#economic dependence

[bandofchimeras]

more unsolicited advice for poor girls & queer & trans kids: - do NOT MARRY THE UPPER CLASS GUY FOR STABILITY and confuse it for love. - do NOT have his children without a PRENUP & a childcare & custody agreement set up in advance. - you ARE marrying your in-laws. if they look down on you and see you as unworthy of their son, it WILL impact you and any children you have. - re kids: you are making an economic decision. raising children is a full-time job. ensure you are being adequately compensated. - if you can help it, NEVER mask your queerness for this kind of "getting stable" relationship - it will just stunt you late into your midlife and give you a lotta baggage to work through. -usually rich/upper class guys have emotional problems they will feel it is part of your agreement to tolerate & accommodate. be aware, pay attention to red flags or warnings from friends as you are entering an economically dependent position.

If it seems too good to be true, it probably is!

_______________________________________________ Stay safe, and remember if you find yourself being financially, emotionally, or physically abused, there is help out there! Domestic Violence Hotline for US: 800-799-7233 An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Stay smart, remember your worth, stay connected to a community of equals...and FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE is key!

[ujusttry]

India Boycott Maldives: Diplomatic Spat Intensifies Unfolding Crisis - 5 Key Points

This article delves into the India Boycott Maldives controversy, unraveling the diplomatic tensions, tourism impacts, and the delicate interplay of cultural ties and geopolitical dynamics in the Maldives. Explore the intricacies of this brewing international dispute. Brewing Tensions in the Maldives CapitalDerogatory Comments Trigger OutrageImpact on Tourism EconomyDiplomatic Fallout and…

[aronarchy]

Why we don’t like it when children hit us back

To all the children who have ever been told to “respect” someone that hated them.

March 21, 2023

Even those of us that are disturbed by the thought of how widespread corporal punishment still is in all ranks of society are uncomfortable at the idea of a child defending themself using violence against their oppressors and abusers. A child who hits back proves that the adults “were right all along,” that their violence was justified. Even as they would cheer an adult victim for defending themself fiercely.

Even those “child rights advocates” imagine the right child victim as one who takes it without ever stopping to love “its” owners. Tear-stained and afraid, the child is too innocent to be hit in a guilt-free manner. No one likes to imagine the Brat as Victim—the child who does, according to adultist logic, deserve being hit, because they follow their desires, because they walk the world with their head high, because they talk back, because they are loud, because they are unapologetically here, and resistant to being cast in the role of guest of a world that is just not made for them.

If we are against corporal punishment, the brat is our gotcha, the proof that it is actually not that much of an injustice. The brat unsettles us, so much that the “bad seed” is a stock character in horror, a genre that is much permeated by the adult gaze (defined as “the way children are viewed, represented and portrayed by adults; and finally society’s conception of children and the way this is perpetuated within institutions, and inherent in all interactions with children”), where the adult fear for the subversion of the structures that keep children under control is very much represented.

It might be very well true that the Brat has something unnatural and sinister about them in this world, as they are at constant war with everything that has ever been created, since everything that has been created has been built with the purpose of subjugating them. This is why it feels unnatural to watch a child hitting back instead of cowering. We feel like it’s not right. We feel like history is staring back at us, and all the horror we felt at any rebel and wayward child who has ever lived, we are feeling right now for that reject of the construct of “childhood innocence.” The child who hits back is at such clash with our construction of childhood because we defined violence in all of its forms as the province of the adult, especially the adult in authority.

The adult has an explicit sanction by the state to do violence to the child, while the child has both a social and legal prohibition to even think of defending themself with their fists. Legislation such as “parent-child tort immunity” makes this clear. The adult’s designed place is as the one who hits, and has a right and even an encouragement to do so, the one who acts, as the person. The child’s designed place is as the one who gets hit, and has an obligation to accept that, as the one who suffers acts, as the object. When a child forcibly breaks out of their place, they are reversing the supposed “natural order” in a radical way.

This is why, for the youth liberationist, there should be nothing more beautiful to witness that the child who snaps. We have an unique horror for parricide, and a terrible indifference at the 450 children murdered every year by their parents in just the USA, without even mentioning all the indirect suicides caused by parental abuse. As a Psychology Today article about so-called “parricide” puts it:

Unlike adults who kill their parents, teenagers become parricide offenders when conditions in the home are intolerable but their alternatives are limited. Unlike adults, kids cannot simply leave. The law has made it a crime for young people to run away. Juveniles who commit parricide usually do consider running away, but many do not know any place where they can seek refuge. Those who do run are generally picked up and returned home, or go back on their own: Surviving on the streets is hardly a realistic alternative for youths with meager financial resources, limited education, and few skills.

