#our true enemy is bigotry

[aaronymous999]

I think many queer people who are exclusionists have been shaped that way by queerphobia which is incredibly sad.

The flaws in homophobia/transphobia is honestly really aren’t their facts or statistics or the things they say- there’s no logic and even if their is the problem will and always will be their conclusions from the information. For example, the most common argument I’ve seen is “Having more gay representation will make the kids gay.” And the thing is this is an entirely neutral statement, the claim in itself doesn’t really mean anything to me, because it’s vague, there’s no context and there’s nothing inherently wrong with being gay.

Homophobia’s problem is coming to hateful conclusions from mostly neutral statements. Or hyperfocusing on the gay aspect to fuel their hatred.

A lot of exclusionists regret the idea of trans people without gender dysphoria because they feel that there has to be some sort of life threatening reason for someone to be transgender, because internally transitioning for “no reason” is an inherent evil. But that’s what the transphobes WANT you to think. There is no inherent evil to transition into a boy just because you like how boys look or you think boys are hot and want to be one, or any other reason. Of course medical transition needs long consideration but there’s nothing wrong with someone without gender dysphoria just deciding to change their pronouns to she/her and start using a girl name even if they had no problems as a man. The only people who think there’s something wrong with transness in any form are transphobes.

To get a little personal, I do have gender dysphoria and all the typical good gold star exclusionist binary trans person points. However, I don’t think it’s a bad thing that one of the reasons I’m transgender is because I grew up in a majority male household. I think due to my gender dysphoria I would have always been this way but my brothers and father definitely contributed. And for some out there, if they were born in a more gender equal society, they wouldn’t be transgender. And that’s okay. There’s nothing wrong with saying that. It doesn’t make you any less transgender.

As for accusations that are inherently negative, the problem is the conclusion and the “evil” drawn from it. Hearing about a story where a trans woman assaults someone, they draw the trans woman from the story and use it as ammunition against trans people as a whole. However the correct conclusion is that we are given little information her and all we know is that someone who happens to be a trans woman assaulted someone. One assumption is taken from hate and malice, and the other is neutral.

Not proofread just some thoughts and your friendly reminder that being queer has no rules and not to let internalized homophobia render you hateful for the members of our community who don’t follow as many “rules”

( I hate that I have to clarify this because I am worried it will be used as a strawman against me or will be co-opted by bad actors but I do not condone pedophilia, racism or anything like that. There is a difference between neo/xenogenders and “genders” that are just racism and pedophilia apology. Queerness shouldn’t involve any of that. )

[genderkoolaid]

Hi. You always post a lot of info so I'm wondering if you might be able to help me. Is there a difference between radfems and TERFs? Are they both bad? If so, why are they bad? Are there any dog whistles to look out for when it comes to these groups? Please ignore this if it makes you uncomfortable. I've seen a lot of people pointing out that they're bad, but never really saying why. I want to make sure I follow intersectional feminism and not those groups.

Radical feminism is the name of a branch of feminism. It originally got its name because it advocated for extreme changes to society to address female oppression, but developed into a specific worldview which I (off the top of my head) would define by certain traits:

Oppositional sexism. Men and women (or "males" and "females") are fundamentally opposed. Oftentimes this is bioessentialist, arguing that this opposite comes from biology, but it may also be framed as a political necessity; a radfem might argue that gender and sex are fake BUT we need male vs female as political identities in order to identify our "allies" and "enemies". Regardless, males and females are physically distinct and political enemies. You can tell a man from a woman, either from their body or their behavior, the two categories cannot overlap, and no other gender/sex-labels are relevant.

Fatalistic perspectives on patriarchy. Not only are males and females opposed, but this cannot be changed. This may be bioessentialist (the opposition comes from something in our nature, which cannot change) or gender-essentialist (the opposition comes from socialization which occurs as a child due to outside pressure and/or internal gender identity, and cannot change.) Focus is not placed on an ideal future where men and women are equals and social partners. Instead, there is a sense that there is no way to truly have a society with men and women where males do not oppress females, or try to. Sometimes this is more implicit and other times you have people who explicitly believe in creating & enforcing female-only societies.

Misogyny as the source of all oppression, or at least the most important & the one people should identity themselves as before anything else. Those who call themselves intersectional generally only really care about other issues to the extent that they affect women in some way. Part of the downfall of the original radical feminists was the fact that the dominant groups were upper-class white women, who ignored racism and classism and silenced poor women & women of color, insisting that anti-racist and anti-classist action distracted from The Movement & that calling out other women's bigotry was anti-feminist.

A general suspicion of sexual desire and sex, often expressing itself as whorephobia (anti-sex work) and anti-kink attitudes, specifically under the argument that they are inherently misogynistic and abusive. Sex is associated with men and maleness, which again, are inherently the enemy. Sex WITH men, or with a person or object that could be construed as male, is especially bad.

The impetus to make your personal life As Feminist As Possible– "The personal is political." That isn't a bad slogan on its own (it's true), but with radical feminists it expresses itself as a high standard of Radfemmaxing. You should be celibate if you are attracted to men, or become a political lesbian, you shouldn't be masculine OR feminine (anti-butch & femme sentiment), you should reject makeup and shaving, you should cut off male relatives and even abort male fetuses– and you must identify with womanhood and femaleness, while rejecting any identity related to manhood and maleness. It's not just that you should examine your desires and choices and question why you feel the way you feel (again, this is a good thing). Radfems have the belief that they already know the correct answer to that Introspection, and if you come to any other conclusion than theirs (I like wearing makeup because it's fun, I want to be a man because it fits me), then it's taken as proof you are still brainwashed.

TERFS are trans-exclusive radfems. They believe that being trans is not real, or at least not healthy or an acceptable feminist stance. TERFs tend to use the language of "sex" and "males vs females." Many use the term "gender critical," meaning they see gender as fake and damaging, while sex is real and the proper platform for feminist analysis. I once saw a TERF define her stance as "it's not degrading because its feminine, its feminine because its degrading." They believe in things like autogynophilia and rapid onset gender dysphoria, and attribute transgender identity with sexual trauma, internalized homophobia and internalized misogyny.

TIRFs are trans inclusive. They believe that transgender feelings are natural and should be listened to and followed, and that feminism should take gender identity into account. However, they still have a "male vs female" worldview. They may argue that transgender men's internal gender feelings led them to internalize male socialization, while trans women internalized female socialization, meaning that all trans people's experiences with gender and misogyny align most with cis people who share their gender identity.

In both cases, anti-nonbinary exorsexism and intersexism are unavoidable. TERFs will label intersex people as "males/females with a disorder" and attribute nonbinary identity either to internalized misogyny (FTX) or to avoid being held accountable for male privilege (MTX). TIRFs similarly fail to acknowledge how someone's socialization can be affected by intersexism. MTX people are either trans women in denial or flamboyant cis men; FTX people are either trans men avoiding their privilege, or cis women avoiding their privilege*.

Not everyone who uses radical feminist arguments or shares the general perspective openly identified as radfem. There are many "cryptos" who purposefully obscure their political identity to spread radfem ideas in queer & feminist spaces. Other people adopt the general ideas of radical feminism without consciously identifying as one, because of cryptos and how pop feminism often adopts their flashier ideas. So it's important to understand these qualities as on a scale, with some versions being more subtle while others are explicit.

Radical feminism always reduces trans experiences (& experiences in general) to a simple, uncrossable binary, based either in gender or sex. Nuance and cros- or non-binary gender experiences are seen as anti-feminist and aligned with the patriarchy, if not part of a targeted plan to hurt feminist movements.

*the idea of "AFAB privilege" is. a thing in some people's analysis of transmisogyny.

