#it's the opposite of the policy that works for me | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

cookinguptales · 1 year

Text

So I’ve been enjoying the Disney vs. DeSantis memes as much as anyone, but like. I do feel like a lot of people who had normal childhoods are missing some context to all this.

I was raised in the Bible Belt in a fairly fundie environment. My parents were reasonably cool about some things, compared to the rest of my family, but they certainly had their issues. But they did let me watch Disney movies, which turned out to be a point of major contention between them and my other relatives.

See, I think some people think this weird fight between Disney and fundies is new. It is very not new. I know that Disney’s attempts at inclusion in their media have been the source of a lot of mockery, but what a lot of people don’t understand is that as far as actual company policy goes, Disney has actually been an industry leader for queer rights. They’ve had policies assuring equal healthcare and partner benefits for queer employees since the early 90s.

I’m not sure how many people reading this right now remember the early 90s, but that was very much not industry standard. It was a big deal when Disney announced that non-married queer partners would be getting the same benefits as the married heterosexual ones.

Like — it went further than just saying that any unmarried partners would be eligible for spousal benefits. It straight-up said that non-same-sex partners would still need to be married to receive spousal benefits, but because same-sex partners couldn’t do that, proof that they lived together as an established couple would be enough.

In other words, it put long-term same-sex partners on a higher level than opposite-sex partners who just weren’t married yet. It put them on the exact same level as heterosexual married partners.

They weren’t the first company ever to do this, but they were super early. And they were certainly the first mainstream “family-friendly” company to do it.

Conservatives lost their damn minds.

Protests, boycotts, sermons, the whole nine yards. I can’t tell you how many books about the evils of Disney my grandmother tried to get my parents to read when I was a kid.

When we later moved to Florida, I realized just how many queer people work at Disney — because historically speaking, it’s been a company that has guaranteed them safety, non-discrimination, and equal rights. That’s when I became aware of their unofficial “Gay Days” and how Christians would show up from all over the country to protest them every year. Apparently my grandmother had been upset about these days for years, but my parents had just kind of ignored her.

Out of curiosity, I ended up reading one of the books my grandmother kept leaving at our house. And friends — it’s amazing how similar that (terrible, poorly written) rhetoric was to what people are saying these days. Disney hires gay pedophiles who want to abuse your children. Disney is trying to normalize Satanism in our beautiful, Christian America.

Just tons of conspiracy theories in there that ranged from “a few bad things happened that weren’t actually Disney’s fault, but they did happen” to “Pocahontas is an evil movie, not because it distorts history and misrepresents indigenous life, but because it might teach children respect for nature. Which, as we all know, would cause them all to become Wiccans who believe in climate change.”

Like — please, take it from someone who knows. This weird fight between fundies and Disney is not new. This is not Disney’s first (gay) rodeo. These people have always believed that Disney is full of evil gays who are trying to groom and sexually abuse children.

The main difference now is that these beliefs are becoming mainstream. It’s not just conservative pastors who are talking about this. It’s not just church groups showing up to boycott Gay Day. Disney is starting to (reluctantly) say the quiet part out loud, and so are the Republicans. Disney is publicly supporting queer rights and announcing company-supported queer events and the Republican Party is publicly calling them pedophiles and enacting politically driven revenge.

This is important, because while this fight has always been important in the history of queer rights, it is now being magnified. The precedent that a fight like this could set is staggering. For better or for worse, we live in a corporation-driven country. I don’t like it any more than you do, and I’m not about to defend most of Disney’s business practices. But we do live in a nation where rights are largely tied to corporate approval, and the fact that we might be entering an age where even the most powerful corporations in the country are being banned from speaking out in favor of rights for marginalized people… that’s genuinely scary.

Like… I’ll just ask you this. Where do you think we’d be now, in 2023, if Disney had been prevented from promising its employees equal benefits in 1994? That was almost thirty years ago, and look how far things have come. When I looked up news articles for this post from that era, even then journalists, activists, and fundie church leaders were all talking about how a company of Disney’s prominence throwing their weight behind this movement could lead to the normalization of equal protections in this country.

The idea of it scared and thrilled people in equal parts even then. It still scares and thrills them now.

I keep seeing people say “I need them both to lose!” and I get it, I do. Disney has for sure done a lot of shit over the years. But I am begging you as a queer exvangelical to understand that no. You need Disney to win. You need Disney to wipe the fucking floor with these people.

Right now, this isn’t just a fight between a giant corporation and Ron DeSantis. This is a fight about the right of corporations to support marginalized groups. It’s a fight that ensures that companies like Disney still can offer benefits that a discriminatory government does not provide. It ensures that businesses much smaller than Disney can support activism.

Hell, it ensures that you can support activism.

The fight between weird Christian conspiracy theorists and Disney is not new, because the fight to prevent any tiny victory for marginalized groups is not new. The fight against the normalization of othered groups is not new.

That’s what they’re most afraid of. That each incremental victory will start to make marginalized groups feel safer, that each incremental victory will start to turn the tide of public opinion, that each incremental victory will eventually lead to sweeping law reform.

They’re afraid that they won’t be able to legally discriminate against us anymore.

So guys! Please. This fight, while hilarious, is also so fucking important. I am begging you to understand how old this fight is. These people always play the long game. They did it with Roe and they’re doing it with Disney.

We have! To keep! Pushing back!

#disney #ron desantis #gay rights #lgbt #queer #lgbt history #queer history #homophobia #florida #us politics #religious fundamentalism #christianity #long post #god that should cover all the pertinent tags and content warnings phew

52K notes · View notes

nientedal · 5 months

Note

What progress at home has biden enacted? What policies of his show that he is making progress that prove he is actually different than trump?

I like to pretend I have faith in humanity, so I'll answer as if you're asking this in good faith.

Biden's DEA has lifted restrictions on telehealth prescriptions to make appointments and assistance more accessible.

He put a funding package into place to help unhoused people get access to mental and physical healthcare, as well as short-term and long-term housing.

He has attempted and is still attempting to get student debt relief through - this was blocked by Republican judges appointed by Trump, but he's still working on it.

Infrastructure repair - his administration has budgeted funds to actually fix some severely-damaged and frequently-traveled bridges.

Trying to expand access to healthcare to include undocumented immigrants who came to the USA as children (Dreamers) under the Affordable Care Act. Support for Navigator programs and outreach has also been increased.

He has vetoed Republican-led bills that were attempting to overturn environmental protections - one that would have forbidden investment fund managers to consider climate change in their portfolios (I have two degrees in accounting and this is actually huge), and another that would have overturned restrictions on agricultural runoff into our waterways.

He and his administration worked for ages to get rail workers paid sick days.

This is just some of what he's been doing. Meanwhile, Trump and other Republicans want to criminalize the lives of LGBT people like you and me. They want to eliminate no-fault divorce and force births that will kill parents or devastate them financially. They have stated flat out that they want to install a military dictatorship in the USA. They attempted to put that in motion on January 6th, 2021. They failed once. They will do better next time.

One party wants to house the homeless and expand social safety nets, while the other one wants to criminalize homelessness. One of them wants a future in which I might be able to vote to change how much of a war machine my country is, while the other one wants to eliminate my ability to vote entirely. Those are not the same. Those literally are opposites.

At the end of the day, all you and I can do is choose to do the least amount of harm possible. You and I cannot choose to do no harm. This is the USA, we sell war, you and I cannot choose to do no harm. I wish we could, my god do I wish we could, but that is not an option. So we grieve for the harm we couldn't eliminate and work to minimize the harm that is done. Despite all the crap they support, Democrats are the minimum amount of harm right now. Acting like they aren't is exactly what brought us to an election where our options are a future where we are either wading in blood or drowning in it.

Not voting for Biden will not help Palestine. Not voting for Biden will guarantee a Republican president who will make the situation in Palestine WORSE. AND it'll hurt a lot of other places as well, both at home and abroad, because Republicans are about business and the USA is in the business of war! And I would very much like that to change someday! I would very much like to someday be able to choose to do no harm! And I know what I have to do to try for that future, so what are YOU going to do? There is no standing off to the side in this. If you aren't helping pull, you're the dead weight we're pulling. Are you going to dig your feet into the mud and blood and drown us there? Or are you going to get the fuck off your ass, grit your teeth, and help us pull free?

#askbasket #iam-the-wild #us politics #israel #palestine #if you do not vote blue you do not get to call yourself an antifascist #i HATE that that's the case; don't mistake me #but that is the reality we're working with #there isn't any other #do nothing and kill five people or act and kill one.#so what are you gonna do? i can't choose for you. but i know what my choice is.#i'm part of this world. and as much as i hate it...turning away is not one of the options.#we fight on ALL fronts #we protest we donate we write we call #AND WE ALSO FUCKING VOTE FOR THE LEAST OF THE EVILS. BECAUSE NO EVIL IS NOT AN OPTION.

3K notes · View notes

gatheringbones · 7 months

Text

[“People are attracted to the concept of a Nordic-style law that criminalises only the sex buyer, and not the prostitute – but any campaign or policy that aims to reduce business for sex workers will force them to absorb the deficit, whether in their wallets or in their working conditions. As a sex worker in the Industrial Workers of the World observes,

I find that how easy, safe, and enjoyable I can make my work is directly related to whether I can survive on what I’m currently making … I might be safer if I refused any clients who make their disrespect for me clear immediately, but I know exactly where I can afford to set the bar on what I need to tolerate. If I haven’t been paid in weeks, I need to accept clients who sound more dangerous than I’d usually be willing to risk.

When sex workers speak to this, we are often seemingly misheard as defending some kind of ‘right’ for men to pay for sex. In fact, as Wages For Housework articulated in the 1970s, naming something as work is a crucial first step in refusing to do it – on your own terms. Marxist-feminist theorist Silvia Federici wrote in 1975 that ‘to demand wages for housework does not mean to say that if we are paid we will continue to do it. It means precisely the opposite. To say that we want money for housework is the first step towards refusing to do it, because the demand for a wage makes our work visible, which is the most indispensable condition to begin to struggle against it.’ Naming work as work has been a key feminist strategy beyond Wages For Housework. From sociologist Arlie Hochschild’s term ‘emotional labour’, to journalist Susan Maushart’s term ‘wife-work’, to Sophie Lewis’s theorising around surrogacy and ‘gestational labour’, naming otherwise invisible or ‘natural’ structures of gendered labour is central to beginning to think about how, collectively, to resist or reorder such work.

Just because a job is bad does not mean it’s not a ‘real job’. When sex workers assert that sex work is work, we are saying that we need rights. We are not saying that work is good or fun, or even harmless, nor that it has fundamental value. Likewise, situating what we do within a workers’ rights framework does not constitute an unconditional endorsement of work itself. It is not an endorsement of capitalism or of a bigger, more profitable sex industry. ‘People think the point of our organisation is [to] expand prostitution in Bolivia’, says ONAEM activist Yuly Perez. ‘In fact, we want the opposite. Our ideal world is one free of the economic desperation that forces women into this business.’

It is not the task of sex workers to apologise for what prostitution is. Sex workers should not have to defend the sex industry to argue that we deserve the ability to earn a living without punishment. People should not have to demonstrate that their work has intrinsic value to society to deserve safety at work. Moving towards a better society – one in which more people’s work does have wider value, one in which resources are shared on the basis of need – cannot come about through criminalisation. Nor can it come about through treating marginalised people’s material needs and survival strategies as trivial. Sex workers ask to be credited with the capacity to struggle with work – even to hate it – and still be considered workers. You don’t have to like your job to want to keep it.”]

molly smith, juno mac, from revolting prostitutes: the fight for sex workers’ rights, 2018

#molly smith #juno mac #currently reading #history stuff

922 notes · View notes

tomorrowusa · 4 months

Text

Don't risk a rerun of the 2000 election.

