#naked capitalism

[theculturedmarxist]

Posted onJanuary 25, 2024 by Yves Smith

Simplicius the Thinker has an important post up giving evidence that the Israel war against the Palestinians and the US operations in the Middle East are buckling, to the degree that US-friendly sources and even officials are acknowledging setbacks and stresses. Early on, Simplicius describes how the ne plus ultra of neocon strategy, the Institute for Study of War, is reporting that Israel has lost ground to Hamas in North Gaza, an area it maintained it had so firmly under its control that it could pull out ground forces.

The Cradle confirms Simplicius’ overall assessment in Israel loses control of its borders:

For the first time in its 76-year history, Israel’s entire security calculations have been turned upside down: the occupation state is today grappling with buffer zones inside Israel. In past wars, it was Tel Aviv that established these “security zones” inside enemy territory — advancing Israel’s strategic geography, evacuating Arab populations near their state border areas, and fortifying its own borders…. Today, Israel is horrified to find itself retreating from direct confrontation lines with its arch-enemies in Gaza and Lebanon. The formidable capabilities of the resistance now include drones, rockets, targeted projectiles, tunnels, and spanking new shock tactics, casting doubt on the feasibility of Israeli settlers remaining safe in any of Israel’s border perimeters.

There is a big sour note in Simplicius’ otherwise informative piece, in that he follows the US official trope that “Iran” is driving the multi-front military operations against Israel. As others on Simplicius’ beat have pointed out, he is very good on military analysis but weak on politics. Hamas launched October 7 without giving Iran a head’s up. The Houthis and Hezbollah get support from Iran and no doubt share intel, but they are independent actors.

The Axis of Resistance, as some like to call it, has been increasing the intensity of its pressure on Israel as the slaughter in Gaza continues, and importantly, they have likely already detected plenty of evidence of Israeli poor performance, which Simplicius describes in detail as it is becoming more visible and widespread. Experts abroad were inferring poor Israel performance merely from knowledge and press coverage. Very early on after the Hamas attack, Scott Ritter, who had considerable experience in Israel in the 1990s, depicted the IDF as a third-rate army, proficient at ops like breaking the arms of Palestinian teenagers. He also called out the bombing of Gaza as a major mistake, assuming the objective was to get Hamas, as opposed to exterminating Gazans. All that rubble, in combination with the vast Hamas tunnel network, results in a much more defender-favorable environment. John Mearsheimer and Alastair Crooke pointed out the inability of Israel to point to any successes, such as freeing hostages or more than isolated kills of the Hamas leadership. Crooke also said the Hebrew press would report on a high (by Israeli standards) IDF death count in Gaza, only to have those stories quickly yanked by the censors.

Israel, or at least the rabid right wingers running its show, may be running up against the conflict between how they have presented the war to the world and their citizens versus what, based on a cold look at their actions, is the real intent. The scale and sheer destructiveness of the Gaza assault make clear that Israel wanted to clear Gaza, not of Hamas but of Gazans (and the persistent demonization of all Gazans as in cahoots with Hamas is part of a deeply offensive rationalization).

Israel, clearly naively, assumed it could push the Gazans into Egypt. When Egypt resisted fiercely, the next Israel move was to increase the punishment of the Gaza population, based at best the idea that it would increase pressure on Arab states to relent and accept Palestinians, and at worse, regarding extermination as a perfectly acceptable way to get rid of the Gazans. So a plan for ethnic cleansing on a massive scale has become genocide. In case you harbor any doubts about the real war aims:

But the cost to Israel and now the US is spiraling out of control. In Israel, citizens have a good sense that the IDF losses are high, yet an end to the war is nowhere in sight. Families with hostages are successfully creating an uproar over priorities, demanding a cease-fire to secure their return, while Netanyahu and the hardliners insist that Hamas must be defeated first, and the release of the hostages will follow. 1

Another source of political and economic pressure is that Israel is now housing nearly 90,000 citizens evacuated from the Lebanon border. Those settlers insist that there must be no Lebanese visible from their homes for them to be willing to return. That would require taken Southern Lebanon up to the Litani River, as in dispossessing Lebanese families for the psychological comfort of these border dwellers. Netanyahu has promised to take that territory if Lebanon won’t surrender it, which is clearly not in the cards. But quite a few experts opine that if Israel were to try to seize southern Lebanon, that the odds favor Hezbollah occupying Israel up to Galilee.

