it is totally okay to be hurt and tired and fed up with the american schooling system but i need you to understand that we need to be better about loudly and routinely defending public education.
yes, many teachers suck, many schools utterly suck. i also got bullied and was absolutely not given the right support for my needs. i am not defending public education because it was kind to me. i am defending it because it needs to exist.
right-wing republicans do not want an educated population. they want kids to be homeschooled or in private school. there is a huge religious undertone to this.
the most common argument is that despite high costs, the "result" is not "good" enough. they point to failing schools as proof that public education is just never going to work out. there will be arguments made here that you actually agree with: that teachers can be bullies, that we taught online for 2 years and still charged the same amount of tuition, that we have no recourse for students to actually have agency or a voice, and that schools are now unsafe for kids due to risk of illness and gun violence.
these are all placing the blame in a fraudulent way, one intended to get your parents to homeschool you. the less kids in a school, the less federally-awarded funding for that school, the less any school succeeds. they will not mention the fact it is their legislation that takes away important funding opportunities, that teachers are living at or below the poverty line, that buildings are not kept up to code, that administration is overpaid and forces specific curriculums, that corporations like (my personal enemy) Pearson Education control certain classroom goals because teachers can't afford other options. they pretend to be ignorant of the gun violence and say "oh just get a gun" - but these are the same people who will be sending their child to a private school with a bulletproof backpack. they don't care if your kid dies, though. they "don't believe" in covid, but they did get their kid vaccinated, because of course they did.
it is a closed loop. conservative parents hear the fearmongering and remove children from the system. frequently these parents are also deeply religious. the kids are raised without access to other media & learn to parrot their parents. you have now created a new generation of conservatives. additionally, one of the parents/caregivers must stay home and homeschool the children, usually for free. i will give you 1 guess which parent tends to stay home to homeschool the children. these parents are encouraged to have many, many children. those children are most likely not getting access to safe sex ed.
we might laugh at fox news suggesting teachers are forcing children to use kitty litter but: first of all, there is kitty litter in the classroom. it's part of an emergency kit in case children are locked in due to a shooter. so that's fucking dystopian, and the fact they've completely reimagined the scenario to somehow make the teachers look bad when it's instead a fucking huge symbol of our failure as a country to protect our children.... it feels a little intentional.
secondly: don't just dismiss the situation. because, yeah, obviously, no teacher is encouraging kids to be a catboy. but the actual undertone that fox news is trying to sew is an outright distrust of teachers and of public education. they rely on the dehumanization of trans people as a common touchstone to hide the fact they're pushing two agendas at once. (which is ironic. because the thing they accuse teachers of. is pushing. an agenda.)
whenever someone tells you they want you to read less, you should be suspicious of that. when someone tries to separate you and your education, you should be suspicious of that. i don't even like incel rhetoric nor would i want my kids exposed to it - but i would not take away my child's (age-appropriate) access to the internet. i would just provide more educational materials, not less. the difference here is that i believe we can resolve ignorance with knowledge; whereas conservatives believe that ignorance is bliss.
they misappropriate funding and demonize teachers. they pull the same trick each time - the same thing we are seeing with anti-trans rhetoric. they do not want you to have access to safe sex ed, so they act horrified, claim sex ed teaches you how to thrust deep, claim that we have no idea what "age-appropriate" means. since the mid-nineties, the united states has spent at least 2 billion dollars on abstinence-only education, even though to quote the above link: "a preponderance of studies has found no effect of abstinence education at reducing adolescent pregnancy". conservatives want you to think less of any person struggling with addiction so they can continue their racist "war on drugs", so they spend up to $750 million dollars a year on the DARE program which has absolutely no effect. acting like teachers "must" be "grooming" children is just the same thing - so they can demand that funding either goes to their causes or the funding doesn't "exist" ("i'm not paying for our kids to learn that thing!")
and they want you to feel uncaring about this. they are aware that you will hate some parts of your school experience. pretty much everyone does. they want to lean into the parts that you hate so that you don't put up a fight about it when they take it away for not being "good enough."
i know i maybe sound like a conspiracy theorist. but truly. truly. it is beneficial for conservatives to reduce your faith in the american public schooling system.
one of the explicitly stated campaign promises of the conservative party: to axe the Department of Education in 2024.
i know we are all tired and burnt out and there is so much else wrong with their entire platform. but maybe just - pay attention to this one.
