#if you can understand that time lords have a concept of gender more complex than even us

[single-snail]

btw my interpretation is that the doctor meant “who i am now” to mean someone who outwardly expresses when they find someone attractive and donna interpreted “who i am now” to mean gay

[mmmonie]

I have obey me brain rot and I physically cannot take it anymore so here are some random HCS I fucking busted out about demons under the read more (and some angel stuff thrown in. For fun. Spice is the variety of life or whatever) I formatted this on mobile so forgive me for my crimes pls..... 😔

Also as an fyi I have never written anything in my life <3 (and also I’m dyslexic) so if something sounds stupid I’m sorry lol <3 also I’m sure u can tell but I never know where to put commas so if that bothers u........sorry again lol

*There are (at least) two demonic languages: one is a bit like Latin albeit way more fucked up. The second one is spoken only. A human can learn to understand both but the second one requires a lot of concentration to discern due to the subtlety in the growls, clicks and other noises demons are capable of making. It’s also very dependent on body language, especially in demonic form.

*It would be nearly impossible for a human to be fluent in the second one because of that. (unless you’re like. A really good mimic?)

* the second one is the oldest language. The new language and it’s written counterpart are derived from it with a little twist, so you’ll still hear some interesting noises thrown in there. It would take some dedication to learn, though the written part is fairly easy once you get the hang of it. It was made to be read quickly and efficiently. The speaking part however...................good luck.

* Demons and angels can instantly pick up human languages including reading and writing. Wouldn’t do you much good to be summoned in like. Germany and not know the language LOL

* Demons purr LOL you can’t click and growl and NOT purr. Like cats, it is both a happy thing and a self soothing thing.

* There is a slight difference between a happy purr and a self soothing purr, but the difference depends entirely on the demon.

* Demons (and angels) are nearly impossible to kill. It’s also very hard to damage them in any meaningful way. They also heal very quickly, so even if you did get a good hit on one, if they managed to get away chances are they’d heal in a matter of hours.

* Stronger demons like the brothers are even MORE impervious to damage. The amount of times Beel’s reached into the oven barehanded just to pop a piping hot cookie in his mouth is insane. He swears it’s the best way to eat them.

* Angels are very stiff but very physically powerful. They have a lot of control over their bodies and are trained from a young age to be able to wield that power responsibly.

* Demons on the other hand are incredibly flexible and bounce back easily. Though your average demon might not be the same physical strength as an angel, they have agility on their side. Angels are heavy hitters where demons rely on their ability to strike multiple times very quickly.

* This was a very weird transition for the brothers, though the amount of strength they had barely changed between realms. Fallen angels don’t change that much strength wise, but a little bit is burned up in the fall (to protect themselves.)

* Angels may be strong but demons also posses a massive amount of strength and have to learn to control it over time. This is known as a “juvenile phase” but it happens at different ages depending on how they were born. Fallen angels do not go through this as they have already learned to keep a grip on their power. Do I have an entire separate post ready about this bc I just couldn’t shut up? Maybe...

* There are four ways of being “born” a demon. Fallen angels, half demons, human borns and natural demons.

* Humans can choose to be turned into demons, but it is a very painful process and they won’t be able to gain any strength, what they get is what the get. They are referred to as “human born” and were considered the lowest of the humanoid demons until Diavolo came into power.

* Human born used to just be made whenever by whoever but that caused problems. Demons would make human borns and then just leave them to flounder about by themselves in an unknown territory. Diavolo’s father put an end to that during his reign, but “accidents” still happen. Now you have to do paperwork if you want to turn your human friend/lover into a demon lol.

* The ceremony for turning humans into demons is incredibly complex, which is why banning making human born unless given permission is less of a problem than you’d think.

* Half demons are just that, they’re only half demon. Most are half human but there are a few other kinds of magical creatures mixed in there. They aren’t as strong as a natural demon nor a fallen angel but they can gain power through their other ancestry. Many of them specialize in unique kinds of magic.

* Half human/demon children aren’t as rare as you’d think they are. This is due to the fact that demons have all sorts of ways to keep a demonic baby alive. Ranging from shapeshifting and (magically) taking the baby themselves once it’s grown enough to handle the transition to various forms of potions and spells to help a human along.

* Half demons and natural demons have the luxury of being born already (mostly) acclimated to the devildom, making some of the transitions that come with a demons lifespan easier on them than human born and fallen angels.

* Angels are taught to control/ignore their instincts where demons are taught to rely on/embrace theirs. Because demonic instincts often work against the things taught in the celestial realm fallen angels have a hard time adjusting to their new environment. Though, as their sins overtake them, their instincts become easier to fall back on.

* Demons have multiple forms, not just the two shown in game. All in all, the brothers have 5, each becoming less and less humanoid.

* Half/human born demons are more likely to have both a tail and wings in their first demonic form. Stronger demons like the brothers are merely showing off the strongest of the two, but everyone has both. (Bc I think they slap LOL *points* u get a tail and wings! *u get a tail and wings*)

* •a demons features can be influenced by what sin they are, but it’s not a hard or fast rule. Don’t be surprised if a demon who looks more akin to Mammon is actually a Sloth demon.***this does not apply to little Ds who’s look is entirely dependent on their sin. Little Ds are an entirely separate conversation 😈

* human borns/half demons can have two sins assigned to them, though this makes them less powerful in both. Usually there is a more prominent sin.

* Diavolo’s rule has helped quite a bit with bringing humans into a new better light, and many natural born demons who haven’t been able to interact with the human realm have become increasingly curious about humans and the way they work. Much of this is due to media that was brought from the human world to sedate Dia’s intense curiosity.

* In the eyes of many older demons, humans are merely playthings and it is expected that most demons will eventually mate with at least one other demon. A human and a demon dating is seen as just infatuation on the demons part, and it’s often thought that there are no real feelings behind a relationship like that. However there have been/are many successful and happy human/demon relationships.

* Demons don’t really have a concept of marriage. They live so long there really isn’t a point to tying yourself to one single person (or a few people) However, that’s not to say that there aren’t relationships like that. There are binding ceremonies for expressing love and devotion to other beings and it has its own unique culture.

* though the gates to the human realm are still technically closed and have been for a long time, demons can still be summoned by witches (sorcerers, wizards, warlocks, whatever you call yourself.) They can also be successfully summoned if you are not a magic user, however this is rare and often can go wrong, much like horror movies.

* Summoning very powerful demons like the brothers is incredibly hard even for an extremely experienced magic user, so often the demon you get claiming to be Satan really isn’t LOL. There are demons who are actually assigned to go to summonings in the place of the seven lords of hell, but many demons will just take on the role to fuck around with whomever summoned them. You think a prince of hell has time to just go possess some object or person for fun? (Ok...Mammon Satan and Belphie might.......if they’re bored enough LOL)

* Demons are actually relatively cuddly creatures. They might be a little rough with strangers but base instincts with family members will always be to coddle rather than fight. They’re more like humans in that right.

* Angels don’t do much casual touching, they’re very uptight. Beel and Belphie being as close as they are was a bit of an oddity in the celestial realm. That’s not to say angels don’t need causal touch lol just that they were trained to avoid that “temptation”.

* the brothers had a hard time starting out in the Devildom because of this. They still have a hard time with casual touches, which is why they seem so touched starved with the MC.

Things I might elaborate on later:

* There is a difference between demons, incubi and succubi but it’s not what you think it is.

* Demons, angels and humans all have very different takes on gender.

* The juvenile phase (DO not tempt me I wrote out like 1000 words about it bc I couldn’t shut the fuck up)

* Animals in the Devildom are fucked up. I WILL fucking talk about this bc it’s my passion.

* Pacts and how they work..........

* Maybe I’ll also elaborate on the hierarchy/power structure of demons sometimes 

[komoryriku]

Queering KH Part 4: Hearts in Tune

Actually KH Finally lol

Pictured: Riku humming Sora’s name in a soft, adoring, wistful voice the way a swooning straight person sighs the name of their beloved of the opposite gender.

Kingdom Hearts gives off so many subtextual signals of queer coding that it genuinely BAFFLES me how people can really believe it is straight. You may be wondering what makes me so confident in that when there has not been anything in the games to explicitly prove any of the characters are not straight, and I will be happy to tell you. It is because in order to believe Kingdom Hearts is straight, you have to ignore WAY too much subtext. To truly believe that Sora is in love with Kairi and only coded to be interested in Kairi, you have to ignore his questioning of what love is. You have to ignore the combined keyblade he shares with Riku. You have to ignore how much the narrative is driving him to understand that Riku is his most important, cherished person. This all goes doubly for Riku who has a coming out story not unlike Elsa’s metaphorical one, in which his love for Sora is his greatest source of strength. You have to pretend the necklace gifting plot point is entirely straight and cannot possibly mean anything homoromantic. You have to ignore the way Sora cries while clutching Riku’s hand compared to his subdued and non-emotional reunion with Kairi- that’s just too much “accidental subtext” for me to confidently ignore lol. Intentional or not, KH is Gay~

Here’s how we’re gonna do this.

So where the hell do I even begin with coding KH? Well- I can’t possibly queer the whole of KH text in 1 summer, so what I plan to do is this:

Give you the tools to understand KH’s coding so that you can code it yourself~

Queer a few major KH scenes so that everyone can see that the proof is in the pudding.

I’m gonna try to break down various scenes to decode them and queer them so you can see what’s at play in KH. Originally when this meta was a single doc, I was only gonna cover 4 scenes. But since I’m breaking it into parts to update at my leisure, I’m gonna just add scenes and meta as I go~

Now without further ado:

How the Hearts in Tune scene is Gay Coded

This shouldn’t be too hard at all.~

This scene is almost too easy. 

The scene opens with Sora bringing Mickey the sound idea he found but as it turns out, one sound idea is not enough. Sora tells us not to worry because he has a friend who is always picking up the slack for him. Likewise, on Riku’s end, he brings his sound idea to Mickey and is surprised to see that Sora’s sound idea is necessary to complete the song. 

Once the sound ideas meet, this beautiful visual plays out in which the 2 sound ideas swirl around each other and the soundtrack title “Dearly Beloved” plays. 

Now, there are several things I want to note about this sequence- heck this visual alone before we move on. 

Recall earlier when I discussed Shiki’s point that blue and pink (likewise blue and red) “go together”, romantically.

I will let the visual of Sora’s sheet music being pink while Riku’s is blue speak for itself. But I will also add how this ties into the yin and yang themes I’m about to discuss:

Yin and Yang

This concept gets its own section because it’s such an influential concept in so many aspects of various cultures around the globe.

Yin and Yang is an eastern philosophy which illustrates the concept of dualism. In short, it is the concept that 2 opposite halves are complements to a whole. The original term in fact translates to dark-bright.  

I am neither a philosophy professor or student so I will keep this as brief as I can and simply encourage you to study up on Yin and Yang at your own leisure. I will however paste this section from wikipedia because I think it is extremely helpful information to have for studying eastern media in general. 

Yin and Yang: husbanded opposing forces. Dark-Light, Moon-Sun, Chaos-Order, Winter-Summer, Negative-Positive.

Female (Yin)-Male (Yang): Yes this is often used in a heteronormative heterosexual context because people are homophobic and believe in gender binaries, unfortunately, but I implore you to consider the concept in more figurative, spiritual, aesthetic themes, especially since Yin and Yang is a much grander philosophy than mere sexuality discourse; it’s about complementary forces creating a whole. 

For shipping purposes, think opposites attract. Think concepts that are traditionally associated with femininity meshing with concepts that are traditionally associated with masculinity. Queer media has a wonderful way of subverting heteronormative Yin and Yang tropes by showing that cis-hetero standards can be hypocritically non-compliant with the complementary concept.

Rather than thinking of this, 2 heteros in love based on being just- the same person with opposite genders:

Think of this, same gendered couples with complementary personalities:

Think about how an aloof scrappy butchy vampire queen attracts an uptight calculating femme princess.

Think about how this goody-goody dumb jock with a martyring hero complex attracts this naughty cunning jock with a self-loathing villaness complex.

And now think about how badly we need more canonical mlm couples in children’s media lol. Oops my finger slipped. But I’m getting ahead of myself lol.

The concepts of interconnected opposite forces are so important and prominent in literature throughout the world, but yin and yang is ESPECIALLY important in Kingdom Hearts because it is a story that explicitly explores Light and Dark forces. It explores how they both oppose one another in catastrophic ways,

and how they complement each other in harmonious ways.

Getting ahead of myself again… But hey speaking of harmony, back to the matter at hand.

Hearts in Tune.

This scene shows a number of romantic symbols. As I was saying before the yin and yang tangent, pink and blue (nee red and blue) are already symbols of romantic suggestion. And in the case of them representing 2 parts of a whole song, these song pieces act as complementary halves, adding another layer of dualism to the scene. Furthermore, the music sheets swirl around each other in a yin and yang fashion. Harmony has been achieved. This lets us know these forces belong together. These forces representing Sora and Riku. They are husbanded together. These 2 hearts in question are part of each other. In fact, Mickey even says so:

Perhaps most damning, however, is that the song in question is “Dearly Beloved”, arguably the theme song for Kingdom Hearts as far as the score goes. I’m sure it goes without say that “Dearly Beloved” is not only in itself a romantic sounding phrase but it is also the phrase specifically said by officiators of weddings to the congregation before the wedding vows are exchanged. “Dearly Beloved, we are gathered here today…” 

I will also mention that Riku’s dream eater symbol visible in the shot is specifically designed based on a bleeding heart flower, a symbol of passionate love. Credit to Steam for pointing this out here, please follow them and read their posts they are magically delicious:

So almost everything about this scene is aesthetically romantically coded, and I didn’t even mention the fact that Dream Drop Distance’s whole color palette is themed with rainbows, which as I said earlier is absolutely still a gay symbol in Japan. Note the rainbow of colors animating from the sheet music. 

So in terms of the atmosphere of the scene, its already incredibly homoromantic in every way I can think of. But what about the dialogue?

Well lets talk about the dialogue. Dialogue should always been read with care when you’re trying to queer a text. Often a lot of queer messaging in a text is subtextual. This means the text itself may actually say something gay, but you have to read further into it. This is an old method of queer writing designed to protect the writer from getting in trouble for their gay crimes.

Historical aside on this:  If you’ve ever read Oscar Wilde’s “The Picture of Dorian Gray”, you may have note that Lord Henry can never just simply say that he is gay, lest Oscar Wilde be charged for homosexuality in 19th century England. Instead, Lord Henry simply tells us he is married to a woman, but makes it clear throughout the text that this marriage is mostly performative and he is not emotionally invested in it whatsoever, going against the puritanical, heternormative ideals of Victorian prudery. Lord Henry is by contrast MUCH more invested in following the life and times of his very close friend Dorian Gray, with whom he shares a hedonistic philosophy in the name of Fin de siècle. Not to be a downer but for the sake of understanding how real this subject of oppressed gay censorship is, despite keeping the homosexual themes as purely subtext, Oscar Wilde was tried and convicted of homosexuality and this book was used against him in court. 

What we are privileged to have today with KH is a cutscene and not just a script. Meaning we have visuals, animation, voice acting, musical cues, etc etc to follow along with to enhance our subtext. 

On Sora’s end of the conversation, Mickey points out that the song is incomplete with just his sound idea alone, and Sora tells him not to worry, as Riku is his dependable friend who will fill in where he fails. The text in the official English translation is:

Mickey: That's strange... Is one Sound Idea not enough?

Sora: Don't worry. I've got a friend out there who will help. He's always 

picking up the slack for me.

This on its own sounds platonic. But note just how affectionate Sora’s voice acting is when he says it. Not only that, he clutches his heart to let us know how close he is to Riku and how much his connection with Riku matters to him. How much confidence he has in this friend he cares so much about. He then closes his eyes after saying it, smiling up in the air blissfully while he waits for their hearts to make their connection and finish the song.

Once it is finished, Mickey remarks that their sounds joined together to make something more powerful. Sora then says looking thoughtful, “Yeah. Two forces are better than one. Right, Riku?”

Following this, Sora leaves to fight the boss.

On Riku’s side, Mickey questions what happened, and Riku looks up thoughtfully, and says tenderly, “Sora.”

Mickey comments “Sora? Funny... Just hearing that name kinda makes me wanna smile.” and Riku tells him warmly, “Yeah. That's how he is.”

Mickey then goes on to say some really shippy stuff:

“Whaddaya know... Riku and Sora. The Sound Ideas you two set free joined together. And when they did, they made a great and powerful harmony.”

Riku then nods and tells Mickey brightly that “Sora can find the brightest part of anything, and pull off miracles like there's nothing to it. It's pretty hard not to smile around him.”

And I would like to pause to look at that line. “It’s pretty hard not to smile around him.” Although Mickey says the same thing, that just hearing Sora’s name invokes a smile, we sense a somewhat deeper meaning in Riku saying it. Why is that? Well, for one thing this game is entirely about Riku protecting Sora and exploring how much Sora actually means to him. This game is continuing Riku’s redemption arc from KH2, but it is also doing something perhaps even more important: it is providing him a journey of self discovery. This test resets Sora and Riku to level 1 so to speak, not just in their powers but even their models revert to variations of their KH1 selves. This helps to underscore Riku re-examining himself and his feelings. 

And then guess what? Mickey makes some even SHIPPIER commentary. He exclaims “Wow! No wonder the music sounded like so much fun. But I bet he's got you to thank for that. Having such a good friend means he could really enjoy it.”

Riku is taken aback by this comment. “Huh?”

Mickey continues, expressing some extremely yin and yang themed sentiments, 

“It's like each of you is holding on to a little part of the other. Your hearts are always in tune, so they're free to sing. Gosh, I hope I can be part of the team someday.”

Mickey did us a wonderful favor and expressed to us explicitly, for those who didn’t understand the romantic coding of the scene already, that Sora and Riku are a good match. Mickey tells Riku that the music sounded like fun in English, that it was a happy, pleasurable time, and tells him that Sora has Riku for a friend which is what must have made it so enjoyable. 

So from this dialogue we get assurance that Sora and Riku are two very close friends, whose hearts are connected, and they are 2 powerful forces that merge into an even greater one. Their hearts are in tune.

Now if this were a scene about a boy and a girl, I doubt anyone would question whether it was romantic. Why should we be asked to look at it platonically just because it is 2 boys? The romantic imagery is clear. 

And let me ask you this while we’re still on the subject of Dream Drop Distance: 

According to Riku’s character files, he had previously thought of Sora as a little brother, and tried to be a cool older brother to him. 

He then tells us that this has changed. What did it change to? 

The surface level, heteronormative answer would say it changed to them being merely friends. 

But isn’t that an odd regression? After all, found family is a thing, and that’s a bit weird for him to question since there is no reason for those feelings to change on that notion. If Sora loved him like a brother, that clearly hasn’t changed. Riku clearly loves Sora as deeply, so that didn’t change. The other problem with this phenomenon Riku is dealing with is that there is no reason for him to feel this strange sense of repression we keep seeing over this change. He is constantly holding back on some feelings for Sora but platonic and brotherly feelings are entirely acceptable. What is it that he is hiding? What sort of feelings for Sora would be hidden?

From the Kh2 Novel: 

He really did want to see Sora and talk. But that was impossible with this appearance. The things that mattered the most were what he couldn’t tell Sora. It had always been that way.

What sort of feelings might be systemically oppressed?

This scene is pretty much EXACTLY what I would do to say as explicitly as possible that Riku is gay without being able to say it outright due to censorship. 

