#this why we need more historic education as a community | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

becausegoodheroesdeservekidneys · 7 months

Note

I realise you're HE, but any thoughts on how high school level education should be run/changed/etc? I'd love to know your views!

Oh sure, plenty, but they're not particularly informed lol

Well; Wales is actually massively and fundamentally changing secondary education atm, but we won't be getting students from it until the year after next, I think, so no real comment on effectiveness yet - but it's very interesting. They're getting rid of isolated subjects in favour of broad umbrella areas, as I understand it? So there's now Science and Technology (Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Computing, and all the various DT subjects like Woodwork, Electronics, Cookery, etc), Maths and Numeracy, Humanities (History, Geography, Ethics, Religion), Languages Literacy and Communication, and Health and Wellbeing (actually maybe Cookery comes under this one now? Dunno.) And there's a sixth to do with arts but I can't remember what it's called. But it includes Art, Drama, Media Studies, etc.

And then the idea is that a class will learn about a given topic at a time (I don't know for how long, so let's say six weeks), and this will be taught in each of those six umbrellas but via their own methods. So like... I dunno, let's say the Tudors:

That's fairly straightforward for Humanities, but in addition to giving you the historical facts you'd also explore historic trade routes and natural resources of the time and how they related to the politics (geography), the religious make up of the country and how THAT related to the politics (religion), etc.

Maths and Numeracy might explore how to use statistics to analyse Tudor era population or trade data.

Science and Tech could look at disease outbreaks and virology, or technological advancements and how they worked and get students to build one, or get students to construct a Tudor-era town using computer software

Languages can study plays from the era (Shakespeare), look at linguistic development, or use historical events as talking points to practice using vocab in conversations

Health and Wellbeing can explore stressors and challenges of the average Medieval peasant and how they overcame them, or play some popular Tudor sport or game, or make food to Tudor recipes, etc

The Arts one (god I cannot remember the name) can look at art history of the period, fashions, perform plays, etc

So everyone is still teaching the skills and knowledge of their subject areas, they're just united by one big case study. It apparently allows for far more integrated teaching, too, where two previously discrete subjects can join forces on a project.

All of which seems pretty good, on the whole, but also rife with issues if everyone isn't careful, so we'll see how it shakes out over the next few years.

From my own experiences of school though. Jesus. Something definitely needed to happen, fuck me.

What I should have learned in Textiles:

How to use a sewing machine

How to sew by hand to mend a tear

How to darn a hole

How to hem, dart, take in, and let out clothes

How to sew from a pattern

What I actually learned in Textiles:

How to use a sewing machine on its most basic setting

How to phone in creating a hand puppet out of felt because gluing was easier than sewing

How to badly sew an extremely makeshift and shit bag out of scrap fabric that you in no way want to then use

How to lose all interest in Textiles because it was useless and uninteresting

Like that is a VITAL skillset-imparting subject, and they fucked it, lads, they completely fucked it. Why did they never set us the task of buying a cheap shirt from a charity shop that we then amended in class? That would have been so useful.

Games and PE! Fucking hell! Here's what I should have learned:

How to stretch my body safely to target specific muscle groups, and in particular, how to cultivate a daily stretching routine I enjoyed and wanted to do

How to find a physical activity active enough to get me out of breath that I genuinely enjoyed, so that I wanted to continue it, e.g. salsa dancing or rope climbing or ice skating or hill climbing or assault courses or fucking anything at all

How to build my body up to doing particular activities safely and sustainably

How to find a physical activity to do on wet, cold, rainy days that would still be fun and I would still enjoy

Here's what I actually learned:

Physical activity is always uncomfortable and miserable and sometimes even painful

If you aren't enjoying running around in the wind and rain instead of the indoor gym The Problem Is You. Start Enjoying It.

Wanting to stay warm and dry and comfortable is a punishable choice.

You are only permitted to do physical activity in clothes that make you feel profoundly exposed and uncomfortable (a gym skirt and gym knickers in my school. Cycling shorts got you detention. Don't get me started on jogging bottoms.) Again, if you do not enjoy this, The Problem Is You. Start Enjoying It.

There are only three activity options. If you don't enjoy any of them, physical activity is not for you.

You should be able to Just Do physical exercise, without any training to build you up to it. If you can't and it hurts, this is because you're Bad At PE.

You will only be shown Once

Physical activity is only ever a team sport that you aren't good enough to be willingly picked for

LIKE WHAT THE FUCK

And you know what, LET'S round off with Food Technology/Cookery. Because I remember the things I was asked to make in FT. As a little baby Year 7, I still vividly remember two of the things we made.

Angel Delight. Easy, you might say! A simple treat, you might think! Easing the children into food prep, I hear you cry! But no, because the theme of the year was healthy eating, and so we were to add fruit to our Angel Delight. Any flavour Angel Delight, any fruit. Off you go. I don't know if any of you have encountered fruit, Tumblrs, but it famously has faintly acidic juice. This will prevent the Angel Delight from setting within the one hour lesson, no matter how well you mixed the pudding, or how quickly you got it into the fridge. It will result in soggy gross lumps of oxidising fruit in sloppy liquid pudding. Lesson learned: fruit makes food worse.

Cake. Easyish, you might say! A little harder than the Angel Delight but good training, you might think! A fairly straightforward process with a child-friendly food at the end, I hear you cry! But no, because the theme of the year was still healthy eating, so the teachers made it into an experiment; make four small cakes. One with sugar, one with sweetener, one with apple, and one with carrot. Then taste them and rank them in order. Off you go. I don't know if any of you have ever tried eating sugarless carrot cake, Tumblrs, but I have, and I can tell you categorically that it really puts the "Did you know" into the phrase "Did you know that fructose and sucrose are not actually equivalents of each other in a culinary setting?" It was rancid. It was disgusting. It was vile. It made me hate carrot cake for the next 12 years, in case my mouth had to go through that ordeal again. I'm still highly suspicious of the stuff even now. To (I assume) the surprise of fuck-damned no one, we unanimously put them in the order of sugar, sweetener, apple, carrot. Lesson learned: FRUIT MAKES FOOD WORSE AND CARROTS ARE ACTIVELY DISGUSTING

What possessed them?! No idea. Fucking hell.

Anyway this is getting long and I am still ill-informed. Peace out.

#asks #education

240 notes · View notes

sparksinthenight · 2 months

Text

Have a Heart Day 2024

This is a letter I wrote to the Canadian Government for Have a Heart Day 2024. I am asking the government to stop discriminating against First Nations children, to stop giving them inadequate services, education, and support, to stop treating them unequally compared to non-Indigenous children, and to stop taking them away from their loving families. I really hope that you read my letter and that you either copy paste it or write your own, and email the Canadian government yourself.

Hello. Our names are ____ and we are people from various parts of so-called Canada. We are writing to you to ask that you ensure the government stops discriminating against First Nations children, by signing a Final Settlement Agreement on Reform that meets and goes beyond the Agreement in Principle on Reform, and by following the Spirit Bear Plan and enshrining it into law.

First Nations children and families on reserves are being discriminated against in many ways. Most communities do not receive the same amount of and access to social services that non-Indigenous people receive. Most communities do not receive as good quality social services as non-Indigenous people. While there has been progress, Jordan's Principle, which is about meeting children's needs, is still not being properly applied. Most children don't have access to an equal quality of education as children off reserves, and many children receive very inadequate education services. And, very horrifyingly, children are being separated from families who love them and want to take care of them. This all needs to stop. We need to make, follow, and enforce laws that stop this discrimination.

First of all, let's talk about the fact that social services are inadequate on most reserves. As you know, the federal government funds services on reserves that the provincial or municipal governments fund elsewhere. The government generally funds services on reserves far less than services are funded off reserves. These include education, water infrastructure, housing, financial assistance, transportation, basic infrastructure, utilities, healthcare, mental healthcare, addiction support, job training, childcare, youth programs, cultural programs, recreation programs, libraries, child welfare, and more. These services are human rights and should be well-funded for everyone. It's not fair that non-Indigenous people have better services to better meet more of their fundamental human rights and basic needs while people on reserves don't.

The fact that people don't have access to the services they need is part of why there are high levels of poverty on reserves. Ongoing and historical racism, trauma, and discrimination have caused a lot of people on reserves to be poor. And this lack of services is part of that discrimination that is causing people to be poor. If people had the healthcare, education, housing, childcare, mental healthcare, addiction support, cultural support, job training, basic food and water, disability support, and other things they needed, they would be able to have the peace of mind, mental strength, knowledge, support, and resources necessary to pull themselves and their communities out of poverty. Also, since there is so much poverty on reserves, these communities need even more services to help meet their basic needs and human rights.

