#HOWEVER this does not mean straight women deserve the misogyny they face

[hneycmb]

If I see one more of you guys take a clear case of blatant misogyny and dismiss it as "heterosexual bullshit" as if both parties are to blame I am going to start biting ppl

[wolf-queer-discourse]

Adventures in Aphobia #1

So I was scrolling through Tumblr the other day (a regrettable mistake as always), and I had the great pleasure of seeing this joyous post.

*deep breath*

Not gonna lie, posts like this make me real pissed. Pissed because the person who posted this exists in a space where they feel comfortable enough to post this online. Pissed because these posts are so common and often face little backlash. And pissed because there’s nothing better than allosexuals condescendingly explaining to asexual people why they’re dirty attention whores who invent their own oppression. Ace people deserve to be defended against this horseshit. Young people see these posts, and it’s extremely damaging to have your identity be nothing more than fuel for people in discourse to mock you and demand you bled in order for them to notice your pain.

Anger aside, many people do not see why this post is wrong, so why is it? Let’s unpack this clusterfuck of bigotry:

“would love to see substantive evidence of systematic “aphobia” that isn’t actually just misogyny, toxic masculinity, or rpe culture.”

God damn, we are not mincing our words here XD. A few things: systematic in bold, which tells you if you do not make a blood sacrifice on the altar of queer pain you will not be taken seriously. Potential nitpick, but systemic and systematic are not the same thing. I believe systemic is the word they’re looking for. Systematic implies a lot more intentionality that can be hard to prove. Systemic merely means that systems, in their current state, do aphobic things, which they absolutely do.

“Aphobia” in quotes is absolutely rich. Not only will this person refuse to acknowledge systemic aphobia, which is only one type, but this poster casts clear doubt upon the mere concept of aphobia in and of itself. We love to see it.

There’s a lot to unpack here. The statement, as clearly condescending as intended, is sort of correct, though it doesn’t mean a whole lot. Systemic oppression is about the systems in a society (government, healthcare, etc) discriminating against people. Systemic oppression is not bigotry faced on a person-to-person level. In short, systematic oppression is something a person experiences in their overall life, while personal discrimination is experienced on a personal level by people who are not singularly in control of the systems. This post boils down the negative comments ace people face into being called “weird”, which is an understatement for sure, but calling a gay person weird isn’t systemic oppression either.

It’s still bad and discriminatory.

This is such a snotty way to dismiss aphobia as some mere, insignificant comment with no meaning as if it doesn’t reinforce society’s painful aphobic views in the same way casual homophobic comments reinforce heteronormativity and society’s hostility toward gay people.

Ace people face discrimination in healthcare, most notably, which is systemic discrimination, but the systemic discrimination of asexuals really ought to be its own post if I’m to nosedive into it. Even if ace people faced no systemic discrimination, it wouldn’t make this point anymore correct. Discrimination is a perfectly valid reason to feel disregarded by society, and often only ace people are denied the right to feel this way and are instead gaslit into admitting what they face is no big deal and they’re just making it up for attention.

The experience of being pressured to have sex when you’re allo vs ace is very different. The vast majority of allo people do not plan to be celibate their whole lives. Many ace people do not want to have sex, ever. “Waiting for sex” in much of western society and in Christianity is seen as pure and honorable. Yet being asexual and never wanting sex is seen as a deviant disorder and people are accused of robbing their partner of sex forever.

There’s really a specific flavor of sexual pressure that is unique to ace people. Sex being to “fix” someone or because they “just need to try it”.

In this respect, aphobic sexual pressure is better compared to that faced by gay people and lesbians. Lesbians especially often can face this same struggle, men pressuring them to have sex because they think lesbians just need to “try it” or to “fix them”. I can imagine this poster would have no issue acknowledging lesbophobia being the root of lesbians coerced into sex with men, yet she does not give ace people the same.

Imagine if someone said (and knowing our fucked world, someone probably has): “Lesbophobia doesn’t exist. It’s just misogyny. Straight women are coerced into sex too!”

It’d be pathetic bullshit. Toxic masculinity, misogyny and many other issues can all tangle into combined messes with other forms of bigotry. Lesbophobia is an experience that deserves to be recognized apart from misogyny, even if the two are linked. Please stop erasing ace people’s experiences with this when it’s not the same thing.

Honestly, though, this post, as trashy as it is, if anything, is perhaps, really asking: Is there any type of aphobic experience that’s inherently exclusive to ace people?

I still wager to go say, yes, yes there is, but I must make an important point first:

Most experiences of queer discrimination are not limited to queer people.

Homophobia and transphobia are both experienced by cishets in certain instances. Feminine straight men can be victims of homophobic harassment. This does not disprove the fact that it’s homophobia just because a straight man is the victim of it. A tall cis woman with broad shoulders and a lower voice may be the victim of transphobic remarks or comments. The basis of these comments is rooted in transphobia, however, so the fact that the victim is cis does not erase the transphobia.

People who argue that experiences ace people complain about can be experienced by allosexuals are not poking a legitimate hole in doing this. Certain experiences related to aphobia can and are experienced by allosexuals. If you do not acknowledge this, then homophobia and transphobia aren’t real because cishet people have sometimes experienced them.

Despite cishets sometimes experiencing queerphobia, most of us acknowledge that their experience of that bigotry, however unfortunate, is not the same as that experienced by actual queer people. It’d be quite homophobic for a feminine straight man to claim he knew just as much about the gay experience as an actual gay man. Similarly, when allosexual people relate experiences that were rooted in aphobia, it’s overstepping a line when they claim asexual discrimination isn’t real because they experienced elements of it too.

Cishet (cishet including allosexuals) people do not experience their doctors telling them their sexuality might be a disorder or caused by trauma. Allo queer people can experience this with their sexualities too.

“using sex appeal to sell products is misogyny, it is not engineered to gross sex-repulsed people, it is meant to objectify women.”

This is a strawman thinner than my last nerve. Uh, what? What ace people are you seeing that literally think sex appeal was engineered to gross-out sex-repulsed people?? I don’t think this is a core argument??

Yes, sex-repulsed ace people sometimes complain about sex appeal in media being uncomfortable. But that’s it. Every time an ace person shares a discomfort of theirs doesn’t mean it’s the entire basis of their oppression. For the love of God, let ace people discuss their experiences without being blow-torched over not being oppressed enough with an individual discomfort. 

BONUS ROUND

(This was in the tags)

“Completely vilifies celibate individuals” 

...no…? What…? Huh…? 

The most charitable interpretation of this vague accusation is that the poster means celibate people face aphobia as well, due to not wanting to have sex. I have no idea how this “vilifies” anyone, but that aside, as said before: people who are not queer can face aphobia. Also worth noting that society treats celibate people way better than ace people, which is really another example of aphobia. Celibate people can be told they’re missing out (which could be at very least related to aphobic ideals), but they’re rarely called broken. Celibacy is seen more as a respected, controlled ideal in allo people, but when ace people want to do it, they’re just mentally ill.

Anyway, the post was aphobic trash, and it needs to be debunked more often. Mocking ace people online is not a good look anymore, guys. Don't be ugly.

[girlsbtrs]

Patriarchy and Pop Punk

Written by Theresa Cambe. Graphic by James N Grey

Yes, misogyny exists in almost every genre of music. Rap and country are usually at the forefront of this conversation, however, today we’re going to dive into the misogyny in pop punk. Lets face it, the misogyny is just covered up with layers of nice-guy, sad boy introspection but deserves the criticism just like everyone else. Just because a man holding a guitar gets vulnerable for a second, it doesn’t mean he is exempt from possessing misogynistic tendencies.

Despite the sexism built into this genre, I am more than guilty of partaking in my fair share of pop punk music. I would try to be at every State Champs, Neck Deep, Real Friends, The Story So Far, and every band of the sorts in between, concerts in Southern California between the ages of 14-16. I finger pointed and yelled those angsty lyrics right back at the bands while crowd surfing towards the stage in whatever sweaty venue in LA they happened to be playing at the time. I bought the merch, I hung their posters up in my room, I reblogged their concert pictures on Tumblr, I was about it. And trust me, “No Good” by Knuckle Puck could come on shuffle again and have me passionately screaming the lyrics while driving alone in my car around my god forsaken hometown (but I love my hometown, contrary to the popular sentiment). However now, I am more conscious of its problems.

I think this is the case for many other non-male enjoyers of this music when they also recognize its misogyny. Of course, there is nothing wrong with enjoying pop punk nor do I think enjoying this music makes you a bad person or inherently anti-feminist. A good portion of the demographic for these bands are women. With this large and important part of the fan base, we should start considering the safety of the environments and attitudes they create.

The attitude of misogyny and objectification is built into the foundation of pop punk. It is apparent in whichever “wave” of pop punk you want to point to. Early Blink 182 and All Time Low music videos had women in them to be silent sexual objects parading around the rock star band. There’s Weezer’s infamous sexist, nerd-rock anthems. “Thank God for Girls” sings “Called upon to employ your testosterone / In a battle for supremacy and access to females glued to the TV”. In a Genius lyric annotation of the song, lead singer of the band, Rivers Cuomo himself wrote “I’m so jealous of the hooker-uppers. Seems like it’s so easy to get laid now. All these good looking athletic guys are getting so much free sex. It kills me. Such a bummer. Such a bummer. To be evaluated by women. To be graded. To be rated. Where do I stand? How big? How strong? How enduring? How energetic? How inventive? So sad that it comes to this. So sad. It IS a competition and I AM being compared”. It is really quite ironic that Cuomo writes this but in the same breath has lyrics “The thing I finally found with these other girls in town / She got hot, and they did not” from the song “The Girl Got Hot” and also “You come like a dog when I ring your bell / I got the money and I got the fame / You got the hots to ride on my plane” from the song “The Greatest Man That Ever Lived”. Then there’s also every song on the album Pinkerton that we don’t have time to get into. Even if this self-deprecating behavior is no surprise from Cuomo, it’s concerning and rooted in some serious hate. If you want to argue that it's all satire, they’re still weird thoughts to have.

I can go on about these recurring lyrical themes. For example, there is The Story So Far’s song “Roam” with the lyrics “I know where you’ve been, you’re ruining men, never again will I let someone in”. And the classic from “Mt Diablo” that sings “Do you look at yourself straight in the eyes and think about who you let between your thighs?”. Then there’s FIDLAR’s song “Whore” which as we can expect from the title, says “Why did you go betray me? / You’re such a whore”. Then there’s the mess of “Me vs. Maradona vs. Elvis'' by the band Brand New, which writes “I got desperate desires and unadmirable plans / My tongue will taste of gin and malicious intent / Bring you back to the bar / Get you out of the cold / My sober straight face gets you out of your clothes.” Look into any corner of pop punk and you’ll find these questionable attitudes, but I digress.

These men play the nice guys and aim at making you believe he is the protagonist in every situation. The commonality between all these artists is that they obsess and fantasize over a girl then turn completely sour once rejects them or leaves a relationship. They want a “cool girl” to listen to underground music and really comfort their sad, misunderstood selves but won’t allow them to make a decision outside of his own benefit. Because god forbid these women have their own thoughts and exercise their own actions! Their fantasy is essentially a manic pixie dream girl that doesn’t speak or act out against anything. These men beg to be at the center, and get aggressive when they aren’t.

This is not to be confused with writing a sad song after you got broken up with or hurt by someone in a relationship. This is also not to say that all women are exempt from having toxic behaviors or from being written about. The guise of the patriarchy also harms those it seeks to benefit and therefore enforces rules of masculinity that restricts men from expressing their frustrations and emotions. I believe that writing music about unrequited love or difficult feelings is a healthy way to combat these roles. However, there is a major difference between processing rejection and hating women for rejecting you, which is an area many of these men seem to blur together.

I still have love for these bands and this genre. I can still go to their shows and have the time of my life, easily. But it wasn’t until I got a little older and more realized with my femininity did I revisit these songs and wake up to the fact that it might have not always been in my favor . I was probably too young to notice or care and was distracted by the catchy, yelly tone and how fun it was to jump around to that I never really sat with what some of the lyrics really meant. It was a major factor in my own internalized misogyny back when I was in the throes of it all. I didn’t want to be like those awful girls that these pop punk dudes kept singing about. They were always described in such a terrible way, that all they do is betray and backstab people. They wanted a “cool girl” to understand them and not be like them. So I rejected femininity and disliked other girls as if I’m in this sort of competition for the sad band dude’s attention. I was idolizing these men whose music mainly centered around their disdain for the women they had experiences with so much that it stuck in my brain that I shouldn’t be like them, that I should be appeasing these people I look up to. But I’ve grown to realize that I was only hearing one side of the story. It was a straight white man’s voice constantly, no one else. This one sided narrative created a false perception of reality, one rooted in a sad boy victim complex, that women are the enemy that shouldn’t be trusted because they couldn’t fit the weird male fantasy these dudes possess. Rarely are women represented in this music except through the lens of a man, which as we saw is almost always disdainful or as a character rather than a fully realized and autonomous person. Women are portrayed as commodities to obtain. It alters our perception of reality.

But with most things you love, you want to see them get better. This music has a fond place in my heart and signifies a really fun time in my life where I found my love for music and concerts. But the genre and the spaces it creates has its own set of problems that I want to see improve.

We have to realize that music has a greater impact on culture. The attitudes that create the genre of pop punk affects the audience that consumes it. The one-sided narrative they build implants harmful ideas about relationships and dynamics into their young fans, as it did to me. Regardless if you want to say lyrics are just lyrics and are meant not to be taken so seriously, artists have so much influence on their fans. They are perpetuating the nice guy narrative that men are owed something from women. And sometimes we unfortunately see this point of view reflected in these band member’s actions. The accusations against them for sexual assault, grooming, and manipulation of young girls runs rampant in these spaces and remains to do so. They abuse their positions of power and influence. Using self-pity in songs does not excuse the shitty things you do.

[yovelknell]

Asexuality & LGBT: Adding New Axes of Oppression

Before I begin, I want to emphasize that although I hold a different opinion on ace discourse, it genuinely does not mean I hate asexuality or want to hurt aces. I recognize their validity and the importance of ace-related activism related to sexual autonomy. I think it is valuable to have ace voices involved in conversations on the breadth of human sexual experiences.

However, this does not mean that asexuality is systemically oppressed. There are no laws, sanctions, or practices that condemn asexuality. Individually, there is prejudice against it, which can lead to awful violence and shaming. But this is due to misogyny and homophobia and how it shapes our societal understanding of sexuality.

It is true: there are gender roles tied to intensity of sexuality. Men must be sexual. Women must be sexual for men and not for themselves. So, asexuality could be considered gender nonconforming in the same ways that transness and gayness have historically?

No. These “oppressions” that asexuals face do not applying equally in the ways that real oppressions do. Gay men are not hurt more if they do not want or have sex. If anything, they would be better tolerated since the physical affections they express are the most hated. Straight men, though, are stigmatized for not being sexually aggressive enough. However, their individual experiences are rooted in the misogyny they should enact on women and the gayness they should avoid. Would we include the cishet men and exclude the gay cis men? Or rather, include both but insist that the gay men defer to the cishet on matters of sexual attraction?