By far, the severely abused child is the most frequently encountered type of offender. According to Paul Mones, a Los Angeles attorney who specializes in defending adolescent parricide offenders, more than 90 percent have been abused by their parents. In-depth portraits of such youths have frequently shown that they killed because they could no longer tolerate conditions at home. These children were psychologically abused by one or both parents and often suffered physical, sexual, and verbal abuse as well—and witnessed it given to others in the household. They did not typically have histories of severe mental illness or of serious and extensive delinquent behavior. They were not criminally sophisticated. For them, the killings represented an act of desperation—the only way out of a family situation they could no longer endure.

- Heide, Why Kids Kill Parents, 1992.

Despite these being the most frequent conditions of “parricide,” it still brings unique disgust to think about it for most people. The sympathy extended to murdering parents is never extended even to the most desperate child, who chose to kill to not be killed. They chose to stop enduring silently, and that was their greatest crime; that is the crime of the child who hits back. Hell, children aren’t even supposed to talk back. They are not supposed to be anything but grateful for the miserable pieces of space that adults carve out in a world hostile to children for them to live following adult rules. It isn’t rare for children to notice the adult monopoly on violence and force when they interact with figures like teachers, and the way they use words like “respect.” In fact, this social dynamic has been noticed quite often:

Sometimes people use “respect” to mean “treating someone like a person” and sometimes they use “respect” to mean “treating someone like an authority” and sometimes people who are used to being treated like an authority say “if you won’t respect me I won’t respect you” and they mean “if you won’t treat me like an authority I won’t treat you like a person” and they think they’re being fair but they aren’t, and it’s not okay.

(https://soycrates.tumblr.com/post/115633137923/stimmyabby-sometimes-people-use-respect-to-mean)

But it has received almost no condemnation in the public eye. No voices have raised to contrast the adult monopoly on violence towards child bodies and child minds. No voices have raised to praise the child who hits back. Because they do deserve praise. Because the child who sets their foot down and says this belongs to me, even when it’s something like their own body that they are claiming, is committing one of the most serious crimes against adult society, who wants them dispossessed.

Sources:

“The Adult Gaze: a tool of control and oppression,” https://livingwithoutschool.com/2021/07/29/the-adult-gaze-a-tool-of-control-and-oppression

“Filicide,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filicide

[bonegloss]

You're not a failed artist.

After over almost two decades on the internet, entering various art communities and establishing my online presence, I've noticed something.

The persistent idea that you've "failed" as an artist if you get a "real job" will not go away.

This, for the longest time, permeated my electronic meat slab and nestled in deeply MUCH to my detriment . For years I fought with myself over this idea. Self-flagellating and noisy, negative thoughts were almost suffocating because I was unable to Do Art As A Job consistently and efficiently enough to maintain a living off of it. Between navigating life for almost 30 years not knowing I was autistic (and all that entails) and trying to turn something I love into something I could make a living off of, it was a vicious and repetitive cycle of trying something new, getting burned out, entering a depressive state, climbing out of it, rinse and repeat. This is clearly unsustainable, especially now that I am more independent in my adult life; bills aren't going to wait for me to get out of my depressive funks. Even having jobs and still making art on the side today, this idea is still nestled in there, nagging me sometimes.

Would I like to make a living off of my art? Of course! Would it be even better if I was supported from making stuff from my own IP's? You fucking bet. But I know how I operate, I know I can't personally do that (yet? maybe?). Now, I realize not everyone can just go get a job, and I don't want this to come off as a rally cry to Just Go Out and Work (I know many creative people are disabled or have other reasons they cannot work), but I do want to stress that its okay if art needs to remain more of a hobby than a job. It is okay if you cannot sustain yourself solely as a living artist. Over the years, I've burned myself out so god damn hard and have watched others work themselves to (near) death or can barely scrape by because of this incessant feeling that we need to be doing art 100% of the time to have "made it". It is hurting us both physically and emotionally to keep this shit up.

Going forward, we have to do better. There is no shame in having an income that is not dependent on the things you make. I think that it can help alleviate a lot of stress and fatigue that can become associated with creating (and thus, making it hard to do something you love). We need to learn to be kinder to ourselves and unlearn comparing our experiences to what we see from other creative peers on social media. Its hard, finding work sucks ass, and no job will be perfect, but if it can help you survive a little easier and rekindle your relationship for creating the things you love to make, it'll make a world of difference.

You are not a failed artist. You're doing what you can so you can keep doing what you love.

[elder-millennial-of-zion]

Shitting on America like your ethnostate would be anything without America. Of america stopped giving Israel guns and bombs and money and un votes tommorow, Israel would literally be nothing.

