#but 'we have to Not say what we mean in order to communicate effectively with them' and i went wait no that's manipulative

[dumb-fictionkin-sideblog]

I think

I think that me thinking I'm a compulsive manipulator for most of my "aware life" has something to do with the tism

[decolonize-the-everything]

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Caroline J. Sumlin | Author & Speaker (@carolinejsumlin)

Her caption:

carolinejsumlin: White Supremacy is the umbrella system that runs our society. It is the foundation in which our society is built on. It is the machine of our society, but this machine cannot run without each part working seamlessly to do its job. Each part of the white supremacy machine is one of these systems of oppression (and many others I was unable to fit here). Now, this isn't to say that these systems of oppression couldn't operate on their own. They absolutely can and do in other cultures and societies. However, within our modern, western society that was built on and continues to be run by white supremacy, these systems strategically run to ensure white supremacy's goal: a pristine social order of pure whiteness. One we understand the depths of how white supremacy works and just how much it is impacting us from every corner of society, we can begin to dismantle it effectively, while freeing ourselves from falling for its devices.

This concept is something I've seen posted and over and over by different people (usually Black women though). The idea that it's not just that specific groups are consistently targeted but anyone who deviates from the narrow norm of White Supremacy becomes a target, which is why Black women with multiple intersecting identities are the worst treated people in pretty much every society worldwide.

Which is why I listen and follow and share so many perspectives of Black women btw. When the Combahee River Collective said "If Black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression." I didn't see any way that could be false and it's because of white supremacy.

And as for how and where white supremacy exists:

I like this White Supremacy Pyramid, it pretty much encapsulates my understanding and belief of how its perpetuated and builds on itself -ultimately up to the genocide of groups that don't fit into the White Supremacist categories of ideal.

The "Pyramid of White Supremacy" is a component of assistant professor Erin Stutelberg's Diversity and the Self class. It's a one-credit course required for students majoring in elementary education at the Maryland college. Stutelberg said in a Friday statement to Delmarva Now that the violent Charlottesville rally took place as the course was being planned. She felt it needed to be brought up in class, but wanted to carefully do so.

She didn't want her students to think about white supremacy only "as men in robes or hoods or torches marching in streets" because it would give them the impression that it was separate from their lives. "Instead, I want students to explore the ways that race and racism are part of all of our lives," Stutelberg said.

Source

And while not everyone (including myself) agrees with the placement of absolutely everything, it's still decent enough to use so that's what I'm doing.

That to say white Supremacy exists and is perpetuated anywhere and everywhere, so it's up to us individually and collectively to hold ourselves responsible for where it's growing in ourselves, our communities, and countrymen.

I don't see how liberation or human rights will be won with anything but solidarity for the most marginalized communities there are.

How do you build white supremacist framework for future generations if the people here now refuse to hate each other enough to allow it?

[lizardsfromspace]

The factchecking this cycle has been so profoundly incompetent that it's finally getting some real backlash, but the extent of it really should be clear. So much of factchecking is not based in reality, but in a kind of contorted moon logic that can find true claims to be false and false ones to be true based on wildly inconsistent reasoning.

But this one really shows off some of the base assumptions of modern factchecking, and also bc it got a community note which is funny:

Let's take this one by one

The idea that quotes have any options but "he said it" or "he didn't say it". It is a binary, maybe with a third option of "it was clipped wildly out of context", but something you see constantly now is the idea that quoting someone's direct words without deceptive editing or removal of context can somehow be false

Pointlessly noting that it's from 2016, and that it's not clear if he currently believes it. What the hell does that matter to the question of if he said that in 2016? People understood that the "dig up someone's tweets from when they were 17" thing was inane, but they counter-balanced by apparently deciding that citing anything someone said more than about six months ago is Misinformation if we don't have objective evidence they would say the exact same thing now, even if there's no evidence they believe anything else. Analyzing someone's high school tweets and analyzing something the literal President said seven years ago are not equivalent

Noting that he walked it back following criticism. You see this constantly, too. Again, what does that matter to the question of if he said it? But this is just taken as a given now: if someone gets blowback and says "whoops I didn't mean it", that should be taken at face value. Effectively, Politifact is letting Donald Trump self-factcheck Donald Trump: their only evidence (and I read the article too) this is at all false is that Donald Trump said Donald Trump didn't really mean the words he said, so they must agree with the judgment of Donald Trump that Donald Trump was treated so unfairly here.

A general confusion over what factchecking is. If you're asked "did Donald Trump say this in 2016?", your sole job is to determine if he really said that in 2016. It's not to divine if he, deep in his heart, still believes it now. That's completely irrelevant.

The two guiding principles of modern factchecking are this: one, it's strongly rumored - and also, obvious to everyone literate - that the major factchecking sites have either standing orders to find equal numbers of lies on both sides, or are staffed by people who think it's their job to hold both sides equally to account (the exception is Snopes, whose writers are just terrible at their jobs). In the name of this, Donald Trump can say something on camera only for it to be judged false, while a Democratic politician can be excoriated for mildly rounding down a figure in a speech. A factchecking website once determined that saying climate change was a threat to life on this planet was a lie, because climate change won't kill all life on this planet. Politifact's lie of the year one year was a Democrat saying a Republican plan would "end Medicare as we know it", which was judged to be a lie because it wouldn't literally end Medicare completely. Figurative language needs to be scoured, comments said directly on camera need to be made fuzzy. This makes factchecking sites worthless at factchecking, because what even is this?

It's not true that Donald Trump will refuse to accept the election results, because he's merely said he won't accept, and has said if he loses, it's only because the election was fraudulent. Okay, what, do you demand that people prove he said his plans in exact words? What is the actual, functional difference between "he said he won't accept it" and "he said if he loses it's because he won and they stole it from him, and he won't commit to saying he'll accept it"? What are you talking about, who is this for? When you go to the Logic and Reason Site for Debunking & end up having to puzzle out their convoluted logic and reasoning to understand anything, the plot's been lost a bit

The other is the idea that context is exonerating. Any context at all. If they said they didn't mean it, partially false. If they walked it back, partially false. If they said it was taken out of context, partially false. If they said it a certain number of years ago, partially false. If there's a longer video, even if it shows functionally the same thing, pants on fire, five pinocchios.

Again, we have footage of Trump saying this, and the footage in the ad is unedited, and the factchecking website is declaring something that OBJECTIVELY HAPPENED WITH HARD EVIDENCE IT HAPPENED didn't really happen bc we don't know his heart, maybe he believes something different now, we simply can't know for certain. But we do know for certain. Because "false" at least used to mean "didn't happen". But factchecking sites are now on those Beyond Belief definitions of "true" and "false" I guess

But the real problem here is that they just accept anything someone being factchecked says at face value. Because, and I can't believe I'm saying this

It seems like the people paid to determine if other people are lying...have forgotten that people lie sometimes

[wizzard890]

So there’s a trend that I absolutely hate in online discussions of (non-satirical) genre, particularly genre that’s influenced by the gothic. This trend makes my eyes roll back in my head until I can see through my own skull. It makes me want to bite a car in half. It makes me want to step into the jellyfish tank at the New York Aquarium and beg for the sweet sweet annihilation of a thousand stings. 

I call this trend: Oh Just Be Sensible, and it goes like this:

“Why do vampires always end up covered in blood when they feed, I don’t spill soup all down the front of my shirt when I eat dinner. Real toddler energy.”

“Why do people always cut their hands to swear oaths, everyone knows it would hurt way less on the [insert body part with fewer nerve endings]”

“Vampires shouldn’t be feeding from people’s wrists, it damages the tendons, if doctors don’t take your blood from your wrist, vampires shouldn’t either! No one will be able to flex their fingers the next day.”

(This comes up a lot with vampires, I mention, as I stride purposefully into the glistening mass of jellyfish.)

There are direct answers for some of these when it comes to the practical visual language of a particular medium (for example, you cut your hand on stage / on set because you can hold a blood pack in there, and even if you don’t have an effect, the gesture and its purpose can be discerned from the nosebleeds) but what really gets me is how thematically boneheaded this sort of observation is. 

Like, let’s go down the list here. 

Why do vampires end up covered in their victims’ blood? Well Scoob, do you think it could maybe have something to do with their bestial, inhuman nature? Or with the erotic and sensual abandon with which they can approach violence, now that they’re untethered from human morals? 