Or, could we acknowledge that cis gay men are harmed by the sexual expectations that the ace community tends to uphold as allosexual privilege? That gay men are not praised for their sexual attraction to other men but instead reviled and excluded from spaces? We must acknowledge that a proposed axis of oppression that does not hurt all who are subject to it is not an oppression at all. It may be a prejudice. It may be the after effect of another oppression, expressed in multifaceted ways. But it is not on par with other modes of sexuality-based oppression when it does not function in the necessary ways. When definitionally, it is incongruent.

In this way, asexuality is not gender nonconforming like transness or gayness at all. It is, instead, an identity useful for sexual definition. It’s members can be sexually oppressed in a myriad of ways, each that deserves sympathy and support. But not for their asexuality.

For those hypersexualized by society, it can be a reprieve, a space to deconstruct harmful expectations. For those denied sexuality at all, it could be a danger. An asexual community that understands and respects the infantilization of autistic, disabled, nonbinary, and transmasculine people as well as gays, lesbians, and poc denied sexual autonomy is needed. It is one that can safely interact and coexist with the LGBT community.

Note “coexist” — Not include. Through a series of violent events, harmful laws, and long history of death and suffering, LGBT formed. It was not formed based on misogyny, although some members experienced it. It was not formed on your intensity of sexual attraction. It was created over time as a response against policy brutality and punishment for gender nonconformity. There was a time where trans and gay people were considered two sides of the same coin in the worst way. We were both classified medically as sexual inverts. Gay men were trying to act as women by being with men. Gay women were the opposite. And trans women were seen as merely gay men. Where do asexuals fit? It’s nonsensical to input them where they were not. The term “asexual” was used but not in the ways that it is today. And even so, even if it were, it does not change our current reality.

In closing, I want to add more nuance to my goal. It is not to discredit, shame, or disregard asexuality as a community or a tool. For some, it is a space of comfort and belonging, and I would not take it away from them. I would ask that cishet aces and aros respect the boundaries between the LGBT and ace/aro community. I know there are differing opinions from each community, so I won’t claim to speak for the whole LGBT side. And I can’t stop asexuals from including themselves in the LGBT community and convincing others to do the same online or offline. Further, I recognize that including asexuality on a pride post is not the same as including it among our understanding of oppressions.

However, I would ask you to consider what your goals are? General inclusion and support are wonderful. But we must consider the other negative side effects that may result from some ace rhetoric. Why would you instill unnecessary (or at least inaccurate) fears into asexuals? Why must they expect to be medically or sexually abused for their asexuality when they will not be? This misinformation disempowers them from exploring resources related to the true cause(s), such as misogyny, racism, ableism and more. What do you gain from muddling the waters around what real oppression is like?

Why not simply create a separate space for this inclusion of divergent sexual lifestyles, for whatever intensity or situational factors they entail? The LGBT community is not the only validating space, especially when membership comes a such a high price of violence and mortality. Do not align yourself to communities that do not serve you, whose goals do not for your own. All of this discourse has been the result. I would rather we focus inward on intracommunity biphobia, transphobia, transmisogyny, and lesbophobia and outward on laws, marriage, domestic violence, murder, sexual violence and more. Issues that affect our material existence.

[monkey-network]

Who is Best Girl in Konosuba?

Welcome back, fellow weebs, to Media & Entertainment Developers Essentials Lessons Book. Today on MEDELB, we’re discussing the question that existed since one of the most disastrous years in the 21st century, 2017. A question that dives into one the greatest anime of all time. Yes, even better than Dragon Ball Z, Cowboy Bebop, and Steven Universe. I am talking about KonoSuba: God's Blessing on this Wonderful World! Today we’re discussing: who is best girl? Aqua? Darkness? Megumin? Your father?

Now it’s important to know that KonoSuba is genius because it supports judicial simplication, a professional term that I can break down for you. Judicational Sampling is the idea that a free society does not impinge on the actual taxing benefits of localized source banks. KonoSuba is genius because it made a lot of money... to make more KonoSuba. It is not Disney, whom is the greatest bottom in the Hollywood industry, but in truth I wouldn’t want it to be. Sometimes, genius is fine where it is and you shouldn’t question it. There are people who question why KonoSuba originated as a light novel, and those people are to be shunned because they also believe Harry Potter is worth reading, straight people are bad, and that ranch dressing is good on pizza. You know, the alt-right and we have enough problems on our hands as it is. And as the great Joe Biden once said,

But today’s focus will be on discussing on who is best girl and how that affects our society. And if you are one of the people unaware of this discussion, then perhaps you should realize that any comments you have contradict themselves and function as your self-righteous wannabe soapbox. In short, you’re acting like a su crit, so please read history. Because ultimately, I am a proud KonoSuba kinnie and member of the intellectual anime community founded by the General Rebecca Sugar. I would appreciate it if you would recognize the context and respect. It. Because ultimately again, I sent you all a respectful anon about this earlier today which you ignore and this sounds, smell, looks, feels, tastes... like Racism. But back to KonoSuba, let us discuss Megumin.

Now, Megumin is a good person. She can create explosions which are big.... explosions, this represents her pride. She wears red which is the color of your blood, so that could mean satanic blood pacts. Megumin represents the resolve in critical deductive intelligent smart reasoning where blind subservience has been... eradicated. But what is blind, subservience? For a simple understanding, think of it as the cooked Molotov of slice of life shows or some other perceptively anodyne prosaic internationalized statement.

Overall, Megumin is a short person so choosing her as best girl is pedophilia and if you try to tell me otherwise, you are a nazi troll and deserve the chamber. And if you agree with me, don’t speak if you’re Afro-American like myself. Because this is just a cartoon for kids and you’re complaining too much about it. Or am I?

Next, we have Darkness, which is a force parallel to light and is also used in the form of attacks in the Kingdom Hearts universe. Those who follow the path of Darkness will usually gain untold power at the expense of something of their former selves, so this naturally explains why she is an explicit masochist. Then again, her real name is Lalatina Dustiness Ford which explains a lot more. We continue asking who she is, and what she is, but nobody is asking how Darkness is. Because looking like the poster child for Aryan superiority with her blonde hair and blue eyes, she isn’t capable of being best girl because that would mean the guillotine for you and I love you too much to not let that happen. She is overall the better character for inventing good things like the dominatrix, but she cannot be best girl because she is a good character and supports capitalism. I too support capitalism but I hate people who think capitalism is alright, if that makes sense.

Aqua is a better contender for best girl because I was fortunate enough to see less porn of her. Kazuma notably has called her worthless, but Kazuma is what internet users would call an braincel. He played video games, so obviously he isn’t one to be speaking on value. Aqua was able to survive getting vored by a frog multiple times, so clearly she is more cunning than the average E-girl. Aqua is able to make the most of her situation and entertain people with watersports.... and tricks. Kingdoms Hearts wishes it had a character named Aqua as cool as this one, but then again, you’d have to wait 4 more years for KH4 so what life would you have? She is mostly blue, which is a color, and I prefer it when anime has color. If it doesn’t, it’s racist. As the wise Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez once said this last November, 

This Disproves Objective Analysis.

She represents the element of the holy flood thesis joining the narrative tripling in subsequent disagreement that there any factual basis to the truth that Kazuma is wrong but because there’s simple authentic observation there is no objective truth. Plus she cries a lot, and if there’s anything I learned from Steven Universe, it’s that if you cry good enough, you can topple entire totalitarian empires. Except for General Rebecca Sugar, because she can smell your fear and absorb it accordingly. She is basically the Mother Teresa of animation. Again, great contender. But we have to consider the others so let’s move on.

Next, we have Wiz. 

...

...

Next, we have Sylvia from their first and latest movie. It’s as they say, if it is new, it is better. I believe Sylvia is more than the sum of their parts, they are caring and charismatic and can turn into a powerful creature. None of the other characters can turn into a powerful creature, and that is why they possess internalized misogyny. The slimy veneer of quasi empiricism can be a very disgusting tool for nefariously slipping in one’s own rotten viewpoint or value. One that you know might otherwise be c̷h̵a̷l̸l̸e̴n̴g̴e̸d̴ ̵a̸s̴ ̸r̵i̷t̸u̵a̷l̵i̴s̵t̷i̴c̵a̷l̶l̵y̶ ̶s̷u̸p̸e̸r̶l̴a̷t̴i̶v̵e̸ ̵o̶r̸ ̷p̶e̵r̵h̷a̵p̵s̵ ̷y̵o̴u̸ ̸t̵h̴i̴n̸k̵ ̷t̴h̶a̶t̶ ̶w̷͍͍̠͉͚̦̦͛̔̓͗̏ā̵̛̬̜̂͋ṙ̸̨̐̌̈̅ ̸̦͔̣̮͔͋̊̑̕i̷̛͎̽̅́͑s̴̠̩̟̝͙̍̏̀͌̑̕ ̷͚͔̦̜̜͊̾̽͊͂j̸̡̨̣̙̮̓͘ų̵̣͚̹̱̐͌̎̑̈̎̆s̶̢͚̺͉̰͂̄̉̾͑ț̵̤̭͔̲̲̮̀͒̏̐̓ ̵̡̙̟̖͐́͋͝p̷̙̳̣̫͍̬͗̽͒̀e̸̻̯̽̆̇́͑͒a̵̡̞̣̫̫̯̰̿͛̅̄̅͂c̷̀͐̊͗͝ͅē̵̠͕̫̙ ̶̻̼̳͑̓̈́̿͐ŵ̷̼̝̣͇̞̞̺̍͋i̸̠͓̪̣̜͍̘͊͂̀̄t̸̟̣͉̼͑̒͜h̵̥̗̲̩̑̏́͜ ̵̡̠͉̝̾̆̌̇͐e̷̢̨̼̺͖̒̈́̃̃̆x̸̟̟͂́̄̍͛́̄t̴͖̣̼̫͇͐͋̆̽̎̚r̷͎̙̯͈͉̲̚a̵̩͎̥̺̮͂̀̃̚ ̸̠̜̣̥̜͍̠̌ṡ̴̢̡̐̽̅̃̇ͅt̴̖̣̹͙̙̼̟̔̐̚͝͝ĕ̵͔͍̤̼̂͌̐̑p̸̡̹̪̻͔̬͕̃̚s̸̫̙̈͛̉̋̉͝ ̶͔͚̽͝y̸̨̘͎̠͕̺̽̉̃o̶̜̥̺͔͑̏ͅu̵̓͜ ̴̨̦͉̀̊͊̓̌̃f̶̢̮̱̳̖̟̼̰͒̊̈͜i̸̯̼̫̩͚̇̉l̸̢̢̯̗̠̪̹͈͎͚̬̭̮̣̬̿̈́̍͘t̸͕͕̮̻̭̰̬͎̻̰̬̙̟̀́̍̋h̷̡̡͎͙̘̩̞̤̰̳͖͙̺͈̅̓͆ͅy̴̡̢̳̤̮̘̻͚̲̪̳̭̗̙͈̽́̔̄̓͊̅̍̓͗͑̓̈̿͝,̵̛͙͚̒͐̍̅̓͗͌̕ ̷̢̡͚̮̜͚͈̖̥̳̹̦̙͈̄́́͛̈́̈́ͅt̸̛̼̯̯̠̰͓̩͍̺̊̽̔͂͑̕ë̵̢̖͕̰͕̜̹̰̫͙̣̩͈́͐͐̿̆̽͌̓̀͐̊̑̀̆͗̕͜ͅͅs̴̢̡̜̯̀͋͛͒͐̌̓̕t̸̠̳̱̙̃̓̽̈̔͗̏̋̓̈̏ ̷̧̧̤͉̦̲̜͔̫̤̯́̽͊̕̚t̸̘̲̼̜̱̿̿͑̽́̈́͋̔͘u̶͍̞̜͛͜b̸̛̯̙̼̜͙̏̓̄̽͆̏͘͝ẹ̷̛̉̑̂ ̵̡̡̞͓̱̤̞̫͛̎̆͘͝b̸̡̡̟̫̱́̔̓̋͗̃̊ǫ̶͍͕̼̥̳͕͖̥͈̼̳̎̒͋ͅŕ̶̢̨̧̛̞̝̰̠͍̥̓͛͗͛̃̏̂ņ̷͔̞̜̟̱̮͍͎̹̬̠̰̳̌͠͝,̸̙͕͓̟̥̜͛ ̶̛͓͊̉̑̍̀̿̽̅̓̂͝͝a̷̧͕͎̜̮̟͚̮̦̜̝̺̿̈́̍̀͂̔͝ņ̴̛̰̮̟̤̭̘̲̠̹̲̟̎̉͂̃̈́̅̂͒͑͠͝ͅͅṱ̶̛̥̘̬̖̳̤͈̟̫̻̘̻̅́̿̓͂̒͂̓̏̐̔̈́̊̊͜į̷̧̱͚̱͉̲̺̬͕̙̀̅̔̆-̷̫͈̳̩͔̠͕͖̹̲̓͊̂̅̈́̔̈́̔̍̎̒̇͌́̃͘͜͜S̶̘̻̱͖̗̠̩̥̝̺̻͕̪̯̊͒͆̽͐́̀͠͝ͅJ̸̨̝̲̬͕͈̘̞̠̱͖̮̒͑̈́̎̃̄̍̃̚͘̚͝ͅͅẂ̸̡̖͉̞͍̙̲͈͈̜̼̪̯̱͇͉̋́͋̎́͗̿̋̈́͂̈́̽̉̚ ̴̣͓̼̟̼̬̙̜͈̰̼̼̖̣̆̅̋̽̕͝͠C̷̙͉̭̜̭̞̝̲̳̰̊̓̃͝E̵̤̟̮͠N̵̨̢̼̱̺̭̦̟̳̪̻̘̿͛̀͜ͅT̸̹͚̆͆͐̊̀̏͑̓̈͝ͅR̸̛̮̲͇̼̻͇̹̙̞̤͎̗̾̊̈́͊͗̋͑̅̿̓̐̔̔͝͝ͅI̵̧̩͕̼̱͚͈̻͎̮̝̖̰̐̑͛̎̂̃̇̇̀̈́́̃̕͠S̶̞̘͔̈́̒̑͒́T!! But, Sylvia is dead, so as much as I wanted to consider, they can’t be best girl so we must move on. 

Next we have Yunyun. It is said that she “forms a rivalry with Megumin as an excuse to create a friendship.” Now we could call her a beta cuckquean, but that would imply you have a life outside a human being. As our current president once said, 

I’m never a Trump supporter myself, but this is wisdom I can kinda get behind regardless. Sure he ghost wrote this, but not all wisdom comes from the mouth. However, Yunyun represents the normalcy of KonoSuba, and as such could be a nice change of pace for those too dependent on the definitive waifu. She has big jiggly boobs, sure, but have you ever considered that her boobs have, personality? A lot of otakus and bronies have not been understanding this as of late, as I feel we’ve overlooked something far more important: Tactile anime feel. We can stare at breasts all we wish, but how realistic are her proportions? You can say it’s fiction all you want, and you’d be right, but if I’m envious that the fiction women have better boobs than mine, my opinion is now better than yours. What I’m getting at is that Yunyun is like a ghost, you try to find her, you search for them, and you look for them, and you try to find them, but you can’t find them, thus they are empty handed.