In the first presidential election of the 21st century many deluded progressives voted for Green Party candidate Ralph Nader.

Their foolishness gave us eight years of George W. Bush who plagued the country with two recessions (including the Great Recession) and two wars (one totally unnecessary and one which could have been avoided if he heeded an intelligence brief 5 weeks before 9/11).

Oh yeah, Dubya also appointed one conservative and one batshit crazy reactionary to the US Supreme Court. Roberts and Alito are still there.

Paul Waldman of the Washington Post offers some thoughts.

Why leftists should work their hearts out for Biden in 2024

Ask a Democrat with a long memory what the numbers 97,488 and 537 represent, and their face will twist into a grimace. The first is the number of votes Ralph Nader received in Florida in 2000 as the nominee of the Green Party; the second is the margin by which George W. Bush was eventually certified the winner of the state, handing him the White House. Now, with President Biden gearing up for reelection, talk of a spoiler candidate from the left is again in the air. That’s unfortunate, because here’s the truth: The past 2½ years under Biden have been a triumph for progressivism, even if it’s not in most people’s interest to admit it. This was not what most people expected from Biden, who ran as a relative moderate in the 2020 Democratic primary. His nomination was a victory for pragmatism with its eyes directed toward the center. But today, no one can honestly deny that Biden is the most progressive president since at least Lyndon B. Johnson. His judicial appointments are more diverse than those of any of his predecessors. He has directed more resources to combating climate change than any other president. Notwithstanding the opposition from the Supreme Court, his administration has moved aggressively to forgive and restructure student loans.

Three years ago the economy was in horrible shape because of Trump's mishandling of the pandemic. Now unemployment is steadily below 4%, job creation continues to exceed expectations, and wages are rising as unions gain strength. The post-pandemic, post-Afghan War inflation rate has receded to near normal levels; people in the 1970s would have sold their souls for a 3.2% (and dropping) inflation rate. And many of the effects of "Bidenomics" have yet to kick in.

And in a story that is criminally underappreciated, his administration’s policy reaction to the covid-induced recession of 2020 was revolutionary in precisely the ways any good leftist should favor. It embraced massive government intervention to stave off the worst economic impacts, including handing millions of families monthly checks (by expanding the child tax credit), giving all kids in public schools free meals, boosting unemployment insurance and extending health coverage to millions.

It worked. While inflation rose (as it did worldwide), the economy’s recovery has been blisteringly fast. It took more than six years for employment rates to return to what they were before the Great Recession hit in 2008, but we surpassed January 2020 jobs levels by the spring of 2022 — and have kept adding jobs ever since. To the idealistic leftist, that might feel like both old news and a partial victory at best. What about everything supporters of Bernie Sanders have found so thrilling about the Vermont senator’s vision of the future, from universal health care to free college? It’s true Biden was never going to deliver that, but to be honest, neither would Sanders had he been elected president. And that brings me to the heart of how people on the left ought to think about Biden and his reelection.

Biden has gotten things done. The US economy is doing better than those of almost every other advanced industrialized country.

Our rivals China and Russia are both worse off than they were three years ago. And NATO is not just united, it's growing.

Sadly, we still need to deal with a far right MAGA cult at home who would wreck the country just to get its own way.

Biden may be elderly and unexciting, but that is one of the reasons he won in 2020. Many people just wanted an end to the daily drama of Trump's capricious and incompetent rule by tweet. And a good portion of those people live in places that count greatly in elections – suburbs and exurbs.

Superhero films seem to be slipping in popularity. Hopefully that's a sign that voters are less likely to embrace self-appointed political messiahs to save them from themselves.

Good governance is a steady process – not a collection of magic tricks. Experienced and competent individuals who are not too far removed from the lives of the people they represent are the best people to have in government.

Paul Waldman concludes his column speaking from the heart as a liberal...

I’ve been in and around politics for many years, and even among liberals, I’ve almost always been one of the most liberal people in the room. Yet only since Biden’s election have I realized that I will probably never see a president as liberal as I’d like. It’s not an easy idea to make peace with. But it suggests a different way of thinking about elections — as one necessary step in a long, difficult process. The further you are to the left, the more important Biden’s reelection ought to be to you. It might require emotional (and policy) compromise, but for now, it’s also the most important tool you have to achieve progressive ends.

Exactly. Rightwingers take the long view. It took them 49 years but they eventually got Roe v. Wade overturned. To succeed, we need to look upon politics as an extended marathon rather as one short sprint.

Republicans may currently be bickering, but they will most likely unite behind whichever anti-abortion extremist they nominate.

It's necessary to get the word out now that the only way to defeat climate-denying, abortion-restricting, assault weapon-loving, race-baiting, homophobic Republicans is to vote Democratic.

#paul waldman #liberalism #election 2000 #election 2024 #joe biden #third parties #vote blue no matter who #donald trump #dumpster fire #trumpster fire #fascism vs. democracy #nra republicans #abortion #climate change #lgbtq+ rights #race-baiting #take the political long view #phil hands

493 notes · View notes

blingblong55 · 27 days

Text

Think I'm pretty -John Price NSFW

Hello, I would like to make a request, please? Court AU/ Lawyer AU Lawyer!Fem!Reader x Lawyer!Price (both as opposition) - they both in court debating over a minor case (gaz+ Soap vs neighbour) - reader representing neighbour whilst price representing soap, debating about noise policies Sorry if this idea is a bit jumble up / difficult. 😅 But tqsm!!! 🫡🫡🫡✊✊🥺 ---- F!Reader, 18+, MDNI, smut, lawyer!Price, Lawyer!Reader, oral!sex, cheating ----

A/N: I know there was no smut requested but my mind immediately needed it..sorry<3

The room is silent. Everyone in the room standing up. Both sides do not dare to look at the other. You sigh as everyone gets ordered to sit down. You, a successful lawyer and your opponent John Price have always had trouble getting along, not just because he always disagrees with you, even outside of court but also because of how cocky he is. Today, as you see him back in court, he gives you a smirk. Oh, how you wish to win this case.

"John Mactavish and Kyle Garrick versus George Allen and others." The woman so softly speaks. "Neighbourhood guidelines about noise policies in a private community, this case will be dealt with by Lord Edward." You prepare your files in hand and when the time begins, you speak up. "Judge and jury, today, we are here for the case these young and immature men have caused. The community in which both live in has already received calls upon calls for the disturbance of these two young men," you begin.

For nearly 20 minutes after your and Price's opening statements, the problem became worse. Both MacTavish and Garrick began to get louder, pointing fingers at your client. You would occasionally roll your eyes and cover your smile when you'd see Price get frustrated over his client's words.

Maybe, after all, you'd win this one.

"No, what I'm saying is, if this absolute fookin' idiot understood how speakers and parties work, we wouldn't be here!" Kyle stands up and Price has to force him to sit back down.

Your client keeping calm, just like you had ordered them to. It's easy. These two guys are showing the court how bad of neighbours they can be and before you knew it, the men whom you stood upon, sighed as once again MacTavish cussed your client.

"Here's what we'll do, and Price, keep your clients shut or they will hurt themselves more," a deep sigh, "Y/N, your client is in the right. The papers and signatures are on file. Price, your clients are meant to keep quiet, not have a rave in their backyard. If there is one more complaint, the community in which both parties are a part of, can and will have the right to hand MacTavish and Garrick an eviction notice. Y/N, your client shan't step into their yard and if it does happen, MacTavish and Garrick can receive a restraining order against Mr. Allen."

It was clear this was a long one for the court to hear.

After the trial though, the two men Price represented were told to leave before your client saw them again. It was better this way.

You shook Price's hand, and he nodded at you and smiled. "You look rather beautiful today," he says in such a soft tone that makes him appear as if he was a completely different man from the one you argued against. "You look…okay for a shit lawyer," you smile back. "Oh darling," he laughs.

You don't have time for any proper conversation and as soon as you receive all files, you leave the room. Price knows where he can find you. After all, it's always been the number one spot for you to hang out after trials and long arguments.

The small pub that welcomes you also welcomes John. "Care to tell me why you're following me?" You turn to him and he gives you a cocky grin. "What, can't I come here to just relax?" "You? No."

"Still hurt over what happened years ago?" "You stole my case, of course I am. And you knew I was asking for it so I have no idea why the hell you'd go for it."

It was a known story. After all, it's how John and you became such rivals in court. But, it never has to end like that, right?

"It's called business darling," his hand snakes over yours and before anything else can happen, you pull away.

He sighs. "What, too good for me now?" His lips touching your ear. You shift away, trying to not yell at him here. It just isn't right, especially in front of so many others who respect you. "I'm not here to be annoyed by some-" You get cut off when he places his hand around your neck. "What, darling? Say it. Hmm, am I mediocre? incompetent? don't act like you weren't fucking moaning my name years ago. You and I know well that you liked me like I did you," his voice deep and in a whisper. Your hand on his wrist.

"You and I both know that was a mistake," you answer back and he shakes his head. "Tsk, tsk, mistakes are a one-time thing. You know you slept in my bed longer than anyone else. What? Did you forget you used to fuck those pretty fingers of yours to my voice?" he chuckles, almost mocking the nights you two spend together.

He sees that you aren't budging to his questions or comments, it's frustrating. He wants you, you know he does. His body and yours are like a puzzle, the one you both know all too well about.

"Look, I know…i know I'm a selfish son of a bitch but you also have your flaws and-"

"And what are they? hm? Because at least a cheating wife or a stupid fucking face like yours is not a problem I have to face."

Oh does he love it when you bite back.

It was true, which is why he nods. "I do have a cheating wife, the face part though…that is false. You should know. I mean you rode my face almost every night, darling" A smirk grows on him.

He notices your silence.

"What, did you not enjoy how i ate that pretty pussy of yours? Or was it too good that the orgasms made you forget?" he chuckles once more.

Is it bad he needs you again? That he wishes you laid on his bed and not the mistake of a girl he married? Sure she was funny but you…oh fuck. You are smart, gorgeous, funny, sexy…fuck..you're perfect.

"My flat is just a ten-minute drive from here, you can always come…maybe pay me a visit…or two..maybe a whole holiday."

You look at him and then at the drink in your hands. You did want him, yearned for his love again.

"The guy you're talking to is no good. Now, me…I'm handsome, funny, good with my hands and mouth and…well…you know the rest."

Was it a risk? yes. Did you both want it? Yes. So…is this why now after practically thirty minutes of asking you are in his car and on the way to his place?

Once inside his flat, he doesn't waste a second and in a matter of moments, he has you on the couch, his mouth to your neck. His calloused hands take your clothes off. His cock is needy to have you again.

His lips move up, embracing you in a kiss. A much-needed one. "Fuck did I miss you, Y/N," he groans. It was more than a need for sex, but for all the other fun and good emotions, you two brought to each other. His fingers teased your folds as he removed your panties. "Hm, already wet for me? Tsk, tsk, tsk. Need to do something about this, huh love," he slowly goes down on you. His lips are attached to your precious body. From your neck to your hips, his lips ran from. Your aching cunt begging for his tongue.

Once his fingers have enough slick covering them, he pushes them deep inside. A small moan escapes your lips. Eager thing, aren't you?

His tongue lapping at your folds all as his thumb rubs your clit over and over. This is what you always needed after a long day at court.

The sensation is so good. Feels like mythical waves of pleasure but it all stops abruptly. One stupid phone call and he leaves you there. "Stay, I'll come back later tonight, love," he kisses your forehead and walks out.

