#who is automatically considered the aggressor and who isn’t

[the-descolada]

It’s very hard to reconcile memories of someone being a positive presence in your life when the downturn was so sudden. One second I had a friend whose love for me I thought was genuine and trusting and then that fell apart so quickly and completely I had no idea it was even happening before it was too late bc of irrational fears inside their head I couldn’t have foreseen or even known about and all of that fell on me and their anxiety became a justification to treat me so fucking badly and I just couldn’t handle that bc I’m only human

[diymechanic]

7 Ways to Attack-Proof Your Home

The typical home isn't anywhere near as safe and secure as we 'd like to believe. All it does is to help keep honest individuals honest-- not keep the dishonest out. The problem is that the majority of home security steps do not consider an identified attack by armed opponents. All they do is keep out individuals who desire to silently slip into your house.

Taking some steps to secure your home is a wise choice. The right security measures will keep your home and your possessions safe from break-ins. These security measures may include things like window security films, plant hedges, and padlocks on the garage door.

7 Ways to Attack-Proof Your Home

The most typical entry points for aggressors and bad guys are the first floor windows and doors. To make the house more safe and secure, begin by making all entryways more powerful. Here are 7 ways you should do to give you safety at home and make your own home more attack-proof.

Replace Hinge Screws

Keeping your hinges well-maintained can help keep your home safe. Door and frame hinges can be subject to wear and tear and may require replacement. If you are unsure of your hinge model, you can check this out.

Some hinges are made of two sections that are joined by a hinge pin. This pin is usually removable and can be driven out with a screwdriver. However, higher-quality hinges do not have this option. To replace a hinge pin, you may need a drill, a hole punch, and a special bit.

There are also numerous self-drilling, thread-forming screws. These screws are designed to keep your doors from splitting around locks. They can also be used to anchor your hinges to your wall stud.

Security Door Strikers

Investing in security door strikers will improve the security of your home. You don't have to spend a lot of money to increase the security of your doors. You can buy generic door guards for less than $15.

There are two main kinds of door strikers: electric and reinforced. An electric strike is an electromechanical door lock. It works with mortise locksets. When the mechanical part of the strike is activated, the lock automatically opens. Unlike a magnetic lock, the electric strike remains locked during a power outage.

Reinforced strike plates provide nearly as much security as a deadbolt lock. They can protect against force attacks, lock bumping, and key theft. They also spread the force over a larger surface area, making it harder to break off the frame.

Replace Sliding Glass Doors

Having sliding glass doors is not only beautiful, it can also make your home more appealing. In addition, they can provide additional visibility into your home and increase the amount of natural light. However, these doors are also vulnerable to attack. Whether you have sliding glass doors or a front door, you should ensure they're secure.

The most common place to install sliding glass doors is the back of a home. These entrances are usually unlit, making them easy access points for thieves. Sliding glass doors can also be damaged by high winds, which can damage your property and cause water damage.

When you install sliding glass doors, you should use a strong lock. There are many types of locks to choose from. The key to choosing a good lock is to select one that is both strong and flexible. This will prevent your door from falling off the track.

Window Security Bars

Having window security bars installed on your home can help you protect your home from criminals. They can provide protection in many situations and are relatively cheap. However, it's important to know what you're getting into before you invest in one. There are many types of window bars available, so it's important to select one that's right for your needs.

A good window security bar is designed to withstand significant force. They are also durable and have a long-lasting finish. They can be installed easily by you or by a professional.

There are many options available, including movable, hinged, and fixed security bars. The movable type is generally installed at night and is usually removed during the day. The hinged type is designed to provide a secure exit route in case of an emergency.

Window Security Film

Having security window film installed on your windows can reduce the risk of break-ins. It can also protect against vandalism, natural disasters, and other hazards. By preventing glass from shattering, you can also reduce the risk of injury from flying glass.

There are several different types of security film available on the market today. Some are more opaque, while others are more transparent. These films can also reduce the damage caused by UV rays and provide privacy. The film can be purchased with integrated tinting, which blocks the sun's direct rays and keeps warm air inside your home during winter. These films can also reduce energy costs.

One of the biggest benefits of security window film is that it can increase the strength of your glass. The stronger the glass, the more likely it is that an intruder will be unable to break through it. This also allows more time for a person to escape from the house.

Padlock the Garage Door

Using a padlock on your garage door to secure your property is a good idea. Not only will it deter burglars from breaking into your home, it will also help to protect your valuables from theft.

There are a number of ways to do this. If you have an attached garage, you should consider all the security options available. The best way to protect your property is to get good insurance coverage. But if you're on a budget, it may be worth the effort to securing your door to keep thieves out.

The most important thing to do is to lock your garage door as soon as you leave. If you're a frequent traveler, consider using a throw latch that can be padlocked from a distance.

Plant Hedges

Whether you are in the market for a tall or narrow hedge, there are a few important considerations that you need to make when selecting a plant. There are a variety of plants that are not only attractive but also very deer-resistant. These hedges are a great investment for your home.

When purchasing a plant, make sure you look for one that is native to the area. These plants are best suited for a living hedge, but they can also be used as a privacy barrier.

There are many plants available for hedging that can be used in combination with each other. The curved-leaf privet is a good option for a hedge. Its twisted leaves add color to the hedge year-round.

The Japanese privet is another good choice for a hedge. It is a fast-growing plant that can reach a height of up to five meters. It has an attractive dark green foliage. It is often used as a windbreak on country properties. It is a dense hedge that can be trimmed into a variety of sizes.

Conclusion

To effectively protect your house, you need to stop considering keeping a cat burglar out and begin considering how to combat off a mad mob. The intruder will most likely do whatever they can to get in without attracting attention, whereas a mob of 10 starving individuals will not appreciate attracting attention. They will take actions that the cat burglar would never ever think about trying.

With that in mind, secure your house by making it hard enough to break within to prevent them and to give you time to respond. Even a minute will give you enough time to get your guns and be ready to fend off boarders. You'll be able to prevent them much more efficiently than your locked door when you're prepared.

[aureutr]

What’s going on in the dinluke fandom? I heard about people being upset about Luke being feminine in the pairing and… chopped it up to “oh, just curate what content you see-“ but I keep seeing people bring up racism and xenophobia and I’m so lost… it’s like I log out for a day or two and the world explodes

Oh, anon. You don’t even want to know. Just pick out the people you want to follow and block the others (even if I’m one of them). But I’ll try to sum up the issue as fairly as I can, though I have my own opinions and this will hardly be unbiased.

And I’ll also say up top that, if y’all don’t want to listen to what I have to say (I guess understandable because I’m One of the Bads, apparently), then at least read this post (not mine) about fandom in general. There are so many babies being thrown out right now.

First, a tl;dr, with admittedly less “fairness” than I’ll expand upon later because I’m mixing opinions in here

Some people think that Pedro Pascal being Latine/Latinx automatically makes him a person of color despite him being very white and also vocally identifying as such

Some people feel that this makes any “bad guy” alternate interpretations of Din Djarin inherently racist

Some people think that tagging is poorly done or purposefully ignored to “trick” people into reading content they are uncomfortable with

Some people feel that Luke being the common fandom bottom and sometimes being depicted in dresses or other gender non-conforming ways is problematic and/or feel uncomfortable with said portrayal

Some people think that the correct way to “drive away” creators whose content they dislike (or whom associate with people whose content they dislike) is to be “loud and mean” to “get rid of them”

So let’s break that down further (again, as fairly as I possibly can). I will be referring to specific people here and there, but none by name. And admittedly, I talk a lot about my own opinions and actions (though I don’t know what else I could do?). Also this is LONG.

First, a disclaimer. I’m a mod in the Star Dads Dinluke Discord server. This does NOT give me a position of authority in fandom, and the opinions stated in here are solely my own. This topic is welcome to be discussed in said server (though, admittedly, we did push the most recent Tumblr blow-up into a thread so those who don’t want to engage can easily avoid it). The one thing that isn’t allowed is active disparagement of individuals.

We’ve put a lot of work into building up a community the last few months, and learned a lot of lessons from the previous Boots & Beskar server in ways to proactively manage content to make things as comfortable for as many people as possible. That’s beyond the scope of this post to detail, however. We also do not consider ourselves “THE Dinluke Server”, just one of them.

Racism/Xenophobia

This hinges upon the idea that Pedro Pascal is a person of color. Therefore, if Din does something bad or evil, like act as the aggressor in a noncon story, the action is inherently racist. This ends up painting a lot of actions with a very broad brush. It is easy to go “I don’t like this portrayal of someone whose actor I feel is a person of color therefore it must be inherently racist to portray them as such.”

And it’s very easy to go “oh, this is racist? I don’t want to be racist, so I should be against it!” Especially on Tumblr, the home of quickly reblogging things without full context. Most people are good and want to treat people with kindness. If those of us in the US have learned anything over… our country’s entire history, it’s not enough to just be “not racist” but we need to be actively anti-racist.

That being said, I disagree that “dark” portrayals of Din are inherently racist in the first place. That does not come from nowhere. As I mentioned in another post, my response the first time I saw this perspective was to find as many Latine/Latinx voices as I could and listen to them. I know that it is not possible to be “just not racist” in an inherently racist society, and that to be anti-racist is to listen and learn when you hear that something may be hurtful. Some of these voices were anonymous individuals reaching out to me, some are people whose names I know but will not be sharing. Some enjoyed “dark” content, some could not stand it and thought it was revolting.

No demographic is a monolith and no individual can speak for the entirety of their own. But the vast majority of people I have listened to and spoken with on this specific issue have come away with “White Latine/Latinx people have an extremely different lived experience than those of color.” Pedro Pascal has taken great pains to explicitly state that he fully identifies as a white Latino, and to dismiss his personal racial and ethnic identity because of one’s personal discomfort with fandom is… pretty fucking gross, I’m not going to lie!

I’m not going to sit here and argue that there is never racism in fandom. There often is, especially amongst fans, but the frenzy whipped up because a handful of people have Declared This is Racist is solving and will solve nothing.

I believe that the majority of people taking a stand “against racism in Dinluke” have good hearts and good intentions. I think that it is difficult to effect change out in meatspace, and so it becomes tempting to try to make waves where you think you will be heard. But when this is done based on little evidence (and at least a little shouting over top of Latine/Latinx voices, as we saw this past weekend), then we’re not effecting good change. This is also an approach that extremely centers US people and our sensibilities about racism.

But I also know that there are a few people out there, not many, who are just latching onto the “racist” label because they don’t enjoy one thing or another and want to tear it down. They are disingenuous and move the goalposts or change the topic entirely when confronted with even the softest suggestion that they might not be entirely in the right. They know how easy it is to get people on their side by making a claim of racism, and whether they do it on purpose or not, that’s fandom poison.

Tagging

The short summation of this issue is that there are tags some feel are “code tags” for dark content and that tagging is sometimes inaccurate. The implication is that creators do this on purpose to trick people into reading things that will upset them. In light of this, there was a post this weekend that was “definitely not a call out post even though [they] named names” that was, purportedly aimed at helping people identify dark content.

I’m not going to pretend tagging is perfect. It’s not, and it will never be because humans are imperfect. While tagging is a courtesy, it’s a common courtesy the way not spitting on the sidewalk is a common courtesy. Therefore I think that, as a creator, it’s important to be willing to listen to and accept polite requests for additional tags. I spend a lot of time carefully considering tags and additional warnings in my works (even and especially the ones that are not “dark”), but sometimes even that’s not enough. Personally, I’m always willing to update tags if I missed something obscure. We’re only human.

However, that only goes to polite requests for tagging. I’ve seen a lot of noise about tags that “should be” innocuous like “Cinnamon Roll Luke Skywalker” (which, as of this writing, there are precisely 32 Dinluke fics with that tag, hardly the purported “flood”) being “code tags” and like… that’s not even a thing. Authors want to tag accurately not only to help protect readers but so that their intended audience can find their work! I have no way to know this, but it feels to me like a group chat got carried away with the concept of “code tags” to the point where they fully convinced themselves that it was a thing.

Tags are a tool for you to use to curate your experiences. I think it’s a horrible event if a creator misses one and that results in someone being triggered, but it doesn’t make the act malicious. It makes it a mistake, an oversight, one that can be corrected by coming together in a constructive way. I have made this point many times before.

I will also say that I deeply resent the way the tagging topic is playing out, not because there’s not a problem (we can make it smaller but, again, not perfect) but because it groups everyone who has ever participated in dark content into a strange monolith. Like, the argument about “Dead Dove Do Not Eat” not being enough on its own has some merit, sure. But it is another sign to be on your guard. And only one person ever has made the argument otherwise (though I think they were responding quickly and with more forethought would have said something different). And yet, every time this comes up now, every single person who has ever participated in dark content is accused of holding this opinion. Or that we’re intentionally leaving stuff untagged to trick people. 

This generalization is flat out not true, and as someone who takes triggers very seriously and works hard to accommodate people as well as I can, frankly, it’s hurtful. I know that was the goal of some people and, well, mission accomplished, I guess.

In the end, no single tag can exist in a vacuum. You, as a reader, are responsible for reading and considering every tag (and author’s notes, as authors sometimes expand on potential triggers that only apply to single chapters instead of the whole work) in order to keep yourself safe. I, and honestly just about everyone, are more than happy to expand on our list of “default tags” when someone points out something new. We’ll touch on that again in a bit.

I have also had a conversation with someone complaining about “neutral” tags being mixed in with dark ones and like…that’s what the Exclude Tags option is for. Their response was “I shouldn’t have to do that.”

Yes. You should. You are not entitled to a uniquely curated experience with no work on your part. You can reach out for help to make it better, sure, but you have to put in some effort.

Feminine Luke

This got brought up in response to my post I mentioned above in a roundabout way. The short version (as I understand it) is that some people, especially queer men, dislike the feminization of men in MLM fanworks. At least one person has decided Dinluke is not for them based on this discomfort.

I have said before, and will continue to say, that no one is wrong for feeling a certain way, only for how they act on it.

This didn’t sit well with me, but I’m not a queer man so I said nothing for a long while. It was not until I spoke to other queer men, nonbinary people, and trans men on the issue that I made up my mind. Disavowing feminized fictional men entirely and dogpiling on people who enjoy it isn’t an answer (and to be clear, the person I mentioned above who disliked the tropes is not dogpiling on anyone). That runs the risk of veering hard into cisnormativity if not outright transphobia. There are a million ways to handle gender identity, some of which will make some uncomfortable while at the same time affirming and lifting up others. There is not a correct way to do gender.

But what we can do is identify it better (tags, again!). I, personally, am determined to tag any content that has Luke in a dress or something similar with “gender non-conforming/gnc Luke Skywalker” (or “gender non-conforming/gnc Din Djain” but that’s nowhere near as common). Here and on AO3. And, hey, if people really enjoy those takes then that will make them easier to find, too.