[bookandcover]

Our monthly book for our family’s Anti-Racism Book Club, Sister Outsider is a collection of essays by foundational Feminism theorist and activist poet Audre Lorde. It was interesting and illuminating to appreciate, as I read, that these essays were penned and published between 1976 and 1983 because so many of the concepts Lorde explores are central to how race, gender, and sexuality are discussed, in academia and in activism, today. Most notably, in my mind, are her descriptions of intersectionality and how intersectionality operates in each life, shaping our perspectives and experiences. Lorde doesn’t use the term “intersectionality,” but this is what she so profoundly describes, as she advocates for unity through diversity (and not “in spite of” or “by erasing” differences). She offers an incredible message of hope. The task she sets to all of us is not an easy one, but it’s a powerful one and one she deeply believes in: through seeing each other more fully, through understanding the intersections of someone else’s complex identity and where that identity does or does not overlap with our own, we can find shared humanity and shared conviction to fight for change.

Audre Lorde is Black, female, lesbian, and the mother of two children. Her perspective and experiences are shaped by these different aspects of her identity, and she explains how each part of her multi-faceted identity has placed her outside of society’s “norms” in a variety of contexts. Even within sub-communities, she has found herself on the outside because of one of her identities. She describes how, when hoping to attend a Feminism conference for queer women, she wasn’t sure how to attend and care for her teenage son, as no boys over age 10 were allowed at the conference. Lorde’s identities do not have a “hierarchy of othering” nor are they separable from each other. Through these essays, she shows how these identities are linked, yet one may be more central to certain experiences than others. She identifies with women across the Feminist movement, yet her Blackness is often misunderstood or blatantly judged by white women. She identifies with Black men struggling against racism, and speaks about Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr., but she’s repeatedly othered and traumatized by the violence against Black women perpetuated by Black men. She speaks out about the violence and hatred from Black people directed at other Black people and she does a lot to explain and examine “internalized racism” (another term that she describes without using this exact wording, and yet it’s a concept that’s important in race discussion today). I wondered whether Lorde is credited with developing these concepts, and how other thinkers built on her ideas, and where the specific terminology itself came from. I’ll do some more digging.

In our family discussion, my sister pointed out how much she liked the part in the Introduction—written by a white, Jewish, Lesbian mother—in which the author explained that Lorde’s explanation of and examination of her intersectional identity allowed the author to examine her own. Although these two women’s identifies are not the same, the act of intersectional thinking and awareness  that Lorde demonstrates allowed the author of the Introduction to better think about these things in herself and to process how to discuss her complex identity with her son. I found this to be such a poignant point—that intersectionality can function as a tool. It doesn’t mean we need to identity with Lorde’s perspective in a specific sense (and the majority of readers will not be able to, having their own identities that are complex, but different than Lorde’s) but we can identify with her ways of thinking about identity. We can learn from her methodology and apply it to ourselves and to our interactions with others. There are a lot of aspects of our intersectional identities that we take for granted on a daily basis. These are the ones that align with the “norm,” the privileged identity in America, and therefore are those we are not forced by others to repeatedly be aware of…the world is designed to fit those aspects of identity. But that doesn’t mean we should not actively examine these aspects of identity as well, and I feel that intersectionality helps us do this, helps us “check our privilege” in these areas. If I read about the experiences of a Black, female lesbian, I gain new understanding of the things I take for granted in my whiteness and my heterosexuality. If I read something written by someone with a physical handicap, I gain new understanding of how I take my able-bodiedness for granted. This does not work only across one dimension, but across many dimensions simultaneously, as I feel affinity for Lorde in her femaleness, but also nuanced understanding of how her experience of being female has been fundamentally different than my own.

This book gave me confidence to speak up about race and identity, more so, I think, than any other we’ve read since June 2020. Because identity is so complex, I am going to make mistakes. I am going to be blatantly racist, sexist, homophobic, classist, and many more things, as these things are ingrained in all of us by society. I am going to be the most blind in the areas where I have experienced the most privilege. But each person’s identity is complex, and race conversations are not “us versus them”—it’s “me and you,” talking and processing, and trying to get to know our differences. Lorde has such a strong conviction in the process of unity, of coming through understanding of each other and each other’s diversity. And it’s clear that this is only achieved through closeness, through effort, through work and discussion (which is inherently painful because it works out the deep thorns of hatred). Lorde’s faith in this is so powerful and it uplifted me to try, with each person, to get closer to understanding their intersectional identities. I know that this is not a project that I can expect another person to enter into with me, and Lorde points to several times when she’s exhausted by this work, when she acknowledges how less emotionally-taxing certain conversations about race with white people would be if they were conducted by another white person.

I think that, on some deep level, I have always struggled with a fear of misspeaking about race. This is a funny fear to have because I have already misspoken about race. I have said things out of ignorance, out of racism, that have hurt others, probably more times than I know. I have had friends call me out. I have apologized. I have felt sad about the impact of my words. I have felt ashamed about my ignorance. Why would I still dread these experiences? I guess, because they are painful, and no one likes anything painful, but they are definitely less painful for me. So I try to overcome my fear of them. I think I am someone who craves the approval of others. I like to be liked, something cultivated from a very young age when I won the approval of teachers and of my parents by being a strong student. I didn’t really have the experience of disappointing someone (I probably should have, so I could have made tools earlier for dealing with it). Why do I want/need the approval of strangers? Why do I want to be liked? Why does this factor into a fear of judgment and of misspeaking? I think as I’ve grown up I’ve improved at taking criticism. I am good at taking criticism on things I produce: my writing, my school work, my work work. I am getting pretty good at taking personal criticism from loved ones—“you said x and that hurt my feelings”—I am good at admitting fault. I do not feel insecure about mistakes or failures. Yet, I’m somehow more afraid of hurting strangers, and the hurt that comes from speaking up and hurting others about race. My logical mind rejects this—“your hurt is microscopic and should not be the focus when you’ve hurt others”—but I also know I still feel this. I’m not doing a great job of talking myself out of it.

Audre Lorde, however, is. My favorite moment in this book is the following quote:

“If I speak to you in anger, at least I have spoken to you: I have not put a gun to your head and shot you down in the street…”

I felt this moment strike me deeply and shift something tectonic within me. I felt this change the way I thought about my fear. I felt the incredible power of someone telling me I’ve hurt them, of being willing and able to do that. Yes, I still would not want to hurt someone else because I would not want to hurt them. But I feel, in a new way, that I am not afraid of misspeaking on race because of the backlash on me. I need to try to not hurt others, but I will. And when I do, I will need to try harder. I will be grateful for words of anger because they are WORDS. Words are not something of which to be afraid; words are opportunities.

Another striking part of this book for me was the conversation between Adrienne Rich and Audre Lorde. I’m a big fan of Rich’s poetry and routinely taught “Diving Into the Wreck” to my students, as a way to talk about Feminism and identity. I really appreciated seeing these women converse, modeling, I felt, the approach to conversations around intersectionality that Lorde supports. These two women don’t hold back, and they don’t always agree. Yet, their friendship and trust deepens through their acts of disagreement and reckoning. The best part of this essay, for me, was when Lorde brings up how Rich asked her on the phone in a conversation around race to provide “documentation” of her perspective, as a way to help Rich “perceive what you perceive.” Lorde, however, takes this request as one coming from an academic/rationalist perspective, a perspective that has often been employed to discredit Lorde’s own, as a “questioning of her perceptions” (which, white men academics too often feel, are suspect when coming from a Black woman). Neither Rich nor Lorde backs off their approach—Rich tying this need for documentation to how seriously she takes the spaces between her and Lorde that she seeks to fill with information and understanding, and Lorde pointing out that documentation supports analysis and not perception, which is the way the world is directly received by her, a Black woman. I don’t think this conversation is colored by them being respectful of each other in their words and language, but by the honesty that is evidence of deep and true respect.

This book is bookended by two essays that take place aboard—the first in Russia and the last in Grenada. In both, Lorde has another identity that she comments on less explicitly, but that is nevertheless explored: that of the English-speaking American aboard. She’s supported by translators and guides throughout her academic trip to Russia, and she experiences Grenada in terms of the American Imperialist invasion that overwrote the narrative of the local people with whom she feels strong affinity through her mother. In Russia, Lorde compares and contrasts the systems she sees at play with American systems (the poor, horrified Russian man to whom she explains that Americans don’t have universal healthcare and if you can’t afford it, “sometimes you die”). Reading Lorde’s descriptions of her trips invoked in me a deep desire to travel, a pining for those experiences that I’ve tried to stamp down firmly in the past year, but travel has been such a significant part of my life over the past 5 years…it’s hard to silence my longing. (I cried yesterday morning about wanting to visit the remains of Troy where they’ve been unearthed in western Turkey near Canakkale…) I felt like these bookends helped me expand the principles of intersectionality beyond the American Black-white dynamic, although this is the hugest and most painful power dynamic impacting America today, to remember that these issues are universal. Lorde focuses more universally than some of the other authors we’ve read recently, focusing her commentary on all aspects of her identity, and not solely race. Struggles around race, gender, sexuality, nationality, and many other aspects of identity are occurring around the world, and it’s important to work to understand the intersectionality of others’ lives and experiences in a complex, nuanced way. By doing this, Lorde shows, we can direct our emotions and our efforts vertically, working to dismantle stratified systems of inequality, rather than battling over differences on a horizontal plane.  

[aeipathic]

1-9 honest meme!

munday honesty || accepting || @miranyutu​

What would prevent you from following someone?

a few things! if their writing style doesn’t seem to jive with mine is a big one -- that is, if i see myself having difficulty coming up with responses or parsing theirs! i also like to go in knowing what to expect, so if you’re an oc but don’t give much info about your character/verses/etc, i might not follow. and also just if, by looking through the blog, the mun displays an attitude i don’t think i’d get along or i don’t think would be healthy for me to have on my dash. also if you’re from a fandom i know nothing about i probably won’t follow because i’d feel out of my depth, lol. 

Are aesthetics important to you? If they are, why?

not really! i used to go in for aesthetics more -- i’d make my own theme backgrounds and promos, and was proud of a few of them -- but i really just don’t have the energy for it now? i still like having pretty aesthetics around (hence why i’ve fallen back into the icon-making pit a bit despite swearing up and down i wouldn’t lmao) but i’m not going to prioritize them over just. writing. 

What current rp trend do you hate?

lord, i’m not sure i’ve been back long enough to know what the current rp trends are. (i was gone from tumblr rp for a couple years.) i’ve talked about this to friends, but i guess maybe i’ll say that i remember when reblog karma first started to be a thing, and i think it’s spread farther now than it used to? like, i totally get “hey don’t reblog a bunch of memes from me and never send one in, that doesn’t make me feel great,” so in regards to ask memes and stuff it makes sense. but now i feel like -- and maybe i’m wrong -- but i feel like some people don’t want you to reblog anything from them that isn’t an ic interaction? i’m constantly worried about whether someone’ll be annoyed if i reblog a musings post or art or anything non-rp from them, and try to go from the source just to be safe, but it feels a lil like walking on eggshells when i’d much rather.....just feel fine interacting freely with the people on my dash without worrying about committing some infraction against this new etiquette that i don’t fully understand, lol.

How do you explain rp to someone in the real world?

i used to never talk about rp irl, because i was worried i’d just come across as weird, but i tended to call it “collaborative writing with people online” when i did. now it’s a little easier to talk about it, because a lot of my friends either play or know about tabletop rpgs, and it’s a lot easier to feel okay talking about written rp when someone already understands the concept of tabletop rp.

Do you prefer interacting with male muses or female more? Why?

i don’t think i have a preference? i think it’s a sad truth that i end up playing and interacting with more male muses than female just because of the fandoms i’m in (you try being into sports anime and finding a lot of girls to interact with, and ofc shows like cql are 90% men), but it’s not because i prefer it! 

Do you prefer writing male muses or female more? Why?

sort of same answer as before, that i end up playing more male muses because there are more male canon characters available in the media i consume, but it’s not that i prefer them necessarily! i love writing women. some of the characters i play that i love and respect the most are my women muses. but idk, i just don’t. think about it in terms of preference? maybe bc i myself am nonbinary, but i don’t think what gender a character is necessarily influences my desire to play them. i’ll play any gender.

What’s your opinion on call out posts?

i’m wary of them. i recognize the importance of bringing attention to genuinely dangerous presences, and i have had friends participate in writing callout posts for people who really did need to be called out, and the rpc was a better space after those people were gone. but i also think the mob mentality behind callouts can be a dangerous thing too. i’m not gonna get into like, the Whole Complex Issues around cancel culture in general, but for my own comfort i tend to just not engage with call outs unless i have personal knowledge in what has happened.

Name any three things about the rpc that bother you.

okay uh. 1) idk if people still do this, but the trend of making things Really Small. like, double-small/superscript text and icons that are about five pixels wide and so high contrast that you can’t see what’s in it? like, obviously i use small text ‘cause i like it, but not that small. actually, i might just expand this to lack of accessibility in general, like when themes have so much going on you can’t find the links to anything, or the colors are so badly contrasted i can’t read the text. i would just like to be able to see please!

2) when clique-iness gets out of hand. like okay, lmao, i’ve been accused of being part of a “clique” before just for interacting with my friends on the dash, so sometimes it’s a baseless thing to talk about, but i’ve also been in rpcs where you were made to feel that if you weren’t part of a certain already-established group of writers, then people wouldn’t want to write with you. i’ve also been part of very divisive rpcs, where you were either in one “group” or the other, and always had to know who was okay to interact with and who wasn’t, and it was exhausting and drove me out of that community altogether.

3) when people are Weird about dupes. like, i understand duplicate anxiety -- i’m duplicate-friendly, because i’m a lot more anxious feeling that i’m Not Allowed To Acknowledge The Existence of dupes, i’d much rather just be friends, but i very much understand wanting to avoid duplicates and i’ll always respect that. but. what i mean is when you have people who act like they’re okay with dupes -- but then get visibly jealous when people interact with other versions of their muse, or feel the need to remind people that they’ve been here longer so they must have a better understanding, or any number of other ways of subtly making duplicates feel unwelcome and unwanted just for existing in the same space as them. 

What is your opinion on exclusivity? Do you practice it? Why / why not?

occasionally! i think i’ve only ever been ship exclusive, and not fully exclusive. i’m much more likely to have mains than exclusives. if i go ship exclusive with someone, it’s because we’ve spent a long time developing that relationship and our investment has defined how i see that ship, and because i feel close to that writer and trust them. and i think it’s kinda special, to have one writer you develop this relationship with, because you can go so deep with it and build up so much.

but in general, no, i won’t go entirely exclusive, because it’s fun seeing different people’s interpretations of characters and i like having the chance to rp with a number of different people! and i know it can feel a little daunting to come into an rpc and feel like everyone’s already exclusive with each other, so i think not being exclusive opens up space for people. but yeah, i totally understand why exclusivity is a thing, and it’s definitely something i’ll practice with ship partners at times.

[ucflibrary]

Ready to fly your flag?

Pride Month has arrived! While every day is a time to be proud of your identity and orientation, June is that extra special time for boldly celebrating with and for the LGBTQIA community (yes, there are more than lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender in the queer community). June was chosen to honor the Stonewall Riots which happened in 1969. Like other celebratory months, LGBT Pride Month started as a weeklong series of events and expanded into a full month of festivities.

In honor of Pride Month, UCF Library faculty and staff suggested books from the UCF collection that represent a wide array of queer authors and characters. Click on the read more link below to see the full list, descriptions, and catalog links.

With the Libraries’ on remote resource access, the usual extended physical display isn’t available so we have created a list of ebooks and streaming videos that you can access from the comfort of your home. 

A Wild and Precious Life: a memoir by Edie Windsor  A lively, intimate memoir from an icon of the gay rights movement, describing gay life in 1950s and 60s New York City and her longtime activism which opened the door for marriage equality. Edie Windsor became internationally famous when she sued the US government, seeking federal recognition for her marriage to Thea Spyer, her partner of more than four decades. The Supreme Court ruled in Edie's favor, a landmark victory that set the stage for full marriage equality in the US. Beloved by the LGBTQ community, Edie embraced her new role as an icon; she had already been living an extraordinary and groundbreaking life for decades. Suggested by Kelly Young, Administration

 How We Fight for Our Lives: a memoir by Saeed Jones Haunted and haunting, Jones's memoir tells the story of a young, black, gay man from the South as he fights to carve out a place for himself, within his family, within his country, within his own hopes, desires, and fears. Through a series of vignettes that chart a course across the American landscape, Jones draws readers into his boyhood and adolescence--into tumultuous relationships with his mother and grandmother, into passing flings with lovers, friends and strangers. Each piece builds into a larger examination of race and queerness, power and vulnerability, love and grief: a portrait of what we all do for one another--and to one another--as we fight to become ourselves. Suggested by Sandy Avila, Research & Information Services

 How to Write an Autobiographical Novel: essays by Alexander Chee Chee’s manifesto on the entangling of life, literature, and politics, and how the lessons learned from a life spent reading and writing fiction have changed him. In these essays, he grows from student to teacher, reader to writer, and reckons with his identities as a son, a gay man, a Korean American, an artist, an activist, a lover, and a friend. He examines some of the most formative experiences of his life and the nation's history, including his father's death, the AIDS crisis, 9/11, the jobs that supported his writing--Tarot-reading, bookselling, cater-waiting for William F. Buckley—the writing of his first novel, Edinburgh, and the election of Donald Trump. Suggested by Sara Duff, Acquisitions & Collections

 Juliet Takes a Breath by Gabby Rivera Juliet Milagros Palante is leaving the Bronx and headed to Portland, Oregon. She just came out to her family and isn't sure if her mom will ever speak to her again. But Juliet has a plan, sort of, one that's going to help her figure out this whole "Puerto Rican lesbian" thing. She's interning with the author of her favorite book: Harlowe Brisbane, the ultimate authority on feminism, women's bodies, and other gay-sounding stuff. With more questions than answers, Juliet takes on Portland, Harlowe, and most importantly, herself. Suggested by Sara Duff, Acquisitions & Collections

 No Tea, No Shade: new writings in Black queer studies edited by E. Patrick Johnson This book brings together nineteen essays from the next generation of black queer studies scholars, activists, and community leaders who build on the foundational work of black queer studies, pushing the field in new and exciting directions. Suggested by Jada Reyes, Research & Information Services

 Over the Top: a raw journey to self-love by Jonathan Van Ness  Before he stole our hearts as the grooming and self-care expert on Netflix’s hit show Queer Eye, Jonathan was growing up in a small Midwestern town that didn’t understand why he was so…over the top. From choreographed carpet figure skating routines to the unavoidable fact that he was Just. So. Gay., Jonathan was an easy target and endured years of judgement, ridicule and trauma—yet none of it crushed his uniquely effervescent spirit. You’ll laugh, you’ll cry, and you’ll come away knowing that no matter how broken or lost you may be, you’re a Kelly Clarkson song, you’re strong, and you’ve got this. Suggested by Kelly Young, Administration

 Queer, Trans, and Intersectional Theory in Educational Practice: student, teacher, and community experiences edited by Cris Mayo and Mollie V. Blackburn Queer theory, trans theory, and intersectional theory have all sought to describe, create, and foster a sense of complex subjectivity and community, insisting on relationality and complexity as concepts and communities shift and change. This collection brings these crucial theories together to inform pedagogies across a wide array of contexts of formal education and community-based educational settings. Suggested by Anna Dvorecky, Cataloging

 Real Queer America: LGBT stories from red states by Samantha Allen Allen takes us on a cross-country road-trip stretching all the way from Provo, Utah to the Rio Grande Valley to the Bible Belt to the Deep South. Her motto for the trip: "Something gay every day." Making pit stops at drag shows, political rallies, and hubs of queer life across the heartland, she introduces us to scores of extraordinary LGBT people working for change, from the first openly transgender mayor in Texas history to the manager of the only queer night club in Bloomington, Indiana, and many more. Suggested by Sandy Avila, Research & Information Services