The Cradle describes how the northern Israel border situation is worse than generally depicted in Western media:

The Israeli Defense Ministry, which pledged a swift and decisive war to safeguard its settlers over 100 days ago, is now actively devising plans to shelter approximately 100,000 people along the northern border, deeper inside its territory. This measure could involve evacuating settlements that may come under fire during any future military escalation with Hezbollah in Lebanon. This situation implies three critical outcomes: any immediate return of settlers remains unlikely, additional evacuations are anticipated, and numerous Israeli families – in the interim – may establish permanent settlements in other, more secure locations at a much further distance from the borders with southern Lebanon and the Gaza envelope. Preliminary reports from settler councils in the north assessed settler “displacement” to be around 70,000 in the initial weeks of the conflict. Subsequent reports, however, suggest a vastly higher figure of approximately 230,000.

Recall we already have the US’ supposedly vaunted Navy being unable to provide for the safety of seaborne commerce, and the US now in an attempt to restore its manhood, making illegal and ineffective missile strikes on Yemen. And recall the US is supposed to be a sea and air power!

In the meantime, most non-Chinese and Russian cargo ships are avoiding the Red Sea. While the rise in shipping costs is not all that bad by historical standards, the US looks and is powerless. And the Houthis are succeeding in their main aim, of choking sea transport in and out of Israel.

Indicators of the state of play:

But bear in mind one reason the US can faff around is that we don’t much bear the cost of longer transit times and supply chain uncertainty. It’s Europe. And the fallout has started:

Now to Simplicius’ on-the-ground sightings, first from Gaza:

As we now know, Israel has withdrawn many of its brigades from the north, citing ‘rest and rotation’ when in reality it appears to be ‘reconstitution’, as the brigades took major attritional losses. Now in the wake of that, the latest bombshell reports state that resistance fighters have re-infiltrated the entire north, leaving the map looking like that of below:

I myself was skeptical—could Israel really have abandoned the entire north after “claiming” to have captured it?

But here’s the double bombshell: even ISW admitted it:

After more examples of Israel doing badly in Gaza, Simplicius adds:

Recall that just last month Kirby admitted that Hamas had not been attrited at all, and an Israeli reserve colonel gave a tearful account of piled up IDF bodies which seemed to imply that they are taking far heavier losses than they’re admitting to.

Later in the piece, Simplicius turns to how US bases in Syria and Iraq are under attack. Oddly he does not mention that the US is in Syria illegally, stealing Syrian oil on a big scale and the Iraqis told us to leave but we refused. Suddenly our position is looking tenuous just when Israel (or at least Netanyahu) is acting like escalating is a great idea to make sure we having to get deeply involved and come to their aid. Again from his post:

And quelle surprise, Simplicius found a story in Al-Monitor that suddenly had the US wanting our buddies the Kurds to “partner” with our former super enemy Assad….which looked like a plan to cut and run, which was confirmed by Foreign Policy headlining that he Pentagon is planning to exit Syria. From its account:

And with such a complex regional crisis playing out, it should not come as a surprise that the Biden administration is reconsidering its military priorities in the region. It should be cause for significant concern, however, that this could involve a full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria. While no definitive decision has been made to leave, four sources within the Defense and State departments said the White House is no longer invested in sustaining a mission that it perceives as unnecessary. Active internal discussions are now underway to determine how and when a withdrawal may take place.

The Daily Sabah reports Türkiye is somewhat skeptical of the story, which it depicts as a rumor, but also lays out some implications if true.

And to round out this remarkable picture, Simplicius includes two stories, one from Reuters, the other from CNN, that the US is negotiating its departure from Iraq.

Simplicius points out:

The US claims these are long-planned talks and have nothing to do with the recent attacks, but that is clearly not the case. The Reuters article above provides one key line: You see, the US previously had preconditions for talks of ending its occupation; one of the conditions being that Iran-backed Iraqi groups first had to stop bombing US bases. But now, the US has apparently dropped this significant precondition, as per the Reuters report. That tells us that US is making concessions out of desperation.

So the US looks to be engaging in a full bore retreat. We don’t begin to have enough weapons, particularly after having depleted our and our allies’ stocks in Ukraine, to wage much of a war, even before getting to that we also can’t land or protect anywhere near enough ground forces and keep them supplied given how the Houthis, and if needed, Hezbollah, have plenty of cheap drones, and the Hezbollah and the Iranians have higher tech, more powerful, longer range precision missiles too.

Given that this is utterly embarrassing, and in an election year to boot, the last thing the US needs is further attention being drawn to its debilities by Israel escalating in a way that necessitates our trying to come to its rescue.

So a nefarious thought: Norman Finkelstein, Ray McGovern, Larry Johnson, and no doubt others, have assumed that the US would join Israel in providing as much pressure as could be mustered on the International Court of Justice judges, and their home countries, to secure a ruling against “provisional measures” to stop what sure looks like genocide. But what if the US has come to realize that both it and Israel are hopelessly overextended, and the best way to limit the fallout is to get Israel that it is risking losing even the US, and not just over time? What if the US has only been going through the motions, recognizing that the press coverage of a South Africa win on some provision measures (South Africa is extremely unlikely to get the court to call for Israel to stop military operations unilaterally) might be loud enough to finally penetrate Israel’s self-delusion and force it to start figuring out how to back out of its Gaza/West Bank overreach?

