Tumgik
#or that the entirety of the Middle East is in fact not homophobic
yugiohz · 7 months
Text
I’m not even trying to convince anyone to care, I know from personal experience that some people genuinely don’t care and I don’t think it’s our responsibility to prove our humanity to you guys, that’s between you and your miserable approach to life
60 notes · View notes
feuilletoniste · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media
I dislike the vibes of this post in its entirety but this part stuck out to me the most. This is a prime example of the “noble savage” mentality—the idea that homophobic and transphobic laws or mores cannot originate because all societies throughout all of history have been homophobic and transphobic (even the ones with higher levels of recognition of queer and trans people!), but that these bigotries were brought to people by white Western colonialism. Obviously that is not true—countries in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East have had discriminatory laws or practices for just as long as those in America or Europe—but it becomes a useful scapegoat to excuse the fact that Western countries have almost universally legalized homosexuality and marriage equality, as opposed to the rest of the world.
5 notes · View notes
thefiresontheheight · 2 years
Text
We really don’t talk about how fucking weird and also kinda shitty but like in a goddamn weird way Clive S. Lewis’ writing is.
Like just in the Chronicles of Narnia you, of course, have furry Jesus. But there’s more.
Islamophobia the Country in the South where everyone worships the devil.
Also that country is heavily featured in a story about a pasty white boy fleeing to the north where they have good (read British) cooking cause Calormen (again, weird orientalist amalgamation of….the entire Middle East I suppose) never felt right with him. Cause he’s white.
An eight foot tall lady arrives in Edwardian London and kicks everyone’s ass when they won’t worship her.
The of course frequently mentioned fact of the Pevensies growing old as monarchs in Narnia then getting de aged to children.
A bunch of Greek and Roman gods show up and are just? There?
The Island in the Dawn Treader where the one footed hopping invisible dwarves need a benevolent dictator, sorry, cough, wizard to rule them.
In the Silver Chair the witch lady has to turn into a snake because they can’t kill her while she looks like a lady.
While we’re at it the weirdly huge number of “people turn into animals” events that happen. A Prince gets turned into a donkey, school children into pigs, Eustace into a dragon.
Also in the Silver Chair there’s a giant underground civilization with an even deeper one called Bism where fire salamanders live? And then this is mentioned once and never again.
Also also in the Silver Chair Jill and Eustace returning to England and WHIPPING their fellow school kids?
The entirety of the apocalyptic fever dream of the Last Battle from the literal devil to the (racist) depiction of a talking ape named Shift who cons true believers with a fake Aslan which is a donkey in a lion skin.
And of course from the same book recursive heaven mountain garden thing.
And that’s just Narnia! I could go into Til We Have Faces. I could go into the Space Trilogy, with Angels protecting Mars and some random British dude protecting the Venusians from falling into original sin. Or even, from that same trilogy, the entirety of That Hideous Strength with its homophobic Ms. “Fairy” Hardcastle, or the literal actual resurrected Wizard Merlin. But I won’t!
C.S. Lewis! Weird ass dude!
27 notes · View notes
So can’t message you for some reason, doesn’t work when I send a message so why don’t we put everything under a read me so it doesn’t get so damn long.
One:
You know what if you won’t take my word for it listen to James Grossman the Executive Director of the American Historical Association:
James Grossman, the executive director of the American Historical Association, says that the increase in statues and monuments was clearly meant to send a message.
"These statues were meant to create legitimate garb for white supremacy," Grossman said. "Why would you put a statue of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson in 1948 in Baltimore?"
(http://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544266880/confederate-statues-were-built-to-further-a-white-supremacist-future)
Or Doctor Mark Elliot:
“All of those monuments were there to teach values to people,” Elliott says. “That’s why they put them in the city squares. That’s why they put them in front of state buildings.” Many earlier memories had instead been placed in cemeteries.
The values these monuments stood for, he says, included a “glorification of the cause of the Civil War.”
(http://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments)
I know you like to use your opinion instead of sources but I’m excited to see how you explain this away or discredit these people. Especially the guy in charge of the American Historical Association.
 Two:
Oh yeah because few people on the left are burning stuff that suddenly means everyone who is left leaning is for that. Are you out of your fucking mind? This is fucking ridiculous you think they speak for the entirety of the Left?? Like show me facts. Show me statistics that it’s a wide spread thing on our side then maybe I’ll take these people seriously until then chill the fuck out.