5K notes
·
View notes
Luke should have killed Vader in ROTJ. He should have cut off Vader's hand then said "you betrayed your friends, the Jedi who raised you. You broke Obi-Wan's heart and caused him to live in exile. You killed my sister's family and killed my mother and my aunt and uncle. And now you're going to pay the price, Anakin." And then Luke kills him.
First off, every single one of those statements is inaccurate.
Anakin’s “friends” betrayed him first. He never had any real friends, except Kitster, who he left on Tatooine years ago. Obi-Wan betrayed him and turned on him. Obi-Wan did, in fact, turn Padme against him. Ahsoka abandoned him. The moment Yoda heard what happened to Anakin, he orders Obi-Wan to kill him. That was everyone Anakin cared about, except Shmi, who was dead, and Rex, who was gone.
And Obi-Wan broke his own heart by being a dumb*** and not helping Anakin or even trying to talk him down when he had the chance. And he lived in exile because of Sidious. Look up who the Emperor was, please..
None of what happened to Leia had anything to do with Vader. That all had to with Tarkin. Padme died from childbirth, literally nothing to Vader either, and even if it did, it’s not like LUke would even know that. And Beru and Owen also had nothing to do with Vader at all.
Luckily, unlike every other single person in Anakin’s so-called family (and most of the blind fandom), Luke actually cared about him.
The point of Star Wars is redemption, not “so-called” consequences that people who like to play god think others should have gone through. And what the kriff is wrong with someone who *wants* other people to suffer, anyway?
Luke was not a monster, and if he’d done that? He would have been worse than Vader ever was.
79 notes
·
View notes
i had a dream last night that bob odenkirk (saul goodman) and bo burnham turned out to be the same person. like. okay. let me explain.
i was talking to bob odenkirk - why, i can't tell you. we were having a conversation, and i jokingly said "hey, saul" and he responded, indignantly, and with an oddly placed rage about him, "saul? who's saul?"
i felt embarrassment creep up on me - how i dare i make a joke pertaining to a character he played! celebrities hate that (apparently)! but then it all started clicking.
i don't exactly know why it started clicking. maybe it was because i was thinking about names and parallels, but my eyes widened as i thought "bob odenkirk.. bo burnham..."
within a matter of seconds, it all made sense. the names sounded so similar (according to myself); i was talking to bo burnhamkirk, and then the world turned upside down.
suddenly, he looks pale as a ghost. a tv turns on. it's blaring the headline:
and i literally cannot remember anything else past this.
63 notes
·
View notes
have you seen the biphobia going around about eris? its super fucking gross
Sorry, forgot about this ask in the middle of all the other stuff that's been going on. If I understand it correctly, this is about the ongoing discourse about the ship between Eris and Drifter. I'll go a bit in depth about this because it's been gaining traction recently.
I've definitely seen some biphobic sentiments, yeah. People are really weird when it comes to bisexuality and this fandom is not any different, unfortunately.
The thing to remember, however, is that there is no canon for Eris' sexuality. There is a lot of speculation, but she has never been confirmed as any sexuality. I personally believe she must be some form of wlw, due to the sheer amount of her close relationships with women; Ikora, Mara, Sai Mota, Eriana-3, the Awoken in general (who are a matriarchal society) and so on.
A post with some details on this + links to other posts about it. Not linked here, but this has been further explored in the Witch Queen Collector's Edition book where Eris explicitly says she felt an "emotional debt" to Mara, that they had some tensions in their relationship that "remained private," and that when Eris was wounded, Mara "treated the wounds in what I interpolate was a moment of reconciliation and perhaps genuine tenderness between them."
I find it hard to believe that Eris is not wlw. However, that could mean many things. She could be a lesbian, she could be bisexual/pansexual, she could be ace or aro or both with a preference for women, or biromantic or... You get the idea. We ultimately have no idea and we're only left with speculation.
More under for length:
Some people insist that she must be a lesbian and only a lesbian and that any other interpretation is wrong. I disagree with this! There are so many other options that people should be allowed to explore and we shouldn't insist that she is canonically and objectively one thing when we don't really know. Until there is an unambiguous canonical proof for her sexuality, everyone should be allowed to HC her as they please, as long as they're not entirely erasing her closeness with women.
