atomicfartarcade

[hotmess-exe]

the way that this world we live in revolves around the portrayal of so many western powers as The Good Guys and Saviors of Democracy or whatever the fuck

and yet it was an African country that finally stepped in and took this shit to The Hague

[apas-95]

anyway the key takeaway for those not yet radicalised, here, is that the architects of genocide will come to you with claims of opposing hatred, with claims of humanitarianism, with narratives that don't simply accuse the Enemy of being subhuman and needing extermination, but of the Enemy being the real perpetrators of oppression and genocide.

the reality is that a simple 'opposition to hatred and oppression' will not save you from supporting and abetting genocide. you need more than that, because you will be presented with arguments built specifically to prey on your kneejerk credulity for, and backing of, the 'victims' of oppression. what you will need is historical, material analysis of the forces at play and their histories. you will need to really ask yourself if the information you're receiving - even if it is an overwhelming and seemingly uncontested information - is coming from an interested party.

and you will find that there exists no disinterested party, that there exists no impartiality, there only exists the sides of genuine oppressors and genuinely oppressed. you will strip away the rhetoric and find that one of those groups consistently sits on one side of a fifth-generation fighter-bomber aircraft, and one sits on the other.

[leikeliscomet]

(Reposting from twitter)

My POV as a Black fan that thinks Dot and Bubble's racism commentary is trash

Rewatched Dot and Bubble and I'm gonna break down from my POV as a Black fan why this episode didn't work for me & why it's an awful racism commentary. Long arse post incoming:

The whole "You should've noticed the cast was all white except for fifteen ha your bias is showing" doesn't work for a show that's been predominantly white for 60+ years. D&B casting has been the default for most of the show so its not abnormal enough to be a racial litmus test. An example is the Matt Smith era The only reoccurring character of colour in s5 (2+ appearances) is Liz 10. Artie n Angie in s7. 0 in s6. RTD's own era isn't fully safe either. For many eps Martha or Mickey are the *only* Black characters. Most POC are side characters or extras.

White fans should be aware of the predominantly white casting of the show but this late in the game feels cheap. Most of the show has gone through 100% white episodes including fan faves and it was never an issue back then bc it was beneficial. This is so hollow. Representing racists as cartoon caricatures SEVERLY underestimates the danger of white supremacy irl. White supremacy is system designed and constructed and rebranded over centuries. It is not accidental. People aren't racist bc they don't know they're racist because they *do* They know the system that oppresses POC, Black people especially, benefits them socially and financially and that is why they participate. Its not stupidity it's intention. That should've been the Finetime core not Lindy goofing around bc the arrows are gone or some shit.

Human Nature showed us racist young people that exercised this power bc they knew this. They may be children but they are still dangerous bc of their views. Martha knew this. The silly tech obsessed gen z angle erases this danger and that of actual gen z white supremacy

Instead of the camp goofy tone we could've gotten a serious focused episode. The slugs and millenial/gen z social media silly distracts from what could've been the main theme of colonisation instead of saving it for 10 mins of exposition at the end & scattering microaggressions. Saving Fifteen's racism scene for a goofy episode was a horrid idea. Spending 30 mins on representing racism as silliness then giving a dramatic dangerous score is the definition of tonal whiplash. Representing his oppressor as a blonde bimbo again does not take this seriously. Fifteen went to 1960s BRITAIN & got through it unscathed. Finetime is a fictional futuristic land but the racism of 1960s Britain was real. If anytime was right it could've been Devil's Chord. Distancing yourself from a panto villain is easy but addressing your history is hard.

The scene itself is incredibly performed so I'll give Ncuti his flowers but what he used this skill for could've been so much more. Having his FIRST SCENE begging to save a racist is disgusting. It isn't Black people's responsibility to show compassion to people that want us dead. Yes the Doctor helps the baddies bc they care. But they're aren't ignorant to prejudice. The liberal anti racism of who is so jarring and why I still think Thin Ice is performative. When white people are angry at injustice it's radical. When it's Black people we're aggressive.

Respectability politics is a tool of white supremacy. That if one pleads and is nice enough they can earn liberation. What would white fans think of Fifteen if he DIDN'T beg Lindy? If your allyship with Black people depends on showing kindness to racists you are NOT an ally.

Next up is Ricky. It was established ALL Finetime citizens have white supremacist views yet Ricky September stans refuse to see him in any negative light. Just like Joan Redfern white dw fans refuse to see racism if a character is likeable. If nice guy Ricky's a racist, then anyone no matter the niceness can be racist too and that's a pill white fans aren't ready to swallow. If racism is systemic and not about individual character, then what's keeping them safe? What happens when YOU are under the microscope.

THIS is why we NEED Black writers in Doctor Who. The nuances, depth and complexity of the Black experience can only be told at it's best by Black creatives and not guessed, assumed or spoken over by white fans and white writers. It's okay to put ego aside and say you don't get it.

"Im white but I loved the Doctor's reaction" "I'm white and i thought the racism commentary was great" "I'm white but i-" Yet again, we have to sit through another round of white and non Black fans of colour dictating Black representation for us. I'm so fucking tired man. AGAIN IM YELLING FROM MY HILLTOP TO WATCH SHOWS BY BLACK WRITERS. Almost EVERY single theme in Dot and Bubble and frankly most of the show has been done WAY better in other media. RTD is not the authority on Black stories. We are. Always have been and always will.

Tl;dr Dot and Bubble is an unserious and tacky racism commentary. It's core message is drowned by more RTD Who camp. Don't tell me this episode was good at representating my own experience. It wasn't. S15 having Black writers isn't a need it's a must. Goodbye.

Reblog this version pls

[burr-ell]

Ngl your probably one of the only profiles I've seen know that the gods are nuanced but also not forget to say what they did to aeor is indeed majorly fucked and should be enknowledged. But also again not say "Their all evil. Selfish. Hate mortals, etc, etc" So Thank you! :3

Well, thank you anon! 😊

It would be easy to simply say Aeor was a totalitarian dictatorship that had it coming and maybe it wasn't great for the civilians but at least we got rid of Magic Big Brother, but that's not true; the citizens being oppressed by Aeor didn't deserve to die for their oppressors' crimes. It would be easy to pretend the gods crashed the city out of pure altruism and fear for Exandrian mortals if Aeor obtained more power, but that's not true; the ultimate concern for both the Prime Deities and the Betrayer Gods was for their own lives and their family's, enough to call a truce in a war that was otherwise destroying the land and its people.

