How people can understand why a pudgy white guy with a minimum wage job might want to escape to a world where he doesn’t have to deal with the mundane, but they can’t understand why a black person might want to escape to a world where they’re a human being. We can understand why you don’t want to be a cashier in the land of Thedas, but you can’t understand why we don’t want to be a servant, backwards freak, or a slave in the same universe?
“They give you little bullshit amounts of money in exchange for your working – wages and so forth – and then they steal all that shit back from you in terms of the way they got this other thing set up – his whole credit gimmick society man, consumer credit, buy shit buy shit on credit, he give you a little bit of shit to cool your ass out and then steal all that shit back with shit called interest – the price of money. Motherfuckers in non-producing, non-existent industries ya know motherfuckers who deal with paper. There’s a cat who would stand up and say to you he’s “in mining”, and he sits in an office man on the hundred and ninety ninth floor in some motherfucking building on Wall Street, and he’s “in mining” and he has paper, certificates, which are embroidered and shit you know, stocks, bonds, debentures, obligations, you know, “he’s in mining”, and he’s sitting up in Wall Street and his fingernails ain’t been dirty in his motherfucking life; he went to Phillips Andover or Exeter, he went to Harvard, he went to Yale, he went to the Wharton School of Business, and “he’s in mining”?
The motherfuckers who deal with intangibles are the motherfuckers who are rewarded in this society. The more abstract and intangible your shit is, come on stocks? What is stock? Stock certificates is evidence of ownership in something that’s real. Ownership. He owns and controls and therefore receives you know the benefit from, that’s what they call profit. He’s fucking with shit in Bolivia, he’s fucking with shit in Chile, he’s Anaconda, he’s United Fruit, he’s “in mining”, he’s in what? He ain’t never in his life produced shit. Investment bankers, stock brokers, insurance man, it’s motherfuckers who don’t do nothing. We see that this whole society man exists and rests upon workers and that this whole motherfucking society controlled by this ruling clique is parasitic, vulturistic, cannibalistic and is sucking and destroying man the lives of motherfucking workers and we have to stop it because it’s evil.”—Ken Cockerel, a communist activist with the League of Revolutionary Black Workers explains capitalism [video of the speech can be found here] (via concretesorrow)
Imagine having braces during the apocalypse. no one can take your braces off. And you just have to accept that you’ll have braces forever.
i want a novel focused around a character with braces during the apocalypse and the entire plot of the story revolves around their search for an orthodontist who is still alive and they sort of accidentally save the world in the process
“Oh rascal children of Gaza. You who constantly disturbed me with your screams under my window. You who filled every morning with rush and chaos. You who broke my vase and stole the lonely flower on my balcony. Come back, and scream as you want and break all the vases. Steal all the flowers. Come back.. Just come back..”—Khaled Juma, a Palestinian poet from Gaza. (via nowinexile)
More than 600 Palestinians are no longer with us in the space of 14 days, 25% of whom were children. May God bless the little darlings and may He grant their parents sabr. (via standwithpalestine)
A bit of advice for friends of depressed/anxious/etc. people (not just me, but anyone):
Sometimes, what we need is to be talked through a situation. Not berated, or told to cheer up, or told it’s “not that bad”… but to be helped through some of the practical considerations that may not always be obvious when we’re freaking out or self-hating.
For example, a friend just helped remind me that I could make oatmeal. When I was freaking out at her about how I didn’t have anything I could eat right away, she helped me go through a list of what I had, and figure out what I could cook at my current spoon level. As a result, I was able to eat and feel a little better.
Another example: Some of you remember how, way back in May 2011, I finally reached the transition-or-die breaking point, which physically manifested as me freezing/trembling in the middle of class in front of everybody. I was fortunate, then, to have a school instructor who helped talk me through the situation and who helped create the beginnings of a plan of action for coming out at school. This then snowballed into coming out at work and getting my name change process started, and I’ve been living as my lady self “full-time” ever since.
Notice how there was no minimizing of the situation, no attempts to tell me that I was “blowing things out of proportion” or whatever. It was more, “Okay, let’s look at the practical situation, and see what we can do.” That sort of help can be invaluable to a person as anxiety-prone/depression-prone as I am.
