The New York Times coverage of the "Israel Day on Fifth" parade yesterday in New York City has a jarring sentence.
While the headline says, "Intense Security at Peaceful Parade for Israel in Manhattan," within the article it says, "The event was mostly peaceful and drew very few protesters."
"Mostly peaceful"? That phrase has become a euphemism to minimize the violence, intimidation and incitement seen at the thousands of anti-Israel demonstrations worldwide since October 7.
Yet there is a world of difference between anti-Israel and pro-Israel demonstrations. Even yesterday's rally attracted anti-Israel protesters with violent messages that the NYT doesn't want to cover, but the New York Post did, showing this protester with a "Kill Hostages Now" sign.
The Times minimized the peacefulness of the pro-Israel protest and ignored the hate from the anti-Israel demonstrators.
This is par for the course for the media.
The Black Lives Matters demonstrations in 2020 that often devolved into looting and burning areas of cities were also described as "mostly peaceful" by the media, a characterization that was much derided. Yet we see the same misleading language being used in anti-Israel demonstrations.
Not to say it is strictly inaccurate. Most demonstrators are not violent, and most demonstrations are people marching without causing damage. But the word "mostly peaceful " is a meaningless term. By the expansive definition of "mostly peaceful" in the media, they could accurately say that war is "mostly peaceful" as well, since the amount of time soldiers are actually shooting is only a small percentage of their day.
You hardly ever see the phrase "mostly peaceful" to describe right-leaning demonstrations. It is not a description - it is propaganda that indicates the the bias of the reporters and editors.
When the NYT uses the same phrase to describe pro-Israel and anti-Israel rallies, it is equating the two. And there is no equivalence.
The pro-Israel rally in New York, as with virtually all pro-Israel rallies, was entirely peaceful, not "mostly peaceful"
13 notes
·
View notes
they want to talk about mental illness and acceptance and how everyone is a little ocd it's cute and quirky and their "intrusive thoughts" are about cutting their hair off and you say yours are about taking a razorblade to your eye and they say ew can you not and everyone is a little adhd sometimes! except if you're late it's a personality flaw and it's because you are careless and cruel (and someone else with adhd mentions they can be on time, so why can't you?) and it's not an eating disorder if it's girl dinner! it's not mania if it's girl math! what do you mean you blew all of your savings on nonrefundable plane tickets for a plane you didn't even end up taking. what do you mean that you are afraid of eating. get over it. they roll their little lips up into a sneer. can you not, like, trauma dump?
they love it on them they like to wear pieces of your suffering like jewels so that it hangs off their tongue in rapiers. they are allowed to arm-chair diagnose and cherrypick their poisons but you can't ever miss too many showers because that's, like, "fuckken gross?" so anyone mean is a narcissist. so anyone with visual tics is clearly faking it and is so cringe. but they get to scream and hit customer service employees because well, i got overwhelmed.
you keep seeing these posts about how people pleasers are "inherently manipulative" and how it's totally unfair behavior. but you are a people pleaser, you have an ingrained fawn response. in the comments, you have typed and deleted the words just because it is technically true does not make it an empathetic or kind reading of the reaction about one million times. it is technically accurate, after all. you think of catholic guilt, how sometimes you feel bad when doing a good deed because the sense of pride you get from acting kind - that pride is a sin. the word "manipulation" is not without bias or stigma attached to it. many people with the fawn response are direct victims of someone who was malignantly manipulative. calling the victims manipulative too is an unfair and unkind reading of the situation. it would be better and more empathetic to say it is safety-seeking or connection-seeking behavior. yes, it can be toxic. no, in general it is not intended to be toxic. there is no reason to make mentally ill people feel worse for what we undergo.
you type why is everyone so quick to turn on someone showing clear signs of trauma but you already know the fucking answer, so what's the point of bothering. you kind of hate those this is what anxiety looks like! infographics because at this point you're so good at white-knuckling through a severe panic attack that people just think you're stoic. even people who know the situation sometimes comment you just don't seem depressed. and you're not a 9 year old white kid so there's no way you're on the spectrum, you're not obsessed with trains and you were never a good mathematician. okay then.
