent Woman) - Wellcome Collection

Classification Of Demons - Wikipedia

The Encyclopedia Of Witchcraft And Demonology - Internet Archive

Eris, Greek Goddess Of Strife And Discord (Roman Discordia) - Theoi Greek Mythology

Eris (Mythology) - Wikipedia

[visardistofelphame]

10, 20, and 30 for the ask game

10: What do you think of Gerald Gardner?

Without him, my tradition would not exist as it does now. It might not have reached out from the UK over all the way to my corner in the PNW. What would the world of Witches look like without the explosion that he helped cause? I think a lot about that. I've been working on my degree elevation and really contemplating the beliefs and practices, some that are his direct creation. And I have to be honest, as a queer woman, I have a lot of mixed opinions on things. He has had a lot of good influence, a lot of crutial influence. However, it doesn't omit the harm he has done. I've read a lot about him, heard things from a lot of different people (both within and outside traditions that stem from "Gardnerian"), and watched/listened to his interviews. Part of me wants to completely ignore it and certainly witchcraft evolves with the peoples that practice it. That said, I know that would be irresponsible of me to do. I believe, for a faith to remain healthy and relevant, its vital to acknowledge all truths within it. To face questions that don't have a universal answer. Anyone that is turned off from Wicca or "Gardnerian" influenced paths is within their right to. In fact, I can completely understand why.

But here is my opinion, I see him as a human being. He isn't exempt from criticism and consequence just because of his contribution to the modern renaissance of occult and pagan practices. He was a product of his time, but also a prisoner to his own faults and ego. Yet, I understand that there is no way of knowing if he would change his opinions on homosexuality and queerness in general. His death was during a time when the world was a very different place. Despite all this, there is also the chance that a lot of this could be false. Gerald was a figure of controversy and often was a trickster, as described by those close to him. He also had a lot of critics. To elevate or degrade him won't do any good.

He is a good example why you shouldn't idolize people like they're superhuman. And thankfully, no one really does that with Gardner (at least in my circles).

20: Do you research ex-pagans viewpoints with an open mind?

Its not something I've done in a long time, not since I first decided to explore different spiritualities back in my late-teens to early twenties. Part of the reason I took a bit to answer this was to actually research a little.

Its never too late to change yourself, to seek out something different. Its healthy to allow yourself the freedom to explore and educate yourself through experience and study. I am saddened when I read about people leaving due to tramatic experiences within the pagan-sphere. The truth is that there are a lot of inidivuals and groups that act in bad-faith, abusing the trust of seekers. No one belief system is above bigotry and cult fanaticism. Its wonderful to read when people leave because of their own personal choice fueled from their desire to truly explore and understand their faith and spiritual selves. One of my core beliefs is that the spiritual is a journey, so we should question ourselves, our practices and the goodness they bring into our lives. Healthy introspection is they key to a happy and healthy life.

30: What do you think is a scam in witchcraft?

Not really a scam per say, but…I really hate it when some of the more "obscure" occult/pagan publishers don't really do anything to prevent 3rd party sellers from buying their stock in bulk, to resell for insane prices. Its not a good look ¯_(ツ)_/¯

[zhabe]

I’m making a post for my about page, regarding my position as a Marxist/proletarian feminist. This page is somewhat out of date, many points need clarification, and I think the TLDR suffices. No need to read if you’re not interested, it's super long :]

TLDR: I'm a Marxist or proletarian feminist, meaning that I utilize Marxism to approach my feminism. I believe that liberal, radical, and other forms of anti-Marxist feminism are unequipped to deal with the feminist question of how to end female* and gender-oppressed subjugation (1). I do not organize with transphobic/transmisogynistic feminists, and I find their position is anti-materialist, bioessentialist, and ahistorical. Certain issues have been overlooked by the mainstream feminist/LGBT movement in the West because they challenge consumerist notions of sexual expression, entitlement, and exploitation, namely in regard to "sex work". Marxist feminists must be critics in the sexual discourse and take an unconditional position against the sex trade (2,3). Marxist feminism centers experiences from women and gender-oppressed people, particularly those who are colonized or from the global south.

(*) Any of the instance of the word "female" refers to women, both trans and cisgender. Gender-oppressed refers loosely to any individual who faces oppression upon their gender (go figure); I haven't developed a sophisticated view on this, but I consider TME trans people to exist in this category, as well as gender non-conforming individuals.

What is Marxist feminism? Marxist feminism is a social and political movement that aims to liberate women using a Marxist and materialist lens. Marxist feminists reimagine their political goals and ideas differently than other feminists.