 Shakesqueer: a queer companion to the complete works of Shakespeare edited by Madhavi Menon Exploring what is odd, eccentric, and unexpected in the Bard’s plays and poems, these theorists highlight not only the many ways that Shakespeare can be queered but also the many ways that Shakespeare can enrich queer theory. This innovative anthology reveals an early modern playwright insistently returning to questions of language, identity, and temporality, themes central to contemporary queer theory. Chasing all manner of stray desires through every one of Shakespeare’s plays and poems, the contributors cross temporal, animal, theoretical, and sexual boundaries with abandon. Together they expand the reach of queerness and queer critique across chronologies, methodologies, and bodies. Suggested by Megan Haught, Teaching & Engagement/Research & Information Services

 Sister Outsider: essays and speeches by Audre Lorde In this charged collection of fifteen essays and speeches, Lorde takes on sexism, racism, ageism, homophobia, and class, and propounds social difference as a vehicle for action and change. Her prose is incisive, unflinching, and lyrical, reflecting struggle but ultimately offering messages of hope. This commemorative edition includes a new foreword by Lorde-scholar and poet Cheryl Clarke, who celebrates the ways in which Lorde's philosophies resonate more than twenty years after they were first published. Suggested by Jada Reyes, Research & Information Services

 Stories I Told Myself: a memoir by Brian D. Crimmins (UCF Thesis) Stories I Told Myself: A Memoir explores the experience of growing up gay in the 1980s. It is one boy's journey toward self-acceptance set against the conservative backdrop of a rural community on California's central coast. The story illuminates the hunger for a life different than the one being lived, and the ever-present sense of being different exacerbated by bullying and unrequited love. It is a narrative of evolving identity, and includes cultural insights and societal context of the time period. The author poses a fundamental question, "How did I make it out of the 80's alive?" and he explores the answer with poignant humor and self-examination. Suggested by Megan Haught, Teaching & Engagement/Research & Information Services

 The Book of Pride: LGBTQ heroes who changed the world by Mason Funk Captures the true story of the LGBTQ civil rights movement from the 1960s to the present through richly detailed, stunning interviews with the leaders, activists, and ordinary people who witnessed the revolution and made it happen. Suggested by Megan Haught, Teaching & Engagement/Research & Information Services

 The Crimson Letter: Harvard, homosexuality, and the shaping of American culture by Douglas Shand-Tucci Historian Douglass Shand-Tucci explores the nature and expression of sexual identity at America's oldest university during the years of its greatest influence. The Crimson Letter follows the gay experience at Harvard in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, focusing upon students, faculty, alumni, and hangers-on who struggled to find their place within the confines of Harvard Yard and in the society outside. Suggested by Pat Tiberii, Interlibrary Loan & Document Delivery Services

 Time is the Thing a Body Moves Through by T Fleischmann Sebald meets Maggie Nelson in this autobiographical narrative of embodiment, visual art, history, and loss. T Fleischmann uses Felix Gonzales-Torres's artworks--piles of candy, stacks of paper, puzzles--as a path through questions of love and loss, violence and rejuvenation, gender and sexuality. From the back porches of Buffalo, to the galleries of New York and L.A., to farmhouses of rural Tennessee, the artworks act as still points, sites for reflection situated in lived experience. Suggested by Sara Duff, Acquisitions & Collections

 Trauma, Violence, and Lesbian Agency in Croatia and Serbia: building better times by Bojan Bilić This book uncovers some of the major moments in the fragile and still poorly known herstory of feminist lesbian engagement in Serbia and Croatia. By treating the trauma of war, homophobia, and neoliberal capitalism as a verbally impenetrable experience that longs to be narrated, this monograph explores the ways in which feminist lesbian language has repeatedly emerged in the context of strong patriarchal silencing that has surrounded the armed conflicts of the Yugoslav succession. The book renders visible a surprising diversity of activist initiatives and the resilience of transnational affective ties, which testify to the creativity of lesbian activist mobilizations in the ambivalent semi-peripheral space that used to be Yugoslavia. Suggested by Anna Dvorecky, Cataloging

We Are Everywhere: protest, power, and pride in the history of Queer Liberation by Matthew Riemer and Leighton Brown Have pride in history. Through the lenses of protest, power, and pride, this is an essential overview -- and a visual record -- of the history of the Queer Liberation Movement in the United States. With exhaustively researched narrative and hundreds of stunning photographs, this sweeping book traces queer activism from its roots in the late-nineteenth-century -- long before the pivotal Stonewall Riots of 1969 -- to today, casting new light on many of the movement's trailblazing activists and organizations. Suggested by Christina Wray, Student Learning & Engagement

[alternislatronemhq]

Congrats, ELLIE, you have been accepted to AL for the role of SEVERUS SNAPE (FC: aneurin barnard). HOLY CRAPOLY, ELLIE! This app was absolutely fantastic! I couldn’t pull myself away from reading it and was just seriously BLOWN AWAY. This is everything I ever could have dreamed for in a portrayal for a character as central to the plot as Severus is! You truly have a gift and I’m so excited you’re here! Please send in your blog (no sideblogs for first characters, please) in the next 24 hours and be sure to take a look at our new player checklist. Welcome home (once again), we’re so excited to have you join the family!

OOC

name — ellie. age — 20+ pronouns — she/her. timezone — GMT. activity level — i’m not a very fast writer tbh, but i don’t have any other hobbies or rl obligations to keep me from rp atm so i should be able to maintain more than 3 paras a week.

IC Overview

name — severus tobias snape. faceclaim — aneurin barnard, louis garrel, richard harmon. age — 26. gender — cis male.

sexuality — demisexual, biromantic. He lacks the terminology for it, and simply regards sex as yet another social endeavor for which he is ill-equipped.

patronus — doe. yes, it still works. no, he doesn’t understand why or how. he is most certainly not pure of heart. the memory he calls on to summon the patronus is his first dinner with the evans family, where mrs. evans piled his plate high with steak and mashed potatoes and peas, and lily snuck her broccoli onto his plate discreetly while trying not to make a face, and petunia was spending the night at a friend’s house across the street and too far away to ruin the lighthearted atmosphere. they joked and laughed and cleaned the dishes afterwards. it was the first proper family dinner he’s had in his life.

boggart — voldemort. Not, specifically, for the man himself although he is a rather striking figure on his own – but rather for what the man represents to snape. Voldemort represents how far snape’s ambition and thirst for power and knowledge will take him if left unchecked. He represents a hungry and gaping and greedy part of snape that will take and take and take, and grow hungrier and greedier still, uncaring. Losing control in such a manner – allowing himself to be led astray by a mad man and his mad men, doing their bidding and spreading pain and grief and loss, thinking himself so righteous and vindicated – the worst parts of himself, unvarnished, laid bare for him to see. Snape has long since discarded any illusions of himself he may have entertained before the war. He knows the parts that make him up. He knows what he does and why he does it. He knows how far he will go without an anchor — and he fears being unmoored and unrestrained most of all. Fears what he will allow himself to do, without a pragmatic set of rules and ethics to keep him in line.

IC In Depth

personality traits —

+Loyal: snape’s loyalty is difficult to earn, but impossible to lose. He has a thorough, comprehensive, all-or-nothing approach towards loyalty. You either have it or you don’t. All of him or none of him. He will give you his soul – his strength, his work, his honour, his dignity, his life, his word – or he will give you nothing. Thus far, the only people who have earned his loyalty are lily evans and albus dumbledore.

+Sharp: snape is clever and perceptive, his intelligence owed in large due to the many hours spent in his mother’s company as a child, listening to her stories and her theories and her careful instruction. She was not a pleasant woman, nor a kind mother, but she taught him the power of knowledge at a young age, and the sharp glint of intelligence in his eyes matched hers.

+Hardworking: say what you will about snape’s character flaws – of which he has plenty, and of which there is quite a lot to say – but his work ethic has always been and will always be impeccable, beyond reproach. He never does things by half. He is a hard worker who spares no efforts once he sets his mind to a task.

-Antagonistic: he holds firm to an unpleasant disposition and hostile countenance. It is his nature to be wary and suspicious and to hold others in low esteem until proven wrong. Snape takes most attempts at social interaction with a grain of salt, expecting mockery and insolence and responding swiftly in kind.

-Bitter: snape’s biggest motivator is spite. He’s a man of well-groomed grudges, what can he say? growing up in poverty with a bitter mother and an unpleasant father, both of whom were uncreative in how they let out their frustrations and rather liberal in tossing about blame for everything that had gone wrong in their lives, had left him with quite an armful of ill-advised coping methods and a less than stellar personality overall.

-Selfish: it’s not that he’s incapable of love and affection. He is demonstrably and regrettably capable of both. He has, as well, displayed a certain capacity for selfless action when it came to his precious few loved ones. Sometimes. But, well. Well. It’s not his default. He spent many years with his head firmly stuck up his ass, seeing and caring about nothing but his own interests and his own ambitions and dreams finally being realized — and nearly lost the only thing in his rather pathetic life that held any meaning whatsoever. And he is still selfish by nature. Even in the years since he’d come to dumbledore to yet again pledge his allegiance to yet another all powerful and all conniving old wizard – the irony of which was not lost on him, not for a moment, rest assured – selflessness is still an installed feature that he must think consciously of before implementing. And, most of the time, it is not something he chooses to do.

-Deceptive: if snape was the sort to keep count of such things – and, as a spy, he most assuredly is – he would truthfully disclose that, in every relationship he’s built in his life since he was old enough for hogwarts, there is a layer of deception that must be adhered to at all times. An intermingling web of lies and half truths and omissions that must be observed with careful attention, lest the whole thing unravel and spill out his doom. He’s a spy. At least now it’s become part and parcel of who he is. At least, he now has a quasi-noble purpose to attach to the rather sticky threads of which he is – secretly – fond. He can admit, if only to himself, that he doesn’t know how to build a relationship without some form of deception to maintain throughout.

character biography —

PROLOGUE.

he stands on his tiptoes over the wooden chair, stirring with the ladle in both hands. clockwise, clockwise, counter-clockwise…. let the ladle rest against the side of the cauldron for thirty seconds. the liquid is two shades off. he adds a pinch of powder, and the color adjusts.

mam’s sharp eyes follow his every move. she nods, stiffly. tension uncoils from his shoulders. “when you get to hogwarts,” she says, brusque, “you’ll be at the top of your class.”

it’s not explicit praise, told more like a command, really, but it’s close enough. emboldened, he asks, “will i ‘ave friends at ‘ogwarts?” he looks up. watches. “lots and lots o’ friends?”

mam blinks. the silence stretches. she pats his head, drops her hand down to his shoulder. “of course, sev. lots and lots. now help me pack everything away before your dad comes home.”

ACT I.

can a place be both hell and home?

well, if it can be — if it’s possible to love and hate a place with equal intensity, if it’s possible to feel like a jigsaw puzzle slotting into place at last and still look over your shoulder and jump at every sound — if it is, then to severus, hogwarts was that place. the home that was unsafe, the home with danger at every corner, the home with no way out. no way out but through.

it’s not s’pposed to be like this, he’d thought, eleven and still a touch naive. this can’t be right. but what did he know about homes and safety, anyway? was Spinner’s End not the same, except smaller and with less magic? did he not look over his shoulder and watch his every step just the same?

being a halfblood matters, more than he thought it would. and being a slytherin matters, but not in the way he’d thought. a poor, dirty, halfblood slytherin with a nasty attitude and an uncouth accent stood out like a rotten stink. hogwarts was magical and whimsical, but it was just a place, just like any other, and the students were just students, and the bullies were just bullies. and sev was still sev, wand or no wand. hogwarts did not fix him and make him better. it did not give him friends on a silver platter.

what it gave him, instead, was knowledge. yes, he spent years the target of relentless bullying, made more enemies than friends and few acquaintances who were in between, but the library was his home. He devoured knowledge with a single-minded intensity, filled with such joy at learning new concepts and spells that it made everything else he had to put up with worth the effort. He badgered his teachers relentlessly with increasingly complex questions, and often times concerning lines of inquiry, and experimented with new spells and potions early on — first with lily, then without — filling notebooks with ideas and information and half formed thoughts. At the age of thirteen, he’d begun working on his own grimoire, writing down his own potions recipes and his modifications to existing potions. All the great potions masters have their own grimoires, why shouldn’t he start his own now?

He isn’t sure when his views began to shift. Somewhere along the way, the facade he’d put on for his housemates began to seep through the cracks and into the boy underneath. it became so much easier to hate muggles and then muggleborns, to blame them for everything that went wrong in his life, to use this hatred as an outlet for all his frustrations he already had with his own life.

By the time the dark lord called, severus was well and truly indoctrinated. It didn’t take much to convince himself that this was the right thing to do.

ACT II.

He takes the mark.

Things… escalate.

They ask him to do terrible things, and he does them fastidiously. He does not feel satisfaction or pleasure when killing and torturing, though he hardly lets that stop him from doing exactly as he’s instructed, to the letter, and sometimes beyond. Vying for the attention and approval of the man who held his soul in the palm of his hand, indifferent to it’s fate, careless in his handling unless the little halfblood proved himself useful. And he did. He proved himself clever, gifted, loyal, ruthless. He worked hard to earn his place, knowing the alternative.

It’s not like he doesn’t know he’s in a genocidal cult. At some point, even the most indoctrinated could see what this was. The dark lord wanted servants to do his bidding, not allies to share in the glory and the power. The dark lord was strikingly clever, imposing and powerful, and stark raving mad.

But severus was marked. He couldn’t put himself at risk, couldn’t think of stepping out of line with his master’s mark upon his arm. The only way out was through.

severus was thorough. he followed instructions to completion, with a single minded focus. he did his work with a professional detachment, a nonbeliever in the guise of a devotee.

And then, he came upon a prophecy.

ACT III.

The dark lord’s fall is a gift that severus doesn’t know what to do with. He’d spent so long treading a worn thread like a tightrope over the brink of hell itself, that the thought of letting his guard down for even a moment sends his every sense screaming DANGER! DANGER! DANGER!

He feels like a man who’s been running full pelt, nonstop, like he was running his whole life and suddenly the ground is pulled from beneath him and he’s free-falling into nothingness. Lily is safe. Unhappy, but alive, and for that he is more grateful than he could’ve ever imagined.

But he is alive, too. And for all his plots and schemes, it didn’t occur to him that he’d make it to the other end of this war in one piece. Not since he turned spy.

The question mark hangs over his head all the way through the chaos following the dark lord’s fall. Severus, sitting through trial after trial, feels as though his ears are stuffed full of cotton and his senses are veiled through with fog. Only in the aftermath of his own trial, when dumbledore rests a hand upon his shoulder and grants him a proud smile does severus begin to hope.

Dumbledore saves him. He gives him a home, a job, a purpose. He guides him through the darkest hour of his life.

Even through the fog, Severus can see it: the headmaster’s true intentions. He knows he must be of some use to the headmaster still, that dumbledore is simply working to gain his true loyalty. That all severus had really done on that stormy night was trade one master for another.

But dumbledore, for all his machinations, is still a good man. There are worse masters to grovel to, as he very well knows. And lily is safe, just as promised. It’s only right that severus pay back his due.

ACT IV.

Once he finds his footing, severus gets busy. He integrates himself with the remaining loyal death eaters as seamlessly as possible, works to maintain at least civil relationships with high ranking order members — with a few notable exceptions — and begins to, brick by brick, build his life from the ground up.

The following years are filled with quiet self reflection. Severus grows more critical of himself, of his actions, of his beliefs. He pulls apart his motives and his reasons for joining the dark lord, inspects his role in the war unsympathetically, the impact he’s had on the lives of others. He does not like what he sees. but he does not look away.

He’s created violent and dark spells for the dark lord during his service. Spells with no counter, or a secret one. Spells the death eaters all knew and used. If he had died in the war as he’d come to expect to, these spells would’ve been his only legacy. His only contribution to the wizarding world. unparalleled violence.

This is who he is. This is what he’s done. He cannot undo it, he cannot be forgiven. but he can strive to be… better. And he does.

beyond the waiting and watching and listening, severus shifts the bulk of his focus upon his work. He creates and tests potions with the needs of the wizarding community in mind, puts his brilliance to good use. He follows a strict code of ethics, to the letter, holds himself to task when it is not properly adhered to. He takes responsibility for the things he releases into the world. He builds himself a respectable reputation in his fields of study, his articles and discoveries published in peer-reviewed journals and papers, his work talked about in academic circles with something like respect.

As the whispers spread and the death eaters prepare for their next move, severus shifts to a ready stance. He has more to fight for — more to live for, now — than he had five years ago. He is ready.

plot ideas —

oh, god, i’m SO excited to explore what snape post-war would’ve been like if he didn’t lose lily. what happened in the books is that lily’s death and his role in it sent him down a spiral of self loathing, guilt, and suicide ideation – and he wallowed in his grief and his guilt for the rest of his life. the trajectory of his life after lily’s death shifted to protecting her son and serving dumbledore. he stopped thinking of his own ends and started viewing himself as a means to an end, that end being the physical safety of lily’s boy (disregarding, of course, the mental wellbeing of potter’s spawn) and while there was growth in his own views over the years i can’t help but think it was greatly stunted by his own grief.

what i want to explore with snape is growth. realistic, nonlinear, steady growth over the years after the war, where he becomes more critical of both himself, his motives, his thinking, and the impact of his actions on other people and the world. he grew up a precocious child with no proper adult guidance, and all his life lessons he’s learned through first hand experience. and like any other 17-year-old, he thought he knew everything. He was reckless and arrogant, and he made terrible choices confidently, with no regard to the greater consequences. post-war snape is painfully aware of his own shortcomings, is trying to be better, not for the sake of being a good person but for the sake of proper self discipline and self control. he never wants to lose control of himself and allow his ambitions and his greed to take him to such lengths again. he wants to have a more positive impact on the world around him, even if he himself is still an objectively bad person, even if he himself is still selfish and deceptive and eaten up by greed.

so how can a bad person be good? by doing good things, even if he’s doing it for the wrong reasons. and snape is doing it for the wrong reasons, he’s well aware of that. He doesn’t have the intuitive grasp of right and wrong that lily always had. He can’t simply do what feels right, as that never turned out to be the right thing at all. Instead, he does what he calculates as having the most positive impact on the biggest number of people, regardless of whether or not it feels right to him. He acts in the interests of the greater good.

It’s a very utilitarian approach. Not dissimilar to dumbledore, who took snape in after the war and was more or less his mentor figure the years following. but unlike dumbledore, snape does not disregard or dismiss the individual lives of people he comes across, is very mindful of his own personal impact in the individual lives of the people around him. in canon, snape is horrified at dumbledore’s plan for harry. dumbledore asks him how many men and women he’s watched die, and snape’s response to that is ‘lately, only those whom i could not save.’ this interaction perfectly encapsulates the differences in morality between the two men. snape is capable of making sacrifices for the greater good and strives to work towards ending the war, making moral compromises towards that end. but his faith in the greater good is limited. When it comes down to it, snape is loyal to people, not causes. And often, since he’s made the conscious decision to become a better person, risks his life for the sake of others.

Another thing i want to explore with snape is his interpersonal relationships. Because, god. Come onnnnnnnnn. His two best friends are lily evans and lucius malfoy. For fucks sake. Lily who cut ties with him when they were 16 and whose husband he is partially responsible for sending to an indefinite coma, yikes, and lucius, for whom he feels the most straightforward affection and who he’s actually quite prepared to stab in the back when the time comes. And it will come, soon enough.

He has….. Complicated relationships. And complicated views on intimacy. He has a tendency to separate his feelings from his duty, which sometimes leads to him doing terrible things to people he cares about. Lying, stealing, manipulating, etc etc etc. it does not mean, to him, that he cares about these people any less. Regrettably, he cares too much, and can’t stop caring once he starts. It does not mean the people he cares about are safe with him. And i want to explore that, especially in his relationships with lily and lucius, as well as his fellow death eaters.

