#Moyar Answers

[moyarb]

spill the bon appetit tea please!

So disclaimer: I’ve never been subscribed to BA. The only videos I’ve watched are the ones that just popped up in my recommendations so that’s why I call myself a casual fan. Therefore the cup of Earl Grey that I’m spilling is just what I’ve seen on social media not because I’ve been invested in the fanbase and channel. 

I do know that the Editor-in-Chief of BA, Adam had been exposed for doing brownface. And it’s so weird how one of his cameos in a GM video made me feel...off about him when he didn’t really do anything bad. I can’t remember which video it was but he swore and it rubbed me the wrong way because it felt like seeing a school principal swear lol. But looking back at it, I guess because he has such a high position imo it made me uncomfortable that he didn’t at least try to be professional? And I remember scolding myself because everyone swears and now I realize my gut was telling me that there was something bigger.

Another thing is that BA doesn’t have any shows with POC. For example: Claire has Gourmet Makes, Brad has It’s Alive, Carla does Back to Back, and so on. I’m ashamed myself that I just realized that none of the food editors of color have their own shows and the only time I would see them are when they have their solo videos, make cameos in the aforementioned shows and others, or group stuff.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but are there even any black food editors on the channel?

Even more tea: Whenever the staff of color appeared on the channel they weren’t getting paid or paid equally for those appearances. That actually set me off because whenever Claire was making something with chocolate, Sohla tempered it or in general, Sohla was always helping out even when she was doing her own work, yet she wasn’t being treated fairly? Garbage. 

As I’m writing this and making sure I got my info correctly, I’ve learned that Adam has since resigned from his position and that the white food editors are taking to social media to announce solidarity with their colleagues. I don’t know the full roster, but some have even stated that they’re not going to appear in any more videos or release any unaired videos until change happens and their colleagues are compensated and are paid fairly.

I already haven’t been watching a lot to begin with, so I know it won’t be too hard to limit that viewing amount to zero. I will be looking out for updates and if there’s been good updates I might return to my casual viewing. It takes a lot for a channel to impress me to gain my subscription.

But seriously, has there ever been a black food editor? I just scrolled through their channel even up to last year and there’s not a single black person aside from a guest. 

[96thdayofrage]

This has been a long time coming. Back in 2010, with the Tea Party riding high in the news, Nils Gilman (author of "Mandarins of the Future: Modernization Theory in Cold War America") wrote a blog post, "Rightwing productions of history," that brilliantly explained how fake history empowers the right — which writes "history" for immediate propaganda value, with only the most tenuous concern for what actually happened historically — while academic history was too nuanced and complicated to help the left in those terms.

“There's an underlying irony here, which is worth underscoring,” Gilman wrote. “While the political right has largely lost the interpretive battle for the American past among professional historians, they remain far more sensitive than the political left to the political importance of dominating popular understandings of key episodes from the past.”

The surprise election of Trump may have shaken things up, however. There’s been a flood of popular writing about histories of populism, authoritarianism and threats to democracy since November 2016. Where all this leads is unclear, but at least the political importance of history has become a vital concern for the left as well as the right — which creates new possibilities. To better grasp how we got here, Salon sat down to interview Gilman about his insight from the Tea Party’s heyday, and what inklings it can provide for the days ahead.

What led you to write "Rightwing productions of history" in 2010?

There were a lot of things going on at that point. One had to do with the contested legacy of the Vietnam War, and counterinsurgency. There was a whole series of books coming out at that time written by various people who are not academics. Some of them were more or less credible sources: scholars but not academics. There's a verystrong consensus among academic historians about the historical legacies of counterinsurgency programs, and the counterinsurgency program in Vietnam in particular. Basically, the last successful counterinsurgency waged by a power in the global North against power in the global South was — and this is somewhat arguable — Malaya in 1961, although Malaya became independent shortly thereafter [as the nation now called Malaysia], so it’s almost a rule-proving exception.

During the high colonial period, there were many insurgencies that were put down. What brought colonialism to an end, more than anything else, was the rising failure or inability to put down insurgencies in Algeria, in Vietnam and so on.