Now as we all know in reality, no one in the Biden Administration has the sense or even the self preservation instincts that it needs to create some daylight between the US and Israel. In keeping, the only idea for a way out from both the US and UN isabsolute non-starter of a two-state solution (please see our recent post for details). If someone had a more realistic de-escalatory path, perhaps the horrible hostilities could go from a full boil to a simmer. But as a friend saids, if you want a happy ending, watch a Disney movie.

____

1 Alastair Crooke recounted that a row in the cabinet the weekend before last included that 80 aid trucks a day were getting in, a level deemed to be too high to stave out Hamas. By way of contrast, before October 7, about 500 trucks of supplies went into Gaza daily. And in a remarkable show of chutzpah, one of the lawyers presenting for Israel at the International Court of Justice on January 12 claimed that supplies had increased over the last two weeks to 109 trucks…as if that were a good number.

[alanshemper]

The post-9/11 War on Terror may have caused at least 4.5 million deaths in around half a dozen countries, according to a report published Monday by the preeminent academic institution studying the costs, casualties, and consequences of a war in which U.S. bombs and bullets are still killing and wounding people in multiple nations.

The new report from the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs shows “how death outlives war” by examining people killed indirectly by the War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.

[internauts]

A humiliating personal fact: two years ago, when the first season of Emily in Paris came out, I watched it and had the closest thing I’ve ever had to a breakdown. It was the antisocial first winter of the pandemic, and I was, at the time, not doing much with my days besides working a job that involved handling digital advertising for this magazine. I had a lot of shame about this job, which more and more struck me as mindless work for a radically unserious person. We would publish an article about the threat of far-right nationalism, or a review of a book about surveillance capitalism, and then I would turn the piece into a Facebook ad. Was “marketing,” even for a good cause, fundamentally slimy, hypocritical, and beholden to capital’s most powerful and destructive digital actors? Was I? Emily in Paris spectacularly confirmed my suspicions. Watching it at the well-meaning suggestion of a friend, who thought I might be amused by its outrageous portrayal of millennial women, I felt almost violently interpellated. Emily, everyone agreed, was catastrophically dumb, hooked to her phone, skilled at the non-art of digital branding and nothing else. Her savviness in marketing was enabled by an inner emptiness that left her sublimely incurious about life’s loftier realms. In one episode, she meets a semiotics professor at a café, who tells her (prompting, of course, a marketing epiphany) that “when two things are next to each other, you’re forced to compare them.” The viewer is supposed to apply the statement to Emily and the semiotician: he’s cool where she’s ringarde, he’s got a Barthes paperback where she’s got that huge honking phone. But right there on my computer, the two things that were next to each other were the Netflix tab and the Facebook Ads Manager tab. Was my work for n+1 any different from Emily’s work for Savoir? Was I, in fact, any different from her? The more I watched, the more real despair I felt, identification striking me like a French laundry truck. Emily and I were the same age, same demographic profile. Like her, I speak no French and don’t know the third arrondissement from the twelfth. And I thought about Instagram ads all day, too.

THE EMILY IN LITTLE PARIS event seemed to promise, if not liberté, at least some degree of sororité: here was a place where everyone was Emily. I don’t know if I’ve ever been to a “pop-up event” before—the term has always reminded me of erections, and I don’t like lines—but, as an indulgent friend and I approached the mass of people grouped on Centre Street, I intuitively understood the gist of the thing: the attendee is prompted to live life like Emily.

It was not hard, either, to discern a powerful strain of Emily-ness among the attendees. The lines for each Experience teemed with white women (“where are the fruity men?” my friend whispered), a sort of surprising percentage of whom were wearing berets. One person was trotting around a poodle, who was also wearing a beret, and every so often I’d glimpse a cluster of beret-clad little kids—Emilys Junior. Wandering around the event’s periphery, I asked a few visitors what they liked about the show. One woman told me she liked the scenery. Another—an Australian—told me that she’d lived in Paris before and found the show “authentic.” “I mean, I didn’t do the things Emily did,” she amended. “But today I am!”