Services delivered need to be good and effective for the communities they are delivered in. This means that services need to meet each community's different needs. Because each community has different needs due to different connectivity to the outside world, poverty levels, local prices, etc. Service providers need to first see what services people need and how to best deliver them, then work out how much money is needed. Money should be the last thing considered. What each person, family, and community needs should be the first thing considered. And of course, services must all be culturally sensitive and relevant.

And part of why services are so low quality, as well as part of why so much discrimination and cruelty happens, is because Indigenous Services Canada has biases in its systems and people, and must be reformed. Indigenous Services Canada doesn't listen to experts about what communities need and how things should be done. They don't try to do their actual job, which is ensuring good services are provided to Indigenous people. They need to be reformed and communities need to lead their own service provision.

The Spirit Bear plan must be properly implemented and properly followed. It must be enshrined in law and the law must be completely enforced. The Spirit Bear Plan is the following:

"Spirit Bear calls on:

CANADA to immediately comply with all rulings by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ordering it to immediately cease its discriminatory funding of First Nations child and family services. The order further requires Canada to fully and properly implement Jordan's Principle (www.jordansprinciple.ca).

PARLIAMENT to ask the Parliamentary Budget Officer to publicly cost out the shortfalls in all federally funded public services provided to First Nations children, youth and families (education, health, water, child welfare, etc.) and propose solutions to fix it.

GOVERNMENT to consult with First Nations to co-create a holistic Spirit Bear Plan to end all of the inequalities (with dates and confirmed investments) in a short period of time sensitive to children's best interests, development and distinct community needs.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS providing services to First Nations children and families to undergo a thorough and independent 360° evaluation to identify any ongoing discriminatory ideologies, policies or practices and address them. These evaluation must be publicly available.

ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS including those at a senior level, to receive mandatory training to identify and address government ideology, policies and practices that fetter the implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's Calls to Action." This information is from the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society.

Another huge factor contributing to the inequality faced by many First Nations children is the fact that Jordan's Principle isn't being properly implemented.

The federal government, not the provincial government, typically pays for the services on reserves. But many times disputes arise about who should pay for a service, and the children don't get the services non-Indigenous children would get as a matter of course. Jordan's Principle is named after Jordan River Anderson, a young disabled boy from Norway House Cree Nation who passed away in the hospital after the provincial government and the federal government couldn't decide which one should pay the costs of his healthcare. The Principle states that if a First Nations child needs something for their well-being, they need to be given that service first and payment disputes should get addressed later. This includes medical, psychological, educational, cultural, disability, and basic needs support. Non-Indigenous children get these supports without having to ask because they have access to many more and better services. These supports are human rights that everyone deserves, especially children going through generational and contemporary trauma.

Jordan's Principle is not being properly implemented, and this is hurting kids. Though there has been much progress, Jordan's Principle requests, which are for things children need, are often denied, which goes against children's rights. Indigenous Services Canada, which runs the Jordan's Principle approval process, doesn't have an adequate complaints mechanism to hold to account its provision of the Principle. The government isn't making data available on whether they're meeting children's needs. Many children have delays in getting help, including time-sensitive medical, psychological, educational, and development help.

The application process, though easier than before, is still difficult and many families don't have adequate help and guidance through it. As well, most doctors don't know which children are eligible for Jordan's Principle supports, 40% don't know which services are covered, and ⅓ don't know how to access funding through it.

Long term reform is needed. An Agreement in Principle on long term reform has been drafted by the government and First Nations advocates, and it looks promising. It talks about increasing funding for Jordan's Principle services and trying to root out prejudice in the system. But the Agreement in Principle is not legally binding. It's not something the government has to follow, or is following, but rather what they claim they might do eventually. Negotiations for the creation of a Final Settlement Agreement based on the Agreement in Principle were underway but have been on standstill for months. A Final Settlement Agreement would be legally binding and would if done right increase the chances of achieving change.

The school system is also horribly unfair. Many First Nations schools on reserves get less funding than schools off reserve, with an average of 30% less funding per school. They don't have adequate funding for computers, software, technology, sports equipment, field trips, labs, lab equipment, extracurriculars, cultural learning, job training, and the list goes on. They don't even have enough money to have adequate heating, good quality infrastructure, adequate and safe ventilation, enough textbooks, and reasonable class sizes. Many schools don't have a safe and appropriate learning environment. All children, including First Nations children, deserve good education.

There is no clear plan to eliminate education and employment gaps.

The government claims it's negotiating with Indigenous groups but there's no evidence that they're actually doing anything to lower inequality. They also claim that they're funding education on reserves equally but all the evidence says they're not. You need to actually, genuinely fund education on reserves adequately and equitably, and make sure that children on reserves are actually receiving a good and equal and equitable quality of education.

A lot of communities don't have self-determination over their own education systems, meaning they can't teach about the history of their people and other important cultural knowledge. First Nations children need and deserve to learn about their culture, about the ecosystems their people are connected to and how to interact with those ecosystems, their history, their language, their traditions. And if communities have self-determination over their own education systems, and they have adequate resources and funding from the government, they'll be able to teach these things so that children grow up proud of who they are.

And what is perhaps the most horrible thing is that so many children are being separated from families who love them. This is the most traumatic thing that can happen to a child, and all children deserve and need to be with the families who love them.

At the height of residential schools, many children were separated from their families. Currently, 3 times as many children are in foster care, away from their families. One tenth of First Nations children have been in foster care. Children in foster care experience higher rates of physical and sexual abuse and do not get as much cultural immersion. Not to mention, even in the best circumstances, they're away from their families.

Most Indigenous children in foster care have loving families that try their best to take care of them, who they want and need deeply. But their families are poor or mentally ill or disabled, or have other factors that make it hard for them to meet their children's needs. Preventative support like financial, housing, health, and mental health aid could keep many families together. If child and family service agencies have the resources and the empathy to help families with what they need so that families stay together, that would be a great relief. Child and family service agencies need adequate money, infrastructure, and personnel to give families real help instead of taking children away. Most agencies do not have these. Programs that help the wider community such as healthcare, financial aid, housing services, mental healthcare, parenting classes, food support, community programs, youth programs, cultural programs, pregnancy support, and others would greatly decrease the number of children taken from their homes. Most communities do not have adequate levels of these programs.

Child and family service agencies need to be completely reformed, and should be led by First Nations communities themselves. Most child and family service agencies are not. This is especially important since there is bias against First Nations people in many agencies. Some communities are getting the opportunities to start their own child and family service agencies, but most communities do not have this opportunity. Canada needs binding laws to ensure child and family service agencies are led by First Nations communities and are based in the unique culture of each community, which they often aren't. Each community has unique needs depending on local prices, remoteness, poverty levels, and other factors. The way child and family services should be funded is by first seeing what services the children truly need, then seeing how to best deliver them, then determining how much money will be needed.

There is a promising Agreement in Principle on Reform, created by the government and First Nations advocates. It discusses increasing funding for child welfare services and trying to root out prejudice in the system. However this is not a legally binding agreement that the government has to follow. It's just something that they claim they'll maybe do in the future. A Final Settlement Agreement based on the Agreement in Principle would be legally binding. It would, if done right, enact more funding and reform. But negotiations for this have been on pause for months. Canada needs to implement evidence-based solutions to keep kids with their families. This means creating a legally binding and well-enforced Final Settlement Agreement on Reform that meets and goes beyond the Agreement in Principle on Reform.

Some communities are trying a new funding model for child and family services that may give more funding, allowing them to do more preventative services instead of taking children away. However, the results of this new funding model are not clear yet, and most communities do not have the opportunity to be funded by it. And there is no guarantee that the new funding model will be applied to all communities if it indeed does work. There is no guarantee that enough funding for prevention services will be given to all communities, whether or not the new funding model works.

The government often promises to create reform or adequately fund things, but they don't follow through on those promises. If the government does make progress, safeguards need to be in place to stop them from backsliding.

So here are our asks for you:

-Implement the Spirit Bear plan and adequately fund all social services on reserves.

-Make sure all services are available de facto just like they are off reserve.

-Fund cultural services and make sure all services are culturally-rooted.

-Eliminate all discrimination and bias in service providers.

-Listen to experts such as doctors and teachers, the community, and community-led service providers.

-Allow and help First Nations communities to lead their own social services rooted in their own cultural values.

-Keep funding flexible and adaptable to changing needs.

-Have adequate accountability measures for all service providers.

-Make a binding law to adequately fund all social services and have communities lead social service provision.

-Create a binding law to ensure that once you start adequately funding social services you don't stop.

-In a reasonable timeframe, reach a Final Settlement Agreement on Long-Term Reform that meets and goes beyond the Agreement in Principle.

-Make sure all Jordan's Principle requests in the best interests of children are accepted.

-Give presumptive approval for Jordan's Principle requests under $250.

-Support organizations and communities already providing Jordan's Principle services.

