#is anyone gonna radicalize that gay man | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

catholic-character-tournament · 1 year

Text

Round 1 - Side B

Propaganda below ⬇️

Johnathan

Catholicism doesn’t really exist in the game but it also kind of does. Basically, Johnathan didn’t know that God existed until one day all the angels started coming down from heaven to have a war with the demons from hell. And then Johnathan made a pledge to go serve god and heaven and kill all humans living on earth because they were like “unfit” or “unclean” or something. So then Johnathan’s friend Walter goes to hang out with satan and then they become enemies :( But he’s basically catholic even if he doesn’t directly call himself that so i’m gonna say yes.

Johnathan literally fuses himself with god to become merkabach. He is unhinged. At the start of the game i thought he was cool because he didn’t want me to kill my best friend like WALTER did. And unlike WALTER, johnathan didn’t fuck up the boss fight with the minotaur. But then johnathan became really really bourgeoise or bougie idk whatever idk how to spell it. And then johnathan was like “FUCK POOR PEOPLE” and i was like no girl nooooo. But johnathan wanted to fuse himself with god and wipe all humans off the face of the earth because heaven thought they were impure. So he was trying to invoke the angels of destruction so badly and i was like johnathan you can’t do that son, and so i had to beat his ass. And then by extension i had to also beat god’s ass. And then i don’t really remember what happens but johnathan was essentially the most catholic guy in existence considering i don’t know anybody else who was chill enough with god to do steven universe fusion with him.

ok so like in smt theres alignments . chaos neutral and law. jonathan is the local lawboy and this means hes like the one who rather follow the rules already established and reject radical changes. but anyways hes also shown to be some sort of follower of god in this world and also of the like. local religion or whatever in mikado (where everyone is from) and hes very devoted to the cause and to keep things peaceful as they are now instead of trying to change shit up like walter (the chaosboy)

if he wants to commit genocide who am i to say no

has one fight with friend and decides to become an angel about it and nuke tokyo off the map

Fuses with literal biblical angels to become another angel that then wants to genocide anyone deemed ungodly/unclean by the biblical higher powers (which includes the entire population of Tokyo. And people who read manga).

Dude he is absolutely insane. He's my poor little meow meow. The party got high and he rolled around on the floor and meowed because he thought he was a cat. He is also so insanely gay. Like stupidly queer coded . that just makes the catholic guilt hit harder tbh

Gay boy who dies in every timeline

Paul

he's like if renfield from dracula was cool youth pastor.

He's also a priest, who essentially becomes a vampire due to an "angel" and tries to convert the entire town. He also runs an Alcoholics Anonymous group. I love him

Listen you've probably gotten this guy idk how many times but JUST IN CASE, I submitted him. He's a priest who fell in love and had a lesbian daughter. He becomes a vampire after his money-laundering fundie simp sent him to the Holy Land. He's so torn up over his lover having dementia and God allowing so much overwhelming death that he decides he's going to try to Cure Death Forever but oh boy is it a slippery slope and the man is surrounded by enablers.

so i binged watch the chosen (it's a drama series but it's the bible) and I needed to balance or else Id be insane so I watched midnight mass. It was good. Fuck this rat -- op

#shin megami tensei #jonathan smt #smt #father paul hill #midnight mass #cct polls #tumblr tournament #tumblr bracket #tumblr polls

221 notes · View notes

melonteee · 4 months

Note

When I watched most of your one piece videos and before I ever saw your real face I thought you'd be someone around your 30s or 40s. 😁

One reason was your voice and accent. I'm not that familiar with Australian accents except for OzzyMan (I'm ESL).

Another reason was your One Piece Women video. The way you talked about fanservice and women's body types was, not gonna lie, not sth young people in these times say that often because they've been infested by radfems and their rhetoric and espouse them constantly.

I saw the beginning of a video essay recently where the YouTuber straight up said that female characters who have been "sexualized" whatever definition he used there, don't count as good female characters at all and in any sense.

In other words, a female character who in some way shape or form appeals to men in a sexual way doesn't have any worth as a female character. Popular radical feminism on the internet.

When you started talking about the OP women without going into that direction I breathed a sigh of relief. You said that sexy character design for the women wasn't a big deal but that the lack of variety wasn't good.

And that was, at least where I was, the mainstream talking point in the early 10's about anime/cartoon characters. So, yeah, I thought you'd be older. 💕

Haha no I'm afraid I'm in my youthful mid 20s! That radfem rabbit hole was one I remember being in when I was 13-18 on Tumblr, but I avoid that kinda stuff like the plague now because radfem beliefs tend to be a dog whistle for terfs. And I'm saying this because if anyone reading this falls prey to the whole "women are biologically superior to men" rhetoric, I really need you to be careful, as that can and will nosedive into terf territory.

As for the sexualisation stuff, the whole "characters who have been "'sexualized" don't count as good female characters at all and in any sense" is ridiculous, because no matter what kind of female character you make, they will be sexualised in some way shape or form by men who find them attractive.

BUT honestly the biggest thing for me is like, this demonisation of sexuality and sexyness? Because, as a gay woman, I am also sexualising characters like Nami. Just because I'm not a man doesn't mean it's automatically redundant that I also find Nami extremely sexy and stare at her tits waiting for them to bounce. There's literally nothing wrong with Oda enjoying women, or enjoying tits or ass, he is allowed to make a female character that embodies his desires. But, as you said here, and as I said in my video, the problem is he's doing that with EVERY woman. I personally don't have any grudges for how Oda draws Nami and Robin, I just truly wish it wasn't every damn woman in One Piece lmao.

Honestly I'm in such a weird place with it because, again, I like women. I like looking at tits and I like looking at women. My unpopular opinion is I also find Nami's design very sexy and very pleasing because...I like tits too LMAO and I always feel like us gay women are forgotten about in the conversation of One Piece girls and their bodies. I'm not going to pretend I HATE the girl designs in One Piece because I really don't, but of course there is a difference when a man does it compared to when a woman does it.

My view on it will always be...the issue isn't men looking at fictional women in any kind of sexual way, it's that WOMEN are demonised when they do the same thing back for fictional men. If women draw fictional men being sexy, being objectified (although you can't objectify a fictional character really but you get what I mean), they seem to be swarmed by men who find that gross and detestable. But when men do the same thing back to fictional women... it's fine and natural?? So pointing at the one piece girls, saying it's too sexual and demonising it, is counter productive in my opinion.

As an individual, you are allowed to be uncomfortable with it, you are allowed to wish they looked different, but I don't think anyone has any right to say they SHOULDN'T look like that. Because that creates this air of "Well we can't put our own desires in fictional characters full stop!" and then this weird guilt is felt amongst all parties.

Equality to me is not taking away the bikini armour from a female character, it's allowing both the male AND female characters to be able to wear that bikini armour. Everyone is allowed to have their sexual desires and sexual preferences in fictional characters.

I love Nami, I love her big boobies, I JUST wish Zoro's tits bounced as much as hers did. That is all!