[wolf-tail]

I want to remind everyone that antisemitism is alive and well on this site and should be taken seriously as a dangerous form of bigotry. Honest to got Nazis have been emboldened by Israel's bullshit and taking every opportunity they can to "justify" their behaviour. Denounce Zionism, but keep love in your heart for human beings. This love will allow you to see who is a true ally and whe is using social justice as a vehicle for their own evil agenda. Remember you have Jewish allies who know what a genocide looks like and wish to protect Palestinians from the one being waged in their name. And remember a Nazi will never be your ally, remember they are scum beneath our boots. Block and report.

Free Palestine

Love to the Jewish allies, I commend your bravery. I'm so sorry you're facing bigotry while you're standing up for genocide victims. This isn't fair to you or them. Your people have been persecuted and used as scapegoats for millennia, and your people's genuine fears have been manipulated by a genocidal regime to justify mass murder. I hope you know that I will never tolerate Nazis, not just because they're my enemies too as a disabled Black queer person, but because I believe that no human deserves to be treated the way you were.

(Btw, Palestinian Jewish ppl exist, but Israel doesn't care and kills them just the same. This was never about religion.)

[greenfinchwriter]

Just scrolling through my feed and what do I see?

This:

@spottheantisemitism

Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you people?!

We really aren't human to you goys are we?

We're aesthetics,an ancient evil to be exterminated,stupid jokes told by stand up comedians,ghouls - but not human.

We are good enough for shit like this and props during Shoah memorials. We are fine dead.

Our lives,our words,our pain,our grief, our history, our humanity is worth nothing to most non-Jewish people,and it shows.

And it goes beyond that,doesn't it? "Oh it's just one tone deaf person!",you might say - no it's not. Far from it. The entire online leftist sphere has silently given up on that usual "good Jew vs bad Jew"- narrative that they have used for decades to shield themselves from being rightfully accused of bigotry. Because it was never true.

They cannot condemn the ongoing rise of anti-semitism,the hate crimes in real life and online,the defacement of Shoah memorials etc because it all comes down to the ancient hatred they have for us - there are no good Jews, or bad ones, even dead ones aren't quite enough anymore - maybe they've never been but there is something to be said about the polite pretense of it. And they know that any word of even human decency to us will be taken as "supporting the Bad Jews" by the other sort of bigots,so they can't be bothered to do even that, lest their comrades deem them the enemy too.

Any other minority and a whole bunch of progressives would be up in arms but not when Jews are debased,and attacked.

Any prejudice is kept alive not by the screaming flag bearers but by the silent majority.

[deerteetharepretty]

Trans Ballister Headcannon and intersectional queer theory thoughts about the movie Nimona

I absolutely ADORE the Nimona movie but as an Autigender, genderqueer, who is specifically somewhere encapsulating genderfluid and trans masc nonbinary lesbian, this movie made me sob. 

I related to Nimona so SO MUCH. But due to my love of studying the intersectionallitys of queer struggles as my special interest, i saw a specific headcannon among fans that has my entire heart. 

I dont wanna put down anyone elses, i love them all, but i wanted to take a moment to talk about the beautiful lense you could look at queer intersectionality with the Trans Man Ballistar Boldheart headcannon. 

I want to be clear i do not mean this in a weird way at all!

I think theres a lot to discuss with how we could view there kingdom as being accepting of gay people (at least a bit more progressed past where we are where there may not be hate crimes or any problems but some people are still terrible homophobs far and few) 

But through the eyes of our child Nimona we see that the society only accepts queer folks who are “the good ones” aka constantly repressing little parts of their true self to appease others. The accept gay people and say they are willing to try with binary trans people but the bigotry and outward threat of violence to anything different has kept people in the coset, hiding beautiful, normal, facets of queer joy to be seen as acceptable to the kingdom.

That's why i am so inspired by the headcannon of Ballistar, maybe not openly trans but fully living as himself accepted by doctors and the queen fully at a young age, striving for his best life, with a loving and understanding boyfriend who truly sees him.

Because its him realizing Nimona isnt the enemy, they are just a transgender/shapeshifter child. Much like he doesnt understand shapeshifters at first, he doesn't understand their gender, but you start to see him see Nimona for who she is and love her so much.  This headcannon also makes me think so much about the scene on the sword of Gloreth and the ones right before. After he hurt her Ballistar immediately regretted it. The look in his eyes and the way his hand went weak in shock when he realized he almost threatened her. He sees the fear on her face and it strikes me so much in the headcannon of them both being trans because he realized he was threatening a child, and a queer one like himself who clearly wanted to just be accepted and not hurt. I also want to talk for a moment about the ending with Ambrosius. I may need to make a part two because theres a lot to unpack with ambrosius being a cis gay man who is very supportive of the trans community and having a closeted trans partner. i feel like when the dust settles he would feel so horrible for how much he rejected Nimona in the first place.  GOD I WANNA WRITE A FANFIC ABOUT THEM WORKING TO HEAL THROUGH THIS SHIT 

[slickbackdani]

Since Macklemore is officially Back-lemore™️, I want to take the time, before Pride Month draws to a close, to deliver a heartfelt "go fuck yourself" to everyone who called him homophobic years ago.

For those not in the know: 11 years ago, Macklemore released "Same Love", a song in which he voiced his his support of LGBT equality and opposition to the oppression and discrimination we face. It was a very moving, powerful, heartfelt ballad that was one of the early markers that the social justice movement was here to stay…

Or at least, that's what I would say if that same social justice movement didn't gang up on Macklemore and declare him the enemy, smearing him as a homophobe because… he talks about gay rights issues despite not being gay himself.

I've heard all the arguments, and they're all bullshit.

"He talks at length about not being gay, so he's ashamed of associating with us!"

First of all, his explanation of his sexuality is limited to the first half of the first verse. The entire rest of the song is dedicated to the message "homophobia is wrong and LGBT people deserve equal rights." Second, his explanation of his sexuality isn't just some "no homo" clarification, but an illustration of how far-reaching homophobic stereotypes are in our society and how they can give children the wrong idea.

"He used the F-slur!"

Take a look at the context he was using it in, smart one.

Our culture founded from oppression, yet we don't have acceptance for 'em

Call each other f——ts behind the keys of a message board

A word rooted in hate, yet our genre still ignores it

He wasn't calling anyone the F-slur or saying anyone should be called that. He was using it as an example of homophobic language that should never be used because it is bigoted and cruel. DEPICTION IS NOT ENDORSEMENT!

"He's paternalistically trying to speak for a group he doesn't belong to!"

No. No. No the fuck he isn't. If you listen to the actual lyrics, he's just making the basic statement that LGBT people deserve equal rights and that bigotry against us is wrong. Aside from the tiny minority of LGBT conservatives who try to move up in the world by sucking up to their oppressors and throwing their fellow queers under the bus, I can't imagine how the LGBT community as a whole would have any reason to object to any of that! He's not speaking for us; he's standing with us. The only ones trying to "speak for us" is you, doing this whole "I'm offended for you" schtick and thinking you know better than we do who our enemies are.

"He's from the privileged majority, he's never been oppressed before, so he can't really know what it's like and therefore doesn't really care!"

I can't believe I have to say this, but being privileged doesn't automatically make someone an evil bigoted monster who is incapable of basic human empathy or compassion. Since most of the people who slimed Macklemore were themselves straight people claiming to support LGBT rights — looking at you, Cody Johnston — THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT!

I'm genuinely baffled at the cognitive dissonance on display here. "Any straight person claiming to support LGBT Rights is a liar," says a group of straight people who claim to support LGBT rights. Are you honestly expecting me to believe that every single one of you are the exceptions to this rule you're claiming is otherwise immutable? From this, I'm forced to draw one of two conclusions:

You're Projecting. You're accusing Macklemore of not really caring about us and only using us for clout because you don't really care about us and are only using us for clout. I don't want to believe this is true, but look. If you're a straight person, and you see another straight person claiming to support LGBT rights, and your immediate reaction is to call them a liar, and you specifically use their straightness as evidence that they're lying… you're telling on yourself.