I don’t think that’s the end of the issue, but it’s what I could think of to do to make people more comfortable. I’m not really sure what else to say about the point that isn’t covered in the first post I linked at the beginning — who gets to decide who Is and Isn’t allowed to write about certain things? Where’s the line?

This Past Weekend and What Can We Do?

(TW: DESCRIPTIONS OF DEATH THREATS IN FIRST TWO PARAGRAPHS, YES REALLY)

Regardless of intentions, there was a post last weekend that kicked off an intense round of hatred and bullying. I do not use those words lightly. Before I went scorched earth, I saw active calls to get meaner and meaner, and literal wishes/threats of physical harm. Most of the latter were in tags, including “I wish all dark content creators would drop dead”, “I hope [Specific Creator] chokes”, and my absolute favorite “If you put Luke in a dress I will kill you.”

I’m not going to get into a blow-by-blow because, frankly, I blocked everyone even tangentially related to the issue and stopped following along after that last threat. I’m sure I caught some people in blocks unfairly, and I might reconsider those, but when we get to making threats to real people over fictional characters, that’s when I drop out.

There were also a lot of disingenuous arguments or points that were meant well but not articulated fairly, to the point where it felt pointless to even start to say anything back. I made one untagged post on my own blog, got one vaguely bad faith anon ask about it, then a bunch of actual anon hate before I turned off anon for a few days. I don’t even want to know how bad it would have been if I hadn’t done that. So, there hasn’t been a lot from the “other side.” I guess that’s what this post is, but to be honest, I really don’t want to be a voice for a given argument. I want to make fanworks, prop up a community (Star Dads), and give a heads up (tags) so that people can avoid my stuff if they want. But it also feels shitty not to say anything directly.

I have lost so much respect for people whose work I used to enjoy and that makes me sad. There has never been what I can consider a good faith hand reaching out for a dialogue. The closest I have ever had was in a round of DMs months back with someone I thought was kind and a friend. We laid out our sides (mine was that supporting better tagging was all that was reasonable because otherwise where does one draw the line?), had what I thought was a very amicable conversation, and then a week later, I was blocked. I later found out they were claiming that they tried to start a dialogue but no one wanted to. I think that interaction is the one that hurt the most. And I’m aware I’ve centered myself pretty hard in the last couple of paragraphs, but it seems relevant.

So, how does a fandom move forward from something like this? Some will say that the only way is for anyone who likes “dark” stuff to disappear from it, but that’s just not going to happen. Even if everyone who currently writes it gives up and goes away, there will be others.

Dark content is an inherent part of fandom because it is an inherent part of fiction. People explore their their trauma, the taboo, and the just plain weird in all sorts of ways. No one has to enjoy any of it, and while it is kind to tag hard sometimes things slip through. That doesn’t make anyone’s hurt over a missing tag any less important, but it should make it more understandable.

(TW brief mention of DV in next paragraph)

Personally, I put a lot of things I’m uncomfortable with in my work. I don’t like choking, sexual or otherwise, due to past DV but I’ve written a bad guy choking a good guy nearly to the point of passing out. It was awful to write, painful to edit, but the correct choice for the scene. I think the story is better for it. I bring it up because it’s a relatively “innocent” form of trauma. You would have never known I was assaulted if I had not just told you, and frankly, I resent that I felt the need to share it publicly at all.

No one should have to perform their trauma for you before being allowed to write about it. No one. Nor is trauma the only valid reason to write about something. I have mentioned elsewhere that my primary (though not only) interest in dark sexual content is my interest in BDSM, which I won’t go over in detail again here.

Again, What Can We Do?

The best that can be done, in my opinion, is constructive conversations around tagging (instead of the bizarre blame game that happened last weekend). I think underage content is disgusting and would never read it, but I think that teens should be allowed to write high school AUs that include first times. I don’t ship Vader/Luke or Luke/Leia, but since it’s fictional, I really don’t care if others do. I don’t read hyper-violent torture fics, but the idea that they exist doesn’t bother me.

I sometimes wonder if Dinluke is people’s literal first fandom because a lot of this is stuff that’s been argued about ad nauseum for literal decades. Our tools have gotten better (AO3), but there’s always someone who wants everyone to follow their personal sensibilities. Sometimes, they have somewhat of a point and we can adjust around it, most of the time the purported line is arbitrary. I do not get to decide what is Acceptable or Unacceptable, and neither do you. All we can do is mark it to help each other navigate the content.

We should all be capable of admitting that not everything is for us, and sometimes we have to do some legwork to find things that are.

And while you should always take accusations of racism seriously (even if they’re worded cruelly), not every accusation is accurate even if it is well-meant. Center the voices of people actually affected by a given issue instead of your own if you are not in the relevant demographic (even if you are a visible minority in another sense).

If you want to take an ACTUAL stand against racism, consider donating to a local mutual aid fund. Local action is the most effective in combating real world inequity. If you cannot afford to donate money, consider donating your time instead. Or, if you are a content creator, consider a charity commission slot where the proceeds go somewhere worthwhile. I leave it to you to decide what mission you find worthwhile.

I realize that sounds very “kumbaya let’s all come together” but there is really no other way to co-exist. And refusing to do so and trying to chase people out will never work long-term. I’ll continue to do my best to tag and indicate where my work might be upsetting, dark or not (btw, on Tumblr I try to do individual tags but all of my dark content is tagged with “tw dark content” filter once and it’s gone). I know several others who will do the same. I will not bow to outside pressure to stop writing because others dislike it, they don’t have to read it and I've put a lot of effort into making sure they can't accidentally stumble on it. I’ll keep propping up the community I volunteer my time to because I enjoy it and I think it’s a net positive.

What about a Dialogue?

I wish we could have one. I hope we can, in the future. But right now there’s no way. Not until things die down and people decide to come at this with calmer heads. I’m turning off replies on this post and, once again, turning off my anon ask box. If my relatively innocuous opinions in my last post about this got a bunch of hate, I can only imagine how bad this one will be.

I don’t like thinking that. I want to believe the best of people. But I was proven extremely wrong recently, and I’m not ready to trust again. All I ask is that, especially if you have disagreed with me in the past or personally dislike me, try to keep an open mind. Even if you don’t change your mind in the end, entertain the concept at least in private.

But What Can We Do Right Now?

Make more of what you want to see. Seriously. If you're self conscious about your abilities, I get it, but make it shitty on purpose. The next draft can improve it. There are so many unfilled niches in Dinluke, find yours and fill it.

You just might find out that you have a blast with it and make some new friends.

[brighteyewrites]

Words as Weapons

With a part of me gone And it’s hard to hold on to the person that I used to know And it kills me inside I am buried alive I am nothing but flesh over bone - The Drug [Egypt Central] Angstember Day 11 | Fandom: Overwatch (Pre-Fall) | Angela / Gabriel

AO3 | FF.net | Works

“I’ll see you tomorrow, Angela,” Dr. Port said as she rose from his couch. Angela didn’t think they had made much - if any - progress, but he didn’t seem to be concerned about it. He’d insisted on daily appointments for the foreseeable future; since this was his area of expertise, and she wasn’t really in a position to argue, Angela had agreed. “Tomorrow,” she replied quietly, before making her way out of the office. Angela stayed close to the wall as she made her way down the hallway, keeping her distance from others and ignoring their confused - or pitiful - looks. The sound of something thudding against the wall had her jumping, automatically putting some distance between herself and the noise. Quickly, she realized the sound had come from the opposite side of the wall - partially because there was nothing there, but mostly because of the raised voices she could hear. The words were muffled, but she would recognize Gabriel’s voice anywhere. He and Jack were fighting. Again. Before, she’d barge in there and do her best to mediate - or at least separate them. But, as she was now, she didn’t think she was in a position to manage either. She’d already had bad reactions to their raised voices; she didn’t particularly want to have another. But, if things were slamming into walls, she might just have to, anyway. Things had never gotten physical between the two men - at least, not to her knowledge. Oh, they could be absolutely vicious with their words sometimes, but the damage was always verbal or emotional. Angela approached the door carefully, doing her best to assess the situation before involving herself in it. As she got closer, she realized that the door wasn’t completely closed - between that small opening and how loud the men inside the office were, she could make out their conversation. “—ell me to calm down,” Gabriel’s voice snarled from the right, making her tense. That partial statement, mixed with things slamming into walls, made it easy to guess what they were arguing about. If they were fighting - physically - Angela could assume that Gabriel was the aggressor and that she - or, rather, her kidnapping - was the topic. Despite her reservations and the absolute terror it inspired in her, she knew that this couldn’t go on. The last thing she wanted was for them to fight about her capture - to allow it even more power than it already had. Angela took a deep, steadying breath; if she was going to go in there, it wouldn’t help anything if she were a wreck when she did it. “I trusted you.” His voice was still an enraged snarl, but it cracked with something sad - grief or despair, she wasn’t sure. After a moment, probably of him composing himself, Gabriel was shouting again. “You were supposed to keep her safe.” Before, Angela might have bristled at the words - she had come a long way from needing a dedicated protector, or so she had thought - but now, a small part of her couldn’t help but agree. “I should have known better,” Gabriel snapped, spurring her into action. The words were accompanied by another thud that had her wincing even as she reached out for the door. “You couldn’t even protect Ana; I never should have believed you could protect Angela.” Angela froze, eyes wide, as his words chilled even her. That was a targeted, vicious attack and a horrible insinuation. “What happened with Ana has nothing to do with this,” Jack snarled, matching Gabriel’s anger with his own. “We took every precaution with Angela. We did everything possible—” “It’s not enough. Have you seen her?” Gabriel’s voice demanded, cutting him off viciously. “No, you haven’t,” Gabriel answered his own question before Jack could even try to respond, “because she’s barely left her rooms. She’s terrified.” Angela frowned, even if she couldn’t refute the fact; she was terrified. Hands balling into fists, Angela reached for the door again - it was time to put an end to this. “They broke her,” her hands froze again as she took a shuddering breath. It was one thing to think they thought that about her, but it was another to hear it aloud - and from Gabriel no less. “There is no ‘enough.’” He’d continued, unaware that she had heard him - but his continued speech made it possible for her to move. It was fortunate that all she had to do was push the door open - Angela didn’t think her shaky hands could manage an access card or doorknob. “Get ou—” Gabriel’s voice cut off abruptly as he realized who had walked into the room; it was an act of pure will that she hadn’t ducked back out of the door, but it was a very near thing. Silence fell, thick and heavy, as she stood in the doorway - Angela had barely managed to take the two steps it had taken to get her just inside. She could feel their shocked gazes on her, though she didn’t turn to look at them. “Angela?” Jack was the one to break the silence. “Is every—” He cut himself off swiftly, changing the question. “Do you need something?” His voice was cautious and far more gentle than she’d expected him to be capable of, considering Gabriel still had him pinned to the wall. Angela balled her trembling hands into fists, trying to build up her courage to speak - and feeling foolish for it. She had been the one to force herself in here, after all. She could have left them to it; this new Angela was far more okay with avoiding conflict – with easy – than the old one. “I—” Angela swallowed, trying ineffectively to bring moisture to her dry throat. Instead of addressing the more painful words, the ones that cut just as deeply as anything her captors had done, she forced herself to focus on why she had come in here in the first place. “You need to stop.” It should have been a declaration - the old Angela could have shouted it at them, glaring with arms crossed as she dared them to argue. This new Angela could barely raise her voice louder than a whisper, incapable of looking in their direction as she gestured at the two of them with shaking hands. “Angela,” Gabriel started, voice notably softer as he addressed her. This wasn’t the first time she’d barged into one of their arguments - but she’d never been as fragile back then. That Angela could stare them down, hands on her hips, as she gave as good as she got. This Angela could barely keep from bolting out of the door at her back. “You didn’t need to come in here,” Gabriel told her carefully; he could clearly see her terror in her shaking hands and haggard breathing. Angela shook her head, a silent argument that was far less effective than her words. There were so many things she could say, but she couldn’t seem to get her voice to work. “I’m alright, Angela,” Jack offered into the silence. Angela glanced their way, eyes briefly resting on Gabriel and then Jack. Gabriel looked frazzled, but he had put some space between the two of them. Jack was straightening his shirt as if nothing had happened. “I’m not hurt.” Assured that they were both whole, Angela dropped her eyes back to the floor before her. Neither looked any worse for wear from what she could tell; hopefully, she had stepped in before any physical damage could be inflicted. Angela knew she had been far too late to defend any of them - herself included - from the psychological blows. “This fighting…” Angela started, voice quiet as she tried to figure out what she wanted to say - and what she could say. “It isn’t helping.” Angela hated to play on their pity, but she could handle it if it kept them from each others throats; the fighting was far worse and would be more than she could bear for long. Besides, it was close enough to what the Angela of before would have said - their fighting really wasn’t helping anything. All the arguing did was make it harder to work towards their common goals; their pride made them nearly impossible to work with some days. Angela wasn’t sure how Ana had managed them for so long, but it was exhausting. “Angela, you don’t understand,” Gabriel said, some of his previous anger tinting his voice. She bit the inside of her cheek and forced herself to remain still; he wasn’t yelling at her. It was fine. Instead, her eyes flashed back to his as anger filled her. “I understand what happened to me far better than you do, Gabriel.” The words were ice-cold despite the tremor in her voice. Gabriels’ jaw clenched against the reminder - as if he wasn’t the one who had started the fight in the first place. “Just,” Angela sighed heavily, the anger leaving her just as quickly as it had come, “please.” The plea in her voice had them both looking away from her shamefully. “Fighting about it will not fix anything.” Angela doubted anything could fix what had happened to her - especially if Gabriel thought she was broken. The two men were silent. Neither was willing to offer a promise of a ceasefire to her, not when they knew it would probably be broken. It was a courtesy they may not have extended to her before, but they both knew she was far too fragile to deal with broken promises on top of her wounded heart. Angela’s shoulders slumped. It had been worth a try, even if she had known it was fruitless. “If you must argue,” Angela muttered darkly as she turned towards the exit, “at least do it where no one can overhear you.” The last thing she wanted was for other people to hear those vicious words Gabriel had snarled at Jack. It was bad enough that she had heard them. “Angela,” Gabriel’s voice stopped her before she could leave the room. “What did you hear?” There was a quiet desperation in his voice. It hadn’t occurred to him until now that she might have heard what he had said. “I heard enough,” Angela replied, voice heavy with far too much emotion. Before he could offer any kind of apology or excuse, Angela stepped through the door and closed it firmly behind her.