-Accept urgent requests within 12 hours and non urgent requests within 48 hours.

-Don't require more than one document from a professional or elder for making requests.

-Make data available on Jordan's Principle provision effectiveness.

-Make sure all supports are given in a timely manner without delays.

-Make it easy and convenient for families and professionals to make Jordan's Principle requests.

-Fund schools on reserves as much as schools off reserve. This includes funding for computers, libraries, software, teacher training, special education, education research, language programs, cultural programs, mental health support, support for kids with special needs, extracurriculars, ventilation, heating, mold removal, vocation training for students, and more.

-Make sure all schools have the resources, funding, and support necessary to teach culture.

-Make a clear joint strategy to eliminate the education and employment gap.

-Make sure all school staff are non-discriminatory.

-Make sure communities have self-determination to create culturally rooted education.

-Adequately fund child and family services on reserves, and make sure they can hire enough people and have good infrastructure.

-Stop discrimination within child and family service agencies.

-Allow and help all First Nations communities to lead and run their own child and family service agencies that are based on their cultural values.

-Enact evidence based solutions to keep families together.

-Don't take children from families that love them.

-Have and fund adequate preventative services so families can take care of their children and no child is taken away.

-Keep funding for child and family services flexible and responsive to each community's needs, and listen to communities to learn what their needs are.

-Have adequate accountability in child and family services so that any underfunding, discrimination, or failure is stopped and remedied.

-Family support needs to start at or even before pregnancy.

-Fund culturally-based healing of people who have been harmed and are being harmed by the government's discrimination.

———

Find your MP here: https://www.ourcommons.ca/en/members

justin.trudeau(at)parl.gc.ca- Prime Minister Trudeau

chrystia.freeland(at)parl.gc.ca- Deputy Prime Minister Freeland

patty.hajdu(at)parl.gc.ca- Minister of Indigenous Services

gary.anand(at)parl.gc.ca - Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations

47 notes · View notes

shuinami · 8 months

Text

Part 2: Why is the accent? Where and when does Hobie come from? Part 1: Who, What (London Accents) | Part 3: How (Writing Tips)

In this section, we'll touch on racism since the 70s, black Londoner youth culture and how punk has historically interacted with those things.

To begin, let’s answer the question of what the hell all us black people are doing here in the U.K. 😂

Long story short, after World War II, the U.K. invited subjects of the empire over, in need of help rebuilding the place and doing essential work after getting bombed and stuff. There was further incentive on the subjects’ side to come as many of their men had been sent off for the war but were out of work and not properly compensated upon their return, leading to a poor economy and many people hoping for better in the ‘mother country’. Caribbean people, mostly Jamaicans, came over from then right through the 60s but were not welcomed and treated as British as many of them thought they might be… cause, you know, racism.

In 1962, 1968, 1971 and 1981, legislation was passed that made it incredibly difficult for black Caribbeans to come over, even to this day, which led to the migration of black people shifting to predominantly Africans, mostly West Africans, in the 80s, who would come for education and work purposes mostly. (For context, in the 2020s, there are more African people than Caribbean people in the U.K.). In the 70s and 90s, East Africans fleeing conflict have also immigrated en masse, although the numbers were quite a bit smaller than the West African and black Caribbean diaspora.

[not an expansive breakdown of all ethnicities, I just wanted to talk about the most populous black nationalities for the general gist of where black British life really got on a roll]

So, onto life as a black person in the U.K.

It’s important to remember that the U.K. was racist as fuck AND did not have Jim Crow laws or a history of relegating certain cities or neighbourhoods to ethnic minorities because, by the time we had been invited, there were not so many of us living in England for such laws to be deemed necessary (by racists).

Living literally side by side, often in the same building, with people who wanted to see them brutalized had a big impact on how black British people navigated life back then and has residual cultural effects on how we behave to this day.

One thing that stood out to me was the line where Hobie says he has “a laugh at the pub with the mandem”. As many of you will know, the pub is a large part of general British culture as the main drinking scene. Until more recently, you couldn’t just go and buy alcohol from the supermarket or whatever like you can now, so people had to go to the pub for a drink. Additionally, during times when getting clean water was unreliable due to cholera outbreaks, a drink from the pub was safer than drinking water.

It’s also important to know that, unlike clubs, many pubs sell food and are family-friendly, so while it’s not likely for a little kid to be bouncing to go the pub because it’s just basically like a restaurant to them, it’s a place that a child can be used to going to.

Not only do pubs sell food, but pubs also are places that are mostly used to watch football, as well as play pool, participate in pub quizzes (competitive general knowledge pop quizzes done in teams) and generally be out late to sit and talk.

That being said, as I mentioned before, how black people navigate where we live is different to how white people do.

Whilst many black people will go to the pub with their work colleagues or with their mixed friend groups, pubs generally have never been a haunt for black adolescents.

Instead, black drinking culture is more associated with dance and music, i.e. house parties, clubs (particularly clubs or club nights where music popular amongst the black community is played and, in older times, basement boozers) and lounges. Unlike white counterparts, most black kids will not have grown up going to the pub or around people who went and would not be used to going until they got invited out, likely by workmates.

To this day, although racism has chilled out so much since the mid-20th century, a lot of younger people actually still have a latent fear of facing racism from white football hooligan types and drunk, older white people in pubs. If you went to a pub, you typically wouldn’t see many young black people in there, if any.

The epitome of this mindset was on display during the last World Cup, during which Gen Z black U.K. TikTok was filled with half-jokes about the brutality they would face sitting in the pub to watch an England game if a black team member were to miss a kick or otherwise make a mistake. It was something we joked about in real life too and there was a rumour that went around - which many of us believed to be true - that two black guys had been thrown in the Thames because the black players had missed the penalty kicks they took.

It was just a rumour, however, people did take to racially abusing the players online and, whilst it wasn’t true, you can see what the general attitude towards pubs tends to be and why it’s not a hotspot for black youth.

There are U.K. pubs that historically have had more black patronage in black communities but there’s only a few and they’re not really a thing in London.

Knowing that, it’s not to say that no young black people frequent pubs, but it means that it says something about Hobie that he does (or his world, which we’ll talk about later). What it says exactly is up to your headcanon, but it’s worth noting that it’s not typical for a black teenager in London to hang out at the pub, even if they are rebellious and not concerned by the drinking age.

So you may be thinking, damn, why do pubs have such a reputation? What happened that meant that - to this day - there’s such a divide?

While the U.K. was always racist and was unwelcoming to those who arrived during the Windrush period, it continued to get worse going into the 70s. The increasing popularity of the fascistic political party called the ‘National Front’ saw the rise of ‘the immigrants are taking our jobs’ rhetoric used to appeal to the white working class that persists, to a less extreme, today, such as with the political party UKIP, as well as the English Defense League (EDL), both of which have taken on a more Islamophobic angle than the focused and explicit anti-black & anti-browness of the National Front. The National Front’s supporters would chant and sing stuff like “We’re gonna send the blacks back”.

In daily life, black kids had to deal with shameless racism, bullying and violence from their white peers. There was a ‘sus’ law implemented, which essentially made it so that police could (and very much did) stop and arrest any black person they saw on the street that they felt was ““““suspected person””””, which included unprovable and outrageously ridiculous bullshit like being suspected of ‘loitering with the intent to steal’ (so basically, if you’re black and outside, you were - and still are, especially if you’re young - likely to be suspected of this). As mentioned earlier, there were people who would watch games and get drunk in the pub, then go out into the streets on a destructive rampage would also take those opportunities of chaos to physically assault black and brown people.

All of this was on top of institutional racism and micro-aggressions like we have today but turned up to 10. Minorities didn’t feel safe going around their own city alone for fear of getting mobbed or having rocks thrown at them. Even in their own homes, racists were putting literal shit and bombs in their letterboxes. The popularity of the National Front saw a rise in Nazism - an especially wild expression of racism, considering the Nazis had bombed the fuck out of London in WW2, which was the reason the U.K. went crying to the subjects for help in the first place.

So, naturally, ethnic Londoners tended to craft and operate in their own spaces when it came to leisure, more attuned to the cultures from their family’s countries of origin as well as the kinds where they were just generally more accepted for who they are. Though no longer out of necessity for safety, this aspect of Black British culture persists today, to a lesser extent though, and latent anxieties about acts of extreme racism still remain in the collective subconscious, even though most young people today will have never experienced such extremes.

Just for clarity, this is not to say black people are afraid of white people in general, I’m not sure that could even have been said in the 70s, since there were also plenty of non-racist (aka normal) people too. Back then, the culture was probably a lot more gatekept than it has been for the past few decades, but I’m trying to explain why black British culture and black British life is a different experience to being white British, it’s not only experiencing racism, but it’s also that we just do different stuff cause we historically didn’t feel welcome at their figurative tables and thus did our own thing mostly. It’s why you still get friend groups that are predominantly black despite everyone’s families likely coming from different countries with different cultures, because we relate in terms of black British culture and not feeling especially understood amongst white counterparts. But if white people make us feel like they are down with us, we’re down with them, as one would hope lol.

