extremercheese

[extremercheese]

SINNERS (2025) dir. Ryan Coogler

Johnny, rosin up your bow and play your fiddle hard 'Cause hell's broke loose in Georgia and the Devil deals the cards And if you win, you get this shiny fiddle made of gold But if you lose, the Devil gets your soul

[extremercheese]

Gender essentialism is still cringe if it is directed against cis people btw. Ive basically had someone say to me that cis people are biologically incapable of understanding less normalized gender identities because "their brains work differently". If anyone has this opinion please come forward now so i can block you thank you. The reason cis people dont understand gender in the same way trans people do is because trans people are naturally more exposed to the discussion about gender because we have to think about it a lot. Cis people, who have never doubted their identity, obviously dont think about it as much, if at all.

Cis people arent inherently more stupid than us, or less capable of talking about gender on a biological level. What would that even look like???

[extremercheese]

This is a friendly reminder that none disabled people often do benefit from the same accommodations disabled people benefit from.

[extremercheese]

Closest to you is hk&$2/

@tangerinedemon @artaelyn @midnightclover @lavender-town-radio (no pressure ^-^)

What vibes do i give off??

[extremercheese]

Your yearly reminder that polyamorous people are queer in every sense that matters.

Unsupported by government, unable to marry the people we love. Risking consequences if we come out within our family, if we come out at our work, in custody arguments against a non-polyamorous person because we are considered a danger or bad influence on children. A challenge to heteronormative conceptions of what love and relationships are meant to be.

Most polyamorous people are queer to start with, because once you start questioning heteronormativity, you start asking other questions about what a sexual or romantic or committed relationship should be. But that doesn't mean that polyamory isn't inherently queer in and of itself.

Please don't forget us in your queer positivity posts. Please don't forget us when you think about what queerness encompasses.

I've seen countless people, many who are fellow queers, talk shit about poly relationships because "they never last", as if most relationships last? As if most people don't have several exes? Meanwhile I'm sitting here in my stable triad polycule that.... in a couple years I will have been in this polycule for as long as I was outside of it (you know, when I was a child). It's an open polycule too, we've all had relationships outside of the triad and we're all still good and happy with each other. My triad has outlasted my heterosexual parents' marriage by many many years.

Stop being weird about poly people. We're exactly as queer as the rest of queer people, and we need you to recognize that.

[extremercheese]

Rewatched Goncharov (1973) and did a few studies of my favourite scenes

[extremercheese]

This seems to be what I've learned.

[extremercheese]

[extremercheese]

i have 2 main thoughts on the perceived hypocrisy of ppl cheering for bombing israel or whatever it is that the people who are "against suffering on both sides" will be critiquing at the current moment

the first is that there are some people who have a relatively principled anti-war or anti-violence stance. they simply do not like violence against civilians and don't find it justifiable, and they usually use international humanitarian law as their basis for what is and isn't acceptable. i respect that point of view and to a very strong extent i share it. i see people across the world with this stance btw, including friends in gaza, and they are usually either human rights lawyers, journalists, people who are exhausted by war and people who are just very kind. i respect and appreciate these people a lot. so i do mean it sincerely.

however, one of the other principles i have is i do not hold oppressed people to a higher standard than their oppressors. it doesn't matter what my personal opinion on something is, what matters is whether i have a right to express it or to critique a people with no other options. i don't like violence personally. but i am not going to mention that when i see people cheering for the elimination of their colonial oppressors. this is again why it is and continues to be important to understand colonial and imperial relationships, because the post-WWII human rights framework was meant to replace these relationships, and if it has not done so effectively then we must use anti-colonial strategy as a reference. and anti-colonial resistance is inherently violent because of colonial methods and violence, and because of the absence of international humanitarian law and its contemporary variations.