On the other hand, Pelor and Sarenrae explicitly wanted to find a way to save the city and destroy the Factorum Malleus at the same time, and indeed could possibly have found a way to do so if Asmodeus hadn't schemed to ensure Aeor fell. All of the Prime Deities were grieved by it, and this was the tipping point for them to realize their efforts to protect Exandria were instead hurting it. This is the event that pushed them to seal themselves away from the home where they'd found a refuge after enduring tragedy themselves. And while I've said previously that any city having a weapon like that would be a bad thing, Aeor is a city where someone had to embezzle money to fund a hospital; I wouldn't trust them with an off-brand water pistol.

That's what makes Downfall so compelling—there are no easy answers. Few important ethical questions have them. If it's a question of if the gods wanted to save their own lives, save Exandria, or just do what they could in the moment because they had one night, the fact that the answer is "yes" is a good thing. As far as I'm concerned, abdicating responsibility is worse than owning a shitty choice.

[mixtape-timeout]

This is the last post I will be making on this topic. Since gimmeurtmi is back and posting again, here is yet another reminder for you that she is a Zionist. She is trying to spin the story and claim that people are witch-hunting her for being Israeli, which is just another excuse to deflect from her disgraceful behavior. Since she wants to say that we are spreading misinformation, please look at the screenshots in the link. These are screenshots of posts SHE made herself. Not my words, just hers. Read her posts without any of my commentary, and come to your own conclusions about her beliefs. Her posts speak for themselves.

((More below))

She can say she's Pro-Palestine all she wants, but her actions do not reflect that. I can't prove if she is attending peace rallies like she says she is, but what we do know is that the things she says and does are in direct contradiction of this. Please look at the tags of the original callout post and see the sheer number of bloggers (including other authors) she had blocked for being Pro-Palestine. She claims she blocked people for being Anti-Semitic, but what she perceives as "Anti-Semitic" is anything Anti-Zionist. The testimonies from people who used to follow her and used to be very close friends with her all say she is a very manipulative person who always makes herself the victim. She has repeatedly made Zionist posts, deleted them, pretended to change her views, post "Pro-Palestine" things, then go back and show her true colors once the accusations blow over. She had reblogged fundraisers for Rafah weeks ago on her blog @stuckonspidey after being called out that are now nowhere to be found. She is a liar and a manipulator who has repeatedly said things that contradict her actions just to save face.

If she's Pro-Palestine, why does she make posts sympathizing with the IDF? Why does she support the occupational force that kills Palestinians for fun, undresses hostages to humiliate them (including CHILDREN), beats hostages to death with hammers in their captivity, disguises themselves as HUMANITARIAN AID to kill hundreds of refugees, takes pictures with hostages/dead bodies and posts them on social media, steals Palestinian women's underwear and takes pictures with it after killing them/ransacking their houses, targets journalists and humanitarian aid workers, straps injured Palestinians to their trucks and uses them as human shields? This is the army that fired 355 bullets at the car that 6 year old Hind Raghab was in while she was surrounded by her dead family members, KNOWING she was in there. They are a depraved, violent occupational force that kills and tortures civilians, and one of the most basic pillars of being Pro-Palestine is opposing the IDF. You cannot be Pro-Palestine and have sympathy for the army that is killing and oppressing them. You cannot say you stand for Palestinian liberation and peace, yet mourn for their oppressors when the resistance fights back. There is proof all over the internet of the IDF's war crimes because they post it themselves. Here are a few links if you don't believe me. LINK LINK LINK LINK. Please research it yourself, too. You'll find no shortage of it.

If she is Pro-Palestine, why does she refuse to acknowledge it as a genocide? Why does she call it a "war"? Why does she call the International Court of Justice's decision to take Israel to court for its war crimes "questionable"? If she believes what Israel is doing is wrong, why would she criticize it being held accountable for its crimes against humanity? If she is Pro-Palestine, why would she call an Israeli propaganda movie that paints Arabs as barbaric savages her all time favorite and complain that it's getting RIGHTFULLY negative reviews for its blatant racism, glorification of war criminal Golda Mier, and historical misinformation? Her excuse was that "she posted about a movie because she likes movies." That is an absolutely pitiful reason and being deliberately obtuse to distract from the actual issue. When you say it like that, of course it sounds harmless, but the CONTENT of the movie matters. For example: Would you call "The Birth of A Nation", a disgustingly racist white supremacy propaganda movie your favorite? Absolutely NOT. And if you did, people would rightfully question you for that. If she's Pro-Palestine, why didn't she boycott LMB when there are two Zionists on it? One of which (Johnny Goldstein) is a former IDF soldier and attends Pro-Israel events? If she's Pro-Palestine, why would she use the well-known Zionist talking points, conflating Judaism with Zionism, and saying that when people say "Zionist" they really mean "Jew"? If She's Pro-Palestine, why would she have such an issue with Stays trying to inform Felix about the Coca-Cola boycott and say they are bullies? Do you notice a pattern here? Her labeling ANY attempts at calling out Zionism to be "bullying" or "Anti-Semitic"? This is the exact rhetoric Zionists use. Once again, she can say she's Pro-Palestine, she might even actually believe that she is, but her behavior does not reflect this. Saying "My posts aren't Anti-Palestinian because I'm not Anti-Palestinian" proves absolutely nothing. Someone who can't even call the genocide a genocide is not an ally to Palestine.

She continues to hide behind "Anti-Semitism" despite me and many of my friends who called her out being Jews or of Jewish ancestry ourselves. If you look through my blog, you will see a majority of my posts are dedicated to dismantling the idea that Jews = Zionists. I have worked so hard in my community to do this in real life, and it's incredibly frustrating to see her perpetuating this harmful stereotype when us Anti-Zionist Jews are doing everything we can to separate Judaism from Zionism. She is also saying we are racist against Israelis, which is an absolutely ludicrous claim. Israeli is not a race, just like American isn't a race. Israeli is a Nationality. 75% of Jewish people are Ashkenazim, meaning European/White, and about 50% of Israelis are White. Nationality =/= Race. Her claims of racism are, again, her using terms of discrimination to distract from her blatantly Zionist posts.