Speaking of the death eaters. Snape was already a high ranking death eater before the dark lord fell, and he’d worked very hard the last five years to integrate himself irrevocably within the ranks of the remaining death eaters. He’d observed their dynamics and worked to make himself seem as loyal and irreplaceable as can be. No doubt he formed many a bond with many a member, not all of them built on lies. And he would take special interest in the hesitant, wavering loyalties, poking and prodding to see how he can use them to further his own position within the death eaters ranks. There’s a lot of potential for inner-politics and sabotage within the DE.

extra —

Mockblog @ sevsnpe.tumblr.com

headcanons:

Snape had a thick manchester accent growing up that was very quickly packed away and replaced with ‘respectable speech’ a few weeks into his stay in the snake pit. When he’s angry or emotional he speaks very slowly and deliberately, his voice dropping in octaves and growing very soft and precise. it becomes very difficult for him to keep control of his speech. He slips on occasion when he and lily are alone.

Eileen sold wonderful ailment-soothing ‘tea’ for her neighbours. severus helped her brew these concoctions regularly as a kid, when he was still too short to reach the tabletop without standing on a chair.

Snape looks up to dumbledore and seeks his approval. It infuriates him to no end, that so much of his own decision-making hinges on the older man’s opinion of him, that he cares what albus thinks of him at all. But after the dark lord’s fall, snape was lost and fumbling, trying to make sense of the world, of himself, of his next steps. He desperately wanted to be a better man, but had neither the tools nor the guidance to do so. if albus hadn’t taken him under his wing, he doesn’t know where he’d be now.

he’s a heavy smoker. he picked up smoking post-war and is not in any hurry to quit. he can stop whenever he wants to anyway.

he maintains a private library in his rooms at hogwarts. he’s as possessive of it and as territorial as a dog. he’s accumulated a very impressive collection of rare books and journals over the years, and a long list of contacts in the private book collectors and book sellers circles to go with. a disproportionate number of his books are highly illegal and officially labelled ‘dark’.

the bulk of his focus, after the war, is split between two things. integrating himself further into the remaining circle of death eaters, and his own personal research into the mind arts, potions, and dark magic, which he conducts in his capacity as potions master and professor at hogwarts. he’s made several discoveries in potions study and published multiple articles in academic journals over the last five years, building himself a respectable reputation and body of works within his field. beyond the fact that such academic pursuits are his passion, his work gives him tangible proof that he is capable of positive contributions to the world around him. that he is capable of doing good, even if he himself is a bad person. his work and his growing reputation gives him something to look forward to after the war. it’s something unrelated to the death eaters and to lily, it’s something completely his own. he is very defensive and protective of his research.

Once or twice a month, snape visits muggle london and spends a few hours in a public library. It’s calming, reading books to simply pass the time. He won’t admit this to anyone, but the connection he has to the muggle world is something he’s learned to accept and even take comfort in from time to time.

[lilmajorshawty]

ASTRO NOTES LONG WRITE UP(6)🌸

•water risings tend to have a lot of trauma especially in the realm of emotions due to their water houses falling on the cusp of air/earth signs and their “water rising” is merely a unconscious reaction to the trauma they see in others—hence why they come across as either nurturing or mysterious as that is their response to the trauma they experienced.

•Virgo and Gemini have a natural connection and can easily interpret the ideas and concepts that the other is making out.

•the sign born in the year of that designated Pluto sign tend to be the most mature and or intense of the bunch. The elements aligned with that sign as well to a lesser extent. Ex. Pluto in sag gen; Sagittarius placements and or sun in sag born during this time are far more intense then they’ve previously been and have a more raw Plutonian energy along with the Leo and Aries of this generation. Cancer/Scorpio/Pisces born during the Pluto in Scorpio generation are far more intense then they’ve been and so on. This applies as well to signs sextile/trine the sign itself. And even more so for signs square and or opposite in close degrees.

•your Lilith sign and the house it’s sits in shows where you will face your greatest battle. It also shows what brings the darkness out in you. Ex: Lilith in the 8th might start to find themselves becoming more ravenous and even controlling once sex is involved. Lilith in the 4th might find that family brings the worse out of them and might be the types to grow hatred toward communities and even churches once introduced.

•5th house: is the more simple you, the playful you and the you people date within the first few months.

•The 7th house: is the you people notice immediately, the you that’s out of your line of sight! They see this in tandem with your rising which creates a contradiction. A Capricorn rising seems stern but also in need of comfort. A cancer rising seems nurturing but also out of reach.

•Your 8th house: is the you that appears once trust is reached, the you after years of being with someone. This is why marriages change and relationships transform because the real us comes into play.

•Your 8th house is your traumas so you want to deal with this before settling down with someone as they’ll make center stage.

•Juno in Scorpio or in aspects to Pluto can show that you need and crave transformation in your relationships and may even force breakups and or tension in order for you and your lover to constantly grow.

•Neptune above the ic can show highly attuned spiritual abilities but can show a lack of grounding to this world and even someone who isn’t really here.

•Pluto below the ic can show a native who’s in tune with their power as well as themselves.

•Pluto above the ic tends to project Pluto’s traits on to others whilst finding it hard to see those traits in themselves.

•venus is how we want to be pleased sexually and what arouses us in a seductive manner. Mars is how we go about expressing our sexuality and or what turns us on in a more lustful way. Ex mars in Virgo will be turned on when they feel as though they deserve it and when their s/o is gentle and sensual with them. Whilst their venus in Scorpio will be at their mercy if they’re intense and overwhelming along with that.

•earth risings are very intune with their sexuality and have a very big appetite for sex due to their water houses being in fire signs! So sex is both a passionate yet emotionally fulfilling experience for them.

•fire risings tend to get lost in the act of sex and can have trouble separating the experience from their ego and that of their lovers due to their water houses being in the sign as well causing their more fiery tendencies to disappear once in love! Which is often why people can wonder why fire signs become more submissive and or passive aggressive once in love.

•sun square Pluto can produce someone who’s both magnetic and soulful but also someone who’s extremely intense and someone you’ll never be able to control no matter how cunning and manipulative you might be—they just always know what’s happening even if they don’t say a word.

•moon square Pluto is someone who has a complex and even destructive emotional world! They can see through the hidden in others and can be very good parents because of their ability to see the pain in others.

•mercury and venus square Pluto are cunning in social situations often able to bewitch a crowd with nothing more than a smile but what they succeed in the public they lack in themselves and can have a hard time understanding their own motives and or desires

•mars square Pluto are very cozy in they sexuality! Be it same sex or otherwise! That being said they’re extremely private and those that aren’t necessarily “out” yet May shy away from someone who’s asking them to do so early on as they like to have control over what they put out into the world especially something as sacred to them as who and what they fuck.

•sign lords can vastly influence how a sign is expressed! Ex: a aqua moon in the third decan is ruled by Uranus and Venus correct? Now place Uranus in the 10th house(Capricorn/Saturn influence) and venus In the 6th house(Virgo/mercury influence) this person is going to come across far more grounded and even more serious/somber than most aqua moons. Or take a Aries moon in the first decan which is ruled by mars correct? Let’s put their mars in the 12th house and have it be mars in cancer—so this native is far more emotionally cautious and receptive than most Aries moons along with maybe their Aries moon already being situated somewhere like the 10th house which adds grounding to all of this.

•12th house is sex on instinct! It’s what you already know how to do and what you desire on a soulful level. 8th house is how you have sex in order to merge with someone! This is the real way you have sex when you are connected to someone. The 4th house is how you crave to be treated during sex! This is how you nurture during sex and or can give insight as to how gentle and or loving will be about the act based on their upbringing.

•Pluto/mercury/Neptune/venus/Saturn in the 7th can have really nice butts be it any gender! Mercury/Neptune and Saturn are more petite and small but Shapley whilst Pluto and venus are more plump and or curvy.

•having more than 4 planets in someone’s 8th house is a sign of a karmic meeting and something that needs to be resolved between the two. Having two or three planets in someone’s 2nd house romantically can show deep loyalty and love that creates an unbreakable bond as well as a connection based on equal give and take out of wanting to do so not out of needing to do so. Planets in one another’s 11th house even if it only hits once can show deep familiarity and love between two people as friends and lovers!

•in synastry it’s good if the house your personal plants fall in is present in synastry or of the similar house elements. Ex: venus in the 6th house would love 2nd house and 10th house synastry and to some extent water! Mars in a fire house might love a lot of 5th/9th/1st house!

•the signs your personal planets fall in are also important! For ex: a Aquarius moon might like mercury aspects and venus aspects in synastry or even Saturn. Or someone falling in their 11th/3rd/7th Houses.

•SYNASTRY IS FELT BOTH WAYS. House person feels it as if they were the planet and planet person feels it as if they were the sign itself! Both parties and how they react to one another depends on if they like one another, the nature of the relationship and wether or not they’re comfortable with the themes associated with the house overlay in question! So if one of you is more Plutonian and the other is more airy you’re going to feel that 8th house overlay differently from one another but you’re both still feeling it.

•composite and synastry progressed show how you guys have grown overtime and it doesn’t replace the natal synastry or composite it just shows how those energies have grown to manifest as time has gone by. Composite mars in the 3rd moving to the 2nd house I’m progressed shows that you’re growing to be more patient with one another as well as putting more value into security and comfort with one another! Less into “brainstorming” and more into sensual moments with each other. You’re still talkative and bubbly as you were but it’s channeled more into the theme of security and you’ve learned to allow one another to speak!

•NO ASPECT DETERMINES WHO YOU ARE! It’s a blueprint to yourself! Like a map of sorts so you do with it what you will but using the aspect as an excuse for your tom foolery is not what astrology is for it’s for self discovery and positive growth!

•Gemini sun struggle less with remaining focused on situations than Gemini moon and Venus.

•cancer sun is more emotive than cancer moons

•Aries suns are less impulsive and Carry a more relaxed energy than that of Aries moons who are far more impulsive and even energetic than their counterparts.

•Capricorn moons and Scorpio moons along with Aquarius moons aren’t the types to say they love you first and would rather show you than tell you.

•sun in the fire houses heals very quickly and have a high vitality. Sun in the earth houses have very sensual and intune body chemistry making it easy for them to sense issues in their bodies. Sun in the water houses can have influential energy even to the extent that it can feel like a wave washing over when they’re around—but they also seem less “here” than the rest of us. Sun in air houses often read body language better than anyone! Which is part of what makes them so likable in crowds because of how well they use this skill to navigate around them.

[feministbibliobs]

bib im mai/bib in may

...und juni / ...and june

do / thu, 9.5.19 19h intersektionale queer_feministische leserunde / intersectional queer feminist reading circle

terminhinweis: sa / sat 25.5. 14 -18h im / at Sp!t: Umgang mit weissen christlichen Privilegien /// Dealing with white christian privilege

so / sun, 26.5. 15h: feminist/ischer diy kompi-klub

di / tue, 28.5.19 19h intersektionale queer_feministische leserunde / intersectional queer feminist reading circle

juni / june:

di / tue, 4.6. 19h intersektionale intersektionale queer_feministische leserunde / intersectional queer feminist reading circle

14. juni: f*streik!

di / tue, 18.6. 19h intersektionale intersektionale queer_feministische leserunde / intersectional queer feminist reading circle

sa / sat 22.6. ab 19h sp!t mit fem_bib = femwo-soliparty-chill space / sp!t with the fem_bib = chill space at femwo soli party

details:

do / thu, 9.5.19 19h intersektionale queer_feministische leserunde / intersectional queer feminist reading circle DE wir wählen zusammen einen neuen text aus, den wir gemeinsam lesen werden. kommt und bringt texte mit, die euch interessieren! Voraussetzung für die auswahl eines texts: 1. der text ist feministisch-intersektional. das heisst: alle diskriminierungs- und unterdrückungsformen (zb sexismus, rassismus und auch kapitalismus und kolonialismus) werden zusammengedacht und aus unterschiedlichen perspektiven angeschaut; 2. der text ist in mehr als einer sprache vorhanden. zur zeit sind es englisch und deutsch, aber deutsch kann ersetzt werden, da alle englisch verstehen) 3. betroffene von komplexen unterdrückungsformen sollen selber zu wort kommen. /// EN together we will choose a new text which we will read together. come and bring texts that interest you! Prerequisite for the selection of a text: 1. the text is intersectional-feminist. that means: all forms of discrimination and oppression (e.g. sexism, racism and also capitalism and colonialism) are thought together and looked at from different perspectives; 2. the text is available in more than one language. at the moment the texts are in english and german, but german could maybe be replaced, because at the moment everyone understands english) 3. people affected by complex forms of oppression should be able to speak for themselves.

terminhinweis: sa / sat 25.5. 14.00 -18.00h im / at Sp!t: Umgang mit weissen christlichen Privilegien /// Dealing with white christian privilege DE In unserer Gesellschaft spielen weisse christliche Rituale, Glaubenssätze und Moralvorstellungen eine grosse Rolle. Auch in unseren Zusammenhängen zeichnen sie sich ab, wir scheuen uns aber davor, dies zuzugeben und schieben es zu einfach von uns weg à la: "Nur Personen "anderer" Kulturen sind religiös". An diesem Workshop wollen wir uns vertieft mit unserer christlichen Sozialisierung und weissen Privilegien auseinandersetzten. Wie beeinflussen sie unser tägliches Leben, Beziehungen und politische Kämpfe? Wie können wir kritisch damit umgehen?Wir sind drei weisse Personen mit Mittelklasse-Hintergrund, wir wurden alle katholisch sozialisiert. /// EN White Christian rituals, beliefs and moral concepts play an important role in our society. They also emerge in our political spaces, but we are afraid to admit this and push it too simply away from us like: "Only persons of "other" cultures are religious". In this workshop we want to look deeper into our christian socialization and white privileges. How do they influence our daily lives, relationships and political struggles? How can we critically deal with them?We are three white, middle-class people who have been sozialised as catholics.Der Workshop ist in deutscher und englischer Lautsprache. The workshop is in german and english language.

so / sun, 26.5. ab / from 15h: feminist/ischer diy kompi-klub DE themen: verschlüsselung, das richtige linux für den eigenen compi finden, evtl webseiten machen, .. je nach den bedürfnissen. dies ist ein diy treff (do it yourself = selber und zusammen machen), das heisst, wir teilen alle unser wissen und helfen uns gegenseitig. es sind aber keine vorkenntnisse nötig! es gibt 1-2 zusätzliche laptops, falls eine_r_s keinen mitbringen kann. feministische biblio: bücher können ausgeliehen werden /// EN topics of the meetup: encryption, finding the right linux system for your computer, maybe creating websites, .. it’s about our wishes. this is a diy (do it yoursel & together) meeting, this means we all share our knowledge and help each other finding solutions. newbies warmly welcome! there are 1-2 laptops for people who can’t bring their own. feminist library: it’s possible to borrow books

di / tue, 28.5.19 19h intersektionale queer_feministische leserunde / intersectional queer feminist reading circle DE Texte: audre lorde: “vom nutzen unseres ärgers”(link: http://blog.zwischengeschlecht.info/public/Audre_Lorde_Gigi11.pdf) und „Du kannst nicht das Haus des Herren mit dem Handwerkszeug des Herren abreißen“ (wird als papierkopie da sein) EN texts: audre lorde: the uses of anger (link: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1654&context=wsq) and “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” (link: http://s18.middlebury.edu/AMST0325A/Lorde_The_Masters_Tools.pdf)

juni / june:

di / tue, 4.6. 19h intersektionale intersektionale queer_feministische leserunde / intersectional queer feminist reading circle

di / tue, 18.6. 19h intersektionale intersektionale queer_feministische leserunde / intersectional queer feminist reading circle DE grad lesen wir "vom nutzen unseres ärgers" von audre lorde, der text ist online hier: (achtung, schlechte übersetzung von "race" und weiteren begriffen) http://blog.zwischengeschlecht.info/public/Audre_Lorde_Gigi11.pdf wir haben letztes mal bis seite 10 gelesen, bis zum ende des 1. abschnitts auf der seite, der mit "...die unerträglichkeit einer unterdrückung schildert, die ich nicht teile oder an der ich vielleicht sogar selbst mitgewirkt habe." komm gern dazu, wir sind eine sehr offene runde, stellen viele fragen, und sprechen über unsere eigenen erfahrungen.           EN Last time we started reading the second Audre Lorde text: "The Uses of Anger: Women Responding to Racism". For those who couldn't join but would like to next time, we read until the end of the second to last paragraph on page 111 (English version). Next time we will continue reading from the final paragraph on this page beginning  "In this place we speak removed from the more blatant reminders of our embattlement as women". <3

sa / sat 22.6. ab 19h femwo-soliparty-chill space während der femwo(feministisches antikapitalistisches politikwochenende)-soliparty ist das sp!t mit der fem_bib ein eher ruhiger ort zum rumhängen und sich unterhalten. femwo-soliparty-orte: mattenstr 74/76, carambolage erlenstr 34, sp!t erlenstr 44 / sp!t with the fem_bib = chill space at femwo soli party during the femwo(feminist anticapitalist politics weekend) solidarity party the sp!t with the feminist library is open as a more quiet space to hang out, chat and chill. femwo soli party spaces: mattenstr 74/76, carambolage erlenstr 34, sp!t with fem_bib erlenstr. 44

---Sp!t--- der raum ist rauchfrei und über 4 stufen erreichbar, eingangstür: 79cm breit, genderneutrale toilette tür: 69cm breit /// the space is smoke free and only accessible by 4 steps, entry door: 79cm wide, gender neutral toilet: door 69cm wide. leider ist der raum nicht zugänglich mit rollstuhl – bitte schreibt uns, wenn wir euch helfen können, zugang zum raum zu erhalten fem_bib(ät/at)immerda(punkt/dot)ch /// we’re very sorry, the space is not wheelchair accessible – please write if we can help you to access the space! fem_bib(ät/at)immerda(punkt/dot)ch

[novantinuum]

A K N O T

Thank you for the ask, fren!! :DDD

A- Ships that you currently like a lot. (They don’t have to be OTPs because not everyone has OTPs.) Friendships, pairings, threesomes, etc. are allowed.

I… get emotional about a lot of relationships, so just for fun I’m gonna list a favorite friendship, pairing, and threesome from all four of my main fandoms. Ones I’m especially emotional about are italicized. :D

Steven Universe

-Friendship: Steven and Peridot-Pairing: Steven/Connie (The essence of childhood innocence. There’s such an open honesty to how they interact with each other that makes me really happy.)-Threesome: Buck/Jenny/Sour Cream

Doctor Who

-Friendship: Tenth Doctor and Donna Noble-Pairing: The Doctor/Clara. (Just like, in general. Doesn’t matter which Doctor. Although Twelve is my personal favorite when it comes to this pairing. It’s been literal years and I’m still not over them. Can’t believe series 9 was pretty much an entire love letter to these two’s relationship ;D;)-Threesome: Twelfth Doctor/Clara/River (I saw this in some fics a few times and it was sooo good oh my god)

Tales of Arcadia

-Friendship: Aja and Jim-Pairing: Blinky/Aaarrrgghh-Threesome: Jim/Toby/Claire (these kids are soooo goood and care for each other so much oh my god)

Gravity Falls

-Friendship: Ford and Dipper (they’re relatives, but it still counts as a sort of friendship, right??)-Pairing: Ford/Fiddleford. (Even though I’m not suPER active in this fandom atm I still think about these two a lot and I’ll also probably never get over them. Give it time and a rewatch, and I guarantee I’ll fall back kicking and screaming into being emotional over them.)-Threesome: Mabel/Candy/Grenda 

K- What character has your favorite development arc/the best development arc?

Steven Universe. I didn’t notice the depth of his character development as starkly while catching the new eps over the years, but as I’ve started rewatching in order from the beginning it’s. Wow, it’s well done. I can easily track this kid’s growth in ability, maturity, leadership, and acceptance of himself from season to season. And then Change Your Mind goes and gives me just… the most satisfying end to a character arc I think I’ve ever seen, with that beautiful refusing scene. The sheer relief on his face as he finally understands who he is and who he isn’t, as he finally comes to fully love himself. RS always said this show was meant as a coming of age story, and it absolutely succeeds in being that.