Speaking of down white people, another huge part of Hobie’s character is that he’s a punk, of course.

So, not gonna lie to you guys, due to the things I just stated about how black people had to navigate the world and craft their own spaces in order to feel comfortable and safe, the punk scene (as we would think of it) has never been a thing that was popular amongst black British people. It’s a predominantly white scene and during the 70s was not unaffected by rising Nazism. To this day, there are still Nazi punks and what we call dirtbag leftists, so you can imagine, at the time, though there were and still are more non-racist white punks, there were enough Nazis that a. it’s not something that seemed welcoming to black people and b. non-racist White punks in the 70s felt that the Nazi problem was bad enough that they needed to do something big about it, which we’ll get onto.

Because we’re not a monolith, of course, there were black punks such as Poly Styrene, the lead singer of X-Ray Spex, and Basement 5, a punk-reggae band (remember this), but other than that, I haven’t been able to find documentation of black punk life in particular, nor have I been able to get any personal accounts from family. Punk is a small-ish scene to begin with, so you can imagine that the black people who participated are very few. Here, I’m not trying to say that few black people enjoyed listening to the music as part of their taste, I’m pretty sure a lot of young people would have liked the music but not necessarily been active in the scene/culture in the way that white counterparts were.

Again, the fact that Hobie is a full-out punk as a black teen says something about him or his world; what in particular, is totally up to interpretation and headcanon, but understand that it’s another unique behaviour.

A similar thing that did include black people was ‘skinhead’ culture, something that emerged from and celebrated the working class, especially Jamaican people, in the 1960s, but it was co-opted by ‘punk’ and white people, then drifted away from its associations with and relevance amongst black people and became most popular amongst Nazis in the 80s, associated with the ‘British Movement’. Most people will think of racist white football hooligan types when they think of skinheads nowadays, even though in reality, for both punks and skinheads, not all people in these subcultures are racist/fascist.

As I mentioned earlier, because minorities were living side by side with working-class white people, a lot of stuff that wasn’t kind of gatekeepy (i.e. super black) has always been at risk of being yanked from us and has historically been done by literal Nazis and I’m sure this plays a part in alternative scenes that stray very far from the cultures we’re raised in not being the most popular amongst us.

Nonetheless, non-racist punks and black people agreed on a lot of core points about classism/capitalism and the need to stomp out racism, which led to white punks starting the Rock Against Racism (RAR) organisation, which held concerts across the country with the intention of bringing people together to take a stand against racism. If you’re able to, I recommend watching the documentary about it called White Riot (2019), which whilst it does include some black interviewees, focuses on the white punks’ side of things and the racism of the time, as opposed to black life. Still worth the watch :)

Other than punk rock, you know what other acts were invited to play at these RAR concerts?

Black musicians who played funk and reggae were also invited. Even though their music taste was different, the message was the same. Additionally, it might surprise non-British people to hear but even white British people have long loved themselves some reggae, hence Bob Marley’s popularity here.

Reggae is a genre that is often used to speak on politics and social issues, it’s why Rastafarians love it and make such music. So, whilst the punk-reggae fusion of Basement 5 might sound strange today when reggae is not as popular as it once was, it makes total sense why. You can also see references to the London punk scene in the 70s (the time he was living in London) in Bob Marley’s song “Punky Reggae Party”.

I mention this to emphasise how the blackness of black British people, even in white space, has not typically proven to give way, that to be punk or believe in such values is not to relinquish all traces of black culture. I also say this to say, as I’ve said in a previous post bouncing off of Daniel Kaluuya’s thoughts on ‘punk’, that people who are adamant Hobie would not listen to genres of music that are popular with or created by predominantly black people alongside the more typical punk rock give off strange vibes. There’s no precedent for a black person to totally give up that part of them that they would’ve grown up with just because they’ve solidified a political view. Of course, some people are less into it than others, as I said earlier, black people are not a monolith, but given all this context, I’m begging people to not post things like ‘Hobie would never listen to [insert black genre here] because he’s a punk! Other people’s headcanons/playlists are stupid and they’re punk posers!’.

You can believe he only listens to genres of rock, and that’s fine, but stop telling black people that their headcanons where they project their more black tastes onto Hobie are inaccurate because they aren’t and it’s very strange to gatekeep interpretations of a black character from blackness in that way.

If you do want to know some genres popular amongst or pioneered by black British people, most of which popped off in the 90s, look to grime (hip hop, electronic), garage (electronic), drum n bass (electronic), jungle (electronic), U.K. drill (hip hop), afroswing (hip hop, r&b), reggae, dancehall (hip hop, reggae), hip hop, funk and r&b. I’d say pop since it’s popular amongst all ethnicities lol but, since Hobie is a punk, you’re gonna wanna exchange that for rock and indie, though I think it’s also fair to think there’s a few pop songs that Hobie would like, since being an anarcho-communist doesn’t mean you can’t have a little fun, idk. Headcanons and stuff are not really what I’m here to share or enforce. Plus, of course, a lot of these genres are anachronistic but, at the same time, I’m pretty sure most people’s playlists feature more modern songs anyway, hell, even the song selected as Hobie’s intro is from 2011.

And none of this is not to downplay Hobie’s love of rock genres either.

I did make a playlist for myself, if anyone wants it or recommendations you can drop an ask 🤓

In the past few years, there’s been a noticeable growth of alternative life in London black youth culture, notably the roller-skating scene, as well as more people participating in more classic takes on alternative culture like goths, punks, etc. and, of course, black nerd culture has been popping since the late 90s. The black people participating in these alternative cultures aren’t relinquishing their blackness, putting hip-hop in the bin and whatnot - people can be multi-faceted.

What I hope you take away from this is that Hobie is a unique and nuanced character, he’s not a typical representation of any of the things he is, which is personally why I love him so much. I also hope you understand that being a black punk in the U.K., before more recent times, would have been a different thing to being a white punk because, not only are you participating in a counter-culture, you’re going outside the safety net and norms of black British culture which has been positioned as inherently counter-cultural anyways and is one you can never hide your associations with or come out of. It says a lot about him, it comes down to headcanon what, but it’s important to recognise that these aspects of him are not a given but things that would have been purposeful developments or huge moments of self-discovery in his life.

Headcanons are something that throws somewhat of a spanner into the works. Everything I’ve said is historically accurate but we also don’t know that Earth-138’s New London would reflect all these aspects of our Earth’s London. Perhaps 138 is written in a race-blind kind of way or, not coming from black British culture, the writers may not envision the world authentically from our point of view and might be unaware of how it’s different; maybe the execs would not allow them to tap into the racist aspect of Nazism and have the writers keep it vague for marketability's sake; hell, maybe the date on the mugshot was just an Easter egg and not a canon-accurate date, who knows?

On top of that, if you headcanon Hobie as a transracial adoptee (meaning adopted by people of another race) or that he was orphaned at a very young age or otherwise not enculturated and socialised as a black boy, maybe none of this applies.

From the current slang to the casting of Daniel Kaluuya, it seems clear to me that, in tandem with the retro vibe, Hobie has been designed to also evoke more contemporary ideas of blackness so the full picture of what the writers have in mind is anyone’s guess at this point.

That being said, I feel like those conclusions would all take some stretching and reaching to come to. I’m not here to tell you what you can and cannot interpret or write, but I’m just trying to give some information so you can write more accurately and understand Hobie and Black Londoner life better.

So, now you understand where we’re coming from, I think you’re ready for the writing advice 😎

#atsv fanfiction #hobie brown #spider punk #black british #across the spiderverse #shui fic #shuinami

129 notes · View notes

meraki-yao · 3 months

Note

Is this a safe place? I sort of want to get something off my chest, but I have to do it anon because I’m scared. I’m a straight girl and a huge rwrb fan, and thus also a big fan of TZP and Nick. Lately I’m feeling more and more alienated in most of the fandom and I’m afraid I’m the problem? It’s just all this talk about topping and bottoming and what that means for how the characters are perceived that I absolutely do not get? Is it empowering in some way I’m not getting, because if not the feminist in me is sort of appalled.