The last contender is Kazuma, who is the villain of KonoSuba because he doesn’t act like the typical isekai protagonist. He isn’t like Kirito from SAO who was almost involved in incest or Sonic the Hedgehog who believed stalking people is okay as long as you’re alone. As Luigi Mario once said, “It is common, but not too common.” He spits in the face of a critically stupid people because he believes in true gender equality. Those who don’t believe in this philosophy are mostly women, and that’s okay. He must clearly be best girl because he is asserted with the phrase “Give and take”. Most people complain about 11 hour Youtube videos, but they can hardly spend three hours overthrowing their bastardizing governments. Which is why Ligma is not running in the 2020 presidential election, because you keep putting your time in the wrong cubby hole. KonoSuba is a complicated anime, and Kazuma is the crux of that complication. So the sooner you can understand Kazuma, the more you’ll understand KonoSuba; that is why he’s considerably best girl. Otherwise, go play World of Warcraft like the mainstream loving psuedo-intellectual toesucking simp that you are.

To conclude, KonoSuba has a lot to think about for a smart people. Choosing best girl is not about finding your interest, it’s about avoiding callout culture because you have shit taste. If there’s enough controversy, I avoid it unless it can benefit me in the long and short term. Clearly Aqua is the choice for when you yourself have little to prove, Yunyun understandably for when you have nothing to gain, Kazuma for when you want to feel better about yourself. In any case, if you are not horny on main, you are probably the reason Trump got elected because you are yourself sexually fascistic. Sorry, I don’t make the rules and ergo this post was never made for you. Real, in-depth nitty gritty perspective, prescriptive criteria for denationalization context barriers are still alive on the internet. Ultimately, we must decide on whether or not this was all worth it. Simplicity is hard to strive for, but that is why people only use five percent of another’s argument. Or else we’re fans of the She-ra reboot, always over-complicating the idea that kinship will save the day in the end and thinking the creator didn’t copy the great works of famous Shark Tale actor Martin Scorsese. You know? Tankies. I myself have made a long post expressing this complicated issue, but then again, I am a chronophobe. I fear time and I would appreciate if you wouldn’t timeshame me, you potential ablest. So in truth, you choose who is best girl because you are valid. Not more than I but still.

Thank you for reading my post. If you liked this essay, please comment. It’s free. If you liked my paypal, please donate. It’s free. Sharing this would be highly appreciated. It’s free. Dollar Dash Share is offering a free shaving earbud for the first ten sign ups when you use the promo code, ‘MNKY’. Make sure to try out their Curiosity streaming service and use the 5000 silver to unlock new warriors or maps. Thank you for reading............ KonoSuba.

[cardentist]

the transmisandry “debate” and the attitude towards trans men is so transparently a retreading of literally every exclusionary movement of the last few decades and Yet it’s being perpetrated and tolerated by what otherwise should be inclusionist spaces because it’s once again being pointed at a more “acceptable” target

like, on some level I understand the gut reaction, the term itself is associated with a lot of negativity and “mens rights activists” and the like have made the idea of men specifically facing oppression for being men at best laughable and at worst a red flag for violent misogyny. it’s one of those things that a lot of people in left leaning spaces take for granted as being true across the board, something they don’t need to think about or examine. and to be clear “they” included me for quite some time, I do understand where the feeling comes from

but it’s not about oppression for being men, it’s oppression for being trans men, it’s transmisandry for the same reason that transmisogyny is transmisogyny. it’s a term specifically meant to cast a net over the broad array of experiences that people have specifically as trans men to give them an outlet to both examine their experiences in relation to the wider community of trans men and to specifically seek and give reassurance and solidarity to each other. 

the bigger problem with this argument is that many people will resort to denying what I’ve just said in order to reject the proposed term, whether it’s something they’d actually believe once they examined the situation in earnest or not. because people act as though acknowledging that trans men face oppression for being trans men will open up the floodgates leading to cis straight white men convincing people that they’re oppressed for being men. so trans men Can’t be oppressed for being trans men because trans men are men and men aren’t oppressed.

so leading from this line of thought what you’ll generally see is the argument that what trans men experience is “just” transphobia, and if you press the issue or bring up a personal example you’ll almost as commonly get that anything else is “just” “misdirected” misogyny. and just, there’s so So much to unpack there that I’m almost tempted to just leave it where it is, but ignoring the issue won’t make it go away and I wouldn’t be writing this post if I didn’t want the issue to change.

the point with, I think, the least baggage is one that I’ve already touched upon, that being that the experiences of trans men and trans women are just naturally going to be different from each other and it’s useful for both parties to have language to talk specifically about their experiences, in the same way that it’s useful to examine the differences between the experiences of binary and nonbinary trans people. it doesn’t matter who you think has it “worse” because this isn’t a competition to see who’s oppressed enough to Deserve having their experiences heard. the urge for trans men to make a term to describe their experiences isn’t some way to try to argue that they’re more oppressed, it’s born from the inherent need to be understood and to see that other people exist in the way that you have. it’s the solidarity that brought the trans community together in the first place

a point leading off of that with probably significantly more baggage is the idea that queer and lgbt+ spaces are a contest to measure your oppression in the first place. don’t get me wrong, it Is useful to recognize different axis’ of oppression, to recognize larger patterns of violence faced by specific groups of people at a disproportionate rate. it helps us, as an entire community, identify the most vulnerable groups of people so we can lean into helping them on both a systemic and individual level, so we can see whose voices need to be boosted so they can be heard both in and out of the community. and moreover having these numbers and experiences together can help people outside of the community see that it’s is a problem as well. 

however, the issue comes in when perceived theoretical oppression is used as a social capital to decide who is and is not allowed to be heard. I’m sure I’ve already lost the ace exclusionists ages ago by now, so that’s a perfect example. at it’s most extreme ace exclusionism is blatant bigotry and hatred justified with the excuse that they’re protecting the queer and lgbt+ community from privileged invaders, and even when in it’s milder form ace exclusionism is powered by the idea that asexual people don’t face oppression. marginalized people are denied resources, solidarity, safe spaces, and voices because they’re painted as not being oppressed or not being oppressed Enough. this wouldn’t be able to happen if your worth as a member of the lgbt+ community wasn’t measured by how oppressed your particular minority group is, if it didn’t have the sway that it has. creating a power structure in any way at all leaves people with the ability to exploit that structure, and the specific one that’s emerged within the queer community and leftist spaces in general allows people to exploit it while hiding it as moral, while hiding that they’re causing any pain at all. it’s the same frame of mind that’s made bullying cool in activist spaces 

another reason why this hierarchy tends to fail on an individual level is, of course, that the level of oppression that an entire group faces does not dictate someone’s lived experiences, which is an idea that goes both ways. the argument over whether or not asexuals are oppressed is ultimately a meaningless distraction from the lived experiences of asexual people. it is a Fact that asexuals face higher levels of rape and sexual assault than straight people, you can deny that what they’re facing counts as oppression specifically but what does that matter? there are people who are suffering and that suffering can be lessened by allowing those people into our community, shouldn’t that be enough? likewise, comparing the suffering of individual people as if they were the same as the suffering of their respective groups combined is absolutely absurd. someone who is murdered for being a trans man isn’t less dead than someone who was murdered for being a trans woman. a trans woman isn’t Guaranteed to have lived a harder life than any and every other trans man just because of a difference in statistics, and the same can be said for literally every other member of the lgbt+ and queer communities. other community members aren’t concepts, they aren’t numbers, they’re people with unique lives and sorrows and joy. neither you or I or anyone else is the culmination of our respective or joint communities and some people need to learn how to act like it.

again, there is Meaning in seeing how our oppression is different, it’s not inherently wrong, but creating a framework where it can be used to paint a group of people as both lesser within the community and less deserving of help is creating a framework that can more than readily be abused. and because it positions the abused as privileged it creates a situation where the abuser can justify it to themselves. you use another minority as an outlet for the pain you feel under the weight of the same system that hurts them while denying their pain.

but to pull the conversation back to trans men specifically, lets examine lived experiences for a while longer. “misdirected misogyny” and “just misogyny” are both employed commonly in exclusionist spaces to deny that either someone’s oppression happened to them for the reason they say it did or to deny that their oppression is their own, and often times it’s both. for instance, the claim that ‘asexual people may face higher rates of sexual assault but That’s just because of misogyny (and/or misdirected homophobia)’ is used to deny that what asexual people face is oppression for being asexual. if you can’t deny that an assault victim was assaulted without either violating your own moral code or the moral code of the community you’ve surrounded yourself with then denying the cause of their assault is a more socially acceptable way of depriving them of the resources they need to address that assault. their pain wasn’t their own, it belongs to someone else, someone who’s Really oppressed.

in the context of trans men the argument is, of course, that they’re men. if they just so happen to face misogyny then it’s because they were mistakenly perceived as women. this works a convenient socially acceptable way to deny the lived experiences of a group you want to silence both in the ways that I’ve already illustrated And with the added bonus woke points of doing so while affirming someone’s gender identity in the process.

again, I want to reiterate, even if it were objectively true that all trans men face transphobia and misogyny totally separately, like a picky toddler that doesn’t want their peas anywhere near their mashed potatoes, that is ultimately an insufficient framework when talking about individual lives. there’s literally nothing wrong with trans men wanting to talk about their lived experiences with other trans men in the context of them Being trans men. being black isn’t inherently a part of the trans experience but being black Does ultimately affect your experiences as a trans person and how they impact you and it’s meaningful to discuss the intersection of those two experiences on an individual level. 

but it just, Isn’t true. this shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone, but trans men were born in bodies that are perceived as being women, misogyny is a Feature to the experiences of trans men inherently. even trans men who are fully transitioned, have full surgery, have all their papers worked out, completely pass, move to a new state and changed their name, and have zero contact with anyone who ever knew them before or during their transition still lived a significant portion of their lives under a system that was misogynistic against them. of course there’s still a spectrum of personal experiences with it, just like there are with cis women and trans women, but to present the misogyny that trans men face as “accidental” is just absurd.  and moreover, most trans men Aren’t the hypothetical Perfect Passing Pete. I’ve identified as trans for seven years now and I frankly don’t have the resources to even begin thinking about transitioning and won’t for what’s looking to be indefinitely, I don’t even begin to come within the ballpark of passing and it Sure Does Show. misogyny is just as present in my life as it would be for a cis woman but the difference is that I’m not supposed to talk about it.  and even barring That there are transitioned trans men who face misogyny specifically because they are trans men, before during and after transition. you could argue that that’s “just” transphobia but you could do the same for transmisogyny. if we can acknowledge that trans women have experiences that specifically come from their status as women who can be wrongly perceived as men then we should all be able to acknowledge that trans men have experiences that specifically come from their status as men who can be wrongly perceived as women and that both the similarities and differences between these experiences are worth talking about. 

another issue with painting it as “just” misogyny that ties pretty heavily into what I was just talking about is the fact that men don’t have the same access to spaces meant to talk about misogyny that women do.  again, this is something that makes sense on a gut level, it’s not like cis men are being catcalled while walking to 7/11. but like, a lot of trans men are. misogyny is a normal facet in the lives of trans men but male voices are perceived as being invaders in spaces meant to talk about misogyny, both in and out of trans specific spaces and conversations

trans men lose a solidarity with women that they do not gain with men. there’s a certain pain and othering that comes with intimately identifying with the experiences of a group of people while being denied that those experiences are yours, of being treated the same way for the same reason but at once being aware that the comfort and understanding being extended isn’t For you and feeling like you’re cheating some part of your sense of self by identifying with it.

part of that is just the growing pains of getting used to existing as a trans person, but that in and of itself doesn’t mean that we aren’t allowed to find a solution. if trans men can’t, aren’t allowed, or don’t want to speak about their experiences in women’s spaces then why not allow them to talk about their experiences together? the fact that we even have to argue over whether or not trans men Deserve to talk about their experiences is sad enough in it’s own right, but even sadder is inclusionists, people who should frankly know better at this point, refusing to stand up for trans men because someone managed to word blatant bigotry in an acceptable way Once Again.

[funknrolll]

Celebrating Prince: discovering a timeless artist and his meaningful and impactful art. Part 3. The legal battle against Warner Bros, The Gold Experience and Emancipation eras.

Hi music lovers, as I anticipated on monday, music addiction is going to celebrate Prince and his amazing and timeless work!! The article will be split into a few little articles. I hope you enjoy this new format and these articles!!

For some reasons I had to repost this article therefore the 4th part will be uploaded tomorrow✨ stay tuned for more✨

As I said yesterday, let me say that I have heard so many things about Prince’s artistry. Some comments came from uneducated people who did not even take a second of their lives to understand, and do research on his art. Hence, I think the time to shed some light on Prince’s art, has come (finally). I hope to help some of those people understand this artist better and to finally appreciate him the way he deserves. We owe Prince big time. Today’s music and musicians  owe Prince everything. Without him, many of the artists we listen to today, WOULD NOT BE EXISTING. As we all know, Prince loved to experiment with music, trying out new music genres, new styles, new harmonies, melodies, rhythms and so on. This is one of the factors that led this legend to create a unique, wide and broad vault. There are so many songs of his that I love so much and that I find relevant for this article. The ones I chose, are going to prove that Prince and his music did not just revolve around sex and sexuality, (even if the artist through his music took the topic to another whole level). Through the article, we will see that Prince was more than all that I mentioned above. He was an extraordinary human being, blessed with so many enormous talents, with a beautiful mind, a uniquely pure soul. A true gift of God. With this in mind, let us start this article.

This is the sequel of the 2 articles I posted yesterday, so in case you guys missed them, check the previous 2 out.

Before I continue with this article, it is important to mention the Prince’s fight against Warner Bros. I know this was a matter so close to his heart and he cared about that. Hence, I think there is the impellent need to explain the situation to spread awareness and to remind the huge efforts Prince made beside his beautiful music. Back in the 90s, the artist’s music was owned by the aforementioned record company, although Prince was the person who composed, wrote, and performed HIS music. The artist was extremely aware of the importance of owning his masters and therefore his music wanted to buy back the rights to his music from Warner Bros, but the company denied that. Therefore, the artist would have had to re-record his music, the same music HE composed, HE wrote and performed. Indeed, as Prince stated in a 1999, Paper interview, “I wanted to buy my masters back from Warner Bros. They said no way. So I'm going to re-record them. All of them. Now you will have two catalogs with pretty much exactly the same music—except mine will be better—and you can either give your money to WB, the big company, or to NPG. You choose.". During this long legal battle, the artist decided to leave Warner Bros and created his own record label The NPG Records. Besides all of that, Prince, during the legal fight with Warner Bros, changed his name into an unpronounceable symbol and started to write the word slave on his face to symbolize the condition of slavery under which many artists had to stay. This battle lasted for about 4 decades. With this Prince was fighting for his artistic freedom, ownership of his work, and his rights. In addition to that, Not only was this huge artist fighting for himself, but also for all the other artists exploited by record companies. The artist formerly known as Prince was not to be silenced. Indeed, many of the works he crafted during the 90s, were an act of protest against record companies. It is extremely important to remind people how this artist gave his contribution and paved the path for other artists to be free and be more aware of this ENORMOUSLY important issue. I briefly summarized and addressed this HUGELY RELEVANT issue, but there would be more to say, and I will write an article about that. I will never stress enough the importance of Prince’s battle against record companies and his music being robbed from him. He has made a big impact and we all should be thankful and grateful to him for being bold enough to speak up about the topic and address this issue. 