One | Two | Three | Four | Five

[paragonrobits]

scythfi-writer said: Pretty sure Jade could literally solo any troll except condy 

scythfi-writer said: Are we talking discworld, homestuck, or under the bridge trolls?

scythfi-writer said: Same with John now that I think about it, except for the god-tier ones

pinches my nose and sighs with exasperated frustration because i’m certain you don’t mean it like that but this is exactly the problem I am having here

firstly, Homestuck, yes. I don’t doubt that there are people who try to argue that humans would win in a fight with Discworld trolls because apparently people have a knee-jerk response to the idea that humans are not the end-all and be-all of fantasy fights

so, yes. Jade or a god-tier could win pretty much any fight against a troll that isn’t Condy, or a hypothetical troll that has gone through the same modifications she has (which is a cool idea and I don’t know why I never see it suggested), or a god-tier troll. Because John, Jade and the others in question are gods. I hardly expect an average troll to kill an actual god in a one-on-one fight.

there’s also the fact that Jade is 1. drawing from the immense power of the Green Sun until the end of the series and so is noted to have a level of power not normally available to her classpect and 2. is half-dog. She’s not exactly a normal human in any case anymore, even without considering that her dog half being a First Guardian, may well give her additional abilities.

here’s the problem though; this is not a case of matching the god-tier humans against the trolls. Because they shouldn’t be fighting the trolls to begin with; if there was such a conflict, they ought to be siding against the trolls against the humans, who are the aggressors in the hypothetical situation.

and that hypothetical situation is that the HS2 writers are claiming that humans would beat the trolls in all-out war, which is absolutely goddamn fucking stupid and the only reason they, or people who for some asinine god-forsaken reason actually agree with them, is because people are hitting the ‘humans are superior’ juice that makes every goddamn person who chugs it look at sci-fi and automatically decide that humans, who are literally just primates adapted for lots of running, are the most powerful and deadly sapient forms of life that could ever exist.

and it’s fucking asinine self-indulgent garbage even at the best of times, but you know what? you know fucking WHAT? it’s even more ridiculous in Homestuck because trolls are fucking murder machines that could potentially drown the skies in their numbers, massively outbreed humans with ease, have an enormous number of psychic powers and the ones that don’t are strong enough to rip humans apart like tissue paper, and the entire reason human life is so attractive to trolls is how pathetic and soft their lives seem to Alternians to begin with

so yes, THAT is what i am incandescently pissed about, THAT is what I am actively arguing against, and THAT is why I am getting so fucking frustrated with people jumping into my notes to try to argue that humans would ACTUALLY win an all out war with a species that thrived on a murderworld that makes the harshest environments on Earth look like a daycare

[the-powerhouse-of-the-cell]

Listen up cowards

Please sign this.

This is a petition for the Trayvon Martin Law.

If you’ve forgotten who he was, then let me jog your memory a little.

Trayvon Martin was a 17-year-old boy visiting his father’s fiancée at the time of his murder.He was coming back from a gas station with skittles that he bought for his soon-to-be stepbrother when George Zimmerman, who was on neighborhood watch that night, had started following him in his car because he had labeled him as 'suspicious'.

Trayvon saw that he was being followed and began to run; Zimmerman reported this to an operator and got out of his car.A grown man was following an unarmed 17-year-old boy with a loaded, concealed weapon.

The ordeal ended with Trayvon's life being cut short.Zimmerman wasn't arrested the night of the murder because Florida Statute 776.032 States that a police officer cannot detain you or arrest you for shooting someone unless they have probable cause to believe the force you used was unlawful or if you shoot a police officer while they're in the act of performing their duties. Law Enforcement didn't arrest Zimmerman the night of the murder because they claimed they didn't have probable cause. (copied from the description of a petition because I feel that they explained it better than I could)

When he was finally interrogated, Zimmerman confessed to profiling Trayvon and following him. He couldn't even keep his story straight throughout police interrogations. The detective admitted that Zimmerman was an "overzealous vigilante who took the law into his own hands" and exaggerated his injuries.George Zimmerman was let go and claimed self-defense.

People worldwide marched and created petitions, and Zimmerman was arrested and convicted with 2nd-degree murder. But this battle for justice isn't over yet. A year after his conviction, a jury found him not guilty of 2nd-degree murder or manslaughter. Now, he's a free man.

Long story short: Trayvon Martin was profiled, followed and murdered by George Zimmerman and has yet to be served justice.

<<<<<<>>>>>>

This petition is so that this never happens again.

(this next part is copied directly from the petition)

This Petition calls for Florida Statute 776.041 (2) (A) to be redacted or revised.

776.041 (2) (A) allows an aggressor to use deadly force even though they started the aggressive act, confrontation or altercation.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

Also, this Petition calls for the Neighborhood Watch Handbooks to be revised. The current handbooks aren't detailed enough and leave too much room for misinterpretation. The revised handbooks should include specific do's and don'ts for its members, and local or state laws that they must abide by while they're performing their duties. The revised handbook should also include rules that the Coordinator must follow. Not specifying these rules can lead a regular citizen to believe that they have the power to make Law enforcement decisions.

Most importantly, it calls for a new law to be made in Trayvon's name. A law that will prevent someone from claiming self-defense after they've done the following:

TRAYVON MARTIN LAW

1. Unless you are a member of Law enforcement, you are not allowed to chase an unknown person while you are carrying a concealed weapon. Unless that person has harmed you or they are attempting to cause bodily harm to you or someone else. Following, chasing or confronting an unknown person, who is in an authorized area or public area while you have a weapon waives your right to claim self-defense should said person end up dead. An aggressor carrying a deadly or concealed weapon can't claim self-defense if they follow, chase, or confront an unknown person who isn't in the act of committing a violent crime towards them or anyone else, and that person ends up dead. If you think said person is suspicious, contact law enforcement instead of taking the law into your own hands.

2. Unless you're a member of Law Enforcement;  following, chasing or confronting someone who has not caused you bodily harm or attempted to cause you or someone else bodily harm, while you are carrying a deadly weapon will be considered an aggressive act in itself; because that act alone automatically puts said person in fear of their life.  An aggressor carrying a deadly weapon enters the situation with more force than their victim has. Therefore they have an advantage over their victim who doesn't have access to the amount of force needed to stand their ground or protect themselves from the aggressor.

3. Following, chasing or confronting an unknown person while carrying a deadly weapon, should be seen as an aggressive or threatening act because you are putting that person in fear of their life. Also, you shouldn't be allowed to claim self-defense should that person end up dead as a result of the escalation of that act. Should that act lead to their death, you should be charged with the highest degree of murder applicable to you or manslaughter.

4. An adult carrying a deadly weapon waives their right to claim self-defense if they follow, chase, or confront an unknown minor, and that minor ends up dead or injured. Unless that minor has caused bodily harm to them or someone else or is attempting to cause bodily harm to them or someone else.

https://www.change.org/p/the-trayvon-martin-law-stop-this-from-happening-again-trayvonmartinlaw-blacklivesmatter?original_footer_petition_id=4496600&algorithm=promoted&source_location=petition_footer&grid_position=6&pt=AVBldGl0aW9uADuwEgAAAAAAXtqg9DzRhDsyNjg0NmRlOQ%3D%3D

(If you haven’t signed the petition for justice for Trayvon Martin you can do that here https://www.change.org/p/jeff-triplett-justice-for-trayvon-martin)

[acitybythelightdivided2006]

on edelgard, and some of the various gotchas people use to discredit her (major spoilers for the whole game):

im gonna keep it real. edelgard was like, 98% in the moral right for her actions.

“she’s a fascist!”

hardly if at all. starting a war doesn’t make you a fascist in the slightest, and her ideology falls far closer to various forms of representative democracy than anything close to fascism. considering various CF endings do corroborate her goals working out, albeit long-term. even before democracy can set into the land, edelgard has the conscience to appoint commoners to positions of power, e.g. manuela becoming prime minister in her and ferdinand’s ending. a power-hungry tyrant probably isn’t going to step down immediately after feeling her work is done, because a tyrant’s only work is maintaining their strength above the people.

"she's an imperialist!”

sure, but her motivations AND end results do not reflect any past real-world imperialism. there is no historical parallel from her to imperialism that relates so much as there is from her to revolutionaries like napoleon (or even lenin), made even clearer by the knowledge that rhea and the church hold a cultural grip over the entire continent and the war is specifically against the church. almyra is never stated to have problems with the leicester alliance so much as they do fodlan as a whole - it just happens that theyre closest to the alliance rather than anyone else. this dichotomy between fodlan and almyra is further acknowledged by a personal problem written by cyril in part 2, where he specifies that people view the two continents separately rather than the alliance versus almyra separately. anyway, regardless of any historical parallels, this is not a retelling of actual history; you can take edelgard’s actions at face value for what they are.

“but this is a narrative written in japan, surely there are sympathies for japan’s imperialist history at play here?”

imperial japan was far from edelgard’s empire. edelgard fights for democracy (or meritocracy, if you prefer) and liberation. imperial japan fought for control and resources. also, do not assume a japanese writer discussing imperialism and war as a theme is automatically drawing parallels to hypothetical sympathies.

"her war is worse than any stagnation rhea was responsible for!"

the crest system suffocated the populace and tortured the nobility alike. any look at the noble students’ supports corroborate this. this stagnation lasted for 1000 years already, and even rhea agrees that her actions over the past millennia were inexcusable in silver snow. this is hardly mentioning the fact that there are various skirmishes and revolts before the war begins, such as lonato’s rebellion. five years of explicit unrest resulting in a golden age taking place (on every route, not just crimson flower) proves that rhea’s rule was stifling the continent.

“edelgard’s actions are overtly violent, disturb the peace, and kill innocent lives!”

while nobody would deny that yes, a warring faction is going to commit atrocities in said war (which is a trait shared by every faction in the game) edelgard nonetheless avoids needless conflict when it is available to do so and vastly prefers to keep civilians out of the picture in said conflicts. by far the best example of this is at the final chapter of crimson flower where she openly gives rhea, her primary enemy in the war, a chance to surrender without any violence required. fighting only begins when rhea sets flame to the city in her violent rage. this is after the fact that edelgard can also spare a vast amount of her former classmates, most notably claude and lysithea. the only reason she kills dimitri in CF outright is because she realizes that dimitri has wasted his life focused on nothing more than revenge, and realizes that he needs to be put out of his misery - the same reason she does not clue him into the truth of the tragedy of duscur, because she realizes that killing him after destroying his entire worldview is needless cruelty. speaking of dimitri, another example of this on a different route is the fact that she is not the aggressor against dimitri in azure moon - he is essentially a wrench in her plan to unify fodlan and establish her goals.

“she starts the war on a false narrative! her understanding of the nemesis/seiros conflict is not true!”

yes, edelgard’s understanding of the conflict is untrue. however, the facts of the matter are known only by rhea, and perhaps seteth and flayn as well. regardless of edelgard’s understanding of the nemesis/seiros conflict being incorrect, that is hardly the reason she starts the war. she starts the war specifically out of a desire to eradicate the corrupt crest system that ruined her and countless other peoples’ lives and gave the agarthans reason to experiment on her, her siblings, and other nobles like lysithea, and to establish the commoners of the continent as independent.

“the adrestian empire’s past actions are unquestionably evil, like their control of brigid as a vassal state!”

yeah, and? edelgard’s actions are not the actions of her predecessors, and she even goes out of her way to rectify these mistakes. on the brigid example, she outright tells petra, who is there as a political prisoner, that brigid can gain independence for itself so long as they assist her in the war effort, which, on CF and routes where petra is not recruited to another faction, seems to happen rather cooperatively.

“she allies herself with the agarthans to further her goals, and if there’s any villainous faction in three houses, it’s TWSITD!”

if edelgard has one fatal flaw, it’s that she’s determined to a fault and needs to get things done quickly lest she dies as a result of her twin crests. while yes, she does indeed ally herself with the agarthans, it is through extremely gritted teeth and with the intent to dispose of them immediately after she is done using their resources. the ending of crimson flower outright says she wages further war specifically on this terrorist group.

“her disdain for rhea is based on a hatred for the nabateans as a whole!”

there are very few nabateans that edelgard ever even knows, and only one of them she ever shows malice towards, that being rhea. both flayn and seteth are able to be spared and edelgard bears no ill will towards them for their race so much as she does their affiliation with the church, and even then, as mentioned, edelgard consistently avoids violence that is unnecessary. as mentioned before, she does attempt to spare rhea’s life at the end of crimson flower, but is met instead with a city on fire.

“she’s responsible for the tragedy of duscur!”

maybe if you listen to dimitri’s entirely false understanding of the situation early in azure moon. she was barely an adolescent and had quite literally zero political power. dimitri needed a scapegoat and realizes the truth (or at least becomes far closer to realizing the truth) with byleth’s influence in azure moon.

“she employed kostas and his gang to kill claude and dimitri in the beginning of the game!”

yeahhh i said 98% for a reason lol

[kumkaniudaku]

BROWN SKIN GIRL: ONE

A/N: Consider this the follow up to The Love Tonight. This sounds very reminiscent to @bribrisback‘s Dance With My Father which is amazingly cute. I promise it wasn’t intentional. It’s my fault for literally take a month to finish one prompt. People tend to beat you to things. Still, I wanted to stick with this. I hope you enjoy part one. 

Little bodies danced in sync to classical music as classes at Tillman Dance Studio neared the end of the first block Saturday session. It was rare that Micah wasn't front and center in her designated age group. Also rare was both of her parents and her younger brother making an appearance to pick her up and whisk the little ball of energy to their scheduled Saturday froyo date. Yet, both of these occurrences came to a head when the Boseman family walked through the door. 

"I wish you would stop," CoCo giggled as Chadwick held the door open for his wife and son, using his free hand to graze across her backside when she passed by.

"Well, aren't you singing a different tune. What changed in an hour?" 

Tasha blushed at the reminder of their earlier activities, but just as she opened her mouth to respond, Noah's yelling caught her attention. 

"Key! Key!"

"You looking for your sister? Point to Mikey!" When the youngest Boseman extended his arm to point in his sister's direction, CoCo was genuinely surprised at what she saw. In a corner, Micah sat with her back against the wall and an odd mix of tear-stained cheeks and an angry disposition. 

"Why is she sitting over there? Who made her cry," Chadwick asked. His body language had shifted from loose, relaxed energy to imposing dominance. "I'm going inside." 

CoCo grabbed his hand to prevent forward progress, "Babe, wait."

"For what? Them to hurt her feelings again? Hell no!"

"Aaron!" 

"Nicole!"

Tasha struggled to reign in her husband's emotions as parents in the immediate area passed around judgemental stares. She offered curt a smile to ward off attention before turning back to Chadwick. 

"I know you're mad," she whisper yelled. "Hell, I'm mad too! But we don't even know what happened yet! Can we at least get the details before we start tearin' shit up?"

Chadwick looked back and forth between his wife and his daughter, who hadn't noticed her parents enter the building like she usually did. He couldn't move past the way she feverishly rubbed at her eyes to stop her tears before drawing her knees up to her chest.