If only he didn't think his wife was pretty, his hands would be all over you

Tags:

@liyanahelena @uniquecroissant @mirzamsaiph @goldenmclaren @ghostslillady @moonsua1 @frizzseaberries @frazie99 @idklols @katybaby00 @saoirse06 @vampsquerade @alxexhearts @baldwinhearts @Juneonhoth @tiredmetalenthusiast @jinxxangel13 @strangepuppynightmare @enarien @Simonssweetgirl @luvecarson @nellsbobells @coralwitchdreamland @ikohniik @nobodys-coffee @strawberrychita @sae1kie @queen-ilmaree @Llelannie @Macnches2 @bbyfimmie @anonymuslydumb @avidreadee123 @talooolaaloolla @skelletonwitch @bittermajesties @1234beeandpuppycat @sparky--bunny @honestlyhiswife @@who-can-appease-me @ghostwifeyy @konigssultwithghost @pinkblossomsworld @lovelyvqer @the_royal_bee @beansproutmafia @luvecarson @soapybutt17 @asianbutnotjapanese @a-goose-with-a-knife @foxface013 @born4biriyani @thegreyjoyed @mychemichalimalance @marshiely @iruzias @@sleepyycatt

204 notes · View notes

chinesehanfu · 2 months

Text

[Hanfu · 漢服]The relationship between women in history is not just love rivals,

“but also thousands of years later, everyone knows that it is me and you.”

Let's get to know about them/她们 in China history.

1.【Han Dynasty】:Princess Jieyou (解忧公主) & Feng Liao (馮嫽)

Princess Jieyou (Chinese: 解忧公主; 121 BC – 49 BC), born Liu Jieyou (Chinese: 刘解忧), was a Chinese princess sent to marry the leader of the Wusun kingdom as part of the Western Han Chinese policy of heqin(和亲).

As the granddaughter of the disgraced Prince Liu Wu (劉戊) who had taken part in the disastrous Rebellion of the Seven States,her status was low enough that she was sent to replace Princess Liu Xijun (劉細君) after her untimely death and marry the Wusun king Cunzhou (岑陬).

Jieyou lived among the Wusun for fifty years and did much work to foster relations between the surrounding kingdoms and the Han. She was particularly reliant upon her attendant, Feng Liao, whom she dispatched as an emissary to Wusun kingdoms and even to the Han Court. She faced opposition from pro-Xiongnu members of the Wusun royalty, particularly Wengguimi’s Xiongnu wife. When word came that the Xiongnu planned to attack Wusun, she convinced her husband to send for aid from the Han Emperor. Emperor Wu of Han sent 150,000 cavalrymen to support the Wusun forces and drive back the Xiongnu.

In 51 BCE at the age of 70, Jieyou asked to be allowed to retire and return to the Han. Emperor Xuan of Han agreed and had her escorted back to Chang'an where she was welcomed with honor. She was given a grand palace with servants usually reserved for princesses of the imperial family. In 49 BCE, Jieyou died peacefully.

Feng Liao (馮嫽)

Feng Liao (馮嫽) was China's first official female diplomat,[citation needed] who represented the Han dynasty to Wusun (烏孫), which was in the Western Regions. It was a practice for the Imperial Court to foster alliances with the northern tribes via marriage, and two Han princesses had married Wusun kings.

Feng Liao was the maidservant of Princess Jieyou (解憂公主), who was married off to a Wusun king. Feng herself later married an influential Wusun general, whose good standing with Prince Wujiutu (烏就屠) of the kingdom later proved beneficial to the Han dynasty.

When Prince Wujiutu seized the throne of Wusun in 64 BC, after his father died, there was fear in the Imperial Court of Han that Wujiutu, whose mother was Xiongnu, would allow Wusun to become Xiongnu's vassal.

Zheng Ji, Governor of the Western Regions, recalled that Feng Liao had married into Wusun and with her familiarity of the Wusun customs, she was a prime candidate to persuade Wujiutu to ally his kingdom with Han. Wujiutu acceded and Emperor Xuan of Han (漢宣帝) sent for Feng. He praised her for her judgement and diplomacy, and appointed her as the official envoy to Wusun.

Wujiutu was conferred the title "Little King of Wusun" while his brother, the son by a Han princess, was named "Great King of Wusun". Wusun was divided between the two kings and tensions in that region were eased.

※Xiongnu: Xiongnu: A nomadic tribe that has occupied northern China for a long time. Later it gradually became a state. It harassed the borders of the Han Dynasty for a long time and robbed supplies.

------

With their efforts, the Wusun Kingdom gradually tended to support the Han Dynasty, and the Xiongnu's defeat in China also began.

------

2.【Tang Dynasty】:Shangguan Wan'er(上官婉儿)&Princess Taiping (太平公主)

Shangguan Wan'er/上官婉儿 (664 – 21 July 710) was a Chinese politician, poet, and imperial consort of the Wu Zhou and Tang dynasties. Described as a "female prime minister,"Shangguan rose from modest origins as a palace servant to become secretary and leading advisor to Empress Wu Zetian of Zhou. Under Empress Wu, Shangguan exercised responsibility for drafting imperial edicts and earned approbation for her writing style. She retained her influence as consort to Wu's son and successor, Emperor Zhongzong of Tang, holding the imperial consort rank of Zhaorong (昭容). Shangguan was also highly esteemed for her talent as a poet.Shangguan was also highly esteemed for her talent as a poet. In 710, after Emperor Zhongzong's death, Shangguan was killed during a palace coup that ended the regency of Empress Dowager Wei.

Princess Taiping (太平公主)lit. "Princess of Great Peace", personal name unknown, possibly Li Lingyue (李令月) (after 662 – 2 August 713) was a royal princess and prominent political figure of the Tang dynasty and her mother Wu Zetian's Zhou dynasty. She was the youngest daughter of Wu Zetian and Emperor Gaozong and was influential during the reigns of her mother and her elder brothers Emperor Zhongzong and Emperor Ruizong (both of whom reigned twice), particularly during Emperor Ruizong's second reign, when for three years until her death, she was the real power behind the throne.

She is the most famous and influential princess of the Tang dynasty and possibly in the whole history of China thanks to her power, ability and ambition. She was involved in political difficulties and developments during the reigns of her mother and brothers. Indeed, after the coup against Empress Dowager Wei, she became the real ruler of Tang. During the reign of Emperor Ruizong, she was not restricted by anything, the emperor issued rulings based on her views and the courtiers and the military flattered her and majority from every civil and military class joined her faction, so her power exceeded that of the emperor.

Eventually, however, a rivalry developed between her and her nephew, Emperor Ruizong's son, Crown Prince Li Longji. Both of them were hostile in power-sharing and they fought for the monopoly over power. After Emperor Ruizong yielded the throne to Li Longji (as Emperor Xuanzong) in 712, the conflict came to the political forefront, and openly, the court became a manifestation of conspiracy rather than the administration of the empire; in 713, Emperor Xuanzong, according to historical records, believing that she was planning to overthrow him, acted first, executing a large number of her powerful allies and forcing her to commit suicide.

------

The relationship between Shangguan Wan'er and Princess Taiping has always been written as "enemies" in official history, but with the phrase "千年万岁，椒花颂声", their friendship that has been buried for thousands of years was revealed.

The"千年万岁，椒花颂声" sentence comes from the epitaph written by Princess Taiping for Shangguan Wan'er. The original text is: "潇湘水断，宛委山倾，珠沉圆折，玉碎连城。甫瞻松槚，静听坟茔，千年万岁，椒花颂声”

Translation: Now that you are far away, the sky and the earth will lose their color. I'm afraid that all I can do in the future is to sit and look at the tea tree in front of your tomb. Maybe I can hear your voice again when I stand within an inch of the tomb. But this is a delusion after all, a quiet tomb, no beautiful face, a empty place of death. I hope that in a thousand or ten thousand years, there will still be people like me who remember you.

------

3.【Late Qing Dynasty】:Lü Bicheng(呂碧城) & Qiu Jin (秋瑾)

Lü Bicheng(呂碧城)also known as Alice Pichen Lee(1883–1943) was a Chinese writer, activist, newspaper editor, poet and school founder. She has been mentioned as one of the top four women in literature from the early Republic of China.

When she was four, her father retired to Lu'an, Anhui. She lived a life of comfort until the age of 12, when her father died in 1895. Because Lü Fengqi had no male heir, relatives of the Lü lineage contested for his inheritance, and Yan Shiyu and her four daughters were forced to move to Lai'an County to live with her natal family. When she was nine, Lü Bicheng was betrothed to a Wang family, but as her own family fortune declined, the Wang family broke off the marriage contract, giving the young Bicheng the stigma of a "rejected woman". The resulting emotional scar is often considered a major factor in her later decision to never marry.[8] Her widowed mother and the Lü girls were not well treated at the Yan family in rural Anhui. When Lü was 15 or 16, Yan Shiyu sent her to live with her maternal uncle Yan Langxuan (嚴朗軒), who was the salt administrator in Tanggu, the port city outside the northern metropolis of Tianjin. Her sister Huiru also joined her later.

During her stay in Tanggu, Qing China went through the tumultuous period of the failed Hundred Days' Reform of 1898, which brought about increasing awareness of women's education, and the Boxer Rebellion of 1900. In 1904, Mrs. Fang, the wife of her uncle's secretary, invited Lü Bicheng to visit a girls' school in Tianjin, but her uncle prevented her from going and severely reprimanded her. The next day, she ran away from her uncle's home, and took the train to Tianjin with no money or luggage. She wrote a letter to Mrs. Fang, who was staying at the dormitory of the Ta Kung Pao newspaper. Ying Lianzhi, the Catholic Manchu nobleman who founded the newspaper, read the letter and was so impressed by it that he made her an assistant editor. Lü Bicheng wrote a "progressive" ci that she had previously written, set to "A River Full of Red" ("Manjianghong") usually used to express heroic emotions. Ying transcribed the whole song in her diary and published it in L'impartial two days later. At the time, it was sensational for a woman to write for an influential national newspaper such as Ta Kung Pao. She was 21 years old. She used Ta Kung Pao to promote feminism and became a well-known figure.

Lü's ci poetry was published in the newspaper and it was very well received. She was the chief editor of the newspaper from 1904 to 1908. In 1904 she decided to improve education for girls. She had published her thoughts on women's rights and the general editor of the newspaper introduced her to Yan Fu who was an advocate for Western ideas. The Beiyang Women's Normal School was established that same year. At 23 Lü took on the job of principal of the school she had founded two years before. At first this school found it difficult to find girls who qualified for secondary education and students were brought in from Shanghai to make up the numbers.

Lü knew the revolutionary Qiu Jin and they had similar objectives but Lü did not join her in Japan when she was invited as she was unsure whether women should meddle in politics. She was then chosen to be secretary to Yuan Shikai, one of the most powerful people in China. When he set out to declare himself emperor of China she left, like many of his followers, and abandoned him.

Qiu Jin (秋瑾)8 November 1875 – 15 July 1907,was a Chinese revolutionary, feminist, and writer.Her sobriquet name is Jianhu Nüxia (Chinese: 鑑湖女俠 lit. 'Woman Knight of Mirror Lake').

Qiu was born into a wealthy family. Her grandfather worked in the Xiamen city government and was responsible for the city's defense. Zhejiang province was famous for female education, and Qiu Jin had support from her family when she was young to pursue her educational interests. Her father, Qiu Shounan, was a government official and her mother came from a distinguished literati-official family. Qiu Jin's wealthy and educated background, along with her early exposure to political ideologies were key factors in her transformation to becoming a female pioneer for the woman's liberation movement and the republican revolution in China.