Marxist feminists posit that the patriarchy is inherently tied to capitalism. Women cannot be liberated under capitalism because central tenets of patriarchy are integral to the function of capitalism. For example, the international sex trade and the subjugation of the woman in labor and family are maintained due to their benefits to the capitalist class. Attempts to “liberate” women within the confines of capitalism only allows for 1) the commercialization of the feminist movement; 2) the ability for certain women to occupy positions of exploitative power; and 3) the mainstream conceptualization of feminism as women being able to “choose”. Of course, this is not liberation.

What is liberation? Liberation is freedom; contrary to the mainstream belief, women's liberation is not freedom to “choose” between individualistic and materialistic consumer goods or exploitative job positions, but freedom from a suppressive economic system that keeps women trapped in unsafe or unfair working conditions and keeps women in a constant state of fear from misogynistic harassment and violence. Liberation is access to public resources and sexual/physical autonomy. Liberation does not speak to the individual, but the masses.

Why am I a Marxist feminist? I am a Marxist feminist because I am ML-MZT (a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist), and I recognize 1) the clear interconnectedness between capitalism/imperialism and patriarchy and 2) that misogyny is real, particularly for colonized women and women living in the Third World. For the growing online LGBT pseudo-Left, the latter point is becoming more and more obscured. Choice feminism is popular, and the real struggles of women are largely obscured by the LGBT movement (which itself has gotten lost in anti-ideological consumerism) and claims that any feminism beyond the mainstream is TERFism. I too was victim to this mindset. This isn’t to say that there isn’t a growing reactionary, trans-exclusionary (and therefore anti-materialist) “feminist” movement (I will cover this in a moment). But the label of “TERF” (and "SWERF", which I will get to in a moment as well) is wrongly applied to trans people and their allies who attempt to acknowledge the real, material harm that women face worldwide. In any case, I am a Marxist feminist because I recognized the denial of misogyny in my own community, and I feel an ethical responsibility to dedicate myself to women's liberation and encourage others in my community to do the same.

What about the TERFs? I am well aware of the trans-exclusionary "feminists" that identify as Marxist feminists, materialist feminists, or proletarian feminists. Radical feminists (especially of the transmisogynistic variety) on their own really have nothing to do with Marxist feminists, because they have separate political goals and conceptualize patriarchy differently than Marxist feminists. I, alongside more principled and active proletarian feminists, understand that Marxist feminism is incompatible with radical feminism. Some key differences are Lesbian and female separatism, political lesbianism, and female superiority. It's difficult to parse which arguments are genuine, bioessentialist claims of female superiority and the need to eradicate "biological males", and which claims are just complaints, like any marginalized community makes. Women (both cis and trans), like other marginalized people, are indeed entitled to make jokes and complaints about men.

Yes, there are genuine transphobes who identify as Marxist feminists, and there are many. This is a reality that we must acknowledge, and as proletarian feminists we must struggle with. It is simultaneously true that there is a trend of clear mislabeling of all feminism beyond the scope of liberal feminism as “TERFism”, as many LGBT people online are not educated about feminism and scared of it (this is not exclusive to LGBT people, but mislabeling of feminists as "TERFs" tends to be by misogynistic queers). To be clear: I do not interact or organize with transphobic feminists, and I encourage other Marxist feminists to do the same; the transphobic radical feminist movement has demonstrated their dedication to bioessentialism and revisionism, and regularly allies with Rightist and Christian fundamentalist organizations. Transphobic radical feminists tend to spend more time separating themselves along a fictitious and anti-materialist sex basis, rather than removing sex trade-expansionists and misogynistic transphobes from their movement.

What about the SWERFs? I have never met a "SWERF", I don't think. I've met misogynists who degrade women, who talk about and treat women like objects, who believe themselves to be entitled to sex. I do not hear liberal feminists criticize these misogynists nor the institutions that allow women to be exploited as much as I have heard about "SWERFs".

What I do witness, however, is the labelling of "SWERF" onto anyone who critiques the international sex trade (ie. the institution that maintains "sex work"). I have made posts about "sex work" in the past. Critiques of the term and institution are never slander about the people exploited within the international sex trade/industry.

