#to be bigoted to me and my ethnic group

[melancholic-pigeon]

Ahead of Irish-American history month, I'd like to make a request.

Can we please try to avoid repeating stereotypes about ethnically Irish people being uniquely savage, brutish, stupid, backwards and violent towards others ethnicities on the basis of them being ethnically Irish?

I would also like to request that we do not joke about priests committing child sexual abuse, throw around slurs, or characterize The Troubles as savage, brutish, backwards, violent Irish people trying to expunge other ethnicities from Ireland.

Thanks.

[thewingedwolf]

i hate the way people will say the most out of pocket nonsense about Latinos in the US and then act surprised when people say they’ve got some racism issues. “oh if it weren’t for the fact that people in the USA hate everyone with ancestry from Latin America, lock Latino children in cages even under democratic presidents, and regularly hop on tv to call all Latinos evil rapists and murderers, they’d all be considered white” yeah no SHIT if literally every aspect of how Latinos in the US are racialized was different, they would be racially categorized in a different way, that is a very intelligent thing to say about race relations and doesn’t at all exacerbate issues thanks you are so wise and educated and learned

[ursie]

Brennan’s statement on Palestine :

[ ID: Statement from Brennan Lee Mulligan, on Instagram. It consists of three black squares with plain white text. The text reads as follows:

"I'm calling on my government officials to immediately demand a ceasefire and de-escalation in Gaza.

I applaud anyone and everyone calling for peace, with the understanding that real peace only exists if it deeply and honestly accounts for and fully ends violence in all its forms. Real peace addresses and corrects wrong-doing in the past and guards against it in the future. It goes hand in hand with justice and requires truth, restoration, reconciliation, reparation.

Peace cannot co-exist with collective punishment, ethnic cleansing and forced displacement. It cannot co-exist with blockades, embargoes, or with 2.2 million people, half of which are children, trapped with no hope of escape or political recourse. it cannot co-exist with murdered journalists, bombed hospitals, or years of protesters being shot and killed at the border. it cannot co-exist with illegal settlements, segregated roads, and the silent, imperial chill that settles over the gaps in the violence - the unspoken geopolitical consensus that a group of people need to unflinchingly accept permanent subjugation and occupation.

My hear breaks for every Israeli person who lost loved ones during the attacks of October 7th. It breaks for every Ukrainian person who has lost their loved ones. It breaks for every Congolese person who has lost their loved ones. I do not speak on behalf of Palestinians now because some lives are worth more than others. I speak on their behalf because I, and all Americans, have a responsibility to pressure our government because we are responsible for this. Some have said that this situation is complicated. The Unites States government clearly disagrees. It has definitively, categorically, militarily chosen a side, and I do not agree with that decision.

In wiring this, I have been wrestling with what I am sure many people like me wrestle with: There is a powerful narrative surrounding violence in the Middle East that asserts and ever-moving goalpost of self-education and study in order to even be qualified to have an opinion. As someone with a love of research, I have at times in my life fallen into the trap that I am not educated enough clever enough, or aware enough to have a worthwhile perspective, and that three more articles and two more lectures and one more book will do the trick. Unfortunately, democracy doesn't work that way - we, the citizens of any democracy, cannot possibly be experts on every aspect of the policies of our governments, and yet if we do not constantly weigh in an make our voices heard, the entire experiment falls apart. Not only do people constantly doubt themselves and the things they can see with their own two eyes, but old shortcuts for political action can fall apart as well: This specific issue exists along a raw, charged and unique faultline in American Politics. Nobody I grew up with has ever challenged me on my support for abortion rights, LGBT rights, Black Lives Matter, anti-capitalism, anti-fascism, none of it. The people in my country who would despise me for those positions are, for all intents and purposes, strangers to me. But there are people who I've broken bread with and shared honest affection with who will see the words I've written here and incorrectly conclude that I do not wish for the security, dignity and happiness of them and their loved ones, and that breaks my fucking heart. Full-throatedly condemning the actions of the Israeli government while battling rampant anti-semitism at home is an urgent moral necessity, and doing so is made unnecessarily challenging for the average person to navigate by the pointed obfuscations of cynical opportunists, bigots, and demagogues on all sides of the political spectrum who see some advantage in sowing that incredibly dangerous confusion.

So, I'm calling my representatives. I'm having hard conversations with friends and family. I'm here, talking to you. I should have done it sooner. If you're Israeli and hurt by this statement, know that I want freedom, dignity, security and peace for you, and that every ounce of my political awareness believes whole-heartedly that the actions of your government are not only destroying innocent lives, but doing so to the detriment of you and your loved ones' safety. If you're American and feel lost and confused - I understand and empathize. This, the whole country, only works when we get involved. I am constantly haunted by the specter that maybe I missed some crucial piece of information on this, or any, important world event. I'll just have to make my peace with that self-doubt and trust my gut by going with Jewish Voice for Peace, Amnesty International, the Geneva Conventions, the United Nations, etc. And if you're Palestinian and reading this: I unreservedly support your right to life, to freedom, to happiness and human flourishing, to full enfranchisement and equal rights, to opportunity, prosperity and abundance, to the restoration of stolen property and land, and to a Free Palestine." End ID ]

[objection-u-a-bitch]

I seen you post about me hating.

I just like to say that I agree with it partialy.

Trans men are men, and disabeld men are men just like ableld bodied men (this includs trans men). But unlike cis, and ablebodid men, trans men and disabeld men are much more safer for women to be around. Trans men were treated like girls growing up, so they know what it's like, and we don't need to explain how we are viewed socialy. And we don't have to be sceard of disabeld men become they can't really hurt us the same way as able bodied men can. Like a man in a wheelcheir can't kill us with his own hands dou to phisical restriction he has.

And I still be sceard of Jewish, black, asian, ect, men because they are men. Like if I'm alone at night going home from work then I will be sceard of any men regardless of his religion, ethnicity (exept Russian, if you see a Russian no metter the genders they are defenetly up to no good), or race I will be sceard the same way.

And fat men are a mix bag. They are eather sweat guys who strougles with self esteem issues and deservs support, or a raging misogenist who hates on fat women.