In the early 1900s, Japan had started to experience western influences earlier than China. As to not fall behind, the Qing government sent many elites to learn from the Japanese. Qiu Jin was one of these elites that got the chance to study overseas. After studying in a women's school in Japan, Qiu returned to China to participate in a variety of revolutionary activities; and through her involvement with these activities, it became clear how Qiu wanted others to perceive her. Qiu called herself 'Female Knight-Errant of Jian Lake' — the role of the knight-errant, established in the Han dynasty, was a prototypically male figure known for swordsmanship, bravery, faithfulness, and self-sacrifice — and 'Vying for Heroism'

Qiu Jin had her feet bound and began writing poetry at an early age. With the support from her family, Qiu Jin also learned how to ride a horse, use a sword, and drink wine—activities that usually only men were permitted to learn at the time.In 1896 Qiu Jin got married. At the time she was only 21, which was considered late for a woman of that time. Qiu Jin's father arranged her marriage to Wang Tingchun, the youngest son of a wealthy merchant in Hunan province. Qiu Jin did not get along well with her husband, as her husband only cared about enjoying himself.While in an unhappy marriage, Qiu came into contact with new ideas. The failure of her marriage affected her decisions later on, including choosing to study in Japan.

While still in Tokyo, Qiu single-handedly edited a journal, Vernacular Journal (Baihua Bao). A number of issues were published using vernacular Chinese as a medium of revolutionary propaganda. In one issue, Qiu wrote A Respectful Proclamation to China's 200 Million Women Comrades, a manifesto within which she lamented the problems caused by bound feet and oppressive marriages. Having suffered from both ordeals herself, Qiu explained her experience in the manifesto and received an overwhelmingly sympathetic response from her readers. Also outlined in the manifesto was Qiu's belief that a better future for women lay under a Western-type government instead of the Qing government that was in power at the time. She joined forces with her cousin Xu Xilin and together they worked to unite many secret revolutionary societies to work together for the overthrow of the Qing dynasty.

Between 1905 and 1907, Qiu Jin was also writing a novel called Stones of the Jingwei Bird in traditional ballad form, a type of literature often composed by women for women audiences. The novel describes the relationship between five wealthy women who decide to flee their families and the arranged marriages awaiting them in order to study and join revolutionary activities in Tokyo. Titles for the later uncompleted chapters suggest that the women will go on to talk about “education, manufacturing, military activities, speechmaking, and direct political action, eventually overthrowing the Qing dynasty and establishing a republic” — all of which were subject matters that Qiu either participated in or advocated for.

Life after returning to China

Qiu Jin was known as an eloquent orator who spoke out for women's rights, such as the freedom to marry, freedom of education, and abolishment of the practice of foot binding. In 1906 she founded China Women's News (Zhongguo nü bao), a radical women's journal with another female poet, Xu Zihua in Shanghai. They published only two issues before it was closed by the authorities. In 1907, she became head of the Datong school in Shaoxing, ostensibly a school for sport teachers, but really intended for the military training of revolutionaries[citation needed]. While teaching in Datong school, she kept secret connection with local underground organization—The Restoration Society. This organization aimed to overthrow the Manchu government and restore Chinese rule.

Death

In 1907, Xu Xilin, Qiu’s friend and the Datong school’s co-founder was executed for attempting to assassinate his Manchu superior. In the same year, the authorities arrested Qiu at the school for girls where she was the principal. She was tortured but refused to admit her involvement in the plot. Instead the authorities used her own writings as incrimination against her and, a few days later, she was publicly beheaded in her home village, Shanyin, at the age of 31. Her last written words, her death poem, uses the literal meaning of her name, Autumn Gem, to lament of the failed revolution that she would never see take place:

秋風秋雨愁煞人 (Autumn wind, autumn rain — they make one die of sorrow)

After Qiu Jin was killed, no one dared to collect her body. Lu Bicheng endured her grief and took great risks to bury her friend. The guarding Qing army learned that the woman who came to collect the corpse was Lu Bicheng, who was famous in China, and they had no choice but to do anything.

Qiu Jin's death caused Lu Bicheng to lose a rare confidant in life. She wrote many poems in memory of Qiu Jin, recalling this like-minded friend.

Later, Lü Bicheng wrote "The Biography of the Revolutionary Heroine Qiu Jin" in English, which was published in newspapers in New York, Chicago and other places in the United States. It caused a great response and not only made many people in the world know about Qiu Jin's legendary story, but also published it in newspapers in New York and Chicago. It also makes people understand the darkness and corrupt social status quo of the Qing Dynasty. Lu Bicheng used a pen of her own to record her friendship with Qiu Jin, and also fulfilled her promise to Qiu Jin to respond with the "battle of words"

————————

📸Video & 🧚🏻‍ Model：@荷里寒 & @阿时Ashi_

🔗Weibo：https://weibo.com/3618951560/NEZZnpQRq

————————

357 notes · View notes

tanadrin · 15 days

Note

RE "revolutionary leftists are revolutionary because they know they can't win electorally."

It astounds me a little that there are leftists who think that a communist revolution is more likely to work than, like, fifty years of community-building and electoral politics. Sewer socialism, union activism, and other boring activities have brought much more success in the U.S. than agitation for a revolution.

What I mean is, setting aside the moral concerns (violence is bad, even when it's necessary, and if there are practical alternatives then we should pursue them), I am not a revolutionary leftist because I think we would lose a revolution. For one thing, there is a considerable right-wing element in the country that is much better prepared for this kind of thing, and I think that the majority of the institutions in the U.S. would pick fascism over communism if they had to choose, but also, prolonged violent action is ripe for breeding authoritarianism.

Goatse is concerned that "the party" might "abandon or neglect its primary ends," but what is leftism if it is not, at bottom, an attempt to improve the living conditions of all people, et cetera et cetera? To the extent that social democratic parties successfully pursue this end to some degree, they're better than than an ostensible communist party that talks the talk but commits human rights abuses. And, more than the fact that U.S. leftism has some pretty fierce opposition that would probably fare better if The Revolution happened tomorrow, I think that, even in winning, we would lose, because what came out the other end would look a lot more like Stalinism.

I think one thing the hardcore revolutionaries in OECD countries don't realize is that the reason they can't marshal support for their revolutions is that the socialists won most of the issues that were salient in the early 20th century--workers got more rights, better pay, unions were legalized, etc., etc. But it didn't take restructuring the whole political economy to do it, which is immensely frustrating if you believe that any society without your ideal political economy is inherently immoral and impure, so in order to justify an explicitly communist platform you have to rhetorically isolate it from the filthy libs and feckless demsocs who it turns out have been pretty effective within the arena of electoral politics in which supposedly nothing can ever get done, and treat them as of a piece with the out-and-out fascists and royalist autocrats of the 1920s and 30s.

Which, you know. Is not persuasive to most people! Most people understand intuitively the vast gulf between the SPD and the Nazis; they see that, milquetoast and compromising though they may be, the center-left can deliver substantive policy improvements without the upheaval of a civil war or political purges, and this is attractive to people who are not of a millenarian or left-authoritarian personality.

Which isn't to say that communists don't often make important points! It sucks having to fight a constant rearguard action against the interests of capital rolling back the social improvements of the 20th century, and it sucks that liberal governments in Europe and North America have historically been quite happy to bankroll and logistically support fascists and tyrants in the third world against communist movements (which invariably only exist as communist movements because these same fascists and tyrants have crushed more compromising movements and only the most militant organizations have managed to survive).

But I agree with you: communists also talk a big game about how liberalism is the real fascism (what's that line from Disco Elysium I see quoted everywhere about how everybody is secretly a fascist except the other communists, who are liberals?), while also being awful at democracy. Suppressing dissent because your small clique of political elites is the only legitimate expression of the people's will (which you know, because you have declared it to be so) really is some rank bullshit. A system with competitive elections is still, well, a system with competitive elections, even if those elections are structurally biased in certain ways; all the bloviating that attempts to justify communist authoritarianism cannot really obscure the fact that authoritarian systems are cruel and brittle, regardless of the ideology being served.

#world's worst leftist #i'm not a huge fan of capitalism #but i am a huge fan of democracy #liberalism rules actually #and its highest expression is probably democratic socialism

157 notes · View notes

baldval · 1 month

Text

ART DECO PART 2!₊˚⊹♡

characters: valentino x gn!reader

wc: 1.7k

warnings: cursing, canon!valentino (he doesn't mind vox's bad actions towards other people), insanely angsty.

series masterlist!

You're half awake and disorientated. Valentino got up to find out who was at the door 10 minutes ago, and frankly, you're getting worried.

Against your better judgement, you throw on his shirt from the night before and make your way out of the bedroom.

You enter the living room to be met face to face with Vox.

Shit.

You briefly wonder if you can play it off, fabricate a story, tell him it's not what it looks like!

Apart from, it's exactly what it looks like.

Someone from Vox's assistance team saw you and Val enter his room together after the meeting. And now you're here, in his living room, wearing nothing but his shirt. And your shoes are by the front door. And there's a wine glass abandoned on the counter.

There's no getting out of this one.

Valentino wants to scream, yell at you to go back to his room. He wants to pick you up and throw you out of sight, praying Vox hasn't noticed all the tell tale signs. But it's too late. He has.

"Okay. Uh - what the fuck is going on?"

Vox asks the question while looking between the two of you like some sort of cartoon character doing a double take. It doesn't require a genius to figure it out, but he needs to hear one of you say it out loud.

"Listen, Vox-"

"Vox, don't get mad-"

You both speak at the same time, verbally tripping over each other. You've never actually discussed what you'd do or say if you got found out. You both just always naively assumed it wouldn't happen.

You sit down on the edge of the couch, and look at your boss earnestly.

You had earned his respect with all the years you'd been working for him, creating and animating shows for the Vees.

However, you knew it could all disappear.

It would be a lie to say you didn't see it coming, what was true is that you weren't ready for it.

"Vox, I'm not going to sit here and lie to you. It isn't fair. But you can't get mad when I tell you the truth."

"I'll be the judge of that," he mutters sassily.

"Will you come and sit with me, please? The standing is making me nervous. I feel like I'm on trial."

"You might be. I haven't decided yet."

You can't tell if he's joking. He's certainly not smiling.

Vox moves to sit down next you. Val follows, perching himself on the opposite end to give you space. Close enough if you need him, far enough that it won't upset your boss more.

"Start talking," he commands, still confused.

"It's... well I - we - me and Valentino, we're -"

"Together," Val finishes for you. Vox glares at him, and he decides he'll keep his mouth shut for a while.

"Yeah, we're together," you continue. "We have been for over a year. It isn't just sex, or anything. I'm like- in love with him."

It's weird to finally bear this truth after keeping it a secret for so long. It feels wrong, but also refreshing - like a bitter lemon on a hot day.

Vox is scarily silent.

"You're... kidding, right?" he asks, finally breaking through the quiet.

Your silence is enough answer for you as he looks at you incredulously.

"You're so fuckin' naive." He turns over to Valentino. "How can you sit here and act like this doesn't change anything?"

Val tries to speak, but he continues.

"You lied to me, first off. Both of you. For God knows how long-"

"Vox-"

"Let me fucking finish."

You shrink back into the couch, hoping it would swallow you.

"You both lied to me. You broke my trust... and uh, that fucking hurts, actually. And then there's the business side of things. They work for me, they work for the Vees. And, I don't know if you remember, but you are a Vee. That's a conflict of interest."

Val scoffs at him, but then realises he's deadly serious.

"... A conflict of interest?"

"It's against company policy. How am I going to trust you? How is anyone? Information might get leaked. What if I tell you something, and then you tell them?" He points over to you. "And then they tell whoever friends they have, and they post about it on social media, and all of a sudden nothing is private anymore. I. Can't. Trust. You."