It’s more or less the idea that bottoming is a little humiliating in a way that needs to be made jokes about that is bothering me. Like the bottom is always a little pathetic or desperate (like how women have historically been portrayed), and we should snicker when the top (or anyone) publicly «calls them out» for bottoming? Obviously not everyone does this but I see it more and more? And when it was just in fics and art I kept my mouth shut because I think that should be a free space, but now I see it in how the actors are talked about too. Like Alex is the top so TZP is made out to be hypermasculine and Henry was the bottom so Nick is either babied or made fun of? It’s bad for both imo. Why can’t tzp be babygirl sometimes and the focus be on his soft sides? All I see is talk about his body and how everyone wants him to top them. And then there’s Nick and how people are saying they are uncomfortable watching him act as a top in M&G, saying he will always be a bottom and that he is a slut etc. If it was an actress or female characters getting that treatment I would riot. And I guess I am a bit now in my cowardly anon way. Am I alone in feeling frustrated about this? Is it bad that I am? Please help me understand if I’m in the wrong.

Thank you for reaching out to me. As long as you’re respectful and not hurtful, you’re welcome here.

Actually, I’ve kind of wanted to write an essay on gay sex and the perception of gender in same-sex couples for a while now! So this might sound kind of academic, bear with me.

Preface: I identify as a straight cis girl, but I’ve been consuming both western and Asian queer media, both fiction and real person for years. This is my understanding of the matter, and I’m trying to be as sensitive and empathetic as I can be, but please note at the end of the day, I am not directly part of the queer community, therefore there may be certain things I miss, or a queer person will tell you otherwise. Also literally all my knowledge of sex comes from the internet, because Chinese culture literally does not talk about this at all. I gave my sister the talk instead of our parents. So please take what I say with a pinch of salt.

Also gonna talk about sex in an academic manner, but it’s still sex, so here’s your nsfw warning!

Ok here we go:

The power dynamic in sex position is fundamentally biological: the penetrator controls the pace and intensity of the act, thus is the active participant; the penetrated is in turn the passive. This is just the mechanics of the act: The penetrated, be it the woman in a straight couple or the bottom in a gay couple is put in the more vulnerable position, therefore the top, as the active participant is perceive as having more power, while the bottom as the passive participant is perceived as having less power.

And there are historical records of this perception: in ancient Greece, there was a common romantic dynamic called pederasty, a romantic and sexual relationship between an older man (the erastes/ to love) who acts as the active, dominant participant, aka the top, and a younger boy/ a teenager (the eromenos/ beloved) who acts as the passive, submissive participant, aka the bottom. It is speculated that this is the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus. This practice was understood as educative, as a means for the older man to teach the younger “how to be more manly as to grow up into a man”. THAT BEING SAID BY TODAY’S STANDARDS THIS IS PEDOPHILA AND DEFINITELY NOT OKAY. On top of that, the perception of being gay in ancient Rome is “it’s okay if you’re gay, as long as you’re the top”. My point is this power imbalance when it comes to same-sex relationships has existed for a very, very long time.

But the thing is a lot of things have advanced in the past centuries, and the perception of sex and gender is one of them.

So firstly in terms of sex, people are much more flexible in terms of the power dynamics, which is where terms like “switch” (can be either top or bottom), “power bottom” (the penetrated controls the pace and intensity of the act) , “service top” (the penetrator focused on their partner’s needs and wishes instead of their own) and the whole BDSM category (which I’m personally not informed about or interested in). So I would say we’re mostly past the point of humiliating bottoms or perceiving bottoms as inherently weak, and use bottom more in terms of the mechanics.

That being said, the power being more balanced does not immediately take away the gender perception of the dynamic.

Since when comparing a gay couple’s sex act with a straight couple’s sex act, the woman has to be in a penetrated position as per biology and anatomy (at least traditionally speaking), the association drawn between the bottom and the woman becomes easy to make. In fact in China, all bottoms, regardless of gender/sexuality, are referred to with female terms, like “wife”, “princess”, “queen” etc. So bottoms tend to be feminized, or at least viewed as more effeminate. Again, this has changed and made more flexible/free in modern times, but this trend is still present.

But when it comes to applying the terms on the boys, something involved is also the audience’s own perception and understanding of gender representation. “Babygirl” is more referring to the “cute” kind of attractiveness than actually babying him, which with given material, tends to apply more to the perception and presentation of Nick than Taylor. That being said I have seen Taylor/Alex being referred to babygirl as well. It’s a little rare but it’s present. I wouldn’t really say Taylor’s hypermasculine either, but in relatively, his style and manners lean more towards the masculine side of the spectrum. But again it’s a matter of perception. Are the gendered terms used on the boys affected by the dynamic of their characters? To some degree, yes. But it’s also sometimes a genuine commentary on their own style as themselves.

As for Geroge, I personally haven’t seen those comments, but the problem with the comments lies in associating George with Nick as an individual and Henry as an individual: as in, they’re not treating George as George, they’re treating George as Nick, which might be why they have such comments. That being said, this is a piece of media, so each to their own.

I think the last thing I’m gonna say to end this is that please remember that this is all subjective perception. If you see something different, then that’s just what you see. Try seeing someone else’s perspective, and if you tried and it didn’t work, then let it be. You’re not in the wrong, it’s ok that you’re frustrated, but at least I don’t think the situation is as harmful as you might see it to be. These types of comments often are throwaway thoughts, so there’s also the question on how serious a comment is.

Hope this helped! Feel free to shoot me another ask if you still have questions.

#rwrb #red white and royal blue #rwrb movie #taylor zakhar perez #nicholas galitzine #alex claremont diaz #henry fox mountchristen windsor #henry hanover stuart fox #firstprince #rwrb thoughts #meraki essay #anon ask #answered

23 notes · View notes

zenithabovemarshland · 3 months

Text

Replying to this awesome post by @corvoidea on Pluto in Aquarius

corvi says:.

It is almost as though there was a massive focus and near-obsession in reflecting on home, family, the motherland, etc. and you see that reflected in the rise of Hollywood culture in the 1920s. Especially because the USA's birth chart has a Cancer Stellium in the 7th house. Of course, this hyper-focus on family and home in the United States also led to extreme issues in other parts of the world such as the rise of Hitler in Germany, Stalin in the Soviet Union, Benito Mussolini in Italy, etc. But relating it to Pluto in Capricorn - I think the current transit through the 1st house is breaking down a lot of those stories and bringing to light a lot of the not-so-great things that were happening. In the old days of Hollywood, as well as currently with the abuse of child stars (children = Cancer), as well as women and the exploitation they endured under other executives.

I just shared the reply where @luciddownloading wrote about the opposite sign getting Pluto-ed too, which feels really applicable in this convo. Pluto moving through the 1H-7H axis is a story of "good guys" and "bad guys", "me vs you", which would have started back with the terrorism fears in Pluto Sagittarius. So Pluto through 1H needs a "you", a "bad guy", an "other" to play out the story.

Now through the 2H, which will continue with Pluto Aquarius, the story is "ME, who DESERVES THIS" versus "YOU, the THIEVING BEAST". Does kind of make me think of the American Revolution last Pluto Capricorn.

I think a lot about the 1H and 2H. In the birth charts of individuals, when I talk to them about it, I feel like planets in the 1H almost don't even seem real to them. It's like they don't notice them, they're so innate to their experiences. But people notice what's in their 2H. It's a very personal, intense place. (Has to be; it's opposite the 8H.)

I also have this thing where I feel like "women", as a "class", is a 2H house. Like I personally feel like you can use derived houses to make the 2H the 1H of "women's lives" in society. (Also cause historically women "are" "property".) (I think it could be considered the same for any "subordinate" or subculture beneath the dominant culture.) I started thinking about this to try to have an answer for the popular thing online about how girlhood is monstrosity. This way, a woman's derived childhood house would be seen through the eyes of the first chart as 6H, of illness. And how what is a relationship to the first chart isn't equal, because it's to an 8H derived house, of sacrifice, mutilation, and control. A woman's (derived) 3H, of education and growing community, is the 4H of the dominant culture, and a woman's (derived) "roots" (4H), is the house of sex (5H) to the dominant culture.

Anyway, that you brought up the USA chart reminded me of this. Because looking at the birth chart of USA and Pluto transit goes through the 1H, a place that is so intrinsic to the nation's being it feels we can't touch or understand it. Then goes through the second house, that feels actionable but also savage, because 2H opposes 8H. With Pluto in Aquarius, the brutality of questions of value and possession will persist, as it has in history.

(I love that you brought up the USA chart. I didn't even think about it lol)

corvi also says:

I think Pluto in Aquarius is going to either: - Cause a cult-like mentality in terms of fame & celebrity, specifically in politics. - Cause people to push ordinary people into the spotlight whose work is geared toward the greater-good.

Yeah! I think this is what I was trying to get around to with my first examples, particularly with Gypsy Rose! I need to do more research about all that, though, cause I don't actually know anything about what she's up to today.

There is definitely a "death" going on right now when it comes to "traditional" celebrities and people's perception of who becomes famous and why, just as you mentioned. I think a lot of people are also slowly becoming more and more frustrated with hyper-vanity pushed by families like the Kardashians.