[platonicwithacapitalp]

theodore nott nsfw headcannons!!

nsfw 18+, minors dni (or do i cant stop yall)

warnings: implied sex, oral sex (both receiving), hair pulling, choking, dirty talk, p in v, praising and degrading, slight begging, possible more (pls tell me if i missed anything)

side note: italics are like flashback typa things idk what to call them lol

a/n: i was bad grammar and i make a lot of typos, i proofread it but if you find anything i’m sorry, it’s like 12 am rn and i can’t sleep lol also bare with me and the translations i used google.

miscellaneous

he LOVES giving you neck kisses, and leaving hickeys all over you, he wants everybody to know your his.

this man is a pussy eating god, not only does he live eating you out, he’s absurdly good at it, he loves the way he has to push your thighs back open when ever he lets out a throaty moan, sending vibrations right through your core.

he is horny 24/7 his sex drive is actually crazy, he go for rounds. he loves it when you start getting overstimulated. “please theo, i can’t,“ you whine, legs closing around his waist. “shh, it’s okay amore mio, just one more for me” he coos as he thrusts into you, his cock hitting your cervix making you let out a string of whimpers and moans. “fuck, quei gemiti sono così sexy, tesoro” (translation: those moans are so sexy, baby)

whenever he is giving or receiving head, there is always a common factor. hair pulling. whether it’s the way you tug and pull on his hair while he eats you out makes him go absolutely feral or if it’s the way he grips your hair, thrusting up into your mouth as he moans, either way he loves it.

he is 1000% a tits man. god he loves your boobs so fucking much. he loves touching them, squeezing them, anything, whether you’re fucking or even just cuddling (really doesn’t seem like a theo thing but he just loves being close to you and touching you)

he likes being rough, especially after losing a quidditch match or when someone flirts with you. he’s extremely jealous and he knows it. he loves hearing the way you beg him to let you cum. “please, theo, i’m gonna- fuck” you moan, your hips bucking up. you expected him to push them back down but he doesn’t, he just smiles smugly down at you “c’mon good girl, cum for me”

even if you weren’t together yet you were still his.

he has a thing for hickeys, he just loves the way you look with hickeys littering your neck and collarbones, leading down towards your chest. he thinks you look absolutely amazing with his hand wrapped around your neck, as he fucks you senselessly.

he definitely has a hair pulling kink.

he loves it when you call him teddy, it drives him fucking crazy.

he loves praising you and letting you know how much pleasure you bring him but on that note he also liked degrading, but he mostly degrades when he’d being rougher.

whenever he’s being rough with you and choking you he is always super gentle, making sure you can still breath, and that your okay.

——————————————————————————

sorry it’s so short, i’m at school rn lol and i don’t want my ohine to get taken lol

— juelz.

[flowercrowngods]

it’s floaty steddie hours

Eddie never knew there were moments that would just steal his breath and not give it back even after they passed, lingering in his mind, his heartbeat, his fingertips, making him wonder if the world is suddenly much bigger than before, or endlessly smaller, reduced only to one impossibly perfect moment.

He never knew. Until he met Steve. Steve, with his moments, with his smiles, with his kisses and laughs and gentle voice singing under his breath when he thinks Eddie isn’t listening.

But Eddie listens. He always listens.

And he basks, taking it all in as he’s sitting in the back of his van somewhere at the foot of Weathertop, leaning against the side wall.

There is a steady pitter-patter of heavy summer rain against the roof of the van, a breeze of fresh air coming in through the open doors that occasionally leaves goose bumps along his arms and brings with it the smell of rain and drenched soil, of blooming fields and trees and life, mixing with their own little bubble of life and love and tobacco.

Eddie wants to catch that smell, that sound, that feeling in a mason jar like Steve told him he used to dream as a kid. Maybe he will. He knows there’s one in the driver’s side door for this very purpose.

It would be a good forever-moment, with Steve lying in the back of his van, illuminated by the soft glow of the fairy lights Eddie installed for him the other week with a hearty but ultimately fake grumble. The warm light dances along his skin, making it look even more golden than usual, complementing the galaxy of moles that is imprinted and immortalised on his skin.

And Eddie watches. He always watches.

Golden light that makes even his dimples shine as he smiles, eyes closed as he’s singing along to the third mixtape of the night. Space Age Love Song, which Eddie pretends to hate. But how could he hate it when it makes Steve look like that? When it thus steals Eddie’s breath, his heart, his sanity?

And then, for a moment, for one perfect, drawn-out moment, all Eddie Munson can do anymore is watch. And listen. And feel. Because what he sees and hears and feels is everything.

His breath is lodged in his throat as he reaches for his little sketchbook — the special one, littered with drawings and doodles and musings of Steve. His face, his hands, the constellations of his moles. The occasional DnD related sketch in there, because Steve just inspires him.

His pencil dances over the page in practiced, familiar movements as he tries to capture the moment on paper. It’s hard, though, because Steve’s nose is scrunched a little with that smile that Eddie’s not even sure Steve’s aware of, and his dimples tell a story of their own tonight. A story of contentment rather than joy or amusement. Eddie has to try and try again, never quite getting it right, this perfection, and he curses a little under his breath.