Moving back to his music, in 1993 Prince ended the partnership with Warner Bros and started his own record label the NPG Records. Needless to say, as soon as the artist started his label, he began working on his new project, The Gold Experience, that eventually was released in 1995. This timeless gem is the product of Prince’s deep and broad artistic evolution. On this masterpiece, there are 3 songs that I find extremely relevant which are: We March, The Most Beautiful Girl in the world, Billy Jack Bitch, and Gold.  Through its forthright and explicit lyrics, We March is a powerful protest song where the artist speaks up against racism, misogyny, and prejudice.

If this is the same avenue my ancestors fought 2 liberate

 How come I can't buy a piece of it even if my credit's straight?

 If all the water's dirty and I wanna lay the pipe, my dammy

 The river that I drink from, will it be the same as your mammy 

In these lines, the artist is raising his voice against the prejudice of moneylenders.

If this is the same sister that U cannot stop calling a bitch (Bitch)

 If U can't find a better reason 2 call this woman otherwise

 Then don't cry, U made the bed in which U lie

These lines are a protest against misogyny, particularly slurs such as the term bitch which is seldom referred to women. 

Now's the time (now's the time) 2 find a rhyme (Yeah)

 That's got a reason (Yeah) and frees the mind (free your mind)

 From angry thoughts, the racist kind (Yeah)

 If we all wanna a change then come on get in line (Get in line!)

 Next time we march (Whoa)

 We're kickin' down the door

 Next time we march (Hey yeah) (Whoa)

 All is what were marchin' 4

With this bit of the lyrics, Not only is the artist revolting against racism, but it is a warm encouragement to react and change the situation. This song is a total anthem against racism, prejudice, and misogyny, to the point that in 1995 it became the hymn of the Million Men March. Moreover, I think it is urgent to focus on the arrangement of this song. The arrangement is strictly connected to the lyrics to make the song even more vivid.  I picked the music sheet for the piano. I am not going to annoy you with some obnoxious details, and I will try to be brief. I hope to be as clear as possible. The arrangement is presenting a key signature at the beginning of every staff which means the song is arranged in G major.  The key signature designates notes that have to be played higher or lower than the corresponding natural notes, and it is applied through to the end of the piece or up to the next key signature. In this case, after the clef, we can find a sharp sign which means that some notes are raised one semitone above the natural notes. Some other notes have the natural sign near them which means that the sharp key signature is canceled for them, hence these notes are natural. With this said, the question should be, why would Prince arrange the song like this? In my opinion, the artist might have used a key signature to raise some notes and the natural sign to cancel the accidental, for a specific reason. Musically speaking, Prince was an educated genius, hence I am sure he knew exactly what he was doing and why. The artist wanted to create an imbalance between the notes to create the effect of a real and difficult march, almost like climbing a mountain. Perhaps this arrangement might symbolize a difficult march that eventually will lead to the achievement of freedom, respect, equality, acceptance. Therefore, I would say that the connection between the extremely complex arrangement and the lyrics was magistrally crafted. This song is just one of the many examples of how brilliant Prince was.

Furthermore, another song that I love is Billy Jack Bitch. This is another protest song, but the topic is totally different from the previous one. Through these hilarious and sarcastic lyrics, Prince is revolting against a gossip columnist named Cheryl Johnson who was caught being utterly rude. As a matter of fact, the song is so crystal clear that there is no need for further explanations. However, one thing that I noticed in the lyrics Prince managed to mention the initials of the woman. 

Joy - it's in the dictionary

 See "J" Billy Jack Bitch 

The artist could not write the actual initials of the woman, because otherwise he would have been sued. Nonetheless, Prince was so smart that through a phonemic effect (see J) he managed to say the initials of the woman and thus give subtle hints about the woman’s identity. Moreover, what impressed me about the song is the drumline which is in my opinion phenomenal. The striking background vocals also caught my attention because, after some research, I found out that the voice we hear belongs to the rockstar and Prince’s fellow artist Lenny Kravitz’s. Two geniuses in one song are there anything more iconic?

Last but not least, my favorite song on the album is Gold. I love this masterpiece with every cell of my body. The meaning and the message this song is delivering are so POWERFUL!! The deep meaning behind these uplifting lyrics is to be ourselves, be unique, and never follow the mass because “All that glitters ain’t gold”. We should never follow the crowd. Not everything the crowd does is gold, even if it looks like it. We should be ourselves and make a difference. We should take difficult roads and climb the highest mountains to see the top. There would be another method of interpretation. The majestic music video and the scribble slave across Prince’s face might be inferring another significance. Thus, I would assume that this song might be another protest but this time against Warner Bros since Prince was in the legal battle against record label. Indeed, the meaning of the song may apply well to that situation. As a matter of fact, Prince might be inferring that even if contracts with a record company look like gold, in reality, they just glitter that tie the artists to a condition of slavery. Anyways, the arrangement also deserves attention. Indeed, the chorus of the song goes “All that glitters ain’t gold” and in my opinion, the arrangement of the keyboard is extremely peculiar and well related to this bit of the lyrics. First, it is important to say that the keyboard is dominating and I also think it is important to pay attention to its arrangement.  As I could see from the music sheet, the arrangement is characterized by high notes which are raised by the key signature after the clef. Indeed, this song is arranged in D major which means that the arrangement contains 2 sharps and the arrangement is written like this : 

This also means that all the already high notes on the staff are raised one tone. Now you might be asking: what is the point she is trying to make? what does this have to do with Prince? I am aware that the logic behind this might seem odd, but I will get to the point of this. As I said, this song’s composition is characterized by a range of middle-high notes. As Prince was musically educated, I am quite sure that the composition of this masterpiece and its arrangement, have a deep connection with the lyrics. Indeed, I would assume that Prince might have opted for this arrangement to enhance the meaning of this beautiful masterpiece. The chorus of this song goes “all that glitters ain’t gold” and in the music video we can see Prince being “showered” with a rain of golden glitters, therefore this recurring topic might be what connects the lyrics to the arrangement of the song. As a matter of fact, when we think about glitters, especially a rain of glitter we might associate this with a particular sound which most likely might be characterized by some high tinkling sound. This is exactly the effect Prince aimed to create with this magistral arrangement. Those middle-high notes I mentioned have the peculiarity of creating this beautiful effect that is the sound of glitter tinkling, which is even more enhanced by the music video. 

The release of Emancipation marked Prince’s definitive end of the partnership with the record label Warner Bros. It was the artist’s 19th studio album and probably one of my favorites. From the self-explanatory title, it is quite evident that Prince was still fighting against WB for his rights. However, not only is this work featuring protest songs but also some covers and some love songs where the artist expresses his affection for his former wife Mayte Garcia. Through some well thought and precise details, Prince’s personal touch is quite evident in this project. Indeed, this is a triple album and each album is consisting of 12 songs. Each album lasts exactly 60 minutes. Hence, the accuracy and the precision behind this masterpiece are quite impressive. In fact, the artist had an explanation for this, as he explained in several interviews, this was based on his studies of ancient Egypt and Egyptians: “The building of the pyramids and how the pyramids were related to the constellations. They were a message from the Egyptians about how civilization really started."

Among the most significant songs on this masterpiece we can find: The Holy River, Slave, The Love We Make, and the homonymous Emancipation.

The first song mentioned is The Holy River. Through these exceedingly deep lyrics, we can infer that the artist went through a major spiritual shift. More precisely, the Holy River might be a metaphor that might be symbolizing the baptism. Indeed, if my guessing is correct, this metaphor will be perfect with the general meaning of the song as being baptized also means the beginning of a new life, which is what Prince experienced with this major spiritual shift. 

Let's go down 2 the holy river

 If we drown then we'll be delivered

 U can still see the picture upon the wall

 One eye staring at nothing at all

 The other one trying 2 focus through all your tears

 U can try and try but there's nothin' 2 hide

 U can't run from yourself and what's inside

 U got 2 find the answers 2 the questions that U most fear

So over and over U ask your soul

 Why'd U come down 2 a world so cold?

 And the voice inside says 2night the truth will be told 

Also, the chorus of the song is quite eloquent as Prince is providing a detailed explaining of how he went through a dark moment in his life where he was struggling to find answers, where he was afraid to look inside of himself and to find the truth and the answers. 

U surrounded yourself with all the wrong faces

 Spending your time in all the wrong places

 Puttin' your faith in things that only make U cry

 People say they love U when they wanna help

 But how can they when U can't help yourself?

 The more they say they love U, the more U just wanna die

 So here we go again, the self-analysis

 Have another glass of Port and uh... forget this

 The band's playin' at the club 2night and they're bound 2 groove 

Also, these lines are quite eloquent, and I think there is no need for some further explanation. These are practically a description of the troubles he went through and how lonely and hopeless he felt during that time of his life and how he managed to survive. 

There U are, U think U're high

 U can't ask yourself cuz U'd only lie

 If U had a dollar 4 every time U tried

  U can't call nobody cuz they'll tell U straight up

 Come and make love when U really hate 'em

 Relationships based on the physical are over and done

 They're over and done (They're over and done)

 U'd rather have fun

 With only one, with only one

 Only one... one (one) 

Again, in these lines, the artist is describing what he went through. In the last 5 lines, we can notice that a major spiritual shift was occurring and thus the positive change the artist went through Indeed, in the next lines, the artist describes how he started to change after he realized that God was by his side.

And then it hit 'cha like a fist on a wall

 Who gave U life when there was none at all?

 Who gave the sun permission 2 rise up every day? (Ooh, oh yes)

 Let me tell it (Go'n)

 If U ask God 2 love U longer

 Every breath U take will make U stronger

 Keepin' U happy (happy) and proud 2 call His name (Go'n and say it)

 Jesus (Jesus)

  And over and over U ask your soul

 Why'd U come down 2 a world so cold?

 And the voice inside said 2night the truth will be told

 And this time I was listening, hear me 

As a matter of fact, as I mentioned, these lines explain, perfectly a time of transition when the artist was evolving and changing. In the next lines, the artist describes the moments after the spiritual shift took place.

Let's go down 2 the holy river

 If we drown then we'll be delivered (Yes we will)

 If we don't then we'll never see the light (No)

 If U die before U try

 U'll have 2 come back and face the light (Oh yes)

 When U believe it, U got a good reason 2 cry (Oh my, my)

  So I went on down 2 the holy river

 I called my girl and told her I had something 2 give her

 I asked her 2 marry me and she said yes, I cried

 Oh, that night I drowned in her tears and mine

 And.. and instead of a glass of sorrow and wine

 Looking back y'all, I don't miss nothing except the time

 And when I see that picture up on the wall

 The one eye staring at nothing at all

 My eyes trying 2 focus but these are much different tears

 Oh, yes they are 

Like the end of a beautiful story, these last lines, are the conclusion of this masterpiece that closes with a “happy ever after”. Indeed, in these last lines, the artist compares the act of going down to the holy river to facing the light which means a new beginning, a new life. In these last 9 lines, the artist describes the exact moment when he proposed to his girlfriend to marry him. He then reconnects to the beginning of the song where he cried tears of sorrow while at the end of this story he said to be crying “much different tears” which perhaps might be tears of happiness. Moreover, musically speaking, the arrangement of this song is quite homogenous except for the very last bars. After the artist finishes performing the lyrics, he reprises the main harmonies and performs them with a guitar and piano solo, then adding a choir that performs the background vocals with some light head voices that recall the angels singing. These last bars are played in such a manner that reflects the feeling of the artist: joy, love, relief, ultimate happiness. All the emotions a person who has experienced a major spiritual shift will feel. Furthermore, I have also noticed a shift in the instrumental. At the beginning of this masterpiece, the instrumental is “softer” and the sound of the instruments is kept lower. This happens for the first part of the song where Prince describes what he experienced when he was going through a difficult time. Then, after the artist sings these lines: “ Relationships based on the physical are over and done

 They're over and done (They're over and done)

 U'd rather have fun

 With only one, with only one

 Only one... one (one) “ 

it is extremely evident that the instrumental changes. Indeed, Prince turns up the volume of the instruments which are in my opinion, also joyously played, like he is telling his listener “listen to me, this is my story, I Am happy, and you should be too”. 

Another song that I totally love is Slave. This is, in my opinion, such an ingenious masterpiece and we can hear how Prince took inspiration from the whole work songs genre. With the forthright message of the song, Prince was still raising awareness about how record companies exploited artists, hence he wrote this powerful masterpiece, a protest song, to release all his rage and frustration. 

Everybody keeps trying to break my heart

 Everybody except for me

 I just want a chance to play the part

 The part of someone truly free 

From its chorus, this song is extremely eloquent. Prince is basically protesting against his enemies who most likely would be record companies and perhaps, as he mentioned in the 4th line 

“My enemies kept it turning, but now they pound the gavel

 And judging me accordingly, I know, I know”  

 those who judge him for commencing a legal fight against record companies. However, I am quite sure that this masterpiece is a protest song crafted to vent and raise awareness about the condition artists had to stay under for an extremely long time which was treated as slaves. In support of my theory, I would report these lyrics:

Slowly candle burns, where'd they learn hypnosis?

 How'd they keep me under for so long?

 Break the bread I earn, just keep me far from closest

 I need their kind to illustrate what's wrong - what's wrong?

 Well, I'll tell you they just keep trying to break my heart

 They just keep trying to break my heart, ow! 

From the second line, it is quite clear that those who kept the artist under and broke the bread he earned might have been the record companies, particularly Warner Bros, that contractually forced Prince to produce his music and kept a big part of his earnings OF THE MUSIC HE PRODUCED, HIS OWN MUSIC. Another interpretation of this line might be that Warner Bros owned the rights of PRINCE’S MUSIC. Therefore, the artist did not have the rights of his own music which should have been HIS OWN. Moreover, as Prince explained in several interviews when he asked the record company for the rights of HIS MUSIC back, they just said no. This might explain well this line as the record label by not giving him his rights back kept Prince far from emancipating, and hence the artist just left Warner Bros and started his own record company. Moreover, what left me speechless and mesmerized, in total awe about this MASTERPIECE, is the instrumental and the music genre Prince chose to craft this MONUMENTAL PIECE OF ART. Why did Prince choose to give this masterpiece the title of Slave and what music genre could suit well a song with this eloquent title? Obviously, a work song with some soul influences. Indeed, what amazed me is that this masterpiece is crafted as a real work song. To understand this masterpiece better, I need to step back to the work song genre and explain some of their distinctive and relevant peculiarities. Work song is a music genre that was spread around the world (indeed there is more than just one type of work song, they were used all around the world), but focusing on Afro-American work songs, this music genre developed in America during slavery times between the xvii-xix century. This genre had several functions for instance: to coordinate the labor of a group of people working together, which improved the efficiency of the work, and to relieve the boredom of a tedious job, which improves the lives of the workers. Also, work songs were seldom used as an act of protest against the condition of slavery, injustice, and poverty. These songs were frequently sung by a leader followed by a choir. Additionally, to keep the rhythm of those chants, workers generally used their working tools or the stomping of their feet or they even clapped their hands. With this said as I would say that Slave by Prince is part of this music genre. Moreover, as we can hear, the beats of this masterpiece resemble the use of the tools used by slaves to create the rhythmic path to their chants. Another peculiarity that was taken after the music genre just mentioned, is the choir to which Prince was the lead singer. Indeed, the artist performs the main lines while the chorus is performed by the choir. This technique is called call and response which was quite typical in Afro-American work songs. Additionally, the emphatic and emotional and heartfelt performance the artist offered, makes it easy to sympathize with his pain, his rage, and his exhaustion. 

