empty-parking-spaces

[empty-parking-spaces]

She was called Phillis, because that was the name of the ship that brought her, and Wheatley, which was the name of the merchant who bought her. She was born in Senegal.

In Boston, the slave traders put her up for sale: “She's 7 years old! She will be a good mare!”

At thirteen, she was already writing poems in a language that was not her own. No one believed that she was the author. At the age of twenty, Phillis was questioned by a court of eighteen enlightened men in robes and wigs.

She had to recite passages from Virgil and Milton and some verses from the Bible, and she also had to vow that the poems she had composed were not copied. From a chair, she underwent her lengthy examination, until the court approved her: she was a woman, she was Black, she was enslaved, but she was a poet.

Phillis Wheatley was the first African-American writer to publish a book in the United States.

✍🏾: Black History Studies

[empty-parking-spaces]

The objective of this Collective Google Drive is to spread information about the Military Dictatorships in Latin America and the involvement of the USA in them through the Plan Condor.

All the books and articles here so far have been compiled by me or were suggest readings by professors when I was taking my Human Rights and Public Policies Post Grad Specialization Course.

I fully encourage people to contribute with other articles and books, however, especially from other countries since the information I have is mostly about Brazil.

*-*-*-*-*-*

UPDATE 25/03/2023

I've just added over 150 PDFs to the GD Archive, mostly in Spanish and Portuguese, please check it out!

I've also created a different section, under the Portuguese folder, for Education on Human Rights, co that we can move forward and make sure history doesn't repeat itself. As I come across resources in English and Spanish, I'll be updating those folders with more information on it as well.

[empty-parking-spaces]

I also think further connections can be made with their own journeys with their sexuality and the roles they play in the video. Dan being the one who performs the sacrifice as an attempt to gain access to Baphomet/get in her graces meaning "being aware that she exists/her power/her influence and being drawn to it but not currently being under her control but actively trying to change that" culminating in performing the ritual and achieving that goal, declaring that finally she is part of you as well. While Phil being the sacrifice feels more like he is already fully enveloped in her, he was given long before we are just now finding out. Those 2 things mirror their own coming out journeys' (to us at least). With Phil having known and accepted his own queerness for years just choosing not to disclose openly to his followers. And Dan knowing the fact that his queerness is present/does exist/won't go away and just finally reaching a breaking point of fully accepting it and deciding to come out. Those enabling Phil to come out as well (ultimately the act of sacrificing Phil which enables Baphomet just as Dan's decision to come out is the only thing that could have triggered Phil's own coming out.)

danandphilcrafts and the tarot's devil

a queer perspective

dan and phil crafts is a short horror film quartet created by famous queer youtubers dan howell and phil lester. there is intentional use of imagery from the devil tarot card in the climactic shot of this installment, as you can observe below:

(images used with permission from the wonderful @danrifics' post)

phil has a long history of including tarot on his channel in videos such as robot death machine (2009), PREDICTING MY FUTURE! (2017), PREDICTING DAN"S FUTURE! (2017), trying to predict 2021 (2020) shorts doing readings for astrological signs on lessamazingphil (2022), and in viewers pick my birthday gifts 2024 (2024).

as someone who's been both a fan and a tarot reader for over a decade, i find this nod to the devil card one of the most essential shots in communicating the complex themes addressed in this video and the craft series as a whole.

how so? i'll start with discussion of the devil tarot card and how it relates to the lovers.

in tarot, the lovers and the devil are both a part of the major arcana, the 22 cards representing more significant, intense & impactful life moments than the cards found in the minor arcana. they are two of very few major arcana cards that mirror each other visually: the other duos in the major arcana are the high priestess + hierophant and empress + emperor. 

in both other cases, the cards hold connected meanings as applied to different areas of life, but reflect a gendered difference - the high priestess and empress are women, and the emperor and hierophant are men. from this we can conclude two things. 

first is that the connected imagery between two cards connotates connected meaning. even without the connected imagery, these cards would be an inverse of one another; they're sibling cards, sharing the same numerology (6).