Also let’s talk about this article in regards to colleges. First and foremost again with the misuse of freedom of speech unless you’re going to fight all the times students have gotten expelled from Universities for saying slurs and shit you really need to chill out with your problem you have with a University exercising their right to not allow someone on to the campus and people exercising their right to protest until they are heard.
There is a code of conduct at Universities and it’s beyond ridiculous if a school is okay with inviting someone that has said/done things that go against that code of conduct when if I a student did any of that I would be fucking expelled. Them bringing that person in shows what the schools values are before you say “well they aren’t students.” If I owned a school and decided I was going to let Sean Spencer [a neo nazi who has called for ethnic genocide] come speak to my students that would say something about myself and my schools values.
Ann Coulter has said some fucked up shit to include the homophobic word f*ggot. She’s said "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity." She’s said "I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo." She’s said “ Jews would be “perfected” once they became Christians.”
Do I need to keep going about the fucked up shit she has said? No one owes this woman a fucking platform she’s garbage. I read something once about how speech can be violent because of the effect it has on the body and the brain but there’s something that stands out to me:
The scientific findings I described above provide empirical guidance for which kinds of controversial speech should and shouldn’t be acceptable on campus and in civil society. In short, the answer depends on whether the speech is abusive or merely offensive.
Offensiveness is not bad for your body and brain. Your nervous system evolved to withstand periodic bouts of stress, such as fleeing from a tiger, taking a punch or encountering an odious idea in a university lecture.
Entertaining someone else’s distasteful perspective can be educational. Early in my career, I taught a course that covered the eugenics movement, which advocated the selective breeding of humans. Eugenics, in its time, became a scientific justification for racism. To help my students understand this ugly part of scientific history, I assigned them to debate its pros and cons. The students refused. No one was willing to argue, even as part of a classroom exercise, that certain races were genetically superior to others.
So I enlisted an African-American faculty member in my department to argue in favor of eugenics while I argued against; halfway through the debate, we switched sides. We were modeling for the students a fundamental principle of a university education, as well as civil society: When you’re forced to engage a position you strongly disagree with, you learn something about the other perspective as well as your own. The process feels unpleasant, but it’s a good kind of stress — temporary and not harmful to your body — and you reap the longer-term benefits of learning.
What’s bad for your nervous system, in contrast, are long stretches of simmering stress. If you spend a lot of time in a harsh environment worrying about your safety, that’s the kind of stress that brings on illness and remodels your brain. That’s also true of a political climate in which groups of people endlessly hurl hateful words at one another, and of rampant bullying in school or on social media. A culture of constant, casual brutality is toxic to the body, and we suffer for it.
That’s why it’s reasonable, scientifically speaking, not to allow a provocateur and hatemonger like Milo Yiannopoulos to speak at your school. He is part of something noxious, a campaign of abuse. There is nothing to be gained from debating him, for debate is not what he is offering.
On the other hand, when the political scientist Charles Murray argues that genetic factors help account for racial disparities in I.Q. scores, you might find his view to be repugnant and misguided, but it’s only offensive. It is offered as a scholarly hypothesis to be debated, not thrown like a grenade. There is a difference between permitting a culture of casual brutality and entertaining an opinion you strongly oppose. The former is a danger to a civil society (and to our health); the latter is the lifeblood of democracy.
By all means, we should have open conversations and vigorous debate about controversial or offensive topics. But we must also halt speech that bullies and torments. From the perspective of our brain cells, the latter is literally a form of violence.
(https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/14/opinion/sunday/when-is-speech-violence.html?mcubz=1)
Now can you say that being anti-Semitic [Jewish people will be perfected by becoming Christian] calling for the invasion, murder and forced conversion to Christianity [man that has a long history of fucking up countries] saying that we should televise and condone torture AND drop fucking bombs [daisy cutters] throughout the Middle East isn’t fucking abusive and oppressive? I mean you could but it’s garbage.
Three:
I love that you left out what that statement was in reference to. You said no one who is affected by it cares which was a blatant lie and you’ve obviously ignored the copious amounts of NA that have called for this stuff to be removed.
Your facts were called bullshit because they didn’t support your original statement.