mental illness is trending. in 2012 tumblr said don't romanticize our symptoms but to be fair tiktok didn't exist yet. there's these series of videos where someone pretends to be "the most boring person on earth" and is just being a normal fucking person, which makes your skin crawl, because that probably means you are boring. your friend reads aloud a profile from tinder - no depressed bitches i fucking hate that mental illness crap. your father says that medication never actually works.
you still haven't told your grandmother that you're in therapy. despite everything (and the fact it's helping): you just don't want her to see you differently.
6K notes
·
View notes
On average, what is the total MONTHLY amount that you spend on dining out*?
*(This doesn't only count going out to restaurants, but also stuff like picking up fast food to bring home, getting a coffee on the way to work, getting a premade sandwich from a grocery store deli during lunch, buying a quick snack from a convenience store or food cart whilst walking somewhere, ordering a pizza or any other food to be delivered to your home, etc.)
*(If you often dine out in groups/as a household: calculate and divide the costs so that you get a Per Person average. This is for YOU individually, NOT the total household/group costs)
(I'm sure polls similar to this have been made before (very common topic), I just haven't personally seen one that I can remember, so, I was curious to do my own! I was discussing this with a group of people today and it was very interesting to see how widely the number varied between individuals. :0c )
(Reblog for bigger sample size if you can, and feel free to explain your answer in tags if there's anything extra to add!)
316 notes
·
View notes
i looooove pokémon npcs whose team members subtly imply something about them that's never touched upon in the story or at least never outright said. i love villains having friendship evos. i love trainers who commit hard to one aesthetic or vibe with their team (beyond simply sharing a type) and i love it even better when there's one random exception especially if that's their ace. i love when later down the line someone boxes the cute fun soft baby pokémon they used to have in favor of a seemingly stronger or scarier one to show that they're getting serious. i love when they have a pokémon that's difficult to get and raises lots of questions about them. i love it when the lore behind a pokémon fits the character to a T and i love it even better when it appears to contradict them. give me the story-gameplay harmony but better yet give me what appears to be story-gameplay dissonance but might actually have implications if we're willing to dive deep into it
642 notes
·
View notes
After dreading scorn and ridicule for weeks I just now came out as genderqueer to my 60 year old biological father during his smoke break and got blindsided with the unexpected joy that was "I don't think being a man or a woman is about what's in your pants- I think it's about being an adult, whatever pronouns you use" and boys we are feeling genuine human emotions in this house tonight
2K notes
·
View notes
There is a cyclic tragedy inherent to Mori's character wherein he's actually a deeply lonely man, but it's mostly because his resolve to do morally reprehensible things and think of people as pieces on the game board is something he prioritizes over his relations with those very same people, and this inevitably pushes them away (for very understandable reasons). And it kind of sucks honestly because the most frustrating thing about Mori is that he 100% has the potential to be a fantastic teacher and mentor, and more than that, I think he loves it! Just look at Beast! But for as long as he decides he needs to be the one to make "the hard calls" to "preserve peace", then Mori will inevitably continue in this cycle of alienating all the people he has a fondness for.
I do feel as though Mori's loneliness is something he views as a necessary sacrifice that he is making for the greater good (and if he is so willing to sacrifice, then Dazai's unwillingness to do the same comes out of left field because - "what do you mean? you're supposed to be just like me!").
Anyways.
Mori voice: "I'm so alone"
Also Mori: *continues to prioritize pure logic over the emotions of his people and himself*
The people: *get rightly angry and/or become extremely traumatized and leave him*
Mori voice: "I did what needed to be done"
Mori: "..."
Mori: "..."
Mori: "I'm so alone"
Sir. You are doing this to yourself.
291 notes
·
View notes