"You promise to let me lead the conversation when get in there," Chadwick asked as he finally turned to face CoCo. 

"I'm in the passenger seat on this one, baby."

Every nerve in his body was set ablaze as Chadwick made the tough decision to tuck away his anger and impatiently wait in the lobby. 

The remaining 15 minutes of instruction felt like 15 hours until, finally, the studio door swung open, and little pupils in blue leotards filed out of the room. Micah trudged behind the group with her head down, following Miss Christy until she reached the threshold of the door. 

"Mr. and Mrs. Boseman, can I speak with you all inside of my office for a moment?"

"We can't talk right here," Chadwick questioned.

Parents craned their necks for information, making the instructor's cheeks turn red with embarrassment. 

"I think you'd much rather have this conversation in private. Trust me; we'll only be a few minutes."

Despite promising to take on the supporting role, Tasha stepped in to agree to Christy's terms on Chadwick's behalf. He instead turned his attention to Micah. She immediately reached out for him when their eyes met. 

"It's okay, Princess. Daddy will fix it, okay?" 

He continued to comfort his first-born during the short and mostly silent walk to the administrative area of the building. Finding safety in her father, Micah maintained a tight grip around his neck as he took a seat. 

A soft drip-drop from the coffee maker across the room provided the only sound, working to push both parents to the highest heights of frustration. 

"What happened?"

Chadwick's cold demand for answers frightened the young woman across from him, though she tried to hide her fear. Tasha's equally cold glare didn't ease any of the tension. 

Folding her hands on the table and clearing her throat, Christy began her explanation. "Today, in class, Micah had an...issue with some of the other girls that turned physical. I recommend a break from the pro-"

"So, someone hit her?"

"No, Mr. Boseman, Micah was the aggressor."

"That's not fair! They were mean!" 

Micah's outburst was uncharacteristic for a child that was almost always mannerable. Chadwick took that as a sign to press for more information. 

"Did you ask what caused the altercation? I'm sure there was a reason."

"Micah says they called her a name, but still, violence is strictly forbidden here. Instructors are available if she wants to report a problem."

"Is bullying against the rules too, or do you make them up as you go," Tasha accused before turning to Micah. "What did they say to you, Mikey?"

The little ballerina fiddled with her thumbs and dropped her head to stare at her feet dangling below her. "Emily said...she said I wasn't pretty like them because my skin is so brown and my hair is frizzy. I'm sorry I pushed her, Mommy. But Ms. Christy wasn't looking, and they weren't nice."

Fearful of whatever punishment was next, Micah continued to avoid eye contact. 

"So when my daughter, the only black child in the age group, was being tormented by a group of girls, were you simply unavailable to step-in or did you not care? I'm curious." 

"Mr. Boseman, I can assure you that we are always watching the girls, bu-"

"Oh, so you saw but didn't care until she had to defend herself. Then, the black child gets in trouble for being the aggressor."

"Are you insinuating that this matter is about race," Christy accused. 

"I'm asking questions. Were you paying attention when Micah was being picked on? Did you ask everyone what happened? Or was she punished while the others were left untouched?"

Christy opened her mouth to speak several times as she looked to CoCo to step in and stop the questioning. 

"You should answer him," she advised. 

"I-I," she stammered, tears threatening to spill. 

"The answer to all of my questions is no, but you don't need to tell me that. You don't need to tell me anything because we're pulling Micah from the program. How should I pay the remaining tuition so that we leave in good standing?"

Chadwick's declaration stunned the other adults in the room, including Tasha. 

"Mr. Boseman, I'm sure we can work something out. Maybe a short break? A meeting between all of the parents?"

"I don't want to meet about a damn thing. I've made a decision. If we need to pay by check, my wife keeps the checkbook. I have my credit card if you'd rather do it that way. But we will not continue to have our child come to a place where she isn't welcome."

There was no room for discussion despite Christy's multiple efforts. Chadwick had made his decision, and it was final. Fifteen minutes and a hefty check later, the family of four walked out of the dance studio Micah had called home for two years. 

After strapping both children into their seats and entering on their respective sides, Tasha smiled at her husband, who was still reeling from the moments prior.

"Where to next, Captain?" 

He thought for a moment, looking in the rearview to find Micah looking back at him. "You still want froyo, Princess?" Her bright smile instantly lifted the mood and alleviated the tension held hostage in his shoulders. Looking back at Tasha, he returned her smile and started the car. 

"Pinkberry it is." 

Frozen yogurt was a quick fix to the issue, but there was still a bleeding wound beneath the bandage. 

As Tasha helped Micah choose her outfits for the upcoming school week, Micah silently ambled around the room. She hadn't said much outside of alerting her parents when she was hungry or ready to play by herself. Instead of pressuring Micah to talk, she was allowed to sort through whatever was in her mind until she was prepared to share. 

"Mommy." 

"Yes, sweetheart?" 

"Am I ugly because I'm brown?" 

The hangers in Micah's closet roughly collided as CoCo lost focus and dropped the dress in her hand. Tasha whipped her head around, her eyes softening when she found her daughter sitting with her knees to her chest. 

"Of course not. You're beautiful." 

"Well, how come they said I was? I just wanted to be friends, and they were mean. What did I do?" 

CoCo could feel her heart and mind going through a range of emotions. On the one hand, she was upset to the point of rage. Someone had destroyed all of the self-esteem they had instilled from the day she was born in one day. On the other hand, she had to fight the urge to cry to stay strong for Micah. 

Placing the dress across a chair in the corner, Tasha moved to sit next to her daughter and pull her into a hug. 

"Sometimes, people are going to be mean to you because you look different than they do, and it's gonna suck. It might even make you wanna cry. But it's because they aren't taught better at home, not because you aren't pretty or smart or anything else. Do you understand?"

"No," Micah muttered before snuggling closer to her mother. "I want friends that like me, Mommy. And I wanna dance too."

"You'll have friends, baby. They'll be the bestest friends you could ever have, not those mean girls that make fun of you."

Even though she acknowledged Tasha's statement with a head nod, Micah was still hurting. And her hurting was automatically transferred and magnified in her mother. She and Chadwick always knew that their kids would face these issues in their environment. But this situation felt like a punch to the ribs. 

When Tasha finally trudged back into the master bedroom, she found her husband silently pacing around the room while scrolling through webpages on his iPad. 

"How'd it go," Chadwick asked without looking away from his device. 

Taking a seat on the chaise near their bed, CoCo kicked off her house slippers and sighed. "She thinks she's ugly because she's brown and I did a shitty job of explaining that people are terrible. So, that's how it went." 

"You told her she's beautiful, though, right? She knows that it's because she looks different than the people in her class." 

"Baby, a six-year-old just wants friends that aren't mean. And, if we're completely honest right now, telling her that only non-black people will dislike her for her skin is a lie. Some of us are going to give her the same shit." The weight of knowing they were only at the tip of the racism and colorism iceberg made Tasha's stomach turn with an uneasy feeling. 

Sighing, Chadwick took in CoCo's words as he placed his tablet on the bed and motioned for her to slide over in the chair. 

"Raising kids is tough work," he spoke, the words coming out in a rush of air. 

"Hell yeah, it is. I feel...powerless." 

"We are doing the best we can given the circumstances. Especially you," Chadwick encouraged while pulling CoCo closer to his side. "What we can do is continue affirming Micah in every way and putting her in spaces where she doesn't have to feel so different." 

"So, we're moving to Wakanda?" 

"Absolutely. Let's pack our shit." The pair shared light laughter despite the issue at hand. When the moment passed, silence began to sit over the room as they both settled into their thoughts to come up with a good solution. "Can I show you something?" 

Tasha nodded while her eyes curiously followed her husband's movements to the bed and back with his tablet. 

"I know you usually take the lead on this stuff, but I would love to see Mikey do something like this. The program director is nice, their reputation is stellar, and the students that give it their all tend to succeed." 

Colors from the various pictures and videos that filled the screen danced across CoCo's face as she examined the website. Chadwick apprehensively watched her face while she browsed to gauge his wife's reaction. He couldn't decide if his efforts were appreciated until Tasha's poker face warmed into a bright smile. 

"This is amazing, baby! How soon can we sign her up?" 

"Surprise, she's already signed up. Her first day is next weekend." 

Tasha's grin continued to spread across her face as Chadwick smiled back at her like a child and made jazz hands for dramatic effect, "I should've known Dad would come to the rescue." 

"We're a team, baby," he correct, kissing her forehead. "But you're gonna need to step back when we go teach baby girl these dance moves. I can't have you confusing my baby with your two left feet." 

Chadwick skillfully dodged a pillow flying through the air as retaliation for his dig at CoCo's dancing skills before sliding out of the room to give Micah some much-needed attention. 

---------

TAGS:

@k-michaelis

@wakandanmoonchild

@idilly

@texasbama

@afraiddreamingandloving

@inxan-ity

@onyour-right

@sisterwifeudaku

@killmongerdispussy

@90sinspiredgirl

@willowtree77785901

@maynardqueen101

@heyauntieeee

@halfrican-heat

@purple-apricots

@lalapalooza718

@blue-ishx

@profilia

@ljstraightnochaser

@girl-wtf-lmao

@royallyprincesslilly

@melaninmarvel

@thiccdaddy-mbaku

@lavitabella87

@purplehairgawdess

@unholyxcumbucket

@airis-paris14

@uhlxis

@oshasimone

@maliadestiny

@drsunshine97

@zxddy-panther

@queentearra

@skysynclair19

@retro-melanin

@mermaidchansons

@misspooh

@melanisticroyalty

@babygirlofwakanda

@wakanda-4evr

@sarahboseman

@karensraisns

@wakandankings

@ororowrites

@awkwardlyabstract

@mixedmelanin

@brownsugarcocoabutterwildflowers

@cosmicmelaninflower

@justanotherloveaffair

@oceanscorazon

@jaeee-http

@iliketowrite1996

@blackpantherismyish

@soldierandawar

@msincognito67

@reignsxjackson

@yaachtynoboat711

@syreanne

@minim236

@yoyolovesbucky

@maddiestundentwritergaines

@bribrisback

[merilly-chan]

About Ven wielding Missing Ache

I've seen many people analyze the newest KHUx update and it seems like more and more people are jumping on the "Ven is the evil traitor" train. While I cannot prove this theory wrong and won't attempt to do so either since such an endeavor would be futile with Nomura and how far the story currently is in JP, I want to present a few interpretations on why they chose Missing Ache for Ven. ●Ventus' name obviously means 'wind' and an attribute associated with it that he displays is speed. He's faster than Aqua and Terra and his attacks are also swift and agile. Since the new union leaders all seem to wield Keyblades which are available to the player so far, it is only natural that Ven should wield a Keyblade befitting his name and fighting style. Not to mention that the image for the gems needed for leveling up the Keyblade is a wing, which is often a sign for wind and speed. That leaves us with three Keyblades that are solely speed-based: Sleeping Lion, Lady Luck and Missing Ache. Sleeping Lion is a Keyblade mostly associated with Leon, Lady Luck is a Keyblade which has a tight connection to Wonderland and Missing Ache originates from 358/2 Days and can be wielded by Roxas and Xion. ●As you can see, Sleeping Lion and Lady Luck aren't the most optimal choices for a speed attribute Keyblade for Ven out of the three we have since his connection to either Wonderland as a Disney world or Leon is rather weak. On the other hand, his bond with Roxas is inevitably fairly strong due to Sora and he's even the reason Roxas looks the way he does. (Duh.) His heart may have even stayed with him for a while if the Ultimania is to be trusted. So Missing Ache is the best choice from a standpoint which simply associates his name/trait and his connection to the characters and the Keyblades. But does it mean he's necessarily the traitor? No. ●Missing Ache may be a mostly reverse medal Keyblade in KHUx but the reason for that could be fairly simple. It's a Days Keyblade. Roxas was part of Organization XIII during that time it could be acquired and regardless of his own tendency, it is connected to the villains of the series. So it is no surprise that they would choose Missing Ache as a Keyblade which focuses on reverse medals. (Of course KHUx plays before Days but it still has its debut in Days which was released before KHUx.) Wielding that Keyblade has nothing to do with the wielder's innate darkness as far as we know at this point, considering many other Keyblades also use reverse slots. We also can't forget that Roxas's base element is light and he is not exactly an antagonist either. Yet, he can still wield Missing Ache just the same without being a vicious villain. I also want to address another theory because I feel like some are 100% certain Ven is actually evil and a traitor. ●There is the distinct possibility that there is no traitor at all. The only evidence there is one is a missing page of the Book of Prophecies which was written by the Master of Masters. People are taking the contents of that book as face value as though there is no possibility at all that the MoM could have lied. The reason would be fairly simple here, too. It creates doubt. The first time the traitor was mentioned was already within the Foretellers-arc and it was one of the main reasons they started distrusting one another and fought against each other. It was one of the reasons the war even happened. But was there actually a traitor among them? We cannot know for sure because the only evidence is that book written by a single person who could have instigated the whole thing to cause a war and follow his own agenda by doing so. The same could be said about the new union leaders. How can we be sure that Strelitzia was murdered by one of them? It could have been a whole other person who murdered her for the sake of either obtaining the book from her and/or in order to plant someone else into their ranks. Possibly without them even being aware that they are being made a pawn. I won't dive further into this because it's pure speculation at this point and we know too little to think about motives or intentions. ●If there is a traitor, they may not be the villain. First of all, the word 'traitor' sounds negative at first but even Axel was also called a traitor for defecting from Organization XIII and then helped Sora in the end. The same could be assumed for KHUx. If we consider the MoM the villain who provided a rulebook to follow, anyone who would diverge from that path could be labeled as a traitor without them having bad intentions toward anyone in particular but rather trying to help 'the good side'. One such example would be Brain. He essentially said he will become the virus which will destroy the system. Virus also sounds relatively bad because we often automatically link it to diseases and computer viruses which steal information or otherwise damage the computer and in consequence us users. But it's a matter of perspective. Let's take an example of an older movie. In Independence Day, the aliens were the aggressors threatening Earth and its populace, and in order to bypass an inpenetrable barrier, they implanted a virus into their system and hence saved the Earth by destroying the attackers. In that case, a virus was used to achieve something good for the heroes, ensuring their survival. As you can see, what sounds negative at first can actually become positive depending on how you look at it. Who's to say the system that was created for them isn't evil and won't lead to disaster? What if the so-called traitor decides to betray the rulebook and the rest because it would have disastrous consequences to follow it? We can already see that this rulebook isn't all sunshine and rainbows and already lead to a conflict whether to follow it. I am personally not too inclined to trust the Master of Masters yet and anyone labeled a traitor in the book he wrote may actually fight for keeping everyone safe. (Without taking this "Darkness" fellow into account just yet.) I know some people are desperate for dark, gloomy tropes because they believe in the one-sided mindset that everything is always better and more profound when it's tragic, twisted and grim dark. But I personally don't see a viable reason to turn a ten year-old into an evil, psychotic kid just to have something become twisted and for the sole purpose of a short-lived shock value. Especially because many assume he would be acting of his own free will and with evil intent instead of being used. Character development only makes sense if there is a necessity and overthrowing a character we've known for 9 years into a complete opposite is, in my opinion, just a cheap method to create a pseudo-depth to a character who was fine to begin with. Of course there are a lot of blank spaces and we know too little about Ven before his memory loss to say he was the cinnamon roll he is in BBS and beyond. Naturally, there is a possibility that he could have a much more sinister nature. As I said, I'm not denying the possibility that those theories are true. But some of these speculations and interpretations are just as vague as mine are. Mainly because they focus a whole lot on Vanitas as well. Once again, I can't say he won't play a role. But it's also possible that fans are overanalyzing it. Vanitas was born out of the darkness of Ven's heart. So of course his nature will encompass what the series has established as emotions nurturing said darkness. But there is no precedence and therefore it's hard to clearly say that just because Vanitas exists the way he does that Ven has been less pure in the past. We have nothing to compare it to. Maybe the same would happen for most other characters as well if they would have their hearts divided. After all, the Heartless are also highly dangerous and are hearts consumed by darkness. We know that darkness exists in every heart except for those of the Princesses of Heart, so Ven is no exception. A person which only has access to the darkness of the heart would likely still only have that negativity to feed on, regardless of how big its part in the original heart was. I'm not trying to claim what is right and what is wrong. Nomura makes some unpredictable decisions at times so it's hard to say what will happen. I just wish that people will not cling to their theories too much or I fear the same will happen as with KH3. Theories are immensely interesting to me and I enjoy other fans' interpretations but depending on how much they work on it, the harder it becomes for some to let go of it and accept a different development due to headcanons and the subjective opinion that this development is for the better. (Which we won't know because we don't know Nomura's plans.) I'm not saying that people were only disappointed because their headcanons weren't fulfilled, but we can't deny that they tend to fuel our expectations for what we perceive to be the ideal development. KH3 does have major flaws, but I dare presume that some overly negative opinions are also caused by overblown expectations because we had plenty of time to come up with all manner of intricate plans. (Which are by no means worse, but sometimes not better either just because they're very detailed.) It's best to remain open for the idea that Ven may just be a cinnamon roll or that his role as a traitor isn't due to a vile motivation but simply to save his friends. I won't discourage anyone from preferring the other options, I'm just saying it might not be as shocking and character changing as some believe. Wanting friends doesn't mean he'll kill everyone just to get some, to put it drastically. I think it's great that people love Vanitas and want to include him more, but I also have to remind people that the backstory in the novel still isn't canon. Books cannot throw around canon and non-canon, sometimes even flat out contradicting, content and pick out whatever aids their case. Fans might not like to hear it, but even if Nomura should have mentioned certain aspects are canon, it doesn't mean everything else is. The moment a novel based on another source contradicts what is established in the source, it cannot be canon anymore. (And I'm not talking about content which fills holes and could have possibly happened/expands the story, but about serious contradictions.) Which doesn't mean that it doesn't contain things that actually happened but overall, it cannot be declared as canon as a whole. All in all, I'd like to present possibilities which provide harmless explanations why certain things are designed the way they are. There doesn't always have to be a dark secret and not every cheerful character needs to be corrupted for the angst-loving part of the fanbase. If people wish for that it is up to them. I won't deny them that pleasure. I just don't want to see anyone attacking Nomura if he doesn't cater to that headcanon. I know most of the people theorizing about this are perfectly harmless and aware of this and are just eager to explore all manner of interesting possibilities. Which is an admirable passion I am not against seeing. I actually think it's great that there are theories like these because they provide interesting material for discussions. I am just more careful about setting on one theory above any other, simply because KHUx has mostly given us questions instead of answers so far. Everything is possible at this point, which is why I want to remain open for as much as possible. The points above are not meant to disprove anything the other theories are suggesting. They are merely a showcase how certain terms can also be interpreted and that there are alternative explanations.