Tears are welling up in your eyes quicker than you can control. You're trying to take deep breaths, begging yourself not to cry in front of Vox.

"You do get this is my life right? I get to choose whoever I date," Val whispers.

"Yeah? Well, it's my life. And they're MY worker. And I get to choose whatever I'll do to them."

A choked sob escapes you, and the floodgates open. Fresh, hot tears sprint down your cheeks, landing in your lap.

Vox doesn't care about your suffering, he just wants to punish Valentino through you.

Val can't stand to sit and watch any longer.

"Okay, Vox, that's enough. This isn't fair."

"What's not fair is that two of people I trust the most both lying to my face for a year. That's what isn't fucking fair."

With that, Vox stands up and strides towards the front door, slamming it behind him as he leaves. The minute he's gone, Valentino is wrapping his arms around you, pulling you into his chest.

"It's okay, darling," he murmurs, stroking your hair. "He'll come around. We'll be okay. If we stick together, we'll be okay."

His reassurances are only making you cry harder, sobs escaping you uncontrollably. You eventually exhaust yourself, falling into a restless sleep in Val's arms on the couch.

︵‿︵‿୨♡୧‿︵‿︵

You wake up in bed. You've temporarily forgotten the events of the morning, before it all comes crashing back down around you suddenly. Distantly, you can hear Valentino in the kitchen, talking on the phone. You look around the room, and know what you have to do.

You leave the bedroom with a bag in hand, throwing it onto the ground as you grab your shoes. Val clocks you, and hangs up the phone.

"Can I call you back? Thanks. I'll see you tomorrow."

He runs over to where you're slipping your heels on, precariously balanced against the side of the couch.

"Honey, where are you going?" he questions, panic washing over him at your frantic state. "Wait, have you packed a bag?"

He's trying to catch your eyes, but you keep looking away, desperate to avoid his unrelenting gaze.

"I'm going home."

A pause.

"... This is your home."

You knew he'd say that. It hurts just the same.

"No, Valentino, this is your home. My apartment is across town."

"You haven't been there in months. All your stuff is here. Baby, talk to me. What's going on? Did Vox get in your head?"

"He has a point!" you shout, trying to pick up your bag. Val gets there first and grabs it, flinging it behind him, out of your reach.

"About what? He's just in shock, baby! He's confused and he feels betrayed. You don't owe him fuckin' anything. Not after everything that he has put you through."

"But I love my job, Val. I can't lose everything I've worked so hard to achieve!"

"You love that piece of shit job? Yesterday you literally had to get up at 6 am just to get here and get yelled at for an hour and a half. Look- I love Vox but he's not a good boss. Hell! I don't even care about that, I just can't stand to see him abuse you and treat you like you're close to nothing. You're better off without him and you know it. You're just too attatched to what you have."

Subconsciously, you know he's right. You're trying to convince yourself he isn't.

"You don't get it though."

"Except I do. Do you think I don't know about Vox's methods? I understand that it's what he needs to do to get the job done, but... I just can't stand him treating you like that."

"You heard what he said! He won't trust you anymore. No one will. Besides, I know it's shitty, but my job is important to me. I can't be forgotten. Known only as an old failed artist."

"Trust me, honey, you're the least likely to be named a failure."

"That's not the point! You're not listening to me. I come from the bottom, I've had to fight for respect every fucking day of my life. I'm finally where I deserve to be. I can't throw it all away for... for love!"

Valentino flinches like you've punched him in the gut. He takes a step back and leans against the kitchen island, trying to keep his balance.

"What happened to 'you and me against the world', huh?" he murmurs.

"I think I got too wrapped up in this - in us. I was stupid to think it could work. We both were."

"I wasn't," he replies defiantly. "I knew exactly what I was getting into. I knew it would be really fucking difficult and I loved you anyway."

"I'm not sorry for loving you," you whisper. "I'm sorry for a lot of things, but never for loving you."

"If you meant that, you wouldn't be giving up."

You turn your head around, unable to look at him any longer.

"This isn't giving up. This is... quitting while we're ahead. If we keep going, we'll just end up having a huge, horrible, public breakup," you stop, and take a deep breath. "I think we were always doomed to fail."

Valentino thinks about the diamond ring that sits in a box in the top drawer of his nightstand. Doomed to fail.

You finally look up at him, and all the air leaves your lungs. You've never seen him look so defeated, so vulnerable. You're the cause of this. And you hate yourself for it.

You pad across the kitchen and pick up your bag from where he threw it, before stopping in front of him.

"I don't regret you, Valentino. I never will."

With that, you stride out of the front door, closing it gently behind you. Val is left, cold and empty, in a room that no longer feels like home.

#hazbin hotel x reader #hazbin hotel imagine #hazbin hotel headcanon #hazbin hotel #valentino hazbin hotel #valentino x reader #valentino hazbin hotel headcanon #cursed cat alastor #hazbin hotel valentino #valentino #the vees #valentino x you #valentino headcanons

145 notes · View notes

probablyasocialecologist · 6 months

Text

Thousands have hit the streets in NYC, Los Angeles, Washington DC, and dozens of other cities. A DC protest organized by Jewish activist groups drew thousands, and hundreds were later arrested, including two dozen Rabbis. An estimated 25,000 people showed up to a rally in Chicago. These events show no signs of stopping, with many more planned across the coming days. These actions have gone beyond marches, with protesters showing up at the offices and homes of politicians demanding a ceasefire. Six activists were arrested at a pro-Palestine rally outside the Boston office of Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). A large crowd demonstrated outside the Brooklyn home of Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY). Jewish protesters showed up outside the Brentwood house of VP Kamala Harris. IfNotNow members have held sit-ins at the DC offices of Schumer, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), and Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA). Former staffers for Warren, Sanders, and Senator John Fetterman have publicly urged the lawmakers to back a ceasefire. On October 25, tens of thousands of students across more than 100 North American campuses united in a walkout to demand an immediate ceasefire, an end to unconditional support for Israel, and university divestment from the corporations funding the occupation of Palestine. On the night of October 27 Jewish activists shut down Grand Central Station, leading to the arrest of over 300 people. “This is bigger than we’ve ever seen,” US Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR) Executive Director Ahmad Abuznaid told Mondoweiss. “This is the result of decades of work that we’ve put into this movement, and I think some of it is connected to the [George Floyd protests of 2020]. There was so much racial, social justice, anti-war building in that moment.

[...]

“The man broke my heart,” Palestinian-American comedian Maysoon Zayid told Politico on October 23, “I never in my life thought the empathizer-in-chief would sound the way he did. The Palestinians were given no humanity. Joe Biden should spend every breath he has condemning Israel’s genocide with the same zeal he condemned Hamas’ massacre of civilians, that same zeal. And we get nothing. 1,000 children are dead, and we get nothing.” “It’s really crazy to me that the Democratic party destroyed 20-years of worth of good will with Muslims and Arabs in just 2 weeks, losing an entire generation that was raised in the progressive coalition, possibly forever,” tweeted author and activist Eman Abdelhadi. “The rapidity of it, the finality–it’s astonishing.” “While Republican disregard for Muslim and Arab lives is clearly on display, some Muslim and Arab Americans also feel like the Democratic Party largely takes their vote for granted, though Democrats’ policies never reflect as much,” writes Dana El Kurd in The Nation. “One Arab American friend expressed to me that, at least under Republican administrations, ‘Arabs could find allies’ in their opposition.”

#usa #palestine #israel #democrats

279 notes · View notes

syoddeye · 3 months

Text

the reward

ceo!price x reader / ~2.5k words

This can be considered the first half of part 4 of Business or Pleasure? my lil ceo!price x reader side project. Please enjoy! 🖤

Parts 1, 2, and 3

CW: hinted possessiveness, power imbalance, alcohol

The reward was never a choice. Cute, in hindsight, how you thought it was and politely declined to exit the car.

Mr. Price squashed your resolve with one look. Both of his eyebrows raised in an expression of almost tired disbelief, mouth a firm line, and a disapproving sound pushing through it. "Hmm. You sure? Store's open just for us, y'really going to make them stay on longer?"

Sufficiently guilt-tripped, you concede.

You expect the pair of sales associates to be miffed, all tight smiles and wringing hands, for working past posted hours. They are not. Quite the opposite. It makes you wonder the true reach of the man beside you.

John ushers you past the display of tote bags in the front of the store.

You try to protest. "But they're the most useful type here. The others are impractical."

You try to reason. "I can use it for work. For travel. See, my laptop will fit."

You want something closer to the reliable carry-all you currently own. He clicks his tongue as if you are an unruly pet, affectionately scolding. "You're not walking out of here 'til you pick something impractical. Think of it as an indulgence."

You are left to reluctantly marvel at the rows of clutches and handbags. They sit under warm, glowing lights designed to underscore the soft luster of their leather. The kind of brand to hide the price tags, you silently make estimates as you peruse. Just one could pay two month's rent.

A sales associate sidles up when you linger too long near a pinkish-gray, compact handbag. Her voice is low and bubbly, explaining the history of the silhouette and model, the leather and detailing. She shows the optional shoulder strap, threads it over your side, and insists you look in the mirror. Feels funny using a full-body mirror for an accessory, but it does make you like it more. A nicer outfit and you could pass for a real customer.

You meet John's gaze in the reflection. Comfortably settled in one of the shop's armchairs, he smiles languorously and nods.

Before you know it, John offers a shiny metal card to the associate, and you walk out of the store with a four-digit handbag.

In the car, it's as if nothing happened. John returns to his phone and padfolio, all business, and you sit slightly dumbfounded cradling a shopping bag. Whiplash does not even begin to cover the feeling.

He likes you, has to. Men, no matter how wealthy, do not spend this amount of money on people they do not care for. It is not your experience, at least. The gift is troubling, though. What precisely does it mean? What did drinks mean? What does his requisitioning you from Kyle mean? You've seen this show before, and it never ends well.

When the car pulls onto your street, it is fuel on the fire. Of course, John has access to employee information; you try not to dwell on the fact he shouldn't use it; there are policies against that. Clearly, he is not one for rules.

When Alex opens your door, John is on the phone, looking out his window. You make a split-second decision. You gather your things, murmur a goodbye, and then climb out of the car. Locking eyes with the bodyguard, you take advantage of his friendliness and mirror his warm energy. It works. Distracted, he does not notice the shopping bag left at the foot of your seat.

But John does. He calls your name as you attempt to distance yourself from the car, stopping you in your tracks.

"Forgetting something?"

Flustered and foiled, you retrieve the shopping bag. He smiles amusedly from his seat.

"Email me the notes. See you Monday, love."

"You're hiding something."

"Jordan, please. I've barely touched my coffee."

"There's got to be more to it," Jordan whispers excitedly over the edge of your desk, ignoring your withering look.

You do not lift your gaze from the packed, colorful calendar on the screen. "Like I told you over text and FaceTime, that's it. Mr. Price only needed me for notes for a partner meeting. He was impressed by the summary I wrote up for Kyle about Project Intercontinental."

As if summoned, a message pops up on screen.

kgarrick - online

> Need to speak with you about meeting the technology directors.

What meeting? He's already met with them this quarter. Nevertheless, you stand and smooth your skirt. "Boss man needs me, talk later?"

The other woman huffs. "Yeah, yeah. Talk later."

You slip into Kyle's office and shut the door. "What's this about the tech directors?"

Kyle smiles, but it does not quite reach his eyes. He gestures to the padded lounge chair across his desk. "Please."

Pins and needles. This was not about the directors.

"O…kay." You sink into the chair, back straight as a board.