The same applies for people insisting that she is canonically bisexual. We don't know! I see her as bisexual (mostly because she's my blorbo and I see my blorbos as bisexual). I don't have any hard proof that she is and neither does anyone else. Canon doesn't say either way.
While some people tend to have a visceral reaction to the possibility of her being bi which I would definitely classify as some form of biphobia, there's a difference between people just being biphobic and people expressing their disdain for how Eris' in-game interactions are now largely revolving around men.
As I've said above, Eris has always had incredibly important and close relationships with women. It doesn't matter which type of a relationship they are (platonic, romantic, queerplatonic). Eris has always been heavily surrounded with other women and relied on mostly women with her interactions. Some people are reasonably upset that this has been slightly pushed aside in favour of Eris interacting more with Drifter and Crow and Zavala, rather than women.
She wasn't present at all in Season of the Lost which Bungie explained as them being limited with how many characters can be active in a given season. This is reasonable to me, someone will have to be cut. I do think that cutting Eris from Lost was a mistake however, and that they should've at least kept some of her content in lore, if not in gameplay and cutscenes. It was one of the most crucial turning points that involved her long-time antagonist (Savathun), her long-time friend (Mara) and the people she feels closely connected with (the Awoken).
In Witch Queen, Eris was there, but her appearance was fairly limited and didn't involve a lot of interactions with Ikora, which is odd. Mara showed up again and had no interactions with Eris, again. Eris was mostly interacting with Zavala and Crow and, finally, Drifter who by far gets the most screentime with Eris and has been getting it since Arrivals.
From what I've seen, people are mostly upset about this sudden shift with Eris being mostly paired up with men in lore and gameplay, while her ties to women are either cut entirely, reduced significantly or kept for special lore pieces and then not brought up again for an extended period of time. I've not seen many instances of people just vehemently disagreeing that Eris should never be with a man and that it's impossible for her to be bisexual. Even if she is bisexual, her relationships with women should still matter and not be pushed aside.
Another thing that people have an issue with (me included) is the way some of her lore with Drifter is presented. I don't mind if the plan is for them to be romantically involved. I would be more than happy if my two faves were both bi and were together. The problem I (and others) have is that there's been significant backtracking in the lore between Eris and Drifter since they first interacted in Arrivals.
In Arrivals, they first meet when Drifter is ready to pack and leave the system due to the Pyramids arriving. He always said that it was what he would do when the Darkness comes knocking again. He has always been adamant about being ready to skip town when the main threat returns. Drifter is notoriously afraid of everything and traumatised. He was 100% ready to leave. Until Eris came to ask for his help.
The two sit. They speak. They listen. Linkages forged in Light and Dark of traded secrets as the Derelict hangs in orbit around the Earth. Pacts are made. Soon, there is only the silence of knowing left between them.
They connect. Deeply. They share incomprehensible traumas that have been going on for centuries and they're both people others distrust because of how close they are to Darkness, despite their best efforts to use that closeness to help.
Obviously, since it's their first time working together, things weren't smooth. They sometimes annoyed each other. Contact event dialogues from Arrivals and Prophecy dialogues often had them bickering over their different methods and approach to the threat; Eris is serious, Drifter tries to deflect with humor. It annoys her that he's joking, it annoys him that she is constantly doom and gloom. This makes sense, since it's their first time working together. It takes time to adjust.
In Beyond Light, they work together again and things are smoother between them. They still have their differences, but Eris admits that he is a good ally, a valuable member of the team, that his perspective brings a lot to the table and that they both understand the need for balance. Again, this makes sense. They've worked together for months at this point.
We don't hear from them a lot in the meantime, but we do get some minor hints. For example, Eris seems to have picked up on Drifter's habit to end sentences with "Trust." This would imply that they kept on communicating and that they've been friendly.
It's very strange when they get the spotlight again in Season of the Haunted and they are... bickering again. I thought they moved past that for the most part? It's been 2 years! In the Eidolon Pursuant set, Eris is uncharacteristically distrustful of Drifter, a man whose help she bet on to save the system from both Savathun's interferences and the Darkness itself. She even believed that Drifter would feed her rotted screebs, for some reason, despite the fact that they must've shared meals while working together on Europa. She is surprised when he tells her he wouldn't do that to her and that he is a good cook. She would've reasonably known this?