[unillustratedadventures]

Abuse is Complicated

I’m writing this after having read Moses Farrow’s article.

What I’m about to say might cause offence (especially if interpreted unfavourably), or else it might seem ill-intended or unsavoury in some way. It strikes me that on its own, none of these is ever a good reason to shut up.

All I can do is insist that my aim is broadly to help rather than harm, regardless of how clearly and carefully I manage to express what I mean. For what it’s worth, I’ve tentatively concluded that my view here isn’t being obscured by any privileged blindspots, at least to the best of my ability (given the optical disabilities potentially conferred by said blindspots). And perhaps most importantly, I’m willing to listen to contrary views and I’m open to changing my mind.

After writing the above disclaimer, I must say that the forthcoming post doesn’t feel quite as controversial as it did initially. I dunno, maybe it is. In any case, the subject of abuse is certainly (and rightfully) a sensitive one.

Whatever the status of Moses Farrow’s article in relation to the accusations about Woody Allen, when it’s considered in wholly abstract terms I think it’s an important contribution to the conversation about abuse. It speaks to the care and critical thinking with which claims of abuse and abusive situations ought to be treated.

This reminder is two-fold and bidirectional. First, it should remind us to be wary of confirmation bias. E.g. we should be careful not to believe Moses Farrow’s version of events primarily because we want to enjoy Woody Allen’s films without guilt. Such motivations are often tacit and easy to deny (or to repress, for that matter).

Second, and from the opposite direction, it should also remind us of just how complicated abusive situations often are. Generally-speaking, it’s too easy and self-serving to immediately jump into firmly advocating for x, where x is the simplest story that initially rings true for us, or fits with our anecdotal experiences or sociopolitical agendas.

In particular, one complication that the article raises (whether or not it’s relevant to the specific case of Mia Farrow vs Woody Allen) is the following rather counterintuitive fact:

falsely accusing others of abuse is a prominent characteristic of abusive people.

Needless to say, this fact alone serves to massively complicate outsider interpretations of abuse claims, even though the informal benefit of the doubt should probably lie with accusers rather than the accused, for broadly pragmatic reasons (and contrary to the legal presumption of innocence, which itself exists for broadly pragmatic reasons). Of course, it’s also the case that truly accusing others of abuse is, by logical necessity, a characteristic of targets of abuse or people speaking on their behalf. However, unlike the above, this fact is hardly a counter-intuitive one.

Given that making false accusations of abuse is a prominent characteristic of abusers, why is it somewhat counterintuitive? In part, I suspect it’s counterintuitive just because it implies that in many cases of alleged abuse, appearances are not merely deceiving but exactly the reverse of what is true (or, to be more accurate, the negation or contradiction of the truth). Such pills are always going to be hard to swallow. Separately, I suspect it’s counterintuitive partly because we’re falling prey to something that usually serves us well—namely, our empathy—and that our empathy is letting us down in two different ways.

First, I suspect that our empathy is letting us down because it makes it hard for us to imagine that some people are wired very differently from ourselves. Automatically, we tend to try to explain other people’s behaviour by using ourselves as a model, and projecting onto other people our own most likely reasons for the relevant behaviour. Because of this, it can strike us as the height of implausibility that someone would make a false claim of abuse, merely because there are very few possible contexts in which we imagine that we (or people relevantly like us) would have a compelling motivation for doing so. (Why would they lie? It’s too risky! Why would they risk the humiliation, invasions of privacy, victim-blaming, character assassinations, and negative attention unless they were telling the truth?!)

Let’s put aside the fact that there are people who are psychotic to varying degrees, and therefore might firmly and inflexibly believe things for which they have absolutely no evidence. Even so, there‘s a substantial chunk of the population (approximately 10 in every 100 people) who not only lie frequently, but also have pathological motivations for lying that would seem bizarre to a person who was relevantly psychologically healthy, and would be difficult for such a person to comprehend.

Indeed, this is a large part of the reason that making false accusations of abuse is a prominent characteristic of abusive people in the first place. Broadly-speaking, lying to get what you want, and compulsively shifting the blame at any cost, are themselves abusive behaviours. The personality disorders that dispose people to abusive behaviours also dispose them, inter alia, to impulsive risk-taking, psychological projection, lying, confabulating, creating drama for it’s own sake, seeking attention (sometimes even if it’s negative), and compulsive blame-shifting. Thus, in effect, such disorders dispose people to making false accusations of abuse, in circumstances in which no healthy person would have any motivation to do so, and even in circumstances in which doing so would be not just risky but inevitably self-destructive. If you don’t suffer from one of these personality disorders then unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) you have very little hope of grasping the mindset and motivations of such a person. In lieu of this intuitive understanding, you simply have to take into account, as a brute fact, that approximately 10% of people (and probably slightly more) can have pathological motivations for falsely accusing others; motivations that would seem bizarre or prohibitively counter-productive to you.

In effect, when it strikes you as implausible that a particular accuser would be lying, it does so only because of your tacit assumption that the accuser is unlikely to be pathologically abusive. However, this assumption could easily come from the fact that you’re also tacitly assuming the wrong reference class—namely, the general population. A random member of the general population is rather unlikely to be pathologically abusive (since this is only true of roughly 10% of that population). However, the general population isn’t the correct reference class. The correct reference class is the population of people who’ve made accusations of abuse (whether true or false). To oversimplify slightly, a member of the general population will have made an accusation of abuse if and only if she either has been a genuine target of abuse, is a spokeperson thereof, or is actually a pathological abuser herself. Overall, this makes up a relatively small percentage of the general population. However, since making accusations of abuse is a prominent characteristic of pathological abusers, pathological abusers make up a sizeable proportion of those who’ve made accusations of abuse (whether true or false). In other words, pathologically abusive people are drastically over-represented within the correct reference class (the population of people who’ve made accusations of abuse, whether they be true or false). Accordingly, while it might seem implausible that a particular accuser would be lying for pathological reasons, it also follows from the mere fact of the accusation that the likelihood of such pathology is actually relatively high; indeed much higher than one might intuitively expect. By extension, one ought to expect the likelihood of an accusation’s falsehood to be much higher than one would expect on the basis of intuition (assuming that the relevant intuitions arise from familiarity with the general population, tacit beliefs about the average person, or tacit beliefs about people who’ve been selected completely at random).

The second way in which I suspect that our empathy is letting us down is far more straightforward. Simply put, we’re more likely to believe and want to comfort and defend those who are presenting to us as victims of abuse, and more likely to want to disbelieve, condemn, and punish those who are presenting to us as perpetrators of abuse. Generally-speaking, of course, these are good inclinations to have. However, it’s important to remember that abusers are good at exploiting those very inclinations for their own benefit. Indeed, this speaks to many of the reasons that abusive people make false accusations in the first place—namely, to garner sympathy, save face, avoid responsibility, get attention (even if it’s negative), shift the blame onto others, devalue and discredit others, punish others, force others to remain in their lives (rather paradoxically), and so on. Indeed, in genuinely abusive situations, it’s terrifyingly common that the real abuser appears to be a sympathetic victim, while the real victim appears to be an unhinged aggressor or crazy person (usually the result, in part, of trauma from having been abused).

I should reiterate, at this point, that I‘m not intending to suggest that Mia Farrow’s accusations about Woody Allen are false or pathological; nor am I intending to challenge the informal social practice of erring on the side of accusers rather than the accused, when it comes to the benefit of the doubt. It’s just that if Moses Farrow’s article is true, then it would seem to imply that Mia Farrow’s false accusations are indeed pathological in the relevant way. And, as is typical of such cases, it would seem that the personality disturbances from which the false accusations arose would have originated with Mia Farrow’s own traumatic experiences as a target of abuse. In this way, Moses Farrow’s article raises the issues that I’ve discussed whether or not it happens to be completely true.

Regardless of what you might tell yourself, you’re not siding with or protecting victims of abuse by ignoring complications of this kind, in order to settle for a simplistic narrative that just so happens to support your existing prejudices or accord with your confirmation bias. Instead, you’re actually providing aid and protection to abusers—specifically, those abusers who are counting on the fact that you’ll ignore the possibility of their own abusiveness, while they set about destroying other people’s lives. Abusers can only count on this because the possibility of their own abusiveness is not always immediately obvious, because this possibility complicates matters (and we prefer our matters to be easily digestible and outrageous, rather than indefinitely uncertain and emotionally confusing), and perhaps because they know that we’re wary of contributing to the very real problem of victim-blaming and invalidation, which genuine targets of abuse so frequently face.

I guess what I’m saying is that these things are pretty complicated, and we should always be wary of a simple and emotionally-resonant explanation, whether it resonates with us because it soothes us or because it horrifies us. In fact, it’s precisely when things are at their most emotional and confusing and distressing that our hard-won critical faculties are most important. It’s when we’re feeling a powerful emotional push towards believing something, or when things just seem self-evidently one particular extreme way, that we should be most careful to engage in self-questioning and scientific reasoning, and to recall what we know about our own cognitive biases and misleading intuitions.

There are good pragmatic reasons for resolving to err on the side of accusers, rather than on the side of the accused. But in light of Moses Farrow’s article, one is forced to ask: which of the accusers, exactly? By themselves, surely all of the following are relatively bad answers to this question: ‘the one who first made an accusation’, ‘the one who made the first accusation that I heard’, ‘the one whose accusation, if true, makes me feel better about watching certain films’, ‘the one who’s accusation fits with the kinds of abuse with which I’m most familiar, or fits with my uninformed preconceptions about what is likely or plausible’, ‘the one whose accusation pertains specifically to sexual abuse’, ‘the one whose accusation pertains specifically to the abuse of children’, ‘the one whose accusation would most horrify me if true’, ‘the one whose accusation pertains specifically to the abuse of someone of gender A by someone of gender B’, ‘the accuser who is gender A rather than gender B’, etc.

I admit that prior to reading Moses Farrow’s article, I erred on the side of believing that Woody Allen must have done something abusive. I’m sure that this belief involved some countervailing of the potential for confirmation bias, since I do like Allen’s early films. I’m also sure that the appearance of Allen’s guilt wasn’t helped by the social oddness of the relationship between Soon-Yi and himself, along with the very real potential for exploitation or an asymmetry of power there. Also, you know, it’s tempting to think that where there’s smoke there must be fire (a belief that’s justified roughly in proportion to the number of independent scientific verifications of smoke, together with the average amount of smoke thus verified). Also, if Allen did even some of the alleged stuff, then that would be really bad. And so on. Of course, by itself, none of these is a particularly good reason.

I’m not sure where I stand now, after having read Moses Farrow’s article. Many of the details seem convincing to me. But who the fuck knows (apart from the people who are directly involved). And I guess that’s the overall point, as unsettling and unsatisfying as it might be.