#ask #melonask

43 notes · View notes

daughter-of-sapph0 · 1 year

Text

I'm sure you all know about that shitty transphobic comic artist, sinfest, aka Tatsuya Ishida. maybe you've seen one or two of his comics from people making fun of him. maybe you remember how he used to be a "male ally of radical feminists" or whatever a few years ago. I still see people spreading his shit around without realizing how terrible he is.

he supports the Jan 6 insurrection. he sees it as a "epic battle between woke gay anarchy man and cool based qanon guy" and not literally a coup

he's extremely antisemitic

like, really fucking antisemitic

like, "not even gonna hide it, evil lizard shapshifters are taking over the government and grooming your children!" antisemitic.

he blatantly supports literal nazis websites. those icons are for websites that host far right video sharing platforms, trumps new social media, and literal neo nazis

look at this shit. he's complaining about "soyboys", "the pandemic", etc. but also thinks that the transphobic ideologies that pretend to be feminists aren't mainstream. too much time on 4chan I see...

and notice how in every single one of these comics he draws himself as a tiny girl. reminder that Tatsuya is a middle aged adult man.

wait a minute. that little girl self insert looks familiar

oh, look at that. one of his older comics from about a decade ago, using that exact character, and being blatantly misogynistic and antifeminist.

terfs and radfems, let this be a reminder to you. he was never a feminist. he is a sexist transphobic racist antisemitic homophobic abilst pig. he slid past your stupid ideology on the way to full on fascism. let that sink in: radical "feminism" is just the middle point between edgy antifeminist garbage and full on nazism. if you support this guy, you are not, and have never been, a feminist.

you didn't have a problem with him drawing himself as a ten year old girl. you didn't have a problem with his blatant sexism bleeding into his comics with his fembot crap. "oh but like he's drawing the sexy women getting beat up because that's how society views women" no its how HE views SEX WORKERS. him constantly showing his fembot characters getting destroyed or reprogrammed is his view that all sex workers, and by extention all women, should either change their views or be killed.

now he's gone full mask off fascist with absolutely no subtlety or shame. and some of you STILL think he's a radfem ally. which means you're okay with radfems being nazis as long as it doesn't affect you.

anyway, Tatsuya Ishida is a nazi, and anyone who supports him is a nazi. how can you look at these disgusting antisemitic lizard drawings and still support him?

#dostxt #tw antisemitism #tw transphobia #tw racism #tw nazis #tw radfems #sinfest #tatsuya ishida

206 notes · View notes

diabolicalcunt · 19 days

Text

I feel the need to pin this cause I’ve always been notorious for people loving me when they first meet me, and then finding out that my political views are not extremely liberal. So here’s all the reasons you will hate me once you get to know me. Or not. I honestly don’t care I’m just sick of the ‘You aren’t who I made you out be in my head!’ conversations.

So my unpopular opinions in no order-

1. They/them is something that’s being encouraged by big brother to see yourself as non or less human.

2. DID isn’t real and you just disassociate a specific way. I look like I’ve been drugged cause I fall down ‘inside’ myself like a well and have no reaction time and can barely speak. I’m like a sloth. You pretend to be a anime character. It’s just coping.

3. The concept of trans genocide is fear mongering by big brother and means to keep boundaries between social groups.

4. To build off 3, the push to medically transition underage children is a move by big pharmaceutical companies to create a permanent customer. Because whether you decide to stay transitioned or de transition, you’re going to be on medication for the rest of your life whether you like it or not. There’s also the whole issue with child exploitation. You’ll be judgmental against Dance Moms, but you won’t say anything about a mom who transitioned her child when they were two years old and made them a social media star.

5. Trans men and women who have been charged with a crime belong in LGBT prison wings. Because we have created a culture where male rapists can put on its dress and be rewarded with a permanent stay in the hen house where they can victimize more women and the system will just cry transphobia and call the victims liars. You got a problem with that? I have never seen a trans man pushing to get put in men’s prison. I wonder why… 😐

6. Blair White is queen.

7. I will fight Henry Cavill on sight. I don’t give a shit how bad you want motorboat him. He’s a fucking pedophile.

8. Same goes for David Bowie. When I get to the afterlife I’m gonna make him wish he could die again. Ask me if you want my full on sight list. 😂

9. I stand with Palestine. Yes I think Islam is a horrible religion that is anti woman. I still don’t think kids should die for the grievances of adults and I think it’s fucked up Israel is doing the same shit Nazis did to them and expect us to nod and smile!

10. Qu**r is just as much of a slur as f*g*t or n*gg*r. I don’t use it and if you do I will block you no questions asked. Say gay! Say lesbian! Say…bisexual! 😱

11. Butch women are valid as fuck and I adore y’all . They aren’t trans men, fuck your lesbian phobia.

12. To build off 11, the new LGBT movement has been infected by woke homophobia and the new trans movement is nothing but conversion therapy in a mask.

13 . Radical feminists are women’s last hope.

14. Marvel movies always sucked, we were just kids and ate up the pretty colors.

15. Dune is a white male savior story.

16. Your fave is not autistic, trans, gay or whatever. You just need validation cause you have no confidence.

17. The Boys should have never cast Jensen Ackles and the Supernatural fandom needs psychological help.

18. Too many of y’all try to primp and posture as the gods of your fandom and yes I say that as someone who did the same and stepped away when I realized how cringe I was. Lording over autistic adults and actual children is pathetic. Get therapy and a real hobby.

19. While gender neutral fanfiction has its place. The trend that all fanfiction needs to be gender neutral is literally killing the creativity and frankly the spice to fanfiction. I hate this trend where piece of media needs to be sterilized so it can be consumed by anyone, even people just passing by. It goes against the concept of creating at its core. Sometimes things are made for specific groups. Sometimes it’s made just for you. The things you create do not need to be sanitized to the point there’s no substance, just a hollow consumption. Think of it this way. Would you rather have a hot pizza of your preference or would you prefer to just drink a bowl of water because someone on the other side of the world might not like pizza?

20. The WWE Divas belt was iconic. I get the whole take women wrestlers seriously movement and I agree! But god damn it, it’s a Bratz belt!!! Gimme!!!!!

21. I fucking HATE koalas. They literally only exist because humans have dumped millions of dollars and keeping them alive. If natural selection were allowed to take his course, they would’ve died off 100 years ago. The food they consume has so little nutrition that they have evolved to have the smallest brain to cranium capacity of any animal to create a built in helmet!! Why? Cause they are so stupid they literally fall out of trees and drop their infants!!! They shit on their young and have permanent diarrhea due to the 0 nutrition thing. They carry chlamydia. They’re so fucking stupid they can’t fuck and have to be artificially inseminated to continue the population. If I couldn’t get laid on my own, the government would not drop millions of dollars into making sure I do!! So why did koalas get it? Literally a waste of resources that could be going to feed thousands of hungry children and instead we’re keeping a fucking retarded (I’m on the spectrum fuck you) animal alive who should have gone extinct hundreds of years ago cause it’s supposedly ‘cute’!! God! I hate koalas!

#get to know me #unpopular opinion

9 notes · View notes

likehephaestionwhodied · 1 year

Note

Can you pretty please make a history of leather lesbians post? Your reblog about lesther daddies made me cry because it was so full of love and respect.

I'm gonna start with the bad news, which is no I can't. That post and the specifics of that post come from 1. being a leatherman and 2. months of intense research prepping to write my master's thesis. And so that is full of academic history. And I'm not knocking non-academic history; I rely on non-academic community history for my thesis; almost entirely, there is very little academic history on the community. But that's the thing, it's community history and I've never been a member of that community.

This is not good or bad news, but because of the nature of some leather spaces, particularly the ones I write about in my thesis, there is very little if any, cross-over of gay men and lesbian leather. THIS DOES NOT MEAN IT DOES NOT HAPPEN but this is why I know very little.

During the 70s there was an anti-sex push that affected gay leathermen and leather lesbians differently. Leather lesbians were in the trenches fighting for their right to also be feminists because there was a huge feminist movement that all sex is bad, particularly sex that looks like or is heterosexual sex and leather/SM is abuse etc. etc. Which is a dynamic that is different from what leathermen are looking at which is more "we should try to be like heterosexuals and stop having so much weird sex"

The good news is I do have some things you could read if you want to get a rudimentary grasp of lesbian leather history.

Leatherfolk: Radical Sex, People, Politics, and Practice edited by Mark Thompson. This is a collection of essays by leatherfolk, by virtue of the editor being a gay leatherman there's an over-representation of gay men in this collection but there are essays by lesbians. Gayle Rubin [who we're gonna talk more about later] writes about a fisting club for gay men but she talks about when Lesbians and women in general were included. But there are other essays by lesbians about lesbians.

Coming to Power: Writings and Graphics on Lesbian S/M Edited by members of SAMOIS a lesbian/feminst S/M Organization. This is going to be probably the most helpful to anyone looking for a historical grounding in Lesbian leather. It's not a text on the history of leather rather, it's a primary source, these are leather lesbians talking about their experence. The unfortunate thing is, and you'll run into this a lot with niche community groups, it's hard to get your hands on. You're looking at 150-200 dollars if you want to buy the third edition. But I found it on accident in my university's library, so you might be able to find it in your local academic library (I am in the middle of Nebraska so there's a little bit of hope for you, too where ever you are.) OR you might be able to get it through interlibrary loan, there might also be like PDF copies floating around.