You're Fishing for Compliments. You think that, if you publicly flagellate yourself enough with this "all straight people are automatically evil" bullshit, the God Emperor of Gayness will descend from on high to officially declare you "one of the good ones" and ease your straight guilt.

I'll admit the second option isn't nearly as bad as the first, but it's still shitty because — to borrow some words from the Rap Critic — you're essentially clogging up an important conversation about our rights and freedoms just to beg us to confirm that you're not bad people. If you really cared about us, you wouldn't be making it about you in the first place!

And I'm sure there are some gays who were also ganging up on Macklemore and declaring him an oppressor and a bigot just like everyone else, and I have a message for them, too.

Darling. Bro. Baby gays. Listen.

The purpose of Pride isn't to tell all straight people everywhere to fuck off and die. It's to specifically fight back against the bigots and oppressors who have held positions of authority in our society since time immemorial, to undermine their power and create a free, equal society for everyone. I can't remember who first said this, but the struggle of social justice isn't "minorities vs non-minorities", but "minorities and non-minorities vs the system."

Here we had a straight person outspokenly demonstrating how emphatically he supports our fight for freedom and wholeheartedly agrees with us that oppressing us is wrong… so why the fuck were you treating him, personally, as the enemy?

You'd do well to remember the words of George Santayana: "Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim."

[darkmaga-retard]

Technocracy is a system pitted against all others, including capitalism, Marxism, and outright Fascism. However, it will use those other systems to achieve its goals of Scientific Dictatorship. The Trilateral Commission kickstarted modern Technocracy in 1973 and devised a policy of using mass immigration as a tool to break down Western society. Peter Sutherland did it in Europe. Anthony Blinken is doing it in the U.S.

No other continent suffers from an immigration crisis. Not China. Not Asia. Not South America. Not Africa. Not India or Russia. What Trilateral policy did in Europe is working on America, with similar results.

Wade though this thoughtful paper and consider the author’s conclusions:

“The oligarchs that wish to see Technocracy established can capitalize on the ramblings of the real far-right minority by framing all dissent against the emerging Technate as “extremism.”

Perhaps more crucially, by perpetuating the left-right paradigm, pitting the identitarian movement against the advocates of identity politics, populations can be mired in pointless debates. This irrelevant distraction, embodied by the vacuum of party politics, leaves the global public-private partnership free to push ahead with the rollout of Technocracy while the people engage in counter-productive arguments and continually fail to recognize their real enemy: the oligarchs. ⁃ Patrick Wood, TN Editor.

In the UK, the so-called far-right‘s stance on immigration is said to be driven by “the Great Replacement conspiracy theory.” According to the influential global think tank the Institute for Strategic Studies (ISD):

“The Great Replacement” theory was first coined by French writer Renaud Camus. Identitarian movements across Europe (including in Austria, the UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, France and Germany) have used the theory to recruit others to their cause, claiming their countries and national “identities” are under threat due to increasing immigrant populations.

It is true, in part, that Camus made this argument. Some elements of his philosophy are racist and do offer apparent rationales for religious bigotry. It is also true that Camus has been influential in the rise of the identitarian movement, which is perceived as “right-wing.” Identitarianism broadly stands in opposition to identitiy politics, considered progressive or “left-wing.”

While the identitarian movement generally opposes multiculturalism and defends ethno-culturalism, identity politics largely holds that states foist structural inequality of opportunity upon people based on their personal characteristics—such as their ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation and disability, etc. Those who oppose multiculturalism perceive identity politics as a deliberate attempt to dilute or even eradicate their culture.

These sociopolitical and philosophical concepts have a massive “influence” on our polity, public discourse and society. The right vs left paradigm is thereby created and perpetuated through the constantly reported clash between the identitarian movement and identity politics.

Those who espouse the Great Replacement theory often cite the comments of Peter Sutherland (1946 – 2018) as evidence that there is a cohesive “plan” to replace European culture. Sutherland was “influential” in guiding the development of the EU and the World Trade Organisation (WTO). He was a banker, business man, lawyer and politician. Sutherland sat on the Bilderberg steering committee, he was chairman of Trilateral Commission European division and the European Round Table movement.

[queerism1969]

Since pride month is near the end I wanted to say some things to my queer siblings. This is important so please pay attention:

Write and draw YOUR own goddamn story. Corporations only care about profits so they are never gonna give us the proper representation that we deserve and straight people have their own fucking struggles, they don’t have time for us. You can do it professionally or as a hobby but please do it if you have the gift.

Read more books based on leftist theories. It will help you understand why the world is fucked up and how we can fix it.

Join left-wing political groups or parties. Despite what you have been told politics is life. Do you really want others to decide important things for you? Be political.

Donate to left-wing organizations, and join and support your local protest.

Learn to outlive your enemies. Just living a happy life and helping others to better theirs is a revolution, never forget that.

Know that if someone is intolerant to some groups they are also intolerant to others and obviously not your friends.

Remember that you might lose some of your so-called friends when you are trying to be your best and authentic self but you are gonna gain more true friends who will give up their lives to save yours.

We need to show the world that we are not what the reactionaries made us to be. We need visibility and it's our greatest weapon against bigotry, discrimination, and harassment.

Hiding isn’t gonna solve our problem. Running away from fascists is the same as being dead. Stand and fight as much as you can. Happy pride from Bangladesh.

By the way, if you ever come to Bangladesh please meet with me, I would love to host you.

[edenfenixblogs]

A Note to Jumblr and my Jewish Followers:

Hey y’all! I see some of you tagging reblogs of my posts responding to antisemitic messages I receive with the tags Jewish Blocklist and Antisemitic/Antisemite Blocklist.

First of all, no shame there! Please feel free to keep doing this and whatever else you need to do to protect your own mental health as well as to your provide tips to our peers and allies about people worth steering clear of!

Second, I do not and will not have a Jewish Blocklist or an Antisemitic/Antisemite Blocklist. I hate blocking people I disagree with. I do try to live by the axiom: “We make peace with enemies, not friends.” And I do think that a lot (not all) of these people will, with the benefit of hindsight, be horrified at how they behaved during this time. Or at least ashamed of expressing such thoughts publicly. Some may be living with legitimate mental conditions like psychosis and mania that can absolutely lead to rigid and conspiracy-based thinking. None of this excuses violence or bigotry or antisemitism. And none of this invalidates your absolute right to block whoever you wish for any reason.

Which brings me to my third point: I don’t want to block people, because I want to track how they behave in the future. That could be four months from now. Six months. A year. Two years. Right now, the fighting between Israel and Palestine is active and brutal. Many antisemites are just using this flair up to justify their pre-existing antisemitic views. I doubt much will change for them. But many people had little to no awareness of the I/P conflict before the 10/7 attack and have been swept up in QAnon-like conspiracy theories. I don’t really expect them to address their hatred or how they allowed themselves to become radicalized extremists while the Hamas propaganda machine is still able to twist every development from the ongoing struggle to grow their support. But active warfare is unlikely to last an extremely long time. Tensions and hatred? Sure. That’s here to stay for a while, but official warfare and bombings from Israel are not likely to continue for years on end without stopping. (Hamas has been continuously bombing Israel for a long time and I expect them to continue even after a peace agreement is reached)

So when Israel’s assault ends, I’m sure the peace agreement reached will fall short of what Palestinians are hoping for and what I as a pro-Palestinian activist am hoping for. And I’m sure Palestinian civilians who endorse Hamas and those who do not endorse terrorism of any kind as well as Israelis and Jews who support Palestinian self determination will all be generally unhappy with whatever temporary solution is reached this time. No true, real progress will occur until everyone fighting over which “side” is “right” shifts their focus to instead cooperatively fight for peace for all.