Which is ironic, I think, considering the Aquarius-Leo axis we're entering! I read through replies and what they've posted on their own blogs about Pluto Aquarius and some people believe social media's gonna (in my melodramatic words) implode and die. I kind of lean that way, too, just because of all the frustration that's been building with social media and technology, and the inklings of people quitting social media, opting for "dumb phones", etc.

People have also split about whether glamour and vapidity will become more popular, or less. I think the World Astrology Report on Youtube did a really cool video on Pluto in Aquarius worth thinking about, about the terms within Aquarius and how they played out 260 years ago. (I can't link the video cause I can't find it; he's made so many Pluto Aquarius videos I don't remember which one it was.) If I remember right, I think maybe around the Venus term, glamour may peak, and after that it may crash.

I hope Pluto in Aquarius causes a collective shift away from celebrities and causes people to be more focused on activists, writers, journalists, etc. who are fighting for human rights and the wellbeing of everyone. Of course, I could be completely wrong. Pluto in Aquarius could very well cause celebrities to become desperate to hold onto any influence they have and peddle in a very dystopian and strange kind of cult-like following via social media in ways we do not expect. It could also cause those who are hungry for fame and self-centered to resort to manipulation (Pluto) utilizing other forms of technology (Aquarius) to keep their power and influence (Pluto again) over the collective and communities (Aquarius).

I've been thinking about this, too. I don't know how "complete" Pluto's upsets are, y'know? I think in individual charts, Pluto transits may end up more "complete" by the end of its wanderings. But in mundane astrology I wonder if Pluto just digs everything up and says "deal with it" while it continues on its way. Our current stories aren't ending, just shifting. And how we're digging those things up is shifting. I wonder if the way we approach things might just be more Aquarian--which is still Saturnian--but it's still just the same old stuff. Just like what you said in the last paragraph.

What if AI is the enemy that pulls up the mirror? What if things really do go Terminator? Wasn't it critical thinking--a value of Capricorn--that dug the grave of Capricorn governance? How does it slide to activism, Truth, and righteousness?

We're already kind of seeing something happen, with Gaza, and the emphasis on Truth, and access to Truth Telling.

But at the least, as we saw in Pluto-Capricorn, the values of meritocracy and government were obliterated, and obliterated by its own example/history of merit and governing. At the very least, I think we can expect the Aquarian value of Truth to be obliterated by remembering our history just the same.

corvi also says:

I do think we are going to see a significant shift in the belief of who gets to be and power and why. But I think it will be a global shift that we are probably not ready for. ... I am a little worried about potential civil conflict and revolutions abroad. Despite the way Americans and other Westerners romanticize revolutions - revolutions are not "amazing" or empowering at all. They are violent, painful, and the people who suffer the most are civilians caught in the crossfire. And the power vacuum left behind can cause unimaginable suffering, as we saw with the Yugoslav Wars - which was led by many Pluto in Leo individuals who carried out genocide and other violence against civilians. I am hoping for the best. I would love to see more Carnation Revolutions & Velvet Revolutions and other non-violent overthrows of horrible people in power. My biggest hope for Pluto in Aquarius is true Democracy and freedom for everyone.

Absolutely. I trimmed your blurbs here, but I agree with the hope for non-violence. I wonder if freedom and non-violence is possible in a Saturnian sign, or an Air sign, and if it can be so with USA's Gemini Return coming up. (The Astrology Podcast has many episodes about the USA Uranus return in Gemini historically coinciding with war, like this one.)

Something I think about a lot is the atom bomb. That was Pluto in Leo, too. I thought it was important that Venus Rx in Leo this past summer saw the Oppenheimer movie for that reason. Maybe the story of that being fresh in mind can alter something in us.

I took a sociology of war class. Sociologists love to classify patterns in levels of society. I don't remember the whole thing, but there's one theory that ideological societies like ours--ones that ally themselves based on ideology as opposed to something like nationalism--has isolationist war. They are push-a-button wars; nuclear wars; wars that spur proxy wars in "less developed" areas to "play" their war for them. Seems very Aquariuan. Seems very Uranus in Gemini to me. But with everything in sociology, we gotta stop being so gloomy and hope for the best anyway lmao or our souls will die.

The Astrology Podcast also seems to be anticipating a change to democracy. The very idea of it scares me because I don't know anything else, but I do think that's a happier resolution than war. But I wonder if we won't see a "new democracy" until Pluto in Pisces, because I think Uranus in Gemini is going to be a big player. And wherever Neptune could be in all that, too.

#pluto in aquarius #astrology community #love u love u corvi xo

24 notes · View notes

incorrectmahabharatquotes · 3 months

Note

I know the history of the word Hindu. I was simply using it to give you clarity.

You've made your perspective clear. Deflection and whataboutism are your weapons.

You are so quick to play your dalit card everywhere, but you forget that dalits were among the persecuted Hindus too. I never denied that the caste system is evil and needs to be gone completely. Why bring it up in a conversation where it wasn't even an issue?

You're so far into your leftie liberal mode that you don't even realise that you're here because of the efforts of fellow Hindus' efforts to abolish the caste system and bring in reservations to compensate for the oppression. It's still a work in progress but there's definitely progress.

Moreover, had this nation been running on the same values as Islamic rulers of the past who broke our temples, you'd be killed just for being a queer or being a Hindu who didn't convert.

Just look at the minorities in other Islamic countries.

But you won't, I know. Because hating fellow Hindus and denying history is more important for you. It's the cool thing to do these days.

One day you'll learn, hopefully soon. I wish you luck. 🙏

How dare you say Babasaheb Ambedkar was a Hindu when he died a Buddhist and swore to not die a Hindu. How dare you insist that the real people who worked towards societal change for women, Dalit and Adivasi people, like Jyotiba Phule and Savitribai Phule, did so at 0 cost of their 'Hindu' society. Savitribai Phule did not have shit flung at her every day by brahmins for you to say 'Hindu' as though they weren't the ones who opposed her attempt to educate girls.

How dare you, lastly, insist that Dalits are ALSO Hindu, as though they haven't been dehumanised and humiliated for centuries on end and prevented from entering temples out of 'Impurity'.

In all our arguments, I find it INCREDIBLY funny that you seem to always focus on Muslim invaders, but never at all focus on the kind of bullshit the British wrecked on us. I'll tell you why: its because the British were the ones to club ALLLLLLL these varied identities together under a wishy washy 'Hindu' label in censuses. Dalit people are also under this label BECAUSE OF CLERICAL LAZINESS.

And this shit worked PERFECTLY for Hindu Nationalists. The more uniform our 'identity' got, the better. But of course, caste was essential to the functioning of 'Hindu' society.

So I give you this chance to inform me: What kind of society acts like this? Why are Dalit children beaten in schools for touching the wrong water pot? And forgive me for assuming, but if you have a household help who comes by, why do you treat her in a way which is 'different' to your family? Why is your circle of friends the same 3 people from the same community? Why do we live in this kind of society? What morality are we functioning on? Tell me, without resorting to justifying henious acts by saying 'Dharma'. I dare you.

-Mod G

--------------------------------------------------

Hello again, Anon-Who-Has-Unfollowed-But-Is-Still-Here-Inexplicably,

Mod G actually replied to you before I did. You didn't say about their reply. That's fascinating. They answered your ask in a far more direct way so I thought adding the same thing would be redundant. Turns out, it wouldn't have been redundant because you didn't even read what they said. Who knew.

You know what? I actually did say what the conquerors did was wrong. I directly talked about it. That's not what-aboutery. Did you not even read that part? I said what they did was wrong and what you're doing is wrong too. (I'm saying it again because you seem to be under the impression that I'm not holding these historical figures responsible for their actions sufficiently enough for your taste.)

I talked about being dalit in terms of reclamation and reparation. It is directly related to the topic you were talking about. Sure, free to tell me that I should be grateful to my "fellow Hindus" and should express that gratefulness by shutting my mouth and not criticizing them when they're doing something wrong. Got it. All that work-in-progress you talk about but I should still know my place and not speak over savarna Hindus. Understood.

Newsflash, the said beloved Hindus will ALSO gladly kill me for being a queer, as you put it. Right now, in fact. We're not exactly a queer-friendly nation, if you haven't noticed.

You also seem to be under the impression that Hindus=Hindutva which is just a wrong assumption on your part. In fact, from all the replies we're getting it seems to me that the other Hindus disagree with your hindutva politics. What do you make of that?

But yes, I'm a filthy leftie liberal blah-blah. I'm hating Hindus because I said something they're doing is wrong. But all you do is keep talking about Muslims and Islamic countries and don't even wonder why.