That was the dominant consensus view among academic historians. Now [in 2010] the U.S. finds itself embroiled in trying to lead the counterinsurgency in Iraq. And that historical view of counterinsurgency wasn't going to work as a usable past for people who are trying to foment contemporary counterinsurgency programs in Afghanistan and Iraq. So a series of books started to appear — some of them more credible as histories than others. Max Boot (who I've known since college) and Mark Moyar (who my wife has known since college) are people I would certainly call credible intellectuals — they aren’t just making up bullshit. But they are very much engaged in a project of writing history that's informed by the need to create a past that works for present political purposes.

I should note that I was actually working as a consultant at the time, trying to help people in the U.S. government try to think more historically about the insurgency processes they were engaged in.

You said “there were a lot of things going on.” What else did you have in mind?

There was also this domestic issue, which is that there are a lot of stories to tell about the past, not just one. If you ask almost any academic historian today, “What was the primary cause of the U.S. Civil War?” the absolute overwhelming consensus is one word: “slavery.” You know, complicated multi-causal factor, but you boil it all away — no slavery, no Civil War, right? But that's not a narrative that a lot of people are very happy with.

In fact, it wasn't the predominant narrative for a long time. It wasn't the dominant narrative really until the 1960s and '70s when there was a whole new historiography on that. And there are people who want to contest that history now. There's this whole industry of people funded by right-wing think tanks and right-wing benefactors, who are interested in creating a narrative about the past which is useful for particular political projects in the present.

I actually think the political right is much better at this. Partly because they lost the academy, they want [to win] these battles to a very large extent, and are hyper-aware that the way the narrative about the U.S. past has solidified over the last generation or two makes it much harder for them to pursue certain kinds of policies. So that's the general frame for the piece.

At the beginning you wrote, “Over the last 40 years of production of American history, historical memory has been quite radically transformed.” How would you explain to a layperson what you meant by that?

There's different dimensions to it. One major factor is that, 30 to 40 years ago we got civics lessons in schools, which were historical stories that were told to present the political values of the country. The Revolutionary War was an uprising against the despotic foreign government, and against taxation without representation. There was education about the republican virtues. There was a story told about the rising arc of freedoms in the history of the country. These things were all told in a pretty explicit way. My kids are school-age now. They don't get that kind of explicit civics lesson anymore. This is part of the retreat of public institutions from engaging in moral suasion in general and American civic life. So that's one part of the story.

At the same time, there's been a real change in many of the dominant narratives about the U.S. past. Academic historians have increasingly told stories in the name of inclusion, social histories. Fifty years ago, the dominant kinds of historiography focused primarily on political elites. The social history of revolution, which began really in the 1960s, and then became the dominant movement in the '70s and '80s, was about teaching history "from below," as the saying goes.

This was the history of various working classes and oppressed groups, and groups that had been written out of history. Because the political history focused on elites naturally was the history of "dead white men," as the saying goes. So people became interested in telling stories about the history of women, of working-class people, of African-Americans. This is done in the name of inclusion, but when the stories get told, they also become stories of oppression. As those became the dominant stories, the history of the past was no longer a history necessarily of the arc of history bending toward freedom. It was a history of a long series of only slowly, haltingly and hesitatingly overcoming oppressions — centuries of suffering. This became a story that was much less celebratory of the American past.

That created problems.

It contrasted very sharply with the kind of story that, at the same time, Ronald Reagan wanted to tell about his shining city on a hill, a glorious beacon that all others look out to. So you started to get a stronger and stronger divergence between the kinds of stories told. Certain political factions in the country — nationalists, and also darker forces like white nationalists, and people who were actually interested in perpetuating these oppressions that these social historians were trying to decry — were not very happy with this turn of historiographical events, where the dominant story was no longer a celebratory story about elites building a great and powerful country. It was instead the story about various kinds of predatory elites who had oppressed large segments of the country, not to say the rest of the world.