There are two people I'll point you towards as being the two people I know that have written on this subject.

Patrick Califia: Patrick is a trans man who, in the late 70s and early 80s prior to identifying as a trans man, was a big name in the San Francisco lesbian leather community. He is featured three times in Coming to Power and has an essay in Leatherfolk he is referenced in a lot of the gay male press as being the lesbian point of contact, also an erotica writer. So his early stuff might be helpful.

Gayle Rubin: If you are want to read heavy academia about queers in general, Rubin is who you should start with. She essentially invents Queer Theory with her article "Thinking Sex." the most pertinent article for my answer to you is "The Leather Menace" The title itself is a derivative of "lavender menace," and it plays with this theme that you see over and over and over again across the queer leather community of being a marginalized community inside an already marginalized community.

Rubin also wrote one of the best academic pieces on the gay male leather community The Valley of the Kings, it was never published and exists in only two places, Ann Arbor at the University of Michigan and Chicago at the Leather Archives and Museum. I have not gotten to read it in full. Someday I'll grow the balls to email her and ask her if there's an easier way to read it.

If you read these anthologies, goggle these women, google the organizations they mention. I know absolutely nothing about Dykes on Bikes but surely someone's written some kind of history about them.

If you have the chance go to The Leather Archives and Museum, there's a heavy emphasis on gay leathermen, but it is a community archive for all the leather community.

The thing about digging for the history of this community is there is no published "here is the history of the leather community" you have to read this person's memoir and the clippings you could find of this or that publication and someone's history of this that or some other organization.

I'm sure if some 50-year-old Leather Dyke comes across this, it'll be met with, "Okay, kid you have no idea what you're talking about." and to her and everyone else, I'd say, "yeah, no, I don't have a clue." this is just where I would start if I wanted to dig into this topic.

#long post #queer history #bc that's who I am now

20 notes · View notes

trans-wojak · 3 months

Note

I just wanted to say I saw your response to the ask about Nex and I wanted to say that the way you explained your stance is very well thought out…

I hold the same beliefs as you, and I would like to not be on Anon but I fear if my friends found I hold these beliefs that they would call me transphobic and hate me (it is a kinda complicated situation…)

I just want to say I admire your bravery to speak your thoughts and opinions so openly and seemingly without fear of being rejected because of them. I hope one day to be able to have the confidence to speak my thoughts on subjects without fearing to be criticized.

-A shy anon 🪼

I have been criticised a lot for my stance because it creates conflict and many people just dislike conflict in general, which I understand. I just avoid trans spaces online and irl these cause they are predominantly filled with trenders and “non binary”. I prefer LGBT mixed spaces cause atleast those are not just a group made up of women who ID as non binary. Since it’s LGBT and not “trans”, there is less room for radical feminist man hating bullshit cause gay men will tell them to stfu.

Non binary in my experience and research is really just radical feminism lite, it reminds me of “political lesbians” who were straight femcels out of choice. All core beliefs of non binary activism heavily align with radical feminist theory more than it does with anything about trans rights. Contrary to popular belief, many radical feminists believe that medical transition is fine aslong as you retain that you’re a masculinised female or feminised male and don’t assert you are changing your sex or try to be in any of your group’s gendered spaces. Though, this treatment is mainly only directed at trans women - they rarely care about trans men sharing spaces with cis men cause they see it as “rebellious against the evil patriarchy” and benefiting.

This is why most “detrans” TERFs you find will have identified as non binary but then switched, usually after trying testosterone and ACTUALLY getting dysphoria. If you go to non binary subreddits, there’s countless posts about being scared to start T cause “I don’t want *insert literal male sexual characteristic*” or even worse “I don’t want to be perceived as a cis male”. The comments are filled with encouragement to start T anyway, saying you can microdose to control effects (a lie, it just makes it slower), suggesting taking certain hormone blockers to literally block male sexual characteristics but get very minimal ones that could be achieved through diet, exercise and voice training. Or worse, suggestions that laser hair removal isn’t even hard or expensive, it’ll work blah blah.

These retards then go on T, get side effects that cause actual dysphoria and then go full blown radical feminist.

At this point? I think anyone who identifies as non binary should be banned from transitioning medically. I don’t think you should qualify for a gender dysphoria diagnosis unless you want to be the opposite sex; not some magical androgynous being to get out of misogyny in society.

Though I do keep my beliefs to myself in many situations to avoid conflict but I also play heavily on my autism as an excuse for things, if the government and society wanna deem me as retarded then I’ll play into it. So, no I struggle with singular they cause I’m autistic. Honestly, I actually do struggle with singular they especially if they look entirely as their birth sex. I just don’t bother putting in effort cause I don’t care about how they feel. The worst woman I ever encountered who got mad at me for this was self diagnosed autistic, had a fucking child and was raising him “as non binary” so she got mad if you used he/him. I’m all for not raising kids with no gender roles or stereotypes but doing that is gonna fuck up the kid.

I also know a woman who started T cause she thinks she’s non binary and immediately stopped cause of body hair growing. Now she complains about her slightly deeper voice and says she wants to get pregnant again but worries that T hurt her. Oh she still retains she’s non binary tho, just that she likes living as a female “cause its way more comfortable” - yeah cause you’re a cis woman!

Anyway sorry for the rant, I’m glad that my opinions aren’t all seen as me being uwu disrespectful and mean cause my intent isn’t to be “mean” it’s to use critical thinking. If you want, you can privately DM me to discuss more on this so you don’t feel so alone in your convictions. It’s one of the reasons I have stopped showing my face online publicly cause trenders tried to doxx me, dangerous at times to not believe in non binary.

#thanks nonnie #thanks for the ask!

3 notes · View notes

butch-bakugo · 1 year

Text

Thats it, im talking about the perisexist aka intersexphobic side of terfs that needs to be addressed more often.

Like terfs fucking hate drag and call anyone, trans or cis, male or female, participating in it "sexual perverts" for wanting to expose children to it but claim you'll die a thousand deaths for gnc women? Bs. Drag is just gender nonconformity on fuckin steroids and it's not inherently sexual. Like why is a woman in a suit only ok to you if she walks around stateing that she is a woman but not ok if she dosent? Like yall are so trigger happy, you shoot at cis butch lesbians with short blue hair who arent actively talking about womanhood and vaginas and accuse her of being an evil tranny whose either a traitor to her fellow woman or a "tim" trying to identify as woman and making a mockery of gnc women.

Yall are so caught up on fuckin genitalia that you dont see the numerous poc cultures, non-christian religions, gnc people and intersex people you drown in your wake who were never aginest feminism but are too "trans-similar" for you to chill tf out. Ive had people tell me im "obviously a non-passing trans woman" just because im intersex with a beard.

Every single time ive addressed intersex people who can not, no matter how much you try, be sorted into male or female, ive been told we dont matter. Intersex people DO MATTER. Your not helping anyone but perisex, hormonally stable cis white women. Hormonally intersex afabs arnt gonna fucking want you, your telling them they dont matter. Physically intersex people raised as women arnt gonna want you, your telling them they dont fucking matter. Hyperandrogonious cis women dont want shit to do with you because your already accusing her of "clearly being a trans woman" because she can naturally grow a beard. The only femininity and women who benefit from terf shit are cis white gc perisex women.

Im not gonna throw away my native culture's gender variance for some white terf just because most white cultures are patriarchal. Im not gonna throw out my genderfluid religious practices for some catholic raised "anti-theist" terf who is one sentence away from saying islamophobic and anti-Semitic slurs just because she believes all muslims and jewish people are sexist and follow the sexist portions of their holy text.