Why do people cut their hands to swear oaths? Aside from what I mentioned above, do you think maybe it’s because it adds a layer of gravity to see two people swearing an oath to one another with blood dripping from their clasped hands? Do you think it’s maybe to evoke a unity of body, something greater and more primal than a unity of word? Or maybe to remind us of the dire consequences of breaking a blood oath?

Why are authors having vampires feed from people’s wrists if it damages their tendons? Damn, maybe that’s because it’s where the pulse is. You know, the pulse? The heartblood, the thing that races when you’re scared or turned on or both? The thing that stutters when you’re close to death and could, should the author choose, ring in the vampire’s ears like a chime or a great pounding thunderclap. Maybe in a story about undead beings who drink blood, we can sacrifice a bit of sensible reality in order to enforce the emotion and thematic heft of a scene? 

Images like these communicate what is happening between two characters, not just the events that are transpiring! No one making stories forgot to consider ~sensible~ little observations, because it would be absolutely inane to consider an observation with the creative value of a wet paper towel. This stuff is part of our visual language for a reason! Themes also need to be communicated! 

God, like, okay, I’m exhausted and the aquarium staff keeps yelling at me when they find me here, but let me just wrap up by saying that relationships, character and meaning are expressed in so many ways beyond dialogue or internal monologue, and those expressions are so rarely sensible. 

(Also all this shit looks cool as hell, do you really want your protagonists swearing to die for one another by dabbing their slightly bleeding elbows together, grow up.)

[unbidden-yidden-deactivated20240]

And just to follow up on that previous reblog without derailing it: a lot of the really weird relationships and discourse that exist out there in the neo-pagan, Satanist, and atheist communities are in fact echoes of the weird relationship that Xtianity has with Judaism.

Xtianity has a weird, tumultuous relationship with Judaism because they must simultaneously validate the Tanakh and the Jews who created it or else their own religion is devoid of context and built on a house of cards. But! If they validate Judaism, then they have to grapple with the fact that the Jews did not accept their interpretation of the Tanakh, that we still, against all odds, exist, and that because we still exist, we are still around to point out the ways in which the New Testament does not fit with the Tanakh and that the Tanakh does not inherently or naturally point to Jesus. And that's to say nothing of the bloody history of Xtianity towards Judaism. Our continued existence is a sore point and a weakness in the Xtian narrative that has been a constant source of irritation, frustration, and violence since the dawn of Xtianity. And, at the same time, there is a certain fascination with Judaism related to things that have been appropriated by Xtians or understood as particularly useful in spreading supercessionist ideas. So what you wind up with is a toxic mix of antisemitism and philosemitism (effectively fetishization and orientalism) that drives too many Xtians to "love" us by attacking our beliefs and way of life, and stealing whatever they think will be most helpful in their mission (especially as it pertains to Jews) in order to try and convert us.**

Many people who have also been hurt from inside of Xtianity or by the broader Xtian culture they live in seek to deconstruct those ideas by creating an inverse of Xtianity in one way or another. Those who turn to Satanism typically do this by worshipping the opposite force of the Xtian god. Those who turn to neo-paganism typically do this by embracing an unambiguously polytheistic religion and/or by turning to the cultural historical enemies of Xtianity. Those who turn to atheism typically do this by rejecting "God," "faith," and "organized religion" (as these concepts are understood by Xtian norms.)

And honestly? That's fine. If it helps, if it brings you meaning and joy, knock yourselves out. I have no problem with people turning to these beliefs for reasons of healing as well as simply being drawn to it. And for what it's worth, I did a similar thing by turning to Judaism. Obviously I had many other reasons for becoming a Jew as well, and I assume that's true for the aforementioned folks, too. Judaism healed a lot of Xtianity-shaped wounds for me, and if your paganism, Satanism, and/or atheism helps you in the same way as well as bringing you meaning, I sincerely wish you the best.

However, the problem is that many times, unless you turn to Judaism and learn our side of the story, it's very difficult to deconstruct the antisemitism of your past entanglement with Xtianity. Xtian antisemitism has permeated western society so thoroughly for so long that it is real *work* to identify and unlearn it. Those converting to Judaism have the benefit of the Jewish community and extensive educational resources to help. Other folks do not.

Here's the problem: if you simply invert Xtian ideas, you are still treating Xtianity as the baseline reality from which your other assumptions and beliefs flow. If you just choose the opposite at every chance, you divorce yourself from Xtianity, but not its prejudices.

Now you might fairly ask, "hey Avital, if we are making the opposite choice at every turn, wouldn't that invert the antisemitism to being at least neutral if not positive towards Judaism?" And that would be perfectly logical! But unfortunately deeply and (for us) dangerously incorrect.

The reason is because (1) antisemitism has never been rational but reactionary instead, (2) philosemitism is also bad, and (3) it is structured in a way that it's pretty much always "heads I win, tails you lose." Have you ever noticed that according to antisemites, Jews are both ultra-white and also dirty foreign middle eastern invaders? That we are supposedly very powerful and run the world, but are also weak and degenerate? That both the Right and the Left have extensive antisemitism problems? Etc.? There's a reason - it's because antisemitism is designed to other us no matter what. So oftentimes I see folks inverting Xtian philosemitism to being "those awful fundamentalist Old Testamenters" or inverting Xtian antisemitism to valorizing Judaism, but only to the extent that they can meme-ify our religion down to fighting God and/or being un-pious godless liberals.

But like other groups, we are a diverse and complicated group with a very long history and a lot of trauma to boot.

If you're trying to unpack your Xtian conditioning, please also unpack your antisemitism and philosemitism. If not for our sake and for it being the right thing to do, at least do it for yourselves, because unless you deconstruct that as well, you will still be operating within a really ugly aspect of a Xtian mindset.

(**Please note that this isn't literally all Xtians everywhere, but it is a lot of Xtians in most places and throughout most of history. There are absolutely Xtians who are good allies to Jews, but they are much smaller in number and are swimming upstream in their relationship to both Jews and Xtianity.)

[roturo]

BAD IDEA, RIGHT?

INUMAKI TOGE X READER

SUMMARY: meeting up with your old friends sounded like a good idea, turns out lying and saying you and your ex ended up as a friends would include him there, so that was a bad idea of yours.

WARNINGS: unprotected sex, subspace, exes!to lovers, use of curse energy for sex, overstimulation, multiple orgasms, squirting, use of sign language, almost caught, after care, dacryphilia.

Life has been great.

Ever since you broke up with Inumaki things have been just fine. Both of you decided to end up as friends. Which might be awkward between the both of you but when you’re together around other people it wasn’t that bad.

You decided to focus on your training, even though it became a little bit too much to be at the same place with your ex… so you decided to live alone and start a new life. College is a new experience and it has been really fun! Training at home wasn’t as effective and efficient as training with Gojo-sensei and your friends… but, you felt more comfortable this way.

Some days you felt like exorcizing some curse and just walked through the city and found one.

Just for fun.

That’s what Maki told you. ‘Let’s hang out all of us together like the old times! Just for some fun!’

And everything was going great! But you never expected Yuuji to enter next to Inumaki into Maki’s room. You haven’t seen him in like four? six months? It’s been a while…

And to say he looked even more handsome than last time is understandable. Half a year and he grew up. He seemed taller than last time, his shoulders broader, and his hands…

You scold yourself for staring too long at him. His eyes locked with yours and a small awkward silence was in the room. But thankfully, Yuuji couldn’t tolerate silence and proposed to order some pizza and talk about how things have been.

You told them about your new friends at college, how you've been auto-training yourself, and how you felt like a new person.

Inumaki felt nostalgic. Watching you grow up and create a life without him made him sad. Thinking about the old times and how you talked to him for hours about having a family. How you stayed with him even if he couldn’t communicate himself like others, he loved you, and he missed you.

You missed him too, and when Maki asked if you were comfortable right now, even if your ex is literally like less than two meters in front of you, you said, ‘yeah! why not, we didn’t end on bad terms! can’t do people reconnect? I only see him as a friend.’

The biggest lie you ever said.

But the both of you knew those glance you gave each other, you needed the other… So when Maki accompanied Yuuji for the pizza you couldn’t control yourself.

And I mean like you couldn’t control yourself literally, he controlled you. He took his hands off.

‘Follow me.’

Your body was moving without your permission. Following Inumaki to what you assumed was his room. A tingly feeling dressed as nervousness was appearing in the low part of your tummy.

You felt anxious? excited? euphoric?