That was a much less useful history for people who wanted to promote U.S. power, plus the power of certain constituencies within the country. They recognized that the understanding of the past that has become the dominant view of academic history was an actual block for them to be able to enact the kinds of policies they wanted to enact. So alternative history started to be written, not by academic historians but by other kinds of people.

You tweeted recently about best-selling “historians” not being academics. What’s the significance of that, as you see it?

The fact that Bill O'Reilly is the best-selling "historian” in the country I think tells you two things. One is that there's a huge amount of demand for different kinds of stories than the ones told by academic historians. Second -- and this is a point I really want to make -- why is Bill O'Reilly spending his time writing histories? Two things: One is he feels that having the kind of story he wants to tell about the past is important for his political project, and two, he sees that such histories do not exist.

It's not just Bill O'Reilly. Jonah Goldberg wrote a ridiculous book called “Liberal Fascism,” where he argued that contemporary liberalism is a direct lineal descendent from fascism, just because there are some resonances between the anti-classicalliberalism of FDR and the anti-classical liberalism of the fascists in the 1930s. There were a whole variety of different anti-classical liberalisms that arose in the context of the Great Depression. It was a major rebuke of classical liberalism, and the question was what to do about it. One answer was fascism. Another answer was communism. A third answer was the kind of mixed economy that FDR put together.

FDR is actually another very important figure in this. FDR has had, I would say, close to a cult following among American liberals, generally celebrated by American liberals as the greatest president of the 20th century.

I must have read a dozen books on him as a teenager.

Exactly. I mean he was celebrated as the guy who saved the country from the worst political fate. He saved American capitalism, he won the war. There were all sorts of things about him swept under the rug in those kinds of hagiographic narratives, matters relating to African-American civil rights, the Japanese-American internment, etc.  So there was some dissent. But basically, FDR was treated as a really important figure.

Republicans have had an explicit campaign to try to displace the memory of FDR as the greatest American president of the 20th century with the memory of Ronald Reagan. I think John McCain has an explicit project to make sure that more sites in the U.S. are named after Reagan than FDR. Why is that? It's a concerted campaign to control the symbolic understanding of the past.

One of the important things you highlighted is the asymmetry involved. There’s very little concern with getting the past right among conservatives, while among professional historians there's so much concern with getting it right that it becomes difficult to have a usable past.

This goes to the style of academic writing, which makes it hard to reach popular audiences. Every year the best-selling histories, whether they happen to have a particular political project or not, tend not to be written by academic historians. That's partly because of the stylistic job pressures within the academy.

There's a second dimension, which is  that academic historians, for the most part, are motivated by trying to get the story right, and to understand the balance, the complexity and the nuances. Academic historians will always tell you two things: It started longer ago than you think, and it’s more complicated than you think. Complexity is the enemy of clarification, for political purposes. Political communicators have to make strong, clear statements. It’s not useful for them to be nuanced.

In a larger context, there is a parallel here with what's happening in the sciences, whether it’s “intelligent design” vs. evolution, or the attacks on global warming. Chris Mooney in "The Republican Brain" argued that the liberal tradition sees reason as the search for knowledge, but that's not what the science actually says. Our complex minds actually developed from being social animals. It's relationships and persuasion that the mind is much more attentive to.

I'm not a neuroscientist so I can't speak to that directly, but it certainly sounds plausible. There is a fundamental relationship between liberalism — not welfare-state liberalism but skeptical, open-minded, non-dogmatic liberalism, a willingness to revise accepted positions that is central to the mindset of an effective scientist -- that are antithetical to political systems that are entailed by dogma. So there is a connection there.

One framework I find illuminating is the one evoked by Karen Armstrong in the introduction to "The Battle for God" — that of logos vs. mythos. The scientific mindset, expressive of logos, is where a great deal of energy of the political left has gone for a long time, both the center-left establishment and more progressive forces. If you want to change the system, you have two choices — one is looking back to how things used to be or were "supposed" to be, and the other is to study things in a problem-solving way, to figure out how we move forward — and that seems to resonate with science.