But after the initial wave of anger and disappointment in the terms of the peace treaty are reached, people will go back to not caring at all about the lives of Israelis or Palestinians or Jews or even thinking about it at all on a regular basis.

And when that occurs, I want to revisit these blogs. When the tension is no longer at a constant rolling boil, I want to see how the worst antisemites I’ve encountered reconcile their behavior during this time with their behavior during peacetime. I want to see how the people who told me to kill myself or told me they wished for me and everyone I love to die in the “most painful way possible” feel about Jews when they aren’t hiding behind the idea of activism. I want to see how these people actually support Palestine when Gaza is no longer being bombed. I want to see how the antisemites relationships with the Jewish friends they claim to have recover or do not recover after the things these antisemites have said and done during a time of extreme danger and aggression toward Jews. I want to ask them if they still mean the things they said. I want to ask them if they have regrets. And most importantly I want to ask them how they plan to avoid causing harm to Jewish people and how they plan to learn about Jewish history and culture so that they can avoid antisemitism in the future when the poorly negotiated and doomed-to-fail peace agreement falls through next time. And I cannot do that if I block them.

So instead, if you want to block the people who have been most heinous to me, you will find them under the tag Antisemites To Remember.

I have had to block a few people from those tags when their continued hatred became too intense and continued even after I disengaged, but I have truly aimed to avoid blocking as many people as possible.

Hope this helps. Sending love and solidarity to you all.

[socialjusticeinamerica]

There are hundreds of millions of southern European white people with an olive (tan) complexion. It’s what happens when white folk live in warm sunny climates. Same is true in South America where tens of millions more of white/white identifying people have been living for generations. Being Hispanic or having a Spanish name doesn’t mean you automatically aren’t white or capable of being a racist.

Fascism held sway in Spain and to a lesser extent next door in Portugal for a good part of the 20th century. Fascism, usually hand in hand with racism, also has a history in South and Central America. Even if someone doesn’t identify as white doesn’t mean they can’t be racist, or xenophobic, etc. Bigotry exists outside the box that young Americans want to fit it in. Only a small percentage of Europeans are pale, blonde/red, and blue-eyed. The overwhelming majority have dark hair and brown eyes, and many more are olive. This simplistic bullshit that someone can’t be a white supremacist because they have an ethnic sounding name is ridiculous MAGA talking points that’s being bought into by Dems. Republikkkan talking points have become so pervasive and so persistent that a majority of progressives buy into them without question or even being aware of it. We’re wasting time debating the perceived identity of a killer that was radicalized for the sole purpose of murdering and intimidating us.

In point of fact the press using the term white supremacist to describe the Allen, Texas shooter is in itself fallacious. He was a staunch xenophobe (and repeated “Great Replacement Theory” tropes learned from Tucker Carlson) and billions world wide don’t like immigrants, it isn’t limited to Caucasian Americans. I’ve said this before, Republikkkans can not generate enough angry white guys so they have been recruiting heavily among “Hispanics” to bolster their numbers. 1/3 of of Hispanics are registered Republikkkans. They have also been recruiting from other groups with much less success. Stop putting people from South America into boxes, that methodical behavior is an Anglo-Saxon characteristic that was transplanted here. Decades of radicalization are bearing fruit for the far-right while we quibble over whether or not the Republikkkans are actually attacking us.

People from South America identify by national origin just like everyone else. They’re Colombians, Peruvians, etc. Terms like Hispanic, Latino, Chicano, etc are inventions of American immigration officials trying to fit people into boxes. Why are we (our media) so obsessed with this when Republikkkans are launching their decades long planned assault on our basic human rights.

MAGAts, white supremacists, Nazis, xenophobe, Aryan Brotherhood, Atom-Waffen, III%’ers, etc can and do find kindred spirits beyond national origin and outdated stereo-types based on appearances. Our enemies are evolving and branching out. We must be aware of their present and historical attempts to spin what they want us to believe. Further you need to know historical context. American racist groups admire fascist dictatorships from South and Central America and wish to emulate them, hence the “Right Wing Death Squad” logos. They admire and learn terrorist tactics from radical Islamic groups as well. Look at WWII, you’d think the “Aryan” German Nazis would have had a problem with the Asian Japanese. Just the opposite, both the Japanese and Germans at the time felt they were racially superior to their respective neighbors and bonded over being kindred spirits. It wasn’t a political expediency. They were too far apart to support each other or have any meaningful trade. They were fascist states that both wanted to impose their own unique fascism in there own sphere. We can’t let history repeat itself either here or abroad.

Not enough people in our society are taking the threat of Republikkkan fascists seriously. If you’re taking the time to read this rant then you were already in the know but the general public, both our side and theirs are not. This threat goes beyond the identity politics so en vogue with young people, not that there’s anything wrong with that, but it’s part of a much bigger war against us all. Republikkkans don’t even realize they’ve been co-opted by Nazi’s and the few that do don’t care.

I’ll keep repeating this ad nauseum but the racists, homophobes, militias, evangelicals, xenophobes, Republikkkan politicians, and even the fascists are all foot soldiers duped into waging war against the rest of us by the billionaire oligarchs and their corporations. It always comes back to money. Yes they share most of the same beliefs and each thinks they are manipulating the others. But the only ones with the power (dollars) to bring this shit storm together in a cohesive fashion are the oligarchs. The Rupert Murdochs, Elon Musks, Koch, Walton, etc are coordinating and funding everything for power and profit. Meanwhile we are fighting a Hydra of Nazis, Confederates, Klansmen, evangelists, and armed militias.

In 2020 we took to the streets to protest the George Floyd execution but that quickly morphed into a widespread national protest of Trump. We can’t only begin massive protests when one of our African-American allies is killed unjustly. We should be doing this for every major issue of the day; abortion rights, disenfranchisement of black voters, gun control, trans-persecution, preservation of Medicare/Social Security, migrant rights, union rights, and all basic human rights that the corporate/Christo/fascist/Republikkkans are taking away from us. They are no longer content to persecute people of color and are coming for us all, at once.

This isn’t an intellectual exercise anymore, we have become a de facto fascist state under the yoke of an oppressive and hostile Republikkkan Party. They aren’t even pretending to disguise it anymore. Their leaders and political spokesmen are openly telling us they are going to strip our rights and begin sending us to death camps. They’re past the concentration camps already and we barely even protested those on the border. Between their control of the state legislatures and the Supreme Court they are doing as they please and will begin overturning election results in 2024. A few more takeovers of state legislatures and they will hold a Constitutional Convention to write a MAGA/Republikkkan Constitution.

Now is the time to fight. Resisting didn’t work and a tidal wave of GQP laws and SCOTUS decisions prove that every day. You can not take the high road with Nazis or anyone who is literally trying to kill you.

Rant concluded. Please bear in mind this is food for thought and not an incitement to violence. Remember John Lewis and his “good trouble.” Also try to refrain from violent comments about Republikkkans in comments, notes, and reblogs. We certainly don’t want any of us to be de-platformed by admins.

✌️

[antitransmasculinityexists]

Ok I'm going to do something crazy for a second and weigh in on the transmisandry discourse because some things have been driving me crazy about it. I'm making a separate blog for it because I don't want to receive any hate on my main for talking about this.

Ok here goes.

The fact of the matter is that trans men and other transmasculine people absolutely face a specific bigotry that isn't just plain transphobia. But it's not quite misandry either.

I kind of agree with the idea that it's a form of misogyny, but not because we're "actually women." It's because in the real world our experiences are absolutely shaped by the way people see us and the expectations they put on us because of that and because of our rejection of those expectations. It's hatred of our masculinity because society expects us to be women.