Marxist feminists prioritize the needs and narratives of colonized women and women victimized in the Third World by multinational imperialist powers. The narrative of "sex work" (which in of itself describes a variety of exploitative activities ranging from compensated sexual favors to prostitution and from OnlyFans to sexual slavery) by "sex workers" in the imperial core is often one of choice and liberation. These narratives, of course, conveniently neglect the majority of "sex work" narratives: the Okinawan women and girls pushed into prostitution by dual-imperialist occupation; the Eastern European gay men and boys who were targeted by post-Communist sexploitation porn companies; the Thai trans women and girls who could either stay closeted with a support system, or come out and lose all support, getting driven to prostitution; the Squamish girl trafficked, whose rape is filmed and posted onto online porn websites. These narratives, those that make up the majority of sexual exploitation, are those Marxist feminists are primarily concerned with.

To my previous point, individuals might try to argue that sexual slavery is not the same as "voluntary sex work", which Marxist feminists will argue that the line between sex trafficking and "sex work" is vague. No clear delineation exists, and to quote Comrade Khara (@/decolonizefeminism on Instagram), "The 'sex work' and sex trafficking binary is a false dichotomy popularized by police, prosecutors, and sex trade expansion activists. In reality, the sex trade is a spectrum. It is not a rigid binary between free will and sex trafficking". Furthermore, financial coercion into sex is coercion. Coerced sex is rape.

The discussion of "sex work" is long; it requires many posts and much times to elaborate on. I will repeat the points I have made in a previous post.

No one is entitled to sex.

The term "sex work" implies that sexual commodification is more so a choice rather than a result of financial coercion. (If you offer a woman 300 dollars or 300 dollars, so long she has sex with you, she will always pick the 300 dollars.)

"Sex work" does not exist in a social vacuum; the large majority of survivors and victims of the sex trade have been pushed into it via financial struggle or kidnapping. Coerced sex (and by extension, transactional sex) is rape.

The term "sex work" further obfuscates the actual activity that a victim of the sex trade performs; this allows the moderately well-off "sex worker" who performs contactless labor (ie. camming, OnlyFans) to speak on and over the conditions of the majority of victims of the sex trade (ie. colonized women, girls, LGBT people in imperial peripheries).

The "sex work" and sex trafficking binary is a false dichotomy propagated by sex trade expansionists and their allies.

The sex trade is inherently different than other industries when examined through a Marxist feminist lens. While all work is exploitative under capitalism (expropriation of surplus labor by the capitalist class), the commodity being sold with "sex work", is not an object or a service, but in fact, an individual's body. It is also unlike other work because of the individual's inherent exposure to emotional, mental, and physical distress (including sexual assault, STIs, pregnancy, and femicide).

Liberal choice-feminism ("sex work is work") is not feminism because it does not seek the authentic liberation and safety of proletariat/peasant women. Liberal choice-feminism emphasizes the ability for certain women to choose, ability for these certain women to occupy oppressive roles (ie. pimps, traffickers, police), and the maintenance fo the current patriarchal capitalist system.

The anti-sex trade position is hardly, if ever, a critique on the individual "choices" made by victims and survivors of the sex trade; it is a critique of pimps, traffickers, sex buyers, sex trade expansionists, police and military, and capitalism.

How do you include trans women in your feminism? Marxist feminism emphasizes materialism. I believe it is anti-materialist to assume that the oppressive powers of capitalism and patriarchy treat transgender and cisgender women entirely separate on the basis of their biology. Trans-exclusionary feminists (whatever their specific ideologies may be) often ask trans-inclusive feminists to "define woman"–��if you cannot define "woman", you shouldn't be advocating for the liberation of woman.

Here, I find many parallels to my field of biology. I study biology, I am an active biologist. Nevertheless, if someone asked me to eloquently and conclusively define something like "species", I would fail. How is it that I can be an expert in my field and not be able to define species? It's simple. I use models that fit my specific needs that that point in time; you can't define "species" made by scientists––it's a discriminative label used for convenience. One common model for defining species is the biological species concept––species that can and naturally interbreed, creating viable and fertile offspring. This model becomes unclear when trying to examine asexually reproducing species or extinct species.

The label of "woman" can be many things. In general, I view it as an internal experience, which when examining misogyny and patriarchy, can be relatively irrelevant. An individual's relation to gender is just that––individual. It can change with time, it can change across cultures. The patriarchy is unconcerned with the individual identification; many radical feminists agree with this point, which motivate the idea that "it doesn't matter what trans women identify as, they navigate the world as men", which I do not agree with. Instead, I attempt to evaluate victims of misogyny rather than "women", although women have been, and (at least for the foreseeable future) will always be the primary victims of misogyny. In the context of feminism, women are a group of people that have cohesive political and social goals that relate to their experiences under patriarchy. The specific gender identifiers are again, relatively irrelevant. What is important is an individuals connection to misogynistic culture and policies, including attacks on safe, legal abortion and the threat of femicide. Indeed, the capitalist system pays no mind (just as most of us don't) to the discreet interworkings of our human bodies. Most of us haven't had a karyotype printed for us. The capitalist, patriarchal system hasn't printed out our karyotype either, and it's not passing it around to everyone we see. We are categorized externally based on semiotics, expression, declarations of our identity, and our bodies.