Furthermore the claim that we are attacking her simply for being Israeli is not only wrong, it makes no sense. I was not aware that she was Israeli before suspecting her of being a Zionist. A huge chunk of Zionists are actually Western Christians who support Israel for Anti-Semitic reasons, and I would NEVER sabotage a fellow Jew for their identity. I went out of my way to emphasize this in the first post. Gimmeurtmi was called out for Zionism that me and several other people in the community recognized, point blank period. We are not "painting her in a specific light", we are bringing attention to harmful, dangerous things SHE said. If I presented her posts to you without commentary, even in context, you could come to the same conclusion. The original callout post was edited many times with many additions as new screenshots/information came forward, and it was through the comments from other people talking about their experience with her that we found out that she was Israeli and had made those Anti-Palestinian posts on October 7th (which she deleted). It was her thinly-veiled Zionism that originally raised our suspicions, the knowledge that she's Israeli came after.

I know gimmeurtmi will continue to see herself as a victim no matter what. I know she will keep pretending she's being attacked for her identity just as all Zionists do. This post is just to disprove her accusations that we called her out on the basis of "racism", when the callout for her was a result of HER racism herself. I never had any problem with gimmeurtmi before she blocked me, I enjoyed her fics and looked up to her, as many others in the community did. She gave me no reason to dislike her before this. The only reason my friends and I put that post together was because we felt it was imperative that someone like her, who uses her SKZ blog to normalize Zionist ideology amidst a genocide, gets de-platformed. I cannot tell you what to believe, but I urge you to be careful and understand what a manipulative person she is. I urge you to read the screenshots of her posts for yourself and come to your own conclusion.

[chronicallylatetotheparty]

I think western media has relied on non-human races as shorthand for oppressed groups so much that audiences have been primed to look for that instead of actual imperialist ideology.

One of the criticisms I've repeated about the Dragon Prince is how the writers take the Aesthetics of fantasy imperialism/indigenous people and just switch them without bothering to change anything about their ideology or historical context.

Kenna on TikTok was right when she said that a franchise where the oppressor and oppressed were all the same species makes a better racism allegory.

The fact that the Four Nations were all human added to the themes of imperialism and genocide in ATLA. While on the opposite side of the coin, the Xadians all being different species undermines it.

You can say Fire Nation people were a bunch of imperialists without going into bioessentialism. You CAN'T say humans are a bunch of warmongering monsters without sounding like an eco fascist.

The Sunfire elves textually being the most fantasy racist group is fine because they're elves, therefore oppressed, and the white writers made them superficially based on African-French speakers.

Meanwhile Katolis is "obviously" a Fantasy European Imperialist nation and therefore the oppressor. Never mind that it's had a black, now mixed, ruling family for a thousand years. Or that it's citizens aren't just white.

I remember seeing a post comparing the taboo against Black Magic to Xtian fundamentalism. At first I thought that was a bit much but no. Season six revealed that TDP has a canonical Hierarchy of Beings so that guy was absolutely right.

In Xtian fundamentalism doing something good the "wrong" way is the same as doing something bad.

Save a kingdom from starving? Well you had to kill a rock monster so obviously the right thing to do was let hundreds of thousands of people starve to death. (I've had weirdos go onto my posts and literally say this.)

Break the chains preventing you from saving the people you love? Well it hurt you so the right thing to do was let your friends and loved ones drown I guess.

Your son is dying? Better protect some old man's sense of moral purity than save a child.

All of these actions are not considered bad because they had a negative effect. They're considered bad because they go against the dominant power's desired order.

They're inherently bad because "humans" are inherently bad. Because human ways are not as pure as a direct connection to an Arcanum.

Note: this^ is imperialist ideology.

The idea that a group of people fighting for their survival justifies ethnic cleansing and mass murder is imperialist ideology.

The idea that the scary, blasphemous practices of a people you don't understand makes them dangerous, and therefore justifies you "defending yourself", is imperialist ideology.

The Liberal focus on "cycles of violence" and "both sides are at fault". Instead of on reparations for the people they killed and the homes they destroyed is imperialist ideology.

But Katolis has a pseudo-medieval aesthetic and the elves do not.

I was so angry at the scene where Sol Regem burns Katolis because THIS is the poor helpless dragons the humans "colonized"!? This living air bomber is the "victim" of the big, bad humans? One Archdragon can destroy an entire city single handedly and you expect me to believe the elves and dragons ethnic cleansing of humanity was REASONABLE!?

No. We are past any doubt or rationalization. What Sol Regem did to Katolis was just a small glimpse of what the elves and dragons did during the Human Exile. Just a small glimpse into how imperialist powers treat those that they cannot exploit.

And then demonize them for daring to oppose/question/subvert the imperialist's god(s) given superiority.

[elspethdekarios]

I have thoughts about Anders

So I just finished Dragon Age: Awakening (I’ve played through all 3 main games, went back to do the DLC) and I have so many thoughts about how different Anders is pre- and post-Justice sharing his body. I think part of this is the voice actor change in DA2, but his personality seems so different, too. Awakening Anders is sarcastic, always cracking jokes, mostly light-hearted even after everything he’s been through. DA2 Anders has moments like this, but he’s much more intense and brooding. Awakening Anders has a few lines about wanting to settle down with a pretty girl or have a plump wife waiting for him at home, but DA2 Anders is PINING. And with the time skip, it’s a slow burn. Awakening Anders doesn’t strike me as the slow burn type—he’s very flirty and even a little raunchy at times. But Anders in DA2 doesn’t really act like that. He’s got a tortured, romantic soul. He’s much more serious. And maybe it’s just because he’s grown up a little bit, but now that I’ve met Justice as a character before he and Anders become one, I wonder how much of that change is Anders maturing vs. Justice’s personality coming through.

I know this game has been out forever and I’m probably not saying anything new, but Anders is so fascinating to me. More rambling and dialogue analysis under the cut:

The very first thing that struck me as different about Anders in Awakening (other than his general personality) was his response to Wynne telling the Warden Commander that the Libertarians in the Circle want to pull away from the Chantry, and Anders says that it’s a recipe for disaster. SIR! WHO ARE YOU?