As an honorary mention, the Twelfth Doctor also has suuuuch a good linear character development from s8-s10. He’s a rare Doctor honestly, in that he actually dies on a high note instead of after just… having the universe chip away at him until he’s nothin’ more but a depressed disaster alien. His development is positive, starting in s8 where he’s in a dark place and is re-evaluating who he is and what he values, and ending in s10 where he’s- by that point- figured out that what he’s all about is simply. Kindness. Laugh hard, run fast, be kind. I love this era for that.

N- Name three things you wish you saw more or in your main fandom (or a fandom of choice).

For Steven Universe…

More fics that deal with Pearl and Greg bonding. (as friends lol, just to clarify.) I just think there’s so much potential with these two coming to understand each other more, and growing closer as people. Maybe this is a sign that I need to write it? XD

It occurred to me today that I’ve never seen any art or fics about like… the angsty dark concept of Steven somehow getting accidentally corrupted, and hooo boy if you know of anything like this that exists please tell me so I can have Angst Tears thanks :DD

Give! Greg! A significant other! :DD I just think it’d be neat. 

O- Choose a song at random. Which ship or character does it remind you of?

Putting my iTunes on shuffle gave me Wrong by Depeche Mode, which is absolutely a Stan and Ford song. I mean, hell, I’ve legitimately made an AMV to it. (it’s here)

T- Do you have any hard and fast headcanons that you will die defending?

A fusion isn’t “controlled” mentally by the people who make up the fusion, and there’s never gonna be any “passing the wheel back and forth” sorta action when it comes to how a fusion mentally operates. Fusions are their own separate, unique individuals with their own unique personalities that become more defined and complex the more they exist as themselves. I cannot even count how many times I’ve… strangely… seen fics where they do the first thing. I’m not a fan of it because it strips away the fusion’s autonomy.

I also can’t believe I’m having to say this in the year of our lord 2019 but- FUSION IS NOT A METAPHOR FOR SEX, it is not a sexual thing it merely represents relationships! Of all kinds! Which do not have to involve sex!

On older Steven/Connie- Steven will have another growth spurt, (and finally stop being trapped in perpetual ten-year-old-face zone lmao), but so will Connie and thus he never quite gets to be taller than her. He is consistently the shorter of the two.

The Doctor has loved and will love many people over their long, long lifespan in a variety of different ways. None of these loves negates the other. So, just because the Doctor was in love with Rose at an earlier point in their life doesn’t mean that they didn’t also love River or Clara etc. etc. as well. Some of these loves were outright romantic. Some were more queer-platonic. Some were more like long-term arranged marriage scenarios, where they were practically thrown together by the universe and they grew to deeply love and care for each other over time despite their differences. All of them are very important to the Doctor.

Stan is aro-spec and Ford is ace-spec. Fiddleford is a trans man and bisexual. My sexuality and gender headcanons for Stan and Ford shift a lot to be honest, but in my mind, these things are always constants.

(Ask meme here)

[clarenecessities]

Queerquiggle/Cybunnypoop

Subtitle: This Again

It’s been around two years since the shit hit the proverbial fan, but seeing as the individual in question has since deleted & remade, some of you may not be aware of whom you’re interacting with.

Queerquiggle & queerneopets are the latest installments in a series of urls belonging to one person, hereafter referred to as the original url, cybunnypoop. Other former urls for his neoblog include (but are not limited to): gaygelatin, shewhoneopetswiththee, neobloq, and candypaintbrush.

I should tell you all off the bat that he’s a Trump supporter, a “recovering” transphobe, and extremely Islamophobic, so this post may contain some upsetting information. There are some instances of misogyny, antisemitism, homophobia, and racism, as well. Oh, and ableism. Honestly, pick an -ism.

None of the information in this post should be a repeat of my first post regarding the matter. Warning: this post is even longer.

As before, I’d be remiss if I didn’t lay out my bias: I don’t like him. He’s been downgraded from “nemesis” to “nuisance,” as he’s no longer harassing minors (as far as I’m aware), but we’re never going to be best buddies.

We’ve spoken several times, though never to any resolution, and with each interaction it became increasingly obvious that it was futile. I ultimately blocked him following repeated propositioning and an unwillingness to engage beyond casting any disagreement as bullying and telling the kids to go back to their safe spaces.

Cybunnypoop is now 25 years old, and he hasn’t started anything major in a while. His posts remain fairly unpopular, though whether that’s the result of the quarantine or simple bad content, I couldn’t say. You’re under no obligation to take my word for any of this. Though I’ve provided links and screenshots where I can, what you make of that evidence is up to you.

TRANSPHOBIA

As it so happens, Cybunnypoop has recently tried listening to another human being, and has been educated about trans issues in a way that ~100 people on the internet offering resources apparently couldn’t accomplish.

What this means is that Cybunnypoop is now IDing with various names (itself nothing new, pseudonyms are an old hat here), gender identities, and pronouns, depending on the platform. I’m sticking with he/him for this post, as those were the last requested on his neopets blog. His description says shey/shem but unfortunately I have no idea how current that is, and his about says “whatever”–so if I’m misgendering here, I apologize; it is not intentional.

I, Clare, Author of This Post, am cis. So it’s not my place to gatekeep or say whether or not he’s ““really trans””. And, as he has expressly admitted to being transphobic in the past, none of this section is really up for debate. I’m just going to provide the information, including his apologies and the redaction thereof. I don’t know that he truly understands everything he did wrong, but he’s explicitly stated he thinks transphobia is bad, so hey, maybe we can all learn something.

I’m gonna try to keep this chronological, so here we go:

A fun little addition to a post via an anonymous terf, “You are still males, you have male privilege, you KNOW NOTHING & NEEVER [sic] WILL KNOW of our goddamn struggles.“ which Cybunnypoop began with “So much agree!”

When asked about the “trans bathroom debacle,” he stated he was, “just afraid it’ll result in sacrificing handicap-accesible bathrooms.” which is only tangentially transphobic but bears addressing: Why would it ever mean that?

Cybunnypoop has something of a preoccupation with the potential negative impact equity would have upon him, and ableism is a convenient vehicle for this–lord knows this country is appalling in terms of accessibility. However, no proposed version of “trans bathroom”s leads to the dissolution of ADA-compliant spaces. Whether it’s allowing trans people to use the bathroom they identify with, or installing/redesignating gender neutral spaces, it remains an issue of improved accessibility, not diminished. A disabled trans person has as much a right to use a bathroom as an able-bodied one.

When he graduated he was questioned on his political beliefs, specifically how he could support Trump and remaining uneducated about trans issues while claiming to be an LGBT ally–and congratulated on graduating. Rather than answering the questions, or thanking them for the congrats and ignoring the rest, Cybunnypoop declared it “harassment”. This is about the standard for what he deems harassment/bullying: Anything that disagrees with him.

Reposted a quote from Dixon Diaz, the alt right guy you may remember him quoting in several citations from my last post, which read, “Liberal: a person who tells you that you’re a bigot if you’re afraid of having weird men in the ladies room, but becomes traumatized if they see “Trump 2016” written in chalk.“ [sic]

trans people bad, diversity bad, children bad & trauma fake

An ongoing problem with fetishizing trans people, dating back long before his identification as trans, and indeed, during the period in which he was a self-avowed transphobe. (Warning: link contains slur!)

This grew more pronounced as he came to understand what it means to be trans, and zeroed in on transwomen in particular. This is itself a complex issue: When is a kink flattering and when is it dehumanizing? Are immutable adjectives inappropriate to fetishize, or is it positive representation?

Again, as a cis person, it isn’t my place to say–I’m just letting y’all know what he’s said, and you can determine how you feel about it. This post isn’t a thinkpiece on my opinions.

Select quotes from The Apology:

“I was transphobic. I was resistant to that term because I felt it was a misnomer. I was more…trans-ignorant, I felt, than “transphobic.” […] I couldn’t see what I was doing because I was too busy, I felt, being attacked.”

“I had a warped view of trans people, and I was too ignorant and stubborn to acknowledge it–to see it, even.”

“[…] it’s hard not to let a jerk taint your view of a minority, especially when that jerk was your introduction to the minority.“

I’ll be honest, my problem with this apology is in how it’s structured, not in its content. It seems to convey genuine remorse, but focuses the bulk of the message on excuses, including that last point, which… isn’t relatable.

Even this I could forgive (after all, he’s new to apologies) if it had heralded a change in attitude–but nothing changed. He continued on as before, and continued to refuse discussions of other issues (which we’re getting to soon).

Which brings us to The Second Apology:

Posted some day and a half after the first, it opens with the artfully passive aggressive line, “I thought this could be over but it’s obviously going to stick around.” And it’s all downhill from there, folks!

“What do you want? What more can I say? There isn’t anything left to say. Nothing will satisfy some people.”

“I never bullied anyone like some do to me.“

“If you don’t want to believe I am different,[…] then the problem is not mine. In these cases, it is a good idea for you to stop talking about me and lying about me“

Here is a glimpse, perhaps, into what he expected. He was waiting for accolades. Commendation. He’d just apologized–and unlike earlier attempts, it was genuine! I don’t know that he anticipated forgiveness, but the outright rejection of that apology by several individuals drove him almost immediately into a bitter tirade, once again foisting the blame onto the people he had hurt or offended.

Aaaand a redaction of former apologies. Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be a date on this one, so it may be referring to the older apologies, but its content bears addressing:

“Yeah, I apologised like a year ago […], and they refused it, so I’m done apologizing–not that I even have anything to apologise for.

“I’ll sooner die than acknowledge and apologise for their demented reconstructions of my words.“

Which, if this is about the older apologies–oops!

“I won’t deny I said some things that people found offensive, […] but they just took everything and ran apedoodie with it. It amazes me that, for all they claim to hate me, they have this obsession with everything I do and say.”

This is actually fairly emblematic of my own interactions with Cybunnypoop: Specifically, the characterization of all attention as both positive, and obsessive.

What is it about being held responsible for his actions that leads him to cry wolf? Historically, an unwillingness to debate his political beliefs. Oh, he’ll espouse Trump’s “virtues” for paragraphs and paragraphs, but anyone who criticizes him is obviously a liberal idiot who just loves to hate him, and I’ll bet they say “lame,” right? It’s these assumptions about other people that lead him so often to tilt at windmills, rather than addressing the subject at hand.

RACISM

“Obama spending $21 million to put refugees to work…why not spend that money in the inner cities to put young blacks to work… once again Obama and the Democrats have proved the black community is their who’re [sic] because we always come back to them after they screw us” a quote he posted from a Facebook page I won’t even name, because it’s literally got the N-word in it! But he’s definitely not a racist, right?

Obama being (literally) booted out of office, by a Confederate battle flag, symbol of white supremacy since the 1960s. (There’s been some suggestion it’s in the classic minstrel show style. Though he forwent the traditional depiction of red/pink lips in favor of purple, there remains the possibility that he just can’t draw caricatures).

I’m going to address this post more in the ableism section, but it’s worth noticing how often, and how readily, he uses the word c*lored unprompted. This is not the first occasion.

More lambasting of whitewashing as a concept, sarcastically proposing we paint a black person white and mutilate them to better portray Michael Jackson (whom he refers to as ‘Wacko Jacko’, an ableist and derogatory nickname) apparently under the impression that there are no other black men with vitiligo.

I think it’s important to cover this, as from Cybunnypoop’s posts suggesting we be outraged at the “yellow-washing” of Joan Watson (see my previous post) it’s clear that he has no idea what whitewashing means.

It is not literally painting POC white.

The term whitewashing is derived from cheap white paint of chalked lime, used for a long time to refer to a specific means of censorship, “to gloss over or cover up vices, crimes or scandals or to exonerate by means of a perfunctory investigation or through biased presentation of data”. Simply put, it’s revisionist history, and the methods used to maintain that illusory timeline.

It isn’t difficult to see how the term came to be applied to the representative censorship in Hollywood.

Shared a Facebook graphic, “Black people who were never slaves are fighting white people who were never Nazis over a confederate statue erected by democrats, and why, because democrats can’t stand their own history anymore and somehow it’s Trumps Fault? [sic]“

“Also, you see Blacks everywhere, but they’re still considered a minority.” (He appended some context but frankly it’s even more damning.)

The term “spirit animal” is annoying but not because it’s racist, I guess

ISLAMOPHOBIA

Cybunnypoop’s Islamophobia is tied in pretty heavily with his support of Trump, so I’ll be citing a few of those posts in this section as well.

“Ban seven countries’ worth of ideology which promotes violence against women, LGBT people, animals, and nonworshippers? Sounds good to me!”

The cognitive dissonance of a self-avowed Catholic posting this is… incredible.

“Sorry to inform you, but the terrorists who attacked New York, Boston, Orlando, our embassies, and others weren’t Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Jews, or atheists. They were Muslims.

“It’s not Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, or atheism which oppresses women, slaughters animals, kills gays, and calls for the conversion or beheading of nonbelievers. It’s Islam.

“Until the ideology evolves to be as peaceful and tolerant as it claims, it doesn’t belong in America.”

There’s a lot to unpack here. Let’s begin by refuting Trump’s claims that “the vast majority of individuals convicted of terrorism and terrorism-related offenses since 9/11 came here from outside of our country.” Plain old xenophobia, not even in the ballpark of truth. Over the past 15 years, none of the self-described Muslim terrorists committing crime have come from the countries on Trump’s ban list. Zero. The country producing the most successful attacks against the USA is the USA itself.

A basic look at the data further reveals that white supremacist, self-described Christian terrorists actually lead the rate of attack and death toll by about 2:1. Yet, bizarrely, nothing from Cybunnypoop about the ‘violence and intolerance’ of Christianity, or even white supremacy… Who saw that coming?

It speaks to Cybunnypoop’s prejudice that he would believe such a blatantly false piece of information with no investigation or critical thought whatsoever. Although, it may speak more to his unwillingness/inability to use Google. We have had some problems with that in the past. 

“Dear Liberals: [sic] You claim to protect women. You claim to protect LGBT. [sic] You claim to protect animals. You claim to protect people who don’t ascribe to the dominant faith. But you’re protecting a violently misogynistic, homophobic, intolerant ideology which still slaughters animals in the name of their god and beheads people who worship otherwise. What the *** is wrong with you?”

Man, for derailing conversations so often to complain about perfectly valid modal grammar he sure loves breaking the English language.

When asked how he could still support Trump, he replied, “Because he hasn’t actually said or done anything wrong. The only thing with which I disagree was the transgender military ban, and that has been shot down, so it’s hardly relevant.”

Particularly in conjunction with his condemnation of liberals on the basis of not like, banning Islam, this is an explicit endorsement of everything from repealing the Alternative Tax Minimum to his sexual misconduct. Everything, except the one thing that directly affects one of Cybunnypoop’s demographics, was right.

HOMOPHOBIA

“I’m not like others in the LGBT spectrum. [bolding mine]

“I hadn’t cared for gay marriage nor had I especially cared to support the cause. […] I’ll fight for the welfare of the many before I’ll fight for the wishes of the few.”

(Well, historically, no, he won’t). Even without the implication that all the gay people who want to get married are selfish, this ignores the reason behind the push for the legalization of gay marriage: The AIDS crisis. Terminally ill gay men were forcibly evicted from their homes after watching their partners die, horribly, because they couldn’t inherit the lease/property. Their partners’ remains were the custody of parents who often wouldn’t allow the survivor to attend the funeral.

Up until gay marriage was legalized on a federal level, these incidents still occurred. One Indiana woman had to pay over $300,000 in taxes upon the death of her wife, and was told by the funeral home she could not arrange for her wife’s cremation as she was an “unrelated third party,” despite having the power of attorney. This is a significant concern.

“I don’t care for "pride.” I’ve actually started to loathe the undertones of the pride movement. […] is it truly worthy of a month and a gold star? […] I think it’s losing relevancy. Can we really celebrate something that’s no longer legally unique? Can we really have pride for… wait, what is it we’re proud of, anyway? We’re legally equal now; we’re socially equal, for the most part.” [bolding mine]

I don’t know if he forgot the homophobia he’s experienced, or if it just doesn’t matter unless it happened it to him.

“The next time someone asks you why LGBT Pride marches exist or why Gay Pride Month is June tell them ‘A bisexual woman named Brenda Howard thought it should be.’“ -Tom Limoncelli

“Another thing–and the most loathsome part–about the “pride movement” concerns the very word itself. “Pride” …be proud of who you are, and be proud of not caring what others think of you. Fine. Sure. It’s fun to wildly flaunt your differences. But what’s the opposite of “pride”? “Shame.” So, if gays are to have pride, does that mean straights are to have shame?”

So why are we to be entitled to pride–why are we allowed to feel good about ourselves and they are not? […] The majority are not oppressive, and even if they wanted to be, they legally couldn’t. 

Good news guys, homophobia is dead and definitely super illegal.

“(Never mind the fact that pride is a negative, narcissistic trait and one of the Seven Deadly Sins.)” [bolding mine]

(We interrupt this post to bring you his “Antipridist Pride”)

“While it seems most of the LGB world makes their sexuality their entire identity, I leave it as just one facet of many.“ Once again, he’s not like Those Other Gays.

“ I’ll bet I pissed off a lot of gays with this post, but I don’t care, and I’m proud of not caring.“ (proceeds to describe the LGBT community as loud, angry, straight-bashing, etc. for a good paragraph or so, obviously very much caring)

That’s enough of that post, huh? Let’s move on.

“I know that a lot of the LGBT community is hypocritical–and intolerantly, angrily so. They scream about others giving them tolerance and respect while they don’t give others such basic rights.

“If there’s Black Pride, why couldn’t there be Caucasian Pride? Gay Pride, Straight Pride.“

As I broke down in my last post, Caucasian≠white, and was first misapplied by white supremacists and popularized by actual, literal Nazis. He evidently doesn’t care, and claims I “created” it. (I can assure you, I haven’t been alive since 1785).

“Is it me, or are there actually very few good gay celebrities?”

Doesn’t like the term “lesbian” because its “image is too pornified”. As I understand it this is fairly common among those who were raised in more conservative or religious families, so it’s not an issue per se; it just becomes weird in conjunction with his wanting to be called a dyke at one point (though I can’t find the post where he said that explicitly, only ones where he describes himself as such).

Said he’d expected Ted Cruz to be a “gay prostitute” because he gave off untrustworthy vibes.

MISOGYNY

As I’m sure most of you are aware, Cybunnypoop is pro-life. From certain parties, that can be motivated by misinformation rather than misogyny (though certainly the misogyny drives that misinformation). In his case? Well, actually only about 75% misogyny. The other 25% is empathizing with fetuses just until they’re born. Idk if it’s because of his parental situation or his existential dread or what, but we’re not here to psychoanalyze him; we’re here to review.

“It’s a point which I make constantly. It’s not hard to not get pregnant. You have a variety of options. There’s birth control. There’s getting your man snipped […]. And there is one absolutely fool-proof, sperm-proof way: ABSTINENCE. It’s stupidly simple, but there are self-righteous women and men out there who say–if you’ll pardon my pun–screw that. Free sex, rah rah. But if you don’t want to “risk” a baby, don’t do the do. There are plenty more things to do in life.”

Yeah, it may be “stupidly simple” for an “asexual homosexual” but other people do, in fact, get horny. “There’s birth control.” Where? You gonna pay for it? You gonna talk their “man” into getting a vasectomy? Pay for that?

I want you all to keep in mind that this is the same person who waxed poetic about his addiction to porn. And hentai. Which he downloaded in a public library, because he was just that addicted. But if someone (god forbid) “does the do,” and their birth control fails? Well, too bad. You should have been able to control your libido.