You do realize it doesn’t fucking matter if 4.7 million don’t care right? Those 520k+ NA still exist and they give a damn so your statement the people affected don’t care is a fucking lie and using that article to push your narrative that is fucking wrong makes it bullshit. It’s not because I don’t like evidence. It’s because the evidence you have provided is garbage and doesn’t support the statement YOU FUCKING MADE. You don’t get to fucking decide an issue doesn’t matter because the majority of said group doesn’t care about it.
  Four:
Nothing you said changes that the article detailed how to help the NA community. So either your article is good and the information is sound or it’s bad. You can’t pick and choose. You can’t use part of the articles information to back up your statement then trash the rest of it. Do you know how that makes a source look?
Doesn’t matter why you omitted it. The point remains it proved my point that the government was fucking the NA community over. Your source that you provided agrees that what the government is doing with the land [along with the cigerrets and the casinos] are hurting the community.
Hmmmm that’s fair the US has provided that but uhm just a quick thing:
 Since it was first established within the old U.S. War Department in 1824, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) has distinguished itself as the most corrupt, ineffective and abusive agency in the federal government. Although the BIA now professes the greatest respect for "tribal sovereignty" and "tribal self-determination," there is precious little evidence of genuine concern for tribal autonomy in its administration of federal Indian policy as its recent illegal intervention into the internal affairs of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma substantiates. The overwhelming weight of evidence tells a very different story about BIA policy making. By any standard, the BIA is a colossal failure as a government agency and the dead weight of its administrative wreckage represents the single greatest obstacle to the freedom, prosperity, cultural integrity and progress of Native Americans. Until the BIA is abolished and federal Indian policy is fundamentally reformed, the future holds little promise of a significant change in the lives of Native Americans.
(http://www.cherokeeobserver.org/Issues/abolishbiapart2.html)
 Five:
I don’t use reddit. Ever. So like again I say just say the shit you wanna say so I don’t waste my fucking time responding to it??
 Six:
So the fact that they haven’t paid there bills somehow means they deserve to be living with dirty fucking pipes? They deserve the city officials to not fix the fucking pipes that a lot of them have been prosecuted over for their role in it?
The first thing that you said in this post was this: We’ve given you everything you want, but you just want more you greedy layabouts. So  you didn’t originally say anything about people only complaining on twitter. Try reading through your own statements.
Seven:
You know how you said that I was misquoting you [which I wasn’t lol] it’s nice to see you doing the same thing. Here’s what I said:
ALSO I don’t know if you know this but not everyone is able to go out and do the stuff I do whether it’s age, whether it’s economical, whether it’s because they have a disability of some sort so calling them a lay about is so many levels of wrong not to mention talking this stuff on the internet can and often does get people involved who can do stuff to do so. You discounting the power of words and the internet is illogical and just to ridiculous for words.
At no point did I say that no one out of the people I listed could go out in protests but the fact remains that for every child, poor person, disabled person that can go there’s someone that can’t so again you calling these people layabouts is fucking garbage, but I love that you think the links you provided mean EVERYONE in those particular communities can do something.
Eight:
Yes. It’s quite possible since you’re more likely to live in poverty if you were in poverty as a child (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/rich-kids-stay-rich-poor-kids-stay-poor/) (http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_911.html) (https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2016/02/19/a-college-degree-is-worth-less-if-you-are-raised-poor/) (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/the-long-shadow-poverty-baltimore-poor-children/) and having literally all your money, land and shit stripped away from is a sure fire way to put people in poverty if I ever saw one.
I honestly can’t expect much from someone that thinks institutional oppression doesn’t exist. I mean I can’t blame you for not understanding this “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” thing is garbage and has always been garbage
Nine:
Read the following: (http://www.aaihs.org/slavery-the-13th-amendment-and-mass-incarceration-a-response-to-patrick-rael/) (http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/gilmoreprisonslavery.html) (https://www.afsc.org/story/slavery-mass-incarceration) (https://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/3/from_slavery_to_mass_incarceration_ava) (https://eji.org/enslavement-to-mass-incarceration-museum) (http://racism.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1470:institutionalized-slavery&catid=137&Itemid=155&showall=1&limitstart=)
 Also let’s talk about your articles
The one talking about Black leaders: I’m all for admitting there were other circumstances as well but the idea that the war on drugs wasn’t to attack Black communities (http://jezebel.com/nixons-policy-advisor-admits-he-invented-war-on-drugs-t-1766359595) or that drugs weren’t funneled into the community (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/10/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html) is factually incorrect.