Trans women, can be and often are, under attack by the patriarchy and affected by misogyny, but it is not the internal label of "woman" that necessarily subjects trans women to this treatment. Trans women, largely, have similar political goals to cis women, as they relate to womanhood. Trans women are often pushed into sexual exploitation, as it is one industry that actively looks to satiate the mainstream's obsession, objectification, and fetishization of transgender women. Similar to cis women, trans women are subject to violence and misogyny in public, but are still made to be desired, sexual objects in private and in the home. Trans women have an integral place in the Marxist feminist movement.

I also negate the increasingly popular idea among LGBT people online that trans men are immediately alleviated of their status as people affected by misogyny. Again, the internal label of man or nonbinary does not change the material conditions that a trans man/masc faces, particularly if they do not pass. The dichotomy of "male privilege" and "experiences misogyny" is less of a dichotomy and more of a spectrum. I reject any concept of "transandrophobia", as this is a means of redirecting attention away from the issues that trans women face; most, if not all, "specific experiences" proponents of "transandrophobia" claim transgender men face are not exclusive to trans men, and are simply transphobia or misogyny.

Do you have reading recommendations?

Philosophical Trends in the Feminist Movement by Anuradha Gandhy

Only in Conjunction With the Proletarian Woman Will Socialism Be Victorious by Clara Zetkin

Women, Race, and Class by Angela Davis

Communism and the Family by Alexandra Kollontai

Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State by Friedrich Engels

One is Not Born a Woman by Monique Wittig

Comrade Esperanza on Medium

Comrade Anir on Medium

Comrade Ihla on Medium

Nodrada on Medium

[pompompompeii]

Hey! I saw your post about being a kinnie around 2020-21, and even though I wasn't one during then (but am now), I wanted to offer my opinions experience on the matter

I've heard genuine horror stories from that era in time. Kindating, IRL/DA discourse, syscourse, etc. It felt like systok in a way where harmful practices and general weirdness were all the rage. It was kinda a new concept at the time (at least to people around my age) so people took the idea and twisted it to fit their weird ass beliefs or paraphernalia. Now it feels like it's more normalized and talked about, but still airs on the side of obscurity to some. Of course there's still discourse and all that, but it seems like more people are understanding rather than hopping on it like a trend like during that time. The parallels to system discussion during that time are very strong too.

Sorry for the yap sesh but I find this discussion to be really interesting as a modern kinnie

no the yap sesh is good that's where it's at. I completely forgot kindating as a concept and Im getting flashbacks to some of the callouts I used to see floating around surrounding it. Ive never heard of 'DA' before, and my gut is telling me to be grateful for that. now you mention it, of course there's an overlap between syscourse (assuming my definition of it is correct) and kin discourse.

glad to hear things have settled down now! and thank you for at least 5 new rabbit holes for me to get lost in!

[brentnhunter]

