also it makes me sad that so many supposed leftists think the answer to 'there is an imbalance in who suffers and who doesn't" is "redistribute the suffering to the people I don't like", not "try to make it so no one has to suffer"
It's extremely punitive-justice oriented but they'd have a ragefit if you told them how carceral their logic is
13K notes
·
View notes
It's always so weird when people who have "proshippers dni" in their bio reblog from me.
Like. Sweetheart. Are you lost? Do you need someone to page your parent/guardian?
I block them as a courtesy to them, but MAN is it odd that they expect everyone else to read their bright-text-on-bright-background bio while not even putting in the tiniest modicum of effort to curate their space themselves. Insert essay about entitlement and learned helplessness here, I guess?
2 notes
·
View notes
I've been seeing a nonzero amount of Jews saying...really sickeningly hibernophobic things in response to Irish individuals being viciously antisemitic.
I've posted about this on my main blog, but it's getting really tiring. Now isn't the time, the potato famine wasn't that bad, the IRA is exactly the same as Hamas, Irish Catholics and Palestinians are the same so Irish Catholics are Scandinavian settler colonists somehow???
It's really making me scared and upset to see people being willing to use collective judgment on Irish people as a whole, to rewrite history to demonize us, to rescind all their viewpoints on how to be decent to marginalized ethnicities as long the ethnicity is Irish Catholic, who rightly point out how fucked up it is that people make exceptions for Jews having human rights...
...and then turn around and make those exact exceptions for Irish people.
This isn't something that needs to be dragged out on posts with people using Irish tragedies to illustrate leftist hipocrisy against Jews, although I do think that rhetorical method is itself hypocritical and it bothers me that anyone anywhere is EVER willing to make exceptions to their principles for ANY ethnicity that exists.
I think that's wrong.
I don't want to take away from anyone's pain. We don't disagree overall. We really don't. I'm infuriated by the "uwu ireland standa with palestine uwu" nonsense too!
I just...I really really hate that the answer seems to be "so we take everything we've been begging people not to do to us and we do it to those filthy micks instead" for an alarming number of people.
I say this here because I think the hamasniks fetishizing Irish history cannot be reached at this point. They need to be fully, formally deradicalized. I'm saying this here because I trust you guys to take me in good faith and actually be open to thinking it through.
I'd like to read some works by Irish Jews, if anyone has any recommendations. I really hope it doesn't need to be said that I would prefer if those works did not also demonize Irish Catholics while uplifting Irish Jews.
1 note
·
View note
Luffy not knowing about Zoro promising Sanji to kill him if he ever ends up losing himself makes me go feral because that's something they can only know about. Because Zoro's respect for life and death goes beyond anything, and Sanji knows he understands. Sanji knows that if somebody has to kill him, it's him.
And I don't even think it's because Sanji assumes Zoro's opinion of him is hatred and it would hurt less for him to do this, but because Sanji knows only Zoro would be able to treat the promise as it is. Because he would put Sanji's wishes before any feelings he has for him. It's not that Zoro doesn't care, but I think he respects people's ideals and decisions to the extent of being able to kill Sanji if he so desires.
That being said, he'd do it if there's no other way to fix it. If it's either dying or living as an emotionless machine, which is the same as dying for Sanji, Zoro would fulfill his promise. And there is just... Something about Luffy not knowing. Their captain. The man they're devoted to the most as if he were their God. Luffy doesn't know. It's something only the captain's wings are aware of and the thought of these two keeping this from Luffy until the end is just insane. Not even trying to make it romantic here, but the bond and respect these two have for each other is crazy.
Maybe it's the poetry of it all, too. Somebody like Zoro, who has looked at Death in her face multiple times and said "no", ending Sanji's life, who wants to give in to death to not experience a fate worse than death for him.
324 notes
·
View notes
It's kind of fascinating to me that towards the end of P&P, Elizabeth has become protective of Darcy and either a) actively tries to insulate him from Situations or b) wishes that she could and gets stressed that she can't.
Darcy deeply loves her and is very ready to do whatever he can to secure her happiness, but narratively, I think the emphasis at the end is very much more on Elizabeth's protectiveness towards him.
It's like:
When Bingley and Darcy first come back to Hertfordshire, Darcy is very quiet and Elizabeth can barely bring herself to say anything—until Mrs Bennet insults Darcy. Then Elizabeth speaks up.
Mrs Bennet enlists Elizabeth to separate Darcy from Bingley with another insult to Darcy. Elizabeth finds this both convenient and enraging.