YES. My coping method was developed out of friends taking this approach with me (and so now I do it to myself) and it helps so much better than “think positive” and other kinds of value judgments… I don’t need your opinion at my crisis point I need some solutions!
Abusive Expectations - Makes impossible demands, requires constant attention, and constantly criticizes.
Aggressing - Name calling, accusing, blames, threatens or gives orders, and often disguised as a judgmental “I know best” or “helping” attitude.
Constant Chaos - Deliberately starts arguments with you or others. May treat you well in front of others, but changes when you’re alone.
Rejecting - Refusing to acknowledge a person’s value, worth or presence. Communicating that he or she is useless or inferior or devaluing his or her thoughts and feelings.
Denying - Denies personal needs (especially when need is greatest) with the intent of causing hurt or as punishment. Uses silent treatment as punishment. Denies certain events happened or things that were said. Denies your perceptions, memory and sanity by disallowing any viewpoints other than their own which causes self-doubt, confusion, and loss of self-esteem.
Degrading - Any behavior that diminishes the identity, worth or dignity of the person such as: name-calling, mocking, teasing, insulting, ridiculing,
Emotional Blackmail - Uses guilt, compassion, or fear to get what he or she wants.
Terrorizing - Inducing intense fear or terror in a person, by threats or coercion.
Invalidation - Attempts to distort your perception of the world by refusing to acknowledge your personal reality. Says that your emotions and perceptions aren’t real and shouldn’t be trusted.
Isolating - Reducing or restricting freedom and normal contact with others.
Corrupting - Convincing a person to accept and engage in illegal activities.
Exploiting - Using a person for advantage or profit.
Minimizing - A less extreme form of denial that trivializes something you’ve expressed as unimportant or inconsequential.
Unpredictable Responses - Gets angry and upset in a situation that would normally not warrant a response. You walk around on eggshells to avoid any unnecessary drama over innocent comments you make. Drastic mood swings and outbursts.
Gaslighting -A form of psychological abuse involving the manipulation of situations or events that cause a person to be confused or to doubt his perceptions and memories. Gaslighting causes victims to constantly second-guess themselves and wonder if they’re losing their minds.
“Most mass murderers do not go from zero to 60. Rodger made escalating assaults on women (splashing coffee on them, attempting to shove them off a ledge) before his killing spree. Both Cho and Justin-Jinich’s murderer harassed women before they killed anyone. When such acts go unnoticed and unpunished — because we expect men to harass women, and it’s not outrageous or even noteworthy when they do — they can become stepping-stones to more conspicuous and less socially acceptable acts of violence.”—
A friend passed this survey along. I haven’t taken it, but she said to prepare to get emotional.
"This study asks questions about experiences of racism, the impact of these experiences, and how you react. We will also ask for some information describing your background which will help us understand who is participating and how their other experiences may relate to their responses. Participation in this study will take about 30-45 minutes. To participate in this study, (1) you must be over 18, (2) understand written English, and (3) identify as a person of color or racial minority.”
“I believe in trans people. I believe in us because we have been honest, at least once, in a way few people on earth have been asked to be. I believe that is what makes us so frightening. That integrity is written all over us. You can see it in the dark. There is no avoiding seeing in us that choice to hold onto the truth even if no-one else would stand with us and do the same. That is enormously threatening. It is no wonder that so many people and communities claim that admitting us among their number might destroy the foundations of everything they know.”—little light, holding on (via kiriamaya)
I watched Snow Piercer. I was thinking, shouldn’t the third class passengers just be grateful that the first class passengers haven’t killed them. They serve no purpose, they don’t even work. Am I a bad person?
Well, that just makes you a capitalist who thinks people should be useful to society…
You can interpret the movie however you want, and that includes sympathizing with the villains, but…
you know who else did no work and served no purpose? THE FIRST CLASS PASSENGERS. All they do is take drugs and go to saunas and raves. And who was using up more resources per person, the first class or the tail? So if you wanted to be ruthlessly efficient with your resources for the sake of survival, wouldn’t it make more sense to kill the first class passengers first?