I generally agree with that, but here's my caveat. Effective politics speaks the language of mythos at least as much as the language of logos. My view is that populism is that style of politics which focuses on not logos, policy wonk detail but politics as a form of expression, as a vehicle for identity, and that takes place in the realm of myth. Really genius politicians manage to have some artful balance between the logos and the mythos. They manage their policy agendas that are rooted in logic and evidence, yet are able to express to people in a common idiom why this is meaningful to them, in terms of the larger values and beliefs -- call that mythos -- that they want to believe in.

I think the fundamental mistake that people make — policy intellectuals, especially — is to believe that everybody sees the world the way they do. Most people don't see the world and see politics the way somebody like you or me does. We're like political nerds, interested in policy details, and that's not how 99 percent of people think. They think about politics as a vehicle for other things. Nowadays, they think of it as a form of entertainment. That's why we have the entertainer in chief as a president.

[outaboxevents]

Time to guess our new Guest this week on MOYARS CONNECT?? 🤝🤝🤝🤝 Hint:Successful Moya Entrepreneur. 💡 💡 💡 *Message your answers on Instagram only. * First message on Instagram will be given a PRIZE!! 🎁🎁🎁🎁🎁🏆🏆🏆 * Only first correct guess on Instagram will be considered. * only one guess per person. Guess who?? 🤔🤔🤔🤔 Download Instagram and follow the Link. https://www.instagram.com/invites/contact/?i=18ifymyatu6rx&utm_content=2xs71oe #eventmanagement #anchoring #virtualanchoring #eventorganizer #moyar #uchil #udyawar #ail #adka #mutta #shiriya #kotekar #someshwar #berika# kumbla #vamanjoor Cheers Sudesh Udyawar & Team Outabox Events 9594074437/8454878304 (at मुंबई Mumbai) https://www.instagram.com/p/CEnpeKcFaPm/?igshid=1prjl25lxw079

[experientialholidays-blog]

More than Ooty, Check out these 5 destinations around the Nilgiris that will take your breath away

When the hills call, you should go. If you are planning to get out the fast moving life of the city, you should head for the mountains in the Southern part of India. Amidst nature’s beauty of the Nilgiri Hills, you can feel yourself get lost. Mesmerizing scenery can give you the boost of energy and freshness and a soul-searching experience that you have longed for.  

The visit to the serene hills of Nilgiri is an experience, which will remain with you for a lifetime. Spread across Tamil Nadu and parts of Kerala, Nilgiri hills, literally translated to ‘Blue Hills’ because of the blue smoke haze caused by the kurunji flowers which bloom every 12 years giving the hills a bluish hue, welcomes each one with open arms as the lush green fauna takes your breath away. The hilly terrain is a paradise for trekkers. Bounded by the Moyar River to the north lying Karnataka plateau and merges into the Wayanad plateau of Kerala at the north-west, Nilgiri hills are abundant with nature’s beauty. Over 2,700 species of flowering plants, 160 species of fern and fern allies, many types of the flowerless plant make the hills distinguished and most sort after by tourists. Rich in Bio-diversity, the Nilgiri Jungle resorts gives the tourist an experience which lets them an inside view of the wildlife.

Besides Ooty, known as the queen of the Nilgiris, several other destinations are waiting to be explored.

Coorg:

Coorg which is also known as Scotland of India, is the most affluent hill station in South India. The landscape which is mystic and majestic at the same time, Coorg’s spice and coffee plantations cannot be missed. The homestays, which are offered to tourists in many towns, can give them a sneak peek in the day to day life the locals and make they visit memorable. The Kodavas, a local clan, specializing in martial arts, are especially notable for their keen hospitality. At an elevation of 1525 meters on the Western Ghats, Coorg is the most sought after tourist destination in Karnataka. Coorg is also famous for trekking with peaks like Thandiyandamole, Brahmagiri, and Pushpagiri. Elephant rides and white water rafting are available at Coorg and other Nilgiri jungle resorts.  June through October is the best suggested to plan for Coorg.