so what do the lovers symbolize? the lovers symbolize healthy, balanced relational connection, collaborative communication, choice, etc. their relationship is blessed/holy/watched over by an angel. 

the devil, on the other hand, symbolizes unhealthy relational connection, exploitation, addiction, hedonism, etc. the figure in this card is the demon baphomet, and the relationship is taboo.

the other conclusion we can take from the pattern of meaning found in visually similar cards is that the variation between these cards is related to gender/sex/sexuality. 

it is extremely straightforward to conclude that the couple in the devil card differs with the couple in the lovers card by being sexually deviant in some manner, and all forms of queerness fall under the umbrella of sexual deviance. 

baphomet as the specific demon in this card ads to the overall queerness associated with the devil. i am not able to speak about it at length as i am not an occultist, but you can read at length on wikipedia. i know i’ve read good posts about baphomet from occultists on tumblr, but am struggling to find those that go into detail. what i’m able to remember is this: depictions of baphomet always show her with a mix of sex characteristics, typically both breasts and a penis, making her either transgender or intersex.

(a baphomet post in line with the one i’m looking for)

my goal with this essay is a queer reading of the devil, though, not a reification of the societal norms regarding gender and sexuality as held when the rider waite smith deck was created in 1909. we can queer the devil by being critical of the institutions and social norms that name the deviance depicted in the devil as bad.

when doing this, the devil can become an empowering figure signifying acceptance of and actualization of queer sexuality, rejection of internalized homophobia and transphobia, freedom from normative expectations, solidarity taking action, and connection with/creation of community. 

you can see similar subversions of christian ideas of the devil in the work of lil nas x, particularly in the music video for MONTERO (call me by your name) - it’s a common queer theme. the rates at which satanic imagery and touch between two men appear increase both rapidly and in tandem with each successive video in the DanAndPhilCRAFTS back catalogue.

i'm not going to delve too deep into past videos, but i will mention that the horror in the first three exists largely in implication: the pentagram in glitter faces is has happened before and happens whether they're trying to make it or not; the "he" they are "friends" with in potato prints never appears onscreen.

tying this back to the devil as a card that stands in opposition to societal homophobia and gender roles, the first indications of this theme appear in DanAndPhilCRAFTS-Slime's opening still:

and the dialogue taking place from 0:17 to 0:24 of the video, which i've transcribed below.

DAN: We've had important events to prepare for. PHIL: I've been in a box. [footage of a presumably deceased PHIL from DanAndPhilCRAFTS - Potato Prints] DAN: They tried to stop us. PHIL: But they didn't.

from these two moments in the film, we can infer that the "they" who tried to stop dan and phil includes the church of england, and that phil's death at the end of the previous video was not permanent.

how does the story change if our baseline assumption is to trust its protagonists rather than the vague "they" trying to stop them, the "they" who recovered the footage?

on that note: how does the fact that dan and phil came out between potato prints and slime impact the way that the story is consumed, and the way that the story is depicted?

i am not well versed in horror. i cannot meaningfully speak to the tradition of horror and its elements and how they manifest in this film particularly.

i can point out what i can identify as worth talking about: the things that are portrayed as horrific. the presence of blood; to lose one's life - specifically to kill or be killed by a penetrating weapon; allying oneself with demonic forces. to my knowledge there's a lot to dig into with that, both regarding horror in general and horror through the lens of queer analysis.

what i'm able to come up with is this: blood is a bodily fluid disease can pass through, and there's a lot of history there with both AIDS and more recently monkeypox; many people lose the life they had before when they come out; i don't think i even need to elaborate about penetration; religious homophobia's insistence that queerness is of the devil is extremely old news.

i would love for someone more versed in horror and queerness than I am to elaborate where i can't.

something i can elaborate on is this: how the video was received.

this video wasn't posted to the gaming channel or either main channel; the only people who will have seen it are people who never unsubscribed to the crafts channel or people who are connected to phannie spaces. this core swath of dan and phil's audience primarily consists of queer people: those of us who are aware of their relationship. those of us who are in on the joke.