I mean fuck, ive seen terfs advocate for hormonally intersex women to TAKE ESTROGEN so they look less "male" and act less "male". Ive seen them advocate for intersex (mostly afab) babies with intersex genitalia to go through Fgm, a thing they VEHEMENTLY hate just so shes more "female" and can fit their boxes better. Ive seen them say that testosterone makes you inherently violent and angry without dareing to see the actual fucking medical evidence that thats entirely untrue. Ive seen them adovocate for putting 10 year old sons of female rape victims out of shelters because "hes a man at that point" and "other women's safety comes first".... Over a hypothetical and soon to be hypothermic 10 year old boy. Some of them fully and shamelessly base their ideology around genuinely killing all men and male fetuses like... Fuck dude. I think you might need some therapy. Like i get feeling that way, im a victim of many men in my life and if i could choose a world where i can only interact with everyone but cis men, id choose it but im not advocating for the complete genocide of an entire group of people.

The way they talk about trans people smells all to familiar to any group thats gone through genocide and governmental oppression. Its similar to gay people, disabled people, women, poc, non-christians, everyone can see abit of the bigotry in their argument they see in their own oppressors and that should be a real big flashing sign that maybe terfism... Isnt the way to go. When i explain to people that radical feminism can be trans inclusive and its simply and active and deeper form of feminism, i get laughed at by both sides but its true. Tirfs do exist and they include trans and intersex and nonbinary people of all kinds and yes, that includes amabs and many progressives today would fall under that label. But heres the thing, modern day and previous forms of feminism in america have always benefited white cishet women. Susan b fucking anthony supported slavery and did not advocate for black women to be able to vote. Anti-gender variance ignores many poc cultures rich and accepting histories of transgenderism, nonbinarism and intersexuality. So many "pinnicles of feminism" that terfs hold up were racist or homophobic or anti-Semitic. Trans, nonbinary and intersex people are just white cis feminism's shiny new chew toy and they will get bored and pick a new target maybe 10 years from now. Probably disabled people.

I understand the anger many terfs carry but sympathy isnt needed here. Many of them actively ignore actual fact and relative understanding towards anything that questions their veiws and they are HAPPY to uplift racists and anti-semites and homophobes(See jk rowling) as long as their anti-trans messages are still singing. Someone who partners with the enemy to hurt others despite the enemy also supporting the things they supposedly advocate againest has no loyalty or shame. They are happy as long as they have a platform. Terfs would go on fox fucking news watching tucker carlson chuckle under his breath at their feminism and "pro-same sex attraction" ideology as long as they get that soundbite of a feminist not supporting trans pple to make all feminists, trans people and gay pple look fucking stupid.

Jk rowling isnt your fucking friend. Shes a mirror held up to YOUR community. One ive heard echos of sedmients made from outside it being ignored. Your litterally femcels. Ive seen terfs get upset at the ableism and racism within their own community thats upheld by white neurotypical women get utterly ignored. I have so many screenshots of white terfs saying the n word its not even funny yet when a tranny like me shows you evidence of the underlying racism in anti-trans/nonbinary rhetoric, you claim that theirs poc terfs. Ive seen white terfs call me a teepee n****r because i said native american people respected all genders and werent inherently patriarchal. Ive seen white terfs advocate for full on ETHNIC FUCKING CLEANSING of certain poc cultures because they had some patriarchal portions. BRUH. If your scrambling to find some crumb in your community to excuse its actions and cover up the evil everyone already pointed out, you should do some introspection into what your supporting.

Terfs dont even see the humanity in trans people or intersex people. Quoting a jewish youtuber talking about oppression he faced after trump endorsed the nazis in south carolina and said that jewish people and nazis should come to a compromise "when one side will never be happy unless their opposition is completely erraticated, there is no compromise. They simply wont stop until they are all dead or 'rehabilitated'. There is no conversation, there is only the eradication of the victims or the offending group.". Terfs are advocating for trans genocide and detranstion of those who remain. They shrink our numbers to deny us humanity and when they arnt celebrating the high trans suicide statistic, they are minimising it. They are no different from holocaust deniers, they just dont have as much support and the more of their own stances they are willing to let go of to take advantage of their shared opinions with alt-right and fascist platforms, the more their feminist and gay rights mask slip off to reveal the racist, antisemitic and hate filled rot underneath.

#levi speaks

7 notes · View notes

madonnamadeofasphalt · 1 year

Text

What “fascism” means

My controversial belief is that it is actually really fucking important to educate yourself on the basics of, from lack of a better word, “philosophical” foundations of fascism. The fact that most people’s knowledge of it is limited to the aesthetics and crimes of the past fascist regimes is what allows modern fascists to strive and make themselves uncritically tolerated by just changing their name and denying their historical connections. It’s how dudes who are practically quoting Mussolini verbatim can go “you just call anyone you disagree with a fascist”. It’s how a fascist propagandist can be like “how can I be a fascist when I’m Jewish/gay/non-white/whatever?” and be treated seriously. It’s how more moderate right-wingers, conservatives and liberals alike, can genuinely claim that all the talk of a fascist renaissance is just conspiracy theories and fearmongering - after all, fascists are obviously fringe, because where did you last see a bunch of dudes goose-stepping with a swastika banner?

So, here’s a very basic explanation of fascism. It’s based on my own readings of fascist texts, as well as some compromising between the definitions and their boundaries proposed by various experts on the subject (one of which, I cannot emphasize it enough, I am not). I’m not gonna do a full bibliography on a Tumblr post, so I propose treating it as a simplified introduction to doing some of your own reading and developing your own opinions. The usual recommended starting point is Ur-Fascism by Umberto Eco, and even though in my personal opinion it focuses on some aspects of the ideology that are more common propaganda tactics than its actual core, it is a pretty good one. Anyway, point is, take me with a grain of salt, just like you should take anything written in some post on Tumblr (and, frankly, anything written anywhere else as well). That said, I’ll do my best to explain the basics, from one amateur to another, as uncontroversially as I can when talking about such a controversial subject.

Fascism is, above all else, about the cult of power. It’s about punishing and despising weakness, it’s about radical individualism, about survival of the fittest, about social darwinism. A man’s success is proof that he deserves his success. A man’s power is proof that he deserves his power. That is, according to fascists, the natural hierarchy that shapes the society to be healthy and pure.

Why, then, are fascists so keen on overthrowing governments? Because they believe degeneracy, a celebration and acceptance of weakness, has corrupted this natural order and allowed the weak to govern the strong. This degeneracy is usually (though not universally) associated with the industrial revolution, intellectualism, social welfare and the accomplishments of various (especially racial and sexual) civil rights movements, as well as the nebulous, antisemitic construct of a devious international Jewry - and you probably know from your history classes how they intend to combat that.

Since fascism is a cult of power, it emphasizes acting over thinking - as acting is a “stronger” activity. It glorifies violence and decisiveness, ruthlessness and unanimity. This is why a core idea of fascism is totalitarianism. This term was originally created to criticize the first, Italian fascism, but very quickly started to be used by the fascists themselves. In most systems, the state’s functions are supposed to be limited to some areas of social life, while what is known as private life should be untouchable by its power. The fascists do away with those limitations, and believe that the state, personified by a singular Leader (or, less often, collectively by the inner circle of a fascist party), has a right to interfere with whatever it wants to, and pass whatever laws it has the power to enforce, especially if their purpose is combating degeneracy. An important thing to note is that while historically the creation of this fascistic “total state” was often attempted by military dictatorships, that doesn’t necessarily have to be the case - fascists have no problems with using democratic or republican means to push their agenda. A cult of power is a cult of pragmatism, after all. Some fascists (like the Polish “endecja” or certain parts of the American “alt-right”) even genuinely believe in a form of totalitarian republicanism - those types, however, turn out to be really picky when it comes to who gets to vote.