Kodaikanal:

Amidst the terrain of the Palani Hills in Tamil Nadu, Kodaikanal is located at the height of 7200 feet above sea level and has a cold, pleasant climate all year round makes it a perfect getaway from the chaotic city life. Kodaikanal means the gift of the forests. The splendid diversity of culture and nature has given it the name ‘Princess of the hills.’ Nature’s beauty reflects in the scenic waterfalls, rolling hills and clear lakes of Kodaikanal creates an enthralling view.

Mudumalai: If you want to spend your vacation taking tiger safaris and bird-watching, Madumalai’s forest resort is the answer.

Famous for its wildlife sanctuary and national park, Madumalai is a house to many endangered species. The hunting ground for kings of Mysore, Madumalai was declared as a tiger reserve, in 2007. Madumalai offers the tourists a chance to be on the front seat of excitement with the stay at places like Madumalai forest resort.  The first national park of South India was founded in the year 1940 in Madumalai where tourists Eight percent of bird species in India occur in the Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary. Among the 227 bird species found in Mudumalai, 110 species are insectivores, 62 are carnivores, 23 species are piscivores, 12 species are omnivores and 20 species are granivores.

Coonoor:

merely 18 km away from Ooty, Coonoor is the second largest hill station in the Nilgiri hills after Ooty. With scenic beauty and tall spice trees, Coonoor provides a palate of a variety of experience. The all in one package, Coonoor offers the tourists with lush green hills, waterfalls, and valleys. Heaven for trekkers, Coonoor serves as a base camp with one of the most popular trails of Lamb’s Rock just nine km away. The abundance of nature and the cold climate is a perfect mix for a soothing getaway. Coonoor, which was unexplored a few years ago, began getting popular due to the urbanization and commercialization of Ooty. Coonoor provides the travelers with a panoramic view of nature as houses a variety of birds such as thrushes, babblers, larks, cuckoos, robins, vultures, eagles and songbirds which attract some tourists. One can enjoy the spicy food cooked by locals.

Nagarhole:

The National park and tiger reserve is named after Nagarahole (Cobra river in the local language, Kannada). Also known as Rajiv Gandhi National Park, Nagarhole used to be a hunting ground from kings of Mysore as the national park is home to India’s pride—Bengal Tiger.

Located in Kodagu district and Mysore district in Karnataka state, Nagarhole is an ideal place to watch animals in their natural surroundings. The park has a rich forest cover, small streams, hills, valleys, and waterfalls giving the travelers, a variety of flavors of nature. Apart from the Bengal tiger, Nagarhole is also home to animals like Gaur, elephants, Indian leopards, and deer like Chital and Sambar. With other places to stay Niligiri Jungle resorts are a good option.  

[johnd13v]

Memorial Day: I Never Walked Alone

A long, long time ago in what seems like a galaxy far, far away I hiked contested hills with a rucksack, weapon and Ashai Pentax 35mm SLR film camera. At the time we didn’t use the term hiked; we humped ruck. For our overnights we didn’t say camped, but instead we set up NDPs (night defensive positions).  And when I took the photo below in 1970 our means of transportation to the trailhead was other than what I do today. Most importantly, I never hiked alone. During those years hundreds of thousands of us humped those trails, or flew the unfriendly skies. Some lost their lives in pursuit of… of what?

With troops of the 101st Airborne Division (Ambl), I Corps, Vietnam, 1970

 As mentioned in earlier posts this blog and the Peaking At 70 project are not simply about the challenges of climbing and crossing glaciers. They are also about rediscovering America. Just as one retraces their track if they miss a flash on a trail, one might wish to retrace our history to find out where we are.

Sunday, May 21, 2017: I’m back on the AT. This section begins flat, becomes gently rolling. The Housatonic River is to my right as I head north toward Cornwall Bridge. To my left there is a broad field (photo below); and west of the field is the ridge. About a mile north the trail will veer into the woods and up Silver Hill. On the trail at the end of the field there is a small sign which explains that heritage plants and farming techniques from the time of the American Revolution are being used here to preserve the accuracy of the agricultural knowledge of that ere. Caution is advised as the field is not sprayed for ticks. Perhaps that’s what set off these thoughts… in pursuit of what? Life? Liberty? The right to…?