I don't know what post I made that you think is about you. The post about needing to unlearn misandry to be an ally that is pinned to my account is directed at everyone in leftist circles, and not because of a singular post I saw anywhere. I made it over two months ago with regards to general frustrations I have with anti-masculinity in the queer community in particular, but also in other leftist circles. It's funny though that you saw that post and thought it was about you. I don't even know who you are. And you clearly aren't telling me, because you're on anon. I'm not going to spend the time telling you why all of your ask is horseshit. It just is. You treat minority groups like a monolith and use it to justify being scared and bigoted towards men of all kinds. You treat all trans and disabled men as nonthreatening, which is infantilising, while saying all Russians are dangerous, which is some McCarthyist Cold War red scare bullshit. You talk about fat men as if only the "good ones" deserve support. Men constitute approximately 50 percent of the world population. To hate, fear, dismiss, avoid, ignore, and insult them is incongruent with leftist ideas of making the world a better place for everyone. Men are as varied and complex as women. They can be as gentle or as aggressive as women can be. They can be as harmless or as dangerous as women can be. They can be as forward-thinking or as close-minded as women can be.

You can't treat men as a monolith, and you also can't divide men into neat little groups that you sort into "good" and "bad". Every person is an individual who can choose to do good or do bad. Some of the white able-bodied cishet men in my life are the most supportive and kind people I know, and I know some fucking vile disabled trans men who need to shut the fuck up.

Taking precautions for your safety at night is reasonable, just like putting your seatbelt on in the car is reasonable, just like putting a smoke and carbon monoxide detector on every floor of your house is reasonable. Treating all men like shit because a few of them could be bad is not.

[thatshirleylee]

brennan's statement on instagram

I'm calling on my government officials to immediately demand a ceasefire and de-escalation in Gaza.

I applaud anyone and everyone calling for peace, with the understanding that real peace only exists if it deeply and honestly accounts for and fully ends violence in all its forms. Real peace addresses and corrects wrong-doing in the past and guards against it in the future. It goes hand in hand with justice and requires truth, restoration, reconciliation, reparation.

Peace cannot co-exist with collective punishment, ethnic cleansing and forced displacement. It cannot co-exist with blockades, embargoes, or with 2.2 million people, half of which are children, trapped with no hope of escape or political recourse. It cannot co-exist with murdered journalists, bombed hospitals, or years of protesters being shot and killed at the border. It cannot co-exist with illegal settlements segregated roads, and the silent, imperial chill that settles over the gaps in the yiolence - the unspoken geopolitical consensus that a group of people need to unflinchingly accept permanent subjugation and occupation.

My heart breaks for every Israeli person who lost loved ones during the attacks of October 7th. It breaks for every Ukrainian person who has lost their loved ones. It breaks for every Congolese person who has lost their loved ones. I do not speak on behalf of Palestinians now because some lives are worth more than others. I speak on their behalf because, as an American, my government is actively championing and financially funding their mass slaughter and forced displacement.I speak on their behalf because l, and all Americans, have a responsibility to pressure our government because we are responsible for this. Some have said that this situation is complicated. The United States government clearly disagrees. It has definitively, categorically, militarily chosen a side, and I do not agree with that decision.

In writing this, I have been wrestling with what I am sure many people like me wrestle with: There is a powerful narrative surrounding violence in the Middle East that asserts an ever-moving goalpost of self-education and study in order to even be qualified to have an opinion. As someone with a love of research, I have at times in my life fallen into the trap that I am not educated enough, clever enough or aware enough to have a worthwhile perspective, and that three more articles and two more lectures and one more book will do the trick. Unfortunately, democracy doesn't work that way - we, the citizens of any democracy, cannot possibly be experts on every aspect of the policies of our governments, and yet if we do not weigh in and make our voices heard, the entire experiment falls apart. Not only do people constantly doubt themselves and the things they can see with their own two eyes, but old shortcuts for political action can fall apart as well: This specific issue exists along a raw, charged and unique faultline in American politics. Nobody I grew up with has ever challenged me on my support for abortion rights, LGBT rights, Black Lives Matter, anti-capitalism, anti-fascism, none of it. The people in my country who would despise me for those positions are, for all intents and purposes, strangers to me. But there are people who l've broken bread with and shared honest affection with who will see the words l've written here and incorrectly conclude that I do not wish for the security, dignity and happiness of them and their loved ones, and that breaks my fucking heart. Full-throatedly condemning the actions of the Israeli government while battling rampant anti-semitism at home is an urgent moral necessity, and doing so is made unnecessarily challenging for the average person to navigate by the pointed obfuscations of cynical opportunists, bigots, and demagogues on all sides of the political spectrum who see some advantage in sowing that incredibly dangerous confusion.

So, I'm calling my representatives. I'm having hard conversations with friends and family. I'm here, talking to you. I should have done it sooner. If you're Israeli and hurt by this statement, know that I want freedom, dignity, security and peace for you, and that every ounce of my political awareness believes whole-heartedly that the actions of your government are not only destroying innocent lives, but doing so to the detriment of you and your loved ones' safety. If you're American and feel lost and confused - I understand and empathize. This, the whole country, only works when we get involved. I am constantly haunted by the specter that maybe I have missed some crucial piece of information on this, or any, important world event: I'Il just have to make my peace with that self-doubt and trust my gut by going with Jewish Voice for Peace, Amnesty International, the Geneva Conventions, the United Nations, etc. And if you're Palestinian and reading this: I unreservedly support your right to life, to freedom, to happiness and human flourishing, to full enfranchisement and equal rights, to opportunity, prosperity and abundance, to the restoration of stolen property and land, and to a Free Palestine.

[freakenomenon]

Just gonna put this out there.

I just don't like nimdok because he's a nazi. Point blank period. I shouldn't have to explain that but I'm going to anyway just to do it. I just. I don't feel like it's entirely my place to speak on him. Like obviously nazis didn't just kill Jewish people they did the same with a lot of minorities including black people but their inpact was the most devastating to the jews and i just 😓 don't want to disrespect that?