Furthermore, one of my favorite songs on this album is The Love We Make. Such a breathtaking masterpiece. In my opinion, the meaning of this masterpiece is quite hermetic. Indeed, just by reading the lyrics, it might not be clear what Prince meant with those words. However, It is widely believed that this song might have been produced to remember Jonathan Melvoin, Susannah, and Wendy’s brother, who died from heroin overdose. Melvoin was a musical child prodigy who worked with Prince on several projects and he also collaborated with some punk bands. It is believed that this song is dedicated to him for several reasons: the first one is the year he passed away which was 1996, secondly, and most importantly because the artist described the song as “written to speak to the spirit of a friend lost to drugs”. Moreover, in the liner notes to the Emancipation 1996 LP, the song is described as “written for a lost friend”. Hence, for all these reasons, this song is believed to be about Jonathan Melvoin. This is perhaps one of the most powerful and inspiring songs in Prince’s vault, truly breathtaking. With the reassuring yet preaching lyrics the artist was delivering an enlightening message: no matter how difficult life might be, there is still hope and we should all be grateful for the miracle and the gift God gave us. 

Happy is the way 2 meet your burdens 

 No matter how heavy or dark the day 

 Pity on those with no hope 4 2morrow 

 It’s never as bad as it seems until we say 

As I mentioned, specifically in these lines Prince is encouraging the listener to be happy and full of hope no matter what, condemning those who do not have hope in the future as things are never as bad as they seem. 

Precious is the baby with a mother 

 That tells him that his savior is coming soon 

 All that believe will cleanse and purify themselves 

 Put down the needle, put down the spoon 

 Even though these lines are quite hermetic and enigmatic I will attempt to give a proper explanation. The artist is mentioning a baby and his mother, and the mother telling the baby that his savior is coming soon. Hence, as Prince was extremely spiritual and had a great, broad, and keen knowledge of the Bible and the Gospel, I would assume that these two lines are related to the Scriptures. The logic behind this might seem odd, but I will attempt to get to the point with a proper explanation. As Prince was fascinated by the ancient Egyptian world, as it is evident from the set up of the songs on the album, I would assume that these lines are connected to two biblical figures. Honestly, at first, before doing my research, I was going to assume that Prince was alluding to Jesus Christ and the Holy Mary. However, the biblical figures he was hinting to, were instead Moses and his mother Jochebed. For those who are not familiar with the Scripture, Jochebed to avoid the mass slaughter of Hebrew boys, and therefore, her son to be brutally killed, she set her baby adrift in the Nile River, hoping someone would find him and raise him. God so worked that her baby was found by Pharaoh's daughter. Jochebed even became her own son's nurse. Then, God used Moses mightily, to free the Hebrew people from their 400 years of slavery and took them to the Promised Land. Although little is written about Jochebed in the Bible, her story speaks powerfully to mothers of today. Hence, the connection between those two lines of the song and the biblical figures is quite clear. Moreover, as the title of the album is Emancipation and one of the topics of this masterpiece is the artist’s rebellion against Warner Bros, which forced him to work in a condition of slavery, Moses's story who freed Hebrews from slavery and took them to the Promised Land, might apply quite well to Prince’s story who fought to free himself from Warner Bros and start his own record company. Moreover, with the following two lines Prince is suggesting that by believing in God we are purifying and cleansing themselves. As regards to the last line, as I mentioned, is what created the widespread belief that this masterpiece might have been dedicated and inspired by Jonathan Melvoin. In addition to that, on the album, there are not reported the full lyrics of the song, but just one line of it which is precisely “Put down the needle, put down the spoon” and on the bottom line we can find “Written 4 a lost friend.” which hints even more to Jonathan Melvoin. Again, referring to the line I just mentioned, Prince is using another tone to sing these words. Indeed, if we listen to the song attentively, we would hear how the artist was preaching against drug addiction. Furthermore, the next lines, are extremely well related to the previous one. 

Sacred is the prayer that asks 4 nothing, oh 

 While seeking 2 give thanks 4 every breath we take, oh 

 Blessed are we inside this prayer 

 4 in the new world, we will be there 

With these lines, Prince is encouraging the listener to be grateful for the gift of life, giving thanks for every breath we take, praying God without asking him for anything but rather praying him with gratitude for the gift of life. In the last two lines, Prince is basically telling the listener that those who pray God, believe in Him, and have faith in Him, will be blessed with a “new world” which is the Kingdom of Heaven. The last lines of the song are the chorus.

The only love there is, is the love we make {x2} 

 (the only love there is, is the love we make) 

 Only love there is, only love there is 

 The only love there is, is the love we make (yeah) 

 The only love there is, is the love we make 

These lines repeated four times like a beautiful monumental hymn, are used to teach a vital lesson: the only thing that matters is the love we give out, the love we spread while we are alive. That is to say, this is the ultimate purpose of life: to give love and being grateful for the gift of life. Furthermore, as regards the arrangement of this masterpiece, it was crafted in such a way that it allowed the artist to use a preaching tone during the interpretation. This peculiarity in the performance of the song is even more enhanced at the end of the masterpiece. Indeed, when the artist performs the lines that begin with “Sacred is the prayer that asks 4 nothing”, he changed the vocal register from a light chest voice to a powerful head voice which also gives more power to the words he was singing turning them into a real preach. The shift of vocal register in this particular bit of the song is also extremely effective as the artist is singing out loud such an important lesson that MUST be heard by everyone. Perhaps Prince has put so much emphasis on these magistrally written lines because this is the fulcrum of the song that everyone must listen to carefully. Additionally, if we listen to Prince’s voice attentively, we will hear some slight shifts in the intention put in the performance. As regards to the instrumental, the Artist opted for a slow ballad in 4/4. Although the choice of a slow ballad, the song is reinforced by guitar, drums, and piano. Additionally, while I was listening to this masterpiece, I realized that the instrumental is characterized by a progressive raising of the tonality of the song. This way, the instrumental was raised by 2 octaves. This characteristic, besides making this masterpiece even more effective and turning it into a beautiful and inspiring preach, gives the listener the idea of a beautiful climb that gets straight to heaven. Personally, whenever I listen to this masterpiece, I feel like I’m watching a beautiful sunset or hiking in the mountains. Moreover, the arrangement is mostly characterized by music accidentals, which in my opinion are an extremely important part of the composition of the song since without them the song would not be perceived as a powerful preach. 

If you guys would like to purchase your copy of the albums I wrote about in this article (which I recommend, PLEASE DO NOT BOOTLEG PRINCE’S MUSIC), I’ll post the links below here

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G4RYC5D/ref=as_sl_pc_tf_til?tag=giuliabianchi-20&linkCode=w00&linkId=2a37eabce98ae7fd530fddeff2287ed5&creativeASIN=B07G4RYC5D

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07VRFM9YJ/ref=as_sl_pc_tf_til?tag=giuliabianchi-20&linkCode=w00&linkId=a1e0d017e5a3de4e6b01f3fc5a5f4f3c&creativeASIN=B07VRFM9YJ

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G4LHQHQ/ref=as_sl_pc_tf_til?tag=giuliabianchi-20&linkCode=w00&linkId=1da616a288e24d1a38bd64113cbb08a0&creativeASIN=B07G4LHQHQ

This was the third part of a series of articles dedicated to Prince to celebrate his life and most importantly his art. Stay tuned for more. If you have missed the first part feel free to check it out✨ In the meantime stay home, stay safe and healthy. Peace and Love 4 one another. thank you so much for your attention 💜 G  💜

[thegodofnightmares]

What makes a character a komaeda please I’m so out of the loop-

heres a quick check list for the komaeda requirements but under it im copying from an indepth post about it if you want more info cause komaedas break me. putting the giant wall of text under a read more tho 

What Defines a Komaeda Archetype?

A Komaeda archetype is based mostly on a character’s role in the plot, and how said role is received by the fandom. Even without interacting with a fandom, it is possible to infer if a character is a Komaeda archetype based on the fandom’s forecasted response. For a character to truly be a Komaeda archetype, they must possess ALL these characteristics. Due to this, these traits are based on the following criteria:

Widely applicable: Traits are not exclusive to one medium nor superficial characteristics. These traits can be found in video games, books, and movies, and apply to characters regardless of gender, species, race, etc. If a plot exists, a Komaeda archetype can exist within it.

Cohesive, but not restrictive: Critical thinking may be required but the traits are, for the most part, clear-cut. They should not be so specific that it becomes difficult to find characters which actually have said trait.

Play a large role in the story

They are not a side character and are integral to the plot. They may not be the most popular character, but are very high up there.

Play an antagonistic role, but are not originally presented as such

The character is not originally presented or treated as a “bad guy”, but they need not be a “good guy” either; they may be suspicious or disliked, but the other characters do not acknowledge them as the antagonist nor have solid reason to believe they are. Later in the story they are explicitly treated as the antagonist.

Are morally grey; have a justification for their actions and/or reason for redemption

Legitimate arguments can be made which put the character in the right or in the wrong, but it is not possible to make an undeniable conclusion. The character can be relieved of blame, commit justifiable actions, or provide reason to believe they regret what they’ve done and will change for the better. Typical examples include a character suffering from mental illness or emotional trauma, “the end justifies the means”, or are forced by things beyond their control.

The character must also be held accountable for their actions even if they are at someone or something else’s mercy. They may still agree with their own actions, go above and beyond what is asked of them, or ignore chances to defy authority and/or act righteously. Whatever the reason, the character is not a helpless puppet.

Split fandom which woobifies or demonizes them (ig their intentionally grey morals are only seen in black or white)

Despite being morally grey, members of the fandom lean heavily towards defending them indiscriminately or demonizing them. Those who love and defend them will woobify them and act as if they are incapable of doing wrong, while those who hate them will demonize them and act as if there is no possible way to rationalize their actions. While this is limited by one’s exposure to different kinds of fans, it is guaranteed that if a character is morally grey, the fandom will treat them like this.

What is Komaeda Energy?

Having Komaeda energy is based mostly on the character and how the fandom treats said character. These characteristics are more subjective and also more superficial. Make no mistake: being a Komaeda archetype and having Komaeda energy is NOT mutually exclusive, but they are also not part and parcel. Perhaps they are a side character, or are undeniably being free of blame, yet still garnar the kind of popularity and arguments a Komaeda archetype generates. It can also be that even without knowing anything about the plot, a character gives off vibes which makes someone think “Yeah, they’re a Komaeda”. That is Komaeda energy. Please note that this is not a comprehensive list. These are a select few characteristics which are common among characters with Komaeda energy:

White or similarly colored hair

White, silver, grey, pale blond… it all counts. It should be noted that blond hair that is not particularly pale doesn’t. Additional points for being on the longer side.

“Edgy”

The character is disheveled. has a dark color scheme, baggy eyes, or emo hair. They hide their neck or face (such as by wearing a scarf or a high collar), like knives, are violent, sadistic, sarcastic, or an asshole… the list goes on. However, they are still generally considered attractive.

Is male

“Komaedas” are most commonly male This is both a result of complex and morally grey female characters being much less common, and that a lot of their hate is from straight male fans (this is related to the next point).

Young/not traditionally masculine

They may be thin, short, have feminine hobbies (such as enjoying art or fashion), and are generally difficult for straight males to project onto. In turn, their devotees are often women and/or LGBT and the criticism these characters get may be redirected misogyny and homophobia. However, these characters are usually still deserving of genuine criticism.

The following characteristics also contribute to having Komaeda energy, but are much less superficial and require a person to actually consume the relevant media. These are more important than the former characteristics due to the fact they relate to the character’s role in the plot, but I believe including them into the primary category would make this checklist too restrictive.

Has gay subtext, or are blatantly gay

Typically associated with male characters but not exclusively. May also include a disinterest in, if not dislike of characters of another gender. Includes any character that expresses attraction to the same gender, not just homosexual ones. Usually their feelings are used to show that the character is not heartless or incapable of connecting with others, or to exemplify that the character feels remorse when they hurt the one they love. Although rarely treated as a negative thing, don’t expect a happy ending.

Protagonist has a “soft spot” for them despite their objectionable action

Related to the previous characteristic as the protagonist is often the love interest, although it does not have to be romantic; it can stem from platonic, familial, etc feelings as well. The protagonist may refuse to believe the character is truly the antagonist, gives them the benefit of the doubt, or forgives them after the fact. The protagonist may genuinely hate them at one point or another, but typically believe “the Komaeda” is not fully to blame.

Actually hiding the true antagonist

The character may be doing this intentionally or not. Regardless, this is usually where they are given a justification or reason for redemption: maybe they were just a pawn, or were trying to protect everyone from the true antagonist, or whatever.

Physically weak/chronically ill

This evokes a sense of sympathy for the character. Although it typically involves being physically weak or suffering from a physiological disease it can include mental illnesses if they also make the viewer pity the character; for example, having panic attacks, anxiety, or trauma-induced nightmares. If mental illness is used to demonize a character or primarily justify/excuse their actions without evoking sympathy, it does not count as this.

Unhappy childhood

Maybe they’re an orphan, were abused as a child, picked last for dodgeball, or grew up poor. Whatever it is, no kid should have to suffer through that!

[amphtaminedreams]

We Voted for Murderers

65.2%.

That’s the percentage of people who voted for the Conservative candidate in my constituency, and I feel completely heartbroken. See, things have properly gone to shit. 

If we’re talking numbers?

Local councils estimate the number of people sleeping rough on any given night between 2010 and 2018 has risen from 1,768 to 4,677, a 165% increase. The Trussell Trust, the UK’s largest food bank charity, has reported a 5,146% increase in emergency food parcels being distributed since 2008. An 8% cut in spending per school pupil since 2009. Funding from central government to local government cut by 60% in that same period. £37 billion less spent on working-age social security compared to over a decade ago by 2020. A 90% fall in the number of social homes being built since 2010. A £7,300,000 decrease in funding for women’s shelters between 2011 and 2017. Don’t even get me started on the government’s treatment of the NHS.