On the Appalachian Trail south of Cornwall Bridge, 2017

Then it hit me. The reason it is hard to answer that question is the same reason many current conundrums are in dispute. Let’s face it, right now everyone seems to be talking or writing about fake news as if fake news has not been around for a very, very, very long time. Indeed, throughout much of history, fake news has been the norm.

There was an article in the local paper last week about a conference at which the participants defined the concept variously as “propaganda efforts to shield President Trump,” or “false stories circulated about prominent Democrats.” They also cautioned about confusing fake news with misguided priorities or biased discussion of events and issues.

Odd! How about fake news is news that is less than real, less than accurate, less than balanced? How about fake news is half-truths, as in, half-truths are lies. It is not simply a bias. It is disinformation. Worst of all: Fake News becomes Fake History. Both are devastating to individuals and to cultures.

Allow me a few examples.

For my third novel, Carry Me Home, I analyzed the raw data from an internal report by ABC, NBC and CBS which listed all evening news stories about the war in Southeast Asia that aired from 1963 to 1977. The total number of stories was 9447. Of that number 473 dealt with one incident which occurred in March of 1968, but remained unknown to the public until November 1969. From the time of first airing to the end of reporting approximately 10% of all news dealt with this one incident--the American atrocities at My Lai. In that incident American soldiers killed between 340 and 504 unarmed civilians.  No excuses. It was an atrocity. In the scope of the war the numbers are small—around 3/10,000ths of the war’s dead—but in reportage the focus was immense. More than any other action it convinced a large portion of the American public that their sons had become baby killers. Incidents in which thousands, even tens of thousands, of civilians were murdered by communist forces often went unreported. If half-truths are lies, what do you call 3/10,000ths truths?

Other fake news (again by omission): in early 1959 Hanoi’s politburo, in secret, essentially declared war on the South by initiating three infiltration routes into the South. The most famous of these tracks was Route 559 (for May 1959), or as we called it, the Ho Chi Minh Trail. On that route and trails 759 and 959, the North sent into the South what were called at the time agents or insurgents. Today we would call them terrorists. From 1960 to 1962 these agents assassinated or “disappeared” approximately 19,200 village, hamlet and province officials, including school teachers. Consider how we react today to a suicide bomber killing 25 and injuring 100. In 1960 South Vietnam was a nation of less 11 million people. The terrorist events it endured would be the equivalent today of terrorists killing over 630,000 Americans in three years. Many people still question why we got involved. Some think it was because North Vietnamese patrol boats, in August 1964, fired a few rounds at American ships in the Gulf of Tonkin.

Let’s go back earlier: A more devastating fake news story—created as disinformation and circulated as propaganda yet reported often enough to have become “factual history,” is the story of Ho Chi Minh in 1945 quoting from the American Declaration of Independence, and thereby showing, according to some historians, his desire to be an American ally. To accept this hypothesis one must ignore not just Ho’s personal history, his actions, and the actions of his faction of Vietnamese communists, but the actions of communists in much of Europe and the rest of Southeast Asia as well. As WWII wound down the American OSS armed many indigenous nationalist groups, including the communists, in France, Italy, Yugoslavia, Vietnam, et cetera. In every country non-communist nationalists attacked occupying German or Japanese forces; in every country communists “nationalists” attacked non-communist nationalists groups. [See Dr. Mark Moyar’s book Oppose Any Foe for a fuller discussion.]

For years, decades, after the American effort in Southeast Asia ended (note—the war went on for ten more years without us) fake news, skewed reporting, false or biased stories and half-truths devastated many of my fellow veterans. Twenty years ago I delivered the following in conference at Texas Tech University:

It is important to keep in mind that our cultural story, our mythos, includes not only the misjudgments, errors, crimes, atrocities and scandals of our past, but also the great accomplishments, the altruistic struggles, the valor and sacrifice earned and waged with tremendous effort, that has brought betterment of the human condition to millions. If only the negatives of our story are reinforced, and the positives are denied or dismissed, then our culture will have no positive role models, and our behavior will reflect our negative self-image.