And I just don't feel comfortable with nimdok because unlike ellens or teds or bennys or gorristers. His can't be shoved in a box of just fictional portrayals of dark subjects that came out wrong.

like sure. Ellens portrayal may harm sexual assault victims. Of course. In that sense it effects reality. Fiction does effect reality. But nothing of ellens psychodrama actually happened. It's not a real documented rape case. It's meant to replicate something like that. Which is why it's easier for me to tackle what went wrong with it as a sexual assault victim and what they couldve done better to represent a victim of assault in a less hurtful and odd way to give a more effective outlook on victims to their audience.

But with nimdok. The holocaust. Is an actual documented attempt at genocide through the monstrous bigoted lense of a bloodthirsty sickening dictator. And thats HORRIFIC. it's just. Wrong. I don't want to mock anything like that. I don't want to draw fanart or be a fan of a character that is meant to represent a horrible perpetrator of an ethnic-religious group within history. Especially with the references to the VERY REAL DR MENGELE. it's just. Not okay. Or comfortable at all for me.

[lee-hellenic-butch]

Problematic and Bigoted Pagan Authors (and how to avoid them)

After what was pretty much a mess in a discord server I'm in over an author posting artwork containing Nazi symbols, I decided to make a post letting everyone know about certain authors and what to look out for. I will keep updating this list as I discover things!

Big thanks to @dvudushnydiaries for letting me know ab some Slavic Polytheist authors, as well as my friend Agnes for letting me know about some Irish Polytheist Authors too! <3

If you have any suggestions to add to this list, please let me know!!!

🛑 = Avoid as much as possible

⚠️ = Be very cautious around this author

Generally, here is some red flags to look out for:

Use of symbols associated with hate groups

Claims an (open culture) is closed via ethnicity, especially if these cultures or religions historically shared with other cultures.

Claims there is a "true" or "pure" version of a certain open religion.

Use of dogwhistles.

Writes historical inaccuracies, misinformation, appropriation, making up things and presenting them as fact, etc.

Refusal to take accountability for actions.

Any form of bigotry or discrimination

The list is under the cut!

Hellenic Polytheist Authors

🛑 Timothy Jay Alexander

creator of the "Pillars of Hellenismos", which have little historical basis.

Made homophobic and ableist remarks in a blog post, essentially saying that because ancient Greece did not allow same-sex marriage, that modern Hellenic Polytheists shouldn't too. In this same post he said that marriage should be for making a family, and that since LGBTQ+ people, as well as people with "physical deformities" either can not or should not have children, they cannot marry according to him.

The same ableist remarks listed above were used as reasoning as to why a disabled person shouldn't become a priest or priestess or any higher up positions due to not being in good health. This also reminds me of eugenics.

In that same blog post, referenced a group called YSEE, which is notorious for being homophobic, xenophobic, displaying nationalism among other things better explained in this post by @hellenic-reconstructionism

Books include: A Beginner’s Guide to Hellenismos - Hellenismos Today - The Gods of Reason: An Authentic Theology for Modern Hellenismos

🛑 Galina Krasskova

Numerous things have happened with this author, some of the most notable being selling "Bacchic Lives Matter" pins on Etsy during the 2020 Black Lives Matter movement protests, as well as defending a neo-nazi and fascist group, AFA, on a blog post

Some of her Hellenic Polytheist books include: Honoring the Mothers: Novenas to the Mothers of Our Gods and Heroes - Combatting the Evil Eye - Unto Herself: A Devotional Anthology for Independent Goddesses - Out of Arcadia: A Devotional Anthology in Honor of Pan - Guardian of the Road: A Devotional Anthology in Honor of Hermes

See Norse Polytheist section for her books on that.

🛑 Edward P. Butler

Supports Hindutva, which is Hindu fascism, antisemitic, as well as defends and supports Galina Krasskova.

Books include: Essays on a Polytheistic Philosophy of Religion - Essays on Hellenic Theology.

🛑 H. Jeremiah Lewis / Sannion

Neo-nazi, having nazi symbols on his blog. Also transphobic, islamophobic, and everything under the sun, really.

Books include: Ecstatic: For Dionysos - End to End - Everything Dances: Strange Spirits 3 - Gods and Mortals: New Stories of Hellenic Polytheism

Norse Polytheist Authors

🛑 Galina Krasskova

See Hellenic Polytheist section for details.

Her Norse Polytheist books include: Living Runes; Theory and Practice of Norse Divination - Northern Tradition for the Solitary Practitioner - Neolithic Shamanism; Spirit Work in the Norse Tradition

Irish Polytheist Authors

⚠️ Lora O'Brien

Has a cultish following, thier followers and even themselves bullying and publicly shaming other Irish Polytheists. Often acts negatively towards the Irish diaspora. Has taught Irish Catholic practices, which are closed.

Runs the Irish Pagan School, which has similar rhetoric.

Books include: Irish Witchcraft from an Irish Witch - A Practical Guide to Pagan Priesthood

Slavic Polytheist Authors

🛑 Patricia Woodruff

Has a cultish following, often writes wildly inaccurate information. In a recent book she had completely made up a deity whose name means "swastika". Rated her own books on Goodreads, and publicly responded to any reviews criticizing her books.

Books include: Woodruff's Guide to Slavic Deities - Roots of Slavic Magic Book 1: Slavic Deities & Their Worship

🛑 Madame Pamita

Recently had a (now-deleted) post with an artwork containing various Nazi symbols, and deleted any criticism and seemingly refused to take any accountability. In DM's had repeatedly alluded to if you didn't follow her you "didn't know anything about Slavic Polytheism". Said to be friends with Patricia Woodruff

Books include: The Book of Candle Magic, Baba Yaga's Book of Witchcraft

🛑 Dmitriy Kushnir

Writes about Rodnovery, which many Rodnovery groups in the US and other countries often have ethnonationalist and right-wing connotations and ideology.

Books include: Rodnover

⚠️ Natasha Helvin

Misconstrues Slavic culture to be Wiccan

Says witchcraft are the "universal laws of nature" and that subjects of karma and divine judgement are solely monotheistic.

Claims to be an initiated Haitian Vodou priestess, which is doubtful.