“What are you drawing?” Steve asks, turning his head and opening his eyes a little, squinting but curious.

“Nothing,” Eddie smiles, pulling the sketch closer to his chest, away from Steve’s sleepy, lazy, slow attempt to reach for it. “Go back to sleep.”

“‘M not asleep,” he sighs, rolling over onto his side, watching Eddie and reaching for his ankle — just to touch. To hold. To feel.

It makes Eddie smile. “No?”

“No,” Steve says, helpless not to smile back, and Eddie wants to kiss him. “Just… I don’t know. ‘S nice.”

“Yeah?”

“Mm-hmm. Perfect.”

Eddie discards the sketchbook and goes to lie down beside Steve, wrapping one arm around his middle, the other coming up to take Steve’s, their fingers intertwined between their faces.

“Then I think the word you’re looking for is basking.”

Steve hums again, touching his forehead to Eddie’s knuckles before brushing featherlight kisses over them. “Yeah,” he breathes. “Basking.”

Eddie’s heart is ready to beat out of his chest, make a life of its own fuelled by the perfection of this moment. Everything about it. Everything.

Outside, the rain picks up even more, a wave of cold air coming into the van that makes Steve cuddle closer to him, until their foreheads are touching. Eddie closes his eyes, breathes him in, and slowly inches forward, tilting his head to claim Steve’s lips in a gentle kiss.

They trade slow, sensual kisses for a while. Steve’s hand comes up to Eddie’s cheek, his thumb stroking whatever skin he can find, caressing his cheek, his chin, his jaw, while Eddie plays with Steve’s hair.

In the end it’s Steve who pulls back first, eyes open, just watching Eddie. Taking him in, making him feel seen rather than watched.

“I love you.”

“I love you, too.” Answering is as easy as breathing. And just as difficult. Just as impossible. His love, his breath — they both belong to Steve, completely and entirely.

Steve, who smiles at him like being loved by Eddie Munson means something to him. Like it means everything. Like it can mean Forever. Eddie feels like he might not survive tonight it Steve continues to be so genuine, so honest, so raw, so open, so vulnerable, so pretty, so beautiful, so absolutely breathtakingly everything.

“Can I see what you were drawing?”

“You,” Eddie says, reaching behind him blindly in search for his book, too weak to refuse Steve anything he asks for. “I was drawing you.”

“You were?”

Eddie nods, feeling a heat creeping up on his cheeks.

“Sap,” Steve grins, leaning in to plant a kiss on Eddie’s cheek as he reaches over him for the sketchbook. “Can I?”

“Knock yourself out,” Eddie grumbles, rolling them so Steve’s lying on his back and Eddie can sprawl on top of him. Hide his face in the crook of Steve’s neck, hide the way he’s flushing, hide the absolutely obvious way he’s a goner for Steve fucking Harrington.

He hears the gasps, hears the pages being flipped, the little giggles of surprise, the hums and tiny, secret little ohs. He hears them and he holds his breath, beginning to shiver for a reason that even the cool breeze cannot compete with.

“Eddie,” Steve breathes. Doesn’t say anything else for a while. And Eddie wonders if Steve is in the same boat, in the same condition, if he has these moments, too. Moments like this. He wonders, and he hopes, and he wishes.

But Steve doesn’t say anything else, and neither does Eddie, and the music switches to Springsteen. Tougher Than the Rest. It’s always been too soft for Eddie, but right now it serves to give the word perfect a new melody.

“Dance with me,” Steve breathes.

“Hm?”

“Dance with me. Please?”

“In the rain?”

“Mm-hmm,” Steve nods, tightens his hold around Eddie as if he forgot that they still had to get up and get out there.

“Yeah, okay,” Eddie says, lifting himself from Steve’s chest and climbing out of the car, warm rain immediately drenching his clothes. It makes him laugh, a boyish little thing that bubbles out of him as he holds out his hands to help Steve out.

Steve takes his hand, jumping out with a small giggle of his own, making for a glorious vision: happy and giddy against the golden light inside the van, his wild hair soon drenched completely, sticking to his face where he shakes his head, showing droplets of water left and right.

It doesn’t fit the song, doesn’t fit the notion of basking, but they’re both laughing and breathless, clinging to each other in the moonlit night somewhere at the foot of weathertop, far away from everyone else that they might just be the only two people left in the world. Two silly boys, giddy and breathless and stupidly in love.

It makes Eddie pause. Swallow. It makes his heart go wild as he stills.

“What?” Steve asks, stilling as well, looking over his shoulder to see if someone was coming, if someone’s watching them.