when the rule of law is restored, i'll talk in terms of human rights. but the absence of it was something the US is responsible for and all of us (the collective global south) really wanted and have warned against over and over again for the past two years. so no, i will not be holding any colonized people to a higher standard than their oppressors. given the extent of zionist atrocities, there is no situation in which palestinians will ever pass that threshold, because in order to do so they will need to fundamentally change the entire structure of the world. palestinians will never be capable of starving israeli children en masse or enforcing systemic, militarized occupation and in the event that they can do so then they will no longer be a colonized people but a formerly colonized people with substantial power of their own, in which case different moral and legal standards will apply.

the second thought i have is that human life has generally become cheap, and there is nobody more responsible for that than the US and its proxies. there was a perception that you could kill millions of people in the global south, from darfur to yemen to iraq, over the past two decades and that this would only cheapen the blood of people from the global south. and maybe on a geopolitical basis, it's true. but morally and ethically, people don't actually care anymore. and this is because mass death has been completely normalized. when israel says something like "why do you even care about 50,000 (incorrect number) palestinians being killed when half a million syrians were killed?" they don't understand that this applies to them too. it even applied on 9/11, and many americans thought this was the height of evil. but the truth is around the world nobody cares if a thousand americans or israelis are killed because thousands of people are killed to no consequence daily. for the past 76 years israelis thought killing palestinians constantly only makes palestinian blood cheap and israeli blood valuable. in reality it made everyone very cold to israeli suffering. i have met israelis who justify that as "of course the stronger side has less casualties" as though this is case-closed, reasonable logic. it is the law of the jungle, the justification of the jungle, and it should not be remotely surprising when it applies to you too.

the problem is when geopolitical calculations insist that cannot be the case against all logic. they insist that (some) american, israeli or ukrainian civilians do deserve the world to stop for them. when it's politically convenient, troops will amass in their memory and politicians will instantly tweet to condemn it. and this insistence becomes very polarizing and hostile. its why so many people are unsympathetic to ukrainians through no fault of their own, because they perceive that ukrainians were treated as though their life has greater value than the average person, and they have no sympathy for it. this is entirely due to the US's position on ukraine in exception to the rest of the world. but if you point out that hundreds of thousands of people were killed with no NATO alignment or EU refugee fast track, it gets called "oppression olympics" (a term i detest). if you point out that there is a fundamental racism to it, you get accused of monstrous dehumanization. but like. that's the world you built. when you let people die anywhere without consequence, it cheapens human life for everyone. and the forced valuation of some life more than others, to insist that some lives could not have been cheapened the way these others were cheapened, creates a very ugly dynamic that we see now across the world. i agree that it's ugly and it's bleak. but you made the sandwich.

[extremercheese]

throws sketches at u and disappears for months* made these while watching secret of the mimic lestplay WOOO

[extremercheese]

So... the secret

[extremercheese]

“if you’re sensitive to sounds when sleeping, just use earplugs!” i cannot stress enough that the sensory feeling of having my ears fully blocked AND now being able to hear my own heartbeat and breathing and every other sound that’s happening inside my own body is a million times worse than whatever ambient noise may be keeping me awake

[extremercheese]

Me lying down: I feel pretty much fine. What am I doing lying around? I should get up and do something. Or at least sit upright, damn.

Me when I’m upright: oh, Jesus. Oh, damn. Oh, RIGHT—this is why I was lying down.

[extremercheese]

Every time I hear people talk about satanic imagery or satanic propaganda I think about that tweet that was like, some people view Satan as a video game villain where he gets stronger the more people worship him

[extremercheese]

[extremercheese]

[extremercheese]

I DID IT

We all know the meme

Well, I went digging further and found the backstory.

–

It all starts in highschool (or early college)

(for time sake we’ll call blue shirt, girl 1 and the other girl, girl 2.)

Girl one begins to grow feelings for girl two.

She get jealous of the man and decides to become best friends with girl 2

soon girl two grows feeling for girl one

Soon, the time of the meme takes place

She finds out that he cheated on her by finding messages on his phone