Kemetic Polytheist Authors

⚠️ E. A Wallis Budge

Inaccurate translations of texts

Books include: The Egyptian Book of the Dead (Translation)

[makerofmadness]

I don't see people talk about it as much as other kinds of intrusive thoughts and I know i really could've benefited from knowing about this sooner than just a day or two ago when I saw confirmation from others that it was a thing so let me say here:

yes, bigoted intrusive thoughts with OCD (racism, queerphobia, sexism, antisemitism, etc.) ARE a thing and you are NOT any of those things for having these thoughts forced upon you by your brain.

This stuff is absolutely fxcking awful to have (especially if you also experience thought broadcasting [a paranoid delusion that often accompanies OCD from what I've read, and that I know I have personally, that your thoughts can in some way be heard or seen by others. This can manifest in multiple ways, and I know it has done such for me. I mainly experience it as feeling that people in my general vicinity can hear/see what I'm thinking. I've also had it latch onto specific people before, even when those people aren't near me physically. Another way you may experience it is that your thoughts are being literally broadcasted in some way, like via a screen or radio. And yes, I've had this too), particularly in a world where cancel culture is so prevalent and where people are sometimes a bit too quick to accuse someone of this being these awful things... often for groups they aren't even a part of themselves and would not have the right to speak for.

I have felt incredibly embarrassed by having to experience these thoughts, sometimes even concerning groups that I am literally a part of. I've had these thoughts even against my own ethnicity from time to time. More often I have misogynistic thoughts despite being a girl. You can experience these thoughts even about groups you are a part of.

Though even if they're for groups you aren't a part of: no, having these thoughts does not mean you actually think these things. You are not a monster and if people were to try to cancel you for this then they'd be incredibly ableist since these are outside of your control. and they're outside of my control too.

I've decided it'd be good to provide a source about these so that others who have or think they may have this kind of OCD can read up on it (the only things I've found so far on them have been specifically about racist intrusive thoughts though, not much about other bigotry, if anyone can find stuff on those feel free to add):

(I'd add more but when I tried to add a second link it didn't display the way the first one did)

And for a final note, particularly for people without OCD:

I had my thoughts worsen a lot after someone pretty much accused me of being racist over something that in hindsight was kinda stupid (and that I would later realize due to another incident that it wasn't race-related at all to begin with). Please be careful with when you insinuate or accuse someone of being racist, don't throw those things around, you can severely harm someone mentally. If you're not part of the group it concerns, maybe ask someone of that group first before you speak on them.

[beesmygod]

listen: when given criticism like "there are no (example minority) in the cast" it isn't (or shouldn't be) a direction to put one in. wait this turned into a more complex thought because i think sometimes people do not make this kind of observation in good faith bc it can be an easy cheap shot where there's almost never a "good response". its like the classic "have you stopped beating your wife" gotcha. no matter how you answer, you do risk looking like a backwards dummy with no spine. it's also possible only i feel like this due to complex "what am i and who am i failing" issues when it comes to my ethnicity.

imo, the point of that observation should not be "and therefore, you are a bigot", but "what kind of world/social group/culture doesn't include/has very few (example minority)?" is it reasonable? is it purposeful? sometimes it's a culture that was historically exclusive to (minority) and the impact of this is still rippling into today. this is the most reasonable explanation for me in most instances where a cast is not very diverse.

using the example du jour, i have a hard time believing that the entire greek pantheon OR a collective of rich individuals would be comprised of individuals who all have the exact same inoffensive, bland taste with absolutely no variation. even if a group of wealthy individuals would be, statistically, almost entirely homogeneous in race, gender and sexuality, there should be vast differences in the tastes, aesthetics and the priorities when examining breakdowns between those of generational wealth and the nouveau riche. those who gained their money through actual work and those who are trust fund babies. the older generation and the newer generation.

but there's none at all. the noticeable lack of minority diversity feels like a consequence of there being no diversity in the literal sense of the word. everyone talks the same, uses the same vocabulary and voice. there are no idiosyncrasies or weird behaviors unless they're plot relevant in which case they feel shoehorned in.

ramble ramble. this isnt for anyone but myself. maybe we can start a convo abt it. much to think about for me as well

[blvck-coffee-dad]

Time for a legit pinned/intro post? Probably...

👋🏿 So hey. Y'all can call me BN (initialism of my old Tumblr URL from about 10 years ago) or "Dad." I've been around Tumblr here and there since... 2009.

☕ Since I've been around so long, it's probably not surprising that I'm in my 40s. I've got a kid in college who I'm very proud of. It's probably unhealthy to say or think that your kid is your "reason for living," but if it wasn't, I might say that.

💻 I'm in tech for a living. Got my first job in IT when I was 19, so I've been at it for over 20 years.

🧔🏿‍♂️ The reason behind my "Black dads are the best dads" quip is because... it's true. Despite the stereotypes you might've heard regarding absentee Black fathers, recent and peer-reviewed research shows that out of all ethnic groups in America, Black fathers have the most active involvement in their children's lives, whether or not they live in the same household as their mother.

🔍 You could just scroll and see what I post here but it's mostly like... pretty scenery, coffee, pretty women, Star Trek, 80s/90s nostalgia, tech, kink, food, more coffee, personal posts, style, and of course shitposts.

🙏🏿 Believe it or not, I'm actually a pretty devout Christian. Church on Sundays, actively involved and everything. Perhaps hard to believe because I clearly don't mind posting nudity/kink things, but... Tumblr's an outlet for me, for now. I'd like to post more things about Jesus-y things, though so maybe you'll see that more often.

🏫 I'm also an undergrad student--yes, at my big ol' age. I'm working on a bachelor's degree in cybersecurity. I quickly trashed my first attempt out of high school, but I'm finally back to it. I'm hoping to graduate by October 2024 at the latest (but really shooting for April... then onto grad school, I hope). I have a sideblog for school things at @coffee-dad-studies. I might be posting more about that here soon too.

⚠️ I promise y'all.... my liking or leaving a comment on one of your posts does not mean anything more than "I liked this." 😅 Despite being a male in my 40s on Tumblr, I'm pretty normal in my interactions. I'm friendly and kind and occasionally flirty, but that's it. Nothing more.