Wonder why Wilford didn’t think of that? Why wouldn’t this obvious fact occur to a person? Maybe because they were blinded by the ideology that says people who are born rich get to play by a different set of rules than everybody else. Had that idea so ingrained in them that they couldn’t even think to question it. A blindness which is way too prevalent in the real world, and exactly what the movie is there to criticize.
Several other people have reblogged this post adding the exact same facts, and it’s a very valid point. Sadly, it just shows how we are brainwashed, in our capitalist societies, to think everyone’s gotta contribute to society, be useful or be erased. (Everybody struggling to get a job gets that kind of pressure, and I don’t even talk about housewives like me.)
Now, I think it also misses another important point of the movie. We need to destruct the toxic idea that “if people don’t work like prisoners they aren’t exploited”. I am not saying that people should be grateful when they have shitty jobs where they work hard only to be disrespected, but sadly, the idea that the ones who suffer the most are the ones with the bad jobs is so fifty years ago! Nowadays the real problem is unemployment. Nowadays, people who have a job consider themselves “lucky” because that could be worse, and it’s in the neighborhoods with the higher rates of unemployment that things go wrong.
When people feel useless, have no purpose in life, no money, no occupation, no way to feed their family, when they feel completely ignored by the system, this is when they revolt the most. This is where there are riots.
See for example all the mines closing in England in the 80’s. People started to protest, not when they were working their asses off in the mines, but when they were losing that opportunity. It wasn’t much but it was all that they had. Same nowadays in Europe when people fight to keep their jobs in factories. A few decades ago people wanted better jobs, now they just hold on to what they have, even if it’s not great, because the growing unemployment is worse.
Nothing to add here, except to say that on the train, the “valued work” is done by the middle in maintaining the train’s society — the security, the haircutting, the maids, the teachers, etc. This is very different from the work that is actually needed for survival outside the train. Not being “gainfully employed” within the system doesn’t mean you’re not capable outside of the system.
Let’s also consider what role the last cars actually DO provide the society as a whole:
1. Children to run the engine
Who else would STAND to have their children taken from them? When you create an underclass everyone hates, they’re totally ok with exploiting and using those children, and keeping the system running. No one is going to feel too much sympathy, they’ll justify it because those kids don’t deserve to be treated like kids.
(Think a bit about US adult sentencing for Black children. Then prison labor… hmm.)
2. “At least I’m not at the bottom!” satisfaction
People will endure a lot based on fear and insecurity. Fear of being sent to the back makes a lot of folks grateful for their lot - which means the middle cars aren’t going to be starting rebellions to get to the front. Consider the guy making the protein bars - “this is my place, gotta stay here.”
3. A “reason” for the enforcers
Gotta have enforcers to keep anyone from taking the front, but what can you do to justify having them? An oppressed underclass who “deserves” to be beaten at every step of the way allows you to maintain the squad of enforcers, keep them trained in causing harm, and, on top of all of that, keeps those same enforcers busy looking at the bottom rather than looking at the top…
The last cars technically do not have to be anything EXCEPT targets, and that alone allows the train to have someone to hate, someone to fear becoming, someone to justify terrible violent security measures, someone to exploit if ever needed.
"The back works with the front" tells you it was important enough to engineer your society around having a group to hate.
Lately the only “hype” I’ve seen over this issue is being raised by the women who actually breastfeed. MOST people I’ve encountered and talked to could honestly care less if you breastfeed in public. I myself did this on several occasions at the mall, in restaurants, at the park, and never once did anyone say anything negative to me about it. The only comment I got was “Oh, what an adorable baby!” from a sweet little elderly lady.
If you would all just stop posting all these statuses and photos about it, then maybe the chaos would die down and it could actually be seen as “no big deal.” By posting constantly about breastfeeding in public, you’re actually stirring up the issue even more.
If you act like something is not an issue, then people will start to believe that it isn’t an issue. But if you keep MAKING it an issue to be discussed, then people will keep discussing it.
I live in Malaysia, where breastfeeding in public is really a non-issue. No one deeply rooted in Malaysia could care less. None of my Malaysian friends re-post public breastfeeding issues and other than through me, they wouldn’t even have heard of the phrase “normalizing breastfeeding” because over here, it is the norm to look away from a breastfeeding mother.