You missed him so much it was hurting, so when you got inside his room, thinking about if what’s going to occur was correct, you stared at your phone for some second before murmuring to yourself ‘fuck it, it’s fine��� —the first thing you did when you had control back was send a text to Maki.

‘I’m sleeping in another place.’ Maybe she’ll think you didn’t feel comfortable enough and needed to leave.

But maybe that’s not the case. You might sleep on someone else's sheets.

‘Inumaki…’

‘Shh… Undress yourself.’— You wanted to first kiss him, but he seemed eager to have you— and how could you say no? Maybe he wasn’t even controlling you and you were doing it for your own taste.

Feeling vulnerable in front of him— he grabbed you by the waist pulling you closer to his clothes body and started kissing you like a hungry man— You missed his touch and he missed yours.

Coming here wasn’t a bad idea… right?

Wrong.

Your body was sore and twitching of how many times he has made you cum. He’s been eating you out for hours now— with just one word making you cut whenever he felt like it. Making symbols on your pussy of what you suppose it’s his curse marks— Your eyes were full of tears, vision blurry and feeling dizzy.

‘N-no more ‘Inu..’

‘Osaka ‘ Was all he said, keeping a straight face before watching you before continuing eating you out— ‘Squirt.’ Your body shook before your vision turned black and everything felt a thousand times more— his fingers inside of you, slurping your fluids out of you. It was a disgusting mess— but he loved watching you turn into a mess thanks to him. It was his mess.

He never abused so much of his power on you, but this time it was different. He needed you, he wanted you.

Once he felt he got enough of your poor and used pussy, he got up— Watching you trying to keep your eyes open. Makeup ruined, hair tangled and tears coming down your eyes. You felt fucked out— feeling sore on parts of your body you never thought could get sore. Trying to plead for your sanity was met with deaf ears.

He started unbuckling his belt, and turned his middle and ring finger down, making the sign ‘I love you’ before signaling he missed you so much and needed you. Sign language was a common thing between the both of you because of his cursed technique. Just a few words, because it’s like destiny brought the two of you together because in some ways you always knew what the other needed.

He teased your cunt with his dick before inserting it in. You were on missionary, him on top of you while he admired the mess you became. He thrusted inside of you with no warning, your fucked up pussy with no need to make it even more sensitive for you to cum, he just started searching for his release.

When he watched you not even being able to say coherent words, tears just streaming down your face, your eyes almost closed and moans coming out of your mouth was enough for him to cum inside of you. The fucked up image of you— thanks to him— will be forever engraved in his mind. He needs you, he needs to be back together.

He groaned at the feeling of your cunt hugging his cock once he came, his body shaking before laying down beside you. Heavy breathings filling the room, he looked back at you and found you staring at him too. A smile adorned his face, moving his body so he could hug yours— playing with your hair and giving you small pecks he heard a knock on his door. 

He supposed you’re still in a subspace and grabbed his boxers, slightly opening the door so only his face was visible— a confused blushed Yuuji was in front of his door. ‘Inumaki, the pizza is here. We can’t find Y/N though… Do you know where she is?…’

‘Go with Maki.’ Were the words he let out, Yuuji’s body moved without his permission, leaving him alone. 

He looked behind and saw you taking small breaths, your chest going up and down— He smiled to himself, before he grabbed a warm cloth and and started cleaning you up— He searched for some candy he used to have in his room since you were always craving them, he grabbed one water bottle too and repositioned you so your now resting on his pillows. He sat next to you, playing with your hair, waiting till you came back to reality.

Once you opened your eyes, the first thing you saw was Inumaki staring at you— Eyes full of love while he played with your hair. You moved so your body was not sitting on his bed, you noticed you’re wearing one of his t-shirts and your panties— You supposed he put them on, he touched your arm and gave you some water and your favorite candy. You looked back at him— surprised he still had some of them here, you smiled at him and drank some water.

You didn’t notice he grabbed a notebook and was writing something until he gave it to you.

‘Can we get back together? You’re all I need, all I love. I would kill any curse, person, thing who tries to hurt you, everything… just to have you back in my arms.’

[mossy-aro]

ultimately i think my insistence on aro positivity honestly is as much a political stance as a personal one.

when i say aro positivity is crucial and that i dislike doomer-ist posts that express sentiments like 'I hate being aro so much I wish I was dead instead’ it's not because I don’t think there can and should be a space for negativity and acknowledging self-hate, or the many ways being aromantic can really suck sometimes. i find that to be very important!

that being said. there is smth here about how self-hate posts are sometimes just arophobia that we inflict on ourselves. and when we put that out into the ether it (intentionally or not) can become arophobia that we inflict on other members of the community. i think there absolutely needs to be a place for negativity and the expression of anger and frustration and self loathing even - these are all good things to talk about because these are things that we experience. that being said, it can also be genuinely upsetting and triggering to people to have what is essentially arophobia shown to them and then have that be validated by other aspec people. your personal thoughts can affect your wider community on a level you may not anticipate. and i understand it i truly do! it took me so long to be able to recover from accepting being aroace - it threw my entire world off kilter and made me question everything about my place in the world.

but my insistence on aro joy and positivity is because ultimately i do believe that building is at the core essence of it all. that ultimately discussions and the purpose of community should be about construction, not destruction. and this is both a personal and a political stance. talking about how much you hate yourself and cultivating online discussions/spaces where negativity about aspec identity is the main and only theme is destructive - if that’s where we let the conversation end. these thoughts can and should be used as a vehicle to look for a path forward!

joy and positivity create a space where the focus can become on forging a path forward, on construction, on community building instead of tearing ourselves and others down with negative thoughts. it’s not productive or healthy when it stops at a place of negativity - it becomes actively destructive to the essence of community.

and i do think that this is especially poignant considering the fact that being any kind of queer, but especially aromantic (and/or asexual) means forging a path for yourself and making your own happiness where there is no obvious way forward. our communities exist mostly online (right now, anyway), there is little recognition of our existence in the real world, the effects of amatonormativity are both pervasive and actively dehumanising, and there are legal, economic and social structures in place actively making our lives more difficult. yes that all sucks! it’s good to acknowledge that. we need to in order to change it. but more importantly, that’s not the end. we are still here and our happiness, our future is for us to determine. even if we can’t change the laws or society, loving yourself and understanding aromanticism as a political identity (as well as personal), as a radical worldview, and as a protest against amatonormativity is essential for both community and personal well being. the personal is political.

tldr. i guess my point is that as a community, we should focus on building, improving, and nurturing ourselves and each other (construction) as opposed to destruction. we should recognise aromanticism and asexuality as political identities as well as personal ones and rely on community and self-love in the absence of anything else as a form of protest and political power. destruction (the recognition of everything that is wrong) is essential as a starting point - but where do we go from there? we rebuild.

[ms-demeanor]

i mean realistically many people do deserve to be the victims of targeted harassment campaigns. if you're being an asshole you deserve to be screamed at by everyone present until you stop. some people commit acts of cruelty and subsequently forfeit their reasonable right to participate in society until they've made amends.

the people of wendy's have a moral right to scream at the manager if said manager sprays them in the neck with milkshake every time they go to pick up their order

damn following up the last ask, ig it was someone in ur notes constructing an equivalence between @tting staff and getting nuked to yelling at a wendy's manager and getting kicked out. my bad lol thought that was part of ur main post

I mean this is something that's still worthwhile to bounce off of even though you're not actually responding to me.

First of all, no, I pretty much don't think that anybody deserves to be the focus of a targeted harassment campaign. At least not the kind that are spun up on tumblr or twitter. I generally think that targeted harassment campaigns don't work to change minds, they only work to torment, isolate, and attack people, which will often further entrench them in their positions.

Sometimes people doing serious antifascist work will make a discovery like, for instance "the principal of X school is a vicious antisemite" and will run an *exposure* campaign to get them removed from a position of power, but with very few exceptions when you see an online callout post for a random internet user it's nothing but abuse and an attempt to bully them off of a specific website, not an attempt to protect victims or inform people of a genuine threat. "ABC is the new alt of this person with a documented history of starting cults, DNI, block and move on" is very different than "This specific user who is on staff posts harry potter fanart and is why fascists continue to exist on tumblr, let's make sure they know what tumblr thinks of them."

You are trying to frame bullying campaigns as normal consequences for antisocial behavior, but the antisocial behaviors under discussion here are "user posted fanart broadly disliked by the community and associated with specific ideologies long after the initial fandoms were crystallized" and "is the CEO of a social media website that is implementing features that the users dislike."