🚫 Please leave me and my blog and my content alone if you're a bigot, an asshole, a fetishizer of Black men, or a minor. (I'm not gonna freak out if a minor likes or reblogs a wholesome text post but don't follow me.)

[thefallenangelsgang]

EDIT DOWN BELOW

I'm afraid I'm about to say something controversial but I don't say things like that often and perhaps I need a little controversy to knock me down a peg:

Katniss Everdeen's Ethnic and Racial ambiguity is important to her character.

She is at her core and everyman character. Working class, hard working, and loyal to a fault. Her ambiguity aids her in being recognizable to most.

A day doesn't go by where I don't see a post attributing a different ethnicity or race to Katniss. Native American, South Asian, Black, Mixed, etc. Personally I think of her as a wide mix of eastern European ethnicities (particularly dark Polish/Russian) because that's what I am and I come from a mining town in the smack dab of Appalachia with a massive swath of Poles and Slavs.

That's the beauty of a true everyman, they are recognizable in all of us. Suzanne knew what she was doing when she didn't specify Katniss's race or ethnicity.

EDIT: I feel like saying this now because this is getting a lot of notes very quickly. And that is scaring the hell out of me.

THIS IS NOT THE POST TO USE TO FURTHER BIGOTED TALKING POINTS

The intention of this post is to point out that Katniss doesn't belong to one single group. She could be any number of POC groups as well as white. If you are using this as a way to prove Katniss is white definitively or to further racist bullshit see my account banner: This Machine Bites Bigots Of ANY Kind. I will not have my thoughts used for anyone's hate. Especially when this post was made out of love for all the variations of Katniss's character.

Godspeed, Good Luck, Gangnem Style, and All That Jazz

Bigots eat shit <3

-Jericho

[jewish-vents]

ok so I was talking to my goyische friend who does basically agree with me on all i/p stuff, but I was talking about how if you want all israelis to die and cheer for their deaths then you want half of all jews to die and are an antisemite, and they were like "yeah that's awful and disgusting, but blah blah blah" and I was like "if someone wanted all Black americans dead are they racist?" (with the implication of, not all Black people live in america, in fact less than half the Black population of the world lives in america) and they immediately said "yes" so then I was like "ok so how is wanting half the world's jews to die not racist" and they made a sort of noise of acknowledgment about it.

I think they were trying to argue about how lefties get into antisemitism thru anger over what the israeli gov't is doing in the war, and my response to that is always just "cool motive, still bigotry." like some people are too far gone to care, but maybe there are some goyim out there who if someone had them step back and reiterated very slowly and clearly that if they hate israeli citizens, then they hate half the world's jews, and they are an antisemite, maybe, just maybe they might rethink things and go "gosh golly gee maybe you have a point there" idk lol man it was just annoying to have to argue that if you hate half an ethnic group and are undecided on the other half (bc most of the rest of us want israel to continue existing) then you are a jew hating bigot.

.

[is-the-fire-real]

'Reminder that "punch a nazi uwu" leftists utilize Nazi rhetoric to justify punching Jews.

It was never about punching Nazis; it was about getting social permission to punch.'

It was this very mentality that drove me away from considering myself a liberal anymore (I AM VERY MUCH LEFT LEANING, I DIDN'T DECIDE TO BECOME CONSERVATIVE JUST TO BE CLEAR. I just don't feel like those spaces have any intrinsic safety any longer). It feels like so much of western leftism has become about "punching up". I don't think it's about compassion or concern anymore, it's about finding the "right" targets. And so often that was just used as a way to excuse bigotry. I'm a goy but I noticed this on a personal level plenty with people identifying as feminists, they'd be perfectly okay saying something unquestionably sexist, as long as "white women" was attached onto the front. It's very much the same with shaming people over physical features that others may have, as long as the individual person is "bad enough" it doesn't matter if wide foreheads or big noses or acne are features many people have and would feel hurt by seeing them used as an insult, because they're only "really" directing it at "one of the bad ones"

So, I'm going to link to this piece again because it's been embarrassingly useful, and explains why I say things like "pretending to believe" despite their clunkiness. For new material, I hope you don't mind that you have accidentally triggered a massive unskippable cutscene, but you tapped into a few things I have been pondering and I'd like to take advantage of your observances to add my own.

Part of what you're discussing here, which I agree with, is that toxic slacktivists pretend to believe that they are Good People Doing Good Work. They are Bad People and their work is Bad Work, but if they all get in a group and pretend together that it's Good, then that's almost the same as being Good, right?

Another worthwhile aspect of what you're discussing is something I became aware of in the aftermath of the collapse of Occupy Wall Street. One commenter on a liberal blog I still follow lamented that mass protest never seems to accomplish anything, and how the millions of people who turned out for OWS protests should have affected more political change. Considering most of them could also vote, write to representatives, etc., something other than littering and arrests could've been done.

Another commenter pointed out that he had personally been at most of the anti-Iraq War protests, including the largest worldwide protest on 15 February 2003 (6-10 million estimated participants). But most of those protesters did not agree with each other. There were at least four major coalitions of antiwar protesters showing up then and thereafter. The ones he listed were:

"Just war" advocates who believed the Iraq War was unjust.

Total pacifists who believed all armed conflicts are unjust, and therefore the Iraq War is as well.

Right-wing bigots who believed a war might potentially benefit those they thought of as religiously or ethnically inferior and subhuman.

Xenophobes, both left- and right-wing, who believed "the US can't be the police of the world" and that any action taken outside USian borders was immoral.

Imagine four people with these beliefs in a room talking about the Iraq War... then bring up the war in Ukraine to them and see how fast the coalition falls apart.

"Well, the war for Ukrainian liberation is a just war," says the just-war advocate. The pacifist starts to scream "HOW COULD YOU DEFEND ANY ACTION THAT MIGHT LEAD TO CHILDREN DYING, YOU MONSTER!". The right-wing bigot says they support the war, too--on the side of the ethnically and religiously superior Russians. And then a left-wing xenophobe says we're wasting money that should be supporting American workers and uplifting Americans out of poverty instead of buying new bombs for Ukraine.

And your "antiwar" coalition collapses, with the pacifist wandering off to agree with the xenophobe while the just-war liberal and the right-wing bigot scream at each other pointlessly and without resolution.