Also there being other contributing factors to Mass Incarceration doesn’t suddenly mean it didn’t start with slavery.  That’s not how that works.
The first article:
Is the fact that Black politicians are on board with this and that there’s some racist black guy trying to put Black people in more economic poverty supposed to prove anything?
 Ten:
Have you ever experienced poverty? Have you ever experienced being so poor you can’t feed your own children [due to racism in the job market and a slew of other things] that you turn to crime to feed said children? If the choice is between starvation for yourself and your children and committing a crime that’s not a real choice.
One I didn’t bring the law in to this [despite the fact there are numerous racist legal practices] but I’m glad you can recognize that stuff from 100 years ago can affect today albeit even if you’re saying so in just a legal capacity. But please tell me how your comment is right but mine is wrong when I say stuff from 100+ years ago can affect people today?
 Eleven:
We are having a debate/argument/discussion whatever you want to call it and while you are right it’s not a research paper when you do this stuff you need to have your fact straight.
 For example I haven’t gotten stuff wrong here that’s fine but nothing I’ve gotten wrong has presented me as a possible racist liar [your own actions even if they were by accident are the same actions that racist people have done. People I’ve had this conversation with before so if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it’s a duck until I know otherwise. AGAIN that was your fault. My initial evaluation of you was your own fault.]
 Twelve:
Don’t really care. If I’ve got the facts to back me up I’ll cuss all I want especially when it’s about topics that directly affect me and others like me. If you allow my insults to detract from the facts that’s something YOU need to work on not me because even if you had cussed me out I still would have read your sources and I would have replied to them in kind.
If my argument is supported by facts and you think me being mean to you delegitimizes my argument that is supported by facts that means you don’t care about the facts because someone was mean to you. People need to stop using people being mean to them as a way to negate facts.
 Thirteen:
So I realized I didn’t actually link my source apparently lol?? I thought I did so that’s on me but it was a list of articles from google talking about the issue but I already know we are gonna run into this problem again later down so I’ll save what I am going to say for then.
 Fourteen:
So all you’ve got is your opinions didn’t I say don’t bother responding if you couldn’t give me something other than your opinion?
However there is something I will address. Yes we commit more violent crimes I won’t ever deny that because I know it’s a fact. I frequently use those FBI tables in conversations. What I will say though is violent crimes doesn’t encompass everything so let’s talk about that other stuff:
Even more surprising is what gets left out of the chart: Blacks are far more likely to be arrested for selling or possessing drugs than whites, even though whites use drugs at the same rate. And whites are actually more likely to sell drugs:
Whites were about 45 percent more likely than blacks to sell drugs in 1980, according to an analysis of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth by economist Robert Fairlie. This was consistent with a 1989 survey of youth in Boston. My own analysis of data from the 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health shows that 6.6 percent of white adolescents and young adults (aged 12 to 25) sold drugs, compared to just 5.0 percent of blacks (a 32 percent difference).
This partly reflects racial differences in the drug markets in black and white communities. In poor black neighborhoods, drugs tend to be sold outdoors, in the open. 
 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/30/white-people-are-more-likely-to-deal-drugs-but-black-people-are-more-likely-to-get-arrested-for-it/?utm_term=.1797b7e3e9ef)
To compound on this cops just don’t seem to care about white people doing this stuff. (https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/smart-justice/war-marijuana-black-and-white) (https://privacysos.org/blog/there-goes-your-overtime-cop-explains-why-police-dont-target-powerful-whites-in-drug-enforcement/) The CIA definitely didn’t care when they were targeting Black people and Hippies.
Not to mention white people are now calling for a gentler war on drugs now because of a fucking heroin crisis (https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/31/us/heroin-war-on-drugs-parents.html?mcubz=1) but I mean fuck the Black community right? Let’s support laws that put them in jail (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/08/racial_bias_in_criminal_justice_whites_don_t_want_to_reform_laws_that_harm.html)
 Black people are more likely to have their cars searched despite the fact that they find more illegal stuff on white people (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/27/police-are-searching-black-drivers-more-often-but-finding-more-illegal-stuff-with-white-drivers-2/?utm_term=.e402ec8667c4)
Black people are more likely to be stopped and frisked despite the fact that white people carry more contraband (https://thinkprogress.org/white-people-stopped-by-new-york-police-are-more-likely-to-have-guns-or-drugs-than-minorities-9bf579a2b9b3/)
And there’s this too: (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/data-police-racial-bias)
So that information about violent crime doesn’t suddenly fix everything.