"People deserve to be screamed at until they stop the bad behavior" is punitive and shitty and so broad and open to so many interpretations that you're basically saying "it's open season on screaming at people." I think that it's bad behavior to support neoliberal political candidates who prop up capitalism but it would be horrible for me to run harassment campaigns against everyone who says "vote blue no matter who" even though I think that attitude perpetuates real world harms. (And it also wouldn't convince those people to change their minds! The fact that I think they are doing something harmful doesn't give me the social license to send hundreds of people to harass them! And it wouldn't work! These kinds of campaigns don't effect change they just isolate people and erode trust and civility jesus fuck we need to be coalition building not posting callouts over whatever activity has been deemed "freak behavior" this week)

some people commit acts of cruelty and subsequently forfeit their reasonable right to participate in society until they've made amends.

oh buddy, I think I get where you're coming from here but considering the kinds of behavior under discussion this is just straight up fascist. You are literally saying that people should be banished from society for wrongthink because nobody under discussion here has actually committed an act of cruelty.

(one of the things that i'm putting under the heading of "tumblr conspiracist thinking" is "staff is currently and continually intentionally flagging certain LGBTQ tags and bloggers" - there is ample evidence that the current staff is working to unfuck flagging and blocked tags that was done long before this crew was working on it. People talk about "tumblr had to settle because their filtering disproportionately impacted lgbtq+ creators" and that is TRUE however that was a filter that was established under different owners with different policies and different staff; the implication that the current staff is guilty of trying to stifle LGBTQ+ content because a lawsuit started before the Automattic purchase of tumblr ended in a financial settlement is just bad, wrong, incorrect, faulty logic. And if I might indulge in a bit of my own conspiracist thinking: I actually suspect a lot of the flagging and tagging and blocking of trans women specifically might actually be targeted attacks of individual users by terfs - many of the things that are getting flagged as needing a community label are things that use tags that terfs follow to attack and if enough users click "this needs a community label" the post will get flagged - I don't know that that's what's going on but just operating on occam's razor I think it's a lot more likely that terfs are coordinating attacks on trans people than that there is a secret group of cryptoterfs on staff taking time out of their day to ensure that trans users get flagged, if only because I think that the vocally trans positive former members of the staff would have said something about it.)

So, given that my position is "it is unlikely that anyone on staff is intentionally targeting LGBTQ+ groups HOWEVER prior policies enacted harm against LGBTQ+ groups and there is visible evidence that the current staff is trying to repair that damage" I'm not seeing any behaviors here that call for individual employees or users to get targeted with harassment from thousands of users.

But anyway, back to the specifics of the ask:

some people commit acts of cruelty and subsequently forfeit their reasonable right to participate in society until they've made amends.

Do you have any idea how frequently amends are made and never circulated as widely as the callout post? Do you have any idea how frequently callout posts are incorrect, and exaggerate the things that need to be amended? I'm reminded of Lindsey Ellis, who was the victim of a years-long targeted harassment campaign and made multiple apologies over the years who was finally driven off of her primary platform because she carelessly misspoke and the people who had been targeting her for years were able to make a post that she had long disavowed and was a relic of her dealing with the aftermath of sexual violence go viral. The internet doesn't let people make amends; people see accusations. They see the first post, not the follow up. That's why starting these campaigns is shitty and dangerous even if you *personally* believe that you'll forgive an individual once they "make amends." (and the "amends" people usually demand are "i want this person gone from the internet forever and cut out of this part of their life" - that's not really something that's fair to ask of people when so much of the world is online these days.)

the people of wendy's have a moral right to scream at the manager if said manager sprays them in the neck with milkshake every time they go to pick up their order

No they don't. Straight up. If the manager of a wendy's sprays you in the neck with a milkshake you have the right to escalate your complaint right up the chain, take your business away and never come back, warn other people "hey the manager sprayed me with a milkshake, stay away," but you don't have the moral right to escalate the situation by screaming at them (and you certainly don't have that right if you happened to get sprayed with some milkshake while the manager was attempting to fix the frostee machine when you came to pick up your order, which I think is actually more analogous to what is happening here).

someone in ur notes constructing an equivalence between @tting staff and getting nuked to yelling at a wendy's manager and getting kicked out

A big point that I think you're missing here is that @-ing staff when there is a problem on a post or you see harassment is generally pretty acceptable (though much less effective than filing a support claim), but the issue under discussion isn't @-ing staff, it was pointing thousands of angry people at two specific people who are *part* of staff and holding those two individuals responsible for all the problems that users see with tumblr.

partyjockers got nuked because their post directed a flood of harassment at one staff member in a post where they had highlighted that user's URL and name:

This is explicitly saying "users like the one I screenshotted are the reason you're being attacked by terfs" because one member of staff posted fanart from two franchises that tumblr-the-userbase has deemed off limits.

(Do you have any idea how extreme a bubble this is? Do you walk into barnes and noble and sigh because the managers are fascists who want trans people dead because there's harry potter merch everywhere? JK rowling is a terf and a horrible fucking person and I am no longer personally comfortable engaging with that fandom but people posting fanart of a franchise are not personally attacking you even if it feels like they are disregarding your humanity; you cannot consider other people's participation in huge, popular, mainstream fandoms as a sign that they are plotting against you this is why i'm calling this conspiracist thinking the entire scorched earth conspiracy spawned from someone interpreting a staff member's art as esoteric signposts signalling their hatred of trans people. Do you remember when the stupid harry potter game came out and this entire website was despondent because it meant that people didn't care about trans people? That's not actually what it meant! What it meant is that the vast majority of people on the planet have neither a twitter nor a tumblr account and have no idea how shitty JK rowling is to trans people and they don't interpret "harry potter imagery" as "covert terf signal" they interpret it as "possibly the most mainstream fantasy series in the last fifty years")

This isn't someone calling out the manager after they spray you with a milkshake. The manager asking someone to leave after they started screaming that the cashier's earrings were hate speech.

This analogy got out of hand but please just understand that there's a difference between @-ing an account that people are paid to monitor as part of their jobs and that they have support and coworkers to help with and @-ing someone's personal account.

Nobody got a post deleted because the used @ staff, they got their posts deleted because they focused viral negative attention on individual users.

[puppyxprincess]

Training logs - Entry #1 05-31-24

We’re still in the early days, only three sessions in, but I’m already very pleased with my results. My subject is overly submissive to me, careful of any misstep or action that could potentially lead me to be displeased. In time we’ll work on instilling confidence in their behavior, as I do not want fear to be her primary motivation. I’ve begun to install a couple triggers, including “Trust Me, Pup” and “Treats!”

Trust Me, Pup This trigger was designed to encourage total submission and trust, a bit of a Mental Off-Switch, if you will. Using this trigger is intended to instill devotion, subservience, and blind obedience, it is the groundwork for my long-term goal of teaching her to trust my words over her own. It also encourages trust in a more kindhearted way, reminding the subject of my own devotion to her. She is to trust that I mean what I say, and trust my commitment to our training. Utilizing this trigger helps put the subject’s mind at ease, which in turn, allows me to have more control over her. If she is worried and anxious, she’ll be distracted from our work, and that’s not conducive to training. I felt this was an important first step of our work because I want to lay a very solid framework for trust, obedience, and total release of her reservations. This trigger serves me well in use whenever I can tell she is feeling insecure or beginning to question my decisions, although I’m finding that, far earlier than anticipated, there is a near complete lack of doubt in me. She trusts me immensely. This bodes well for our progress.

Treats! This is the second trigger installed into the subject. This one was intended to be more light-hearted, a fun and pleasurable way to lead my subject into the next step of our work together, but ended up adopting a bit of an edge that I’m pleasantly surprised by.

The original concept was that whenever this trigger was used, it would send a wave of pleasure into the subject, while also increasing her devotion to me. When she receives a treat, she is to feel a burst of overwhelming euphoria, followed by the desire to obey my every word. When discussing with another trainer, we decided it may be interesting to allow this trigger to be used by any individual who wants to participate in the training of this subject. I elaborated on this concept by telling the subject I was giving a bag of these special treats to anyone who she felt she could trust, in addition to the addendum that these treats would fail to work if there was a lack of trust, meaning she would not be forced to obey any who would hold negative intentions. Adding in safeties in this fashion helps to further cement a subject’s trust in their Owner, as they can rest assured knowing that their Owner has considered all outcomes and will protect their best interest. We also fashioned in a note that this treat trigger would have an addictive twist to it. The more treats this pup receives, the more she wants, furthering her desire for that euphoric sensation, and in turn, solidifying her total devotion to the user.