This is one of the wisest breakdowns of human behavior I have ever discovered:

Any coalition of people is made up of many sub-coalitions who only temporarily agree on a single aspect of a single issue. Making sure the group does not collapse prematurely is the true, unsung labor of movement maintenance.

To be real, it's much easier to let one's coalition collapse and scream about how The Menz, or The CIA, or Greedy Capitalists, or The Jews artificially forced your group's collapse than it is to admit that one might just suck a big one at coalition building. This is especially true among leftists, who are sometimes anti-hierarchy and frequently fall for populist, anti-expert nonsense. Having a leader means you're suggesting someone should have authority, and a lot of leftists are allergic to that suggestion.

Moreover, though, a lot of "leftists" are "leftists" but only agree with one or two aspects of leftism.

To use your feminism example: I have absolutely seen feminists who think they can be misogynists so long as they say "white" before they say "woman". I mean, who can even argue? I have also seen feminists who think they can be gender bioessentialists so long as they're doing it towards "men" (a category which includes a lot of people who neither look like men, nor live as men, nor benefit from male privilege). I have seen feminists who think they can call themselves "trans allies" while consistently ignoring, degrading, and dismissing the concerns of anyone who isn't a binary trans woman. Etc.

The thing is, they are all feminists. What makes someone a feminist, at bottom, is the acceptance of and opposition to patriarchy. That's it. It's similar to how what makes a person a Protestant Christian is the acceptance of Jesus as their Lord and Savior--you might need to do one or two things to be considered a part of a specific branch of Christianity, but all you need is that one specific belief about that one specific idea. There's a lot of bunk about how "you can't be a REAL Christian unless you do X" just like there's bunk about how "you can't be a REAL feminist unless you do Y", and it's all bunk.

There are people who might be really bad feminists or Christians, but that's not the same as not being feminists or Christians.

So, the coalition of leftism has several sub-coalitions who actually despise each other. Here is my proposal for the sub-coalitions. (Please keep in mind that I am not defining groups by how they define themselves, but by the far more useful metric of their actions.)

Liberals who agree with leftist economic thought, but strongly disagree with leftist conclusions regarding violent revolution. Liberals do not have time for online arguments and superficial action. They are generally participating in protests, running for office, writing postcards to advocate for candidates, informing voters, and working within the system for positive change that alleviates suffering. They are pro-expert but opposed to a vanguard party due to its inherent authoritarianism.

Tankies, whose primary interest in leftism is authoritarian. They oppose capitalism and support violent revolution because they imagine themselves as the vanguard party who gets to control everything when the revolution comes.

Anarchists, whose primary interest is opposing hierarchy. They want to burn down the system because it is a system, and frequently become angry and defensive if you try to ask them any questions about what would be built out of the ashes.

Progressives, whose primary interest is opposing liberals. They also oppose capitalism; they are, like tankies, positioning themselves as the vanguard party because they are already in political power. What makes them Not Tankies is that they care more about sticking it to "the Dems" than they do about actually being the vanguard, opposing capitalism, or achieving anything of worth or meaning politically.

"Red fash", who used to be called "beefsteak Nazis". They say all the right things regarding violent revolution and economics/capitalism, but they only believe what they believe for the sake of their specific ethnic group and nation (frequently, white and USian, but this is extremely popular in Europe too). IOW a red fash wants the vanguard party to only have whites of a specific ethnicity in control of the revolution; they only want universal health care for "their" people, that sort of thing. Some red fash are actual Nazis cosplaying as leftists, but some are just really, really, REALLY bigoted leftists.

Whether we like it or note, the acceptance of armed, violent revolution as a Good Thing means that leftism has always regarded punching up and violence as a necessary component of leftist thought. This is not a perversion of Real Leftism. This is leftism. If you think revolution is good and necessary instead of a terrifying possibility, then you also think punching up is okay; it's just a matter of who is Up and who gets to punch.

Of the five sub-coalitions I described, only one has rejected violent revolution--and it's the one all the other leftists accuse of being right-wing. And interestingly enough, only liberals are habitually accused of secretly colluding with the right... when red fash are natural allies to the right, and when all other forms of leftists openly ally with right-wingers so long as they say the right things about economics. (See under: "After Hitler, us" leftists, left-wing Trumpistas who think they'll rule the ashes after Trump burns down the current system.)

And if you believe in violent revolution, then (let me be facetious for a second) what's the problem with making fun of your political enemies for being ugly? If we believe Steve Bannon is a Nazi, aren't we obligated to stop him by any means necessary, and doesn't that include mocking him for his alcoholism? Isn't mocking someone for their appearance and intrinsic characteristics mild compared to, say, threatening them with exploding cars covered with hammers? Or retweeting pictures of pitchforks and guillotines?

If we believe Ben Shapiro is an opponent to the revolution we accept is necessary and vital to the movement, then what's a little antisemitism in the name of the people? Don't we have to be bigots to oppose bigots? And--

--oh. There's that horseshoe bending round to the right again.

[ozthedm]

I love Astarion to death, I really do. He has some of the best moments in the game, and is probably my favorite of the origin companions...

Which is why I have to say as an Astarion-enjoyer that it is deeply concerning to me how his racism is brushed to the side so easily both in-game and in fandom.

And yes, he is canonically racist. I'm not going to go into his gnome comments or what early drafts of the character indicated about his past, since those are slippery slopes. But trust me, his in-game attitude towards the Gur (who are stand-ins for Roma, a real-life minority ethnic group) is enough.

"But it makes sense that he would be prejudiced against the Gur because of his backstory." Yes, it does. It's understandable, even. But that does not mean it shouldn't be called out and condemned beyond one optional line about not holding a grudge against an entire ethnic group because of his tragic backstory.

Also, it's possible he may have had this mindset even before his death. Astarion has a line indicating that, when he was a magistrate he'd made some sort of ruling against the Gur that angered some of them enough to attack him in the street.

Now to be fair, Astarion's history before Cazador is deliberately kept vague, so at a certain point this becomes conjecture. I still think this is worth mentioning because if we take his words at face value, then that goes beyond benign ignorance into the active participation of subjugating a minority group.