He takes a moment to lean forward on his desk, elbows resting on the surface, one hand rubbing the knuckles of the other. "I understand John took you to meet with Graves."

"Yes, I was under the impression you knew." The fear that Price possibly lied about that instantly surfaces.

"I knew, told him it was fine. I'm curious about your first impression.

So that's it. Kyle wants to know more about the new contractor. You relax a bit and recall the sportive, if not roguish American. "Oh. Well, he is certainly different. I am curious if his company's style will align with ours, given how–"

Kyle raises a hand to stop you, and his smile is almost pained. "No, sorry, I meant John."

Your eyes widen a little in surprise. Crossing your legs, you force your fingers to lace around a knee. "I see. Um, he's...Assertive."

It prompts a snort of laughter, seemingly breaking Kyle's odd nervousness. "Sorry, go on."

Pursing your lips a moment, you tread carefully. "Perhaps 'confident' is the better term," It isn't. It is kinder. "Strategic and intelligent." Strategic in how he basically used you and intelligent but clueless with office equipment. You think to tag on 'generous', but rather not be forced to explain.

Kyle chuckles, and his grin slowly returns to an uncertain curve. "Did he talk to you much?"

Yes and no. Yet, what was the correct response? 'Yes, Kyle, and he admitted to using me as the adult equivalent of a ring of keys to a toddler or monkey to gauge Mr. Graves's attentiveness. Oh, and this was after he described my clothing in detail over the phone to an unknown party. Did I mention the five thousand pound gift back at my flat?' Complete honesty was out of the question.

"He did not ignore me. We had a polite conversation."

"Did he say anything about me? Ask?"

You smirk. "Only that you gave him your blessing."

The spot of levity is lost on him. Your smirk fades.

Kyle almost looks worried. "And he…He didn't…"

Your face heats. What does he know? Does he know about drinks? The message? The handbag? The conversation teeters into minefield territory. You play dumb. Best to let him get out with it. "What?"

"He didn't ask you to move over to his desk full-time?"

Relief floods your worried nerves, quelling the fretful thing in your chest. You understand now. Kyle doesn't want to lose his assistant. Your smile nearly splits your face. "No, he did not."

The man slumps some and chuckles. "Excellent. Had me worried. I don't think either of us could refuse if he asked, y'know."

That is a discomforting piece of knowledge.

"I still would," You reassure, lean forward, and tap the surface of his desk. "Now. Was that all? I don't know about you, but I've got work to do."

He shakes his head. "No, but you tell me if he tries to snipe you, yeah?"

The earnestness throws you, despite how accustomed you've grown to it during your tenure. It makes keeping this thing with Price a secret all the more difficult.

"Of course. Now. Message me when you decide on lunch, dates for the Mexico trip, and what you'd like to give me for my fifth anniversary since I know you've already forgotten."

"Shit. That's–?"

"Next Monday."

"Pick out something nice."

And you will. Just not Moynat nice.

The rest of Monday keeps you hellishly occupied. Your head's above water for the first time in the day, and it's nearly quitting time. Kyle's off at his last appointment, some check-in meeting on tax season preparations, when you power off your desktop. You slip on your coat, pack your bag, and discreetly slip off to the elevators. There's time to beat the evening rush.

The elevator arrives from a higher floor and for a moment, you briefly consider diving out of view. You come face-to-face with Alex and behind him, Mr. Price. Both of their faces shift for different reasons.

"Miss," Alex drawls.

You give the bodyguard a rigid smile, then glance at your employer.

"Going down?"

"I can–"

Alex holds the elevator doors open when they try to close, his smile warm and clueless. "C'mon in."

Price speaks when the car starts to descend. "You're not using your new bag."

Your eyes flick to Alex's back then focus on the LED panel indicating the floor. It feels inappropriate to talk about it in front of the other man, despite his presence on the 'errand'.

"I can't."

"Something wrong with it?"

"Yes, it's too nice."

Price chuckles and Alex's shoulders shudder in a clear attempt to suppress a laugh.

"I fail to see how that's a problem."

"Mr. Price, while my compensation is fair," You continue carefully, still avoiding looking at him. "It is not within my budget to afford luxury brands. If I turn up to the office with that nice of a bag, all of a sudden, people would talk. And besides, it's my bag, and I decided it is not for work."

You don't miss how he ignores the first part of your answer. "What's it for, then?"

"Socializing."

Do not look at him. Oh, what you would do for the elevator to stop.

"Socializing," He repeats, elongating the word as if it's in a foreign language. "Dates?"

He has to be deliberately trying to get under your skin.

"Yes," A single word. A confirmation and a warning.

"Go on many of those?"

Even Alex tenses, back muscles tightening beneath his suit jacket. Your head finally snaps toward Price, who, irritatingly, wears a controlled smile.

"Yes," You answer again and push through the absurd embarrassment. "My fair share."

He hums. "Your anniversary with us is next Monday, yeah?"

The sudden change in topic does not bode well. "Yes, sir."

"You free Friday?"

The lie is out of your mouth before you can stop yourself. "I have a date this Friday." Whatever this baffling situation is between you, it needs to stop. Should've all the way back at the malfunctioning copier. He does not need to know your 'date' is celebratory drinks with Jordan. You just need him to drop it.

It's as if the elevator car turns into an icebox. The mirth bleeds from Price's gaze, but his smile remains. "And Saturday?"

There is a tacit warning in his tone. In the slight turn of Alex's head in your periphery. Your mouth dries, and you swallow hard.

"I'm free on Saturday."

The lights come back on in his eyes, and miraculously, the car reaches the lobby. "Wonderful to hear. Pick you up at eight."

Alex steps aside to let you out.

"Have a good evening, miss," the bodyguard says softly as you pass before hitting the number for your office's floor to head back upstairs.

You meet eyes with Price as the doors close, and a shiver runs down your spine. It's unsettling. You can't tell if it was good or bad.

Thankfully, you do not run into Mr. Price the rest of the week. You take care not to. If Kyle suspects something from your excuses to sit out on meetings, avoiding any whiffs of the CEO, he says nothing. When you leave on Friday to meet Jordan, you take the stairs all the way down to the lobby and claim exercise. She wrinkles her nose at the idea of trekking a half hour away to a pub closer to yours, but after the first two rounds, she forgets her griping.

And after four rounds, you forget yourself. You slip up.

Giggling, you sip your gin and tonic, poking at the lime wedge. "The bartender reminds me of the place I went to with John–"

The way Jordan's face lights up makes you try to backpedal, but it's too late.

Her voice slurs some, part alcohol and part explosive excitement. "Waitwaitwait. John? Like capital 'J' John? Not my John? What place? When? Whatdoyoumean?!"

Through no small amount of lovable torment, she coaxes the story out. It is heavily redacted despite your inebriation, but now she knows. And she is not known for her tight-lippedness.

"Swear on your mother, you won't breathe a word."

"I swear."

"'Cause I'll tell MacTavish you steal–"

"I swear. Now. What are you going to wear for your date?"

Only then does it hit you: you know nothing about this…'date'. If it's anything like the other places you've accompanied him, it's somewhere beyond your wallet and comprehension.

Jordan might as well sit on your shoulder, the devil. "Message him. Ask. Bet it won't matter by the end of the evening."

"Shut it, I'm not gonna message him."

Yet, on the ride home in the taxi, you do. It takes a few tries, with the drunkenness making everything fuzzy and sluggish.

johnprice - invisible

Hi, what should i wear tomorrow?

It's late. You don't expect a reply. The phone nearly launches out of your hand when he swiftly messages back.

> Something nice. I liked the green dress.

The dress from the Christmas party. He remembered. Clearly, it made an impression, given his current fascination. Before you can respond, he messages again.

> Date go poorly?

> Might want to take this to text, love. Don't want to get chewed out for misuse of company resources.

He sends his personal number like it's nothing. Asks about your 'date' like it's nothing. Infuriatingly confusing man. Still, you save his contact information and switch platforms. You swear it's the gin moving your fingers, the liquid puppeteer.

Only texting because I wouldn't want to get you in trouble sir

And my date was wonderful

Were you possessed by a flirtatious spirit between the bar and cab?

> I wouldn't be the one getting into trouble.

Price is fishing for it. You oblige him.

What if I'm the trouble

It takes two, no, three minutes for him to reply. Worrying your lip, you think you've gone and royally fucked yourself now. Pushed the envelope too far, flew too close to the sun, all the turns of phrase. Then those three dots appear. You've really done it now.

> I know just what to do with you.

#call of duty #john price #captain john price #captain price #price x you #price x reader #john price x you #john price x reader #john price x female reader #captain john price x reader #captain john price x female reader #captain john price x you #price x female reader #cod fanfic #cod fic #ceo!john price

173 notes · View notes

argyrocratie · 3 months

Text

(...)

In a message that sharply diverges from the mainstream Israeli public discourse amid the army’s ongoing assault on Gaza, and at a time when anyone in Israel who expresses even mild opposition to the war is facing persecution and repression, Mitnick told +972: “My refusal is an attempt to influence Israeli society and to avoid taking part in the occupation and the massacre happening in Gaza. I’m trying to say that it’s not in my name. I express solidarity with the innocent in Gaza. I know they want to live; they don’t deserve to be made refugees for the second time in their lives.”

(...)

How did your decision to refuse enlistment come about?

Even before the first draft notice, I knew I was not interested in enlisting. I knew I wasn’t willing to serve in this system that perpetuates apartheid in the West Bank and only contributes to the cycle of bloodshed. I understood from the very privileged position I find myself in, having a supportive family and environment, that I have an obligation to use it to reach other young people and to show that there is another way.

When I talk to my friends — some of whom serve and some of whom received exemptions — about why I’m not going to the army, they understand that it comes from a humane perspective of consideration for the other. No one thinks I support Hamas or want [my friends] to experience harm. There are people who believe that military activity will bring security; I believe that my public refusal is what will influence and bring the most security.

How did the protests against the judicial overhaul help you shape your worldview?

Before the protests, I viewed political activism as something very distant, and I didn’t think it was possible to make an impact as an individual. When the protests began and I saw they included members of Knesset going out to the streets, I realized that politics is closer to me than I thought, that it can reach every corner of the country, and that it is possible to have an influence. That’s where I understood that my actions can affect the reality we see here, and I have an obligation to act for a better future.

Were you debating whether to do it now, given the current atmosphere?

Yes, there were doubts. I always knew that the army doesn’t have a consistent policy regarding conscientious objectors, that the response can change in a moment – to release all objectors or to imprison them for a long time — and I was prepared for that. After October 7 and the [government’s] attack on the peace movement, on Jewish-Arab partnership, and on Palestinian citizens expressing support and solidarity with the innocent in Gaza, even on demonstrations, it has become frightening. But now is precisely the time to show the other side, to show that we exist.

Do you think there’s anyone in the country willing to listen to such messages right now?

We all know that we need another way, especially after October 7. We all know that it simply doesn’t work, that Benjamin Netanyahu is not “Mr. Security.” Managing the conflict is a policy that hasn’t worked and eventually collapsed.

We can’t continue with the current situation, and there are two options now: the right suggests transfer and genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza; the other side says there are Palestinians here, living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, and they are entitled to rights. Even people who voted for Bibi, and even those who supported the judicial reform, can connect to the idea that everyone deserves to live justly, that everyone deserves a roof over their heads, and support shared existence here.

After October 7, many who were on the left claimed they “sobered up”. Did this affect you?

There is no justification for harming innocent civilians. The criminal attack on October 7, in which innocents were killed, is illegitimate resistance to the oppression of the Palestinian people in my eyes. However, outlawing legitimate resistance such as protests, or declaring human rights organizations as terrorist organizations, leads people to dehumanize the other and to actions targeting civilians.