My subject did inform me that while this trigger is effective, she finds that it takes a few in order to stack the pleasurable feeling, so I do intend on dropping her again in order to reinforce a sudden, overwhelming, but also short lived nature to this trigger, which will in turn heighten her desire for more treats in an attempt to chase the pleasure. I’m pleased by her ability to communicate the efficacy of my methods, it allows me to adjust as needed. I’m lucky to have such a receptive subject.

To close out this entry, I want to again emphasize how satisfied I am over the complete change in demeanor this pup has shown in the short time we’ve been working together. Considering her near-immediate devotion, along with the plans I have in store-- to say that I’m excited would be an understatement.

[tanadrin]

RE "revolutionary leftists are revolutionary because they know they can't win electorally."

It astounds me a little that there are leftists who think that a communist revolution is more likely to work than, like, fifty years of community-building and electoral politics. Sewer socialism, union activism, and other boring activities have brought much more success in the U.S. than agitation for a revolution.

What I mean is, setting aside the moral concerns (violence is bad, even when it's necessary, and if there are practical alternatives then we should pursue them), I am not a revolutionary leftist because I think we would lose a revolution. For one thing, there is a considerable right-wing element in the country that is much better prepared for this kind of thing, and I think that the majority of the institutions in the U.S. would pick fascism over communism if they had to choose, but also, prolonged violent action is ripe for breeding authoritarianism.

Goatse is concerned that "the party" might "abandon or neglect its primary ends," but what is leftism if it is not, at bottom, an attempt to improve the living conditions of all people, et cetera et cetera? To the extent that social democratic parties successfully pursue this end to some degree, they're better than than an ostensible communist party that talks the talk but commits human rights abuses. And, more than the fact that U.S. leftism has some pretty fierce opposition that would probably fare better if The Revolution happened tomorrow, I think that, even in winning, we would lose, because what came out the other end would look a lot more like Stalinism.

I think one thing the hardcore revolutionaries in OECD countries don't realize is that the reason they can't marshal support for their revolutions is that the socialists won most of the issues that were salient in the early 20th century--workers got more rights, better pay, unions were legalized, etc., etc. But it didn't take restructuring the whole political economy to do it, which is immensely frustrating if you believe that any society without your ideal political economy is inherently immoral and impure, so in order to justify an explicitly communist platform you have to rhetorically isolate it from the filthy libs and feckless demsocs who it turns out have been pretty effective within the arena of electoral politics in which supposedly nothing can ever get done, and treat them as of a piece with the out-and-out fascists and royalist autocrats of the 1920s and 30s.

Which, you know. Is not persuasive to most people! Most people understand intuitively the vast gulf between the SPD and the Nazis; they see that, milquetoast and compromising though they may be, the center-left can deliver substantive policy improvements without the upheaval of a civil war or political purges, and this is attractive to people who are not of a millenarian or left-authoritarian personality.

Which isn't to say that communists don't often make important points! It sucks having to fight a constant rearguard action against the interests of capital rolling back the social improvements of the 20th century, and it sucks that liberal governments in Europe and North America have historically been quite happy to bankroll and logistically support fascists and tyrants in the third world against communist movements (which invariably only exist as communist movements because these same fascists and tyrants have crushed more compromising movements and only the most militant organizations have managed to survive).

But I agree with you: communists also talk a big game about how liberalism is the real fascism (what's that line from Disco Elysium I see quoted everywhere about how everybody is secretly a fascist except the other communists, who are liberals?), while also being awful at democracy. Suppressing dissent because your small clique of political elites is the only legitimate expression of the people's will (which you know, because you have declared it to be so) really is some rank bullshit. A system with competitive elections is still, well, a system with competitive elections, even if those elections are structurally biased in certain ways; all the bloviating that attempts to justify communist authoritarianism cannot really obscure the fact that authoritarian systems are cruel and brittle, regardless of the ideology being served.

[vidavalor]

Well, Aziraphale went Down like a...

Bullet = lead.

Ball = root word of balloon.

...lead balloon.

Loon (contained within balloon): a rascal.

Rascal: from rabble, meaning: a mob.

Loon: a diving bird. A bird with a love for diving into the sea.

Loon: a boor. Boor: from bovis & bos, meaning cow or ox.

Boor: a farmer; a dweller. Someone who is part of a community.

Loon: One who dives; a diver. A fall involves a dive.

Loon: A mentally unbalanced or an eccentric person; from lunacy.

Heaven's ideas are, as Crowley accurately put it, lunacy.

Loon: An ember-goose. Geese: you know, as Muriel would say: big, cross ducks.

Cross: to be upset, especially angry. You don't want to cross Aziraphale when he's cross.

Also: the thing Jesus was murdered on.

Embers: the small, still-burning bits of a dying fire.

But...

Embers: the small, still-burning bits of a dying fire that are often used to stoke that fire back up to a roaring blaze.

The essential element of a fire that never dies.

Lead: Alternate meanings: one who goes first..

...and one who acts as a guide. So, Crowley...

Lead: Alternate meanings: primary; main. The character whose story arc forms the outline of the story. So, Aziraphale...

Bullet: from French boulette, meaning cannonball and small ball.

Ball: a three-dimensional, round object. Also: a party.

Information that "goes down like a lead balloon" is information that generates a negative response in the recipient.

Like when you tell off a fascist floating head over Heavenly Zoom like the total badass that you are... but then he decides he doesn't like it so he lets Satan have at tempting you... and then Satan shows up the next morning looking like said fascist floating head guy to help with his temptation because the fascist floating head is the only person who can give you the power you think you need to more fully protect the love of your life... which also just so happens to be the only thing that would ever, ever, ever tempt you to Hell...

Aziraphale already having spoken to The Metatron the night before seems to be implied in this bit here:

A "Lead Balloon": A balloon made of lead, which is heavy metal. The heaviness of the lead inhibits the balloon's ability to float in the air. It is too weighed down to be its otherwise light, joyous, balloon self. Ahhh, the scent of Aziraphale metaphor...😊

A lead balloon, by design, is never going to be able to stay Up. It's unlikely it ever was truly, fully Up in the first place.

The lead balloon is always going to fall Down.

From its beginning, its fall has been inevitable.

To "bite the bullet": An expression meaning to accept an impending difficult situation or hardship and endure the pain of going through it with fortitude.

To bite a bullet (literally) is to successfully survive The Bullet Catch.

The expression is thought to have originated from doctors who would have patients bite down on a lead bullet in order to redirect their focus enough to help them endure the pain during an operation that was occurring without anesthetics.

I'm not suggesting any bullet-paralleling shenanigans here; Crowley is a metaphorical bullet here enough as it is. This kiss is as painful as an operation without anesthetics, though...

An operation (in espionage): organized spying on and manipulation of enemy targets.

An operator: an effective, clever manipulator.

A lift operator: a person who operates the buttons in an elevator.

As we know, in Britain, what Aziraphale gets into is referred to as a lift. In the United States, it is called an elevator. This lift/elevator is in the doorway to a pub-- The Dirty Donkey. Why this location for the lift/elevator, of all the shops on Whickber Street?

Are you going to be surprised at this point to learn that I think there's a word-related reason? 😂

Elevated: Slang for being drunk, off of the notion that being drunk is experiencing a kind of high.

A high, though, is not necessarily an experience of elevation; it is just a generic term for any mental experience that is outside the norm, due to the influence of an ingested substance or substances.

A high? Can bring you down.

In Crowley's foreshadowing/paralleling case in 1827, he was elevated from the laudanum-laced wine when he was dragged down to Hell.

Alcohol is what they sell in The Dirty Donkey where the elevator/lift is.

Alcohol is not a stimulant. It may appear to send you up... but it does not actually physically send you up, no matter what it appears to be doing on the surface.

Alcohol is a depressant. Alcohol sends your body down...

It also can come with a real crash down if you have too much of it. That crash down, as we know, is called a hangover. Remember when we heard that term used in S2?

From Crowley, when Hell first showed up on Whickber Street and started to circle closer to Aziraphale:

A hangover (one of two original meanings): a thing left over from before. Like the fact that Satan and The Metatron were pretty pissed off about the end of S1. Like the fact that S2's cliffhanger, hangover ending is going to carry into the plot of S3.