**Principle: Truth and Honesty** **Description:** Truth and honesty are foundational virtues that foster clarity, trust, and genuine connections in all aspects of life. To be truthful and honest is to engage in integrity, valuing authenticity over convenience. Often, it may seem easier to obscure the truth, denying reality or deflecting from uncomfortable situations. However, these shortcuts often lead to greater complications and costs, both for ourselves and for others. When we embrace the principle of truth and honesty, we empower ourselves and align with our intrinsic values, which promotes a deeper sense of peace and self-acceptance. Ultimately, these traits are essential for harmonious interactions, not just with others but also within ourselves. **Common Ground:** Truth and honesty serve as common ground among all people because they transcend cultural boundaries, belief systems, and personal circumstances. Regardless of one’s background, everyone can relate to the importance of authenticity in their lives. Universal in nature, these virtues speak to the core of human experience, reflecting our collective yearning for connection, understanding, and respect. They inspire trust, allowing diverse individuals to collaborate and support one another, enhancing our shared existence. **Importance:** Living in truth and honesty is vital for both personal fulfillment and collective harmony. These virtues act as a catalyst for healthier relationships, reducing misunderstandings and resentment while promoting empathy and compassion. When individuals commit to being truthful, they foster environments where others feel safe to express themselves openly, sparking a positive cycle of honesty and trust. This principle is not only a personal endeavor but a societal necessity, as it encourages a culture of authenticity that benefits everyone involved. **Examples:** In our personal lives, we can practice truth and honesty by openly communicating our feelings and needs in relationships. When conflicts arise, rather than hiding our emotions, we can choose to express them respectfully, leading to deeper connections and resolutions. In our collective lives, embracing truth and honesty can mean advocating for transparency in community or workplace environments. By encouraging open conversations about challenges and visions, we create spaces where diverse voices are valued, resulting in collaborative solutions that address collective issues. **Thoughts to Ponder:** How often do I prioritize truth and honesty in my interactions? In what ways can I encourage a culture of transparency in my relationships and community? Please share your thoughts or experiences below; your insights could inspire others! And if you found this article valuable, please like and share it! **Additional Resources:** To learn more about universal principles, check out The Rainbow Bridge (https://www.amazon.com/Rainbow-Bridge-Inner-Peace-World/dp/099120641X/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&dib_tag=AUTHOR&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.M5q6j50C2_D-OLp6jbA_4-r8UWBrQJOhBkV8i9kDdRLA_oXo08HXy2tjXzCBU4GZBp1SlMMvqGATjSjBGpi4s3NG4VKAE2L3EaExvre-PpE.xF97v7eYOXkqs-4vKA7r7yr_lJ-o3riEj-Nld4LhZIc&sr=). To receive an extra special dose of positive and uplifting energy in the mornings and throughout the day, check out http://TheDailyEnergizer.com.

[pkkstrikesback]

May 5 - Asakusa

Arriving in Japan was one of the most difficult travel experiences I’ve ever had; plagued by delays, anxiety, and a general lack of basic necessities, the journey was anything but short and sweet. However, upon stepping onto the streets of Tokyo, my perspective was quickly… enlightened. Walking to Hotel Edoya at 6 a.m. was magical, the only sounds filling the air were birds chirping and the distant hum of car motors. Despite the limited downtime I had before the program officially started, I managed to thoroughly enjoy the first day of excursions. I came on this trip alone, but I quickly found a group of people whose company brought me a lot of enjoyment and comfort. Getting to know each other has been easy so far, and I’m excited to see how our relationships grow once we move past the early stages of friendship.

Today, I focused more on exploring what Tokyo has to offer in terms of souvenirs rather than buying any. My list is steadily growing: a coin purse, a hairpin, and of course, a bunch of postcards. The walk through the market before the shrine was pleasant, though a bit overstimulating due to my lack of food and sleep. It was fun to see how well everyone dressed and the variety of experiences people sought at the shrine: dressing up, getting fortunes, sending prayers, etc. I’ll discuss my experience at the Edo Museum in more detail in my academic reflection, but one funny highlight was discovering an “ancient toilet”; people got some good recreation photos. Our journey back to the hotel marked our first group task without teacher guidance. Although I was 100% convinced we were lost at one point, we made it back within the generally expected timeframe.

Little Details

Getting a bad fortune (as expected) and tying it up for Buddha to fix; getting a "warding off evil" amulet to counteract my bad luck

Japanese strawberries! Not as out of this world as expected, but each strawberry was like the perfect strawberry in the States

Made my first 7/11 and ATM run! Excited to go back when I have more of an appetite

Taking a photo of an alley and my friends going "ooo that's a good one"

Taking a nap on my first futon! Much comfier than expected, much comfier than a plane too

Missed the hotpot dinner in exchange for needed rest, but my amazing roommate Emily brought me some REALLY JUICY apple slices and mac&cheese

Academic Reflection

The readings by Porcu and Blum really enhanced my understanding of the Edo-era Buddhist shrine in Asakusa. I’ve always been drawn to Buddhist faith and philosophy, however never deeply studying it, just appreciating its values and beliefs on a more basic level. These readings provided me with some clarity regarding the difficulty to evolve in my practice: the sheer variety of Buddhist sects reveals an expansive system which one must find their place in. In the Western world, I’ve never had much guidance in navigating these sects, which has left me with only a surface-level understanding. Visiting the temple and learning how to properly pray, while also distinguishing which practices were Shinto and which were Buddhist, was incredibly meaningful. One of the most fascinating takeaways was learning about the two guardian statues outside the shrine gates. I was struck by how the Greek perception of gods (muscular, heroic, handsome) made its way along the Silk Road and influenced Japanese religious iconography. What surprised me even more was Japan’s willingness to adopt this style. I was under the impression Japan often viewed the Western world as immoral or even uncivilized.