October 7 did not change my perspective; it only reinforced it. I still believe it is impossible to live with the siege on Gaza and an occupation, and not feel [any consequences]. I believe that many people finally understand this. The idea of “out of sight, out of mind” doesn’t work. Something needs to change, and the only way is to talk, to reach a political settlement. I’m not saying it will solve everything, but it will be another step toward justice and peace.

What was your experience at the Conscience Committee?

The pre-committee interviewer was aggressive. She questioned my nonviolence because I opposed the government’s actions and the occupation. Essentially, due to my opinions, she told me that I am not a conscientious objector because these were political views.

In the end, I went through the pre-committee, and appeared before the committee itself less than a week after the interview, while many people usually wait half a year. It was a hostile interview: me opposite four people.

They attacked my opinions. They asked me what I would have done on October 7, and how I would have handled the situation. They constantly interrupted me, and said they would phrase the question differently. I tried to continue answering, but they said I wasn’t responding to them. I am not the leader of Israel; they can’t place me in that position.

They asked me how my refusal is different from the refusal of Brothers in Arms [a group of army veterans who declared their refusal to show up for reserve service in protest against the judicial coup]. I replied that I appreciate them and think it’s important that there are people who have a red line for service — but I set my red line before that, and I hope their red line moves in the direction of my red line.

Two days later, they told me I hadn’t passed the committee. I wasn’t surprised. I didn’t receive any explanation, they just called and told me the result."

...

#israel #palestine

260 notes · View notes

sepublic · 1 year

Text

The Collector’s story is so sad to me because they really do try!!! They are putting in the effort to be better!!! They defy the other collectors’ policy of imprisonment and genocide, for the sake of the Titans! They go along with Philip’s plans, giving him the draining spell and a bunch of other magic! And they listen to King’s Owl House rules, they’re gradually adjusting their behavior according to his advice, respecting his boundaries, even letting him get away with Eda and Lilith!

He’s learning. He really is doing all he can to improve, he’s listening. But the Collector isn’t doing it fast enough, they haven’t figured it out quickly; So it feels like for the adults and everyone else around them, they don’t want to put in the effort to teach and rehabilitate this kid. That’s too long and arduous, it’s much easier to stick him in a prison and hide it, or even kill the kid.

The Collector invests so much good-faith effort into changing for people, but those around him? They don’t want to reciprocate the same effort to understand him in return, that’s how it feels. They demand so much but give nothing back, use the Collector. And would rather take the easy route of punishing the kid to make him shut up for their convenience, instead of really working to talk with him at his level, and explain how to get better. There’s this silent, genuine, hurt and confused question echoing from the Collector; “What did I do wrong?”

It really does feel like one big metaphor for neurodivergent kids, and children in general, who are seen as misbehaving troublemakers. And rather than taking the time to understand their perspectives, and communicate to them about the problem, adults would rather just hit them until they’re quiet.

Because it’s easier, more convenient that way, like sweeping dust under the rug. Even if it just makes this kid who IS willing to improve feel neglected, unappreciated; Allows their problems to fester untouched and unseen, until it boils over and explodes later in life. And suddenly adults are all shocked because He was such a quiet, obedient kid, who could’ve seen this coming?!

The Collector feels like the collective wrath of so many kids who were treated like inconveniences to deal with, rather than growing children who needed help and guidance. And boy is the Collector messy about it, because they’re tired of playing by other people’s rules and trying to appeal to them with good behavior, in exchange for compassion, because that clearly hasn’t worked out and never will.

They are every child who has asked Why about a rule, and instead of being treated like a person with an honest need to know, was just told Because I said so. They want to get it, but people just prefer them being blindly subservient; People don’t care what the Collector thinks, so why should he feel the same for their judgment? The kid is panicked when he insists King focus on the revision he made to the storybook, the lesson he learned, but he’s still being put away for what others wrote.

“You can trust me” is something Philip and King have both told them, and maybe that parallels how adults insist children follow their seemingly arbitrary rules even without knowing why, because “It’s the rules” and authority dictates all. So after struggling under that command, of course the Collector is eager to be the one wielding it this time, with his rules...

The rules of a game. The rules of behavior. Both are laws dictated for people to follow, with someone often deciding and being able to change them as they see fit, especially with childrens’ playground games. Life is a big game and the Collector wants to play his own, after all this time following others’ rules; His people’s, the Titans’, Philip’s, and finally King’s.

There’s a lot to be said about how we expected the Collector to have been someone who didn’t play by any rules, did whatever he pleased. But it might just be the opposite, the kid has never had true freedom, always subject and listening to what someone else tells them, because they’re in charge or it’s the moral thing to do. They’ve been imprisoned their whole life, literally even, and now their desire for agency has burst free.

The Collector wasn’t the god of chaos we thought they were, but now they will be and we’ve seen why; It’s not because there weren’t any rules for them, it’s because there were too many, and the more you tighten your grip, the more something slips free. Too much authority, too little, the kid needs a proper balance of contradictory lessons, like so many in this show...

#the owl house #the owl house collector #king clawthorne #character analysis #meta

754 notes · View notes

txttletale · 1 year

Note

I was a member of a trotskyist organization for about a year, before I left due to life circumstances. I was a left-liberal before, and this group radicalized me. they were staunchly anti-ml, anti-anarchist, and i have been considering the org as perhaps not quite so good, especially since i find myself agreeing with all that you have to say. if it contributes to having a nice time on the computer, i would like to hear your criticisms of trotskyism and/or modern trotskyist orgs?

alright so i have a few different critiques of trotskyism and trotskyists--both theoretical and practical. the primary theoretical critique i have based on trotsky's own writings is that the idea of 'permanent revolution' is completely idealistic nonsense. it rests on incorrect assertions that marx & engels made about the global nature of socialist revolution--assertions that were already visibly incorrect when trotsky was pushing the theory of permanent revolution, not just with the benefit of hindsight. ironically, a lot of the things about the USSR that trotskyists love to criticise the most (the process of collectivization, socialist adventurist interventions) are things that trotsky was the fiercest advocate of all for!

i also think in practice a lot of trotskyite organizations in the imperial core--having defined themselves in huge part by their opposition to the USSR--have historically served as useful stooges for imperialist interests. whether they like it or not, the more energy they dedicate to their public and vocal criticisms (however correct, mind!) of socialist states, the more amenable and compatible and non-threatening their positions become to imperialist hegemony. this is (imo) even sillier in the present day, after the tragic¹ dissolution of the USSR; trotskyite tendencies are positioning themselves against something which no longer functionally exists as a global political force. relitigating the Evils of Stalinism (as a matter of political line and not as a productive conversation about what modern socialist movements can learn from the failures of the USSR) seventy years after the fact is a political project founded on shadowboxing.

finally, in my personal experience, i have found that trotskyist orgs are much more sectarian and unwilling to work or communicate cross-tendency than anarchist or ML orgs. again--this is partially because a lot of 'trotskyism', especially in the modern day, has less to do with anything that trotsky wrote or did and more to do with performative rejection of the USSR (which, i cannot stress enough, no longer exists!). but like, i've seen more ML-anarchist cooperation in actual organizing on the ground than i've seen trotskyist cooperation with either of those tendencies. a lot of the major ones i've had any experience with also tend to have longstanding and entrenched organizational issues.

tldr: permanent revolution is a silly idea, trotskyist orgs have tended to align with imperialist foreign policy, modern trotskyist orgs tend to be hypersectarian newspaper sale platforms with entrenched leadership issues

¹ i'm still planning to make a full post about this at some point but you do not have to be a late Soviet apologist or a marxist-leninist or even a socialist to recognise that the collapse of the USSR and the resulting period of shock therapy caused mass amounts of human suffering and tragedy btw.

#ask #no disrespect to my like 3 trotskyist follows i believe in left unity n all i've just had bad experiences #and am critical of the theory and movement

406 notes · View notes

writingquestionsanswered · 9 months

Note

So how do you come up with a good motivation for your villian character

Coming Up with the Villain's Motivation

Every story has an antagonistic force. The antagonistic force works in direct opposition of the protagonist and their goals. Villains are a type of antagonistic force, so your villain needs a goal that is in opposition with the protagonist. Knowing the villain's goal will help you figure out their motivation.

Once you know the villain's goal and how it opposes the protagonist, you can think about the reasons behind the villain's pursuit of this goal. Depending on who they are, their motivation might be selfish, greedy, revenge-based, or even simply misguided. It depends on what works best for the characters and story. What are some reasons why the villain might want this outcome rather than the outcome the protagonist is pursuing?

Here are some links to different ideas for motivations: Coming Up with an Object Antagonist Wants 15 Non-Tragic/Traumatic Motivations for Villains Non-Sympathetic Motivations for Villains

Happy writing!

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

I’ve been writing seriously for over 30 years and love to share what I’ve learned. Have a writing question? My inbox is always open!

Learn more about WQA

See my ask policies

Visit my Master List of Top Posts

Go to ko-fi.com/wqa to buy me coffee or see my commissions

#writing tips #writing help #writing advice #wqaadvice

283 notes · View notes

iamadequate1 · 9 days

Text

I have some longer thoughts on it being exhausting to try to have discussions with people who care only about Izzy, but I want to do an addendum on this post by. I have a different bizarre take I'm going to write about for funsies (stressing: funsies, I'm writing a lot but this is just me chilling out on a Sunday afternoon with my cats and watching TV), but this became a side tangent that got too big. I was going to do it as a RB to put it next to my first logic thing, but I was having too much fun, and this got way too big.

I have a bit of a ramble before calling BS on "Izzy taught Stede how to be a pirate and/or captain!1!11" I put an ALL CAPS STATEMENT in big bold red font on its own where I actually start talking about this ridiculousness specifically. 😁

Since pictures cause posts to be noticed better, look how beautiful Stede is in 2x5!

OK, now onto the long ramble.

I put the basic background here, but the logic conclusion is marked with bold blue if you just want to scroll! The Izzy thing is directly after.

With a statement in the form "(cause) implies (effect)", there are several ways to prove or disprove it. In disproving it, a common method is proof by contradiction. That is, assume the (cause)/triggering event (is true)/happens (i.e., the antecedent/hypothesis statement is satisfied) and find a situation where the (effect)/consequence (is false)/doesn't happen or show that the (effect)/consequence (is always false)/never happens (i.e., consequent/conclusion statement is NOT satisfied).

For example: "I go to work if it's Monday" in a general sense rather than being THIS Monday specifically. The antecedent statement is "It's Monday", and the consequent statement is "I go to work." This implication can break with contradictions if you start having to consider things like "What if it's a holiday?", "What if you have PTO or other leave?", "What if you don't have a fixed schedule?", etc., and extra conditions may have to be thrown into the antecedent/hypothesis statement or given situation statements should be clarified. Saying something like "I have a fixed schedule, I get major holidays off, and I have a reasonable leave policy unlike most Americans (burn). I usually go to work on Mondays." (you know, imagine if this were organically phrased like a human instead of a STEMy robot)

Another way to PROVE statements is proof by contrapositive, which is awesome. This is logically equivalent to proving a statement directly (i.e., cause=true means effect=true) by doing a reverse negation: that is, assume that the conclusion DID NOT happen, and show that the hypothesis DID NOT HAPPEN (i.e., effect=false means cause=false). Above, the contrapositive of "I go to work if it's Monday" is "It's not Monday if I did not go to work." It's often easier to DISPROVE a statement by DISPROVING the contrapositive: that is, assume the conclusion DID NOT happen, and find a situation where (or show that in all situations) the hypothesis DID happen. In the example, we get a contradiction in the contrapositive by starting with the hypothesis "I did not go to work" and find a situation where this is true but "It's Monday."