I think there's so much rhetoric that we try to use to explain our experiences that just ends up misinterpreted. Like, the idea that describing how our agab affects how we are treated is misinterpreted as identifying our actual gender with our agab, but it isn't. It's the fact that *society* continues to identify our agab when we don't pass and treats us a certain way because of it. That doesn't mean that we identify ourselves with it.

The fact that the larger trans community refuses to see the specificity of bigotry against transmascs is a huge problem. The framing that transfems have it worse does make me angry because it isn't true. That doesn't make transfems our enemies by any means, but I do expect some solidarity and some understanding of our experiences and circumstances from them too. It needs to go both ways.

[that-ari-blogger]

The Wizard Is Right? (Sentimental Man)

Here is a question: Does a lie have to be untrue for it to be a lie?

I was to say something, fully believing it to be false, and then find out later that it was actually true and I didn't realise it, am I still lying?

I would argue that the answer is yes. A lie is a willing act of deception. But it's interesting how flimsy the relationship between the concept of truth and reality is.

The Wizard Of Oz is a character who lies through his teeth at all times, with one exception that we will come to in a later post. However, a lot of what he says ends up coming true anyway.

Let me explain.

SPOILERS AHEAD: (Wicked)

Let's be clear about something. The Wizard is not a politician, he's a conman. That is the point of his character. Oz as a whole parodies the performative nature of rulership, how it is often just as much about convincing people that you are doing a good job than actually making changes for the better.

The joke therein, is that this conman got further than anyone who is trained in the field by playing the system how it actually works, rather than how it should function.

So, no, I am not going to draw any conclusions about individuals in the real world, historical or modern. Likewise, I am not going to claim that the Wizard is an allegory for anyone in particular.

Take that as you will.

As we have been making our way through Wicked, we have been introduced to characters with varying relationships with the truth. Elphaba's mother is having an affair, Galinda and Fiyero are both putting up masks to cover up their true selves, and Elphaba has bought in to the mythology of the wizard.

Then we meet a character who is pure deceit in a crystalised form, Oscar Zoroaster Phadrig Isaac Norman Henkle Emmannuel Ambroise Diggs, the Wizard of Oz.

"I am a sentimental man Who always longed to be a father"

The word sentimental is defined by the Cambridge Dictionary as: "related to feelings rather than reason", and the wizard is certainly not that, because he isn't from Oz at all. He was unwillingly plucked from his true home and placed in Oz, a place that was in the midst of a history defining drought. He remained in Oz for a while before he became the Wizard, and he had no interest in returning home at all.

He also, I will remind you, runs a country based on constant surveillance and propaganda, which is a very detached approach.

The wizard knows all of this, he is complicit in it, so he is lying here, right?

But, he is sentimental, and for that I point to the acting. In the version of Wicked that I went to see, the wizard was played by Simon Burke, who gave the character a vibe similar to Matt Smith's 11th doctor. He is enjoying being in power and taking actions that sabotage the future of Oz in order to stay in power. That doesn't seem reasonable to me.

There is also the fact that his idea of crisis aversion is "giving people a common enemy", something he achieves by actively oppressing a specific group of people. This is bigotry and shows a belief on his part that this group of people is somehow less valuable to Oz, which is irrational, and bigoted.

The frightening thing about Oz, is that I don't think he actually knows why he does what he does. I think he thinks of himself as a chess master style ruler, who makes the optimal decision for Oz at all times. I don't think it has occurred to him that the most optimal decision is to not be the one in charge.

The rest of this song is a metaphor about how the wizard sees himself as the father of his country, and by extension Elphaba. This is what those in the business like to call irony.

I that the effect that the wizard has on Elphaba is fascinating. He inspires her. Although it is important to make a distinction between his mirage and his reality. The Wizard has lied to Oz and sold them an idea of fairness and equality that he is going out of his way to enforce the opposite of.

But that myth that he has created directly inspires Elphaba, as she becomes someone determined to make that false hope into a reality.

Final Thoughts

I think its rather funny that the Wizards' lies become self fulfilling prophecies, directly causing events later on in the story. It's like fate itself has this guy's number and sent him a text during the intermission that read "I know where you live."

In related news, the wizard's actual name is Oscar Zoroaster Phadrig Isaac Norman Henkle Emmannuel Ambroise Diggs, which is absurd, even for a satire.

Next week, I will be looking at a lesser known part of this musical. it's a small song and not that important, I was considering skipping over it. I think its called Defying Gravity. So, stick around if that interests you.

Previous - Next

[meret118]

I want an XF like series where the aliens have been pulling the strings of big oil in a decades long plot to make the earth hotter so the aliens could comfortably live here. The extinction of humanity is just a side benefit. They manipulated elections and public sentiment to allow it to occur too. Not through any high tech wizardry, just by playing on human greed and bigotry.

In the final season the heroes reveal the existence of aliens, and the globe works to defeat them the only way they can - by declaring war on climate change. Carbon emissions and livestock production is immediately slashed. The change in people's lifestyles are seen as patriotic sacrifices. Even trump voters compete in having the lowest carbon footprint.

The heroes, especially the sceptic of the pair, start to have questions. Some things still don't add up. In the final episode it's revealed that while the threat of extinction of humans by climate change is very real, the evidence it was an alien plot is not. It was created by environmentalists in a desperate last ditch effort to save the world.

"We warned people for decades. Showed them study after study. Nothing worked," the climatologist said. "They denied the evidence right in front of them. Giving them an external enemy was our last chance. We are fighting for the fate of the earth. That part is true. Does it really matter who the enemy is if the result is literally saving the world?"

The heroes now have to make a decision. They've spent years fighting to reveal the truth and see justice served for all those harmed by this plot, at great personal sacrifice. Do they reveal the truth, and risk going back to policies that doom the planet, or keep quiet?

[jackoshadows]

The Night's Watch needed leaders with the wisdom of Maester Aemon, the learning of Samwell Tarly, the courage of Qhorin Halfhand, the stubborn strength of the Old Bear, the compassion of Donal Noye. What it had instead was them. - Jon, ADwD

So, on the topic of Jon’s mentors and mentorship, I thought I would highlight what Jon’s mentors taught him and how he used that as a leader.

As a protagonist, Jon Snow is one of those characters with many mentors and father figures as he climbs that ladder to become Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch and possible future KITN. He learns from all of them - enemies and allies - what to do and what not to do. He implements what he learns from them and in some cases his mistakes stem from not using what he has learned.

Let’s start with Ned Stark, the character Jon refers to the most in terms of advice and strategic policy making. It’s from Ned that Jon has gained his understanding of the North, from how to treat with the mountain clans to his distrust of the Boltons. Jon’s chapters are peppered with ‘My father said this’ or ‘My father’s bannerman would do this’ and so on.

From studying the dead wights:

“My lord father used to tell me that a man must know his enemies. We understand little of the wights and less about the Others. We need to learn.” - Jon, ADwD

to knowing his men and their abilities to have the best man on the job.

Jon hopped down onto the ice, thanked the men on the winch, and nodded to the spearmen standing sentry. Both wore woolen hoods pulled down over their heads, so nothing could be seen of their faces but their eyes, but he knew Ty by the tangled rope of greasy black hair falling down his back and Owen by the sausage stuffed into the scabbard at his hip. He might have known them anyway, just by the way they stood. A good lord must know his men, his father had once told him and Robb, back at Winterfell. - Jon, ADwD

The Halfhand gives him similar advice on their ranging beyond the wall and their mission to find the Freefolk - ‘Know your men’. And Jon does. Jon observes and assigns jobs to his men based on what they are capable of doing despite the obvious bigotry they face from the other crows at the Wall.