Awakening Anders also doesn’t seem particularly interested in justice for mages or revenge for how he and other mages have been treated. He wants his freedom, and I’m sure he wants freedom for other mages too, but he’s not exactly radical like he is in DA2. In fact, it’s Justice who seems to inspire Anders to, well, seek justice. I’m emphasizing some of this dialogue to analyze it below:

Justice: I understand that you struggle against your oppression, mage. Anders: I avoid my oppression. That's not quite the same thing, is it? Justice: Why do you not strike a blow against your oppressors? Ensure they can do this to no one else? Anders: Because it sounds difficult? Justice: Apathy is a weakness. Anders: So is death. I'm just saying.

Justice: I believe you have a responsibility to your fellow mages. Anders: That bit of self-righteousness is directed at me? Justice: You have seen oppression and are now free. You must act to free those who remain oppressed. Anders: Or I could mind my business, in case the Chantry comes knocking. Justice: But this is not right. You have an obligation. Anders: Yes, well... welcome to the world, spirit.

Now, look at this conversation between Anders and Isabela in DA2:

Anders: I don't know how you live the way you do, blithely ignoring the consequences of your actions. Isabela: This is about the Qunari thing, isn't it? I'm not ignoring it. I just recognize that it happened years ago. Isabela: There's this fantastic thing called "moving on." You should try it sometime. Anders: Has it occurred to you that Kirkwall is only just recovering from the Qunari attack? Isabela: And you want me to... what? Flog myself daily? Isabela: Has it occurred to you that maybe there's no justice in the world? Other than that voice you keep in your head.

Isabela sounds more like Awakening Anders than Anders himself does in this conversation. Justice accuses Awakening Anders of ignoring the oppression of other mages like DA2 Anders accuses Isabela of ignoring the consequences of her actions (for the record, I don’t think either of these assumptions are 100% true, but I digress). In Awakening, Anders is cynical when Justice tells him he has an obligation. What can he change? He has to worry about his own survival as an apostate before risking his life even more to save others. Hence the line “welcome to the world, spirit.” Anders is pragmatic, even a little pessimistic, where Justice is idealistic.

But then, the conversation with Isabela! Like Justice tried to convince Anders of his obligation to other mages, Anders now is trying to convince Isabela to take responsibility for her actions. She’s ignoring the unrest that was caused by her stealing the Qunari tome instead of doing something to help—just like Awakening Anders is ignoring his oppressor. 

When Anders and Justice merge, Anders starts to see the bigger picture, the oppression that reaches far beyond himself. From the short story Anders:

I always knew I wouldn't submit. I could never be what they wanted from me -- compliant, obedient, guilty. But before Justice, I was alone. I never thought beyond my own escape: Where would I hide? How long before they found me? Now, even that thought repulses me. Why should so many others live with what I will not? Why must the Circle of Magi stand? Just because it always has, just because those who read Andraste's words twisted them to mean that mages must be prisoners? Why has there never been a revolution? … They will all die. Every templar, every holy sister who stands in the way of our freedom will die in agony and their deaths will be our fuel. We will have justice. We will have vengeance. And suddenly I'm alone, standing in a burning forest, with the bodies of templars and wardens at my feet. So many, and I didn't even know they were there. Didn't even know I had killed them, but the evidence is all around me. Not the aftermath of a battle as I've known it, but a bloody abattoir of rent limbs and torn and eaten flesh. This is not justice. This is not the spirit who was my friend, my self. What has he become? What have I become? We must get out of here. There is no place for me in the Grey Wardens now. Is there a place for me anywhere?

First of all, ow, my heart. But the point is: before he becomes part of Anders, Justice doesn’t feel a personal connection to mages’ freedom—he only cares because of the injustice. But once he and Anders become one, the source of injustice that Anders cares about the most, that he has deep resentment for, that has caused him great harm, becomes Justice’s cause. We know that Justice can sense/feel memories of the body he inhabits because he remembers some of Kristoff’s past, or at least feels connections to certain objects or people even if he can’t explain it. Kristoff was dead, though, so those memories were only fragments. I imagine that with Anders, he can experience those memories more clearly, including, of course, the injustice he and others have suffered at the hands of the templars. Justice is able to integrate into Anders fully, whereas with Kristoff, the body was an empty vessel with remnants of the past soul that was within it. 

Now, let’s talk about where Anders ends and Justice begins, something that even Anders himself is unsure of. Here are some DA2 banters about the division (or lack thereof) between the two of them:

(Outside The Hanged Man, Act 3) Anders: Justice doesn't let me get drunk anymore. I kind of miss it.

(in Legacy DLC) Anders: I've tried to forget about this side of myself. Justice is... so strong. Sometimes the Wardens seem insignificant. But seeing that poor bastard brings it all back. The Darkspawn taint. The call of the archdemon. It's inside me, as much a part of me as Justice.

Anders: Justice once asked me why I didn't do more for other mages. I told him it was too much work. Anders: But I couldn't go back after that. Couldn't stop thinking about it. Anders: Sometimes, I miss being that selfish.

Varric: So, the knight-commander... Boiling in oil? That one never gets old. Anders: This is past time for joking. Varric: I'm helping you indulge in elaborate revenge fantasies. I think it's good for you. Anders: Meredith will die. Do not doubt that. Varric: Go away, Justice. Can Anders come out and play? Anders: [Justice voice] Stop. Varric: You are no fun anymore.

(if Anders was taken to the Fade) Anders: I have tried to avoid the Fade since Justice. It's disturbing when he takes over.

The above dialogues imply that Anders and Justice are two separate entities in one body. The one from Legacy is tricky, since he compares it to the taint, but he still refers to Justice as separate from himself, which is why I included it. And that’s not even touching on the fact that Justice has a different voice than Anders. But these:

Aveline: So you're two people, Anders and... Justice? Anders: That's not strictly accurate. Aveline: But you are of two minds. Anders: Many people are.

Isabela: Hello? Is Anders there? Can I speak to Anders? Anders: You can stop yelling. It's always me. Isabela: Oh, good. I didn't want to talk to that other guy. You know, the stick-in-the-mud. Anders: He can still hear you. Justice and I are one. Anders: Anyway, you wanted to talk to me? Isabela: Not really. I just wanted to make sure it was you.

(If Hawke convinces Anders to give up his plan) Vengeance: Leave! This does not concern you! Hawke: This is Anders's decision, not yours! Vengeance: I am Anders! You have given into sloth. You would stand by while mages are abducted and tortured. Go. Anders has no need of you.