Elevated is a slang term that uses language of "going up" (elevated; high) to actually describe "going down" (drunk; depression).

That other, original meaning of a hangover, though?

A survival. 😊

[elminx]

Energy Update: Mercury Retrograde, August 2024

Starting on August 5th, Mercury enters retrograde 3/4 of 2024. The retrograde runs from 04° Virgo to 21° Leo and makes thrice repeating trines with our Wounded Healer Chiron in Aries and squares to Uranus in Taurus. Retrograde Mercury will also conjunct the Sun and Venus once (as it does most retrograde cycles) and sextile Mars in Gemini once, as well.

The Basics

Mercury, our planet of communication, technology, and travel, is the fastest-moving planet in our solar system and retrogrades 3 to 4 times every year. This means that Mercury’s retrograde cycle is “business as usual” and isn’t something that should be feared but it is a change in the energy signature of one of our personal planets, so it’s worth paying attention and making adjustments where necessary.

Retrogrades don’t mean that the planet ACTUALLY is moving backward, of course. It is a perspective shift in our perception of the planetary movement through our skies. In this way, our perspectives and perceptions can get a bit twisted during these times and it is easy to miss key details or communicate ineffectively.

During Mercury’s retrograde, Mercury traces its path backward in our skies and it is considered better to go over your work rather than start something new. Mercury passes over these degrees in the sky thrice: the first time during its pre-retrograde shadow, the second time while it moves backward during its retrograde, and again a third time while it moves forward in its post-retrograde shadow. Because of this, we all get the cosmic opportunity to relearn and refocus on certain things that are going awry in our lives.

By looking at the degrees of Mercury’s retrograde and comparing it to your birth chart, you can understand how Mercury’s retrograde cycle might affect you. If you don’t want to do this yourself, you can always purchase a Mercury retrograde transit chart from me on Kofi.

Mercury retrogrades affect some people more than others. By order of significance, these people are most likely to be affected by a Mercury retrograde:

If you have Sun, Moon, Ascendant in Gemini and Virgo, or Mercury closely conjunct (within 2°) to your Sun, Moon, or Ascendant

If your natal Mercury was in retrograde or out of bounds

If the current retrograde crosses over your Sun, Moon, or Ascendant (in conjunction) or makes a square or opposition

If the current retrograde crosses over your Mercury, Venus, or Mars or makes a square or opposition with them

If the current retrograde makes a trine with one of your personal planets or a sextile to your Sun, Moon, or Ascendant

If you work in a job that involves technology, communication, or travel or are currently undergoing a task that involves one of these domains during this retrograde cycle

If you live with, are in a relationship with, or closely work with a person who meets the above criteria

One can assume that the more of these factors in play, the stronger you may experience the effects of a Mercury retrograde cycle. This isn’t to say that what you experience will be bad or wrong – some people experience a lot of freedom from Mercury’s journey. The more open you are willing to give up control and stay open to the ever-changing landscape of a Mercury cycle, the easier it will be.

The Nitty Gritty

Now that we’ve gone over the basics let’s take a look at the specifics of THIS Mercury retrograde cycle. Mercury will retrograde backward from 04° Virgo to 21° Leo. This puts the stressors of this retrograde on the early mutable signs (Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius, Pisces) and late fixed signs (Taurus, Leo, Scorpio, Aquarius). The switchover from Fixed to Mutable signs can be viewed as the energy of relaxation, both of effort and intent. It’s important that we need both types of energy in our lives (both fixed/controlled and mutable/relaxed); this retrograde cycle is likely to bring up issues of imbalance between these two differing energy signatures. You may find yourself stuck on one side of this equation (all relaxed and unable to accomplish anything or all fixed and unable to stand down).

Mercury will interact with all of our other personal planets (the Sun, Moon, and Venus through conjunction and Mars in sextiles), which shows that this retrograde will take on a more personal nature. Although we experience Mercury’s retrogrades 3-4 times a year, not all of them pack as much punch as others. This Mercury cycle will be inside our homes and likely impact our daily lives and our interactions with our Others.

Additionally, Mercury will make three trines to Chiron in Aries (sitting on top of that touchy point from our total solar eclipse back in April) and three squares to Uranus in Taurus. Unlike our personal planet aspects, these don’t influence our personal lives as directly, but they will impact the general energy of the world at large, which sometimes can trickle into our personal lives. [Note here that if you have personal planets that interact in aspect with these Mercury-Uranus and Mercury-Chiron moments, this may impact you personally.]

Let’s start with Chiron because it’s the energy we’ve already stewed in. Chiron isn’t one of the planets but an asteroid that has caught the interest of many astrologers in recent years. Often called the Wounded Healer, it represents a pain point or an unhealed wound. Back in April, we experienced a Mercury retrograde that coincided with our eclipse season, and during the total solar eclipse, the Sun was conjunct with both Mercury and Chiron. This was a whopper of a day that many people are still reeling from. Although Chiron has kept moving, it is still only 4° from this fate-filled spot. That means that, to a greater or lesser degree, each connection between Mercury and Chiron is another chance for us to revisit this energy.

“Revisit,” being one of the big re’s, is one of the keywords to understanding Mercury retrograde lessons. We are being given a chance to revisit, revise, rework, and reimagine. With Chiron involved, it’s likely to hurt (at least at first). It may feel like too much. But its worth remembering that Chiron isn’t something that happens TO you, it is considered to be a force of strong healing energy working FOR you.

It’s also worth remembering that Mercury will pass over this point with Chiron three times: once in forward motion during its pre-retrograde shadow, a second while moving backward in retrograde, and a third time in forward motion during its post-retrograde shadow.

Newsflash: you don’t have to get it right the first time through.

A common metaphor for imagining retrograde cycles is as a lesson or “hole” in the ground with which we must fall in/pass over/encounter trice to gain the full experience of the situation.

The story unfolds something like this:

Oh, there’s a hole in the ground! I fell into it because I didn’t know that it was there. It’s not my fault. (pre-retrograde shadow phase)

Oh, there’s a hole in the ground. I fell into it again. I did know it was there…maybe I should learn to avoid this hole? (retrograde phase)

And, if all goes well: Oh hey, that’s a hole in the ground! It’s the same hole I fell into before. I know how to walk around this now. (post-retrograde phase)

If the solar eclipse in April passed by uneventfully, you may find that this Mercury-Chiron set of trines also does. If the eclipse was especially difficult, consider this a chance to gain better insight into what happened and why. We can re-frame these transits to be for our own good by being open to the experiences of Mercury’s underworld journeys.

Lastly, we should discuss Mercury square Uranus. Mercury and Uranus have a lot in common—they both involve and control our brain processes to a certain point. If Mercury is the thinking brain, Uranus can be viewed as pure inspiration. Mercury is quick-moving and changeable; Uranus is slow-moving but enacts drastic and lasting change. Many modern astrologers view Uranus as the higher octave of Mercurial energy; it is Mercury’s energy infused with the beyond.

For the most part, Uranus’s energy simply happens to us. It is the lightning bolt in the Tower card, the hurricane that washes away a whole floodplain, or the volcano that awakens to bring destruction and rebirth. What I mean by this is that it is so far beyond us that it can often feel catastrophic, but – like the eclipses – Uranus has a way of blowing open opportunities that we couldn’t even have imagined. We are all stuck little humans who don’t like to change our own lives and sometimes something beyond us seems to reach down and make that change FOR us so that we are forced to move.

We don’t get a choice in what happens to us in situations like this, but we do get a choice in how we respond.

Two out of these three Mercury square Uranus days are full moons, which puts extra emphasis on their energy signatures. On one of these two days (8/19), the Sun in Leo will be conjunct to Mercury and also square to Uranus in Taurus, making a fixed t-square in the sky. Of the three days, this is the one to watch out for and potentially lie low through. The other two dates are days to encourage divine inspiration if that is your thing.

Watch out for how you speak during these rough squares, as misunderstandings will run rampant, and tempers may be at an all-time low. Uranus is never a patient planet, but in Taurus, it can become a raging bull in about six seconds flat. Give yourself and your others as much grace as you can during this time. Shut your mouth entirely, perhaps, and work on listening (something Mercury in egoic Leo definitely can have a problem with at times).

Any time a retrograde bridges the cusp between signs, you can guess that we will need to dig deep into the differences between the two signs somehow. Virgo is our mutable earth sign, often concerned with work, perfectionism, and effort. Leo is our fixed fire sign, more likely to be the lazy lion basking in the sun while the gruntlings do the work. Remember here, there is no judgment on these energies: there is a time to do the work and a time to bask in the Sun. The problem comes into play when you only do one and not the other.