to a cisheteroallo audience, especially one completely unfamiliar with dan and phil, this video would likely be experienced as straightforwardly scary. this hypothetical audience doesn't know, as we do, that it's deeply unrealistic that dan or phil would ever harm one another as depicted in the film.

the reactions i have seen in phannie spaces have all found and delighted in the humor in it, and many have enjoyed the well executed horror. but beyond that, this queer audience widely perceives and enjoys the eroticism of the film.

there is intimacy in the violence, and a thrill in the transgressions required for two people to align themselves with the figure of the devil.

something i particularly enjoy: despite the sources of horror i listed earlier, none of them result in consequences for the characters dan and phil play. they end this film in a place of power beside the devil figure. what is frightening is the threat they pose to the "they" who tried to stop them, the threat they pose to institutional cisheteroallo normativity.

the way that DanAndPhilCRAFTS - Slime presents imagery from the tarot's devil card is unequivocally, undeniably queer and in opposition to oppressive structures. the way this film expresses ideas is incredibly coherent, and the nod to tarot serves it so well to that end!

thank you for coming to my fucking ted talk.

and thank you to @danandphilandthedevil, @dnphobe, and @yonpote for hanging out with me on discord and contributing feedback as i wrote the first... half? of this.

[empty-parking-spaces]

You ever been doing something completely different and entirely unrelated, and suddenly one of those "hold on what the fuck" memory connections pop into your head?

My mom had a remarkable gift for often unintentionally saying something rude or uncalled for, without even noticing it. As kids we were told to "not care about what people think", so I always figured that the way she would casually breeze past her own faux pas and ignored other adults' intentional mean and snide remarks was just her practicing what she preached - not caring that she insulted people, and not caring when people insulted her. In hindsight, I've started to put together that she may not have been pretending because she was brave, she just genuinely didn't notice when people were mean to her on purpose.

They were married for 20 years, and there's a good chance that mom wasn't just in denial about it. It may be that she just genuinely never noticed that dad hated her.

[empty-parking-spaces]

not to be controversial bc I know this is like…not in line with shifting opinions on fanfic comment culture but if there’s a glaring typo in my work I will NOT be offended by pointing it out. if ao3 fucks up the formatting…I will also not be offended by having this pointed out…

‘looking forward to the next update’ and ‘I hope you update soon!’ are different vibes than a demand, and should be read in good faith because a reader is finding their way to tell you how much they love it. I will not be mad at this.

‘I don’t usually like this ship but this fic made me feel something’ is also incredibly high praise. I’m not going to get mad at this.

even ‘I love this fic but I’m curious about why you made [x] choice’ is just another way a reader is engaging in and putting thought into your work.

I just feel like a lot of authors take any comment that’s not perfectly articulated glowing praise in the exact manner they’re hoping to receive it in bad faith.

fic engagement has been dropping across the board over the last several years, and yes it’s frustrating but it isn’t as though I can’t see how it happens. comment anxiety can be a real thing. the last thing anyone wants to do is offend an author they love, and that means sometimes people default to silence.

idk where I’m going with this I guess aside from saying unless a comment is outright attacking me I’m never going to get mad at it, and I think a lot of authors should feel the same way. ESPECIALLY TYPOS PLZ GOD POINT OUT MY TYPOS.

[empty-parking-spaces]

White USAmerican voice: global southerners are so mean 😭 don't they understand we deal with [thing that is also an issue in the global south]

[empty-parking-spaces]

Every country in green is a Federation. Even the Unitary countries in blue still have internal subdivisions. The US is not "50 countries in a trenchcoat", it is a federated state with 50 subdivisions. You're not unique.

[empty-parking-spaces]

1. A Primer for the Small Weird Loves - Richard Siken / 2. The Crane Wife - CJ Hauser / 3. Automat - Edward Hopper / 4. Red Doc> - Anne Carson / 5. Melancholy - Edvard Munch / 6. The Village (2004) / 7. So We Must Meet Apart - Gabrielle Bates and Jennifer S. Cheng

[empty-parking-spaces]

I got to hold a 500,000 year old hand axe at the museum today.