When Trump was elected he had the following to say:

“This is a time for healing.” No, this is a time for you to suck it up. You may not have wanted this result, but I and half of the country did. So, instead of bitching and moaning and trying to undo what I and half of the country have been working hard for, you need to shut the fuck up, go to school, work, or volunteer, and stop being an intolerant, selfish, hypocritical asshole.

Frankly this could go in a lot of sections but it’s using bitch pejoratively so…

Honestly there are more instances but I feel like you get the picture and this thing is already absurdly long, so we’re going to move along.

ANTI-SEMITISM

On screenshots of a neoboard discussing the origins of the ichthys symbol (the Jesus fish), Cybunnypoop added, apropos of nothing, “Hey, how about the fact that Christianity was originally illegal while Judaism was lawful, and the early Christians had to hold some Jewish mores so they wouldn’t be arrested and executed? Interesting, isn’t it…” and tagged it “two can play at that game”.

Christians weren’t being persecuted for not being Jewish; they were being persecuted for refusing to participate in state events from which the Jews were exempt via religious tradition. Christians were too new to be considered traditional, and were therefore considered in contempt of the state when they refused to, say, make a sacrifice on behalf of the Emperor. Also, we called each other brother & sister but still got married, and spoke weekly about eating a man alive, so people were kind of concerned.

Also, like, it was an explicitly socialist religion in an empire. That was never going to end well. The “mores” they had to hold were “don’t be anti-fascist” and “stop meeting in secret, we don’t know who you are and it’s freaking us out,” neither of which is explicitly Jewish and neither of which you can blame the Jews for.

Pretty minor, but in a poorly executed attempt to be inclusive, he wished everyone a happy Easter & Passover at the same time, only to be informed that Passover wouldn’t be happening for a month. So more about the assumption that Jews are lesser Christians again than any direct hostility. Perhaps better evidence of his ignorance of Jewish customs/how to hit “search” on Google.

 ABLEISM

Here there be slurs!

Alright. We’re going to begin this with a breakdown of the “lame” issue. Here’s the thing: Cybunnypoop hates it. He compares it (ceaselessly) to the r slur, which he uses liberally in his own defense.

I’m certainly not saying it isn’t a slur, or that you should use it, but to be frank, he’s wrong.

In both severity and time in which it’s been part of the English vernacular, lame is far more akin to other ableist slurs like “dumb,” “stupid,” “moron,” “idiot,”–all words which Cybunnypoop uses on the regular. The closest comparison we have to the r slur would be “cr*ppled”–which Cybunnypoop quotes on the regular.

Dumb is the closest analogue, as those middle three weren’t really popular until the American Eugenics Movement kicked in, but hey. If it bothers him so much, why say any of them?

Simply because, it only bothers him when it affects him directly and is said by his enemy.

For example, no problem whatsoever quoting Trump’s book, Cr*ppled America.

Here he calls someone ableist scum for calling him the r slur, yet here he mocks another’s offense at the term by comparing it to modern medical jargon.

Atheists and Liberals [sic] are “dumb”

“entirely okay” with the R slur

This post, which was also in the racism section, littered with fun slurs and what’s either blatant hypocrisy (see: his regular use of words like dumb/stupid) or one of the most incredible point-dodges I’ve ever seen.

Now we get into a recurring theme, with a recurring character. The problem with most of Cybunnypoop’s legitimate criticisms (e.g. lame is a slur, accessibility is bullshit) is that they’re never even googled, let alone researched, and that they come, 9 times out of 10, at the expense of another minority. Or, through sheer ignorance, one of his own.

“Trans people get [famous trans people]. Gay people get [famous gay people]. Black people get [famous black people]. Who do I get? I get Joe Swanson.”

“While everyone’s battling over how to bend backwards and make others comfortable, I’m just sitting here, cursing out the ungrateful bastards because there are places I can’t even ACCESS. […] And never mind the fact that there is no good disabled representation out there. You know who I get to look up to? Joe frickin’ Swanson. It’s so nice to be a forgotten minority. [bolding his]

Joe Swanson, for those of you who (like me) have no idea who that is, is a character on Family Guy in a wheelchair. This begs the question: Why do you need to shit on other groups and their representation to acknowledge how bad you have it?

There are dozens of famous disabled people I can name off the top of my head. Stephen Hawking, Hellen Keller, Beethoven, Lord Byron, FDR, Frida Kahlo, Sudha Chandran, John Milton–a cursory Google search reveals even more. Saying there are no famous disabled people is a shitty fucking thing to do, both because you’re erasing their accomplishments and you’re depriving other disabled people of that representation by pretending it doesn’t exist. Spreading misinformation so you can complain that everyone else is better off than you specifically is just plain cruel.

“I’m so sick and tired of society catering to race, ethnicity, sexuality, gender, but never giving a thought to people with disabilities. We don’t get a slice of the “diversity” pie.“

Catering to. … Catering to.

“Until our society can grow to acknowledge, accept, and represent the diverse world of disabilities, then we don’t have true equality and diversity.”

Like… he could have just made a post saying this. I mean, we have diversity regardless of equality, but that’s semantics. We don’t have to tear down other minorities to be heard. There’s enough “pie” for everyone.

Society: You should accept everyone regardless of sex, culture, gender, sexuality, race, class, ethnicity, economic status Person: What about disabled people? Society: Huh?

I’m not a big fan of his little infographics, primarily because he uses them exclusively as a platform to strawman himself, but this one in particular is uh, frustrating. If he’s speaking about popular society, very few people accept all the groups he listed, particularly class/economic status. If he’s speaking about our country….

Federal protected classes include: Race, color, religion/creed, national origin/ancestry, sex, age, physical or mental disability, veteran status, genetic information, citizenship. 

It’s the same story.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

BLOCK HIM. Do not reblog his content. Stop him preemptively from reblogging yours. Do not engage with him. 

If you try to debate him, he will probably call you a bully, and you will probably get some not-so-mysterious anons. You will definitely be unable to reach a resolution. I know of at least one individual who’s attempting to “rehabilitate” him, so I guess we’ll see how that goes? I’d be genuinely delighted.

Reblog this post if you can, to spread the word.

Educate yourself about the issues addressed in this post. If you have questions, my inbox is always open.

I am not infallible, and I will also make mistakes. Please bring these to my attention immediately and they will be addressed.

This is a much less urgent situation than the previous post, as he’s (mostly) stopped harassing people, but you have a right to be aware of whom you’re interacting with. Whether you block him or befriend him or whatever is up to you, and I hope whatever choice you make is the right choice for you.

[himalayaz]

Title: I hope the fact that I voted makes this an easier read 😬 

By: Miliaku Nwabueze

 Part One: Examine the Self

I was appalled at the cognitive dissonance in movement thinkers this summer. I witnessed “radical” organizers, activists, and thought leaders encourage members of the rebellion to channel their rage and frustration with state sanctioned violence into voting. Simply and unilaterally, “Vote!”, was the universally agreed upon call to action. Folks rarely identified whom to vote for or on what which ironically symbolizes the meaningless nature of their compulsing. The investment into state infrastructure puzzled me. 

Organizations and individuals that do land acknowledgements before meetings know whose territory they’re on, but insist on realizing freedom through participating in state systems of governance that further solidify the state’s occupation. I’m not feeling that folks can legitimately have a decolonial or anti-coloniality orientation while they are actively advocating for voting and other methods of change-making that involve the state over autonomous, localized, and collective organization of meeting human needs: the commons. 

The work of feminist scholars such as Donna Haraway, Patricia Hill Collins, Nancy Hartsock and others teach us that we know our world from what identity-as-spaces we occupy. Marginalized people have insight to build consciousness about their worlds and their oppressor’s because their positionality within them is defined in relationship to the violences of structural hegemony (i.e. woman to man, colonized to colonizer/settler, undocumented to citizen, black to white, etc.). Mahmoud Keshavarz builds on this theory by asserting “One’s class gender and/or ethnicity shape [their] being, interactions and inhabitations in the world...” 

Aspiring revolutionaries “often present themselves as being critical, political and radical yet, in practice, and by what they produce, remain innocent, neutral or, merely well-intentioned.” People trying to design existences different from our status quo consistently give way to reform. I feel this is because we have not collectively nor individually interrogated our cognitive dissonance. We have not killed the cops, the state, the capitalist, the oppressor, the aspiring winner in our own heads. We have treated the means of allowing for the emergence of generative deviations from our trajectory of global, ecological collapse as somehow separate from the ends. Kehavarz continues: “...designers cannot simply engage in such complicated issues without a complex political understanding of their own position in terms of gender, class and ethnicity as well as how the contemporary orders of capital and the bodies serving those orders are organised by dispersed material articulations such as passports, camps, and borders, all configured by design.” Our failures to develop self awarness are the precursors to reform.

Part Two: “We Want to Do More Than Survive”: Self Examination

As Imani Scott-Blackwell penned so eloquently in a Facebook status about the 2020 Presidential election:

“While y’all mourn the results, I’ll continue grieving the fact that rather than using our resources, time, and talents to fortify local mutual aid networks that can sustain and protect us regardless of who the elected official are, we instead put that into elections, pamphlets, yard signs, social media tech company coffers, Halloween candy and snacks for the sake of “voter outreach”.

……

I’m really just confused like what are we actually doing.....what is it we actually want? Because impact > intent and we seem collectively committed to the wrong solutions and though I do see people that are critical of electoral politics few seem ready to talk about what we really need to do here.....divest from electoral politics all together.”

The amount of people encouraging other people to vote this year was historic. In my personal experiences, strangers with my private information texted and called me, knocked on my door, and hand wrote me letters urging me to engage in the spectacle of emergency voting. In meetings with grassroots and change-oriented organizations, people are doing land acknowledgments, and discussing indigenous sovereignty. These same meetings that begin with land acknowledgement often ended in encouraging attendees to vote. 

But, aren’t the state and its power inherently colonial? So how does a strategy that envisions freedom and/or sovereignty for black, incarcerated, indigenous, and/or undocumented people include actions that codify state hegemony?

The first type of cognitive dissonance that “hit me in the head” was W.E.B DuBois’ Double consciousness in high school; in an English class with the only black teacher. It applied so directly to my experiences as a working class black girl packaged and scholar-shipped into a wealthy, predominantly white private school with a college acceptance rate of 100%. I took so much pride in this despite constantly having to be “twice as good to get half as much”. I spent so much time explaining I tested into Detroit Country Day, that I wasn’t there because I was good at sports. I spent so much time laughing on the outside while crying on the inside at insensitive jokes and comments. I spent so much time embarrassed by being dropped off in my father’s rumbling work van. Upon understanding W.E.B DuBois’ theory I realized all that time was wasted. I made an instantaneous shift in my consciousness. Learning about my positionality disrupted how I speculated my future.

In becoming aware of my own cognitive dissonance I was able to immediately re-imagine myself off of the trajectory of becoming a black femme agent of white supremacy. I leaned into my queerness, I continued to wear my hair as it grew out of my head, I defended myself and others against racism, and became increasingly disinterested with seeking the approval of my white classmates. One might have seen a Condeleeza Rice as my future, but I became an unemployed, overworked, weed-smoking, mushroom tripping (okay, only like twice), hippie dippie black abolitionist, gay ass radical. I changed my belief system and praxis to incorporate what I was learning about myself in relationship to the structures that dominate our lives, and the trajectory of my life was disrupted.

Part Three: The Theory 

Again, can we who believe in freedom from US hegemony have a decolonial orientation while encouraging engagement in state infrastructures? Is channeling mass frustration with state violence into voting a decolonial framework? I ask, declaratively. Decolonization is a speculative disruption and a deviation from the trajectory laid out before us, requiring the abolition of the state. I believe this is an issue with speculative design - it’s failure to disrupt our thinking and how we might imagine life after now.

Professor Jamer Hunt at The New School once summarized a point by Arjun Appadurai from his piece “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Economy”: “We lean on sameness, really, to understand if we’re doing things right.” We do this in the most mundane of ways. If you got the same answer as me then I must have gotten it right! Right?... In her iconic work, “The Master’s Tools will Never Dismantle The Master’s House,” Audre Lorde teaches us difference is a practice of discovery. However, we respond to differences -not the status quo as difference within marginal contexts- as if it's a disruption. As a deviation in need of discipline. We then, sometimes, rely on our conceptions of hierarchy to determine “rightness”: young over old, literally any racial-ethnic identity over black, teacher over student, man over woman, etc.

Sameness can build a nation. Appadurai asserts a nation is a set of communities based on shared cultural values. In the US that culture is whiteness. That is the “nation” in the “nation-state” on Turtle Island. The dash is the “articulatory” piece. “Nation” and “state” were intentionally intertwined and can be separated and destroyed. 

The job of the “state” in “nation-state” is to spread itself. Colonization (direct and indirect) is what makes/made this possible; coloniality is what makes it enduring. After all, a state is simply a condition or what “is”, and white supremacy is what articulates and unifies this being. Therefore, one can only conclude that on turtle island, the “United” “States” is the product of spreading white supremacy in all shapes and fashions, enduringly. This has shaped identity, positionalities, and mobilities and thus speculative design(ers). Statist thinking is thwarting possibility and distorting it into limited likelihoods. This is a trap door to reform. This is where decolonization, returning land to the not only indigenous people, but indengous life--the commons--is transformed into a metaphor to live in infinite land acknowledgements and celebratory, meaningless court decisions. The endurance of the state’s illusory nature forces us to endure, feeling as though nothing will change nor end. Right? Nope, that’s not the answer I got.

In Design Politics: An Inquiry Into Passports, Camps and Borders the most fire book on design right now, Mahmoud Keshavarz asserts the non enduring nature of statehood: “The State is designed”. He says, “Refugee, settlers, displacement,” and I would add colonization and racism etc. is realized via statehood. Statehood will not be the liberating variable in these narratives as these positions are diametrically opposed to the ever demonstrating settler, colonial, capitalist, and violent interests of the nation-state.

Advocating for divestment from state infrastructures is unfamiliar, different, and possibly unsettling. Unsettling is our future state if there’s anything real behind your land acknowledgements. To summarize Yang and Tuck in Decolonization is Not a Metaphor: “What is unsettling about decolonization” is the literal unsettling. To “Unsettle” is to disrupt. As designers think about futures we must be aware of our standpoint, reorient, and think about what decolonization, anti-racism, undocumentedness, anti-capitalism, etc. wants - designing from this standpoint is where speculative disruption is born.

Part Four: Speculative Disruption

Speculative Disruption begins where reform ends. Speculation, unimaginatively, has become a practice of prediction. A space we’ve let our data-driven culture of determining likelihoods colonize (Lol, jk.) imagination in service of accuracy. We let our obsession with predicting outcomes, performing certainty, and being “right” be conflated with and distort possibility. 

There’s a saying circulating around radical communities: “abandon the capitalist, king, and the economy to govern an empty house”. Designers can materialize the future right now. “...Zoom out and start with new realities (ways of organizing everyday life through alternative beliefs, values, priorities, and ideology) then develop scenarios and possibly personas to bring it to life (173)”

This is deeper than designing what we “want”. Folks love to metaphorize colonization in the following phrases: “decolonizing our desires” or “decolonize our minds” though I think they mean our thoughts have been co-opted by the enduring nature of the nation-state and reinforcing of sameness and correctness. What we want is influenced by what we want to destroy as evidenced by the cognitive dissonance rampant through change making institutions. “VOTE!” But “Police are bad”, “So we have to vote for the people who vow to hire them!” [I’m not making this up]. Or immigrants or black people who defend their piece of the settler pie while feeling “it’s a shame what happened to the ‘natives’”.

My friend Sasha once said we need to organize to make things possible and impossible. This is the speculative and disruptive process of designing the unfamiliar -- the being that does not replace what we have and is not an evolution of the existing. The word unfamiliar comes from the Latin and Old English words for servant and family, respectively. Humans need to prepare for freer worlds that don’t currently serve our present ways of thinking and that are non-proximal to us. The designs for free worlds will come from the wants of the subaltern who have consciously refused to endure. We need to design the abolitionist mechanisms that will make a commons possible while making the empire impossible. 

Speculative disruption speculates the unsettling, the deviation from where we are headed and the orientation towards the directions in which we hope to journey. I ask declaratively: How can we learn to be okay with what is not familiar to us and how can we allow that which does not serve the current and dominant trajectory to inform what we create? How can we engage in a radically feminist practice of embracing uncertainty by acting without fear of consequences we are also uncertain of? 

[thedancingwalrus-blog]

I am attempting this meme thing. I hope I’ve got it right.

Rules are:

·         Post the rules

·         Answer the questions given to you by the tagger

·         Write 11 questions of your own

·         And tag 11 people

 1. if you were Not A Mammal, what (other) animal would you be?

Could I be the kea-bird? I very much like the kea bird. You see I have a lot of admiration for any animal that has figured out a way to snowboard, have snow ball fights and also kill things several dozen times its size so it can eat their kidneys. :)

New Zealand is insane and I love it.

2. what AU would you kill to see someone write about your OTP?

Hmmmmm well first I need to decide what my OTP is.

I write a lot of different ships. Like I checked my AO3 tags just now and the biggest number I have for one ship is 3 fics. The vast majority of those fics are AUs so there’s a certain amount that if I want a pairing and AU I write it myself because I don’t expect other people to be interested in what I am.

I’m honestly struggling to think of one pairing to put down let alone an AU for them.

I would be like Golem and want them ALL. MINE! MY PRECIOUS!

*ahem*

I love Lena Luthor/Supergirl to a ridiculous degree but don’t have any particular AU urges with them.

I think I’d really love to see an AU where Alex Danvers and M’gann Morzz were a couple, a long, emotionally intense slow burn, dealing with M’gann’s PTSD and Alex’s desire for a family and everything happening on Mars.

Having just watched the latest Star Wars and the Doctor Who Christmas Special I’d also really love to see the AU where the Doctor and Bill show up right at the end of The Last Jedi and Bill’s incredible whirlwind romance with Rose.  

3. do you like crossover fics/stories? (e.g., blending marvel and dc?) why or why not?

Considering how many of them I write I don’t actually read a lot of them.

I like writing them because doing them well requires that extra level of thought: how do the worlds overlap? How do the characters interact? Is there anything from either world that doesn’t fit and can it be reconciled?

As much as it’s slow going I’m loving writing the Batman/Iron man crossover with my partner. For me fiction should be talking about something, no matter how light the story and no matter whether it’s publishable or not. I really like the way we’ve used Bruce and Tony to talk about different approaches to social problems, a sort of ground-up personal approach versus a top-down at a remove approach. I don’t think we could have done so well outside of a crossover.

But that extra complexity is probably why I don’t read a lot of them. With my health problems over the past year-and-change I’ve found it difficult to dedicate time and focus to reading other people’s fiction. And given the choice between reading and writing I’ll always go for writing.

4. what’s the last piece of fiction you read that you would recommend?

Heh, yeah I’m not sure what the last book I finished and enjoyed was. My difficulty focusing over the year has meant a lot of books were started and put down again, no matter how good they were.

I also read a lot of non-fiction rather than fiction.

Generally though here are some I managed through mental health problems and probably give an idea of how eclectic my reading is-

The Lord Peter Wimsey Series by Dorothy L Sayers.

·         These were written in the 1920s and there are some issues with racist language as a result. But by Gods they’re brilliant. Startlingly original mysteries that don’t always turn out to be murders, excellent, varied female characters, a mentally ill protagonist, a wealth of disabled characters, memorable descriptions. They’re worth a read.

Ancillary Justice by Ann Leckie

·         Best sci fi book I’ve read in a very very long time. Excellent plot. Wonderful lightness of touch when it comes to world building. And an intensely personal, emotional focus. It’s essentially the story of a loyal soldier plotting to kill the head of their nation, not out of any moral compulsion or difference of opinion but because she killed someone the soldier loved. Powerful stuff.

5. your thoughts about poetry? Do you write it?

Poetry is excellent but I never write it myself.