So are Jews evil because we love America, or because we hate America? I can’t keep up.

You’ve used “colonialist” and now “ethnostate.” All you need is “apartheid” and “genocide” and you’ve got bingo.

[magnetictapedatastorage]

periodic reminders for newcomers to the cassette tape:

in most cases, the OLDER the MACHINE, the BETTER. once tapes stopped being popular (due to new things like CDs gaining popularity instead) the quality of new tape recorders/players DROPPED, meaning modern machines are VERY BAD. the highest quality of recorders/players are from times of intense competition of tape-vs-tape, not tape-vs-CD or tape-vs-spotify. Grab something from the 1980s, and you'll be golden.

the TAPES THEMSELVES can be as new and cheap as you'd like though! tapes are really "idiot proof", and will work fine no matter who made them, especially if you're only buying them for personal use.

finally, remember: a walkman can not record. recorders are usually bigger than tape players. recorders have a record button. that doesn't mean a walkman is useless. but if you're trying to record, you need a recorder. recorders are also able to play tapes, so if you're buying just one device, get a recorder.

[jeromepowell]

if you ask me a “what if” question, my answer will be “it depends.” no exceptions.

[theroundbartable]

Me: positive responses to my school work? The hell?

Teacher: well, yeah, you did good-

Me: but this- I! Did this!

Teacher: yes. Well done

Me: holy shite! I did good? What if I do another task?

Teacher: awesome!!!!

Me:

I present to you: the mind boggling concept of getting praised for your accomplishments rather than punished for your mistakes.

I've been living off this experience for over 6 months.

[ancient-rome-au]

The Vanilla Expedition (Part IV)

[poibynt]

The earlier HTTYD books occasionally refer to Hiccup as 'the last great viking hero' which is already a bit melancholy but grows even more so with the context of the later books. I doubt viking society as it was known and understood just totally imploded into dust during Hiccup's lifetime, it's even implied in his old man monologues that that doesn't happen. But it does imply that the end of the viking age, the death of the viking world and way of life is rapidly approaching. Just as the dragon time is over, and the dragons are slowly, slowly leaving as Hiccup grows up and old, the Viking time ends and they too slowy, slowly, die out. I wonder if Hiccup saw this coming decline and thought it was because the vikings couldn't live without dragons, economically and spiritually. How awful, to lose the thing you fought to save and sent away and then your culture year after year.

[terroristiraqi]

quick anyone have sources on how israel dominates palestinian economy

[pepi-nillo]

reading the orv novel at this pace isn't enough i need to inject it straight to my brain

[geisterland]

Brazil historically speaking had a great economic relationship with the UK following our independence (before that, we were on good terms too but that was serving the Portugal-UK relationships, see the Strangford Treaty). Until the horrors (the Christie Question). Later Brazil restored diplomatic relationships with the UK but I think the Christie Question was irreparable damage and nowadays we just have a good, mostly neutral relationship.

[an-organized-confusion]

This may be a little topical but watching a[nother] doc on SBF and the collapse of FTX really twists up the rhetorical angle of "effective altruism" brought up in POF.

Like. That collapse was kind of doomed to happen given how actually idealistic/naive some of the starting assumptions for EA are. One of which is not asking what forces even makes charity a "necessity" to speak of - wealth hoarding.

In order to get filthy stinking rich to "give back even more" you will fall into capitalism's traps. You will become the monster that makes people go to bread lines. You will have to fall into the trap of endless profits - and becoming more and more miserly when it comes to reporting to your investors and to the government.

Because to those investors? They couldn't give less of a shit how much you spend on "philanthropy" as long as you show infinite growth. It's why mass lay-offs can STILL happen during a GOOD quarter or product release. It's why rich philanthropy is pocket change compared to if said rich people didn't wriggle themselves outta paying taxes.

Taxes that fund social security, welfare programs, education, infrastructure, etc. Things that actually help people.

What I'm saying is - I think Janus (and Logan?) was definitely playing into some pro-capitalist rhetoric here. Which, I think should be more taken as a dialectic. Janus is known to discard inconvenient facts to make his arguments... but I do think his greatest value is to simply make one think about stuff more critically/comprehensively. Offering more questions to ask.

Neither Janus nor Patton has ALL the answers in the topic of ethics/morality. One can take/leave what works from their discussion as one sees fit. This is just me rambling/reflecting on it.

[breitzbachbea]

Logging off and trying to fall asleep quickly enough to not miss my hairdresser appointment tomorrow while I think about all possible scenarios of toxic, problematic, sweet sweet Kilick love.

[echidnana]

made $26 by being a communist fuck yeah