It was at times like this that Jon missed Maester Aemon the most. Clydas tended to the ravens well enough, but he had not a tenth of Aemon Targaryen's knowledge or experience, and even less of his wisdom. Bowen was a good man in his way, but the wound he had taken at the Bridge of Skulls had hardened his attitudes, and the only song he ever sang now was his familiar refrain about sealing the gates. Othell Yarwyck was as stolid and unimaginative as he was taciturn, and the First Rangers seemed to die as quick as they were named. The Night's Watch has lost too many of its best men, Jon reflected, as the wagons began to move. The Old Bear, Qhorin Halfhand, Donal Noye, Jarmen Buckwell, my uncle … - Jon, ADwD

One common criticism levied against Jon Snow as a leader is that he should have just replaced his top deputies if they were not ready to listen to him or follow his orders. Replace with whom though? He had no one else. All he had were the likes of Othell, Bowen, Clydas etc.

He hires Satin as a steward and Leathers as Master-at-arms, assigns many of the castles to men and women like Iron Emmett and Morna White Mask.

Septon Cellador spoke up. "This boy Satin. It's said you mean to make him your steward and squire, in Tollett's place. My lord, the boy's a whore … a … dare I say … a painted catamite from the brothels of Oldtown."

What he was in Oldtown is none of our concern. He’s quick to learn and very clever. The other recruits started out despising him, but he won them over and made friends of them all. He’s fearless in a fight and can even read and write after a fashion. He should be capable of fetching me my meals and saddling my horse, don’t you think?” - Jon, ADwD 

"Is it true that you mean to replace Emmett with this savage Leathers as our master-at-arms? That is an office most oft reserved for knights, or rangers at the least."

"Leathers is savage," Jon agreed mildly. "I can attest to that. I've tried him in the practice yard. He's as dangerous with a stone axe as most knights are with castle-forged steel. I grant you, he is not as patient as I'd like, and some of the boys are terrified of him … but that's not all for the bad. One day they'll find themselves in a real fight, and a certain familiarity with terror will serve them well."

“He’s a wildling.” 

“He was, until he said the words. Now he is our brother. One who can teach the boys more than swordcraft. It would not hurt them to learn a few words of the Old Tongue and something of the ways of the free folk.” - Jon, ADwD

And then there is Jeor Mormont under whom Jon Snow is trained as a steward.

Life at Castle Black followed certain patterns; the mornings were for swordplay, the afternoons for work. The black brothers set new recruits to many different tasks, to learn where their skills lay. Jon cherished the rare afternoons when he was sent out with Ghost ranging at his side to bring back game for the Lord Commander's table, but for every day spent hunting, he gave a dozen to Donal Noye in the armory, spinning the whetstone while the one-armed smith sharpened axes grown dull from use, or pumping the bellows as Noye hammered out a new sword. Other times he ran messages, stood at guard, mucked out stables, fletched arrows, assisted Maester Aemon with his birds or Bowen Marsh with his counts and inventories. - Jon, AGoT

And as steward to Jeor Mormont, Jon is present when Mormont makes plans to defend the Wall.

The Old Bear unrolled a map, frowned at it, tossed it aside, opened another. He was pondering where the hammer would fall, Jon could see it. The Watch had once manned seventeen castles along the hundred leagues of the Wall, but they had been abandoned one by one as the brotherhood dwindled. Only three were now garrisoned, a fact that Mance Rayder knew as well as they did. “Ser Alliser Thorne will bring back fresh levies from King’s Landing, we can hope. If we man Greyguard from the Shadow Tower and the Long Barrow from Eastwatch …”

“Greyguard has largely collapsed. Stonedoor would serve better, if the men could be found. Icemark and Deep Lake as well, mayhaps. With daily patrols along the battlements between.” - Jon, ACoK

And then as Lord Commander Jon Snow implements what Jeor Mormont planned to do. This is how the author organically builds up and writes a leadership arc.

“True enough,” the small man said. “Is it just to be Icemark, then, or will m'lord be opening t'other forts as well?”

“I mean to garrison all of them, in time,” said Jon, “but for the moment, it will just be Icemark and Greyguard.” - Jon, ADWD

“The wildlings will remain upon the Wall,” Jon assured them. “Most will be housed in one of our abandoned castles.” The Watch now had garrisons at Icemark, Long Barrow, Sable Hall, Greyguard, and Deep Lake, all badly undermanned, but ten castles still stood empty and abandoned. - Jon, ADWD

Then there is Tyrion Lannister, one of Jon Snow’s first friends he makes at the Wall.

Let me give you some counsel, bastard,” Lannister said. “Never forget what you are, for surely the world will not. Make it your strength. Then it can never be your weakness. Armor yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you.” - Jon, AGoT

A piece of advice Jon never forgets. He embraces and uses his bastardy to gain Mance Rayder’s confidence and by the time we get to the end of ADwD, Jon Snow shrugs off insults easily enough considering the existential apocalyptic threat at their doorstep.

“And did you see where I was seated, Mance?” He leaned forward. “Did you see where they put the bastard?”

Mance Rayder looked at Jon’s face for a long moment. “I think we had best find you a new cloak,” the king said, holding out his hand.- Jon, ASoS

“If you mean to kill me, do it and be damned for a kinslayer. Stark and Karstark are one blood.” “My name is Snow.” “Bastard.” “Guilty. Of that, at least.” - Jon, ADwD

There’s Donal Noye who plainly and openly tells Ned Stark’s son of his privilege, which Jon acknowledges and makes right with his future friends.

Donal Noye leaned forward, into Jon's face. "Now think on this, boy. None of these others have ever had a master-at-arms until Ser Alliser. Their fathers were farmers and wagonmen and poachers, smiths and miners and oars on a trading galley. What they know of fighting they learned between decks, in the alleys of Oldtown and Lannisport, in wayside brothels and taverns on the kingsroad. They may have clacked a few sticks together before they came here, but I promise you, not one in twenty was ever rich enough to own a real sword." His look was grim. "So how do you like the taste of your victories now, Lord Snow?"

"Don't call me that!" Jon said sharply, but the force had gone out of his anger. Suddenly he felt ashamed and guilty. "I never … I didn't think …"  - Jon, AGoT

Grenn edged backward and put up his hands. “Stay away from me now, you bastard.” 

Jon smiled at him. “I’m sorry about your wrist. Robb used the same move on me once, only with a wooden blade. It hurt like seven hells, but yours must be worse. Look, if you want, I can show you how to defend that.” - Jon, AGoT

Donal Noye who puts Jon Snow in charge of the defense of the Wall:

"No," Donal Noye roared at three of the Mole's Town men, down below. "The pitch goes to the hoist, the oil up the steps, crossbow bolts to the fourth, fifth, and sixth landings, spears to first and second. Stack the lard under the stair, yes, there, behind the planks. The casks of meat are for the barricade. Now, you poxy plow pushers, NOW!" He has a lord's voice, Jon thought. His father had always said that in battle a captain's lungs were as important as his sword arm.

More than ten stepped forward, and the smith picked his four. "Jon, you have the Wall till I return."For a moment Jon thought he had misheard. It had sounded as if Noye were leaving him in command. "My lord?"

"Lord? I'm a blacksmith. I said, the Wall is yours." - Jon, ASoS

Then there is Maester Aemon and his advice and guidance to Jon Snow about making the tough, unpopular choices as a leader. Something that Jon follows by actively pushing through his decisions despite facing opposition at every level. From sending the paper shields to getting the men to listen to him:

Fewer than a dozen shields remained, sad grey things with faded paint and long cracks in the wood. But fresh torches burned in the iron sconces along the walls, and Jon had ordered benches and tables brought in. Men with comfortable seats were more inclined to listen, Maester Aemon had once told him; standing men were more inclined to shout. - Jon, ADwD

Mance Rayder is very important with respect to Jon’s arc of being a leader to the Freefolk. It’s from Mance that Jon understands how to get the loyalty of these people, how to interact with them, how to get them to follow orders.