Regardless of how one should err pragmatically, perhaps the surest belief that one can form, upon hearing a claim of abuse, is that some instance of abuse has almost certainly taken place, even if it’s not the particular instance that’s asserted by the claim.

[occupyvenus]

Yes, I hope we get a shot of those burnt lannister army that just destroyed the Tyrell army. I wonder if any of those Tyrell army men were expecting a child too? Probably

You know I’ve been thinking about numerous ways to answer this … maybe make a statement about how you are completely (and I believe deliberately) missing the point, maybe go on a long rant about how not a single one of Dany’s enemies so far has been sufficiently humanized for us to actually care (compared to many antagonists our other heroes faced), and some more blah blah blah, but it I think you actually put an interesting thought in my head … so thank you 😘 

I think that having one of the ed-sheeran-squad soldiers turn up dead at the Field of Fire would be far more emotionally involving, if not challenging, than having a equally “developed” Tyrell-soldier show up dead at after Jaime sacked high garden. It would make way more sense for the narrative and let’s call it “viewer-engagement” as well.  

War is an ugly affair. The books show this much better than the show, but even though GoT loves it’s bloodshed in an almost perverse degree and I’m pretty sure D&D get off good to gruesome revenge and violence, it has depicted the horrible realities of war several times. War is ugly. Really ugly.

But Grrm is not making the point that war is always wrong, no matter how ugly. There are things worth fighting and dying for, maybe, probably, even sending other men to their death for.

The important question is what are those things? How do we know?

Fiction and especially visual mediums have a rather easy solution for this: Show us the consequences after we know about the motives and intentions and let our gut decide. Those feelings can sometimes be hard to articulate, but you can and should try (I mean we are on tumblr here after all). But war-battle-sequences are a bit tricky: We get lost in all the spectacle and the amazing visual effects. At some point you just don’t see “people” anymore. We really need a “human face” to produce a real emotional connection. I think that the best way to achieve this is the pov-battle-sequence. You follow one character through the chaos, the bloodshed, the killing, a la Jon Snow in the botb. Draws you right into the horror that is war, you don’t even need tragic backstories for it. They tried to replicate this with Jaime and/or Bronn but it didn’t feel quite as “intimate” as it did with Jon. I am not exactly sure why, maybe it’s just me, but the botb is still the BEST FUCKING BATTLE SEQUENCE IN THIS GODDAMN SHOW ! I WILL FIGHT YOU ON THIS! THE FUCKING EMOTION BEHIND IT! THE FUCKING CAMERA-WORK! LIKE FUCK IT WAS … but I digress. 

War is especially ugly if the party we are rooting for is in the offensive. We tend to be far more forgiving towards people in the defensive, after all they didn’t “choose” to fight. So far, we have already witnessed two wars in which our hero could be seen as the “aggressor”, sort of. One of them certainly more than the other, but bear with me for a minute. In this case we really have to be down with this issue, we really need to agree with what “we are going to war for”. 

1. Robb’s Northern Campaign

I don’t know if it’s really fair to call him the “aggressor” (it isn’t, btw), considering everything that lead to his decision, but I hope you get the parallels I’m trying to draw here. He took his army south - into “foreign territory” - and went in for the attack on people that wronged his family. The show did not shy away from showing how ugly it was. We got this nice little scene of a Lannisters soldiers foot being cut off. A poor lad from a fishing-village near Lannisport who had no choice in any of this. In the beginning Talisa’s entire character more or less resolved around throwing shade at Robb (and de facto the audience) for being YASSSS KING IN THE NORTH! FIGHT THOSE FUCKERS! DEATH TO JOFFREY! DEATH TO THE LANNISTERS! As much as criticism Talisa’s character received, she did serve one important role. She put on her best disappointed mom-face, looked us straight in the eyes and asked “Now look at the mess you’ve made, was that worth it?” In this case both the narrative and most, if not the entire audience agreed: Yes. It failed, but Robb was right for trying. Our conscious was tested by an “innocent” enemy soldier being crippled, but Robb’s “honor” came out of it intact. We understood his motives and intuitively decided that this war might be ugly (as all of them are), but not necessarily “wrong”.

2. Dany’s Invasion 

Side-note: About the dead Tyrell soldier: There is no reason to put in a dead lovable Tyrell soldier, because we already know that Cersei is driven by nothing but powerhunger. How would that influence the audience? Hah, Cersei evil doing evil shit, what else is new. We know that she (on the whole) is bringing death and destruction to the Seven Kingdoms for completely selfish reasons. The only thing that would accomplish would be to flash out Cersei as “tha villain™” and that really isn’t necessary at this point… We are not rooting for her, we do not have to ask ourselves whether her motives “justify” all this. We already know the answer to this: No. (Though I suppose there are some weirdos who are genuinely rooting for her, most are just fucking cynical … I hope, I neither want her nor Dany anywhere near a Throne). 

It feels like until this point, both D&D, Dany and the audience have been “selling” her invasion as a glorious endeavour, quite similar in many aspects to Robb’s Rebellion actually. They are both trying to avenge their father, they are trying to overthrow an illegitimate ruler, both have armies at their backs that fiercely believe in them, both said that they do not want the blood of innocence on their hands. Among the differences is that Dany clearly is the main aggressor of this war and that her motives might not be as “pure”. She is not trying to save her siblings, her father was rightfully disposed and most importantly: She is a conquerer. She is fighting to gain power over others. She is waging war for her “birthright”.

I would simply love for one of those ed-sheeran-squad lannister soldiers to show up dead because it would put Dany’s ideals and her crusade to the same ultimate test: How are we feeling about the mess Dany is causing? Is that worth it? Do we start to question her after being faced with an innocent real human victim we are at least a bit familiar with? Someone we can actually empathize with instead of the anonymous mass of soldiers she sets on fire? This is less about the poor soldier himself and more about our reaction to it. And how it does or does not change our perception of the person responsible for it. 

Also Dany does not have her own personal Talisa right now. Varys and/or Tyrion might involve into something similar, but since they are still on Dany’s side … let’s just wait and see.

I know that my original post was a bit snarky, but why do you even assume that we would automatically blame Dany for his death and not Cersei for sending him to the Reach in the first place or simply the universe for “the world” being such an awful, awful place. I’m sure after giving on of her inspiring speeches, all would be forgotten. Maybe the reason that you, anon, and so many others are that sensible and defensive to this suggestion (you are not the first ask and I doubt you’ll be the last), is that you yourself are not sure if Dany’s “purpose” justifies this? Is that it? Maybe? 

If Dany’s conquest is only worth fighting for if no lives are lost (or at least none that we care about) … is it really worth it at all? Should we cheer for her to win if one dead father leaves a bitter taste in our mouths? Have you lost faith in Dany’s cause and can’t stomach the consequences once they have a human face? In that case, welcome to the club. I can’t neither. Come to the dark!dany-side! We appreciate and love her character as the interesting, multi-faceted “villain” she really is and we have cookies. 

[ericleo108]

🌆 The Result of Corporate Rule in America: On Gun Control and Abortion

This post is in two parts, “On Abortion” and “Gun Control.” Both subjects are used to show how corporations rule. I use reason, philosophy, and anatomy to make my case that America is ruled by corporations and gun control and abortion are an example of the horrid outcome. 

Gun Control: Does America Deserve School Shootings?

What I want you to think about is “Does America deserve school shootings?” 

At first look, you have to think it’s absolutely repulsive to deserve such a thing. But when we look at the expectation and the reality the contrast is quite stark. Children and adults are grabbing guns, the best semi-automatic that is available, and are shooting up schools and public places. It’s an epidemic. 

Any rational country would look at the problem, clearly see it’s the access to guns, and ban them. As a matter of fact, although I don’t think it goes far enough, that’s what everyone wants! Everyone wants background checks. 

Proponents from the republican party like to blame video games. We don’t have to look any further than our neighbors in the pacific to see that isn’t true. Japan has a rampant video game culture but they don’t have mass shootings because guns are illegal. In Europe, even the cops don’t have guns. 

The problem is with how the way the country is run. Many Democrats whole campaign is fixing wealth inequality. Money in politics is such a problem monied interest buy elections and the legislature through lobbying. Princeton calls the US an oligarchy. This corporate rule is universal and is no more evident than with gun control. Tom Steyer puts it best:

People don't think about this in terms of corporations, but we've had decades of gun violence in this country that's off the charts, almost every day we see a mass shooting... 60% of gun-related deaths are suicides.  Over 90 percent of Americans want mandatory background checks on every gun purchase for a long time, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. Over 90%, and we've never gotten it and the reason is, the NRA is controlled by the gun manufacturers and they won't let it happen. (6:26) 

America deserves school shootings because it is a symptom of a dysfunctional democracy and tyrannical rule. The individual doesn’t deserve it, the country does. People value money and their guns over children and safety. The country as a whole doesn’t do what it needs too to end mass violence in America, they make excuses and their actions are really a value judgment. What should we expect? If you were serious about ending mass violence in America you enact stricter gun control measures even if it meant a constitutional amendment. 

The political theory behind the second amendment largely came from John Locke who said we need guns to overthrow the government if it becomes tyrannical. In “Locke's view, regulations of the means of self-defense may be enacted by a duly constituted legislative power if thought to be for the public good, even though this may limit the arms available to individuals when confronted with aggressors or tyrants.” That’s the theory. However, It comes down to this, the gun companies control the NRA, the NRA lobbies win in congress.

This is the same with health care. People die because they can’t afford their medications and can’t afford to see a doctor. This is how greed manifests itself, it costs lives. America doesn’t have universal health care or consider healthcare a human right. Just like with banning guns, America doesn’t do what is necessary to usher in a more peaceful and prosperous future so they deserve the violence created by their greed, their ignorance, and their ability to act. You’re not supposed to like it, just like I don’t, but I accept as an American, if we let corporations run the government and the electorate, death and mass violence is what we deserve. 

On Abortion: Judith Jarvis Thomson & Faith

In this treatise I will introduce the philosophical argument of abortion from Judith Jarvis Thomson. Then I’ll talk about the anatomy of pregnancy. I will explore the pro-life stance and Christian morality and then talk about abortion as a women’s health issue. Throughout and at the end I will explain why corporate rule is responsible. 

I see many pro-life arguments, mostly from Christians, and they are all rather illogical. In this writing, I will explore why (especially) Christians think as they do. I explore why irrationality rules the mind and commands the will of many who support the pro-life arguments. Personally, I’m pro-choice because I see pregnancy and abortion as a women’s healthcare issue. To explore the argument for abortion properly we’ll turn to a dilemma by Judith Javis Thomson: 

“You wake up in the morning and find yourself back-to-back in bed with an unconscious violinist, a famous violinist, who has a fatal kidney ailment. You alone have the right blood type to help and so you have been kidnapped and plugged into the violinist’s circulatory system, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. You are told that if you disconnect him he will die. But if you allow him to remain plugged into you for nine months, he will be cured and survive.”

“It would be very nice if you were to agree to lie there for nine months until the violinist is cured. But you are not morally obliged to leave him plugged in. You have the right to disconnect yourself, if you wish.” Although “if the violinist has the ‘right to life,’ a right that trumps your right to do with your own body as you wish, then you are morally obliged to leave him connected.” 

“Thomson thinks this demonstrates that there is something wrong with the ‘right to life’ argument.” “Thomson concedes people may have a right to life. But that does not mean they can never be killed, only that they should not be killed unjustly.” There would be no injustice in disconnecting the violinist or a fetus. “Her strongest argument is that, in order to argue for the immorality of abortion, it is not enough simply to show that a fetus is a person.” 1

Christians conflate faith with having good morals. If you can’t think for yourself you can’t have a good ethical foundation. Like most who give their life to faith, Christians don’t have the will or understanding to make cogently reasoned ethics. 

This is where I would like to bring in an argument from the pro-life side. There is a video of a gentleman that is upset about Miley Cyrus licking a cake that says “abortion is healthcare.” After watching the video you realize people with no education or understanding are baseless in their assumptions which they find noble in misinterpreting the meaning of a fertilized egg. The cognitive dissonance is so great the zealots equate abortion with killing babies. 

In a more realistic perspective pregnancy is a woman’s health issue where abortion is protected as a constitutional right. From the pro-life view their protecting life. The problem is they don’t see it as a potential life already in a live person who has rights. To American organized Christianity women are just a vessel once pregnant. 

Bill Nye’s argument about the commonality of fertilized eggs and how they shouldn’t be considered a person is more reasonable. Below is a picture of the gestation periods of a developing baby. Even if we put aside Judith Thomson’s argument about the morality of unplugging an adult, the blastocyst doesn’t even resemble a human until 9 weeks.

You can get a glimpse of just how ignorant the pro-lifer is by listening.  He says “Our future generations will look at us as barbaric.” Actually, the most current philosophical argument is Judith Thomson’s and it’s about how the woman has rights over her body and shouldn’t have to carry the baby to term. He fails to give any historical context because we actually look quite civilized to the ancient Spartans who used to have government overseers who would throw babies off a cliff after birth if they didn’t meet the state’s standards. What is barbaric is taking away access to abortion that makes it safe.

He also says “Abortion is so good we’re gonna equate it to cake.” This man has no empathy or respect for women. It’s more like women celebrating their freedom over their own bodies. Maybe now women know how black people feel because this is what the white man does, convinces you that you don’t have rights and your interests are his. Just like with this guy, it’s usually men making the decisions over abortion and therefore women’s healthcare. 

So why does this man hold a belief contrary to objective reality? … because of faith. To believe in Jesus and his teachings don’t require reason but faith which is ending reason for belief in a religious doctrine. He probably thinks the bible is the holy word of the lord because he was told it. The problem is not only are his morals and ethics based on outdated and allegorical stories that are defended with faith, but he can’t decipher reality. 

The picture of this car with its stickers that “Jesus is Lord” and “Earth is Flat” is a great example of what faith-based religion has become. It’s clear from looking at this car, the owner doesn’t know how to discern reality. The result is a large portion of the population doesn’t think for themselves. They don’t use reason to make decisions, they use faith... and where does that faith come from? People like a preacher and god-fearing politicians that have all the answers and don’t require you to think. Christians and pro-lifers believe what they are told to believe. They are giving blind faith to power, not god. 

This ignorance is why corporations rule. In my post “Gun Control” I discuss how corporations rule because they buy elections and congress, but that only works because they have learned to manipulate the minds of the masses that, as you can see, aren’t very intelligent. The wealthy have had decades to develop their propaganda to rule ever since Edward Bernays. Since they don’t use reason, all the wealthy have to do is make a faith-based argument to gain support. There needs to be a resurgence of reason and independent thought in America if we ever hope to fix America’s problems like inequality, healthcare, and gun control.