I want to be clear that I'm not saying Larian and Astarion fans are condoning racism. Again, I am an Astarion fan. I totally understand that saying "my blorbo is a racist" is deeply uncomfortable. I know that the idea of an amoral character is more fun than actually addressing that amorality is, in fact, bad.

But maybe that's the point of Astarion. In a choose-your-adventure game, he illustrates how easy it is to do and excuse terrible things while brushing them off as not a big deal.

It's just very weird to me that the narrative goes all in on addressing actions which Astarion had little to no control over, but hardly even acknowledges the harm he's done of his own free will. Especially when a major part of his arc is about how to move forward when you are responsible for others' suffering.

TLDR;

If a character (who isn't an antagonist) is intentionally written to be bigoted, that isn't something that should be easily glossed over by the writer or reader/viewer/player/etc.

[ruminativerabbi]

Anti-Judaism Then and Now

On Sesame Street, they used to sing a song that challenged young viewers to decide “which of these things belong together.” The idea was that the youngsters would be presented with a group of things all but one of which belonged to the same group. But the trick, of course, was that the specific nature of the group wasn’t revealed—so the young viewer had to notice that there were three vegetables on the screen and one piece of fruit, or three garden tools and a frying pan. You get the idea. All of the things belonged together but one didn’t. It wasn’t that complicated. But the tune is still stuck in my head and I don’t think I’ve heard the song in at least thirty years.

In the grown-up world, there are also all sorts of groups made up of things that are presented as “belonging together.” Some are obvious and indisputable. But others are far more iffy.

Languages, for example, are in the first category. Danish, Japanese, Laotian, and Yiddish all belong in the same group; each is an artificial code devised by a specific national or ethnic group to label the things of the world. You really can compare the Japanese word for apple with the Danish word because both really are the same thing: a sound unrelated in any organic way to the thing it denotes that a specific group of people have decided to use nonetheless to denote that thing. Languages are all codes, all artificial, and all each other’s equals. The world’s languages, therefore, really are each other’s equivalents

Other groups, not so much. Religion comes right to mind in that regard: we regularly refer to the world’s religions as each other’s equivalents, but is that really so? In what sense, truly, is Judaism the Jewish version of Hinduism or Buddhism? Is Chanukah the Jewish Christmas? Is the New Testament the Christian version of the Koran in the same sense that the Danish word for cherry is the Danish version of the French word for that same thing? You see what I mean: the notion that the religions of the world are each other’s equivalents hardly makes any sense at all.

But what about prejudices of various sorts? Are racism and homophobia each other’s equivalents, distinguished only by the target of the bigot’s irrational dislike? Are sexism and ageism the same thing, only different with respect to the specific being discriminated against? And where does anti-Semitism, with its weird medial capital letter and its off-base etymology (because it denotes discrimination against Jews, not other Semites), where does anti-Semitism fit in? Is it the same as other forms of discrimination, differing only with respect to the target?

I suppose my readers know why this has been on my mind lately.

Last week I wrote about that grotesque congressional hearing in which the presidents of three of America’s most prestigious institutions of higher learning, including two of the so-called Ivies, could not bring themselves to label the most extreme form of anti-Semitism there is, the version that calls not for discrimination against Jews but for their actual murder—they could not bring themselves unequivocally and unambiguously to say that that calls for genocide directed against Jews have no place on their campuses. The president of the University of Pennsylvania paid with her position for her unwillingness to condemn genocide clearly and forcefully. But hundreds and hundreds of faculty members at Harvard, perhaps the nation’s most prestigious college, spoke out forcefully in support of their president despite her unwillingness to say clearly that calling for the murder of Jews is not the kind of speech that any normal person would imagine to be protected by the First Amendment.

At a time when anti-Semitism is surging, it strikes me that treating different versions of prejudice as each other’s equivalent is probably more harmful an approach than a realistic one. That is what led to the moral fog that apparently enveloped the leaders of three of our nation’s finest academies and made them unable simply and plainly to condemn calls for genocide directed against Jewish people.

I think we should probably begin to deal with this matter in our own backyard. And to that end, I would like to recommend three books and a fourth to my readers: the three are “about” anti-Semitism (and each is remarkable in its own way) and the fourth is a novel that I’ve mentioned many times in these letters, the one that led me to understand personally what anti-Semitism actually is and how it can thrive even in the ranks of the highly civilized, educated, and cultured.

The first book is by the late Rosemary Ruether, known as a feminist and as a Catholic theologian, but also the author of Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism, published by Seabury Press in 1974 and still in print. This was not the first serious study of anti-Semitism I read—that would have been Léon Poliakoff’s four-volume work, The History of Anti-Semitism, which also had a formative effect on my adolescent self. But Ruether’s book was different: less about anti-Semitism itself and more about the way that anti-Jewish prejudice was such a basic part of the theological worldview of so many of the most formative Christian authors that the task of eliminating it from Western culture would require a repudiation of some of the basic tenets set forth by some of the most famous early Christian authors. I was stunned by her book when I read it: stunned, but also truly challenged. In think, even, that my decision to specialize in the history of the early Church as one of my sub-specialties when I completed by doctorate in ancient Judaism was a function of reading that book and needing—and wanting—to know these texts (and, through them, their authors) personally and up close. Jewish readers—or any readers—concerned about anti-Semitism could do a lot worse than to start with Ruether’s book.

And from there I’d go on to David Nirenberg’s book, Anti-Judaism: The Western Tradition, published by W.W. Norton in 2013. This too is something anyone even marginally concerned about anti-Semitism in the world should read. The book is not that long, but it is rich and exceptionally thought-provoking; its author describes his thesis clearly in one sentence, however: “Anti-Judaism should not be understood as some archaic or irrational closet in the vast edifices of Western thought,” but rather as one of the “basic tools with which that edifice was constructed.” Using detailed, thoughtful, and deliberate prose, Nirenberg lays out his argument that Western civilization rests on a foundation of anti-Judaism so deeply embedded in the Western psyche as to make it possible for people who have doctorates from Harvard to feel uncertain about condemning genocide—the ultimate anti-Semitic gesture—unequivocally and forcefully. This would be a good book too for every Jewish citizen—and for all who consider themselves allies of the Jewish people—to read and take to heart. Anti-Judaism is deeply engrained in Western culture. To eradicate it—even temporarily, let alone permanently—will require a serious realignment of Western values and beliefs. Can it be done? Other features of Western culture have fallen away over the centuries, so I suppose it can be. But how to accomplish such a feat—the best ideas will come from people who have read books like Nirenberg’s and taken them to heart.