"Free folk don’t follow names, or little cloth animals sewn on a tunic,” the King-Beyond-the-Wall had told him. “They won’t dance for coins, they don’t care how you style yourself or what that chain of office means or who your grandsire was. They follow strength. They follow the man.” - Jon, ADwD

We see the value Jon has for Mance’s experience and leadership in how he keeps advising Stannis to use Mance instead of executing him as a deserter of the NW and in his understanding of the Freefolk

"Mance knows the haunted forest better than any ranger," Jon had told King Stannis, in his final effort to convince His Grace that the King-Beyond-the-Wall would be of more use to them alive than dead. "He knows Tormund Giantsbane. He has fought the Others. And he had the Horn of Joramun and did not blow it. He did not bring down the Wall when he could have." - Jon, ADwD

It is too cold for this mummer's show, thought Jon. "The free folk despise kneelers," he had warned Stannis. "Let them keep their pride, and they will love you better."  - Jon, ADwD

While Stannis Baratheon and Jon Snow end up butting heads over strategy, there is begrudging respect for each other on both sides. It’s Stannis who first agrees to let the Freefolk this side of the Wall and Jon later builds on what Stannis sets in motion.

No, thought Jon. You closed that door. Longclaw descended. “Can I have his boots?” asked Owen the Oaf, as Janos Slynt’s head went rolling across the muddy ground. “They’re almost new, those boots. Lined with fur.” Jon glanced back at Stannis. For an instant their eyes met. Then the king nodded and went back inside his tower.- Jon, ADwD

Jon going from mocking Sam’s love for books to appreciating his learning and wisdom makes Samwell the next mentor. Or more like an honorary mentor considering they are around the same age, help and learn from each other. From both Maester Aemon and Samwell Tarly, Jon appreciates the useful knowledge obtained from old books.

Books covered his table, tall stacks of them. He’d fetched them up himself, after spending half the night searching through dusty vaults by lantern light. Sam was right, the books desperately needed to be sorted, listed, and put in order, - Jon, ADwD

We will see, Jon thought, remembering the things that Sam had told him, the things he’d found in his old books. Longclaw had been forged in the fires of old Valyria, forged in dragonflame and set with spells. Dragon-steel, Sam called it. Stronger than any common steel, lighter, harder, sharper … - Jon, ADwD

Other honorary mentors include Ygritte and Arya Stark. Ygritte who teaches Jon Snow the ways of the Freefolk and who opens his eyes to the fact that the Freefolk are simply different and not to be hated.

"Maybe they were tired of fighting. Tired of barring their doors every night and wondering if Rattleshirt or someone like him would break them down to carry off their wives. Tired of having their harvests stolen, and any valuables they might have. It's easier to move beyond the reach of raiders." 

But if the Wall should fail, all the north will lie within the reach of raiders."You know nothing, Jon Snow. Daughters are taken, not wives. You're the ones who steal. You took the whole world, and built the Wall t' keep the free folk out." - Jon, ASoS

"Gerrick is the true and rightful king of the wildlings," the queen said, "descended in an unbroken male line from their great king Raymun Redbeard, whereas the usurper Mance Rayder was born of some common woman and fathered by one of your black brothers."

No, Jon might have said, Gerrick is descended from a younger brother of Raymun Redbeard. To the free folk that counted about as much as being descended from Raymun Redbeard's horse. They know nothing, Ygritte. And worse, they will not learn. - Jon, ADwD

And finally I see Arya as being the lone positive female figure in Jon Snow’s childhood, growing up Winterfell, and this is exemplified in the girls he admires, appreciates and ends up loving. Sadly, while Jon has a dozen father figures he is provided with no mother figures to help and guide him and all he has is the little girl he loves and to whom he gifts a sword. Interesting then that this little girl resembles his mother in both looks and personality.

He keeps seeing an Arya in every girl - be it his lover Ygritte or little Freefolk girls wanting to fight for him. She’s not his mentor, just someone who very much influences his outlook on women and girls in Westeros, seen in his respect for the Spearwives and trusting them with the defense of an entire castle.

“The Lannisters are proud,” Jon observed. “You’d think the royal sigil would be sufficient, but no. He makes his mother’s House equal in honor to the king’s.”

“The woman is important too!” Arya protested. - Arya, AGoT

“I will take any boy above the age of twelve who knows how to hold a spear or string a bow.

“And girls?” a girl asked. She looked as young as Arya had, the last time Jon had seen her. “Sixteen and older.” 

“You’re taking boys as young as twelve.”

“As you will. Boys and girls as young as twelve. - Jon, ADwD

Then there are his teachers in Winterfell like Rodrick Cassel and Maester Luwin. Teaching him the sword and his lessons on history, math, languages etc.

Jon Snow is essentially a character that absorbs a lot from the characters he interacts with, learns from his betters and and tries to succeed where others before him - Jeor, Mance, Stannis - failed.

[walks-the-ages]

Honestly? This article is 100% accurate to the various issues I myself have with some of the themes in the books!

You can love a story and still acknowledge its flaws, without ""canceling"" the work or the author; being aware of unintended, harmful messages in a work is an important step in critical thinking, and ensuring you're not internalizing those harmful messages, especially if they're common tropes in fantasy and scifi--

one of those common tropes the article talks about is how the Fell are, innately, intrinsically, and Evil Race with no redeeming qualites.

What are the Fell?

They are cannibals.

They are kidnappers.

They are rapists.

They only steal from other cultures, creating nothing of value on their own merit.

Their features, as one race, one drop in the bucket of the Three Worlds, are described as "distorted, savage"

Their most distinctive feature, their most defining trait, is that all of them are black.

Their groundling form being white skinned makes their "true" form being black all the more insidious, because while clearly unintended, that sends the message that they are all the more dangerous, because they are these savage, black monsters disguising themselves as harmless, beautiful white people, so they can trick their way into settlements to wipe out the innocent people in the city.

You cannot ignore how that reads to an audience who are a real life victim of these kinds of real life conspiracies, no matter how clearly unintended the parallel is -

- we are all products of our society at large, and that includes unconsciously absorbing these fears that we're exposed to every day, either directly from far right conspiracy theorists, or in media like this, where a race is purely evil because they're just Born That Way, and that slowly builds up over time as its in media, and is a subtle foundation for every real world prejudice you can think of; because if you've been told all your life growing up that people can be inherently bad based on who/what they are, then you're going to be a lot more susceptible to believing it in real world --

Do you believe all homeless people are lazy or dangerous?

Do you think people with psychosis or multiple personalities are dangerous serial killers?

Do you pass a Muslim man on the sidewalk and cross the street to avoid him?

Did you answer yes to any of the above? Or hesitate?

You know anyone that would immediately answer 'yes' to any of these questions?

THAT is why it is so important to think critically about the media we consume.

Acknowledging flaws in media does not mean you need to tear something to shreds and dance on its grave.

Mythcreants focused "on the negative" because they are a blog dedicated to reviewing and critiquing world building, and they have plenty of amazing articles where you can read more about the importance of avoiding these "evil race" tropes on their blog if you want more perspectives, especially from POC who are impacted every day by the prevalence of these tropes.

The Fell would have avoided this trope with one simple solution, and that would have been to show more pure Fell who are just normal people, horrified at what the corrupted Flights are doing in the area around the Reaches.

Consolation and her flight do not count, because she's the Raksura equivalent of an Orc/Elf Hybrid taking after their Elf parent and leading Orcs on the path to goodness by virtue of their noble, pure Elf blood being able to override the evil, tainted orc blood.

Here's the relevant quote from the article:

The Fell aren’t just a group that does bad things. The book is very clear that being evil is in their nature. They’re compared to parasites: feeding off of others and never creating anything for themselves. Except in this case, “feeding” means that they literally eat their enemies. They also constantly stink, which is about the most visceral way to signal that they’re bad. 