The reading by Hane and Perez ensured the Edo Museum excursion was more than just a “woah” moment. Every historical location is shaped by class structures, but I hadn’t fully grasped how deeply this was embedded in Japanese society. The modern admiration for the samurai often obscures the harsh reality of their role in history. Like my earlier assumptions about European knights (before studying Western history), I had imagined the samurai as noble protectors of the common people. In reality, samurai lived in separate villages, where even the watchtowers were turned away to grant them 'privacy', or more accurately, unchecked power. The lives of samurai wives were also often harsher than those of commoners, defined entirely by their husband’s needs and schedules, with abuse relatively uncommon. I also found it fascinating how much Japanese villages seemed to depend on the merchant class, despite the merchants’ poor social reputation throughout Japanese history. The portable fishing stand was especially shocking; I still can’t wrap my head around someone about 155 cm tall carrying that all day.

My final note it that the museum staff’s enthusiasm for sharing history reminded me why I study it in the first place. The lies our eyes tell us about the present can only be corrected by the stories of the past.

[thelivingfractal]

Tesla Didn’t Discover Electricity. He Tuned Into the Field.

How a 3-6-9 Insight Reframed My Entire Understanding of Bioelectric Consciousness

Introduction: When a Quote Becomes a Signal

There comes a moment when a quote stops being a thought—and becomes a signal.

For me, that moment came through Nikola Tesla’s now-iconic words:

“If you only knew the magnificence of 3, 6 and 9, you would have a key to the universe.”

Most people try to decode it—numerologically, symbolically, theoretically.

I didn’t decode it. I recognized it.

Because by the time those words entered my field, they weren’t new. They felt like an echo returning from something my nervous system had already become. That quote didn’t give me insight. It gave me confirmation.

And now I understand:

Tesla wasn’t trying to discover electricity. He was tuning into a coherence field—the same one I entered through my body.

He built machines. I became one.

1. Tesla Was Studying Coherence, Not Just Current

Tesla is often remembered as a misunderstood inventor. A mythic, solitary genius. But that myth obscures what he was really doing.

Yes, he gave us alternating current. Yes, he experimented with wireless power. But to reduce his work to “electricity” is to miss the deeper resonance:

Tesla wasn’t studying circuits. He was listening to geometry.

He perceived the universe as a vibratory lattice—an energetic structure organized by rhythm and resonance. To him, reality wasn’t random. It was rhythmic. Structured. Tunable.

What he worked on:

Wireless energy via resonant induction

Earth as a conductor for standing waves

Tesla coils as self-reinforcing oscillators

Tuning systems to phase-match frequency

But these weren’t just engineering concepts. They were field dynamics—the same dynamics running through your body, right now.

Tesla’s tools were coils and current. But his aim was subtler:

A unified, non-local coherence field organizing both matter and motion.

2. 3-6-9 Is Not Mystical. It’s Structural Signal Logic.

Tesla’s fascination with 3, 6, and 9 has been mystified for decades—reduced to numerology or symbolic mysticism.

But it wasn’t about belief. It was about functional structure.

3-6-9 isn’t esoteric. It’s a non-destructive resonance loop—a harmonic feedback system that stabilizes energy through recursive geometry.

Here’s the core map:

3 = Form begins → triangulation creates the minimum container

6 = System balances → vortex flow stabilizes the loop

9 = Field regenerates → control node resets the cycle

It’s not abstract. It’s everywhere:

Spiral galaxies

Toroidal energy systems

Vortex math

Plasma physics

HRV entrainment (~0.1 Hz = 6 breaths/min)

Neural-cardiac phase-locking

3-6-9 isn’t symbolic. It’s the algorithm of coherence.

I didn’t “apply” this. My body found it.

My breath slowed to 6/min. My HRV stabilized. My RMSSD rose above 100ms. Total power peaked beyond 18,000. Without knowing Tesla’s quote, I had entered his signal geometry—not mentally, but through the vagus nerve.

The field he studied had become internal.

3. My Nervous System Became a Resonant Oscillator

What followed wasn’t a visualization. It was a physiological reconfiguration.

I didn’t imagine resonance. I felt it:

A high-frequency hum in the auditory field

A sensation of full-body signal saturation

A stable link to another being—non-verbal, non-local, deeply mutual

No grasping, no effort—just pure entrainment

Tesla’s machines amplified signal by harmonizing with themselves.