There’s not a clear answer either way. And I didn’t expect to find one. I think a lot of this back and forth is Anders trying to understand who he is now that Justice is part of him. He clearly still feels like he has some level of agency and individuality apart from Justice, but he struggles with it. This feels very anticlimactic, but I guess that’s just the nature of it all.

If you read this far, wow thanks. Now to not leave off on a sad note, here are some DA2 banters that feel very Awakening Anders to me - please enjoy <3

Anders: I keep thinking I know you from somewhere... Isabela: You're Fereldan, right? Ever spend time at the Pearl? Anders: That's it! Anders: You used to really like that girl with the griffon tattoos, right? What was her name? Isabela: The Lay Warden? Anders: That's right! I think you were there the night I— Isabela: Oh! Were you the runaway mage who could do that electricity thing? That was nice... Hawke: Please stop talking. Now. (Or if Varric is in the party) Varric: I don't think I need to know this about either of you.

Anders: So, I never expected to be palling around with the captain of the guard. Aveline: We're not "pals." Anders: We're not? What about that time we painted each other's toenails? Aveline: Do you want something? Anders: Love, life, and liberty. What more does a man need?

Anders: Nice day to be planning a trip into the Deep Roads, don't you think? Anders: The Blight, the dampness, the festering darkness filled with tainted rats... Carver: Shut up. Anders: You've got a real chip on your shoulder, you know? Carver: I've got a big blade on my shoulder, magey. Anders: Right. Wonder what you're compensating for.

Fenris: Is there something you want, Anders? Anders: You really don't have the temperament for a slave. Fenris: Is that a compliment or an insult? Anders: I'm just wondering how your master didn't kill you. Fenris: How have the templars not killed you? Anders: I'm charming.

Anders: Is that supposed to be Andraste's face on your crotch? Sebastian: What? Anders: That... belt buckle thing. Is that Andraste? Sebastian: My father had this armor commissioned when I took my vows as a brother. Anders: I'm just not sure I'd want the Maker seeing me shove His bride's head between my legs every morning.

(All dialogue found on the Dragon Age fandom wiki.)

[slyandthefamilybook]

they're not dismissed because they live in "the bad country" they're dismissed because any solution they might pose, for the vast majority of them at least, will fundamentally involve preserving the state apparatus of israel, which is an inherently oppressive force. the two state solution is not justice. don't twist this into a call for the murder of the israeli population. that is explicitly not the goal. it is a demand to dismantle the fucking government system of a settler state that has spent 75 years committing genocide. if your leftism was worth anything you would believe that israel should be abolished. if you don't, your allyship is shallow and will only lead to electing people who will still do genocide, but with better pr so you can go back to ignoring it. if you really give a shit, genuinely ask yourself if the solution you have in mind would actually stop the genocide of Palestinian people, or if it would just slow it down a little, and answer the question honestly. if you can't do that, fuck off

HA

I predicted this. I saved this to my drafts 3 days ago

here's that response

there are a lot of people who seem to think that peace would be bad because it would involve Palestinians cooperating with the Israeli government. They believe the government should be spurned at every moment. Any action taken by the Israeli government is inherently one-sided and therefore it's categorically impossible to reach an agreement that's mutually beneficial and respects the dignity and autonomy of Palestinians

I hear this a lot in discussion of the UN Partition Plans. "Oh, so you want victims of violence to just roll over for their oppressors? You can't just steal someone's land and then offer it back to them!" To which my response is always "this is better?". Can you honestly look me in the eye and say that whatever lopsided colonial apartheid agreement you're imagining would've been made in 1948 would've been worse than the situation we have now?

It displays a really limited understanding of how geopolitics works. Countries aren't just a government and a set of borders. A country is also a people and a mechanism through which that people can interact with other peoples. You can't just point at a country and say "they're doing bad things, we should get rid of them". That's how America has functioned for the past 150 years and I thought we all decided that was bad. Dismantling a country doesn't solve your problems, it just creates new ones. "Burn it all down and start over" won't bring back the dead. It won't honor their deaths or make them any more worthwhile

Every time Hamas attacks Israel, Israel gets stronger. The right thrives off of conflict. It's why they don't want to give people free healthcare. When people suffer, it strengthens their positions. Every time Israel is attacked it generates more support for the military, in the people and in the Knesset. The IDF gets more soldiers, more rifles, more tanks. It drives the Overton Window further to the right. The Israeli government starts borrowing more money from the US, starts getting sent more foreign aid, further entrenching their economic dependency. The only reason Netanyahu has stayed in power for so long is because Israel keeps getting attacked. Israel gets hundreds of millions in military aid from the US, a country that has made killing people a science. You're not going to defeat them in open battle. People have been trying for 75 years with no success

I dislike the Israeli state as much as I dislike every state (which is a not-insignificant amount). But I also understand that states are massive webs of economy, policy, international trade, and agreements and treaties. If every member of the Israeli government stepped down tomorrow with no plan, the country would be thrown into chaos and millions would die. You can't say you want to destroy the apparatus of a country that is currently at war, while also claiming you want its citizens to be safe. That's not how that works. You claim that the majority of Israeli leftists want a two-state solution (something I don't believe I've ever said I support), but if that the case you don't have to throw your weight behind those people! There are also leftists who want anarchism, and a no-state solution. There's a vast diversity of thought and pretending that there isn't doesn't help anyone

I notice that in your decrial of people who are actually trying to help, you don't offer an alternative solution. You say you want to dismantle the Israeli state, but how do you plan to do that? I assume from your tone that you're not yourself Israeli, so how do you plan to affect change? You can pressure whoever is the leader of your country to stop sending aid to Israel, but Israel has a domestic economy as well. The worst you'll do is send them into a depression. And if you are somehow successful in cutting of Israel at the windpipe, what will you do when people begin to starve? When people are kicked to the curb because they lost their job? Will you be proud of yourself for sending 9.5 million people into a humanitarian crisis? Does your plan to end suffering involve making other people suffer instead?