We’ve explained the problem with this trope before, but the short version is that when stories cast an entire species or race as evil, it reinforces real-life ideas about how certain people are inherently bad. It’s also just hard to believe. The Fell are so cartoonishly destructive that it’s difficult to see how they could have evolved that way, and I wouldn’t be surprised if we learn in later books that an evil god made them that way just because. 

On the bright side, the Fell aren’t obviously coded as people of color the way orcs often are, so in that way, they aren’t quite as bad as what Tolkien got up to.* But on the less bright side, their big evil plan is that they want to “breed” with the Raksura to produce powerful offspring. 

Oh boy. So now we have an evil species whose main goal is to rape the good guys. I know I said the Fell aren’t obviously POC coded, but that sounds an awful lot like what white supremacists say about anyone with darker skin than them. It also casts the heroes as not just trying to stop rape, but also being disgusted at the idea of any mixing between Fell and Raksura. Gotta keep the bloodlines pure, I guess! 

I saw others commenting on the "underpowered groundlings" topic and it only takes a few seconds of reviewing the races we meet in the whole series to realize -- "oh yeah. The Raksura and the Fell are not only the only shapeshifters we meet, they're also the only race who can fly under their own biological power other than the Dwei".

There's dozens of groundling races described and met, but not one of them have wings and can fly? really?

Just imagine for me, if the Three Worlds was as populated in the air as it was on the ground.

Imagine for me Moon meeting all these different fliers growing up but still not quite fitting in.

Traveling the world on the wing with these various races but becoming so lonely to interact with groundlings (or needing to rest in his groundling form and being left behind as the flock continues to migrate) as well and always unable to find a balance of the two

instinctively seeking out the dynamics of the Aeriat/Arbora without knowing what he's looking for. It makes seeing a court for the first time all the more emotional-- he finally, truely feels like he's found his people

The Raksura, clearly, are predators. But they're the only predators we meet who are "good"-- all other predator races are demonized as cannibal savages who can't interact with normal groundling society because they might eat the other races (including Raksura) and thus are relegated to slums and the outskirts of settlements.

I love the Books of the Raksura, so much so that I am planning on writing my own novel inspired by them (much like how Murderbot was inspired by Imperial Radch), and my deep love of the series is also what drives me to be aware of its flaws.

The writer of the article is not "rageposting"-- they're giving a well-thought out, analytical response to the first book about which tropes they spotted that made them uncomfortable, because spotting these tropes is literally part of their job.

Consorts can be taken against their will, Consorts can be Stolen like a piece of meat, instead of kidnapped like a person because in Raksuran society, Consorts are there to look pretty, be trophy husbands, and make babies; outside of Moon, (who wants to take action and be in the thick of things instead of sitting safe and sound at home) and Shade, who is afraid to have kids (because his evil tainted corrupted Fell blood would automatically mean his kids are going to be evil and tainted and corrupted by their Evil Heritage) --

-- outside of these two outliers, we never see any young Consorts who are dissatisfied at their lot in life, which has been decided for them since the day they were born purely based on their gender.

Chime is literally forced away from his friends and family, shamed and disparaged, (they don't even let him help pitch a tent!) because suddenly he's a warrior and thus lesser, incompetent, lazy, because the Warriors supposedly exist to physically protect the Colony, but we only ever see them acting like immature children who have to be rescued by Jade or Moon in most of the combat situations we see them in, and they're looked down on as lazy and childish by both the Royal Aeriat as well as the Arbora, who despite living with these people their entire lives and hundreds of generations previously are still out here genuinely believing that the Aeriat are lazy instead of realizing there's an actual, physical reason that the Aeriat need to sleep more.

Only female Warriors are ever allowed to be calm, collected, and capable of holding responsibilities, wheras males are seen as either childish, incompetent, or overaggressive

The Raksura dynamics between genders and castes are the inverse of the usual fantasy dynamics of sexism, constantly calling for women to be quiet and demure and passive, only good for making babies and being married off to form alliances -- while inversing the trope is fine and dandy, the fact that no one outside Moon ever seriously questions or outright bucks these sexist expectations for them speaks volumes; it's less that the Raksuran society is flawed, and more like those flaws are never confronted and are actively shown to be good and natural .

Even the fact that Indigo Cloud got it's name from a Stolen Consort (Cloud), which deeply freaks Moon out (you know, like it should) was retconned into a simple romance story where the equivalent of a woman in an unhappy marriage runs away with a handsome hunk who doesn't care about the political consequences of their union as long as it makes the woman happy-- and even before the characters knew the actual facts of Indigo and Cloud being a consensual Stealing, everyone was dismissive of Moon's disturbed and apprehensive reaction, dismissing his misgivings and fears as being unfounded.

There's more I can say about the issues I have with the Books of the Raksura, but I've already lingered over this post for like 2 hours now and don't want Reddit to eat it lol.

TL;DR: acknowledging flaws and harmful messages in your favorite media does not mean you hate it, acknowledging flaws in writing is an important part of critical thinking and media analysis. You can acknowledge the flaws/iffy themes in the media you love and still *love* it

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Can you talk about Gladue Reports for Native criminals? I was SA'd as a child by a Native man and I remember his lawyer reading a Gladue Report for him during sentencing and it felt like such a slap in the face to me, because it basically excused everything he did to me without him actually having to take responsibility. That's just my opinion though, would love to hear yours.

To be honest, I had to look it up as I'd not encountered the term before. And I agree with you, the whole thing is repugnant.

Essentially, a Gladue Report is the opposite of a victim impact statement. Instead of a victim describing how the crime has impacted their life, it's the perpetrator saying why what they did is somehow mitigated by the fact they're native/indigenous/first peoples.

What this says is, this group of people over here can't be expected to behave according to the norms of the society in which they live and were born into, so we should lower our standards and stop expecting them to. It's the bigotry of low expectations.

That somehow the sexual assault this man perpetrated against you is lessened or less of a crime because the man who did it is indigenous/native/whatever we're calling it now. He's less in control of and responsible for his own actions and less able to learn to behave right.

Imagine being able to say, I'm of Slavic descent and my ancestors were enslaved throughout the Middle East, therefore when I murder someone it's less of a crime because history or something. Or, many of the first Europeans in Australia were convicts who were shipped out having committed only minor crimes in Britain, so a descendant of those people gets a lighter sentence because history and deportation and shit.

Ridiculous.

In looking into this, I went down a bit of a rabbit hole regarding indigenous violence. As I've mentioned before, there's a myth that native people were peaceful and coexisted with each other and nature until the evil settlers arrived. Except this isn't true. Natives made alliances with settlers in many cases, in order to gain access to the weapons to exterminate their enemies. (They really needed Starfleet's rules around the Prime Directive, First Contact and not granting access to alien technology back then.)

In many communities with a high percentage of native people with tribal backgrounds, violence occurs at a higher rate per capita than other communities/populations. And this is across multiple countries: USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and so on. Tribal customs of retaliation or score-settling are common. But nobody wants to talk about or address this because racism, colonialism, white guilt, something, something, something.

And yet, the existence of Gladue Reports at all is covertly an admission of this reality.

Lower violence is actually associated with strong centralized government, where violent deaths occur in the low single digit percentages... at their worst. Which is the absolute lower band of tribal societies and only goes up from there.

Bringing it back to the point, the legal system said to you, what you went through is less serious or less of a crime because of who he is.

In essence, it's like saying that he owes you $1,000 for what he did to you.... but you owe him $500 because of something he didn't experience that you didn't do, so he only owes you $500 and then you're even.

Or, more insidiously, that society owes him some proportion of a sexual assault, and disturbingly, you're the one to pay him the reparations he's owed.

Ridiculous, racist and utterly immoral.