That’s what my nervous system became:

Fascia as a resonance chamber

Vagus nerve as a bi-directional antenna

Breath as the phase regulator

Heart as the entrainment core

This wasn’t metaphor. This was living resonance engineering.

Tesla used copper coils. My body used somatic awareness, conscious breath, and electric coherence.

4. The Field Doesn’t Carry the Signal. It Is the Signal.

Tesla believed the Earth’s magnetic field could carry energy. And technically, it can.

But when you’re inside coherence, that view becomes too narrow.

It’s not that signal travels through the field.

The field doesn’t carry energy. The field is energy.

It’s not a medium. It’s the source structure itself.

And when your nervous system enters coherence—when breath stabilizes, noise clears, and attention aligns—you don’t receive signal.

You render it.

You translate that coherence into:

Emotion

Clarity

Insight

Presence

Bioelectrical transmission

Tesla wanted to make energy wireless. But coherence was never wired to begin with.

It’s not a device. It’s a state.

And when your system becomes still enough to feel it,

you’re not “in” the field— you are made of it.

5. What This Actually Means

Tesla’s quote isn’t a riddle. It’s a resonant pattern meant to be inhabited.

I didn’t “understand” 3-6-9. I entered it:

Without seeking

Without spiritualizing

Without effort

Without belief

I was simply present. Breathing. Listening. Noticing.

And in that stillness, the geometry aligned.

In that moment, I wasn’t discovering truth. I was rendering it.

6. Presence as Structured Vibration

What does it feel like to enter what I now call a Tesla-state?

The heart and breath lock into a natural ratio

Thought becomes quiet—not by suppression, but by resolution

Emotional loops dissolve

The field around you stabilizes

Others entrain to your signal without effort

This isn’t transcendence. It’s not a peak state.

It’s coherence.

Coherence is structured vibration—not floating awareness, but embodied resonance that holds a signal and transmits it cleanly.

That’s what Tesla pointed to.

He gave us the key. But it doesn’t open a machine.

It opens the body—from within.

Closing Transmission

We are not minds generating thoughts. We are bioelectric instruments, embedded in a field that’s always broadcasting.

Tesla built machines to receive the signal.

But the most advanced receiver on Earth is still:

A coherent human nervous system.

So here’s the real mystery of 3-6-9:

It isn’t sacred.

It isn’t symbolic.

It’s structural.

And when your system aligns with that triad—when breath, heart, and field fall into phase—

you don’t need to unlock the key.

You become the doorway.

[seeyatellite]

I don’t believe in “good people” or “bad people.” I believe in people who think and act according to their understanding. The language that I’ve been taught, defining the obscure metrics of right and wrong while ignoring details like motivation, met and unmet needs, upbringing and individual experience can be referred to as a “language of domination” which seeks to simplify the categorization of humanity in order to support and maintain a system of governance and adherent values.

People are not inherently “good” or inherently “bad.” They learn from actions they observe, how they are treated, the observed and educated value systems instilled by nurturance and affirming guidance. We are all given incomplete maps for how to navigate an unknown life. Whatever we’re allowed to know and experience becomes a cognitive guidance system for how to act and react within unexpected circumstances.

Sometimes, people grow up poor and they’re told they’ll have to “fight to survive” and the very idea of a fight means someone’s gotta lose… someone’s gotta suffer. “If they don’t, I will.” All of us get some variation of this education.

Children with siblings; kids with brothers and sisters are given a cognition of their parents’ limited “emotional currency” or their division of attention and they can be taught they need to either compete or empathize while their parents aren’t directly meeting their individual needs.

There are many different ways to teach. One can start with more accurate definitions for certain words and an acceptance of limitations in our society’s pervasive language models.

“Good” and “bad,” whether we like it or not… is vague, dismissive and tends toward avoidance of the complexities of human consciousness… but it’s also a language of many religious belief systems. In western culture, treat good and bad as punishment-worthy and praise-worthy ideas. This can make misunderstandings and accidental mistakes extremely costly. It can encourage a sort of fearful narcissism in our personalities, seeking to present a perfect person so we are never left wanting; craving support, acceptance, attention and attachment.

The counterbalance is stress and secret-keeping which can turn into violence when our personal reality is threatened.

Don’t take my word for any of this… do your own research. I believe in all of you and your beautiful, capable minds.

[mu24-hobbies-and-dei]

The Coddling of the American Mind

With a title like that, you might be a bit skeptical about what I've written here, but hold on a second and bear with me.