However, what else is normal in Malaysia, is to stare at people who are less than normal. Big breasts are considered very unusual, and in a land where size B was considered big, I was a size E. I was stared at a lot, even when I was just a young teenager. I had just gotten used to being stared at all the time when my family moved to New York. It was completely mind blowing to me that no one stared at me there. I had become so used to being stared at everywhere in Malaysia, that when I was living in New York, I felt invisible.
What I’m trying to say with this little tale is that different places have different reactions and different behaviours by the people who live there. You may be lucky that the area you live in may have no issue with public breastfeeding, but the tales I’ve read show that there are places out there in this huge world where mummies are accosted with demands to leave restaurants, shops and government buildings for breastfeeding.
It’s for people who live in such areas that discussing public breastfeeding and making it an issue, is necessary, as we’re not all lucky to be able to move away from where we live.
Okay, this is the…super extra sparknotes version of my dissertation on Harry Potter and the ways its worldbuilding is just asking to be shaken to pieces. It’s called:
~*Ten Ways To Irreparably Fuck Up a Civilization: A Harry Potter Rant*~
1.) Put the major base of your economic power—such as a national bank—in the hands of a class you are busy oppressing. Because goblins definitely have forgotten centuries of warfare and specicide anti-goblin sentiment and will totally treat your ancestral gold with the fairness and even-handedness it deserves. Ditto with house elves and your children.
2.) Don’t try to understand or theorize about how your power works. Do not inquire as to how a particular measure—spell, hex, or charm—works. Do not try to test its effects. If a spell builds a house, do not attempt to test the durability of the roof—the roof will have come into existence with the necessary durability for roofs. Do not ask why a perfectly ordinary Latinate word and a stick of wood conjures the Platonic Form of a roof. Have no engineers or philosophers. Make sure no one thinks the phrase “hypothesis.” Make sure no one tests theirs.
3.) Make sure the schooling that you do offer is, essentially, a technical school. Make no attempt to teach students how to write, read, do maths, or think critically, even though those skills may be required. Those who do not arrive with such skills must learn them independently, because helping students with learning disabilities or those who come from difficult home lives is for chumps. Also, make sure to sow the seeds of deep social divides that will persist through your population’s adult life.
…there is no alternative.
4.) Don’t have any institutionalized pre-schooling or post-secondary education. Because everyone worth educating has access to tutors, or parents who have the time, energy, and ability to teach. Do not have institutions for further learning, because there is nothing more to learn. Do no try to understand how your power works.
5.) Allow the government to be the single biggest employer. Small businesses may be tolerated, but private chains, corporations, or conglomerates should not be allowed to operate independently. Make sure that your population gets its news from the government. Dissenting voices that cannot be rendered unemployed can be narratively shamed.
6.) …and then have that government rife with corruption and barely representative. The people in power now should be descendant from the people in power then. They should love their own kind. Trial by jury is unnecessary. Elections are unheard of. Influence talks, and money covers a multitude of sins. Nothing says forgiveness like a bag of galleons and an invitation to the Malfoys’.
7.) Don’t innovate. Your mores should be Victorian and your aesthetic Medieval. “Technology” is a broom, a radio, and an hourglass.
8.) Don’t have any contact beyond the incidental with the civilization literally occupying the same space as yours. Particularly if there is significant crossover in population. In fact, make sure those individuals who emigrate from that civilization cannot return, cannot discuss their new country with friends and family, or use their new-found knowledge to help those friends and family. God forbid they try and help that civilization in turn.
Reduce interest in their world to a laughable hobby. You are the only civilization for them now.
9.) Ensure that all those who do not fall within specific parameters are labeled Other and de facto exiled from your civilization. Particularly squibs and werewolves and other species. An accident of birth implies someone isn’t at fault.