I’ve heard stories of individuals applying for PIP due to mental illness being berated about suicide attempts and the likelihood of another as part of a “formal interview” process to see whether they qualify. People collapsing in job centre queues, freezing to death on the streets and the elderly in their homes, suicides whilst on never ending mental healthcare waiting lists. In fact, 17,000 sick and/or disabled individuals have died whilst waiting for PIP payments to come through, and in total, UCL researchers have linked 120,000 deaths to austerity (I’m not going to comment on the irony of my former university that’s notoriously lacklustre when it comes to giving a fuck about the wellbeing of its students publishing this unless...I just did?). 8 years of negligent homicide of the most vulnerable people in our society under the Conservative government and we voted them back in.

So I ask, are people really stupid enough to believe that the politicians responsible for this mess are the ones who are going to fix it just because they make a few characteristically empty promises on TV or does the British public at large really give even less of a fuck about other people than I thought? As in actually not give a fuck about people dying?

I have to tell myself it’s the former. The press’ treatment of Jeremy Corbyn and Labour was scathing. 

Corbyn, a man who has stood by the same principles of fairness, justice, and equality, for the entirety of his career, was criticised by the likes of The Sun, The Daily Mail, and The Telegraph, for being indecisive and a threat to this country whilst Boris Johnson, a man who can barely string a sentence together when he is asked to give a straight answer to something and blocked the release of a report covering Russian interference in British politics, was held up as the one people should put their faith in. 

I know, the press are never going to be completely neutral. But shouldn’t they at least be committed to integrity? And the truth? Isn’t that the WHOLE FUCKING POINT of journalism? I’ve been hearing the phrase “post-truth world” thrown around a lot and it’s probably an indication of my privilege that it was only with this election that I properly understood what that meant; it was found by the NGO First Draft just 2 days before the election, damage way past the point of done, that 88% of the Conservative Party’s Facebook ads (compared to 0% of Labour’s ads) contained misleading information. The repercussions were non-existent. After Boris Johnson’s claim that Jeremy Corbyn wanted to raise corporation and income tax to the highest levels in Europe was publicised, only Channel 4′s Factcheck website published the actual statistics (France, Belgium, Portugal and Greece all have much higher corporation tax rates than Labour’s proposal). Similarly, in many constituencies, the Lib Dems were posting fliers where Labour candidates were, in the previous election, the runner ups to the Conservative candidate, claiming that it was instead THEIR party’s candidate who had the highest chance of unseating the latter. Days before the election, the headline of one of Britain’s most highly circulated papers claimed that a Corbyn government would plunge us into a crisis the likes of which “we haven’t seen the Second World War”, which is kind of wild considering that 130,000 preventable deaths have been linked to austerity under the Conservative government compared to 70,000 civilian deaths in said war. Not that either is good, obviously, and I can’t believe I have to point that out. But then, right-wingers did paint Jeremy Corbyn as a monster for passing up watching the Queen’s Christmas Day speech to volunteer at a homeless shelter, so I thought I’d just cover my back, y’know. 

Shouldn’t there be standards that the media is held to? You know, like not making slanderous statements about some politicians that have no actual basis in fact whilst brushing over the statements of others. Whilst the PM’s father Stanley Johnson was on nation television calling the public illiterate, and Jacob Rees-Mogg was blaming the Grenfell victims deaths on their “lack of common sense”, and Michael Gove was stating that people who needed to use food banks had brought it on themselves because they were not “best able to manage their finances”, it was Jeremy Corbyn who was being called an enemy of the people, accused of trying to plunge us into a “Marxist hell”...I mean, if Denmark and Norway and Finland with some of the highest living standards in the world are “Marxist hell”s  then sure, that’s what he’s doing. But that’s a hell I’m sure a lot of people would find much comfier than a freezing cold pavement. Before Labour had even released their (fully-costed!) manifesto, barefaced lies were being published about how much it would cost and how it would plunge us into trillions of pounds worth of debt, as if it hasn’t increased from £1 trillion to £1.8 trillion in the years since David Cameron took office. Meanwhile, when Labour did publish their manifesto and the Financial Times published a letter signed by 163 prominent economists and academics backing their spending plans? Crickets. Nothing sums it up better than the debate around Jeremy Corbyn’s alleged anti-semitism, discussed ad-nauseam whilst Boris Johnson’s actual racism, islamophobia, misogyny and classism, RIGHT OUT OF THE HORSE’S MOUTH, was completely ignored by most news outlets. 

You know what, maybe people earning £85k just DON’T want to pay an extra £3 in tax a week to make sure children get an education. Maybe everybody IS just as selfish as that one twat on Question Time who got all red in the face over the prospect of having to give up an amount less than the cost of a tub of Ben and Jerrys a week. But if that’s true, this isn’t a country I want to live in at all, or a planet I want to live on, really. I hope it’s not. I hope it’s a case of a need for some kind of collective realisation that the Sun ain’t shit. Merseyside did it. The younger generation are catching on. And look at the results there.

Labour probably couldn’t fulfil ALL of their promises. No political party is perfect. I was told again and again how unrealistic those promises were as if that was enough to make me go ”oh...I guess I’ll vote for 4 more years of people dying in the streets instead”. Yes, in an ideal world, the entire manifesto would be made a reality, but it depended on far too many rich people being good and honest. Let’s be real-the elite will always find a way to avoid paying their fare share on the premise that they “earned it”, as if anybody earns billions by sheer hard work alone and past a certain point, not off other people’s backs. As if there aren’t nurses and teachers and firemen and other public sector workers who don’t put in just as much energy and as many hours and emotional labour as CEOs and business owners and investors. But the point is that Labour under Jeremy Corbyn acknowledged this, and their manifesto aimed to give the power back to the average person, from the vulnerable to the supposedly middle class still struggling to make ends meet, and give them the quality of life they deserve. It was built on the simple premise that the people should use their government, not the other way round, and that everybody deserves the basic human rights of shelter, nutrition, safety and dignity, regardless of their fortune in life. However many of Labour’s policies would actually have been fulfilled, it would’ve been a shift in the right direction. 

Now the election’s been and gone and I’m scared. Already, the narrative is being rewritten by the billionaires in control of this country that a manifesto like the one we saw this year will never sit right with this country, when it is what so many desperately need. The people putting this information out there know the truth: that Labour’s membership trebled in size under Corbyn (more people voted for him than for any Labour leader since Tony Blair), that most of the safe labour seats were lost because of Brexit, and that if the manifesto had been represented accurately, there’s a good chance that Boris Johnson would no longer be our Prime Minister. I’m scared a person like Jeremy Corbyn will never front Labour again. 

Because I do not want a tory painted red who’s friends with Jacob Rees-Mogg behind the scenes, I do not want a war criminal who thinks that bombing innocent people is ever acceptable, I do not want a person who doesn’t see people of colour as part of the working class and indulges in the occasional bit of TERF-ism.

Already, the Conservative party are backpedaling on the few promises they made to increase NHS spending, and I am scared. I am scared for myself, in the event that I need urgent mental health care again, and I am scared for those less privileged than me who don’t have a family to support them, who don't have a roof over their head, who weren’t fortunate enough to be born in a country with relative economic and political stability, who cannot physically go out and work to earn a living. I am worried about the bigots that this election has already emboldened, the Katie Hopkins and the Tommy Robinsons of the world, who think the things that blind luck have graced them with they somehow earned, who pride themselves on ignorance and cruelty and selfishness.

So for now, what can we do? 

Join trade unions. Organise. Write to your MPs. Bring attention to those who are vulnerable. Be vocal with your criticism of the establishment. Call out those in politics for an ego-trip hiding behind “personality”. Do your research. Keep an eye on the numbers. The “it doesn’t matter who you vote for, just vote” sentiment is old, because it does. No “as a feminist, I exercise my right to vote for whoever I want”, because as a feminist, you should care about ALL women, not just the white, middle class, able-bodied ones. 

And if anyone has any more suggestions, let me know. Because I am sick and tired of living under a government who doesn’t give a fuck about the people it’s supposed to protect.

Lauren x

[DISCLAIMER: The photo is not mine. Just devastated and trying to find the words to express it.]

[groundramon]

I don’t really know how to word this without immediately knowing that tumblr could accuse me of a fuckton of different buzzwords, but I’m going to try to anyways - and hopefully if any hyper-woke people find me, they’ll tell me how I should better word myself in the future instead of immediately calling me an abuse apologist or some shit.

But anyways, here’s a hot take - people of minority groups can be abusers.  Sometimes, they can abuse people for their minority status.  Sometimes, people lie about sexual assault.  Sometimes, people use their mental health or identity or race or whatever as an excuse for being a despicable human being.  How do I know?  Because I’ve had it happen to me, over and over and over.

I am: a trans, LGBT+, mentally disabled + ill, DFAB person.  I am also: a white, able-bodied fuckboy who lives in California, one of the most progressive states in the country, even in its conservative areas.  I am on both sides of the spectrum, and the times when I see minority statuses being abused are usually from the groups that I’m a minority of.

For example, I was harassed (and arguably sexually abused, however because I couldn’t find those comments that could’ve made him face legal consequences for all he’s done, I struggle to say that this is the case - additionally, I was never his target, just my art) by an autistic man online when I was younger.  It’s the reason why I can’t interact with the HT/TY/D fandom and why I won’t be seeing the third movie (keep in mind this happened right before the second movie, and I went to see that one because it legitimately interested me - this one seems heterosexual AND reminds me of my abuser’s dragon OC, which he guilt tripped me into drawing for him as his form of porn).  He ruined an entire franchise for me because he harassed me so badly.  He guilt tripped me in about how hard it was being autistic (and threw in some comments about how teens think they have it “so hard with their anxiety and depression” when “they really have no idea”, to a teenager struggling with identifying anxiety and depression - i didn’t believe that bullcrap but I did fall for his autism sob story) and convinced me to do art trades with him which were just redraws of my own stuff, and he’d repeatedly spam me and yell at me and guilt trip me to finish his work if I so much as read his note without responding.  He drained my motivation for DeviantArt along with my love of a franchise.  This man was also a serial harasser/spammer, he did this to MANY people, including other minors.  I wasn’t a specific target - honestly, I think I was pretty low on his priority list, considering he only tried to come back a few times.  The kicker?  I’m pretty sure I’m autistic, even though I had no idea back then.  At least, I sure do have a lot of symptoms of autism now that I look back.

Not good enough for you?  Okay.  How about the fact that a relative of mine tried to convince my aunt that she (my aunt, not the relative) was sexually abused by my paternal grandfather as a child, sending my aunt into a mental breakdown because she couldn’t remember anything like that and had no idea?  My aunt is the weak link in our family, she’s adopted and felt othered for it, and lived away from the rest of our family for a long time.  She recently started getting involved and just happened to be attacked by a known financial and mental abuser in our extended family right when she started getting back involved.  I’m thankful that my dad and my uncles were able to help her get a better picture of her father.  Keep in mind that I don’t have a positive image of my paternal grandfather, because he smoked and gave my dad + uncle health problems due to it - and I personally consider that an accidental form of child abuse, in a way.  But he was NOT a fucking incestual pedophile.  It infuriated me to hear that, despite never meeting him, and having a negative overall impression of him.

How about another?  My step-step-grandmother (long story) has accused my deceased uncle of being a money-hungry monster and stealing all of her rightful money after his father/her husband died.  We’re in a court case to get the inheritance we deserve from her now, but she only ever brought this up AFTER he passed away.  When informed about his dead, she bitched about how he made her loose money, and how she was struggling despite using up all of my mom’s inheritance (from her step-father AND her mother).  Because you know, that’s what you do when someone dies.  My uncle was the only uncle on my mom’s side to make it to my birthdays, his family gave my mom and I a place to stay when we ended up stranded down south due to a bad head injury my dad got (also long story) and we didn’t have time to make it back home and we didn’t want to just leave my dad there.  My uncle was probably the nicest, kindest family member I had.  His funeral was the first funeral I went to, and there were TONS of people.  He was a Christian man who lived by true Christian values, and plenty of people testified this at his funeral.  People I’d never even met before.  This old woman accused him of stealing her money (where did it go?? his wife is fucking broke now that he’s gone!), never caring enough to visit her, ect.  This old woman, who never even responded to my birthday invitations let alone came, who never made any attempt to make a mutual outreach to us.  She expected us to do all the work, and when we decided it wasn’t worth her ignoring and rejecting, we stopped.  And then she accused us of abandoning her.  This is an old woman, but she’s still an evil person - or an evil person who is now just a shell of evil, unable to even remember a time when she didn’t believe these lies that she told herself.

And don’t get me started on how this applies to ace discourse.  Heaven forbid I compare the ace/aro experience to another LGBT experience!  It’s only okay if I compare it to the straight experience (which i do btw, because i KNOW we benefit from homophobia unless we’re also sga) even though it has 99% more in common with the LGBP experience than the straight experience.  This isn’t an inclusionist vs exclusionist thing - this is just COMPARISONS.  It’s like saying murkrow looks like a crow - like yeah, no shit sherlock!! doesn’t mean murkrow is just the same as a real life fucking crow!!!  And god, haven forbid you talk about real aphobia and how it affects real aspec people.  Immediately every allo in the area will jump on you about how that’s just misogyny and rape culture and blah blah blah.  Then what about when it happens to men?  What about when it happens to nonbinary people?  What about when it has literally nothing to do with gender or being forced to have sex, and is just a constant feeling of being othered and excluded?  Forgotten and not believed?  Constantly doubted that your experience is real?  And then to be told that the very bigotry you suffered was just a part of a bigger issue, instead of specifically about a part of your identity....bullshit.  There IS overlap in certain social issues.  Race affects how homophobia and transphobia affects a person deeply.  Same with misogyny and race.  So of course there’s overlap.  But to say that aphobia doesn’t exist, I’m sorry - I don’t say this lightly, but that’s unconscious gaslighting. (there is no better term than that - believe me, I looked.  My point is that I don’t believe it’s intentional, but LGBP people, trans or not - you NEED to stop doing this.  You ARE unconciously gaslighting aces and aros.  This is not anecdotal, there are statistics and you refuse to believe them, despite pointing at just as credible statistics to prove your own points.  You say we can’t use anecdotal evidence, but then go on to use it yourself.  Intentional or not, you need to quit it.)

I really don’t want to talk about how race and this stuff intertwine because I really don’t have any experience with that as a white person.  All I know is that groups of POC can be bigoted towards other groups of POC, and they can even be bigoted towards people of their own race.

Which leads me to the most important part of this post: The fact that minorities can abuse majority groups, even if its on the basis of their minority group, does NOT mean that minority groups are not oppressed.

Just because a few women lie about being raped, doesn’t mean that all women who say they were raped are lying.  Just because an autistic person abused me, doesn’t mean that all autistic/mentally disabled people and mentally ill people are scary.  Just because aphobia is real doesn’t mean that non-SGA aces and aros don’t benefit from homophobia to a certain degree.  Just because homophobia kills doesn’t mean that aphobia isn’t just as real.  Just because the LGBT community has a habit of gaslighting victims of aphobia doesn’t mean that the LGBT community oppresses the aspec community.  Just because POC can discriminate against or even hold systemic power over another POC doesn’t mean that they aren’t both oppressed by white people.