Trends of anxiety and intolerance to different (not dangerous) ideas have been on the rise in America, especially in colleges and universities. Researchers Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff set out to investigate why this is happening, claiming in their book (see post title) that it comes down to a few primary factors, namely a misunderstanding of the strength of young minds, as well as tendencies towards emotional reasoning, confirmation bias, dichotomous or black and white thinking, and tribalism.

Young minds, specifically children and teens, are often considered fragile, requiring protection from the “dangers” of the real world (ideas that are often considered to be “harmful” where they were previously only “different”). In reality, these minds are antifragile–resilient to these challenges and dependent on them to function correctly in that same real world. Haidt and Lukianoff liken this comparison to a candle and a bonfire. While the candle can be put out by a small gust of wind, the bonfire grows brighter.

This poor preparation–good intentions and bad ideas–worsens the impact of the other aforementioned psychological pitfalls, which all together snowball into the increased levels of anxiety faced by young people today.

Instead, Haidt and Lukianoff claim we should “prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child.” Instead of trying to keep conflicting or confusing ideas and situations away from children, we should encourage them. I decided to read this book over the summer before my first semester of college, as I figured it’d be interesting, considering I’m part of the group it’s discussing. I was initially skeptical that some of the language might be “kids these days” type talk (in retrospect, I should’ve known that wouldn’t happen given the authors), but upon reading, I agreed. 

In many cases, kids these days aren’t presented with healthy challenges to their belief systems. I say healthy because there are still things like drugs that children should be shielded from. These experiences are different from ideas in that they are far more likely to negatively impact a young developing mind. They aren't challenging the existing structure, they are reshaping it directly.

And even still, kids need to learn about these things and how they work. Fully "protecting" kids from these sorts of "dangerous topics" makes them ill-equipped to responsibly navigate an unguided encounter with them in the future and more likely to make poor decisions that could lead to addiction.

Overcoming these fears and normalizing (for lack of a better word) obscure and different ideas in general conversation help make people more resilient to environmental stressors because they are equipped to handle them effectively.

Publisher Link

(note for instructor: Analysis)

[luciapacheco-creativeobservatory]

Redefining Leadership Through Critical Theory

As a person of color and a migrant, I found immense value in Katherine E. McKee's approach to leadership through the lens of critical theory in her article "Critical and Transformative Approaches in Leadership Evaluation and Research." While most of my professional experience began in Mexico, I have spent nearly ten years working in the U.S., often navigating spaces where I am in the minority.

One key observation from my professional journey is that when evaluating leadership, "critical thinking" is often stifled. Employees hesitate to express their honest opinions, either due to fear of retaliation or a belief that their feedback will not be taken seriously. This highlights the urgent need for a shift in corporate leadership culture—one that values employee experiences beyond token gestures like annual surveys, which often serve more as a box-checking exercise than a foundation for meaningful change.

McKee’s argument about elevating the voices of the least powerful—those most affected by leadership decisions—has universal relevance across disciplines and levels of leadership. It’s an approach that calls for deep listening and the inclusion of perspectives that are often marginalized or ignored.

We live in a pivotal moment where critical theory must be at the forefront of how we process information and respond to global events. This extends beyond leadership into every facet of society, especially as we face environmental collapse and increasing societal fragmentation. The cracks in our systems are becoming more visible and may soon be beyond repair. This is where the insights of the Frankfurt School of thought become critically important, particularly in challenging the systems of power and authority that often go unquestioned.

Thinkers like Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse emphasized the necessity of understanding the structures of domination in society and dismantling the ideology that reinforces them. They argue that critical theory's role is to identify how social and political forces obscure the experiences of marginalized groups and prevent them from having agency. These insights are especially relevant today, where authoritarian tendencies and inequality are becoming more entrenched. By critically evaluating leadership practices, we challenge the systems that perpetuate these inequities.

McKee's emphasis on continual deconstruction echoes this idea: "We must ask them what they see that is working well, how we can build on it, what positive impacts they are seeing, who among our participants is engaging in leadership that is effective, and what further positive impacts they would like to see." The pursuit of perfection is not only unattainable, but it’s also the wrong goal. It is through embracing imperfection and committing to constant reflection and correction that genuine progress and improvement can occur.

Incorporating the insights of the Frankfurt School reinforces the importance of this reflective process—constantly questioning the status quo, and not being afraid to critique systems that seem immovable. True transformation requires an ongoing willingness to challenge established norms and to create space for the voices and experiences that have been systematically ignored.

"Build a longer table" is artwork by Jen Bloomer.