We live in a statist world. As much as you or I dislike it, that's the reality we have. You can aspire to a better system, you can set your sights on a world in which there are no states, no governments, no militaries, and no borders. But you can't work within that framework before it's applicable. You can't eat raw cookie dough because you want it to eventually become a cookie. Liberalism won't save us, but it might stop the bleeding

[psychotrenny]

When Liberals describe a piece of media dealing with contemporary war or politics as being "Morally Ambiguous" they mean nearly always mean that it questions the specific decisions of those in power, not the basic ideological assumptions that their power rests upon. Like it's always "Was it a good idea to invade this tyrannical terrorist shithole in order to spread freedom and democracy?" or "Is it okay to torture evil terrorists shitheads to save people from their oppression", never questioning whether the US actually are protecting the innocent and spreading prosperity or if their enemies really are straightforwardly sadistic oppressors. It may question whether the US is acting like a good guy, but it always affirms that the US inherently is good or at least has the greatest capacity to be. Even in Liberal media where the doesn't come off looking the best, they still make sure to present their enemies as even worse. Not to mention the way that any atrocities the US does commit are presented as either mistakes, malicious perversions of the system (probably orchestrated by enemy infiltrators anyway) or tragic but necessary evils. Meanwhile the atrocities committed by their foes are the proof of their innate evil and strong necessity of stopping them; this is the basis of that whole discussion around whether terrible means should be adopted to achieve the noble end of defeating these villains.

And like a story apparently "isn't making a political statement" when it doesn't give a clear answer on these terms, but the terms themselves are never up for discussion. Like I heard someone call Call of Duty: Modern Warfare "apolitical" because it neither justifies nor condemns stuff like those SAS soldiers torturing Arabs and killing sleeping or unarmed Russians (leaving it for the player to decide oooooooooh sooooo deep), as though its choice of antagonists and decision to present them as unambiguously evil isn't a statement in of itself. And like its choice to give Soviet imagery to the Russian Ultranationlists is apparently just a silly oversight (like ooooh real Ultranationalists hate those Soviet lefties hahaha) that says nothing at all about the creator's view of international politics and anti-US ideologies.

As far as your average Liberal is concerned, media contains political statements are when a character turns directly to the camera and says "This thing is good/bad". Anything else is deep stuff that makes you think and lets you come to your own conclusions. Just play the game, don't worry about who set the rules

[badrrr]

“While you're amongst your children playing and joking with them and patting their heads there's a prisoner who's been there for a long time, in a dark depressing cell, yearning for his children, he misses their smell and tries not to forget their features, he dreams of hugging them, he whines of pain and longing, he suffers from the oppression of his arresters and the neglect of his brothers, be kind to them and their relatives, for their hope is in you, save them, free them, for the one worse than the oppressor is the one who remains silent whilst seeing oppression and betrays the victims and turns a deaf ear on their calls."

-shared

[wafflinglumos]

(Idk if I should put a content warning but I’m going to just to be safe for; vague mentions of SA. Also this is just how I personally feel about dramione, ship whatever you want)

I will now and forever be a dramione hater, I hate how certain dramione shippers perceive Hermione.

Hermione ��brightest witch of her age” Granger would NOT fall head over heels for the guy who bullied her and called her a slur for six years. Also, in what WORLD would Draco ever feel that way about Hermione? Draco was a spoilt little brat who hated muggleborns and thought they were subserviant to purebloods, it wasn’t a “playground crush”, he felt Hermione was beneath him(and NOT beneath him in the way that you guys try to push in fanfics)

Also, ALSO, if the only way you can make Draco a likable love interest is to bash Ron, maybe he’s just a bad love interest.

Don’t even get me STARTED on how heavily sexualized Hermione is sometimes, Jesus Christ it’s like her whole personality is just being a glory hole for Draco at any time of the day it’s GROSS, on that note the amount of SA, specifically of Hermione whether it be from Draco or a third character just to make Draco save her and be a cool good guy, which is in an abundance of dramione’s media is so gross. You give Draco the barest minimum of character development, sometimes not even that, then make Hermione basically just an one dimensional hole with no other characteristics except her sexual prowess, and that’s not saying you can’t make Hermione be comfortable with her sexuality, that’s great, but holy shit is that all she is, is that all the development she gets as a character in your mind??

To make it even worse, Draco is sometimes STILL a piece of shit to her, news flash guys “mudblood” isn’t a silly little insult in the Harry Potter world, it’s a derogatory slur!

It’s not even enemies to lovers! At all! Drarry is enemies to lovers! Dramione is just bully x bullied, oppressed x oppressor at the worst.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk ig, stan drarry and romione

[spottheantisemitism]

Magneto and Holocaust Inversion (Many Such Cases)

Case #1: He who fights monsters ( UXM #150 I, Magneto - Chris Claremont)

So this was my first X-men comic I got at a con at a discount so THIS was my introduction to Magneto. I love this comic to bits. It's a great scene

While this sudden breakdown is quite good there's the pieta symbolism between two jews and there's the distinct implication of "I'm no better than the Nazis" in his breakdown (you are allowed to fight me on this as not counting as holocaust inversion)

to pivot Magneto this much Claremont pretty much had to do something akin to holocaust inversion because Lee and Kirby wrote him as a fascist coded character and Claremont couldn't not have Jewish (and Romani?*) holocaust survivor who was likely sonderkommando not realize the irony of his actions.

Also we get more Magneto backstory and depth in ONE PAGE than any comic before and most comics since

Case #2: No equals (Magneto Rex episode 3- Joe Pruitt)

Listen the Genosha metaphor was clumsy when Claremont wrote it but the hands of Joe Pruitt, it sounds like a Soviet psyop about the evil colonizer Jews who like apartheid.

While Pietro is one of the few people who get to say the "you're making us look bad" line and it landing in and out of universe the way it's presented is the most simplistic argument possible

The implication of "he's gone full circle and become the oppressor" is clear and this time painfully intentional. The fact that these people are imprisoned for having legacy virus- the x-men equivalent of aids just makes it all worse

Case #3: A mad old terrorist twat (New X-men: Planet X -Grant Morrison)

^ tw for misgendering Grant Morrison who used he/him at the time of publication but use they/them now.

Many people have pointed out that part of what stings when Morrison separates McKellen from the "schizoid-conflicted" Hitler reborn terrorist twat Magneto is the former is a gentile and therefore more deserving of their respect. The implications that Magneto is like that because his ideas are dumb and out-dated mirrors the way antisemites claim that Jews are gentiles over "their made up fairy tales".