Eddie pulls him closer, makes Steve meet his eyes again as he rests his hands around his neck. “Dance with me.”

A smile spreads Steve’s lips, breaking through all of Eddie’s walls to let the light in — even in the middle of the night. “Okay,” he breathes.

And if you’re brave enough for love, // Honey, I’m tougher than the rest.

The sound of rain isn’t loud enough to drown out the music, but still Eddie can barely hear it over the sound of his own heart. Over the sound of I love you, I love you, I love you. Over the sound of Is this forever? Can this be forever?

They slow dance to Springsteen, then to Tears for Fears, and eventually to Prince. They dance until Steve begins to shiver in his arms, until the rain has drenched them so completely that none of the day’s heat is left in the air and the breeze is getting uncomfortable. And then, they dance a little longer, because Steve is capturing Eddie’s lips again, slow and unhurried and like he means it. Like he means it all.

“One day,” Steve breathes against Eddie’s lips. “One day I’m going to marry you. I’ll find a way.”

And it’s Eddie this time who gasps, who falls into Steve because his knees are giving out. It’s Eddie who’s lost for words.

But he doesn’t need words, because Steve is kissing him again, holding him up, holding him, holding his heart and his life and his future in hands so gentle and sure that Eddie wants to fall apart, just a little bit.

“Not if I marry you first,” he says eventually, brushing one last bruising kiss to Steve’s lips before pulling back and climbing into the van, dripping as he is.

Steve, laughing and giggling, follows immediately after him, pulling off his clothes in a hurry to get under the blanket. Eddie watches him with a leer — at least until Steve kicks him in the side and tells him to get out of these clothes and come under the blanket to warm up.

“If you wanted to get me naked, you could’a just said so, Harrington. Didn’t have to propose first.”

Steve grins, helpless against it, blushing a little and hiding his face in the blanket even as he reaches for Eddie to come closer.

But Eddie doesn’t, and awkwardly climbs over Steve to reach for the driver’s side door.

“What are you—“

Steve shuts up when Eddie retrieves the mason jar, his mouth clicking shut adorably, making Eddie grin, vulnerable and nervous and raw as he feels.

“Told myself I’d capture a perfect moment for you. What do you think, does it qualify?”

Steve swallows. Nods. Reaches for Eddie once more, who shuffles closer until Steve can test his head on his shoulder.

“Can’t believe you remembered,” he murmurs, trailing his index finger along the lid.

“I find your lack of faith disturbing,” Eddie grins, making Steve laugh. Alleviating the moment, but not dislodging it. “So?”

“Yeah,” Steve breathes. “It’s perfect. I’m… God, I love you so much, Eddie, shit.”

“And that’s how I’m gonna label it,” Eddie grins.

“Not One day I’m gonna marry you?”

And Eddie’s breath hitches again. He lowers the mason jar, meeting Steve’s eyes this time. He wants to ask; needs to ask. Needs to know.

“Do you mean that?” It’s whispered; he doesn’t have the strength or the bravery to be any louder.

Steve’s hands come up to his cheeks, cradling his face in the gentlest way as he holds Eddie’s eyes. “Eddie Munson,” he says, “one day I’m going to marry you. And I won’t let you marry me first.”

Between them, Eddie opens the mason jar just as Steve leans in to capture his mouth in a kiss that really is nothing less than a promise. Nothing less than Forever.

happy birthday @anzelsilver i have the hugest “pls be my friend” crush on you so i decided to write you a lil thing and hope you enjoy this and the rest of your week 🫶🤍🌷

[thornescratch]

Oh hello there.

[wolfpup30]

Day 55/366

Being an undiagnosed neurodivergent individual living during late stage capitalism in an unkind country is not what it's cut up to be. I just wanna be naked in nature.

[governmentissuedclone]

All you 'i know he whimpers' girlies are SLEEPING on Klemens Hannigan fr fr. The man has intentionally characterized himself within Hatari as soft, effeminate, and submissive. The OPENING LYRIC to Klamstrakur is 'i whine and whimper'!!!!

[thegaypheasant]

Since I feel like we have finally culturally developed enough as a society to address this instance, I’m the one to say it:

THE SHOWER SCENE IN PITCH PERFECT HAS GOT TO BE ONE OF THE GAYEST THINGS IN THE 2010s

[folkloristico]

I don’t mean to sound like a hater, but while I think the first look at the ATLA live-action looks good, I can’t stop but thinking… was it really necessary?

I know the answer as to why we have this upcoming project is money, same reason why they keep trying to milk old hits by turning them into live-action (Disney is doing it, Netflix is doing it—everybody is doing it), but you can clearly see the double standard here.