And the final book I would like to recommend is James Carroll’s, Constantine’s Sword: The Church and the Jews, published by Mariner Books in 2001. The author, a former Roman Catholic priest, makes a compelling argument that the roots of anti-Semitism are to be found in the basic Christian belief that the redemption of the world will follow the conversion of the world’s Jews to Christianity. I was surprised when I read the book by a lot of things, but not least how convincingly the author presses his argument that the belief that the redemption of the world is being impeded by the phenomenon of stubborn Jews refusing to abandon Judaism is the soil in which all Western anti-Semitism is rooted. It’s an easier book to read than either Ruether’s or Nirenberg’s—written more for a lay audience and clearly intended by its author to be a bestseller, which it indeed became—but no less an interesting and enlightening one.

So that is my counsel for American Jews feeling uncertain how to respond to this surge of anti-Semitic incidents on our nation’s streets and particularly on the campuses of even our most prestigious universities. Read these books. Learn the history that is, even today, legitimizing anti-Jewish sentiments even among people who themselves are not sufficiently educated to understand what is motivating their feelings about Jews and about Judaism. None of these reads will be especially pleasant. But all will be stirring and inspiring. And from understanding will come, perhaps, a path forward. Any physician will tell you that even the greatest doctor has to know what’s wrong with a patient before attempting to initiate the healing process. Perhaps that is what is needed now: not rallies or White House dinners (or not just those things), but a slow, painstaking analysis of where this all is coming from and an equally well-thought-out plan for combatting anti-Jewish prejudice rooted in the nature of the beast we would all like to see fenced in, tamed, and then ultimately slain.

And the novel? My go-to piece of Jewish literature, André Schwarz-Bart’s The Last of the Just, was published in Stephen Becker’s English translation by Athenaeum in 1960, just one year after the publication of the French original. A novel that spans a full millennium, the book traces the history of a single Jewish family, the Levys, and tells the specific story of the individual member of the family in each generation who serves as one of the thirty-six just people for whose sake the world exists. (The book begins in eleventh century England and ends at Auschwitz, where the last of the just perishes.) I read the book when I was a boy and have returned to it a dozen times over the years. No book that I can think of explains anti-Semitism from the inside—from within the bosom of a Jewish family that is defined by the prejudice directed against it—more intensely, more movingly, or more devastatingly. This is definitely not a book for children. I was probably too young to encounter such a book when I did, but it is also true that, more than anything else, it was that book that set me on the path that I followed into adulthood. (And that is probably just as true spiritually and emotionally, as it is professionally.) I was too young, perhaps, to process the story correctly. But when I was done reading even that first time as a sixteen-year-old, I knew what path I wished to follow. The Last of the Just is not a book I would exactly characterize as enjoyable reading. But it is riveting, challenging, and galvanizing. To face the future with courage and resolve, the American Jewish community needs to look far back into the past so as to understand the challenges it now faces. And then, armed with that knowledge, to find a path forward into a brighter and better world.

[machiavellli]

https://x.com/heccinbork/status/1811222183500255666

^^^ Ignorant people like THAT original poster who says stuff like that makes me so mad. Especially when those same people ignore the atrocities that the Sith caused. Anyways, the Jedi are GOOD, and that show is very poorly written and pandered to the haters like that original poster.

girl that scene was so out of any Star Wars physics and logic. I can’t comprehend to save my life HOW stuff like this gets accepted when it comes to create new products. It’s almost as if the new Star Wars directory’s completely lost sight of the actual Star Wars lore and what George Lucas meant. Perhaps because they don’t actually put that much of an effort anymore, since from what I came to understand they are shifting in MCU mode™️ , dropping products like it’s nothing. Because you know: quality has never been a synonym of speed. Anyway, they make money with all of this and they know, doesn’t matter how much we get pissed.

It’s just that it is so astonishing to me how willing they are to make the Jedis, a group of people that suffered a GENOCIDE, look bad.

Why are they using the narrative of the empire/siths, the guys literally based off the nazis, for justifying the mass massacre of the Jedis? Don’t they hear themself? Why are they going full nazi? The sith isn’t some cool edgy goth club. They are straight up villains. Then yes, there are some more prone to evil than others, but still. There is good and bad, very evidently so too (as Lucas intended for the Star Wars universe to be).

Using Palpatine’s narrative, arguably one of the most, if not the most, evil character in the whole franchise to justify violence against an ethnical group of people is…an interesting choice of direction, to say the least.

The Jedi were set up for their failure: it was never their fault. You can make them look as bad as you may want, but what happened to them was simply atrocious.

I want to live in delusions and I want to think that this show will end as someone wrote here on tumblr (sorry I forgot who): with all of this being a story told from Palpatine’s prospective. Otherwise this show, the writers in particular, failed for me.

I wanted to like the Acolyte, I thought it had a great cast and a VERY interesting story to tell…like THIS IS THE HIGH REPUBLIC CMON!! I have been waiting for this for SOOO long. But perhaps I’ll never learn: certain things aren’t made to be put on a screen. I was sad over the misrepresentation of Thrawn in Ahsoka and now the one of Jedi’s here. Star Wars do better pls. (This goes beyond this show’s narrative, I’m talking about the quality in any aspect, such as the writing, the stenography, the costumes,…).

Like I’m sorry, but the hot sith can distract me just for so long, but it isn’t enough to save a show. Nice try tho, Manny and that beach scenes was the best part without a doubt.

Last but not least…YES. Like it has become impossible to criticise on this show openly because you get immediately associated with racist bigots. I just want the jedi to have their good representation and for Star Wars to have good stories. I just want the best for anyone and I despise the people doing hate on the cast. They are just ignorants who don’t care about the franchise.

Let’s hope for the best. Mh.