Standard Mercury retrograde warnings apply:

Technology tends to go a bit wonky, so save your work often and proofread twice before you hit send on an important document. Mercury retrograde is considered the ideal time to edit: reread, rewrite, rework. Travel will take twice as long and almost inevitably involve detours—pack your patience and determination to enjoy the ride. If a person from your past shows up again, look into the unfinished business, but don’t expect it to last past Mercury stations direct. Mercury is a trickster: if it looks too good to be true, it probably is.

All that glitters is never gold during Mercury’s retrograde cycles, but Fool’s Gold can be its own reward.

The Details

7/16 – Mercury enters its pre-retrograde shadow 21° Leo 7/18 – Mercury in Leo trine Chiron in Aries 7/21 – Full Moon 29° Capricorn, Mercury in Aries square Uranus in Taurus 7/25 – Mercury enters Virgo 8/5 – Mercury retrogrades 04° Virgo 8/8 – Retrograde Mercury conjunct Venus 03° Virgo 8/14 – Mercury enters Leo 8/18 – Sun conjunct retrograde Mercury 26° Leo, Retrograde Mercury in Leo square Uranus in Taurus 8/19 – Full moon 27° Aquarius , Sun conjunct Mercury 27° Aquarius 8/22 – Sun enters Virgo 8/23 – Retrograde Mercury in Leo trine Chiron in Aries 8/24 – Retrograde Mercury in Leo sextile Mars in Gemini 8/28 – Mercury stations direct 21°Leo 9/2 – New moon 11° Virgo, Mercury in Leo trine Chiron in Aries 9/7 – Mercury in Leo square Uranus in Taurus 9/9 – Mercury enters Virgo 9/11 – Mercury exits its post-retrograde shadow 04° Virgo

Do you like my work? You can tip me over on Kofi, sign up to be a monthly supporter of my work or purchase an astrology commission. I have a limited number of spots open for personalized Mercury retrograde reports.

[butchpeace]

it is so insane to say that doctors shouldn’t practice gender reassignment surgeries, or that hrt shouldn’t be accessible, and not for transgender activism reasons either (though ignoring the enormous number of people that are happy with their transition is just willful ignorance). where do you draw the line on what adults can do with their bodies? do you ban all plastic surgeries? do you ban all the surgeries that require removing “healthy” body parts? Do you have any idea the amount of autonomy that strips cis women of? What about breast reductions? Oh, they can be removed because the woman’s back hurt? What is the level of hurt required, how do you decide which women’s backs are hurting enough and which aren’t? What about cis women who desire hysterectomies for a variety of reasons? how is removing my breast different from say, getting breast implants. do we ban breast implants, and then where do you draw the line? it’s such a non-nuanced way to see things.

“all plastic surgeries should be banned!” what if somebody gets into a car accident and doctors have to reconstruct their face. Probably they can live without it, but are you saying they should? What if somebody breaks a nose, should the doctor do the absolute bare minimum to fix it instead of trying to give it the aspect it had before? What if a woman requires a mastectomy for medical reasons, and lately wants breast implants, should it be illegal for her to get those? besides, what is the level of illness required to perform a surgery that is outlawed? Do you think having to fight the law as well during something like breast cancer or similar would be of benefit to women? worth it if it means transgender people can’t get it either?

and don’t even get me started on hrt, because if you can’t prescribe those meds for a certain mental condition, what is the difference with any other medicine, especially psychomeds? That it has collateral effects? Guess what? Most of them do! That it shows on the body? What is the actual difference, that you can make a law out of, without any overlapping, between something working on your hormones to show a change in your physical appearance and something working on your hormones to show a change in your brain activity? What if a med that’s needed to cure whatever illness has certain effects on the body? I swear you people do not think.

I’ve thought about all of these things, over the 12 years I spent in the trans community and the 10 years I spent on hormones. I still came to the conclusion I did. Actually, going through it myself is what brought me to this belief and cemented my opinion.

HRT and gender surgeries are different from necessary medical treatments and procedures because they aren’t medically necessary. They are medically harmful across the board in every case, to varying degrees. Female bodies are not meant to have high levels of testosterone. It causes health problems. Same for males.

So in order to defend using HRT, they have to prove that the benefit outweighs the harm. How do they attempt to do that? By claiming that everyone will commit if they can’t transition.

And what basis do they have for that belief? Nothing scientific. The only way they could get that data is through a study that gives half the participants HRT and doesn’t give it to the other half, and compares how many people commit.

So right now, they’re just going on the assumption that transitioning helps our mental health better than any alternative mental healthcare treatment option would be able to. (And better than just leaving us alone.)

This is when most people bring up how trying to treat dysphoria in another way would be “conversion therapy”. Because they apparently aren’t aware that there’s a huge difference between using electric shock to try to change people’s sexuality, and using exploratory talk therapy to help dysphoric people work through the issues that caused them dysphoria in the first place.

Proper mental healthcare, medical education, feminist education, and teaching dysphoric people to connect with their body has the ability to get rid of their dysphoria. It worked for me and many others I’ve talked to who have detransitioned or desisted. And sometimes all it takes is just growing up for us to understand ourselves better and accept our bodies. But of course, that idea threatens the entire foundation of the trans movement, so it can’t be true. Right?

In my mind, it’s fucking dystopian that we have all these kids now who never even got the chance to grow up before having these decisions made for them. Being fed the idea that they’re trans, and the only way for them to be happy is to make drastic medical changes to their body, has a devastating affect on their mental health and leads them to medicalization they otherwise may not have needed.

As for elective procedures, yes I also oppose those. I think any surgeon who gives someone a potentially dangerous procedure, or a procedure with a high regret rate, should lose their license to practice.

It’s not “oppressive” to women to say I don’t agree with them getting cosmetic surgeries or electively getting their important reproductive organs removed. That’s fucking ridiculous, to call that “oppression”. The fact that women think they need these cosmetic surgeries is the real oppression.

Anything with a legitimate medical reason, breast reduction, or simple procedures to prevent pregnancy are exceptions to the rule because they legitimately improve quality of life.

I hope that helped you be able to follow my train of thought about all this, and understand better what I’m saying.

[placeholder-mcd]

(Obligatory "I sound like I'm speaking objectively from authority but this is just my opinion and it's okay for you to like media I dislike for whatever reasons you may have")

Okay so like. while "the minecraft move trailer is so bad that it makes minecraft story mode look good in comparison" is both true and funny, can we please not start pretending that story mode is a well-crafted piece of media. as someone who has played through it multiple times (first when it originally came out and I was 12 and thought it was awesome, then later as an interactive Netflix experience with friends for so-bad-it's-good reasons) I feel pretty qualified to say it blows

Like, yes. There are so many things that MCSM got right that the movie apparently got wrong. But, like, they're all extremely common-sense things to get right -- like having the whole thing be animated, and maintaining a visual style that feels consistent with minecraft, and spending time with individual aspects of the minecraft experience that have their own communities (like redstone contraptions). that sense seems a little less common now that the movie trailer exists, but still, these are all bare minimum expectations of a piece of narrative-driven media set in Minecraft.

MCSM still completely fails, however, to have any compelling characters (RIP Reuben you were just as annoying as everyone else) or non-grating dialogue. The universe they depict isn't even well thought out! Like, okay, example:

Right off the bat, they make a big decision about how they're going to handle MCSM: they are not telling a story about people playing Minecraft the video game, but are instead depicting a universe where Minecraft is inhabited by a civilization of NPCs that have identical abilities to a player (aside from like, pausing the game or changing settings or what have you). This, in itself, is not a bad decision, but it puts the writers in a position where they need to conceptualize what is effectively a Minecraft AU. You're not playing survival mode or creative mode, you're playing Story mode. In this AU, humans exist in the minecraft world and have for a long time (centuries, at least?), they've built cities, they have language, etc. Imagine you're Jesse. Imagine you've grown up inside of Minecraft. Everyone is playing on hardcore, there is no respawning, and you live in a world filled with strange and dangerous creatures that seem hell-bent on killing you. Why the Fuck does anyone go out at night. Why isn't literally everyone combat-trained. Why is Jesse acting like he's never seen a Creeper before. Why is Petra the only member of the main party who knows how to craft a pickaxe.