I'm going somewhere with this, I promise. In logical statements, we can add conjunctions "and" and "or.": "P and Q" is true if both P and Q are true, and "P and Q" is false if at least one of P and Q is false. "P or Q" is true if at least one of P and Q is true, and "P or Q" is false if both P and Q are false. (In Venn diagrams, "P and Q" is where you shade in the P and Q circles' intersection, and "P or Q" is where you shade in the entirety of both the P and Q circles, i.e., the union... the negation is where you shade in the opposite, i.e., the complement.)

In a logic statement, a contradiction of "P and Q implies R" means we have a situation where both P and Q are true, but R is false. For example, "I go to work (R) if it's Monday (P) and not a holiday (Q)" fails if it is Monday and not a holiday, but you don't go to work (ex, a situation where you were never scheduled on Mondays anyway!).

The contrapositive of "P and Q implies R" is "(not R) implies (not P) or (not Q)." The contrapositive of "I go to work if it's Monday and not a holiday" is "It's not Monday (not P) or it's a holiday (not Q) if I don't go to work (not R)." If you want to disprove this with contradiction, assume that you didn't go to work, but show that this is true in at least one situation where it's Monday but not a holiday.

In cleaning up logical arguments, you want to reduce the amount of "and"s and "or"s you toss in to the hypothesis statement. If a statement in the hypothesis statement doesn't actually add anything to whether the implication is true or false, toss it out. For example, "I go to work if it's Monday, the capital of Canada is Ottawa, it's not a holiday, I live in a blue house, I have a fixed schedule that includes Mondays, my cat's breath smells like cat food, and I'm not using un/paid leave."... some of that has no effect! Tossing out all the superfluous statements that don't affect the statement's logic is necessary to make a clean statement.

The logic conclusion

In cleaning up arguments, ask yourself if the condition is excluded from the hypothesis or conclusion statement, does a contradiction appear in the logic connection as a result? That is, when removing the condition, does a true antecedent statement always guarantee a true consequent statement (direct implication), and does a false consequent statement mean the antecedent statement is false (contrapositive implication)? If removing a condition doesn't break the argument, the condition should be removed.

Stressing again: I'm writing this for funsies. Writing about that logic stuff is fun to me! 🤣

BS ON IZZY CONCLUSION STARTS HERE

In 2x5, we have a scene where Izzy has Stede do some stuff that leads to some bizarre takes along the lines of "Izzy taught Stede how to be a pirate and/or captain!" Lol, what?

So, let's break this down!!!

Antecedent S2 actions of the end of 2x5:

Stede is still called captain in 2x1 even though they have no ship. His crew remains together with him through working odd jobs and living under a bridge even though they could easily have joined other crews (and, no, Izzy's "bottom of the barrel" comment does not contradict this)

Stede puts his grief aside and prioritizes rescuing his crew from execution and reclaiming his ship at the end of 2x3

Stede listens to the crew and abides by their decision that he disagrees with at the beginning of 2x4 (and giving Izzy a separate scene with a deciding vote is such BS, but I digress...)

Stede listens to the crew (including Pete's adorable kitty collar idea to give Lucius warning, lupete my otp! 💜) on keeping Ed aboard at the beginning of 2x5 (and, no, Stede shushing Jim isn't a point against this... they all obviously have already had a discussion that led to a majority decision with a plan of action, and interrupting people giving a short speech is rude! also, Stede is still learning)

Stede tells Ed that he has to keep up the probation until the crew is comfortable

Stede tells Ed that he hasn't felt like a captain since they returned to The Revenge

Ed tells Stede to confidently/properly say he is captain and own the role (partially to help Stede and partially as a treat for himself)

Stede tells Ed to fit in, be helpful, fix something, and stop p---ing people off

Ed tells Stede to work on his mean voice. Stede's very next scene is going to Izzy

Point here: it does not matter if Izzy says Stede is a s----y captain, knows nothing, has a total lack of skills, etc. In stories, show matters significantly more than tell. In talking about this, you need to ask "How is he measuring that, and are those metrics effective?" or "Is Izzy actually right?" or "Why does Izzy think he's right?" and use those answers to look at how the pieces fit into the story and overall themes. Again, back to the first bullet point: Stede kept his crew together without a ship for three months, and Izzy got mutinied on in like, idk, a day. Izzy is lacking captain skills and knowledge that Stede has whether he's realized it at this point or not

"You taught him everything he knows, made him the captain he is today" Ed is very pointedly not a captain on that day, emphasized with his scene with Stede a few minutes prior. As we already know, Izzy did not teach Ed his pirating and captaining skills (1x4: "...I was honored to work for the legendary Blackbeard, the most brilliant sailor I had ever met"). By what we already have been shown in the story, we know Stede is aggrandizing with this statement and "one of the greats" in order to flatter Izzy. Since this comes directly after Stede being told to work on his mean voice and he's in a friendly but passive aggressive mood (see, the "good candles" remark), ask yourself about Stede's motivations and how literal he's being. He told Ed (his safe person) that he doesn't feel like a captain, not that he doesn't know how to be a captain

We get a montage: Izzy sucker punching Stede, Izzy pushing Stede for one go at a rope swing, and Izzy having Stede take one shot at some bottles that he misses. What we are very specifically not shown in this montage or even later in the episode is Stede showing improvement in or even using these activities that Izzy is having him do (and I am veering far away from the word "teach" with respect to that montage) Compare this to Mulan's "I'll Make a Man Out of You", which starts with showing everyone sucking, showing the instructor having base competence in the skills (even prior to The Leg, we never saw Izzy punch in battle, rope swing, or shoot targets well), and showing marked improvement in the skills in the montage, though not at expert level; furthermore, the skills in the montage are used later in the movie as a bigger payoff of the montage

Izzy then makes fun of Stede some. Stede says "I think being out in the field is my thing. It's like I black out, my body just takes over. I beat you in a duel (...) I have no memory of it." This starts introducing the idea that Stede has strong instincts. It also ends with a hilarious power move brush off

They find the ship of the dead (that is never explained, lol... I love this show). Jim says the dead priest says everything is cursed, and Stede takes the suit anyway. (Note: this is not a failing on Stede for not immediately doing what Jim wants! Curses aren't real, and that suit was gorgeous)

Stede punches a guy who pops out of the closet (I am not counting this as a point of Izzy "teaching" this to Stede in the montage since we're only shown Izzy punching Stede in the abdomen. We have already seen Stede doing the quick "my body just takes over" spin-and-attack move with "Unhand me or bleed", so this is just a feature of Stede, not something Izzy "taught" him)

They celebrate the raid. Most people say the suit is awesome, and Jim plants the seed with the crew that it's cursed

Izzy tells Stede that he has to "burn" the suit because the crew believes in the curse (stressing here: Izzy says to burn it, but that's not what they do)

Jim, Oluwande, and Archie wear garlic and put up a salt line to protect themselves. Stede walks in and leaves right away

Stede calls Frenchie and Roach "men of science" sees some of their beliefs with the yeast-and-faeries talk

Hilariously here, Roach picks up a correlation "Frenchie starts itching right as Stede leaves" means "the suit caused the itching, so it must be cursed!" which is a logic fail (ilu, Roach, but it's on theme here)

Stede talks with the crew, and they all say they think it's cursed and try to take it from him. He runs off to protect his suit. Izzy repeats his earlier statement, and Stede tells him to f-off

Then we get the consequent actions, where the "Izzy taught Stede how to be captain and/or a pirate!" kicks in, I think?! Because I absolutely cannot imagine what story beats in 2x6, 2x7, or 2x8 are claimed to be the payoffs of the tiny montage and this statement always stands alone like that as A Fact (and any detraction is Your Opinion)

Stede removes the outer suit part and has a meeting with the crew

Stede allows the crew to believe the curse is real

They came up with the plan to give the curse to someone else (on Oluwande's suggestion)

There is a cut to them carrying out this plan and Stede complimenting Izzy's swordplay (payoff to Izzy's candle practice) and saying he fought back to back with Oluwande, then Oluwande saying Archie swung in on a rope (Archie, not Stede! Archie was already a "proper pirate", and there is no evidence Izzy taught her anything), then Stede does another spin-and-attack by shooting into the air (not at a target) and using a captain voice on the would-be-attacker

Stede downplays his day when talking to Ed at the end

The beginning logic ramble and conclusion has me asking this: what would have changed at the end of 2x5 if Stede did not have that short montage with Izzy? Would something have broken in the narrative of getting Stede to that point if Izzy were absent?

We have a lot of interactions feeding into what Stede does at the end of the episode, but without Izzy there, would Stede NOT have had the crew meeting (he already was shown to have them at the beginning of 2x4 and 2x5), would he NOT have eventually gotten rid of the suit (he let the crew vote out the love of his life at the beginning of 2x4 so the suit is an easy casualty), would he NOT have worked harder to own the captain role (like Ed instructed him to after he expressed his fears), would he NOT have chosen a style where he leaned toward kindness and compliments (killing with kindness and being a polite menace and talking it through is the brand he's building from day one)? Really, what goes wrong if Izzy is not there?

And, going with my contrapositive points, if Stede had had a massive failure of captaincy at the end of 2x5, would a longer Izzy montage have prevented it? Would further antecedent actions from Izzy changed anything?

My beginning statement comes into play: it is extremely frustrating to talk to people who only pay attention to Izzy scenes. If you remove every bullet point in the antecedent action list that isn't about Izzy's actions, you can fill in a story that Izzy was the one to teach Stede everything! Ludicrous, and it's a disservice to Stede, Ed, and all the other characters and how they're developing. In particular, Stede and Ed are the main characters, and Izzy is a supporting character to their story. It does not make sense for the narrative to remove accomplishments of a lead (e.g., Stede evolving as a captain by interacting with multiple people and developing his own captaincy brand) and hand it to a side character.

We cannot even draw a conclusion that Izzy taught Stede anything because Stede isn't shown using anything Izzy taught him. When Jim and Oluwande taught Stede the stun move, we saw Stede later using the stun move (not in the way he intended!). When Ed taught Stede about being run through, we saw Stede later using that knowledge (in a rather unconventional way!). When Izzy does some activities with Stede, we aren't shown Stede using that information later. This is a story being told, and these characters do not exist. If the story is showing us these activities and there is no follow up of Stede using these lessons at all, we cannot infer that Stede actually learned anything nor, specifically, can we infer that the point of the scene was Izzy teaching Stede something. This montage is a subversion of most other times we see this trope used, and its subversion is that the story payoff is not that Stede was taught anything but something else entirely that wasn't expected from the usual set up. The frustrating part of these Izzy-only arguments and that it doesn't seem to matter the effect that it actually has on Stede's character, only that Izzy had the appropriate beginning story beats, and the rest can be filled in with imagination.

The Izzy montage and allowing Izzy a few thumbs up doesn't change Stede's captain story, though it does bolster it as it is part of how Stede interacts with his crew. This is a season that was given a truncated run time, and it became more critical that all scenes mean something. Since it doesn't actually have an effect on Stede's story, the montage wasn't about teaching Stede captaincy at all.

Changing the conclusion, though, what if it was more about Stede's effect on Izzy than Izzy on Stede, what is it saying about the existing pirate culture and its efficacy, and looking at how Stede is developing his own captaincy style in reaching out to all crew members is a much more interesting and developed read. (Example)

In post conclusion, I had fun writing this, and now I'm going to get some pizza and watch more junk TV! 💜

#our flag means death #ofmd #stede bonnet #izzy hands #logic my beloved #fandom critical #stede is best captain

58 notes · View notes