It's right-handed

I am right-handed

There are grooves for the thumb and knuckle to grip that fit my hand perfectly

I have calluses there from holding my stylus and pencils and the gardening tools.

There are sharper and blunter parts of the edge, for different types of cutting, as well as a point for piercing.

I know exactly how to use this to butcher a carcass.

A homo erectus made it

Some ancestor of mine, three species ago, made a tool that fits my hand perfectly, and that I still know how to use.

Who were you

A man? A woman? Did you even use those words?

Did you craft alone or were you with friends? Did you sing while you worked?

Did you find this stone yourself, or did you trade for it? Was it a gift?

Did you make it for yourself, or someone else, or does the distinction of personal property not really apply here?

Who were you?

What would you think today, seeing your descendant hold your tool and sob because it fits her hands as well?

What about your other descendant, the docent and caretaker of your tool, holding her hands under it the way you hold your hands under your baby's head when a stranger holds them.

Is it bizarre to you, that your most utilitarian object is now revered as holy?

Or has it always been divine?

Or is the divine in how I am watching videos on how to knap stone made by your other descendants, learning by example the way you did?

Tomorrow morning I am going to the local riverbed in search of the appropriate stones, and I will follow your example.

The first blood spilled on it will almost certainly be my own, as I learn the textures and rhythm of how it's done.

Did you have cuss words back then? Gods to blaspheme when the rock slips and you almost take your thumbnail off instead? Or did you just scream?

I'm not religious.

But if spilling my own blood to connect with a stranger who shared it isn't partaking in the divine

I don't know what is.

[empty-parking-spaces]

you do not miss them btw. you miss the version of them you created in your head to which they never lived up to

[empty-parking-spaces]

Every time i purchase a moderately expensive item the Karl Marx on my shoulder is like "For shame... you purchase yet another pair of jeans when you have 5 already at home, you despicable commodity fetishist? In my time, a man with five outfits would consider himself blessed beyond measure, and yet you want for more, while there are children starving in the world??" to which the second Karl Marx on my other shoulder says "Objection! Those 5 pairs of jeans all wildly uncomfortable or have holes in the ass, due to the decline of clothing quality driven by the fast fashion industry, unfortunately making this purchase a necessity... Plus, by purchasing a slightly more expensive pair of jeans from an independent brand, seeking quality over 'brand recognition', they are deliberately trying to avoid engaging in conspicuous consumption!" to which the third Karl Marx clinging to my back like that beetle from Doctor Who says "Remember, my friend; the less you eat, drink, buy books, go to the theatre or to balls, or to the pub, and the less you think, love, theorize, sing, paint, fence, etc., the more you will be able to save and the greater will become your treasure which neither moth nor rust will corrupt — your capital. Buy the jeans," to which I say "I don't know if any of you have actually read Karl Marx"

[empty-parking-spaces]

Having a traumatic childhood means you cannot talk even objectively about your basic foundational experiences without it being "venting", even if you're not actually venting. You just straight up have a huge chunk of your life you can't talk about, full stop, without it being trauma dumping.

And it not being socially acceptable to talk about your own childhood is super alienating. Sometimes people want to know why, and any answer you can give them is going to be off putting.

It's to the point I get irritated when something I said is framed as venting when I'm literally just talking about my life experiences, doing my best to keep emotion out of it.

[empty-parking-spaces]

Leather jackets are cool okay 🥺

also Dick has unknowingly opened the door to little birds stealing his clothes from him lol. It's a love language 😌

Inspired by ↓↓

that time Discowing wore a leather jacket:

and this precious panel of baby Jay:

[empty-parking-spaces]

[empty-parking-spaces]

― Albert Camus, Notebooks: 1935-1951

[empty-parking-spaces]

Original

[empty-parking-spaces]