10.) Expect people to quietly stand by. Some of them will. Most of them will. But sooner or later you’ll piss one off, and all the ones who have been afraid to speak out will nod, will join in, and the whole affair will come tumbling down around your ears as that one troublemaker screams to the heavens for justice and knowledge and innovation and truth and light and then my dears
So, I’ve mentioned before that Marietta Edgecombe’s treatment in HP bothers me, and gotten several inbox messages basically asking “Why does it bug you so much?” This answer is probably long-overdue, and like everything I write, will likely be just plain long.
What happened to Marietta again?
Marietta Edgecombe was Cho Chang’s best friend, who Cho cajoled into joining the DA. Marietta’s mother, Madam Edgecombe, worked for the Fudge Ministry, and the knowledge that they were disobeying the Ministry to follow Harry (who Marietta distrusted) eventually got to Marietta, who informed Umbridge about the DA. That allowed the Inquisitorial Squad to break up a DA meeting, capture Harry, and almost force Harry’s expulsion - and it did lead to Dumbledore’s departure from the school.
However, Hermione had jinxed the parchment that DA members had signed when they joined up, and when Marietta broke their code of silence, a jinx came into effect: large purple pustules spelling out “SNEAK” covered Marietta’s face. Those pustules faded a little with time, but permanently disfigured her face: after getting out of the hospital wing, she wears a balaclava for the rest of OotP, and the marks are still vislble even under a thick layer of makeup in HBP.
Marietta is not seen in DH, but in 2007 when JKR was asked about what happened to Marietta and if the scars ever went away, she answered that it faded a little eventually, but still left scars, and punctuated that with “I loathe a traitor!" That implies that Marietta was left permanently scarred by the experience - and not only that, but demonstrates JKR’s explicit approval of the scarring: the perma-scarring is an authorial decision that reflects JKR’s dislike for Marietta and basically holds up the punishment as right and just, something that the author applauds - and that, by extension, we should applaud as well.
JKR and Traitors
I do think that betrayal - particularly betrayal of our heroes - is something that JKR loathes; this may be a part of why Gryffs often try to aggregate Hufflepuff loyalty onto their House traits, because JKR the consummate Gryff values it so highly and deals so harshly with the traitor characters. Characters who are traitors - specifically who betray the heroes of the series - aren’t afforded the sort of moral complexity given to other characters; they’re indelibly marked as bad, not afforded the sympathy given to other complex characters (including those who have betrayed evil characters: Snape is vastly better-developed than Pettigrew, and fandom at large far more sympathetic to the former than the latter.) Pettigrew betrays the Marauders, and is afforded little character development, less real role in the plot, and shunted aside quickly with an unsatisfactory death in DH; Marietta betrays the DA, is permanently scarred, and is generally never afford the sympathy or complexity that she deserves.
Ugh that post has gotten me thinking about fat acceptance in a way I haven’t in years. I’ve read more studies about weight and health than probably any other topic I’ve ever researched. And every time I see someone wail about health I am just like
Did you know that in post-mortem examinations there is zero correlation between weight and levels of arteriosclerosis and related diseases found?
Did you know that people with an overweight BMI have the longest life expectancy, that those with an “ideal” and an “obese” have about the same life expectancy, and that being “underweight” raises mortality rates more than being “morbidly obese”?
Did you know that losing weight and then gaining it back is worse for your heart than remaining at the weight you started consistently?
Did you know that 95% of people who lose weight do gain it back, and there has never been a single documented weight loss program that has been demonstrated to keep the weight off for five years or more in the majority or even a significant minority of people? Like, telling people to lose weight isn’t much use if we don’t know HOW to make that happen.
Like I have read The Obesity Myth by Paul Campos and Rethinking Thin by Gina Kolata and Big Fat Lies by Glenn A Gaesser (Ph.D!) And Fat!So? and several other books that I don’t own and so don’t remember all of their names I spent like four years reading every single study coming out and looking at the methodology and noting which ones had huge holes or terrible methods and which didn’t (the holes were almost always in the pro-weight-loss studies) and like
Big Fat Lies has 27 pages of bibliography. 27 pages worth of scientific citation. The book content itself is only 197 pages. That’s a page of references for every 7 pages of book. Reading the book is just reference after reference and study after study. Most of these doctors (like Linda Bacon, author of Health at Every Size) started out the same way. They wanted to use the scientific method to find a real weight loss program or health solution that worked and could be proven to work, and so studied everything they could about weight and fitness only to find out that we didn’t need weight loss in the first place. That all the studies calling for it were lacking or nonexistent. That weight and underlying metabolic health have very little relation. That the history of our relationship with health and obesity has little basis in fact and a LOT of basis in capitalism, politics, and fashion. No, really, the association between weight and health was first proposed by insurance companies looking for ways to charge people more by claiming risk. They also charged tall and short people more. And people with different skin colors. When they got in trouble for charging people for things they had no control over and had no bearing on their health, they set out to prove that weight was controllable and that fat was unhealthy to make money.