-Mod S

#incorrect quotes #incorrect mahabharat quotes #i'm tired #i'm so fucking tired as shit #mod replies #ask reply #mod: g #mod: s #asks

17 notes · View notes

nothorses · 7 months

Note

About your post about Educating People, it also means you have to give clear examples of how privilege, bigotry, and stereotypes actually work, because you can't be morally uppity that ignorant people can't fully grasp it.

So much online discourse makes me exhausted, because I see a post on my dashboard, and then immediately several posts talking about why that post is problematic, often without clear explanations.

Ironically, it was Writing With Color, a blog listing a bunch of stereotypes and actually engaging in discussion about the historical roots of why they exist, that helped me dismantle my racism, antiblackness, and sexism. I'm not white by the way! Far from it. But Writing with Color helped so much more in me understanding fandom racism than something like End OTW racism that seeks to moderate the fics of a goddamn archive, lmao.

I feel so many people assign a Moral Factor or Threshold you have to meet before you get to call yourself anti-ableist, anti-racist, a feminist, etcetera. And these same people often say, "Unlearning systemic oppression is a lifelong journey so just shut up and learn and stop your white fragility." (A valid point! But when someone makes a mistake that's likely stemming from extremely subconscious belief, they say, "Are you really an anti-racist, etcetera." )

I'm just tired of the guilt tripping, the gatekeeping. Leftism is being learned through scrambled social media condemning certain behaviors without connecting to the larger movement, and people are angry when others make the resulting mistakes. There is barely any kindness, lmao, or real education.

Yes, exactly!

Education is necessarily about community. In order to effectively educate people, you have to understand what and how they need to learn; where they're starting from, what the next steps might be, and how to engage them in that process.

You need to help them avoid shutting down, either because they feel overwhelmed or don't know where to start, or because they feel guilty and ashamed, or like they can't trust their teachers and mentors enough that they're able to open themselves up, ask for the help and clarity they need, and put their time and energy into the learning process for and with them.

Learning involves a lot of vulnerability! You're admitting things you don't know, you're asking for help, and you're trusting someone else to guide you in something you can't navigate alone.

Educating is difficult and taxing, and educators take on a lot of risk and harm in the process, too. But if we can't honor the vulnerability we're being trusted with, and we can't value the learning process, we're not going to be able to educate at all.

And if we want to see our values, knowledge, skills, and wisdom reflected in our communities, we need to engage in this process. We need to educate, and we need to learn.

And that's gonna take a lot of work, vulnerability, and trust that a lot of us, being very often traumatized people, are going to struggle with- which means it's that much more crucial that we share our progress by supporting others in making it as well. We need to trust people, forgive their mistakes, and initiate positive learning interactions ourselves. We need to show our communities patience and compassion, and we need to do it even (and especially) when it's not given to us first.

Change doesn't happen passively, and you can't destroy your way into creating something better.

41 notes · View notes

batmanisagatewaydrug · 1 year

Note

Hello sex witch! Long time listener, first time caller, love how you do the teaching you do 😄

I was having a chat with my (college age) sibling, and I found she might have some... skewed views on the morality of being sexual. Think along the lines of purity culture, with a sprinkling of religious teaching, and a dash of how legality/morality must be intertwined. I know that sort of thing can lead to some unhealthy thinking, and honestly, I'm a little worried!

This is just background for context, I'm not asking you to solve or even unpack all that lol. But I really vibe with your stance on sex-neutrality, and it seems like a good concept to introduce her too. Like, a lil'nudge.

My personal sex-neutality mindset was gained over years of life experience and internet osmosis, which is really difficult to condense into a "quick-start guide," given I've never really had to educate on it before. I mean, I'll start with the definition, but she would probably prefer having sources other than just me talking for hours lol.

So. TL;DR. As an educator, do you happen to have any resources you could point me towards on sex-neuteality? Books, websites, podcasts, previous posts..? Things I could pass along?

Thank you so much sorry for the length

hey anon,

this is a tricky one because, as you said, sex neutrality is something that comes about from a lifetime of nurturing influences. adopting a totally new mindset is rarely something that can be adopted by one book or video essay, no matter how good they are. this is especially true in the face of religious influence, which can be very difficult to tactfully circumvent without making someone feel as if they're being criticized for being religious at all.

just having a figure in their life (that's you!) who's willing to start and engage with non-judgmental discussions about sexuality can be really helpful for people unlearning sexual stigma, so congrats to you for doing the hardest work just by being present!

having said that, you can't do everything and a recommended media list never hurts. there isn't a lot of work (that I'm familiar with, at least) that just sit you right down and say "hey. here's why sex neutrality good," so I'm going to drop work where that's sort of a powerful background radiation.

Emily Nagoski's book Come As Your Are is a pretty great guide for cis women learning to get comfortable with their bodies and sexualities and, more importantly, the possibilities of communication to find a relationship and sexual style that works for them! I really like the way Nagoski normalizes such a wide range of different needs and desires while assuring readers that there's no "wrong" approach; it's very comforting! if your sister is a podcast person, Nagoski also has an eight part podcast series of the same name where she debunks myths and answers more questions about sexuality.

actually hi as long as we're talking about podcasts Kate Lister, a historian who specializes in historical records of sex work, has a terribly fun podcast called Betwixt the Sheets that's nothing but sex friendly fun. it's got enough interesting historical meat to it that it's not even obvious sex neutral propaganda on the surface; some of my favorite episodes have Lister interviewing other academics about Queen Victoria's dietary habits and Hollywood portrayals of vodun.

if we want to talk about the 101 of getting comfortable with one's own genitalia and reproductive health, I must point to Dr. Jennifer Gunter's Vagina Bible. Dr. Gunter has made a whole career out of debunking medical misinformation, wellness scams, and Goop over on twitter. I think she should be allowed to attack Gwyneth Paltrow with a sword but I can't make that happen so I can at least promote her book.

if your sister starts feeling adventurous, Dr. Lindsey Doe's youtube channel Sexplanations has been a formative influence on me and has years worth of videos covering tons of topics in quick, unabashedly enthusiastic bursts of information. this video where Dr. Doe talks about her own instances of internalized sex negativity could be an excellent starting point, especially if you want to discuss it together like a lil youtube bookclub.

for a longer youtube dive, Khadija Mbowe's ruminations on sex positive feminism, its shortcomings, and which parts they see as worth preserving could also be a great point of conversation, especially for someone whose coming into the conversation not identifying with sex positivity. caveat that they do link to Christine Emba's book Rethinking Sex in the video description and I cannot in good conscience recommend or fuck with that at all, sorry.

Angela Chen's book Ace, about asexuality, is genuinely so so wonderful, and I think required reading for anyone trying to make sense of any kind of sexuality.

Meg-John Barker's book Rewriting the Rules is a maybe a more expansive version of Nagoski's book, less focused on sex and much more interested in expanding ideas of what relationships can look like and encouraging personal expression within them. honestly I think that's a really important part of embracing sex negativity - more compassion and less judgment for yourself can lead to more compassion and less judgment for others, right? right, hopefully.

Jaclyn Friedman's book Unscrewed is a delight, and does something similar to Mbowe's video linked above by highlighting ways in which commercialized #girlboss "sex positivty" is useless and then providing instances of real people doing actual, tangibly useful and positive work. Friedman highlights everything from queer youth shelters to orgs run by and for trans sex workers of color to reproductive justice organizations; it's a great dip into a lot of different radical causes without (hopefully) being too overwhelming.

I hope this serves as a good starting place for a lot of positive conversations with your sibling! good luck, friend xoxo

#sex edventures 2023

97 notes · View notes

thefernbi · 2 months

Text

[Why is the effort to remember so important in todays times?]

Effort of rememberence, especially in the context of historical events like the holocaust and other crimes against humanity is important for different reasons:

Conscience and education: The confrontation with history and the reminding of past horrific acts create a consciousness for the consequences of discrimination, racism and intolerance. It aids the aids the public education and promote critical thought and empathy

Protection of the human rights: remembering historical crimes shows that there are baseline principles for human rights and humanitarianism that need to be protected. The deference for diversity, tolerance and justice are values that must be protected.

Empowerment of democracy: remembering unjust regimes strengthens democratic values and their institutions. Through analysis of past and present can communities bolster their democratic structures and move against antidemocratic movements.

Integration and reconciliation: In communities that were affected by conflict the effort of rememberence can help support understanding and reconciliation between groups. It is a important step on the road of healing trauma and of creating one united future.

All in all, the effort of rememberence contributes to a open, democratic society in which respect for human rights and tolerance of diversity are put to the forefront. It teaches us the lessons of the past, so we may activly work for a better future

It is crazy to me how I could wake up one day and go to uni only to read things like this. This seemingly full awareness about why it's important to remember crimes past. Why it is important to uphold the memory of those lost. How 'never again' exist to activly prevent from such atrocities to happen NEVER. AGAIN.