Abuse is not oppression.  Oppression is a repeated, prolonged offense of cruel and unjust control.  None of my anecdotals “prove” that oppression for these groups isn’t real.  Because I’m part of these groups, and it’s my opinion that it IS real.  But my anecdotals are also still valid.  It is not problematic to point out when someone uses their minority status to abuse and manipulate others.  It is not problematic to call bigoted, cruel mentally disabled people problematic for being manipulative and abusive.  Their disability is not an excuse.  Their identity is not an excuse.  Their experience may be a reason, but not an excuse.  But neither is your experience.  Let people talk about their individual experiences AND the wider issues of oppression as a whole.  They don’t have to be opposite faces of the same coin, and it’s sad that we act like they do.

[golbatgender]

@failure-artist replied to your post “You know the “Chinese room” linguistics experiment? I think anti...”

What is the Chinese room?

http://www.iep.utm.edu/chineser/

Against "strong AI," Searle (1980a) asks you to imagine yourself a monolingual English speaker "locked in a room, and given a large batch of Chinese writing" plus "a second batch of Chinese script" and "a set of rules" in English "for correlating the second batch with the first batch." The rules "correlate one set of formal symbols  with another set of formal symbols"; "formal" (or "syntactic")  meaning you "can identify the symbols entirely by their shapes." A third batch of Chinese symbols and more instructions in English enable you "to correlate elements of this third batch with elements of the first two batches" and instruct you, thereby, "to give back certain sorts of Chinese symbols with certain sorts of shapes in response." Those giving you the symbols "call the first batch 'a script' [a data structure with natural language processing applications], "they call the second batch 'a story', and they call the third batch 'questions'; the symbols you give back "they call ... 'answers to the questions'"; "the set of rules in English...they call 'the program'": you yourself know none of this. Nevertheless, you "get so good at following the instructions" that "from the point of view of someone outside the room" your responses are "absolutely indistinguishable from those of Chinese speakers." Just by looking at your answers, nobody can tell you "don't speak a word of Chinese." Producing answers "by manipulating uninterpreted formal symbols," it seems "[a]s far as the Chinese is concerned," you "simply behave like a computer"; specifically, like a computer running Schank and Abelson's (1977) "Script Applier Mechanism" story understanding program (SAM), which Searle's takes for his example.

But in imagining himself to be the person in the room, Searle thinks it's "quite obvious...I do not understand a word of the Chinese stories. I have inputs and outputs that are indistinguishable from those of the native Chinese speaker, and I can have any formal program you like, but I still understand nothing."

So essentially, REGs follow authorities who dictate what they are supposed to believe and what they are supposed to hate. They are given symbols--discourse buzzwords--and are told to produce outputs such as “good,” “bad,” and “pee your pants” in response to certain sets of buzzwords. However, most REGs don’t actually know what most of the buzzwords mean, only how to recognize them and choose the “correct” output. If you force them beyond the limitations of the input-output script, they lose the artificial coherence of the Chinese Room and start outputting word salad. A good example of an anti doing this is this post. They seem to just look for keywords, disregard the actual content of what the other person is saying, and then spit out a pre-prepared, insulting response based on just those keywords.

I mean, given the homogeneity of that school of “thought,” it’s not really surprise. Do you need to know what “pedophilia” or “ddlg” mean if the only thing you are allowed to express without facing persecution from your “friend” group is some syntactic variant of “Ddlg is pedophilia and fetishizing childhood!” or “If you ship ___ you’re supporting pedophilia!”? Do you need to know what “fetishization” is or whether straight women are actually doing it or writing the majority of m/m slash if you aren’t socially allowed to have any opinion on the subject other than “Fujoshis are homophobic and fetishizing mlm by writing fetishy fic about them for female consumption”? Do you need to know what cishets, asexuals, queer/lgbt resources, taxonomy, or the state of those things in the real world are if the Smart Multiply Oppressed People you look up to are so absolutely certain that “Homophobic cishet asexuals are invading lgbt spaces and stealing resources” or that “Asexuality is white supremacist and colonialist because it taxonomizes sexuality”?

No, you don’t. You repeat the Safe Opinions that these people give you, because if you have an opinion of your own and it accidentally contradicts that (or can be perceived to do so) in any way, or if your glorious leader chances to disagree for unrelated reasons, you are now the target of the same righteous wrath you have been dishing out on others, and you will deserve it. And you’d better pray that you’re not interested in something or part of a group that will be deemed problematic for whatever valid-sounding reason tomorrow, or you’ll suddenly be on the outside all the same no matter how well you have behaved up till this point--though most REGs don’t see that far ahead. They see their leaders as people fighting injustice, not people who just want to fight something, anything, and are looking for any slipshod excuse to have a reason to and get praised for it. They think that as long as they are Good they will be safe, and don’t yet realize that under this system there is no such thing as absolute good or bad, but only what their leader currently likes/tolerates or dislikes, and that that can change at any moment.

It’s a horrifyingly abusive system. Because it relies on a specific type of abuser to work--a well-spoken, demographically oppressed person who frames themself as progressive and fighting bigotry, and who indeed often does start out fighting real oppression (such as misogyny, racism, or homophobia) and having real insights into that oppression, and who almost always believes their own arguments and projected image--and also on a crowd of lackey enforcers of varying degrees of awareness and complicity, even survivors of past abuse are often vulnerable to these systems and become convinced that the head abuser(s) know better and are right. After all, they’re marginalized/survivors themselves, more than you are, always somehow more than you are, and they keep coming up with insights you’d never have figured out on your own.

(And the reason you wouldn’t have is often simply that they’re illogical, untrue, or just make no sense, but it would be bigoted to question them, you’ve been taught. These kinds of abusers have turned the very good strategy of “Believe the experiences of victims and marginalized people; don’t say they’re lying about it” into the now alarmingly prevalent idea that “disagreeing with someone who’s a victim or more marginalized than you about anything, especially anything even tangentially related to what they’ve gone through, or even something completely unrelated to their past or marginalization, is bigoted.” Put simply, “the most oppressed person in the room must be right.” Like being oppressed makes you an expert, instead of simply giving a little more insight. Ironically, REGs turn themselves into the very thing that anti-SJWs stereotype activists as!)

This type of abuser identifies as an inherently good person, and because of that thinks that anything that confuses, scares, or disgusts them is bad. They have no separation of action from identification; just as they think that their being good makes them inherently good, they think that doing anything they deem bad makes someone inherently bad, and therefore a target. Moreover, when they see something that claims a difference between identification and action, and the action applies to them but they don’t like the identification, their response is to say either that the identification doesn’t exist, if the perceived conflict applies to the outgroup, or that the identification is wrong if the conflict applies to self/ingroup identity. (E.G. thinking that asexuals who choose to have sex must not really be asexual, because they’re doing the same thing as non-asexual people, completely ignoring their reasons or what they feel; being told that telling people to kill themselves is bad, and deciding that it must not be bad because they’re doing it so therefore it must be good). Their rhetoric oscillates between loaded emotional appeals and paragraphs of dense theory with provocative, soundbite conclusions; they are very good at justification, and attempts to disagree with them will end in gaslighting. If they can’t convince you that their argument is right, then they will try to convince you that asking to have boundaries respected is ableist, or that trying to disagree with them in the first place is racist or homophobic, or that they’re inherently more oppressed than you are and so therefore their opinion is more valid, even if it doesn’t directly relate to the subject in question at all but yours does...and so on.

And then if you keep disagreeing with them, all their fans who still believe waht they say will rush to harass and denounce you and get approval points, while the primary abuser(s) disavow their involvement with the harassment (and yet make no effort to stop it). Next week, some of them will get the same treatment, or next month, or next year, whether for disagreeing, offering a minor factual correction or asking a question, or for some inherent trait or formerly-considered-harmless behavior that has suddenly become the new source of all evils. I really hope most of the lower-ranking REGs can get out of these Woke Personality Cults before they get hurt too badly, and unlearn the patterns of thought that got them there in the first place. Heck, I hope the higher-ranking ones can stop doing it, too. If they don’t--I want to say I hope they experience what they’ve done to others, but I’m not sure I could willingly inflict that on even the worst person in the world. There are certain levels of cruelty that are just pointless.

There is nothing more dangerous than a person utterly convinced of their own rightness or righteousness who has learned to manipulate people’s fears. Doubt yourself and your motivations often.

Personally, I think the only way to combat a politics of fear is to learn how to act out of love, but this post is already  a mile long. But tl;dr, REGs are manipulating people though a combination of fear of ostracism, fear of the villain of the day, and the positive reinforcement of being able to consider one’s self inherently good. Because ostracism can be so swift and arbitrary, and because the logic is so bad, their side of any discourse turns into though-terminating cliches, with an input-output based call-and-response so that the lower ranks do not even have to understand what those thought-terminating cliches mean, just the moral value attached to specific buzzwords. This prevents the dupes from figuring out that the catchphrases are either a) entirely meaningless or b) incredibly and unarguably bigoted if you consider their actual implications in the slightest. And all this resembles the “Chinese Room” scenario where someone can produce coherent or at least semi-coherent responses in a language they don’t understand by means of pattern recognition, within a limited set of possible topics, but not when something happens that isn’t programmed for.

[tranz-ferdinand-blog]

Trans Intracommunity Issues 

The trans community isn’t some monolith and we aren’t bonded by any polticial ideas, but our general existence so please take this with a grain of salt. These are my experiences as a trans person and what I’ve noticed from extremes in the community over several years.

Animosity Between Trans Men and Trans Women Because our experiences are a bit different and our histories are not as intertwined in some cases, there is definitely at times a dissonance between us. I’ve seen many transmisogynistic trans men and many and transphobic trans women for various reasons. But there is no reason why this can’t be mended. Solidarity is much more important than our slight differences.

‘Anyone Can Be Trans’ Rhetoric I think it’s very disastrous to everyone in the long term to insinuate that anyone is trans if they are uncomfortable with gender roles or their body or if they ‘choose’ to. We’ll soon have a wave of people who detransition or realize they were using a transgender identity to hide behind. This happens with lots of identities too (i.e trans people first thinking they are gay, a lesbian IDing as ace before realizing internalized lesbophobia). It’s important to think critically about why you feel the way you do and not stick to a label at the slightest discomfort with gender roles/presentation.

’Transmedical’ Rhetoric On the other extreme, I feel like transmed/truscum/whatever title ideology goes too far. Trans people can be just as gnc as a cis person. We do not exist to uphold gender roles and presentation and we do not have to follow cis standards of presentation and can create our own while still being critical of our identity. Medical transition is also not something that is necessary to be trans and can even be a negative thing for some people, especially those who later detransition. It is very expensive and for some things, not effective. Trans people should be allowed to medically transition as much or as little as we please.

Not Acknowledging Same Sex Attraction This is a recently touchy subject and I feel that our opinions on this are all across the board (like most things, but you get my point). There are many cis gay or straight people that are attracted to us based on gender alone, but there are also cis gay and straight people attracted to us based on sex. If a lesbian is dating a trans man and he is comfortable with that, they can do as they please just as a cis straight man dating a trans woman should be able to. There are some of us that do not feel comfortable dating people attracted to us on a genitalia basis, but some of us are okay with it. (I personally am not.) People, both cis and trans, can acknowledge all of this  without disrespect or shaming people into changing their gender or sexual identity. 

Or Same Sex Oppression I feel like many times we gloss over same sex oppression because we are trying to be as respectful as possible and not misgender anyone. But gendered and sex oppression are complicated things to apply to trans people. DFAB people are oppressed specifically for being born female unlike DMAB people, but trans women still face gendered oppression for being women and transgender. Gendered and sex based oppression or privilege is hard to realize how vastly differently it can effect us based on how well we pass, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Or that you can’t realize this without respecting trans people and our identity.

Desperate to Scientifically Prove Ourselves We’ve all seen the disproven brain sex articles, and I understand why we were so ecstatic about them in the beginning. But fact is, we don’t need some gene or brain anomaly to prove that we are real. Even if this is caused mainly by social factors, it is not an inherently bad or misogynistic identity. I know it can be so relieving to have a scientific reason for why we are the way we are, but it is so much more important to love yourself and deconstruct your identity to understand it yourself. You deserve to exist.

Not Respecting GNC Trans People This is common within transmedical ideas and heavily ties into that, but the simple fact is that a trans man dress ‘feminine’ and a trans woman can dress ‘masculine’ and that makes them no less trans or their gender for it.

Or GNC Cis People or Detransitioned People There is a pretty large divide between trans people and cis people of all kinds, but I think that it’s depressing for gnc cis people, detransitioned people, and trans people to get along so poorly or be hostile towards each other. Our identities and narratives do not cancel each other out. Some of us have very similar experiences but take different avenues to realize our true selves. Some of us are pressured into the wrong option first like detransitioned people or trans people who are forced out of transitioning. We have more in common than our extremes let us know, and we need to stick up for each other.

Or Non-binary Genders  I am still on the fence and not the best person to talk on this because I do not quite grasp some NB identities myself. But I do think that nb genders can be good ways of understanding yourself and your gender and can have cultural or religious importance. Just because a masculine presenting DMAB NB may not experience as much transphobia, does not take away that identity. Just because you do not understand something doesn’t mean you can’t respect it.

New Gender Terms I do however, have an issue with the exponential growth of NB terms as of late. As I said above, there is nothing inherently bad about being NB, but I do think there are some ways that it is being used as a way to hide internalized transphobia/homophobia/misogyny/etc. which is a possibility in trying to understand yourself. It’s best to be critical of these terms and really think about what is causing your discomfort/dysphoria and if you are using an identity to hide your true one. I know many of these new terms are from young teens online and I mean no disrespect to you guys, but it is something to look into from time to time.

[theladyshelbi-blog]

6 Things Men and Society really need to Get

*I wrote this in 2014 (time flies when you’re busy not getting published!) and submitted it to Thought Catalog. I’m still very surprised they never published it. 

You can find the original article here:

http://thoughtcatalog.com/mena-coticelli/2014/04/6-things-men-will-literally-never-get/

A response to “6 Things Men Will Literally Never Get” ,  by Mena Coticelli

 By: Shelbi R. Evans

 After years of meticulous research, I have finally discovered that if men do not “get women” they are simply idiots. No, not all men are idiots. But it appears they still have a lot to learn.

 I do not want those men to read an article like “6 Things Men Will Literally Never Get” and believe that their un-evolved behavior is acceptable and desired by the average woman.

 Do I sound like an angry feminist? Oh, I’m sorry. That’s because I am.

I am angry that an article that urges men to ignore what women say has been liked/shared on Facebook more than 94.6 thousand times. I’m angry that these are issues that still must be discussed when it seems so incredibly obvious to little ole me.

 It is not rocket science, people. When a woman says something, she means it. Plain and simple. But, for the sake of internet fun, here is my list of 6 Things Men and Society really need to get.

 Note: This article excludes Feminist Ryan Gosling.