If you want to honor the memory of those who humped the trails in Vietnam, or in any and all of our wars, and of those who paid the ultimate sacrifice, ditch fake news. Realize, also, that accurate story insulates those who survived from the ravages of stress disorders, and the nation from unnecessary domestic polarization.

NOTE: I am beginning a new project: Peaking At 70: Rediscovering America and Self. Please visit the new website: peakingat70.com. The above post is the fifth in the series.

[moyarb]

greetings! when u get this u have to answer with 5 things u like about yourself, publicly. then, send this ask to 10 of your favorite followers (non-negotiable, positivity is cool) 💜💜💜💜💜💜💜

My hair (which is a big deal because I spent most of my childhood and teen years hating it)

My determination

My openness to learn new things

My love for superheroes! 

My bond with animals

[moyarb]

16,30,32,43

16. favorite makeup brand(s)? 

Beauty Bakerie and Fenty Beauty! 

30. whats your favorite candle scent? 

Anything tropical like coconut, pineapple, etc. And all the autumn themed scents. 

32. 3 favorite girl names

Niara, Rachel, Tatiana 

43.what is your skin type? (oily, dry, etc)

Combo. Dry on my nose, oily everywhere else. 😩

[moyarb]

It’s not that i’m sexist, I just remember a time, when I held the door open for a girl, and she began to scream and cry. “You oppressive piece of shit,” she began to say, and when I tried to calm her, she kicked my way. I used self defense, and moments later she was on the ground. The cops were called, and I’m writing this from prison now. It’s not that I hate women, just a selective few, the ones who abuse the system, and many of them do.

??????????????????????????????

[moyarb]

pass the happy! 🌻🌈 when you receive this, list 5 things that make you happy and send this to the last ten people in the notifications!

1. Being Black

2. Disney Films

3. Achievement Hunter 

4. Spider-Man

5. Mermaids

[moyarb]

This is random but how do you feel about Latinos using the n word?

Afro-Latinx, it’s whatever, but as for every non black person including Latinx, No. Especially when they tend to be antiblack too. I live in an area with a lot of Caribbean immigrants (mostly from Jamaica, Guyana, Puerto Rico, and Hati) and the ones from PR tend to call each other the N-word and it’s infuriating. 

[moyarb]

You’re so precious and valuable! I hope your night is filled with peace and love. 💜

Aw thank you! Sorry I got to this so late!

[moyarb]

You are so pretty!!!💜 I hope you have a fantastic day!

Aw shucks! You too!

[moyarb]

Saw your Florida post and wanted to send a shout out. Also they do need to stop generalizing. We’re not all nuts.

I know it’s a joke. But every time I see a joke about Florida, I think about the horrible traffic during the major holidays and breaks caused by the very people who shit on the state and say to myself “Interesting.” 

But seriously, if you’re going to partake in the making fun of Florida shit, stop coming here during Spring Break and Christmas so I don’t have to get stuck in traffic all the time. Or at least learn to drive. 

Also, Nevada voted for a pimp as a state assemblyman weeks after he was dead, but yes, let’s shit on the people with drug problems in Florida. 

[moyarb]

Girl Kim and Kanye are the worst tbh

I just feel like they’re raising those kids to be those oblivious black kids who don’t think racism exists because either they feel like they never experienced it or because “I’m not black, I’m mixed.” 

[moyarb]

Who are some of your favorite people to follow on Tumblr and why?

@onefruitfultree @guesswhofoundyourblogand because they’ve been my friends on here for the longest

@longlivethesemoments another longtime tumblr buddy and we’re both thirsty for Nick Jonas lol

@jmberries and @gildedbadger more friends! And we like some of the same stuff like Disney! 

@droo216 Because he’s a sweetie and makes pure art

@freshprinceofmaldonia bc um he’s an actual Disney Prince obviously

@cydalei we like most of the same stuff and she’s cool too! 

lmao most of them are ppl I consider friends, but if we’re going into pure content wise, I really like @mickeyandcompany because he feeds into my Disney addiction

[moyarb]

Does tom have an accent??

He has a lovely British accent!