At the build competition, the party is surprised that the reigning building team has a beacon. But nobody takes a second to actually investigate what that means. Did their team intentionally spawn and defeat a Wither? Doesn't that make them more badass and legendary than the order of the stone? Is there a black market for nether stars? (I think Petra is probably the one who gave them the beacon since she also trades Ivan a Wither skull. But like. Why isn't literally anyone else just going and doing what Petra does. Why aren't they impressed)

Ivan having access to a Command Block is also insane. Like, it has potential to be an extremely cool choice -- did Ivan find a way to break the fourth wall? Did he find an exploit in Minecrafts code that allowed him to obtain this? The command block has the power to just generate resources out of thin air. Ivan could actually use it to become a god and give himself creative mode. But okay, we can assume that the command block is just... Different, in the AU. Fine. It's a computing center / power core for the Wither Storm. Sure

But, like. I, even as an 11 year old, knew everything there was to know about minecraft when I played story mode (and, unlike the Movie, MCSM was actually attempting to appeal to the existing fanbase), so watching these characters who have lived for DECADES within the Minecraft universe just. Be helpless and completely clueless as to how the universe works? It makes me hate like all of them. I don't care about Jesse or Gabriel and if I actually had the freedom to perform the basic actions I could perform in Minecraft -- mining, building, and crafting -- I could use my game knowledge to pretty swiftly end the entire conflict at like any point in the story. And I'm not very good at video games. But I would expect a character who's been LIVING IN THE MINECRAFT WORLD TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. BECAUSE THEY'D BE BETTER AT MINECRAFT THAN ANY OF US.

The whole thing is a contrived and buggy mess that feels like it was written by a Hollywood CEO who watched someone play the game for 30 minutes, looked up some basic information like how to beat the game and whether there's any in-game lore, and then riffed on that until a script outline was finished. The programmers, visual artists, and composers clearly did a ton of work to make MCSM feel like minecraft. And they did a good job -- clearly, a much better job than the Movie is going to do. But that doesn't change the fact that the Story -- the focal element advertised in the title -- completely misses the fucking mark and centers around a group of characters who are largely incompetent and stupid in an unfunny and uninteresting way. MCSM was a shitty cashgrab by telltale games and I am not apologizing to it.

[creacherkeeper]

happy pride everyone

for some reason i was sitting outside this morning and enjoying some shockingly not boiling hot weather and reflecting on a post i had made like ... 12 years ago on here that "blew up" (like 60k notes on early days tumblr) and thinking like. wow i sure do know a lot more about myself now that makes all that make sense but

the post was someone saying like. hey how can you call yourself an atheist and support gay people because gay people go against the concept of evolution. and my reply was like. actually there are gay members of like every social species weve studied it in and i had a bunch of facts laid out about all the different very gay animals of this world (like giraffes having very largely m/m sex)

but now, like 12 years later, i am thinking about human evolution and queer identity and thought it would be fun to talk about. i am by far not an expert and so if there are experts who want to correct me or talk more in depth about this Please jump in but

... why did humans evolve to be queer anyway?

very short answer: because its helpful to raising kids

longer answer: though its debated whether humans are a prosocial or eusocial species, it is agreed upon that early humans cooperatively raised young, including those that they did not personally sire or give birth to, and that we lived in multi-generation communities where younger members would help raise older members offspring, and vice versa

(note: im using the terms amab and afab for human populations potentially pre concepts of gender but work with me here, i dont want to keep repeating genitalia or genomes when those arent always a helpful 1 to 1 either. sex is a spectrum gender is made up etc support intersex rights)

we know that due to fraternal birth order effect (npr link), youre 33% more likely to be gay with each older amab sibling that you have (not 33% total, but 33% more, so like 2% to 2.6 to 3.5 etc). this is true of both amab and afab people with older amab siblings. we also know that a birthing parent having more of a specific antibody makes their children more likely to be gay (and that antibody is not exclusive to but is highly tied to giving birth to amab children)

in addition, evolutionarily speaking, its just as advantageous for your siblings children to do well than it is for yours to. its incredibly rare you would happen to have a very helpful mutation that your siblings dont have. which means that your siblings kids would be about 25% amab grandparent, 25% afab grandparent, and 50% a parent who is unrelated to you. this is exactly the same for your own children

okay, so what does that mean?

to put it simply, it means that having older siblings, specifically older siblings who are more easily able to sire more children, makes you more likely to end up in a same-sex couple, which means you are two adults with no children who are now around to help raise children you are equally invested in the success of than if they were your own

the more older youth or adults you have around to help who are not also using up a bunch of resources by being pregnant and having non-helping-age children, the better off that community's children will be. more people to hunt and gather and create resources like tools, which means everyone prospers, especially the kids

or, to frame it from the opposite view: having gay siblings means your children are more likely to survive and thrive

(kind of funny how conservatives are like gay people shouldnt be around children when the entire point of our evolutionary development was that we were great to have around if you had kids but like. alas)

so, thats the very basic core of it. but you can apply this concept to a lot of queer identities. aroace? working adult around to help who is not bringing in an unrelated partner or having kids. trans? you now either have an m/f couple who can fill two different social niches without having kids, or you have a gay couple who is able to do more varied physical tasks whether or not they do have kids. bi people may have kids or may not, or their children may be more spread out if they have partners of different sexes over time

not to mention you kind of have some built in, ready to go parents in the case that another community member dies, and there are now orphans that need raising. its a lot harder for someone whos already a parent to take on more children, as opposed to an adult couple who doesnt have any

so yeah :) were queer because we were helpful to have in communities and allowed everyone, but especially youth, to prosper and thrive

tl;dr: queer people were an evolutionary advantage to have in an early community because we were helping-age members who were able to cooperatively raise young and take on orphans without using up resources on birthing and raising our own young

yay science :o) happy pride everyone!!!

[rollercoasterwords]

hi there! i saw a post you made ages ago about gender not necessarily being a static thing and being something that can change over a person’s lifetime.

excuse my ignorance in this but do you think that is something that applies to a person’s sexual orientation as well? i always appreciate your insight on these topics.

also, apologies if anything is worded strangely. english is not my first language.

no worries, i can understand u perfectly! and my short answer to ur question is yes

longer answer is i don’t think anyone is born w some innate metaphysical identity that they can unearth to discover their True Self; i think sex, gender, and sexuality are largely socially constructed, though obviously materially rooted. the comparison i sometimes make to explain this to students is to think about an accent—certain physical aspects influence accent (mouth shape, vocal chords, etc) but ultimately the accent a person has is almost entirely shaped by the world around them; babies aren’t born with some “true” accent they have to discover about themselves. but that doesn’t make a person’s accent any less real or “natural”!

i think where some people get defensive abt the idea that sexuality isn’t necessarily static or innate is that oftentimes conservative voices have used this specifically to say that being gay is a phase, etc. this is a very clever trick, in which heterosexuality is enshrined as “natural” and any sexuality departing from that is a phase, a choice, etc, such that many queer people have found themselves cornered into arguing that queerness is also natural and innate, just like heterosexuality. but the ‘born this way’ narrative will ultimately not lead to liberation, because it fails to question the basic premise that heterosexuality is natural and innate; in reality heterosexuality is just as constructed and contrived as any other form of sexuality, and in fact we often see the lengths that people must go to in order to hide this fact. kinda like the wizard of oz behind the curtain (the invention of heterosexuality by jonathan ned katz is a great book abt this!)

the other sticking point i think people often have with this concept is that they think saying sexuality isn’t innate means people can just pick & choose who they’re attracted to. but that’s not how social constructs work! again, going back to the example of accents, just because an accent is socially constructed/developed does not mean that people can just snap their fingers and get a new accent. this is because social constructs are grounded in material realities and have material effects; they’re not just playing make-believe. money is another good example of a social construct that has very real and tangible material effects; i can’t just take monopoly money to the store and buy something.

so…yeah. i think sexuality can be just as fluid as gender. maybe you’ll be attracted to something at one point in your life and that’ll change over time, or maybe you’ll identify with one sexuality and then later figure out a different label works better for you. when it comes to queer politics & queer communities, i really don’t see a point in trying to nitpick or analyze whether someone is REALLY x sexuality, or what the “correct” label is for someone to use, bc i find labels more useful for identifying shared struggles than for like. unearthing buried metaphysical truths about identity lol. i also have found that i personally am much happier not worrying about figuring out my “true” sexuality and just using whatever label best fits my experiences & how i’m perceived in the world