Finally, there is the idea of a perpetual war. Humanity, according to fascists, is inherently divided into some kind of groups, which nature depends on the particular brand of fascism - most common types include races, nations, ethnicities, states, religions, any combination of the above. Sometimes these groups are equal at the starting point and you should be loyal to yours just because its yours, sometimes some of them are naturally superior to others. The important part is, the fascists claim that the primary function and the historical destiny of each of those groups is to destroy or subjugate all the other groups (either globally or in a given territory). Equal and peaceful coexistence is impossible, and any group that genuinely attempts it, will inevitably be backstabbed by the opponents they naively tried to tolerate. That is why militarism and expansionism are often (though not always) an important part of particular fascisms - the state’s purpose is to ensure the ultimate victory of the group it represents in the perpetual war. The people’s purpose is the same - that’s why it is necessary to subjugate them all under totalitarianism, so their private lives don’t distract them from their role in the perpetual war. And regardless of wether one of the groups was superior to all others from the start or not, one of them will prove its superiority when it proves its power and finally emerges victorious from the perpetual war.

As an ending note, I’d like to make clear that not all fascists use the exact words I have used above - in fact, very few of them do. “Totalitarianism” in particular became a dirty word due to the memory of horrific crimes comitted by the 20th century totalitarian regimes; it’s more likely to be implied by the lack of consideration for individual or social rights in fascist demands. You won’t see a lot of fascists talk about a “cult of power” or a “perpetual war”, either, and only the most blatant ones will utter the words like “social degeneracy” or “international Jewry”. They will instead talk about a “strong state”, “protecting our traditions”, “decadent youth”, “overpopulation”, and so on, and so forth. They will approppriate conservative, liberal and even leftist language in order to obfuscate their actual view of the world. And then there’s the fact that “fascist” and “non-fascist” isn’t really a neat binary - few things are when you actually look at them closely. There will be politicians, ideologues and activists, especially (but not exclusively) on the right, who will dip their fingers in fascism, but won’t go all the way down. It especially applies to the ones who do have some basic education on the topic and therefore are aware of how close they are to fascism - you may be a bigoted piece of trash and share most of fascist viewpoints, but still feel uncomfortable to admit to yourself that you’re on the same side as the fuckers who did the Holocaust. Yes, that last sentence is about Jordan Peterson (but not only about him).

And finally, remember that you can make an effort to understand an idea without sympathizing with it or empathizing with its followers. No matter how they justify and rationalize, and decorate their beliefs, if you decide to do some deeper research on the topic (which I, again, really do recommend), for the love of God, remember that this shit always leads in the same direction. It leads to the death camps, to the mustard gas bombings, to the pogroms and invasions, and forced euthanasia, and wholesale slaughter of human beings. It’s inherent to its core ideas. A cult of power means destroying the weak. Totalitarianism means tyranny and enslavement. Perpetual war means perpetual carnage. Death to all fascists. Take care.

#fascism #anti-fascism #philosophy #political philosophy #politics #political ideologies #antifa

5 notes · View notes

radlymona · 2 months

Note

hi. I am genuinely not trying to start shit or argue here, can I ask why you are so against labels (that have been around for ages) like transgender, aromantic, polyamorous, and queer (when its used to describe someone who isn't a strictly homosexual man)? as someone who identifies with multiple of these labels I think that we should let people be and let them call themselves what they want. even I don't understand or agree with every single label in the queer community, but as long as it doesn't hurt others I'm not gonna go around arguing, cause in the end it won't get anyone anywhere. I am genuinely curious.

(although I do agree with you on one thing, that being a furry/into certain kinks doesn't automatically make you queer)

First, thank you for your very considerate and kindly-worded ask. I appreciate wanting to have an open and honest dialogue about this issue.

Second, I understand the exact thinking behind “we should let someone use a term if it doesn’t hurt anyone,” because I was very much in this mindset before getting into radical feminism.

But the problem is a) these labels DO hurt people and b) words need to accurately describe reality. Otherwise they’re meaningless.

To go into more detail:

a) Certain “Labels” DO hurt people:

"Queer" is a term that is offensive to many same-sex attracted people, especially in older generators. For decades it was used as a horrific slur, especially against gay men, and is often associated with gay bashings. Ergo, when people label themselves as "queer", they're identifying with a slur that hurt an untold amount of lgbt people in the past. It also forces the word to become detached from its original meeting, and thus erases the very history of it.

"Pansexual" as a term is offensive to many bisexuals. It seeks to promote itself as an elevated, more inclusive sexuality by being like "we are attracted to ALL Peoples regardless of gender! #heartsnotparts." The implicit meaning of this is that the existing sexuality (bi) is not inclusive enough. Other terms like omnisexual have the same issue. Funnily enough though, Pan has become less used in recent years and instead replaced with the above "queer".

b) "Labels" to be worth a cent, need to accurately convey reality. I.e those who identify as homosexual need to be only attracted to the same sex. Otherwise anyone can identify into that label, and co-opt the resources, history and culture of that group. As such, what labels do is help us identify which groups actually belong in the lgb community as it was founded- by and for same-sex attracted people.

Transgender isn't an incorrect term. Some people decide to transition to the opposite sex. I don't disagree with that as an experience that happens, I'm critical of the conflation of sex and gender by trans advocates. Despite all their slogans saying otherwise, I've seen this conflation increase exponentially in the last few years particularly in regards to single-sex women's spaces and experiences of sexual orientations. I also want to point that historically the "t" community involved in lgb spaces was overwhelmingly gay men who identified as transexuals due to intense homophobia and dysphoria. They're already included in the "g". The problem is that the modern trans community has less and less to do with the original meaning. But that's a different conversation.

Polyamorous is not a sexual orientation. No one is born with a specific attraction against multiple people. This is in contrast to lgb people who are born as their sexuality. Ie. A person is born gay, not polyamorous. The latter is a description of the type of relationships people engage in. It also doesn't belong as a label in the lgb community, because heterosexual people can be polyamorous by only wanting to be with multiple partners of the opposite sex. The lgb community doesn't mean "everyone who isn't explicitly heterosexual, gender-conforming, monogamous." It's of a specific group of same-sex attracted people with a shared history, experiences, and occassionally culture.

In the same vein, neither aromatics and/or asexuals belong in the lgb group. Because they lack same-sex attraction. Not helping things is the "grey-aspec" orientations that muddle up the waters by trying to explain every minute facet of sexual attraction. I.e. only feeling sexual attraction sometimes does not make you lgb.

Overall what I'm getting at is that words have meaning. Trying to change the meaning of certain words, implicitly tries to erase their history. Trying to include every label under the sun in the lgb community, means that you're ascribing a history, culture and experience to a label that may have next to no relationship with that original community. You can have and use as many labels are you like but at the end of the day, if they're being used to co-opt experiences of same-sex attracted people then they are indeed hurting people.

To be explicitly clear:

Sexual orientation equals who you're attracted to.

Not how, or how many, how little or how much.

And who you're attracted to is based on biological sex. You are innately born with this- probably the most foundational point of the lgb community.

#lgb

0 notes

daddysboyys · 6 months

Text

This is not a political blog so I'm inly gonna comment on this once.

If you support Hamas, fuck yourself.

If you support or defend the way the IDF has treated Palestinian civilians in retaliation for the Hamas attack, go fuck yourself.

I don't care who the land was promised to. I don't care who was there first. If you are fighting a war based on superstition and two religions who at the end of the day worship the same non-existent god, you can go fuck yourself.

The rest of the world can't afford to get sucked into a religious war.

Right now most people are on one side or another, but I promise it won't be long before the world is so sick of this that they write off supporting either side.

Fuck Hamas. Fuck the Israeli government.

Also sorry not sorry but those Palestinian kids are gonna grow up in a religion that would have them hate me as a gay man whether they're radical members of their religion or not so forgive me for not shedding a tear for them.

Don't fall for either side's propaganda. At the end of the day, it's just hateful people blowing each other up. We get enough of that here in America. Don't need anyone else's bullshit.