I find it’s a wonderful way to summarise intense emotion. I memorise a lot of it (for which we broadly blame Saudi) and quote it fairly often. My favourites are Sassoon, Sappho and Rumi. I dip into Byron occasionally and I have a compass engraved with The Road Less Travelled By.

I’m also a big fan of the Sagas but obviously they lose a lot of the meter in translation. I’m thinking of trying to learn Lokasenna in the original because I think it would be satisfying to growl at people. I’ve got a copy of Beowulf in Old English that I go back to every so often to look at the language. One day I shall have the courage to read it aloud as it was supposed to be.

6. what’s one period of history (from any place) you find interesting and want to either learn more about or teach others about?

I have to choose ONE?!

I mean it’s sort of obvious but also I think the only reason this is counted as ‘one’ thing by a lot of people is bloody Western bias not taking the entire African continent seriously.

West African pre-colonial history.

For godssakes if you’re making the slightest pretence at understanding the New World you should know the basics. It feeds into so much Caribbean, Brazilian and US history. It shaped wars in Brazil and Cuba and Haiti.

It's also a wonderful contrast to Western philosophical schools. There are completely different concepts about deities, kingship, gender and souls.

And honestly? I just think it's really interesting and really under appreciated. I really love learning more about it and I wish more people learnt about it.

 7. salty or sweet?

Sweet. No sweeter. Sweeter than that. Look just pass me the fucking sugar already I’ll handle this.

Wait- This is about food right? This isn’t that weird American thing of assigning flavours to emotions and behaviours?

Are you trying to confuse me so you can take the coffee? I see through your cunning ruse and the caffeine is mine. Yes.

8. feelings about gift-giving? Enjoy it? Find it burdensome? Think it’s too commercial? Ritualized? Etc?

Well…of course it’s ritualised but that doesn’t make it wrong. Rituals are a large part of what holds us together.

I like gift giving. It appeals to the old fashioned part of me and I think it’s a good way of reinforcing social ties and showing appreciate of others. Sure it can be difficult, but I enjoy the exchange.

At least when it is actually focused on the person getting the gift rather than just some generic expensive thing for the sake of it.

9. vampires: yay or nay?

-the Queen of air and darkness

begins to shrill and cry,

Oh young man oh my slayer,

Tomorrow you shall die.

Oh Queen of air and darkness

I think it’s true you say,

And I shall die tomorrow

But you will die today.

10. what’s one trope you love and can’t get enough of, no matter the medium in which it arises (tv, film, fic, etc)?

Hmmm difficult.

I really like seeing characters who are genuinely very different, with different backgrounds and beliefs coming together to do the right thing. That's part of why I liked the Justice League, seeing very different people working together and becoming friends.

I also like complex villains. I have a serious weak spot for them. My favourite characters are often villains, Lex Luthor, the Joker, Catwoman- But I sort of have mixed emotions about that. Because it comes from....poorly written heroes essentially. I often focus on complex villains when the heroes are bland and uninteresting. I think a lot of the time that comes from people assuming that the audience will empathise with the hero and that they need to take more effort over the villain.

So when I write I try to make a concerted effort to make the heroes interesting and flawed and complex. Because otherwise why aren't we reading a story about the villain?

 11. are you a morning shower person or a night shower person? or the elusive bubble baths person?

I am an ‘ARGH NO WATER!!!! WHY IS IT SO COLD?! WHY IS IT FALLING FROM THE CELING?! THIS IS UNNATURAL AND WRONG!!! THE PAIN!!! THE INDIGINITY!!!!!’ person.

 1) John Boyega or Idris Elba?

2) Murder Mysteries, good family fun, awful and disturbing, dull- Thoughts?

3) Favourite mythology and why?

4) Is there a type of story you wish you could write but don’t want to attempt?

5) Never-fail feel good book?

6) Last film that made you cry?

7) Do you get carsick?

8) What’s the best plant in the world? Have you grown one?

9) Dosas. Breakfast food or lunch food?

10) If you were dividing things up into seasons from scratch what would they be based on and what would you call them?

11) What and where is the best time of year?

 @akindoodle, @phynali @thehungryvortigaunt @warclad (sorry mate I couldn’t remember what your personal blog was called) @bysamanthakeel, 

[joshchristvevo]

She Has Upheld Justice

Or: Why YHWH’s Definition of Justice Has a Bit More To Do with Promiscuous Widows Than Your Congressman Might Have You Believe

[[The following is the incredibly rough draft of a piece that I will probably have published one day within a larger work. There are a lot of ideas expressed here that aren’t fully fleshed out or expressed in full detail. This entire essay/prose poem is copyrighted to myself.]]

People get so surprised, I think, when I tell them that there’s a story in the Bible where a girl disguises herself as a prostitute and has sex with her father-in-law. They don’t expect that to be in there. They’re even more surprised when they find out that she’s the hero. That at the end of her story she is applauded for what she’s done. That later she gets a mention as the ancestor of Christ.

Her name’s Tamar, and you can read her story in Genesis 38, but I’ll follow the text pretty closely here while I tell it. You see, there’s this guy Judah, and he’s the son of Israel, the ancestor and namesake of the people of Israel. Judah’s not the firstborn, but due to some earlier mishaps and events his older brothers have been disinherited and Judah is the heir now. So Judah goes out and finds a Canaanite woman and marries her – which was a big no-no for the day – and he and this woman, Shua, have three sons.

The oldest son grows up and marries a Canaanite girl – like father, like son – and this girl is Tamar. Trouble is, this oldest son is actually a terrible person, so God strikes him dead. This creates a problem for Tamar – women in ancient Israelite society weren’t legally allowed to own property unless they were tied to a man in some way (usually their fathers during the earlier part of their life, and then their husband during the later part). Not being tied to a man was also bad in other ways: there was no one to defend Tamar if she were in trouble, and the way that home economics functioned in that day meant that, if a person of any gender wanted to survive, they needed at least one other person living with them to divide tasks with. Life in ancient Israel was really complex and tough.

Luckily Israelite law allowed a clearly designated loophole to this aforementioned rule in order to protect women in Tamar’s circumstances: if a widow bore the son of a brother of her dead husband, that son would be legally considered the dead husband’s child and rightful heir. Problem solved. The widow is no longer “untied” to a man (my words, not the Bible’s). Through this process, Tamar could be redeemed – that is, restored to a state of legal and social freedom.

Unfortunately for Tamar, however, the second-oldest brother isn’t a very good redeemer. Actually, he’s a really bad one. He explicitly does not want to be a redeemer. He marries her, certainly, but in one of the most sexually explicit passages in the Bible we learn that whenever they have sex, he just pulls out and climaxes on the ground.

God doesn’t like this very much. The second brother also dies.

Judah, apparently not understanding that his sons are just horrible people, assumes Tamar is bad luck and sends her away (destitute) instead of letting her try again with his youngest son.

Fast forward some time later and Judah is traveling with a friend. They visit a small town and there by the town gate Judah spies a beautiful woman with a veiled face – a cult prostitute. Within the context of ancient Near Eastern society, these were women employed by the cult of a fertility goddess. You could pay to have sex with them, for a price, and in return you’d receive some serious blessings from the fertility goddess.

Maybe Judah was a little worried about the state of his fertility given the recent deaths of his two sons. Maybe he just thought she had nice boobs. We aren’t told for sure. He has sex with her though, and this is a pretty big red flag to be honest. The whole point of the Bible’s overarching story until now has been that Judah’s family has a contract with YHWH and YHWH is supposed to be the source of all their fertility. Judah’s not just cheating on his wife right now, but also on his family’s personal deity. He’s actually breaking divine contract. Not good.

Perhaps just as bad, Judah’s a bad john. He doesn’t have any money on him.

“Give me your staff and your signet ring as collateral,” the cult prostitute says, still veiled this whole time. “You can have them back when you return to me with the money.”

Judah goes back home and comes back with the cash, but the cult prostitute is gone and so are his staff and signet ring.

“Where’s the cult prostitute who sits by the town gate?” Judah asks the people of this small town.

“We haven’t got any cult prostitutes here,” the people reply, bewildered.

Judah goes back home utterly confused, and lifted of his staff and signet ring – important symbols of his authority as head of his household.

Some time later, he hears upsetting news: Tamar has been found. Pregnant.

Judah is suddenly filled with righteous indignation. “Not with any son of mine!” he probably says to himself, all smug. He orders that she must be brought and put to death – the proper fate for a woman guilty of an extramarital affair in Israelite society.

Tamar is brought before him.

“Do you want to tell me who the father is?” Judah asks her.

“The father, my lord, is the man who left these with me,” she says – and displays Judah’s own staff and signet ring.

Judah tears his robe and cries out:

“She has upheld justice better than me!”

“Upheld justice”? In my Bible? It’s more likely than you think.

The story of Tamar presents a tough challenge to the popular modern conception that the God of the Bible advocates for the punishment of women who have sketchy sex. (More on that later.) But it also offered a challenge to ancient Israelites in their own society.

Think about it: Judah is the son of Israel, founder of Israel. Judah’s own name is where we get the word Judaism from. He’s the ancestor of many notable Biblical characters, including King David and eventually Jesus. But who is the woman through whom he begets these great figures? Tamar.

Tamar, who tricks him into having sex with her. Tamar, who can’t keep a man. Tamar, who is a Canaanite! One of the most enduring narrative threads throughout the Bible is the struggle between Israel and the Canaanites! Not only is there a struggle for resources with them both living in the same area, but the Canaanites are just straight up sketchy people – among the rituals the Bible describes them as practicing, having sex with prostitutes to get fertility blessings is honestly one of the less disturbing ones.

Judah ought to be the hero here! He’s far better qualified! But what does he do in the story? He makes shady deals with Canaanites. He refuses to act as redeemer for a disenfranchised woman! He cheats on both his wife and his God and breaks a contract with said God!!!

As for Tamar?

“She has upheld justice better than me.”

You see, the Bible doesn’t really treat justice the way our modern society does. The word used here for it is the Hebrew word tzedakah, and though it’s often translated as “righteousness”, the more proper way to translate it is “social justice”. Within a Biblical context, tzedakah is the ongoing process by which people, both on an individual and national level, ensure that others are treated fairly and receive the same privileges and benefits as everyone else. YHWH is always described as a champion for tzedakah, and commands his people to do the same. Our modern concept of “human rights”? That comes from the Bible’s description of tzedakah. You want to be a “righteous person” according to the Bible’s standard? You uphold tzedakah.

And the trouble is, tzedakah never really has anything to do with punishing. No one’s ever described in the Bible as upholding tzedakah because they executed a murderer, or stoned an adulteress, or railed publicly against people with different religious beliefs, or used tax money to bomb another country.

The Bible’s definition of justice hardly ever focuses on punishing – even though it does make it clear that there are actions YHWH disapproves of and that people who do those actions should be punished.

But whenever the Bible talks about justice, it talks about it not in terms of taking away, but in terms of giving.

To really get into the ways that the Bible, and specifically YHWH, describes social justice, we’ve gotta get into the Torah (the first five books of the Bible), specifically the Book of Deuteronomy. A lot of scholars will tell you that the Book of Deuteronomy describes YHWH’s view of justice this way: if you’re a good person, YHWH gives you good things, and if you’re a sinner, YHWH takes things away. By this model, then, we should expect that people who are happy and successful and rich are the people who do what YHWH wants and whom YHWH has rewarded for such. Alternatively, we could then assume that people who are sad, who are unsuccessful, who are poor, are just that way because they aren’t good people and haven’t done what YHWH wants them to. You could say, in effect, that they haven’t earned the right to be successful. Sound familiar?

The problem is that if you project that view onto Deuteronomy, and therefore onto the rest of the entire Bible, it won’t actually have a leg to stand on. Scholars who purport this view that Deuteronomy says this are basing this view on a standalone chapter toward the end of Deuteronomy, in which YHWH tells Israel that if they follow his commandments, he will give them some pretty sweet blessings, but if they don’t, then he’ll curse them with this long laundry list of totally bad things.

So what’s the trouble? Well, even me describing this chapter this way already completely divorces it from any relevant context in the story. First off, it divorces it from its narrative context – the whole point of Deuteronomy so far has been that YHWH, through Moses, is preparing the people of Israel to actually enter their homeland of Canaan again after the whole slavery-in-Egypt incident (if you don’t know what I’m talking about, put this down real quick and either go read the first 15 chapters of Exodus or watch The Prince of Egypt.) In addition, the entire Torah so far has been about the covenant (or contract) YHWH has been making with Israel since he first started talking with their ancestor Abraham back in Genesis 12 – a covenant contract which in essence boils down to “If you do what I say, you can live in the land of Canaan.” So this whole blessings and curses business? Well, if you read the blessings yourself (they’re in Deuteronomy 28), you’ll notice that they all have to do with living in the land of Canaan. Especially within an ancient Near Eastern context, you could basically condense all those blessings down to “If you do what I say, not only will you live in the land of Canaan, but the land will be really great and fertile and you’ll be able to grow, like, so much food.” The curses, which make up the rest of the chapter after the blessings, are pretty easy to understand then once you take this into consideration and also read up a bit on how siege warfare works: YHWH describes a lot of curses that sound really gross and strange but actually in context are things that these people would have recognized as the effects of a devastating war. Essentially, then, the curses are all just saying, “If you don’t do what I say, not only will life in the land of Canaan not be really cushy, but I won’t let you stay there – you’ll leave one way or another, either on your own or being dragged away by foreign invaders.” If Israel breaks the contract, it’s not YHWH’s job to keep them safe from enemies anymore. They’d be on their own, and the ancient Near East is not a friendly place.

Second, describing this chapter of Deuteronomy this way also divorces it from its legal context – the Torah’s description of tzedakah and YHWH’s contract with Israel. See, the way the Torah describes YHWH’s contract with Israel, it seems that the bulk of YHWH’s terms for Israel boil down to “do these specific rituals to worship me, and uphold tzedakah”. Roughly half of the commands YHWH gives Israel revolve around the particular ways they are (and aren’t) supposed to worship him; the other half revolves around YHWH’s definition and command of justice. This first category isn’t so important to the issue I’m discussing, but is interesting on its own and a lot has been written about it. The second category is what I’d like to explore.

Within the context of the Torah, and especially within Deuteronomy, the process of tzedakah, social justice, can be described as the process of lifting up those in society who don’t have the same opportunities and privileges you do. The Bible’s word for these sort of marginalized, desperate people is often translated “the poor”, and the Bible often concretizes these people into three easily distinguishable categories: the widows, the orphans, and the aliens (i.e. foreigners). (Cf Exodus 22:22, Deuteronomy 16:11-14, 26:12, etc.)

Why are these categories notable?

The widow, in ancient Israelite society, was any woman who, like Tamar who we met earlier, didn’t belong to the household of any particular man, in this case because her husband had died. We’ve touched already on why this was such a huge issue in this society.

The orphan was equal to the widow in terms of social status. In this context, an orphan was a person of any age who didn’t belong to a household. Like a widow, this meant you had no rights, because rights and blessings were passed down within the family estate – without that, you had nothing. (I say an orphan can be any age here, but technically speaking in order to be put in a position in which you’ve lost your entire household, you’ve likely got to be pretty young, at least at the time of the disaster.) Also, remember earlier, when I said that due to the structuring of Israelite society and the harshness of life in Israel, it was impossible to survive alone? That was assuming you’re a strong, able-bodied adult man. Try being a child. Without charity, you’d be dead within a month.

The alien was in a similar position to the widow and the orphan – as a foreigner, you wouldn’t have ties to any Israelite household which you could rely on for food, financial support, and legal rights and protections. Like the widow and the orphan, the alien would have been out on the street, alone and afraid and completely destitute, with no clear sign of where their next meal would come from or where they could find relief if they were bothered by a summer storm or a band of thieves.

These people had absolutely no rights in ancient Israelite society, and no means to survive.

And the thing is: YHWH absolutely loves these people. In the parts of the Torah where he isn’t specifying how he is to be worshipped, he just can’t stop gushing about these people. There are a ton of laws given specifically to ensure that these people, the poor and disenfranchised and destitute on the edge of society, are looked after and provided for and redeemed.

Deuteronomy 10:18-19 says, “He restores the rights of the orphan and the widow, and he shows love to the alien by giving him food and a cloak. You also must show love to the alien, for aliens were you in the land of Egypt.”

One of the Bible’s most startling claims is that the all-powerful God who moves heaven and earth is deeply invested in the lives of those who lack provision in society.

This is because, at his core, YHWH is a God of Love.

In Exodus 33 and 34, the prophet Moses seeks to see YHWH face to face. YHWH agrees, but explains that he is too powerful for Moses to see him and survive, so he will only show Moses a tiny glimpse of him as he passes Mount Sinai. So Moses goes up Mount Sinai, but does he see anything? No.

Instead, in order to glimpse YHWH’s true form, Moses is blasted with a list of YHWH’s core defining characteristics, in one of the most beautiful poems in the Bible in my opinion:

“YHWH! YHWH!

A God who loves intimately and is full of favor!

Who takes a long time to get angry!

Overflowing with mercy and honest faithfulness!

Who keeps mercy for thousands,

Who accepts guilt and rebellion and failure,

But who never acquits freely,

Visiting the fathers’ guilt on their children,

and their children’s children,

to the third and fourth generations!”

This poem is repeated and quoted often throughout the rest of the Bible in order to describe YHWH. We’ll explore it more in-depth in a moment, but for now what I want you to take away from it is that YHWH is a God of Love – slow to anger and quick to forgive and devoted to his people. This love, it seems, extends even to the marginalized, the poor, the needy.

Just because YHWH is slow to anger doesn’t mean that he never gets angry. Once we leave the Torah we find countless places in the books of the Prophets in which YHWH expresses his extreme rage against the Israelites. They are not upholding tzedakah, he says!

But when YHWH is railing against the injustice in Israel through his prophets, it never seems to be about the individual, small-scale failings of the people.

It’s never the fault of that sinful Sarah down the street,

or that girl Rahab who lives in the tenement housing,

or the dude who begs on the street corner for handouts.

It’s never that the widow didn’t try hard enough to improve her situation,

or that the orphan didn’t look hard enough for a job,

or that the alien should have just stayed where he came from.

When YHWH says in Exodus 34 that he visits “the fathers’ guilt on their children” – a lot of ink has been spilled over that, but I’ve never seen anyone point out the obvious fact that both “fathers” and “children” are plural. After all, YHWH says in Ezekiel 18:20 that “The soul that sins – it shall be put to death. The son must not carry the guilt of the father...” Guilt is not genetically transmittable on the individual level. When a father sins, his son has nothing to do with it. But when fathers sin – when an entire generation of a people group takes part in a rebellion against the will and love of YHWH – well, they will be lucky if the effects of that sin have dissipated by the third or fourth generation.

That’s why when YHWH denounces the sin of Israel through the prophets, he consistently always addresses the leading generations, the rich, the wealthy, the upper class, and the people in power. And his indictments are not that they have let too much go unpunished – his constant grief against the upper class of Israel is that they have let too many go unhelped.

They have neglected the poor. (Isaiah 10:1-2)

They have oppressed the widow. (Jeremiah 22:3)

They have abandoned the cause of the orphan. (Psalm 94:6)

They have abused the alien. (Ezekiel 22:7)

In a moment of superb righteous indignation

the prophet Micah asks,

“What do you think YHWH requires from you?”

All YHWH requires is that you

“Seek justice,

Love Mercy,

And Walk in Humility with your God.”

The contractual commands of the Torah to uphold tzedakah, to practice justice, are not a command to see how many whores and sinners can be stoned to death.

They are a command to take care of the people who otherwise won’t be taken care of.

They are a command to notice the everyday problems and struggles of those who have less than you do.

They are a command to redeem.

[crimsonrevolt]

Congratulations Taylor you’ve been accepted to Crimson Revolt as Daisy Hookum!