These are also a lot of the same people who went on to invent the President’s fitness program, so if you went to public school you probably already hate them.
Anyway, if you want a place to start reading about the issue, this article is a pretty good launching pad.
"[Kamel] Khalili designed a CRISPR that recognized the beginning and end of HIV’s DNA contribution, and then watched as the enzyme snipped out HIV from the cell’s genome. “I’ve been working with HIV almost since day 1 [of the epidemic] and we have developed a number of molecules that can suppress transcription or diminish replication of the virus. But I have never seen this level or eradication,” he says. “When you remove the viral genes from the chromosomes, basically you convert the cells to their pre-infection state.”
The advantage of the system lies in the fact that CRISPR can recognize viral genes wherever they are – in infected cells that are actively dividing, and in infected cells in which the virus is dormant. Current drug-based strategies can only target cells that are actively dividing and releasing more HIV, which is why they often lead to periods of undetectable virus but then cause levels of HIV to rise again. That’s the case with the Mississippi baby, who was born HIV positive and given powerful anti-HIV drugs hours after birth and appeared to be functionally cured of HIV when the virus couldn’t be detected for nearly four years, but then returned.
Khalili admits that more work needs to be done to validate the strategy, and ensure that it’s safe. But it’s the start, he says, of a potential strategy for eradicating the virus from infected individuals. That may involve excising the virus as well as bombarding it with anti-HIV drugs. “We can get into cells, eradicate the viral genome, and that’s it,” he said.”
Click the link to read the rest.
ALSO. CLICK.HERE. for the paper in PNAS “RNA-directed gene editing specifically eradicates latent and prevents new HIV-1 infection”
A few days ago, I talked to my grandmother in Eritrea about working in the food service industry. Most of the conversation was me trying to rationalize the depraved mechanisms of capitalistic voyeurism in the US, though there really isn’t such a thing.
When she realized that much of the food gets thrown out at the end of the night, she asked why when there are so many people going hungry. I told her a lot of it had to do with discouraging the employees from taking food. “What’s wrong with taking food? Especially if its already been bought and winds up in the trash anyways? These employees have families, don’t they? They could use the food.” she replied. And honestly, how do you respond to surplus of food being tossed as waste to a woman’s whose witnessed people die from famines?
There wasn’t anything I could say to justify it. There was a long silence between us and I said I don’t know, it doesn’t make sense. We ended the conversation with her stating “adikhi com himamey eyu dizekireni, si’ilu yiserikh bizey mikhiyat, bizey misikar, nabra yebulun” which roughly translates to “your country reminds me of my last episode of cancer, causing theft and dispair simply because it can, its entire life dependant on the suffering of others” and that’s probably the most honest way I’ve heard someone refer to the way American capitalistic economics function.
Why single out Israel? Because Israel is the only serial human rights abuser that enjoys consistent and enthusiastic support by all the liberal democracies of the North.
This support gives the Israeli state an impunity that Iran, Sudan, Zimbabwe or Burma, to name but four, do not enjoy because their human rights abuses are all—rightly and however unprincipled—attacked by the major powers.
Israel alone is allowed to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity; it alone is allowed to repeatedly ignore United Nations resolutions without any opposition from northern governments and major institutions.