#end rant

1 note · View note

crescairis · 2 years

Note

hi, i genuinely don't understand how a lesbian person can be attracted to men? like i really don't get "pan lesbian"/"bi lesbian"/etc... im an AFAB, transmasc NB lesbian myself but i am, for all intents and purposes, exclusively attracted to women.

i thought the term "lesbian" meant "any non-man exclusively attracted to women/fem-aligned people"

please explain? this is not hate or anything, this is a genuine question!

hi there! thanks for your good faith questions! :] this is gonna be a long one, so buckle up

the simple answer is that queer identity is never as simple as A + B = C. people can be multigender, genderfluid, genderqueer, Literally Just Butch, etc... it puts a wrench in very simple descriptions like that. there's gotta be some wiggle room for labels to work—and even then, it's entirely against the idea of queer liberation to let anyone but yourself define your connection to a label. as the saying goes, "not gay as in happy, but queer as in fuck you". (not directed at you, ofc :) /lh)

plus, the "non-men" definition kinda...inherently misgenders people who aren't men but aren't lesbians either. i know people who aren't men and would frankly bite anyone who tried to call them a lesbian for the sole sake of them liking women. a label based on exclusion is always going to run into road bumps like that.

but, if you want a more historical answer...

basically, the definition of lesbian has changed a lot over time. for a while in the 20th century, lesbian basically just meant "woman attracted to women", or even just "women who sleeps with women", regardless of how they felt about men.

the idea of lesbianism inherently not including men only really came around with the advent of lesbian separatism in the 1970s:

"In essence, lesbian feminists tried to untie lesbianism from sex so heterosexual feminists were more comfortable. ... Lesbian feminists responded by distancing themselves from stereotypes of “masculine roles,” maleness, and patriarchy. One way they were able to do so was by disentangling lesbian sexuality from heterosexuality and re-conceptualizing heterosexual sex as consorting with “the enemy”. ... They were then able to draw a distinction between lesbian sex and heterosexual sex, claiming that lesbian sex was “pure as snow” since it did not involve men." —Yamissette Westerband, "Lesbians in the Twentieth Century, 1900-1999"

this was coupled together with political lesbianism, and putting this all together, you got a doctrine that followed as such:

lesbianism was a conscious, feminist, and correct choice. (political lesbianism)

any relations with men were considered traitorship towards women and compliance with the patriarchy. (lesbian separatism)

this meant that bisexual women were considered traitors to their sisters. (biphobia babey!!)

this, at its core, was the belief of radical feminists—and it certainly wasn't something that was met with full agreement. while there were many lesbians who scorned any physicality with men, there were just as many lesbians who refused the idea that to be a lesbian, one must completely remove men from their lives.

there are accounts of bisexual women who saw their lesbian identity as a political stance alongside their bisexuality, or even the other way around. [there's a few here!] the phrase "lesbian-identified bisexual" comes up a lot in the literature spanning from the 1970s-1990s.

here's a couple select quotes from the page i linked:

"[Betty Aubut]: ... I never used to identify as lesbian out of respect for women who made the lifelong choice never to sleep with men, but then I realized that was a lot of bullshit. Calling yourself lesbian does not necessarily mean you have made that lifelong decision. Now I mostly identify as a lesbian–so I call myself a bisexual lesbian." —Robyn Ochs, “Bi of the Month: Betty Aubut,” Bi Women Vol. 5, No. 2, April-May, 1987]

"10 years ago when I left my husband and full-time role of motherhood, it didn’t make me less conscious of what being a mother means. In fact, it gave me a deeper understanding. I am still a mother. That experience cannot be taken away from me. In much the same way, my lesbian awareness isn’t lost now that I claim my bisexuality. When I realized my woman-loving-woman feelings, and came out as a lesbian, I had no heterosexual privilege; yet there were important males in my life, including a son. I am bisexual because it’s real for me, not in order to acquire or flaunt the privilege that is inherent in being with men. My political consciousness is lesbian but my lifestyle is bisexual. If I keep myself quiet for another’s sense of pride and liberation, it is at the cost of my own which isn’t healthy–emotionally, politically or medically. Not only is it unhealthy, it’s ineffective." —Lani Kaahumanu, “Bisexuality & Discrimination,” BBWN Vol. 3, No. 6, Dec 1985-Jan 1986; Reprinted from the 1985 Gay Pride March magazine, San Francisco

regardless of what anyone thought, this was still an opinion that stretched forward into the modern day, though it feels that a lot of exclusionists have all but forgotten it was the belief of radical feminists—or even accepted it, becoming modern radfems all on their own.

there's actually a huge radfem population on tumblr, and has been since tumblr's inception—and that's a big part of why this belief system was able to push its way into the wider queer community. with such a lack of queer elders coming out of the AIDs crisis, queer teens on the web didn't really have very many ways to learn about queer history—especially with bigoted parents around, leaning over their shoulders.

thus, radfems were given a perfect opportunity to deliver their verdict, and these queer teens just...didn't know better. i'd go so far as to say that i've seen radfems and exclusionists alike scorn their queer predecessors, claiming that, in nicer words, "being older doesn't mean you're right". it sucks a lot.

in general, a lot of the hatred comes down to the views of radical feminists. that men and masculinity are inherently evil, that to have relationships with men is a betrayal to one's sisters...when really, there's a lot of men who don't benefit from the patriarchy at all. if the patriarchy were some magical force that protected all men, we wouldn't get cishet men being called f or t slurs for showing emotion. men wouldn't be constantly doubted every time they admitted that they'd faced abuse from women.

instead, the patriarchy only rewards complete compliance and gender essentialism. to be viewed as a good man under the patriarchy, there can't be a whiff of femininity on you. likewise, to be a good woman, you can't be masculine in the slightest. (this is a big part of why things such as stay at home husbands and working wives are seen as such a "horrific" phenomenon. it's also the basis of—you guessed it—homophobia!)

it doesn't just tie into gender; in fact, it's very much tied to white supremacy as well. to quote gerald torres, in his book "Understanding Patriarchy As an Expression of Whiteness: Insights from the Chicana Movement" (which i highly suggest you read, as i can only say so much on the subject, being white myself):

"Whiteness has a gender. The history of American racial thought held that to be white was to possess certain superior characteristics that on closer inspection turned out to be as gendered as they were racial. Though the content of the construction of race and gender changed over time, the gendered nature of whiteness, and of race in general, remained constant. Whether attempting to claim white privilege for themselves or positioning themselves in opposition to that privilege, America’s racial and ethnic minorities have historically defined and redefined themselves in relation to the core characteristics of whiteness. To be white was to be civilized, rational, moral and in command of one’s emotions. Of course, these are also gendered characteristics. The absence of these characteristics was stereotyped as definitive of lesser races, and was sometimes even characterized as such by the occupants of those classes."

to double back to radical feminism, this actually also ties into a lot of queer issues that people feel much less vicious about; transmascs are seen as traitors by radfems as well, abandoning their womanhood to join "the side of the oppressors", or even that, by being men, they automatically have all of the same privileges that cishet men do, completely ignoring the fact that a LOT of transmascs don't ever get to access the male privilege that radfems believe they have by nature of being men. (gnc transmascs, those who don't or can't pass, etc)

the same goes for the trend of mlm positivity posts being hijacked by women who feel the need to complain about how "ugly" and "gross" men are, or that people with male partners should "dump them and get a girlfriend instead".

this lateral attack on queer people all comes down to the idea that "it's okay because men are the ultimate oppressors", yet another idea that both benefits radfems by implying that, because they're women, they're the ultimate oppressed party, while also ignoring the fact that, by nature of many of them being white, or cis, or dyadic, or allo, they still have power over those who are people of color, or trans, or intersex, or aspec.

all in all, this isn't to say that you have to like men as a lesbian. you don't! you yourself can define your lesbianism as completely absent of men, and no one can stop you from doing that. in fact, i would defend your right to do that just as much as i defend bi lesbians.

the problem is when people try to define everyone's lesbianism by their own personal definition, and/or they decide that to like men as a lesbian (or at all) is some irrevocable sin. it's ahistorical, it enforces gold star lesbianism, which is already a lesbophobic concept, and it completely contradicts the idea of queer liberation and autonomy.

and to any radfems and exclus who decide they're gonna send me some mean messages after reading this: hi <3 anon is off. show me your pretty urls so i can block you.