↳ please refer to our character checklist

Taylor lovely, your applications are always so full of beautiful characterizations and complexities (as is your writing in general) that it is a joy to get them and read through everything you provide! I adored Daisy from when you first played her in the rp and it’s so wonderful to think about having her back on the dash and to see you explore her character further! We can’t wait to see what you do with her and how she’s going to change as the war progresses! 

application beneath the cut (tw: Death)

OUT OF CHARACTER

INTRODUCTION

It’s Taylor! Currently 18 and residing in the midwest, in good ol’ CST and using female pronouns.

ACTIVITY

Er – well, currently around a six or seven out of ten, weekly? I have real life responsibilities of course, and dearest Marlene, but I try to generate about four replies weekly. Of course this depends on circumstance but for the most part I can stay caught up with little issue.

TRIGGERS

*removed for privacy

HOW DID YOU FIND US?

Originally, I think it was somewhere in an Andromeda Black tag way back in December. But I’ve been here nearly a year now!

WHAT HARRY POTTER CHARACTER DO YOU IDENTIFY WITH MOST?

Okay, don’t judge, and I’m sure this isn’t a great surprise but - Draco. I’ve been immensely attached to him for years now, for a variety of reasons, and I just have a lot of feelings. But also, Harry and Ron as well - for a very recurring theme we don’t need to get into, just know I love them all very much.

ANYTHING ELSE?

Nothing that wouldn’t absolutely just be my singing praise, which really I do enough as it is.

IN CHARACTER

DESIRED CHARACTER

Daisy Grace Hookum.

Her mother, Jocelyn, was a Muggle with a deep fondness for The Great Gatsby, and chose to name her only child accordingly. However, Daisy’s middle name was a hopeful sort of gesture from her parents, a suggestion and prayer that she would grow up to be eloquent and beautiful in all forms throughout her life.

FACE CLAIM

Katherine McNamara will always be my first choice for Miss Daisy.

REASON FOR CHOSEN CHARACTER

I tried.  I really, really tried to bid her ado, to tuck her away and move on but it’s proven impossible. Daisy is, and will always be, my first love, a part of me that is unshakable  - it’s that easy.

And oh man, oh man. How do I even begin to describe the deep rooted love and affection I hold for Daisy Hookum? She was my first character in CRT, and the first character in a Marauders rp that I truly fell in love with. I had dabbled with others before of course, but none enough that truly struck the way that Daisy did. She was the first character I understood without fault, that I could question and push and she would push back – I grew so much as a writer during my time with her and I know she has so much more to teach me.

She’s such a gentle, kind soul. Raised to have courage and be kind in all strokes of life, Daisy strives to do exactly that; she’s incapable of hate, because there has never been any reason for it. Even after the traumatic, devastating murder of her parents in the new year, Daisy cannot bring herself to hate the Death Eaters. Then again – she doesn’t know what truly caused such a horrendous crime to take place. If she did, it is completely possible that the tables would be turned, but well, she doesn’t. That in itself is an incredibly important facet to her personality, to her humanity; at nineteen to be faced with such a brutal loss is a hardship that I, thank the heavens, have never had to personally experience. To be so young and in the midst of way, to feel so wholly alone must be terrifying. It takes a toll on even the brightest rays of sunshine, which Daisy truly is.

But trauma is not all there is to a person, and there is a love and passion for the written word that was instilled into Daisy by her mother by such an incredibly young age that it is not just a passion, it is a very important facet of who she is. While she doesn’t believe her writing to be any good, it is her safe space, therapy from the world.

Her place in Aversio is one that is to be questioned. She doesn’t get her hands dirty, nor does she truly condone the things that they do – but she’s frightened of the Order. That is what it comes down to, the true reason she never joined. Members of the Order are brave, willing to take risks, be hurt. And while Aversio is very similar, they’re a bit more reckless, and therefore she is more capable of being hidden in the shadows. It has nothing to do with cowardice, it’s fear. Fear that she isn’t a good enough witch, not strong enough to hold her own, not magically, not emotionally. The self doubt is crippling.

But she’s strong, oh lord, is she strong. She has the temper of a red-head, even if it is very seldom seen to the naked eye. Very often Daisy hides her emotions, buries them in fear of becoming too much for someone to handle. But there is nothing she does not feel so strongly that it sometimes pains her in the most powerful of ways. Sometimes it feels as if she may combust with the pressure of it all. Especially now, with the loss of her parents. Moreso than anything else, Daisy is predominately lost now. Protecting her mother was her sole intent behind every motive, in the war, in life. And without her here, Daisy isn’t entirely sure where she stands; a typical teenage emotion, in a much more mature version of life.

There are so many layers to this character, things I still discover now, even after having parted with her. I love her with all of my heart and would be so grateful to write her beautiful mind again.

PREFERRED SHIPS // CHARACTER SEXUALITY // GENDER & PRONOUNS

Sexuality is not something Daisy thinks of, per se, for no reason other than it truly just makes her uncomfortable. Wildly unfamiliar with her own body and personal preferences, the concept of sex isn’t something that bodes well. Never having explored sexual experiences in the past, Daisy often considers the idea as something her body has now become incapable of such acts. However that aside, Daisy is truly demisexual. It takes true emotional connection to become sexually attracted to anyone, but Daisy isn’t convinced she’s ever experienced as much. But this does not specify female/male preference; when it comes down to it, Daisy sees people. That’s all.

Okay. Let me preface this by saying that Daisy views gender primarily on a spectrum more than anything else. There are those who identify as men, as women, and then a very broad area gray shades in the middle. She, predominately, is genderfluid but generally uses female pronouns. This is in part due to the time; they/them pronouns were not widely used in the 70s, and Daisy is not all that aware of her true gender identity. This meaning, Daisy goes between feeling predominantly feminine to out of place in her female body, almost uncomfortably so, almost as if she would feel better to be detached from the sex she was born with. It is something that confuses her greatly, that she does not very often think of - well, that she admits to - but it is always present in some way or form. Whether she knows it or not.

CREATE ONE (OR MORE!) OF THE FOLLOWING FOR YOUR CHARACTER:

Oh boy, oh boy.

Aesthetic1

Aesthetic2

Mock Blog

Pinterest Board

Caring (adjective) - displaying kindness and concern for others; there is not a bone in Daisy’s body that is not built on love. It is almost impossible for her first reaction to anyone to not care more about them and how they are doing, no matter what is going on in her own life. Daisy just wants others to be happy, and okay. Her heart is truly too big for her body, so much that it sometimes feels as if she might die from the weight of it all. Especially, and almost exclusively, when she is suffering - or if someone she cares for is.

Imaginative (adjective) - having or showing creativity and inventiveness; from the earliest days of the capabilities, Daisy has been writing. Creating ideas that simply won’t stay within her head, things that must be released onto paper. They strike at any moment and very rarely do they ever leave her be until the moment comes that she can release and truly do something with them. Otherwise they tend to circle through her mind like a carousel or broken record, repeating and growing, until something is done with them.

Timid (adjective) - showing a lack of courage or confidence; hoo boy, if there ever was a hamartia. A very prominent problem with Daisy is the fact that she doesn’t understand how strong she truly is. If she would only tap into her grief and pain, and true abilities more than just being ordinary Daisy could truly be extraordinary. She already is of course, but too afraid of rejection and criticism to realize it’s so close to her fingertips, so easy to reach out and grip. Daisy has a particularly hard time understanding that in the midst of war, especially, softness is strength. There is too much fear, too much self doubt that it is crippling at times, but so deeply embedded into the very core of being.

Reserved (adjective) - slow to reveal emotion or opinions; really, it all goes back to Daisy’s strong, innate desire to please others. It takes a very specific person for Daisy to feel safe enough to express opinion without fear of being shut down - so few of these exist they can be counted on one hand, and even fewer than truly see her angry.  It comes down to fear, and feeling safe. She had it once, at home. But with the loss of her mother and father it has become even more scarce than before, if possible. She puts others first, always, no matter how many times she is told not to.

Unsteady - X Ambassador Hold onto me ‘Cause I’m a little unsteady

Moondust - Jaymes Young I long to hear your voice But still  I make the choice To burn my love In the moondust

Jack and Jill - Katie Herzig She wore that dress Like it was a Saturday Pretty as a summer rose Picked in the morning Time ticked away, the way That it will

Turn it Off - Paramore I scraped my knees while I was praying And found a demon in my safest haven, seems like The tragedy, it seems unending I’m watching everyone I looked up to break and bending We’re taking shortcuts and false solutions Just to come out the hero

Beauty Queen - Ben’s Brother And her eyes shouldn’t have Blurred my vision I know that she, oh she Was a beauty queen And if you’re gonna cry Don’t cry for me

If You Could See Me Now - The Script (for her parents, rip) I’m trying to make you proud Do everything you did I hope you’re up there with God Saying ‘that’s my kid!’ Would you stand in disgrace or take a bow Oh, if you could see me now

IN CHARACTER QUESTIONNAIRE

♔ If you were able to invent one spell, potion, or charm, what would it do, what would you use it for or how would you use it? Feel free to name it: “Something to…help see what the most likely outcome of a situation would be.” Daisy said, a small nod of certainty following the words after a moment of quiet consideration. A moment to really think about it. “I have absolutely no idea what I could possibly name that, but it would be quite helpful.”

♔ You have to venture deep into the Forbidden Forest one night. Pick one other character and one object (muggle or magical), besides your wand, that you’d want with you: “Oh, that’s easy. Andromeda, and a flashlight. A bit of bravery, something to provide a vast amount of light. And then I would just have to hope Andy would know a spell to help keep us shielded.”

♔ What kinds of decisions are the most difficult for you to make? “The kind where someone could get hurt. Which I guess are…a lot of decisions these days.”

♔ What is one thing you would never want said about you? “That I…that I’m a failure,” it caught in her throat, the words. Thick and painful, almost like swallowing a cauldron cake whole. “Especially to Dora. I don’t think I could take it.”

WRITING SAMPLE

Warning: this is an old para I wrote for Daisy and for this case, I must prepare for the angst monster that exists in terms of Taylor.

Things had felt wrong all day. New Year’s Eve had come to pass, and Daisy couldn’t help the dread that swarmed in the pit of her stomach. It should have been expected, really – what with the events of the previous evening. The witch had yet to hear from any of her friends, to find that they were okay. But still…something felt off.

It had been the first holiday season Daisy had spent with no contact to her family. As horrible and painful as it was, the decision had felt like a necessity. She had spent months fighting her father. Begging him to help her master Fidelius, to protect her mother, only to be told no, again and again. If only she thought she could do it on her own, she would have…but she couldn’t.

Christmas and New Year’s had been increasingly lonely. Most of it had been spent in her tiny apartment with her cat, or at Aversio meetings, trying to remind herself why she had entered a place in the war in the first place.

Perhaps the loneliness was what left her waking up on the first of the new year with such a hollow ache in her chest. Or maybe it was the fact that now marked two months since she had returned home, had any contact with her parents at all. The truth of it was, Merlin, did she miss her mother. Her gentle eyes, and warm heart and the way she seemed to just calm the realities of what was happening.

Hours seemed to pass, simply sitting in her bed, frowning to herself, tiny grey kitten mewing quietly in her lap. Snow drifted down outside the window, cheerful chattering echoing up from the streets as London emerged into a new year. Once the afternoon sun shifted in the sky, only then did Daisy realized she had wasted so much of the day…realized that she still had yet to hear from her friends.

Impulse took over, blinding her, accompanied only by the desperate need she had to be in Jocelyn Hookum’s embrace again. To be promised that everything would be okay, if only for a moment – to be with her mother.  Preparing best she could, Daisy soon Apparated to her family’s home.

The house was still - just enough that Daisy hesitated on the doorstep, unsure of if either her mother or father were truly home. Regardless, she allowed herself in, stepping carefully through the house, unease spreading over her. Even in the January afternoon, the house was dark. It was still.

As she reached the sitting room, the dread, the unease she’d felt for months and even through the morning had nothing on the agony that replaced it all. There, lying on the floor, paled and cold, was her mother. A devastated scream burst from Daisy’s lungs, ringing out so badly that all else seemed to have faded away. There was nothing to give her the indication that she was still moving.

Her small frame dropped down next to her mother’s corpse, tears flooding out of her green eyes at such a speed that it was nearly impossible to see. Breathing had all but ceased. Several pained moments of sobbing later, she finally noticed her father, crumpled dead only feet away.

“No,” she cried, incapable of thought, of anything but just pain as she remained on the ground, desperately wishing for it all to be a cruel nightmare, knowing that there was no waking up.

[howlsmovinglibrary]

So I finished ACOWAR

This is in no way a coherent or articulate piece of writing in the same way my ACOTAR/ACOMAF piece tried to be, and I don’t think it even can be called a review, because I don’t tend to review books that already have this much visibility in the booklr community. It’s more just the notes I made while reading ACOWAR, which I kind of felt was the weakest book in the series so far (and if you haven’t already guessed it, I’m not much of a fan to begin with).

This entire piece is basically just spoilers, and salt, so please don’t read unless you already know/don’t mind finding out some major plot points!

First off, can I just say that every time ‘the male’ or ‘the female’ is used as a descriptor, I wince. I think it is a) bad writing and b) cis-centric as fuck. There needs to be more non-binary people in fantasy!

This book was so….bloated. It needed to be edited down a lot – the sheer number of chapters is insane. I had this poignant realisation when I read five chapters of High Fae trash talk at the faerie High Lord meeting and then…the thing they were having a meeting over just…happened anyway? And the meeting suddenly had no meaning whatsoever?

So many abusers are now being made into sympathetic/rehabilitated figures. I took Rhys’ redemption arc in ACOMAF because I kind of suspected that that was the way his and Feyre’s relationship were going to pan out but….both Eris and Tamlin received sympathy, and were made into heroes or forces for good at some point in the plot? Feyre forgave Tamlin? Mor’s abuse at the hands of Keir and Eris is pushed aside because ‘times are hard’ and ‘tough choices have to be made’? And Mor had literally no say or agency in that decision?

Meanwhile we have Ianthe. an abusive woman who’s entire character is one-dimensional villainy and demonised female sexuality. She is portrayed as having not a single scrap of goodness in her soul, not one redeeming characteristic, someone who Feyre has no moral quandary over letting be munched up by the Weaver. Even though her use of sex could realistically be portrayed as a product of internalised misogyny? And yet the men who ‘nailed a message’ into Mor’s womb get nuanced portrayal, the benefit of the doubt in the run up to the war, and even moments of heroism?????

I’m not saying that Ianthe should be redeemed, I just don’t understand why this instance of sexual abuse is so utterly condemned to the point where we watch her smash her own hand in some kind of medieval punishment, and yet the instances of sexual abuse perpetrated by men are all given a degree of either redemption or pardoning because of the circumstances of the plot. Is it because female to male abuse is more taboo and thus seen as more ‘evil’? Because SJM has so ingrained male-to-female sexual abuse into the very fabric of her patriarchal fantasy society, that we and Mor are expected to just accept that this is ‘the way things are’, or even write it off out of necessity as ‘boys will be boys’? I HAVE NO IDEA AND IT MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE.

Given my recent essay on the subject, I was interested that SJM tried to problematize and dismantle the concept of mating bonds a little in the conversation Feyre and Rhysand have about Lucien and Elain. It’s made into ‘Some natural function, not an indication of true, paired souls’ (Chapter 24). There was even the handwave of ‘oh this homosexual relationship may be the product of a mating bond, but they’re probably keeping it a secret from everyone’.

To be honest, I don’t think it succeeded in explaining away the problematic elements of mating. The biological imperatives were still there, ‘the bond is nothing more than...preordained guesswork at who will provide the strongest offspring’ (Chapter 24). Aggression was still a major part of the male side of the bond (like when we get the internal monologue of Lucien and witness him fighting his ‘instincts’) and it’s still implied that men are slaves to the desire that the bond generates, whereas women don’t feel it as strongly/can control their physical desires? ‘But the males...It can drive them mad. It is their burden to fight through’ (Chapter 24) This has some serious ramifications in terms of gendered conceptions of sexual drive. In my opinion, mating bonds are still squicky.

I now mostly just want SJM to put her money where her mouth is and follow through on her attempts at muddying the water: if she insists on pairing the spares, have Elaine get together with Azriel rather than Lucien, and show a relationship where the mating bond is terminated not because of outright physical abuse on the side of the male, but because of a romantic attraction overcoming a sexual/biological one. (Yes, I ship it. Or rather, I ship Elaine overcoming her trauma and going on to be a badass seer, building herself a temple and calling out bullshit like Cassandra in ancient Troy. But if she needs to have a boyf – and it’s SJM so she probably does – I want it to be Sad Shadow Man.)

‘Helion favours both males and females. Usually together in bed’ (Chapter 47). I’m not saying that bisexuality can’t work this way, but I gather that SJM has used the hypersexualised bisexual trope before. 

I think that perhaps Mor’s jealousy of Nessian is because she’s attracted to Nesta (a la season 1 Korrasami)? But even so her possessiveness of Cassian and her hostility towards Nesta was horrible and OOC and made me angry every time it happened. I hate it whenever female-female relationships are sacrificed because of a guy, but it is particularly frustrating in a book where male-female relationships are definitely already the priority. And given the way that Nessian is reaching canonical status, even if you do attribute the jealousy to female-female attraction, it’s only going to end badly for Mor.

Feyre used Mor’s sexuality as a weapon against her after she was justifiably called out on reckless behaviour. Fuck off Feyre.

I know that Azriel is a good character. I know this. And yet this book turned his relationship with Mor into this awful poster child ‘friendzone’ dynamic, where Mor feels pressurised to hide her sexuality because of the hurt it will cause *him*. I don’t think this is a fault of the characters, but of the entire treatment of their friendship and SJM’s portrayal of Mor’s queerness as a burden.

No main characters die. In this apparently impossible war that basically ends in an afternoon. No – everyone is magically resurrected after barely five pages.

Bonus points for not even having the courage to keep Amren out of fae form and thus rip up her incipient ship with Varien. You could have written an entire book on the inner circle going off on a quest to find and subdue a superhuman dragon Amren unshackled from the bonds of human morality. But no. She’s ‘in the cauldron’.

DEUS EX MACHINAS (dragon ex machinas?) MAKE ME WANT TO SCREAM. Find a better way to resolve your conflicts. Especially when even the decision to unshackle Amren from her human form in order for her to become the Deus ex Machina in question has literally no lasting consequences.

Speaking of deus ex machinas: is anyone else annoyed that the only death god who survives the battle is Bryaxis, the one who only asked for a window in exchange for his services, rather than freedom and an implicit murder spree? This means that there are literally no consequences to these so-called ‘tough decisions’ that have to be made in times of war, and everything can just go on fine. ‘No evil death gods were permanently unleashed in the making of this war.’

Can I forcibly rip SJM away from the Russian mythology that she is no doubt going to butcher in the continuation of this series? As soon as I read the name ‘Koschei’ I groaned aloud. You can’t just take whatever mythology you like and use it to make your own magic system! You’ve already detached the Morrigan from any semblance of Celtic Mythology!!!

That being said, I did like:

That the Archeron sisters FINALLY seem to be forming a strong friendship rather than the girl-on-girl hate mess it’s been for the past few books. I liked that Nesta was as powerful as Feyre, and had a more integral role in the final battle than she did.

I liked that in Feysand we see a stable ‘after they get together’ relationship. I still think ACOMAF is ‘stronger’ as a book, as SJM is better at writing romance than plot, but at least there was no needless YA angst, beyond Rhys’ martyrdom complex.

And this sounds awful, but I’m glad that Feyre had a PTSD relapse. I felt that in ACOMAF, her recovery from mental illness was equated a little too strongly with her growing romance with Rhys. Love doesn’t cure mental illness, and I’m glad the SJM showed that.

But overall, this book (much like this commentary) was a bit of a rambling mess of little consequence.