Across the Spider-Verse hasn’t even been out a month now, and while it’s been globally acknowledged as one of the best superhero movies ever, people are already talking about which actor they would cast to play Miles and the others. Which begs the question, why is no one talking about translating the MCU, or any other franchise really, into animation? It always boils down to animation being lesser than. And I really, really, really hate this narrative because the thing about art is that it should be daring, it should push people to try out new things instead of replicating the same formula over and over just because it’s safe.

“But live-action movies can be a way to further explore some dynamics and—” yeah I don’t buy that. Sure, some live-action movies do add flavour to the original piece of media, but that’s not why they do that. The narrative is always going from animation to live-action, and never the opposite.

Katara, Zuko, Aang, Sokka, Toph, and the others already have amazing storylines. While I do think some things could’ve been handled better or given more care, I believe that what it’s done is done, and you can always keep expanding on the world-building and the lore by pushing for new animated movies. Which they are doing, actually, but I know those won’t be getting the same attention as the live-action because, you know, people just assume that live-actions = adult content while animation = child stuff, so of course live action > animation. Which is just sad.

[theculturedmarxist]

Conor here: The following post goes into the ins and outs of the case ahead of the April 23 beginning of the case, the outcome of which seems to be a foregone conclusion and will be a major blow to labor.>New York Times labor reporter Noam Scheiber noted back in January when the Supremes agreed to hear the case that the very fact that they did so meant they would likely rule so that it’s harder to unionize. The reasoning behind that belief isn’t just the conservative majority on the court but also that the courtdeclined to hear a similar case in 2014 (back before the current conservative majority).

By Michael Z. Green, professor of law and the director of the Workplace Law Program at Texas A&M University. Originally published at The Conversation.

What factors must a court consider when the National Labor Relations Board requests an order requiring an employer to rehire terminated workers before the completion of unfair labor practice proceedings?

That’s the central question that the Supreme Court will consider on April 23, 2024, during oral arguments in the Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney case. The global coffee shop chain is challenging the NLRB, the federal agency responsible for enforcing U.S. workers’ rights to organize, saying that the agency used the more labor-friendly of two available standards when it asked a federal court to order the company to reinstate workers at a Memphis, Tennessee, store who lost their jobs in 2022 amid a nationwide unionizing campaign.

The Conversation U.S. asked Texas A&M law professor Michael Z. Green to explain what’s behind this case and how the court’s eventual decision, expected by the end of June, could affect the right to organize unions in the United States.

What Is This Case About?

Seven baristas who were attempting to organize a union at a Starbucks shop in Memphis, Tennessee, were fired in February 2022. Starbucks justified their dismissal by asserting that the employees, sometimes called the “Memphis 7,” had broken company rules by reopening their store after closing time and inviting people who weren’t employees, including a television crew, to go inside.

In June of that year, the shop became one of more than 400 Starbucks locations since 2021 that have voted in favor of joining Workers United, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union.

While a complaint over the mass dismissal was pending with the NLRB, Kathleen McKinney, the NLRB director for the region that includes Memphis, sought an injunction in a federal district court to force Starbucks to give the Memphis 7 their jobs back while the case proceeded. The company must “cease its unlawful conduct immediately so that all Starbucks workers can fully and freely exercise their labor rights,” she said.

By August 2022, a judge had ordered Starbucks to do that, and in September the baristas were back on staff.

Although the seven baristas got their jobs back and the union vote prevailed, the company has appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court because it believes the court should not have ordered the company to reinstate the workers while NLRB proceedings were still pending.

But the NLRB argues, and the lower courts agreed, that the terminations chilled further union activities at the store even after the election.

Nevertheless, Starbucks argues that firing the seven workers had no effect because employees at that coffeehouse still voted in favor of unionization.

What’s Being Challenged?

The justices will have to decide which approach federal courts should use when they consider requests for injunctions like this one.

Currently, five appeals courts, including the one where this case arose, base their decision on a two-part test.

First, the courts determine whether there is “reasonable cause” to believe an unfair labor practice has occurred. Second, they determine whether granting an injunction would be “just and proper.”

Four other appeals courts use a four-part test.

First, the courts ask whether the unfair labor practice case is likely to succeed on the merits in establishing that labor violations occurred. Second, they look to see if the workers the NLRB is attempting to protect will face irreparable harm without an injunction. Third, after showing likelihood of success and irreparable harm, they ask whether those factors outweigh any hardships the employer is likely to face due to compliance with the court’s order. Fourth, they ask whether issuing the injunction serves the public interest.

Two other appeals courts use a hybrid test that appears to have components of both of the tests. They ask whether issuing an injunction would be “just and proper” by considering the elements of the four-part test.