#asks #radfem cw #exclus cw #long post #discourse cw #racism cw

125 notes · View notes

arthur-does-tingz · 2 years

Text

Why Viktor Was In Love With Jayce

Okay so I watched Arcane and I can say with conviction that it is my new all time favorite series (maybe even hyperfixation?? We’ll see) and as part of both being gay, a lil bitch, and too much of an analytic, I tend to overthink character relationships. Vi and Caitlyn I smelled from a mile away, Mel and Jayce were obvious, even Jinx and Silco???? (i don’t know what the hell is going on there and I don’t think anyone does,) but something I didn’t expect to find on the way were the hints hidden in Viktor’s actions that were GLARING at me during my first rewatch and as I watch compilations (thank god I’m not alone in this).

So because I need an outlet, ur welcome to read my scrambled thoughts about why Viktor was in love with Jayce, why its beautifully tragic, how its shown, and trying to construct the thoughts going on in Viktor’s mind.

Okay so first things first, let’s deconstruct the why.

As a person who loves to analyze relationship dynamics in media (fancy way of saying I’m shipping trash) its important to also acknowledge that, such as in real life, not all close relationships are romantic and there’s no fixed or universal origin of romantic feelings. But HO MY GOD THESE BITCHES WERE GAY!

Even at first conversation, Jayce was a cloud of wonder and mystery in Viktor’s eyes. Like, “who tf does this guy think he is?” trying to artificially replicate arcane magic and all that shit. His ambition is further proved by every word they share with each other. It’s easy to be charmed by this well respected, hopeful BEEFCAKE of a man with dreams that are more radical than a 70s surfer. The image that Viktor fell in love with was one that was bathed in light and working closely with him for (we can approximate) like eight years?? As someone who never looked at him as an assistant but as an equal and a partner?? That’s just poetry.

NOW FOR THE TRAGIC SHIT! Viktor was a man doomed for darkness in both Piltover’s eyes and the eyes of the viewer (I JUST LOOKED UP HIS LORE AND I- hrrrrrrrrngh) . He was from the undercity, he was a “cripple”, and had chosen, as we see, horrible methods in order to try and extend his lifespan. HELL EVEN DESIGN WISE, he was a character surrounded and shrouded by shadows in like EVERY SCENE WE SEE HIM IN, ESPECIALLY when Jayce was there. Design wise, he was Viktor’s light.

And I could go on. Actually, I will.

Time and time again, Viktor is stuck in the darkness while trying to reach for Jayce’s light. EVEN IN THE LAST SCENE THE FUCKING LAMP IS ON JAYCE’S SIDE! And in the less obvious ones, Jayce is on the side of the light source while Viktor always has a side of him that’ll be stuck in the dark.

And of course, Jayce finds a new light. Mel, being a councilor, “saving the world.” And Viktor is stuck trying to chase after him. Always behind him in some way.

Until of course, Viktor tries to recreate that light and Jayce is stuck behind him in terms of their original dreams.

And its such a tragically beautiful dynamic. The only time that they get to be together, side by side, is when they are chasing their original dream together.

PLUS GIMME THE LONGING STARES!!!

(BTW moment above was when my gaydar officially started going WEE WOO WEE WOO) HE’S LOOKING DIRECTLY AT HIS FUCKING LIPS I-

Anyway, it makes it even more upsetting that Jayce will never see Viktor the same way, which is why it CUT BETWEEN JAYCE AND MEL HAVING SEX AND VIKTOR YOU CANNOT TELL ME OTHERWISE!!! And it fricking hurts. I think its why Viktor becomes even more engrossed in his work. He’s not gonna get the same level of hope and happiness that he got in Jayce and the dream of Hextech so he tries and tries to crack the code. Which elicits another parallel to arise. Sky and Viktor.

The reason why Sky was so important, at least from the perspective I’m trying to articulate, is because she is the Viktor in his and Jayce’s dynamic. Is that understandable?/gen. It’s like one of those comics where the shy girl is in love with the nerdy guy and the nerdy guy is in love with the cheerleader and the cheerleader is in love with the popular guy and the popular guy was in love with the shy girl all along. Except Sky is in love with Viktor is in love with Jayce is in love with Mel. And its this big cycle where no one is happy except for the fucking BEAUTIFUL heterosexuals. Sky’s death wasn’t pointless (okay is was kinda unnecessary but) because it showed Viktor just how far he was going into the arcane. And I haven’t FULLY looked at his lore. Really hoping he’ll turn out alright (though I know it isn’t likely.)

But Viktor was in love with Jayce and its a lens to put on the story that does nothing but enhance how fucking sad it is. BRING ME THE FANART CUZ I NEED TO COPE NOW!

#arcane #into the arcane #viktor #jayce #viktor arcane #jayce x viktor

67 notes · View notes

nerdygaymormon · 3 years

Text

The Pride Month We Know & Love

In 1969, the Stonewall Riots occurred. This is considered the beginning of the modern queer rights movement. At the time, it was called the gay rights movement and the word gay, while meaning homosexual, also was an umbrella term that included all of what we now call the queer community.

————————————————————

On November 2, 1969, a group of people proposed the first gay parade be held in New York City, both to commemorate the 1969 Stonewall riots and to be an annual reminder that we are in a struggle for fundamental human rights. They called on homophile organizations throughout the country to hold demonstrations the same day to show nationwide support.

On June 28, 1970, the Christopher Street Liberation Day marked the first anniversary of the Stonewall riots with a march. Christopher Street is the road in front of the Stonewall Inn and the road participants marched down. The New York Times reported (on the front page) that the marchers took up the entire street for 15 city blocks. Marches were also held in Chicago & Los Angeles while San Francisco held a “gay-in.”

In 1971, marches took place in Boston, Dallas, Milwaukee, London, Paris, West Berlin, and Stockholm.

By 1972 the participating cities included Atlanta, Brighton, Buffalo, Detroit, Washington D.C., Miami, and Philadelphia, as well as San Francisco.

————————————————————

The first marches were both serious and fun and served to inspire the widening activist movement. There was a dramatic increase in the number of people organizing for queer rights. In 1969, there were 50 to 60 gay groups in the country. In 1970 that increased to at least 1500. In 1972 it was 2500.

Prior to 1969, the organizations called themselves the homophile movement. They focused on showing that gay people are respectable and politely asked for discriminatory policies to be removed. Their marches had dress requirements, age limits as to who could participate, and even the signs held had to be pre-approved.

The Stonewall riots with images of gays retaliating against police changed things and inspired new activists. They considered the movement an uprising and renamed it the gay liberation movement. We are gonna be who we are and live as we want, respectability be damned. Parades and festivals were to specifically to not have dress requirements or age limits.

————————————————————

In Nazi Germany, gay men were prisoners in the concentration camps and their clothes had inverted pink triangles sewn on them to mark them as homosexual men (this also included bisexual men and trans women). This pink triangle was extra large so they could be easily identified from a distance.

After the concentration camps were shut down at the end of World War II and prisoners freed, the gay survivors were not released but locked up in prison. Homosexuality was illegal in Germany. West Germany continued to imprison them until 1994!

In 1973, Homosexuelle Aktion Westberlin, a German gay liberation group, called for gay men to wear the pink triangle as a memorial to past victims and to protest continuing discrimination. This pink triangle became a symbol of the gay rights movement and many displayed it proudly, but the symbol couldn’t shake its association with the horrors of the Nazis.

Harvey Milk, one of the first openly gay elected officials in the U.S., urged artist Gilbert Baker, an openly gay man and a drag queen, to create a new inspiring symbol for the gay community to replace the Nazi symbol.

It’s thought that Baker was at least partially inspired by the Judy Garland song "Over the Rainbow" (Garland being among the first gay icons). He also liked the idea of a flag, as that is a way of being visible. The rainbow flag was unveiled at the 1978 San Francisco Gay Freedom Day parade. After the parade, hot pink was removed from new flags due to fabric unavailability. The murder of Harvey Milk in November 1978 led to a surge of requests for the Rainbow flag, which led to it being adopted by people around the country.

For the 1979 San Francisco Gay Freedom Day parade, the organizers reduced the number of colors from 7 to 6 so that they could divide it in half and have 3 colors decorating one side of the street, and the other three colors on the other side. This 6-colored rainbow flag became the standard and quickly replaced pink triangles.