ALSO Black people are more likely to be in poverty so there’s a racial aspect to all of this isn’t if it isn’t the single contributing factor. One of the reasons is probably this: (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2915472/) or this: (http://www.epi.org/publication/african-americans-are-paid-less-than-whites-at-every-education-level/)
 Fifteen:
Columbus was also trash and his statues need to be removed and Columbus day should be replaced with Indigenous People’s Day [it’s already happening but all of America needs to get with the times] again books, museums and mandatory curriculums exist that’s not gonna change.
Have you heard anyone call for the removal of museums that are about educating people? I know for a fact that the African American History and Heritage Museum has a section about Civil War and there’s no way people would remove that. Now a museum glorifying the actions of the Confederate sure remove it. History like that should be remembered not glorified.
Educating isn’t glorifying and if you can’t tell the difference between those two words I can’t help you. NOT TO FUCKING MENTION it’s the people that are supporting this shit that are ALL FOR revising ACTUAL HISTORY BOOKS that teach kids about this stuff. We aren’t the ones doing what you’re accusing us of. The right is.
  Sixteen:
Soooo you’re against pedophilic material being censored since no one should be forcibly censored? I mean that’s cool…I guess….I can’t even.
Now obviously, I don’t actually believe you believe that but your stance is no censorship is good but if you budge that means in certain circumstances it is. So who are you to decide what those circumstances are? Mine reasons are based off the racist history of the statues and their continued presence in a society that claims to be post racial/racism
 Seventeen:
So I’ve already proven that you’re wrong about why those statues were put up from two very reliable sources but I am eager to see how you plan to discredit them or if you’re even gonna bother providing sources and are going to use your opinion again which will not hold up to that.
Anyway those statues were put up to glorify the reasons the south seceded [racism along many other things] and to terrorize Black people. It wasn’t solely about memorializing their fallen [I’ll agree that was part of the reason] but like that part shouldn’t matter since the racism is quite clear now. At least to anyone that cares about sources.
 Eighteen:
Things happened in the past that effect the present [which you agreed with] and therefore reconciliation should be made.
Also you didn’t have a single source to back up your opinions so you saying it’s not real doesn’t mean shit to me because your opinion doesn’t mean shit without fucking sources. Your word isn’t fucking fact.
OH MY GOD yes because a Black man managed to do that with some KKK members that means they can all have that happen? Didn’t you get “mad” at me earlier for something along these lines? You are a joke if you think the people he convered represent the entitirety of the population of the KKK which is said to be 3000 people (http://www.epi.org/publication/african-americans-are-paid-less-than-whites-at-every-education-level/) We don’t even have a number of how many people he converted but you wanna use that as proof that all these racist fucks aren’t gonna stay that way?
Fine I will change my stance THE MAJORITY OF THESE FUCKS will continue to be the way they are unless there are serious consequences for the fucking behavior whether it’s getting expelled from college, losing their job or someone beating the ever living shit out of them. This is not me saying I condone violence but my point stands.
 Nineteen:
Do you realize the KKK have been marching around the US before this? Do you realize the Nazism and all that was on the rise before this happened? Also when it comes to PoC people claim the victim narrative is bullshit but let it be the KKK and Neo-Nazis all of a sudden it’s got legitimacy that’s racist bullshit.
Their beliefs don’t change facts. Their history is racist. The KKK is racist. Neo-Nazism is racist. The Confederacy seceded for multiple reasons but one of them was RACISM. The fact that people are claiming to agree with them is just more proof that our country is racist but of course no one will go for that because these people are the actual ones trying to erase fucking history.
Things aren’t always black and white. Things don’t always happen because of racism but you acting like systematic oppression doesn’t exist is factually incorrect, moronic and doesn’t help shit in tearing down these systems in order to help people.
REMINDER: PUT YOUR RESPONSE UNDER A READ MORE
1 note · View note