In this season, they've been bickering again on comms in a very childish way. They keep calling each other derogatory nicknames, despite knowing the other doesn't like them. Their relationship tends to jump all over the place from deep respect to childish bickering and back. It can be jarring. In comparison with the first lore I linked (Whispering Slab), it's so incredibly odd to hear Drifter mocking Eris for "calling him" when she is literally just speaking on a public communication.
Drifter simply isn't like this? And it shows in the lore tab from the seasonal lore book, titled "TRUST" as a callback to Drifter's catchphrase which Eris picked up on. He respects and trusts Eris. He is comfortable around her and minor jokes at his expense (and at hers!) are fine. He respects her space and her orders. He also thought of her and her expertise first to help them with relics.
I appreciate this type of an interaction that makes sense with how long they've been working together. It also makes sense with their personalities; Drifter really isn't the type to continue aggravating someone he respects and Eris isn't the one to tolerate someone being openly aggravating to her. She very clearly disliked Cayde for how he acted with her and she never backed down from her disdain. Drifter is similar in that he tends to use (and overuse) humor to deflect from his pain and trauma, but he doesn't do so when the other person is someone he likes and respects. He is especially not like that in private settings.
A lot of people dislike the way Drifter and Eris sometimes act like the classic trope of a toxic m/f relationship where they have to tease and hate each other because they're actually in love. It's immature and goes against their characterisation. I completely understand people who dislike the ship because this dynamic is being presented in lore sometimes and very often in fandom. That dislike is not inherently biphobic and it has merits especially when lore also cuts all of Eris' relationships with women in order to put Drifter in the center and have him being mean to her. It just makes no sense that Drifter would do this and that Eris would tolerate it. And it also makes no sense that she would ignore her close connections with Ikora or Mara in order to spend time with a man who is mean to her.
However, sometimes people go too far with it and instead of criticising these aspects, they simply criticise the idea of Eris liking a man. Even if their reasons are all I've mentioned above, the way a critique is framed can make a difference between that critique being reasonable or biphobic. Eris can like whoever she wants and her relationships with women aren't less valuable if she likes a man as well.
I definitely wanted to make a comprehensive post about the issue because some of the criticisms of this relationship are valid, especially when that relationship comes at the expense of us not getting more lore on a much more established friendships and relationships in general that Eris has with female characters. I think people wouldn't mind the focus on her and Drifter in the lore if we also got some new lore of her and Mara or Ikora.
It's important to understand what aspect of this people have a problem with, because for the most part, it's NOT simply about Eris possibly being bisexual. But also, people should be careful with how they phrase these criticisms because it can definitely be read as biphobia.
157 notes
·
View notes
@laozuspo @aemiron-main and anyone else talking lately about Henry/El/Brenner memory alteration shenanigans and lab footage, have you talked about the HNL Control Room teaser already?
they titled this video HNL Control Room so as not to tell us too much too early, but of course we know now that this is NINA and not a control room.
and no, that video doesn't show the same lab footage we see El watching. this is just artistic license for the sake of a teaser and not necessarily actual footage she would've been shown, but if we do take an in-universe view of this just for shiggles, the implications of the footage in that teaser are WACK.
I'd say that only one of these clips could actually be filmed from one of the wall mounted surveillance cameras (the one at 0:22). most of the rest are close-ups someone shot of blood splatters, the door handle (a curious choice) etc.
but the tasty part is that some of this footage is impossible according to the timeline we're shown -
the blood splatters are there, but the bodies aren't. well, this must just be footage from after the massacre, after they removed the bodies?
that's the obvious explanation, except for this clip:
the dead kid whose blood I assume that is, isn't there, nor is Two who should be over on the right. but if this after the massacre, that mirror should be broken. this shot could only have been obtained DURING the massacre.
and I don't see any surveillance cameras in the rainbow room that aren't mounted in high corners, which is not the angle of that footage. those two clips I screenshotted would be filmed more or less from each others' vantage points. someone filmed these on tripods like the one that's sometimes visible in the rainbow room.
or maybe not that specific one, because here it is, but one of the other ones like it (and yes those wall camera lights are both on it's just too small to see)
now again irl this is just to not spoil the massacre for us long before season 4 came out by leaving the corpses in these shots. but in-universe? bruh.
29 notes
·
View notes