I don't think Morrison is so much an antisemite as the kind of fanenby hypocritical chud who loves the silver age (bad era to fandomize and idolize, Grant) exactly as it was. They love when THEY get to make Beast or Ice man gay but hate when a Jewish writer makes a wannabe dictator a Jewish holocaust survivor. We get it Grant, rules for thee but not for Jews. No, no they'll rewrite the character as literally Hitler to show that only Morrison gets to re-write X-men comics, antisemitic implications be damned.

Well you made one thing clear, Grant sweaty, you hate retcons and the art of Jewish writers whose politics and visions you dislike.

screenshot source:

Case #4: when your boyfriend invokes Godwin's law (House of M: Civil war #3)

I feel like Charles only gets away with this because they're such close friends (who canonically share a room) and he's been through a lot in this issue.

To be fair "you twisting semantics won't save people from fanatics who want genocide" is the BEST comeback to holocaust inversion I've seen in an X-men comic

the framing here is both of them are wrong and Magnus (that's one of Magneto's human names) is clearly in the right about this. The humans may think he's Mutant Hitler but that's because they're projecting

(sorry for making you read sideways and making you read something I took a picture of IRL)

Case #5: The oppressed becomes the oppressor (X-men 97 episode 2)

Magneto's speech in X-97 has been said as a watered down version of his speech in Uncanny X-Men 200

What is pointed out many times is the line where he claims "his own people joined the nazis to betray him". Never expanded upon, never brought up again. There are no other Jewish character in 97, no foils. It feels almost gross and tokenistic, like Marvel wanted Magneto be the good token self-hating Jews. Since at that was the only acceptable type of Jew in early 2024.

I do hope to see a course correction seasons 2 and 3 as something as simple as showing a flashback of his past or just showing a character like Kitty would go a long way to dispel the accidental implication that Magneto thinks all other Jews are evil

*While Magneto's children Wanda and Pietro are explicitly Jewish-Romani everywhere BUT the MCU in some universes like House of M, so is he. These intermarriages happened in Weimar Germany all the time so these universes are quite plausible

[quranwithsehar]

Surah Al Qasas: Chapter 2

Pharaoh divided the people of Egypt into two groups.

The two groups were:

-Bani Israel - who shifted to Egypt through Yusuf AS

-Qibti - The locals of Egypt

Although they were living in same land, Pharaoh had created a division.

He would oppress Bani Israel. He made them the lowest class and tortured them to the point that he would slaughter their sons and keep the women alive and no one from the other group stood up to defend them.

Because of the division. Firaun had done a good job of separating them, creating animosity between them.

This was very important for Firaun because if people start seeing themselves as one, then they may unify, and if they unify, then he may lose control over them. If you can keep people apart, if you can keep people divided, then you can pick them off easily. If people are united, you can't touch them. The easiest way to do that is to create a class society.

So, Pharaoh had a plan. He wanted to destroy, oppress, and control Bani Israel.

But Allah had a different plan. Allah wanted to make those oppressed people leaders and inheritors of the land as mentioned in Surah al Qasas.

Whose plan worked out at the end? Allah's plan!

Oppression and injustice cannot exist forever. Allah does not like fasaad. He allows it to happen, He let's the oppressors do whatever they want to only for some time.

Eventually what happens? Allah intervenes and seizes the oppressor.

We have studied again and again that any person who reached the height of power, eventually he was brought down.

Prophet SAW said, Fear the prayer of the oppressed, for indeed it is carried on clouds. Allah says by my honor and glory, I will surely help you even if it is after a time.

THIS IS WHY WE MUST NEVER LOSE HOPE.

There seemed to be no escape for Bani Israel, but weren't they saved? Yes.

Allah was telling this story to the Prophet (pbuh) when the Quraysh were oppressing him and every Muslim in Makkah. It sent a message that your pharaoh, the Quraysh, will be brought down very soon. Through the Prophet (pbuh), this story tells us that today's pharaoh 🇮🇱 will also be brought down very soon, and the oppressed people 🇵🇸 will be free. In the end, it is Allah's plan that wins.

[tepkunset]

Thoughts on X-Men 97 S01E02 – Mutant Liberation Begins

TL;DR: X-Men 97’s butchering of the Trial of Magneto is more than just a bad adaptation. It’s an offensive stripping of a core part of the original story and of Magneto’s character.

The Trail of Magneto story arc in the Uncanny X-Men comics is an iconic turn for the character and the team; it is a transformation of an enemy turned friend. But that is not all the story represents. Delving deeper into its layers, one can pull out a lot of messages. The biggest one I relate to is the effects of compound systemic oppression when one has multiple identities marking them as a minority. But that’s missing in X-Men 97’s adaptation… even worse, it actively counters this point.

Before we get into the cartoon’s adaptation, let’s take a look at the comics, first.

The story begins in Uncanny X-Men #199, where Magneto and Kitty Pryde both attend a special reception at the National Holocaust Memorial in Washington, DC. It is here that Kitty is able to reconnect with folks who knew her family, who were victims in the Auschwitz concentration camp, and Magneto reconnects with people he knew there as well. They praise him for helping them survive.

But Freedom Force breaks into the reception and tries to arrest Magneto in the name of the US government. Magneto initially resists: “My land—all the countries of the world—turned their backs on me and mine when we were condemned to Hitler's death camps. Therefore, in return, I have sworn to deny them!” However, when he sees how afraid everyone around him is, he accepts their arrest and agrees to stand trial.

The story continues in Uncanny X-Men #200. Magneto’s trial by the international court of justice begins with England’s Attorney-General claiming there is no such thing as mutant oppression, which we the readers know, is a blatant lie. Despite this, Magneto remains calm, and when it’s his turn to speak, he says the following:

“My dream, from the start, has been the protection and preservation of my own kind, mutants. To spare them the fate my family suffered in Auschwitz and do not tell me such a thing cannot happen again, because that is a lie! You humans slaughter each other because of the colour of your skin, or your faith or your politics—or for no reason at all—too many of you hate as easily as you draw breath, what's to prevent you adding us to that list?!”

But the trial attracts the attention of the Fenris twins; the Nazi offspring of Baron Von Strucker. They are there to kill Magneto, Xavier, and Gabrielle Haller (AKA David Haller’s mother), because she is Jewish and was an enemy of their father. Magneto risks his life to save everyone in the trial from them, but Xavier’s heart gives out and he nearly dies in Magneto’s arms, until he’s whisked away by his alien girlfriend who says she can save him. Xavier makes Magneto vow to stand with the X-Men and teach the New Mutants in his absence.