That day, Elizabeth decides to privately tell Mrs Bennet about her engagement to Darcy, specifically so that Darcy will be spared Mrs Bennet's first unfiltered response.
Elizabeth fiercely defends Darcy's character and love for her, as well as hers for him, to Mr Bennet. She not only says she loves Darcy but that it upsets her to hear Mr Bennet's criticisms of him.
Elizabeth is both relieved by Mrs Bennet's ecstatic reception of the engagement and a bit disappointed by how completely shallow she's being about it, and 100% sure she made the right call in keeping Darcy away.
Elizabeth defends Darcy against Darcy himself, repeatedly.
There's a period where Elizabeth seems to unwind and laugh, but this passes, especially after Charlotte and Mr Collins show up. Darcy manages to stay calm around Mr Collins (I think this is framed as a significant and admirable achievement for him), but Elizabeth does not like him being in a situation where he has to deal with Mr Collins in the first place.
Elizabeth tries to shield Darcy from being noticed by Mrs Phillips and Mrs Bennet, who do seem to make him pretty excruciatingly uncomfortable.
Ultimately, Elizabeth ends up trying to keep Darcy to herself or to shepherd him around to relatives he can handle more easily, and is so stressed at this point that she just wants to get married and escape to Pemberley.
After their marriage, things are actually great at Pemberley and in their married life, despite the occasional complication.
Lydia writes a congratulatory letter to Elizabeth, asking for Darcy to get Wickham a promotion unless Elizabeth would rather not bring it up with him. Elizabeth really does not want Darcy to have to deal with this and handles it by privately setting aside a Lydia fund out of her personal expenses. (IIRC, it's not clear if Darcy even knows about this.)
Elizabeth also is the driving force behind Darcy's reconciliation with Lady Catherine.
This could read as an unsettling, unbalanced dynamic and a very odd ending point for the arc of a woman like Elizabeth, but in the context of the overall novel, it doesn't feel that way. Or maybe I'd see it more that way if I interpreted Darcy (and for that matter, Elizabeth) + their arcs differently? But as it is, I do think that by this point in the story they are genuinely doing the best they can, independently and for each other, and they've both come a long way. They shine in different contexts and support each other as much as they can in the circumstances that do arise.
It seems very them, in terms of their temperament and abilities, that Elizabeth would put all this effort into shielding Darcy, while at the same time, Darcy completely cuts off Lady Catherine for insulting Elizabeth and only ever speaks to her again because Elizabeth wants him to.
172 notes
·
View notes
imagining the story from pei ming's perspective is rlly funny i think. this god from all that time ago ascends again (you were there for the first two times) and immediately waltzes into a situation that fucks something up for your descendant (putting both of your reputations on the line, messing up how hard your descendant worked to become a god and how hard you worked to ensure that he would have that chance) and then refuses to let you smooth the situation out and on TOP of that your friend's little sister (who hates you and who you are trying to look out for by request of your friend) is on your case about it too. so you've gotta work all that out and then like. you chill for a little bit (still kind of upset about your descendant) until your friend undergoes a heavenly calamity. and then in the space of like A Day the god from earlier shows up again with a fucking ghost king, your friend dies, the little sister you're supposed to be looking out for disappears, and everything just kinda goes to shit. so you're like. grieving. trying to process everything. until your OTHER close friend goes off the fucking rails with the spirit of that guy she murdered, and then you get called out to the spooky ghost mountain where you're confronted with the girl whose death YOU were essentially responsible for and have never really come to terms with, and then like. you just kind of hang out with these gay people until everything resolves itself. fight some ghosts. fight the heavenly emperor. get your friend to stop being evil for a little while so she can fix the filing systems. and then you just have to keep being the god of love i guess
216 notes
·
View notes
Just to be extra clear—when I talk about how raging antisemites/bloodthirsty tankies/Glorious Revolution LARPers etc are "supposed leftists" or "shitty progressives", I don't mean it in a No True Scotsman way. I mean that our movement is, unfortunately, beset with members who claim to espouse certain views (compassion, truth, justice, kindness, the bettering of the human condition) and then act in a way that is vicious, conspiratorial, unjust and cruel and explicitly crow about their desire to make things worse for humans (but it's okay because they're the BAD humans, see)
It's not that shitty leftists aren't really leftists. It's that shitty leftists' actions contradict their stated morals and they're really, really bad at furthering the goals they claim they want to further.
1K notes
·
View notes