 1.    Drinks at the Club

First of all, clubs are stupid. Let’s talk bars. I agree with Mena- buying drinks for my friends and I certainly doesn’t entitle you to anything more than..well spending your money on drinks for my friends and I. That being said (and more importantly) I do not need you to buy me a drink. Do you see this drink in my hand already? Guess who bought it? I did. Because I came to this bar with my friends and when you go to bars, sometimes, you go with the intent of drinking. Crazy revelation, I know.  It’s a nice offer, but I have a job and I don’t want you buying me shitty well liquor and then thinking that four-dollar drink gives you access and entitlement to my body or time. My time is precious to me, just like it is to you. I will buy my own drinks, and if I feel like it I will buy drinks for my friends as well. Why? Because I didn’t exactly come to this bar to connect with the love of my life (or the best fuck of my life) while he gets me so drunk I start to think he is actually a decent human being. Moreover, if you feel like you want to buy me a drink, maybe first try having a conversation with me. If I am interested in you, it will be clear. But lets get it straight- you do not know me. You should not assume I want to talk to you in the first place.  You should not assume that because I happen to look in the general direction you are standing for more than three seconds that I want you to come over and talk to me. You should not assume that by purchasing drinks for me or any woman you will earn her time or interest. No need to buy drink after drink and convince yourself that by the fourth one I’ll think you don’t completely suck.

 The point being, buy me a drink, or don’t. I don’t care. I’m not at the bar because I need your money or attention. On the contrary- it really bums me out that you think I want to talk to you when I’ve made it clear that I do not want to talk to you. Go hangout with your friends. Buy them drinks. I’ll do the same. If I want to talk to you, I will. Don’t assume that because I am a woman at a bar I am there to meet men.

 Furthermore, if I say no to you when you offer to buy me a drink, that doesn’t make me a bitch. It means I’m not interested in you. You aren’t so special that you deserve my attention simply because you are a man at the bar. The fact that I probably make less money than you, and STILL don’t want you to buy me a cheap fucking drink should be enough for you to understand I don’t want your company. At that point, walk away.  Sorry I’m not sorry.

 2.    When we say we need space

Holy fuck. It might actually mean we need space. What would the world be coming to if a woman says something…and actually means it? Does this mean the foundation of all your beliefs are crushed? Are you really a man? What is the meaning of life? WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN? When she says she isn’t interested…does she actually MEAN she isn’t interested? What?

Let me make it clear, because, this seems to be an issue that is deeply engrained in so many men and women (apparently); it is quite possible, and in fact highly likely, that when a woman says something, such as “I need space”, it means just that. Give me space. It does not mean, “ignore what I’m saying, do whatever the fuck you want, buy me stuff, and maybe I’ll do what you want.”

If men want to “get women”, they could start by respecting what she says and understanding that women aren’t irrational creatures who say things for fuck’s sake. Ignoring what I say, and assuming I do not mean it does not make me feel “wanted, needed, loved, important, irreplaceable.” It makes me feel like you are a fucking idiot and slightly crazy.

Moreover, you can not buy our love.  Buying dinners, movies, or shows fixes nothing. Money does not equate respect. I do not want to go on a “surprise vacation” with someone who has no respect for what I say. Bonus point: Bitches love when you listen to what they say and understand that we mean it.

 3.    We don’t over-think

The important thing about this stereotype that was left out is the fact that men have been trained to treat women as if the way she thinks or feels is wrong or “crazy”. Rather, this fails to address the fact that, maybe, the man is just doing something shitty and the woman is responding in a natural, normal way. Saying that women over-think and over analyze things allows men push aside any responsibility for their action, while labeling women as “crazy”. Instead of accepting that they did something wrong in the situation, that their actions directly lead to anger on the part of a woman, they have been taught to believe that women overreact and their responses are based on emotion rather than logic. This is simply not true. Do men and women think differently? Maybe. I’m not a scientist.  I have met a lot of men over the course of my life that dissected every single move I made and every single piece of punctuation I put in a text message. What does this mean? It means that men “over-think” and “analyze” the same way women do, however, their feelings and analysis of the female species tend to be treated with respect and acknowledgment whereas when you piss off a woman and she responds, it is commonly shoved off as “crazy” behavior and the problem with misogyny in this society is furthered. Maybe, if men want to understand women, they should stop trivializing their feelings and reactions.  Novel idea, I know.

 4.    We already know the truth

Umm…don’t be a liar. Why is this even on the list? Are men so idiotic that they don’t understand not to lie? I don’t think so.  

It is really disheartening that a woman feels she has to post an article where she discusses how important it is for men to tell the truth. Yes, men lie. So do women. How about, you don’t date lying assholes?

  5.    When we say we’re fine, we’re NOT

Or, maybe we are fine. Maybe, again, we say we are fine and are actually fine. You do not have to be a magical prince charming in order to understand that when a woman says something, she means it.

 That’s not to say that women never say things they don’t mean. Maybe, there are women that say they’re “fine” when they really aren’t. In fact, I’m certain there are some women who do that. I’m also certain there are some men that do the same thing. However, grouping an entire sex of people together and assuming that we never actually know what we want and often say things we don’t mean is simply idiotic. If I say I’m fine, I’m fine, man. If I want to discuss my feelings with you, I will. It absolutely does not mean ask me 20 to 25 times over a span of a two to four hour period of time. That is completely and utterly insane to me. I will punch you in the fucking face really hard if you ask me about my feelings over and over and over again.

If you ask a woman once if she is fine, she says yes and then you follow that up by asking her 20 more times, eventually, she will be fucking pissed.  Surprise!

God, what a crazy bitch?!

  6.    Fantasies

Um…what? Yes. Women have fantasies. Shocking. So so shocking. I also agree that the beauty standards women are held to in society (by men) are depressingly unrealistic. If you expect women to look like whatever model Leonardo DiCaprio is dating, well, you should look like Leonardo DiCaprio.

I also agree that men should not be “piggish” and “ridicule” the needs and desires of women, but is this not common sense?

 However, the idea that women are waiting around on you, their prince charming, to ride up and save them from the hardships of life, is completely and utterly laughable.  This is not a fantasy shared by most women in the world. And, just because you think you are Prince Charming and by default the fantasy of every woman you come in contact with, does not mean she owes you the fulfillment of your fantasies. I know, I know, it’s a real hardship that because you open the door for me I don’t automatically fall on my knees and open my mouth. Poor thing.

 Yet, the idea that women aren’t as interested in sex still plagues this country. Why? Women who do enjoy sex and are open about it are often regarded as sluts. Women who are less open about their sexual desires and practices are bitches and prudes. When will this stigma die? It is not and has never been backed with actual facts. Women for the most part, do enjoy sex. It’s an important part of human nature. That does not mean we want to fuck every man we meet or talk to or go on a date with or let buy us or drink or look at  etc. When we say no, that means we do not want to fuck you. It probably also means you are a douchebag. If you put a woman in a position where she feels as if she must tell you that she does not want to have sex with you, you probably already crossed a line and you fucking suck.

 Also, maybe, just maybe, you are not the sex god you believe you are. Maybe you aren’t even in my sex fantasy. Imagine that? Maybe I’m perfectly content with my vibrator .  I just bought a new pack of batteries. Thank you very much.

 I do agree that we all have fantasies; mine however do not include stories from Nicholas Sparks’ books or Disney portrayals.

 Want to know what I fantasize about?

1. Going to a bar and not being annoyed by some guy trying to buy me drinks all night because he thinks he has a chance of fucking me.

2.  Walking down the street to work without having to hear a man yell disgusting things at me.

3. Having equal (truly equal) opportunities in all areas of employment as a woman.

4. Not having to be worried for myself, or women everywhere, when I walk alone late at night that the man walking on the street towards me could attack me because he feels he deserves sex.

5.  Being taken seriously in all aspects of my life, despite the fact that I have really large tits.

6.   Also, Feminist Ryan Gosling. Because, who doesn’t?

There you have it, guys. If you want to understand women, start by not being a douchebag. Start by accepting that sometimes, we don’t want to have sex with you. Start by understanding that our life does not revolve around you.

Peace, bro.

[litterpinkglitter]

You’re White, Don’t Say the N-Word

My stepsister Nicole just turned thirty; I hope this year she stops casually dropping the N word. I went out to dinner a couple of nights ago with Nicole and her dad, celebrating her birthday and eating delicious pasta. I was not expecting the dinner discussion to get as deep as it did. To set the scene, I was invited to dinner with her and her father who I do not know that well; what I do know is that he is an avid Trump supporter, so naturally I wore a hip tie-dye shirt with Trump’s face on it that says “impeach” over it. Her dad advised me not to wear that shirt on the Upper East Side because most people there are Trump supporters. He mansplained that Hillary did not win because she has a bad attitude and Trump was more likeable (which I found humorous). I should mention here that both Nicole and her father are privileged and white.

I voiced my opinion that someone should not be president if they go around sexually assaulting women and mentioned that he is an awful president for many reasons. Nicole justified my words by explaining to her dad in a very patronizing tone “well...she’s a feminist.” I then asked her out of curiosity if she was a feminist and she replied, “what does that even mean?” I explained that feminism means that women and men deserve equality. Nicole then said she is a feminist but added defensively that she is “not as much of a feminist” as I am. So, I guess that means that she does not believe in equality as much as I do? It is also interesting to me that she used the word “feminist” as an insult when she did not know what it meant.

We then moved onto another topic and out of nowhere, she dropped the N word (with a hard “R” I should add.) I was so taken aback by it that I mentally blocked out everything that was said around the use of that word. I immediately looked to her dad to see if he would speak up, but he said nothing and did not seem phased by it at all. I was the only one at the table who considered what just happened as an issue. Although I felt very alone and outnumbered, I told Nicole that she can’t use the N word and that it’s extremely offensive. With a lack of empathy, emotion, or basic understanding, she dismissed it with, “but my black friend gave me permission” and “I’m only saying it around you.” It just doesn’t work like that. You should not be asking anyone for permission to say something racist and then brag about getting permission...maybe recognize it as a racist word that has been used to dehumanize black people throughout history. It would be one thing if she was part of the African American community, but she is not. The N word does not belong to her at all. She doesn’t understand her own privilege. Admittedly, I certainly didn’t when I was growing up.

When I was living at home in high school I was constantly with my family and I looked up to my dad, stepmom, and Nicole. I thought that since they were adults they should be able to teach me right from wrong. I really looked to them to set an example and especially took notice of Nicole because she got the most attention from my family -

my dad always implied that he wanted me to be more like her and dress more like her. I would put on a comfortable outfit to wear to school and my dad would say something like, “you should put a different shirt on. Don’t you care about how you look? I mean, Nicole wouldn’t wear that to school because she cares. You should care too.” I grew up in a home where I was constantly compared to my stepsister. She was praised for her looks and how she presented herself while I was put down for that same reason. However, my family did motivate me to do well in school and strive for As (which I always got BTW). All throughout high school I received compliments for my grades since I was known as the more bookish and school-smart one in my family. My brains did not go unnoticed, but looks were definitely more of a priority in my household. I also got the hint that it was important to stay skinny and would often hear my dad comment, “your friend put on a lot of weight since freshman year and looks too fat.”

An even worse comment came from Nicole when we went to go get fro-yo one day; she leaned over to me and gestured to a girl in the store saying, “I don’t think fat people should wear crop tops. It’s disgusting.” I remember this brief moment from a couple of years ago because I felt my face get intensely hot and bright red as I was explaining why she shouldn’t body shame other women for wearing something they feel comfortable in (also note that these are just two tiny examples out of what seems like a million). I grew up around a family that is constantly judging, scrutinizing, and shaming everyone around them based on their looks. They did not value intelligence and never went out of their way to educate themselves on topics they did not understand. Obviously, growing up in this kind of environment really shaped me. I got so used to hearing these judgements that I thought it was natural to behave this way too and did not see why it was a problem for a long time.

It was very challenging for me to realize that I should not look to my family to set an example for me and it took a lot of hard work to unlearn all the unhealthy behaviors that had become normalized by them. I grew up in a toxic environment where I have distinct memories of my stepsister saying the N-word a lot at home. My family wouldn’t say anything about it and would even laugh because they thought she was being funny. So I grew up not knowing what the word meant or why it was not okay to say. I grew up thinking, “oh, if you say this word people will think you’re funny.” I am now a stand-up comedian, so I have always grown up wanting to get a laugh. I hate to admit it, but I have said the N-word a handful of times in my life, not even realizing what I was saying was harmful. I had said it around a couple of friends and they would laugh, so I thought it wasn’t a big deal. Eventually, I grew up and educated myself, vowing to never utter that word again. I do not hang around with the same group of people that used to validate my use of the word and only surround myself with people who also agree that the N-word should never be said by white people. I honestly look back on myself saying that word and feel so ashamed of myself, but I wish I had people in my life that did not think it was funny and encourage it. I look back on this as a learning experience and can now say I know better. I became my own parent by teaching myself what is right and wrong. I now know exactly who I am and what I believe in. That young girl who said that word is not who I am today. I made a mistake that I own up to and since then have made a promise to continue to become educated and learn about topics before I speak about them. I fully identify as a feminist, activist, and ally.

It took a lot of learning and making mistakes to get to where I am now and I am writing this in hopes that my sister realizes it is never too late to change your mindset or the language you use. After the dinner, I called my dad and stepmom to urge them to put an end to this and teach Nicole that she cannot say the N-word. They of course laughed it off and excused her behavior by describing Nicole as “daring and different.” Unlike them, I think what makes someone “daring and different” is having the courage to stand up to racism, sexism, misogyny, and injustice instead of adding to the problem or letting it go unnoticed. My dad also said that he would talk to Nicole, because swearing like that is low-class and that “she cannot attract a man with that language.” This is problematic for many reasons, but I was particularly taken aback by his belief that the N-word is in the same category as every other swear word. My problem with her has nothing to do with cursing. She can say any swear word she wants to as long as it is not one that dehumanizes people. Another issue I have with his claim that she seems “low-class” when using such words is that describing people as low-class in a derogatory way is classist. My dad, a privileged straight white cisgender man, equates low-class as being inherently bad and negative. He also stated that my sister can say the word because it is “freedom of speech” but why would someone want to use their freedom of speech to oppress others? Why should we let them?    

The last thing my dad said to me about the topic was to just “let it go” but I am here to declare that I will never “let it go.” I am writing this letter to hold myself accountable and to hold my sister accountable for our words and actions so we can make a positive change. I have heard some of my white friends say the N-word in the comfort of spaces with other white people and it happens way more often than it should. This word comes from the mouths of some of my most liberal and #woke friends that I know. They also say it in an attempt to be funny and think that since they aren’t saying it in a derogatory way that it is okay. I do not think that every person who says this word is racist and terrible and mean-spirited, but rather, that it comes from a place of ignorance. We should not assume that every person who says the N-word is intentionally being racist but perhaps, like me and Nicole, they come from an environment where they simply never learned. I have since moved out of my house and have become a more independent thinker. I have learned from my mistakes and my family’s mistakes and I will try to never make them again. I have put so much effort into unlearning all of the negative things my family has taught me. Anyone can make this change, but it all starts with educating ourselves and others about these issues. There is nothing wrong with admitting that you started from a place of ignorance and moved past it. I actually find that to be a noble trait that you can use to inspire others from a place of love, understanding, and compassion. Sorry Dad, but we will not “let it go.” You shouldn’t either.