So, let’s keep in mind how intertwined Magneto’s Jewish and mutant identities are in this story; how they interact and shape his views and actions together. Because X-Men 97 is about to take all that away.

In X-Men 97 S01E02, when Val Cooper and the UN show up to arrest Magneto, he surrenders peacefully to try and gain the X-Men’s trust. And Magneto’s speech is very different from that of the comics:

“As a boy, my people's homes were burned to ash, because we dared to call God by another name. Then, my people hunted me with those who had once hunted them. I was a freak, born a mutant. An abomination to their misnamed gods. In history's sad song, there is a refrain. Believe differently, love differently, be of different sex or skin, and be punished. We sing this song to one another. The oppressed become oppressors.”

And it is not the Fenris twins who show up, but just generic Friends of Humanity baddies, led by X-Cutioner.

This adaptation may contain the surface-level story beats of the original, but it misses the heart of the matter; it misses the point!

Magneto’s cartoon speech separates him from his Jewish community. That is something the Magneto I know would never do. In the comics, his part about how humans are always killing each other speaks much more volumes, because he is speaking about his experience not just as a mutant, but as a Jewish person who has survived genocide. Magneto, or anyone with more than identity, does not have to choose between them. This show now says otherwise.

What I hate most of all about his cartoon speech though, is the line, “the oppressed become oppressors.” This is straight up cloaked white supremacist rhetoric; the fear that if racial/ethnic minorities are given equal rights, we will take over and start oppressing white settlers. And no, I’m not saying minorities are exempt from carrying prejudices against others, obviously. What I’m saying is, oppression is a systemic problem that largely stems from colonialism, and to paint oppressed people as a danger that needs to be oppressed or will oppress you, is a terrible idea used by colonizers to justify the system of colonialism. It is not based on fact.

The message of Magneto’s speech in the comics is that he has personally suffered from the hands of oppression before, and does not want others to suffer more. The message of magneto’s speech in the cartoon is that all people are bad, end of story. There is no nuance, there is no larger context at play, and there is no real grit to the words said! They have de-clawed Magneto’s character, and they have ripped away what he stands for… who he stands for.

[the-path-to-redemption]

You know what's another thing that keep me up all night how Blake got on her soap box and "solved racism" I rewatch that scene where she convinced other faunus to "let go of their hate for humans and realized they are human just like us"

Blake hunnie I can't defend you with this one. You are convincing YOUR MINORITY GROUP TO LET GO OF THEIR PAIN for humans despite what many have been through. Being a minority myself I see time after time where many POCs were being harrased, SA, assaulted, and worse case were killed by white people and they never got the justice they deserved.

This is my biggest problem when somebody is trying to make the minority group understand that their oppressors are the same as them. When that speech should've been directed towards their oppressors.

When speak out against racism they are mostly targeted towards to their oppressors and that they will not be silence by them.

It would've made more sense if Blake made her speech towards the humans instead of her group and humans hate for faunus would change.

Is it a permanent solution? Obviously no because their will always be racism there no matter where you go. Is it better than her soap box speech. Yes because this is how you handle racism realistically.

Long Post Ahead

I fucking tear my hair out every time that shitty ass speech enter my mind. I fucking hate Blake so much, you have no idea, especially when in comparison to other Faunus characters she is privileged beyond belief.

Does that mean I believe that she haven't experienced racism? NO. But when someone of her caliber is preaching forgiveness to people who have lost their families, lost their jobs, lost their fucking body parts, to humans and the systematic racism that aims to put them forever on the bottom of society, it makes her a fucking shill and a race traitor.

You're right that she should have had a speech for humans. The arc where she preached to her people took place in Mistral, the second most racist nation towards Faunus, so it's the perfect place for Blake to call out humans for the shit that they're STILL putting Faunus through. It might not be a permanent solution to fixing the system of Mistral, but it will at least show that Blake isn't putting the needs of her people behind playing nice with racists who wouldn't even care that the Faunus of Menagerie is risking their lives to save them from getting bombed.

If anything, that would worsen their relations because those same racists would now view the Faunus as runt soldiers who will still protect them no matter how shittily they are treated and double down. Because the Faunus doesn't care, if one speech is enough for them to forgo the decades of oppression.

[kazu-naito]

astaroth is such an interesting character - hear me out:

once the ban was lifted and he finally could roam around freely he felt like a bug, like he would always be one step down from everyone - he felt it was unfair that mc came from nothing and gained power but the same could not happen to him. he thought she looked arrogant, as if she would always be one step higher and he'd be lost in the crowd. so when the horsemen came and he was thinking about which side he'd take he realized it was easier to become a villain than a hero, it was easier to kill for revenge. the oppressed becomes the oppressor.

in a way the horsemen saved him and for that he'll always be grateful to them, no matter how despicable they are - they still made him feel more valid than those who were supposed to do so from the get go and didn't

he wanted mc to despise him because she was finally the 'bug' he felt like he was when she was a councilor, because even still he wanted her but had no hopes of getting anything positive from her - so it was easier to make her hate him

but as the time went by he realized he didn't want revenge anymore. according to him when you fight only for revenge and influence you're bound to have a meaningless existence - ''skulking around catacombs like a rat" - when you fight for something you believe in then your immortality makes sense

on top of that, christopher escaped alone after fulfilling his part as he was also done with everything and he started developing feelings past hate for mc - realizing she was not what he thought she was. he started caring for her: not telling on her, asking hunger nonstop about her, hesitating when they were on opposite sides. and of course all of his desire to have her in every way possible

"don't you want to burn to ashes along with all this madness with me?"

all of this culminated into him betraying the horsemen by taking a blow from plague that was directed at winchesto and officially becoming part of the resistance

after that the arrogance is gone, he says he wants her favor, her respect and her love, and he doesn't want to hide that anymore. his disdain towards her before was precisely because he thought he could never have any of that, he wanted her so he could stop feeling inferior, and now he wants her for her and proves he's by her side and won't budge

i feel like most of hs1 characters are very linear, he was a breath of fresh air truly - he's interesting and complex, unpredictable even. in my opinion he's one of the true gray characters that rc got right and i am loving his path