In 2003, a mile-long version of the rainbow flag was made by Baker for the 35th anniversary of the Stonewall riots, this recognized the rainbow flag as THE international symbol for LGBTQ pride, it can be seen all around the world.

On June 26, 2015, the White House was illuminated in the rainbow flag colors to mark the legalization of same-sex marriages across the country.

In June 2017, the city of Philadelphia adopted a revised version of the flag that adds black and brown stripes to the top of the standard six-colors to draw attention to issues of people of color within the LGBTQ community.

In June 2018 designer Daniel Quasar released a redesign incorporating elements from both the Philadelphia flag and trans pride flag to bring focus on inclusion and progress within the community.

————————————————————

But when did it go from Gay Liberation to Pride?

Meetings to organize the first march in New York City began in early January 1970. Brenda Howard, a bisexual activist, is known as the "Mother of Pride" for her work in coordinating the march. She also originated the idea for a week-long series of events around the march.

She wanted to create a number of events to bring in people from out of town and wanted to unite the events under a label. The first idea was 'Gay Power,’ however gay activist L. Craig Schoonmaker didn’t like that suggestion. He explained, “There's very little chance for [gay] people in the world to have power...But anyone can have pride in themselves, and that would make them happier as people, and produce the movement likely to produce change."

Brenda Howard, L. Craig Schoonmaker and bisexual activist Robert A. Martin (aka Donny the Punk) are credited with popularizing the word "Pride" to describe the festivities in New York.

As the 1980s approached, there was a cultural shift in the gay movement. Just as the elections of Ronald Reagan & Margaret Thatcher indicated a conservative shift in their countries, activists of a less radical, more conservative nature began taking over the march committees in different cities. They dropped "Gay Liberation" and "Gay Freedom" from the names, replacing them with Schoomaker’s idea of "Gay Pride." This also coincided with the replacement of the more radical pink triangles for the more positive rainbow flags.

The word "pride" was embraced as it defies the bigotry and hatred against the LGBTQIA+ community. It also teaches people they should be proud of themselves rather than feel shame. Replacing shame with pride helps people to come out and to be more assertive about who they are and that they deserve the same rights as others.

In 1999, President Bill Clinton issued a proclamation declaring that the LGBTQIA+ community and its allies would "celebrate the anniversary of Stonewall every June in America as Gay and Lesbian Pride Month." President Barack Obama issued a proclamation in 2009 declaring June LGBTQIA+ Pride Month.

This is how we got Pride Month!

————————————————————

Part of the original ideas of parades was to bring queer people and queer culture into what was considered heteronormative spaces. Queer lives were seen as dissident and radical.

Today Pride events have taken on a festive character and it’s fun to join hundreds or thousands of other queer people.

Pride events still have some of the original political or activist character. Most offer some aspect dedicated to remembering victims of AIDS and anti-LGBT violence. Booths are often on hand with people collecting signatures in support of constitutional amendments or petitions for laws & policies to change.

Large parades often involve floats, dancers, drag queens and amplified music, and they usually include political and educational contingents, such as local politicians, and groups from LGBT institutions of various kinds, such as PFLAG. Other typical parade participants include local LGBT-friendly churches and LGBT-employee associations from large corporations.

The Stonewall riots, as well as the immediate and the ongoing political organizing that occurred following them, were fully participated in by lesbians, bisexuals, transgender people, and gays, from all races and backgrounds. Pride festivals and parades continue to be inclusive spaces.

Historically these events were first named Gay, the word at that time being used to cover the entire spectrum of what is now called the queer. Today these festivals & parades are often called Pride.

#long post #queer pride #lgbtq pride #Pride month #queer history

212 notes · View notes

uta-makura · 2 years

Text

I found an old word document where I stuffed my favourite answers under my uquiz question "if you want, add what's your opinion about the mage rights movement & revolution" (to this quiz) and why not post them here so we can all scream mage rights together. if u are any of these people, i love you

The Templar Order is corrupt and does more to encourage Mages to resort to extremist methods than it does anything else. Locking people away and teaching them to have an intrinsic fear of something they were born with is so inherently wrong. Magic is just as dangerous as a man with a sword. Teaching fear will only build prejudice and self-hatred, leading mages to turning to demons. Whilst there are some mages who would use their power to seek authority, the same can be said for anyone who has a big army and a fancy sword to match. Mages need an environment where they can learn safely without being torn from their homes and treated like abominations from the get go. Thedas’ entire concept of Mages (with the exclusion of Tevinter) is based on historical prejudice for a time that no longer exists but this prejudice leads Mages into radicalism- such as domestic terrorism or blood magic. If Mages were treated fairly then there would be less mages turning to darker arts. Furthermore Ander’s was completely justified; Elthina was complacent in the abuse of the mages which then led to larger scale crimes and the Chantry as a whole is guilty of the same problem. The compromise between Meridith and Orsino wouldn’t have worked- what Ander’s did was an unfortunate necessity that stemmed from the incompetence of the Templar order and the Chantry as a whole

mage rights or mage fights. anders was right

fucking good

mage rights (im gay)

if i see a templar its on sight

cullen is shit and anders was right the templar order can get stuffed

I think there should be a codex entry which is a literature review summarising the data on Possessed-Mage-Related Incidents. anyway, Mage Rights Now™, what do you mean it's a complex issue and there are genuinely some safety concerns. Mage Rights Now.

im too lazy to type down my proper opinion in detail so im just gonna: [children yelling: mage rights! mage rights!]

The mage rights movement and revolution both have my full support, as templars and the Chantry are corrupt and nothing will change if they continue to be allowed to treat mages the way they do.

im a mlm (mage loving mage), also fuck da templars

personally i hate the chantry as it functioned prior to the revolution, i dont think any group of people deserves to be oppressed in such a way, especially not by a theocracy driven by fear. mage rights or mage fights! anders did what needed to be done, and the whole "but he blew up a CHURCH" thing is just wrong imo, the kirkwall chantry was never a simple place of worship, it was a sign of the chantry's power and authority in kirkwall (golden statues anyone? the money they're worth could be put to so much good use, but nooope), a political symbol, and i dont believe anders hurt innocents bc 1. we dont really see innocent worshippers in the chantry at any point bc its not that kind of establishment, and 2. he blew it up at night, that one sister got away with m u r d e r in there at night. anders tried peace and nothing happened; destroying such a symbol made the impact that was needed to spark a wave of change. sorry i just feel veryyy strongly about this matter i dont mean to sound hostile ?

i'm a pacifist and would prefer things not resorted to violence, but the mages have been oppressed for centuries and have none of the rights non-mages do. they're locked up in towers and hunted down if they manage to escape. that's cruel and vile and outright inhumane. furthermore, the people in power have made it clear that they don't care nor will they do jackshit about it. the way things are the situation can't be solved through diplomatic means, no matter how much i would like it to, and therefore i'm in favor of forcing change. though, no blood should be spilled unless absolutely necessary. no one deserves to die, no matter who they are or what they've done. justice shouldn't be confused with revenge.

mage rights baybie!!!!!! education and destigmatization is the best way to combat possession & blood magic, not imprisonment (as it is, people are too scared to come forward about their powers which causes ignorance which leaves them even more vulnerable to possession. if people weren't AFRAID of circles that would happen MUCH LESS)

anders did domestic terrorism and that was really sexy of him

mage rights babeyy. i project too hard as a neurodivergent gay ex-catholic (thus, apostate)

Mage rights! Make the circle a school rather than a fucking prison, and separate the chantry from it

Mages deserve their own rights and the revolution is absolutely justified

Anders was (and still is) right, fuck the chantry

Basically, anders was right but the man can't do everything himself. They need to organize and obtain thing without violence. Violance was necessary just to start but can't be forever

Anders was right and I will not forgive the DAI writers for making hawke talk about him like he wasn't. No more circles.

templars/the chantry = trash. burn it all down.

#dragon age #anders #anders was right #mage rights #meta #da2

27 notes · View notes