This is so important. No one is saying Israel is the only state to ever commit human rights abuses, but it is unique in enjoying support for those human rights abuses [from most of powerful states] by painting itself, the oppressor, repeatedly as the victim.
i will literally never understand how white ppl found an entire continent unknown to them and entire cultures unknown to them and proceeded to destroy them like??? ? that just never fails to blow me away
>Implying PoC never did the same thing
Mongol empire no real
Ottoman empire no real
Moors no real
Imperial Japan no real
only feels real
implying any of the above were as impactful, lasting, or pervasive as western imperialism.
and this coming from someone whose home country suffered under japanese imperialism in ww2.
The Mongols, Moors and the Ottomans did not engage in a sustained, prolonged and frankly non-stop attempt to erase, re-engineer and subvert the economies and cultures of their subject peoples into serving Imperial centres of power, often at the expense of the lives and livelihood of said subject peoples, over generations. They would attempt to do it, but fail, because all three of these empires were agrarian empires that simply had hard-set limits on how long they could sustain Imperial ambitions.
Western Imperialism has no such limits, because they stumbled across the industrial revolution, and this allowed them to convert subject nations to nothing more than providing raw materials and wealth to their colonial centers of power. So when their expansion of territory stopped, all they needed to do was consolidate annd convert, and not worry overmuch about stretching themselves too thin.
Imperial Japan was an imitation of Western Imperialism, as is the late Ottoman Empire, and both failed within a hundred years (in Imperial Japan’s case, it failed within less than a generation).
So, yeah. There were POC empires. But nothing, nothing like the scope or the damage that Western Imperialism wrought.
You are putting your responsibility at the feet of marginalized people when you ask for nebulous “permission.” Please stop doing that. It’s not an okay thing to do. It is NOT the responsibility of marginalized people to pat you on the back and tell you that you’re a good person, you’re doing okay, and not to feel bad. Don’t put that on them. NO ONE can give you some kind of magic blanket “okay” on your writing, ESPECIALLY when they’ve never read it.
That’s perhaps what bothers me most… asking people to tell you it’s okay for you to write something when they have absolutely no context or idea of how you write. They don’t know if you’re going to research. They don’t know if you’re going to write stereotypes. The real answer to this question is always going to be I don’t know, it depends on how it’s done.
Last year I ended a brief online friendship with a woman in another state who had clearly become fixated and obsessed with me, making me uncomfortable with the intensity of her attention and the demands she put on my time and energy. After weeks of her blogging constantly about me being her star-crossed soul mate, of having led her on, of her passionate and undying love for me, I snapped and told her with great finality to leave me alone, that the connection she saw between us was a fantasy, that her behaviour was creepy and inappropriate and that I wanted nothing more to do with her.
Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine what would happen next.
Her obsession with me not only grew, but became hostile and vindictive in nature. As she refused to come to terms with my boundaries, she gradually recharacterised me from a perfect symbolic figure of all she desired into a malignant villain who had deliberately set out to make her fall in love with me only to discard her cruelly. Already showing signs of delusion, she diagnosed me as being a “narcissistic sociopath” determined to destroy her.
She became similarly fixated on a woman living in the same state as her and began claiming this woman was me, in disguise to hunt her down and kill her. She started harassing this woman and I daily, threatening us with various forms of actions if “I” did not leave the state. All efforts to explain that we were two separate people who had nothing to do with each other, and that I was carrying on my life in my own state, fell on deaf ears. She continued to insist this woman was me in disguise and engaged in constant, defamatory claims about me, including that I was out to kill her.
At the same time she was harassing a friend of mine, claiming she was harbouring me in her home while I waited to kill her. As my friend lived in the same state and feared further action, she persued and successfully obtained an intervention (restraining) order.
This infuriated the stalker who escalated her attacks and claims against me, vexatiously reporting me to the taxation office, harassing me online, continuing to make false and defamatory accusations, attempting to sabotage my business (and therefore source of income) and contacting my family to harass them as well. She published my phone number and other highly personal information and obtained my residential address through underhanded means. She also continued to harass the woman she claims to believe is me in disguise and after this woman went public on twitter to expose the harassment she had been subjected to, this stalker filed for an intervention order against me - the basis of which she claims are the (understandable) actions of this other woman objecting to being harassed.
This means I now have to obtain legal counsel and travel to another state to attend a court date.