With Planned Parenthood under attack, the fear of being ruled by ignorance is a reality for women in America. In reality, abortion is women’s healthcare. Let’s take rape for example. If you say a woman has to be raped to be able to get an abortion your saying she has to be violated to have rights over her own body. A woman should have the rights over her own body regardless of being violated. In the Gender Equality treatise, I talk about how allowing “rape babies” is breeding aggression (or at very least that behavior) towards women into the species by not getting an abortion. 

Still, subjects like abortion and gun control are related in their support. Usually, those who are pro-life are also pro-gun. My favorite is how the pro-lifer in the video has a hat on with a gun over the American flag. Ignorance loves company. As Gloria Steinem puts it: 

"How about we treat every young man who wants to buy a gun like every woman who wants to get an abortion — mandatory 48-hr waiting period, parental permission, a note from his doctor proving he understands what he's about to do, a video he has to watch about the effects of gun violence, an ultrasound wand up the ass (just because). Let's close down all but one gun shop in every state and make him travel hundreds of miles, take time off work, and stay overnight in a strange town to get a gun. Make him walk through a gauntlet of people holding photos of loved ones who were shot to death, people who call him a murderer and beg him not to buy a gun. It makes more sense to do this with young men and guns than with women and health care, right? I mean, no woman getting an abortion has killed a room full of people in seconds, right?"

With the exploration of these two topics, abortion and gun control, it’s clear to see how the wealthy rule. They create an ignorant faith-based populous whose opinions who can be swayed to enact their will. People are too stupid to vote for their interests and rampant inequality, gun violence, and a broken healthcare system is the result. 

Law, Stephen “Judith Jarvis Thomson.” In The Great Philosophers, 197. London: Quercus Publishing, 2007

[outlyingthoughts]

Trapped in a carnival: Feb 19

According to the Oxford reference definition, a carnival is : “a social expression that often subverts and parodies the conventions of society. Such subversion, parody, and satire, when applied to other realms of everyday life such as literature, is sometimes called ‘carnivalesque’. It exposes and mocks the flawed practices and decrees of officialdom”.

Costumed festivities are and have been a recurrent pattern in innumerable cultures across the globe. Whether it is the Catholic carnival or the Halloween tradition in the english-speaking world (derived from the pageant celebrations of the Gaelic Samhain Eve festival), it appears that costuming is part of basic human traditions and behaviors, regardless of cultures, ages and places.

Couples days ago, my friends and I were about to attend a themed party (basic human behavior remember?). Angels and demons. After agreeing that we’d go all together, we quickly started to rack our brains, trying to figure out how we would dress up for the event and we settled for matching outfits.

A friend and I ended up twinning as demons, both of us wearing bodysuits with coordinated colors. red and black. Hellish colors for what we expected would be hell of a night. But when I got my bodysuit out of the mail, questions were raised. As I tried it on for the first time with two friends, one had a knee-jerk reaction to it, stating that it was a lot and that she wouldn’t be comfortable wearing it. The other one’s opinion was in between, liking the outfit but also unsure about the revealing features of the bodysuit.

Revealing, indeed it was. A red laced V-neck, leaving little room for mystery. And even though questions started to build up into a debate within my styling crew (isn’t that what friends are?) on whether I should pull it off or not, one part of me was clinging onto the idea of wearing it. As I slipped into the bodysuit, I also slipped into the character, making me out of the sudden both emboldened and confident. Frustrating it would have been to not wear it.

Women bodies have always been pointed out as fruits of sin, and this idea is somehow anchored in most of human cultures for a reason I still haven’t figured out. As early as the metaphor of Adam and Eve, women have been branded with the symbolism of temptation but also as temptations themselves. We have been directed by patriarchal society to hide our bodies, one way or another, and throughout history to remain pure: putting on us men’s faults, weaknesses and inability to control their desires and blaming the victims.

As much as desires are also part of basic human behaviors, they are also a peculiar craft of our own. Shaped and reshaped during our entire socialization, they are mirrors molded in the cultures we live in. Human desires are inherently artificial, they are not biological needs and are rarely fulfilled for the sake of specie survival.

Thus the idea of lack of agency regarding one’s desires and the debate on one’s responsibility over her/his desire is a crucial concept. Researches have been and are still conducted to analyze the human brain and its reactions. The results of the first studies of that kind had serious legal implications as law solely relies on them to prove that humans are physically able to control their desires, thus legally binding them for their voluntary and conscious choice to commit an offense or a crime in the pulse of a desire. Such studies highlighted the fact, that it is possible for any mentally healthy human to control its desires and react to them according to her/his will.

Based on this, the almost automatic societal response consisting in blaming male’s lack of control and agency towards their sexual desire over women’s behavior and appearance comes as a proof of the normalization of what I consider a deviant behavior that men are socialized to interpret as normal or at least something they shouldn’t be held responsible for. Funnily enough, throughout history, those same men claimed that women had no will of their own and thus shouldn’t study, vote, work on their own, meaning shouldn’t be responsible of their own lives. For centuries, we have been handled by our fathers, husbands or literally any chromosome Y bearing person on earth, the very same that are rarely held accountable for their abnormal desire-led behaviors while putting a stereotype of irresponsibility on women.

Without meaning to, my red laced top was thrown in the middle of an everlasting debate: should I censor myself or be blamed for other people’s voluntary sexualization of my body ? A lot of weight on the shoulders of an eighteen years old girl who just wanted to party with her friends. As one part of me craved to rock my very own forbidden fruit as I felt enbolded in it and it had been praised by all my very feminist and politically aware friends, the other part of me held all the negative remarks, feeling guilty just at the thought of wearing it, as it would make me the prey of male gaze. If I listened to the remarks I got, by dressing up in such ways I’d justify or worst encourage the behavior I was denouncing earlier. To sum up, I’d become another blamable temptation. This highlights how we still live in a patriarchal society in which the rape culture is still a burning reality, where sexualizing women’s bodies regardless of the context or their intent is still the norm.

After dwelling on whether I should or not wear it, I went against my doubts and decided that I’d wear it for several reasons. Firstly, I know for a fact that if you are going to be sexually harassed or aggressed, the way you dress is just a mere excuse for the aggressor. Hiding behind clothes branded as « safe » isn’t 1) a solution for the societal issue behind the debate 2) going to prevent the person whose mind is set on agressing you from agressing you. It simply strips you from your freedom to dress accordingly to your own will, and that is a fundamental freedom for women. That day, I decided to not let male gaze or any normative patriarchal discourse prevent me from exercising this freedom that has been given to me through the fights of generations and generations of women.

As for the “reputation” side of dressing up in such ways, I sent out to our main groupchat the following text: «so I’m gonna go like that (insert picture) to Angel and Demons, so if you wanna gossip about it, you can start now, because people will see my nipples and I don’t care, if anyone pisses me off, I’ll tell them not to look at me, it’s not my problem if people choose to sexualize a part of my body that is not sexualized on men». I did not want to let slut-shaming get in my way, and quite frankly it’s 2019, if you put words and meaning behind appearances and acts, there is little harm possible to your “reputation”. Everybody understood and accepted my decision, my incentives were praised and others girls told me they had also decided to dress up in -what could be branded- a “scandalous” way. Being mainly surrounded by male friends that are aware of how flawed our society is in terms of sexism and aspire to participate along the side of women in the making of new norms, they also supported my choice of wearing my red bodysuit and I was, then, 200% sold.

From the moment I posted that text until the day of the event, everything went great, people might have been bad mouthing me but for all I knew and I cared, my friends supported me and the party turned out to be a fun event and we danced the night away. I don’t know if it is that I’m surrounded by an amazing community or that I simply got lucky, but no one harmed me, looked at me intensely in that threatening sexual manner that too many of us know. I tried to limit the spread on social media of pictures from that night to websites where I could control them. Yet to be honest, as soon we accept to take pictures or go out in our everyday life, we accept that anyone can find, keep and spread later images of us in public spaces. This bodysuit debate made me come up with a guideline of only wearing and doing things I would and will still be ok with being seen and posted in a twenty years time. This oversharing and ineffaceability that characterizes the internet created something that most of my friends and I have integrated. Living in an overconnected world and planning to have thriving careers, we owe it to our success to own and control every single word, act and image of us that could be, in this digital age, used against us.

But here again, I would willingly show these pictures to my children, and if I ever get lucky enough I’d be proud to explain my decision of wearing such revealing piece of clothing to who ever would try to minimize my professional legitimacy or who I am to a simply piece of scarlet lace. Because that is something that needs to be reiterated, the world has to stop associating women’s worth to their appearance. I find it increasingly shocking as days pass by that a woman can be denigrated on the basis of her clothing only because people have crossed boundaries and sexualized parts of her body regardless of whether she meant or not to sexualize her outfit. I could go on and on about Instagram’s policy regarding the ban women’s nipple while male nipples are seen as non harming to/by the Instagram community, or even something as innocent as hairstyles in the professional life (the fact that black women are often facing troubles within the corporate context because most of our natural hairstyles are considered to be unprofessional or unfit to someone holding a high position in hierarchy): it appears that women’s bodies have been institutionalized as a danger to human kind requiring to be tamed or hidden.

Meanwhile, few days after the Angels and Demons night, one of my relatives called me, fuming after seeing pictures from the party. He said he was ashamed of me, of seeing me dressed up like this, in a way he considered indecent.

But whether it is or not indecent, little do I care. The problem with “indecency” or such terms is that they are socially constructed and vary according to time periods and cultures. One part of me has understood through socialization that indeed nudity or partially nudity is indecent/deviant, abnormal/illegal in public, which makes me understand his point of view and shock, but then another other one looks at #freethenipple movements and many others, that argue that what makes women’s breasts or part of them indecent today is the tradition of blatant sexualization of women’s bodies throughout ages. In my relative’s argumentation, it appeared that a huge part of the issue to him was the vision people would have of me, that men already “disrespect women but that it’d be worst” if people associated me to that lacy scandal. He professed that I’d only meet ‘bad men’ and have a bad reputation if I kept up with that attitude.

And I was shook to my very core.

There was something extremely primitive and backward to his arguments. While I could understand his views on decency, the fact that he supported them using patriarchal clichés, implying that if I hooked up with men and dressed in a provocative way, I could/would only be passivily used by men. Through his speech, he took from me any kind of control over my sexuality or room for my own desires as he was describing the “consequences” of appearing in public in such ways.

This made me realize how women’s desires are often suppressed or disregarded from mainstream discourses and ideas but also the way I was educated by my atheist so-called progressive left leaning family. Within my family context, female sexuality was solely addressed in the context of informing us about sexual reproduction -which I already feel very lucky I received because there is an unbelievable number of women on earth who are not taught about their own selves, thus lacking of any resources to learn how to protect themselves and their sexual life-. But never has any adult throughout my teenage years addressed what pleasure was. Not in sex ed class, not in a family talk on sexuality, never.  The thing is that along with not owning the sexualization of our bodies or the link between our reputations and appearance, society also expected us to be hidden whores. You’re expected to meet patriarchal expectations, be a sexual being (remember our bodies throw men “out of control and responsibility”!) but you can’t explore it on your own  (outside of a normative heterosexual monogamous exclusive relationship) without being discredited, stigmatized as being a slut or deviant.

As such my relative was afraid that my reputation as a woman (supposed to have standards) would be jeopardiwed because I’d be associated with a provocative piece of clothing suggesting that I’m not a hidden whore but an public one. It felt like he thought I couldn’t afford to not be respectable based on men judgement and standards. Then he suggested that my outfits would increase the chances of me of getting raped or sexually harassed and it felt like he was just re-assessing the entire sexist dynamic of our society: instead of normalizing women’s ability to dispose of and expose their body in the way they want to, it just slut-shames them into covering their body parts.

By saying that he was ashamed, he associated my clothing to a certain type of behavior that he then judged and shamed. Adding to the fact that it is inherently wrong to “judge a book by its cover”, it just shows how even people that know you rarely dissociate people from their appearances and tend to easily forget your initial worth when they interpret negatively the symbolism in your clothing. As he normalized through his discourse the minimization of women to their appearance and legitimized through his meant-to-be educational advices that women are treated and seen as if they were as shallow as the layers they coat themselves into, I felt hurt. Without meaning to, he still suggested that I was acting like a whore. As hurt as I was, still I knew.

I knew that I had slipped into my stigmatizing scarlet bodysuit just the time of a night and I wouldn’t let myself become my carnival costume. And so no matter how bad I felt, I decided that I’d keep on dressing up the way I wanted to. One day this relative might tell me off again and I’ll tell him: I won’t reduce all my intelligence, experiences, dreams and expectations to the way I appear to people that are -sorry if I cross anyone- stupid enough to judge me only in the context of a themed party and choose to ignore the multiple layers a human being can have.

[scripttorture]

Not sure if you've already answered something like this, but I haven't seen anything so far... what are the psychological effects on a torturer? Are most of them able to just brush it off and move on with their day when they torture someone, or does it haunt them? Also, I'm setting up a situation where my character is tortured and then forced to torture the girl he loves (with threats of "we'll kill her if you don't do this"). Would that in itself be consider a form of psychological torture?

Very goodquestion! I have a Masterpost coming up that covers some of this but I’ve beenquite bad about posting Masterposts regularly- I should change that.

 Therehave been no scientific studies on torturers but the anecdotal evidence in thiscase is overwhelming-

 Torture is incredibly bad for torturers.

 Torturerscan be expected to manifest the same severepsychological symptoms as their victims.

 Theleading theory at the moment is that this is because of how we register andprocess other people’s pain. Humans have an innate, measureable, automaticresponse to seeing other humans in pain. It isn’t something we can control orstop and it is essentially traumatising.

 The major patterns for torturers are (broadlyspeaking) substance abuse, addiction, depression, PTSD and suicide.  

 Thesymptoms usually manifest after theyhave stopped torturing and are away from the environment where they were encouragedto torture. As an example, soldiers who tortured generally show symptoms afterthey come home or are moved to a different unit where torture is not supported.Away from a structure that reassures them they acted correctly torturers break down.

 To quoteone of the British torturers interviewed in ‘Cruel Britannia’

 ‘We are where we are- and we’re left poppingour Prozac and taking our pills at night.’

 Basicallythey might be able to move on with theirday immediately afterwards. But they probably won’t be able to move on withtheir life a few months later.

 The sortof scenario you’re describing for your character, where he’s forced to torture,is the sort of scenario that (anecdotally) seems likely to make him suicidal.His recovery might be helped if ‘his’victim shows an understanding that he didn’t act willingly.

 I try tostay away from the term ‘psychological torture’ where possible. That’s partlybecause there’s not a clear distinction (all of the things I discuss produceserious, measurable physical changes in the brain) and partly because the termoften gets used to dismiss certain tortures as somehow…..less bad.