In its Supreme Court brief, Starbucks argues that having to give workers their jobs back in these circumstances can cause “irreparable injury” and that it’s an “extraordinary remedy.”

The NLRB, in its Supreme Court brief, says that the injunction was proper in this case because Starbucks terminated 80% of the union organizing committee at the Memphis store and the evidence showed the chilling effect this action had on the “lone remaining union activist.” According to the NLRB, this chilling effect “harmed the union campaign in ways that a subsequent Board ruling could not repair.”

A labor reporter discussing Starbucks’ unfair labor practice cases, including the one involving the Memphis 7, determined that NLRB administrative law judges had found labor violations in 48 out of 49 cases.

What’s the Potential Impact of the Court’s Eventual Ruling on This Case?

While the case may sound like it’s only about seven people employed at a single coffee shop, the scope is wider than that.

Although the NLRB issues hundreds of unfair labor practice complaints against employers every year, it usually doesn’t turn to the courts to force the rehiring of employees. It only sought these types of injunctions 17 times in 2023, for example.

And seven of those efforts involved Starbucks. Despite the small number of overall injunctions, the large number of unfair labor practice complaints – and the eventual 48 out of 49 findings of violations – might support the rare use of injunctions in this case.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Starbucks, the overall impact seems unclear.

For one thing, the court will have picked one test over another without any proof that one is more likely to result in an injunction or not. In addition, the underlying unfair labor practice case has been resolved, since the workers have gotten their jobs back and their workplace has joined a union.

What’s more, Starbucks has agreed to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the union – which has continued to make inroads at the company’s coffee shops.

Because the NLRB rarely seeks injunctions, the fact that this issue has obtained enough importance for consideration by the Supreme Court seems odd considering its valuable time and the limited number of cases it can consider each year. But let’s see what the court’s majority decides.

[non-prophetic]

I went to see the art installations downtown 2night and it was so LAME and DISAPPOINTING. disturbed. Mught not like art anymore idk

[meirimerens]

Consider re: herb brides, because of the rituals and nature around ripping and tearing seams and fabric what if like “very nice” or formal ware was styled around clothing that CAN’T rip? Either very very thick and sturdy material OR like loophole designs…. Dresses and tunics woven out of like layers of cords draped over the body?

the whole of the herb brides' Things is that the uncovering of the body is the point, you have this line in p1 of a dancer saying "The body is sacred. The naked body is the most accurate image of the world." so the uncovering/the tearing/the ripping appears as like the point [one of the points] of the capital-d-Dance ("Why do you strip your sacred body naked?"/"Because I know the Dance and have the right to do so."). it's interesting thinking about material that Can't rip because it'd be like... a test of strength and of fortitude, almost. "how passionately are you willing to dance in order to make this un-rippable material, rip?" type of thing. in the same way they are forbidden from wearing shoes because the tippytapping of their steps/connection of their bare footsies to the earth is thought to be the one thing that brings the harvest i wonder what would be the #consensus on what they can wear. but also a sturdier/thicker material would make it harder for them to dance, and their whole point is that they dance, but referring to what i mentioned above maybe it's a test of sorts... it's kinda how i see the herb maidens [lore i made the fuck up] the many layers is a burden for them to prove they Can dance but they shed them during adulthood. many things to consider!

[natsmagi]

It's incredibly tough because we no longer have social media that's suitable for fandom interactions the way livejournal was. Individual journals + interest communities which could be easily locked/unlocked as you wanted. People had to search out what they wanted etc. Twitter and tumblr just can't do it (and let's not even mention tiktok)

ITS KIND OF SAD......... i was never really on livejournal when i was younger bc i was like 10 and did not know what the internet was capable of offering but even just being on deviantart in the early 2010s gave me a strong sense of community and support...... just a bunch of hobbyists doing their own little things and joining those groups deviantart had was alot of fun for lil kid me!

the best substitute we've got for livejournal these days is like. discord. but thats so annoying especially when theyre specifically locking content behind a discord invite since many of us may not even know if we vibe there!! and its intimidating to be thrown into a group chat with people who already have established bonds ONTOP of not even knowing if youll get along😭

while i think tumblr is relatively good for fandom posting and such i definitely wouldnt call it the best place to make friends with similar interests...... since its hard to really like. have actual conversations with people on here since the ask feature is pretty one-sided, tags arent meant to be responded to a majority of the time, the comments feature barely gets used and the dms system is wonky as hell. and twitter is just a cesspool of reactionary people who dont think before they tweet and are just waiting to make their next callout post, but god is it a good place to hold a conversation and bond with people................ you just cant win these days huh

[cfrog]

pony time for The Sages :]

[duckofthelaw]

big q and i are hanging out and he went to the bathroom guess who’s boss now