I am self-employed in the sex industry, a student with debts I am struggling to catch up on and continue to pay off, with severe depression who is still recovering from a nervous breakdown I had a couple of years ago. I am attempting to rebuild my life and gain qualifications that will enable me to persue employment (in beauty therapy) that will bring balance to my life. I have PTSD that makes it very difficult for me to work in my current job without being triggered and further traumatised (a fact my stalker has also used against me in psychological attacks). This stalker’s actions have caused strife between me and my family members, which has been devastating to me. For a very long time I have resisted persuing legal action as I am aware this woman is mentally ill and I also believe the justice system is flawed and oppressive, but I cannot allow a false order against me with no basis go forth when it has the potential to affect my future.
The emotional distress caused to me by this woman’s harassment and abuse has been extreme. Anxiety, turmoil, insomnia, emotional instability, intense fear and even paranoia are some of the consquences I have been living with. At times I have been left unable to work and have even feared she has set up friends of hers to pose as clients, as she has done with the other woman she claims is me. I am also concerned her constant diatribes that I am a psychopath will be accessed by potential future employers and affect my ability to find steady work.
I am not this woman’s only victim. She has targeted several people, mainly women and many of whom are marginalised in various ways, in the last year and subjected them to various forms of harassment and abuse. It seems that I serve as the proxy for all her rage and resentment and so am the one she focuses her most concentrated efforts on.
I am asking for donations to help me cover the cost of travelling to the state where the court date will be held and of paying lawyer’s fees. My income is inconsistent and highly dependent on my psychological ability to work, my study commitments and whether the industry is in flux so it is concentrated on paying my rent and utilities and covering my debts. I have nothing extra left over to account for these unexpected and unjust costs I am facing and am imploring those of you out there who might be able to afford $5 here and there to consider helping me in this time of need.
I have stated a goal of $3000 which I hope will be sufficient and in the instance there is money left over it will be donated to a women’s shelter in either Victoria or NSW I will select after investigation to identify those that are inclusive of trans women. Receipts will be provided.
If you are able to donate, please accept my enormous thanks and gratitude. I am hopeful that opposing this vexatious order will discourage this woman in her harassment of her other victims and ultimately be beneficial for us all. Thank you so much for your support.
This is super, super important, you guys. Please please read this and reblog it and consider donating if you can. This person is a dear friend, and dealing with a person whose attitude and tactics are similar to what I have experienced. I don’t want to see a friend go under financially because of the impact of abuse and stalking.
This person’s abuser has not only subjected them to abuse and stalking, but has harassed me and others online over the course of the past year. I know they have other victims because I’ve seen them do the same thing they did to my friend to other people online, but they seem to be focusing all their energy on my friend right now.
I worry that by reblogging this I will give this stalker the information to find this blog and campaign and make things worse for my friend, because I know they read my blog. But it’s so important that this money gets raised.
My parents are both pastors and once I was fucking this one dude whose dad was the pastor of the rival church and he whispered ‘talk biblical to me’ so i started reciting Psalms 23 and we ended up getting into a competition of who could recite the most bible versus before they cummed
When women began transitioning from homemade or seamstress-made clothing to ready-to-wear, sizing was problematic from the start. Back then, many women’s sizes were centered around the hourglass ideal of a 36-inch bust, 26-inch waist and 36-inch hips. One frustrated department store executive told The New York Times in 1927, “I don’t know who the mythical size 36 is who forms the basis of sizing, but average, tall, short, thin and plump women come into a department store and the 36 size fits none of them.”
Oh this makes so much sense now:
Finally in the late 1930s, the U.S. government decided to get scientific about women’s clothing sizes and undertook the first, large-scale study of female body measurements. Employees from the U.S. Home Economics Bureau took 59 different measurements from 15,000 different women around the country. However, the data set ultimately used by the National Bureau of Standards was all-white, as measurements from participating women of color were discarded, and skewed thin since the volunteers tended to be poorer and thus, at that time, likelier to be underweight. Moreover, in the late 1940s, measurements from military women were added to the data pool, further distorting the results toward the thinnest and fittest women in the nation. In 1983, the Commerce Department finally tossed out the standardized women’s clothing sizes.