 So Iwouldn’t personally call forcing someone to torture a loved one ‘psychologicaltorture’. I would call it torture.And I believe it would meet the legal definition of torture.

 I thinkin the scenario you described it’s highly likely this character will……end upwith a lot of self-loathing. He’ll probably blame himself both for what he didand perhaps for what he suffered later, telling himself that as a ‘torturer’ he‘deserves it’. He may even be blamed by others and ostracised by his community.

 And thatmakes me think that he’ll really need professional help to make a fullrecovery. Because I think otherwise he’s unlikely to get the support he needsto deal with the very serious consequences of these experiences, both as victimand as (unwilling) aggressor.

 I couldwrite more about this, and about particular cases where medical professionalhave examined torturers but I think that might start getting close to tellingyou how I’d write this rather than giving you advice.

 So I’mgoing to line up a Masterpost on torture as a trope in interrogation for laterthis week. It has some more information on torturers and the psychologicaleffects torture has on them. If you’ve got more questions or ideas after thatdrop me another line.

 And goodluck with your story. :)

Disclaimer

[berserkhamster]

Fangs and Muzzles - Chapter 21

another one so soon? something must be wrong

Read it on AO3: http://archiveofourown.org/works/8390551/chapters/23483724

Tags: Alternate Universe - Werewolf, Alternate Universe - Vampire, vampire!Tony, werewolf!Bucky, Hurt/Comfort, lots of fluff, the literal kind as well,   Aftermath of Torture            

Not the best idea he ever had, Tony thought as he clung to a giant werewolf flying through the air wearing nothing but his boxer shorts. The sun was hitting his bare back and tiny bits of glass were poking his skin. A really bad idea, he corrected himself, when Furball landed on the ground and his whole body shook from the impact. The werewolf cushioned the fall by landing in a low crouch but his muscles were hard as rock and did nothing to soften the blow for his passenger.

Furball growled deep in his throat and stayed in his crouch, not moving at all, his whole body vibrating from the tension. Tony relaxed a little bit, he feared the werewolf would turn on him, the way he had looked in the bed room. The rage had practically dripping from his eyes, but there had also been something else. Recognition -  Furball had remembered something and the way he had taken off after JARVIS had revealed he had been with HYDRA had Tony worried the werewolf was going to return to them. He couldn't let that happen.

The suit had to be ready at any second and it was desperately needed, there was no cloud cover and the afternoon sun was burning down on Tony, another thing he hadn't considered when clinging onto Furball. It wouldn't kill him, but it was going to start to get really uncomfortable and eventually really painful if he stayed out in sunlight any longer and it was draining his energy levels fast. He suddenly really regretted not going for another drink of blood at the end of the night earlier.

Suddenly Furball shook himself, not hard enough to throw Tony off but definitely enough to get the point across that he wanted his rider to dismount. Tony tightened his grip around the werewolf's neck.

"You're not going back to them. I'm not letting you." He was counting on Furball's good nature and the tiny bit of trust they had built up over the past days that the werewolf was not going to kill him now. He counted it as a good sign that he wasn't putting more effort into getting rid of him.

Furball shook his head, trying again to dislodge Tony and a couple of times more and Tony would have gone flying because it took all of his strength to hold onto the wolf.

Yelling from the front of the mansion drew their attention, it was soon joined by the roaring of engines and the noise quickly came closer, three agents with drawn guns on quads raced around the corner followed closely by more agents wielding assault rifles.

They were heading straight for them.

"Fuck, JARVIS, now would be a good time." Tony looked back to the mansion and the sight of the suit bursting through the window would have been great but nothing. He doubted JARVIS even heard him out here, he didn't have his phone with him, but if the AI was piloting the suit he should find him without problem.

Furball growled again, looking at the nearing agents on the all-terrain vehicles, and then he suddenly took off, the movement almost dislodging Tony. He ran at top speed but not towards the aggressors like Tony had thought, no, he was running across the garden of the mansion away from the agents and towards the wide expanse of forest that was bordering Tony's property.

Retreat, yes, retreat was good, Tony thought, just as the agents opened fire on them. The bullets zipped past and it took everything Tony had not to let go of Furball and fall off. The werewolf was leaping over fences and walls, zig-zagging through the garden finally reaching the ring of turrets, beyond those they would be safe. They were designed to keep people out but they would recognize the fake SHIELD agents as intruders and return fire. And finally after an eternity Tony heard the familiar buzzing sound of his suit's repulsors, now he could fight back and clean up this mess, he only had to get into the suit and for that he had to get off Furball in one piece, except the werewolf showed no sign of slowing down.

Tony tried to pat him, tried to tug on his fur, yelled against the wind for Furball to stop but either he was completely on auto pilot and didn't notice Tony anymore or he deliberately ignored him.

They reached the tree line and it gave at least a tiny bit of comfort to Tony to not have the blazing sun burning the skin of his back and his legs anymore as they entered the shadowed forest, but the small relief was soon overshadowed by the twigs and branches hitting him instead when Furball broke through the underbrush. All Tony could do was keep his head down and protect his face while he listened to the automatic fire of the Iron Man suit fighting the HYDRA agents behind them. At least JARVIS was having his back. As for Furball, it felt more like he was being kidnapped by the werewolf right now, there was no way he could get off without getting seriously hurt.

Tony didn't know how long he had been clinging to Furball, he didn't seem to slow down, there were brief periods where Tony didn't feel anything hitting his skin, sometimes he felt the sun again but mostly they were traveling in the shade. The sound of bullets and explosion had long faded before Furball made any notion to slow down, Tony couldn't look up, if he moved now he would fall off and pass out from exhaustion. He could do nothing else but hold on.

He was so... /thirsty/.

Eventually the werewolf stopped and crouched and Tony simply slid down into the cold dirt, he felt Furball nudge his head with his snout but he passed out a second later.  

When he came to he could tell at once that some considerable time had passed as it was turning night. It was something. The second thing he noticed was that his whole body was numb and slightly wet. Furball was licking across the many tiny cuts on his skin and it felt really soothing until he remembered where he was and who was responsible for how he got there.

Tony scrambled backwards and got himself into a sitting position, Furball whined and ducked down, making himself as small as possible.

"You want a fucking cookie? Did you try to get me killed?" Fuck, he was in the middle of nowhere with a traitor werewolf and practically naked, he should have just stayed in the bedroom and get into the suit and blast HYDRA into oblivion.

Furball whined again, inching just the tiniest bit closer, head flat on the ground between his paws.

"And what now? We wait for HYDRA to pick us up?" That got Furball out of the defensive and he lunged forward, Tony pulled back, bracing for an attack that didn't come, instead Furball eagerly licked across his face and Tony was barely able to push him back.

"Okay, I am a little bit confused right now and you know I don't like that. Are we still good? Because I vaguely recall we cuddled in bed this morning and this whole kidnapping thing and dragging me through the woods isn't really fitting in with that picture."

Furball just looked at him with those steel grey eyes, ears flat against his head. Communication was again a problem, they really had to work on that. "You know what, just... scratch the ground once for yes and twice for no and now I want to know if you have any intention of going back to HYDRA."

Two scratches.

"Alright, that's good enough for me." Tony was relieved albeit still confused but communicating with Furball now was complicated and exhausting and he was too tired for anything other than maybe passing out again. He really needed some blood to drink or else his body could not heal all the cuts and bruises. He wasn't seriously hurt and under normal circumstances he'd probably not even stop working in this condition but along with the sun exposure and nothing to drink his body threatened to just go into hibernation mode to conserve energy.

Tony scrambled and groaned his way to the nearest tree and gingerly leaned against it, not the best idea with his back practically raw but the ground wasn't an option either. Furball came closer again, walking around him agitated, the werewolf seemed to have endless energy even after running for who knows how long.

"You don't have any blood vials on you by any chance, do you?" Tony would bite something living at this point even if he didn't know how exactly that worked having never done it before, he never needed to nor did he have the desire to. He'd figure it out, he was a genius after all, but chances were nothing was going to come his way anytime soon anyway. Maybe he could ask Furball to let him drink, he was sure the werewolf would comply at this point but Bruce's words were still in his mind. Werewolves and vampires just don't mix.

Furball didn't answer as expected but his behaviour changed, he started sniffing the ground around them, looking for something, then focused in on one direction and started to walk away from Tony.

"Hey, don't leave me here, the least you can do is carry me back!" Tony tried to get up, is body protesting and somehow Furball was back in front of him, gently nudging him down. Tony stayed were he was, having no energy to fight.

Then the werewolf looked at him imploringly and placed his right front paw on Tony's chest. He nodded awkwardly, like he was trying to mimic human behaviour, before turning around, walking in the same direction again. Tony didn't make an attempt to follow this time, he got the hint.

Furball only looked back once before disappearing into the trees and leaving Tony behind.

[onceandfuturekiki]

EDIT: This was in reply to someone who decided they didn’t want some of the stuff they said in response to one of my bullying AMA posts. They asked that I take down the post, but I thought the information I provided was important so I asked if it was okay if I kept the post up but removed their name and reply and they said. For a little bit of context, this is in response to a question about whether or not saying that the best way to react to bullying is to either respond with respect of to refuse to engage is victim blaming.

It’s not victim blaming. There is a difference between saying “it’s your fault this is happening” and understanding the situation and the aggressor and recognizing what kind of things perpetuate the situation, not in any kind of “it’s your fault” way, but in a way that recognizes the differences between a healthy mindset and the mindset of a bully. 

The problem is, it’s not really standing up for yourself. Understand, my advice is purely about cyber bullying. This is the only bullying I have experience in actually being, and there are absolutely difference between online bulling and “real world” bullying in so many ways, and those ways do include a bully’s reactions to various behaviors. There’s a different psychology to internet bullying that comes from that feeling of anonymity and that inability to actually see the person you’re interacting with. That’s something that has a big impact on empathy. So the way you deal with a cyber bully and the way you deal with a “real world” bully are going to be different. And as I have no experience being a real world bully, I can’t give any insight into their mindsets, their reactions, anything, so I can’t give any kind of advice as to how to handle those situations.

But when you’re dealing with a bully online, any factor of empathy that personal defense might be able to elicit from a bully face to face does not exist. The more “traditional” ways of “standing up for yourself” are simply, as I said, giving them what they want because they want a reaction out of you, and the ways that people react that they see as “standing up for yourself” just show them the emotional response they crave. If you try to appeal to their empathy by explaining how much they’ve hurt you, they’re getting what they want because they wanted to hurt you. If you do anything that shows they’ve made you upset or angry, it makes them happy because they’re seeing that they can control your emotions with just a few well chosen words. One of my favorite things in the world when i was a bully was seeing people thinking they were really “sticking it to me” or “showing me” by being “sassy” or “clever”. They were still showing me that I got to them, and there was the added bonus that they thought they would then upset or insult me, that they would then make me feel bad, or that they thought they were making themselves look clever and smart.

When you’re dealing with a bully you’re dealing with someone whose thought processes and mindsets are not healthy and rational. If you’ve read my other posts from the AMA you’ve seen me discuss how bullying causes the release of “feel good” neurotransmitters, and that when you engage in it enough it starts to rewrite the reward pathways in your brain. It becomes a literal addiction. The addict mind is incredible at rationalizing and twisting things so it can keep getting those feel good chemicals going, because it reaches a point where you have to do it to feel good, and then it reaches the point where you have to do it just to feel normal (I speak from experience as both a bully and a drug addict). When you’re dealing with a brain that gets those feel good chemicals going from the way people react to their abuse, you’re dealing with a mind that isn’t like yours, that isn’t going to react to behavior in rational, reasonable ways, so you can’t think of interacting with them in normal, terms. You can’t think about it in ways that a healthy mind would.

You have to think differently about what defending yourself is. When you’re dealing with a bully, things that would typically be considered defending yourself is actually giving in, and things that would typically be considered giving in are actually fighting back. Reacting in any kind of way that suggests emotionality, whether it’s getting sad, or angry, or defensive, and so on, it’s giving them what they want. It is giving in. When somebody wants something from you and you give it to them, you’re giving in. You’re not defending yourself.

The way you defend yourself, the way you stand up for yourself, is to not give them what they want. And that can be either by refusing to engage and ignoring their messages or their posts, or it can be by responding with respect. The latter is incredibly effective and no, it’s not just lying there and taking it. They’re going after you because they want a reaction. If you refuse to give it you are taking any power they have away. They know you’ve seen the message, or the post, or whatever. They know you’ve seen it and they know you’re refusing to engage with them, that you’re refusing to play their game and give them any power. It’s not some kind of situation where they think “oh, they’re not saying anything about me treating them like this so that means I can keep doing it”. They can’t see your face or your body language to get any kind of confirmation that they got to you even if you don’t say anything. The only way they can know that they had an impact on the way you feel or acting is if you respond to them. They need it. When you refuse to give it to them you are telling them in a very direct way that they don’t have the power, that you have the power, and that you’re not someone who is going to give them what they need.

Offering respect is another effective way to respond. Responding to hateful, cruel bullies with respect is another way to deprive them of the reacting they’re seeking. Not only does it show them that they are not going to get the emotional reaction they’re seeking, it also hits them in their issues. Bullying is motivated by any number of emotional/psychological issues, and having someone respond to your hate-as-an-attempt-to-elicit-an-emotional-reaction with respect hits most of those issues. People who are seeking to control your emotional because they struggle with control issues will be shown that they can’t control your emotions while having the control of the situation slip completely away from them. People who are attacking you because of issues with either insecurity or arrogance will not only see that they aren’t making you feel bad about yourself, that you’re capable of defending your position in a rational, objective way while they’ve proven with their attacks that they can’t. People who just seek to hurt you because they want others to hurt like them will be shown they haven’t succeeded at their goal. And so on. A respectful response is an incredibly effective defense because it automatically puts the power in your hands and establishes a point of severe comparison between your behavior and theirs. (Though I do have to say that I never advocate for any kind of false respect. If you’re going to offer someone respect it should be because you believe that you should show everyone the same respect you know you deserve, regardless of their behavior. Employing things like false respect in order to get one over on a someone or make yourself look better than someone is bad for you)

It’s not about victim blaming or saying that you shouldn’t defend yourself. It’s about recognizing that when you’re dealing with a bully you’re not dealing with a reasonable, rational mind, so you have to change what you think of as “defending yourself”.

There’s also often a fine line between what people see as “defending themselves” and simply responding in kind (meeting hate with hate). It’s so easy to be tempted into responding to that kind of treatment by treating them the same way, but again, that’s something that’s bad for you. Even when what you’re doing isn’t bullying, confrontation and anger still cause those feel good chemicals to be released, and if someone continually responds to hate with more hate, they could be going down a very a dangerous road that ends with them being on the other side of the line.