But yet here we are. An absolute double Standard. Its sad, sickening and demoralizing. All the points listed here are violated. I don't see a conscience. I don't see humans with their rights upheld and protected. I do not see the will of the people being what steers this country. I don't see anything being integrated in a peaceful constructive matter. All i see are victims, more cruel deaths ushering in by the second while this country preaches all the values above just to be at the back and call of the perpetrator of a genocide.

-------------------------------------------------------

Ich finde es einfach verrückt wie ich einfach eines Tages aufstehen kann, zur Uni gehen kann und sowas lesen. Das es doch eigentlich so klar ist warum es wichtig ist sich an vergangene Verbrechen zu erinnern. Warum die Erinnerung an die verloren aufrechterhalten so wichtig ist. Das 'nie wieder' dazu dient, aktiv dafür zu sorgen das solche Grausamkeiten NIE. WIEDER. PASSIEREN.

Aber davon ist nichts zu sehen. Absolute Heuchelei. Es ist traurig, widerlich und entmutigend. Jeder dieser genannten Punkte wurde hintergangen. Ich sehe nichts von einem Bewusstsein. Nichts vom Schutz irgendwelcher Menschenrechte. Ich sehe nicht wie das Volk in der Lage ist ihren Willen durchzusetzen. Nichts von Versöhnung und Verständnis. Alles was ich sehe sind Leute die jede Sekunde einer Grausamen Mühle des Todes zum Opfer fallen wärend unser Land Gott segne es alles daran tut den Vebrechern des Genozid rückendeckung zu geben.

Fuck Israel

Fuck German

Fly high Palestina

From the river to the sea, you WILL be free

#gaza #palestine #free palestine #free gaza #from the river to the sea palestine will be free #israel #genocide #current events #freepalastine🇵🇸#fuck israel #fuck germany #fly high Palestina #bruder ich kann nicht mehr #Nie wieder #nie wieder ist jetzt #Wirklich jeder von den dir Verantwortlichen gehört kaput geschlagen #translation #German

14 notes · View notes

hussyknee · 1 year

Text

Every time I think white and Western leftists can't disappoint me more, they prove me wrong.

Y'all memefied the threat of war with Iran following the assassination of Soleimani, the Australian wildfires that razed Aboriginal communities to the ground, Black Lives Matter, the fall of Afghanistan, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Putin, and the mass protests in Sri Lanka. The No Fly List has been leaked for the first time since 2014, showing that the majority of it are in there for the crime of having Muslim and Russian names, taking part in anti-war protests and being a child while Muslim. And now y'all have started merchandising the memes?

Every single time we point out that the suffering of diasporas and the Global South is not yours to joke about, we are inundated with screeching about how y'all need them to '''''cope'''' with having woken up to the fact that other people have been living in a fascist dystopia, that memes spread "awareness", that it's unfair to take the jokes to mean you don't care, and "we can be concerned about two things at once". Meanwhile, the jokes and memes and white coping drown out the voices of BIPoC and Eastern Europeans almost entirely. Then you forget all about us and eventually say that nothing we did made any difference, fighting the state is hopeless, and meme some more.

At this point I can only imagine that you wander into random people's funerals, crack jokes about the dead guy to his family and sell funeral t-shirts in exchange for telling everyone else that they're dead. "Well why can't we celebrate and uplift queer people?" – you mean white and Western queer people, because it's sure as hell not our queer people who're getting profiled and bombed and starved.

"That's not my experience of what we did" – we do not care. Your experience of your own actions, of how events unfolded for you and of our hurt and our suffering is utterly irrelevant. You do not get a say on whether you're hurting us. You don't get to police our tone and wording and anger. You don't get to weigh in with your white guilt and white defensiveness and Western and white privilege and pathological need to be the Main Character in every situation. "Why is this so guilt-tripping" that's your white guilt, Karen. The fact that you only just woke up to all the ways you've been asleep is your white privilege. Your inability to boost our voices and center us without any commentary and not speak for us is white supremacy. Your consistent focus on valorizing activists and advocates and centering white saviours is white supremacy. Your making money and fame off "raising awareness" and "educating" other people about our suffering is capitalist exploitation and white supremacy. You are not living through a "major historical event", we are. Every damn day.

Those of you who don't behave like this will never chime in and tell your racist fellows "hey stop that, that's fucked up! That's racist! Shut up!" You dont look for resources yourself, dont accept that maybe we can't provide solutions every time we raise concerns, that maybe your allyship should be about self-reflection and learning how to handle your own emotions without taking up all the air in a room.

This shit is fucking constant. Every single time. We are suffocating. Even with all of that, do you have any idea of the amount of patience and understanding and forebearance we have tried to give you?

Edit: btw the trans femme of colour who uses it/its pronouns that said "please stop memeing about our very serious issue, go read these sources, pay attention to this bill, if you care then act like it"? Y'all sent it so much racist hate that it had to deactivate. But yeah, y'all care about queer people. Lmao.

75 notes · View notes

xxlovelynovaxx · 3 months

Text

Hmm. Screenshot:

(It says "Regardless of who you are or where you come from, if you do not feel outrage, anguish, and grief for these innocent lives lost, something is amiss, and you must consider why you lack the drive to take action.")

Consider, perhaps, that:

1. There are people incapable of feeling "outrage, innocence, and grief for the innocent lives lost" who are involved in effective, compassionate activism. "If you don't feel bad about this, you are in fact just reinventing thoughtcrimes! In fact, you're generally going to be MORE effective in a situation involving massive human rights violations if you're NOT in a major overwhelmed or really difficult emotional state. Like, sending your brain into survival mode where parts of the brain responsible for complex reasoning shut down is in fact Not Helpful for activism and yes, feeling strongly enough for others can do that.

Basically "feeling bad" isn't activism.

2. Perhaps even more importantly, conflating not feeling those things with "lack[ing] the drive to take action" is in fact a problem on multiple levels. Once again, of course, because people who lack empathy and/or otherwise don't feel bad for other people who are suffering engage in effective and compassionate activism.

But also because there are times when, if you dive into "taking action" without educating yourself first, you're just going to hurt everyone involved, including the people you're claiming you want to "help" and "protect". Sometimes in fact "taking action" means listening to the people affected beyond the first sentence they say; listening to actual activists and advocates within that community or country; and sitting down, shutting up, and WAITING until you know enough to not have your bumbling "action" be actively harmful.

Sometimes, you should not be encouraging people to dive in impulsively with no idea of what they're doing.

Perhaps if this person had offered directions or resources on how to do so in a way that is actually helpful and not harmful, I wouldn't be saying all this. But they didn't.

So basically: It doesn't matter how people feel, it matters what they do, and that's exactly WHY you shouldn't be guilt tripping people to jump in headfirst to activism which isn't simple even in the most black and white of human rights issues. There are entire books of sociopolitical theory written on this stuff. Entire organizations and communities have been divided by questions such as "when is peaceful protest most effective and when do we need to riot". One of the single biggest issues with historical activism has been throwing vulnerable people under the bus to reach goals.

Another big one is excusing bigotry and violence towards one group because it "helps the cause" of another, even when invariably it does not and typically actively hurts said group's cause.

There's more I could say, besides about how waiting to figure out how to be effective is exactly the opposite of "lacking the drive to take action" (it's in fact putting in the actual difficult work necessary to be an effective activist instead of being a moral crusader to be SEEN as "righteous".

And about how there's also a difference between "lacking the drive" to take action and "being unable to". Especially for profoundly disabled people, and with so many people becoming a part of that category due to long covid and/or being immunocompromised during a pandemic, there is a double challenge of the disability itself and surviving in an actively eugenicist country - especially one that nondisabled people refuse to actually recognize as such.

But anyway, as someone in multiple marginalized groups and communities affected by significant state violence, I'm telling you that you are in fact harming the people you're trying to "help" by plunging in without first educating yourself. I've witnessed it, and I've been hurt by it. It's happened repeatedly without fail in every community I've been in.

Even people WITHIN these communities have to educate ourselves in order to not harm other people within our communities and be effective. As someone with privilege, in an oppressor class, what would make you think you're any different?

Unless you don't actually care about enacting change and only about being seen as "caring enough" to get the Good Person designation...

#activism

10 notes · View notes

kanerallels · 2 months

Note

Re: homeschooling. There is ALOT of stigma, but I’ve heard the stigma is much higher in the USA than elsewhere, and this is an American site so all polls results are skewed to an American world view. So there’s that, what fears exist there that influence the vote? I’ll try to summarize. I’d be interested in a poll from everyone else. Also the points I’m gonna cover are just what I’ve heard over the years, and over the border as a Canadian myself, who only homeschooled for a few of my years, so it’s not iron clad or anything. Just some possibilities.

The stigmas come from the idea that it’s bad because there are, unfortunately, a lot of people who don’t do it right, or for the right reasons. The main objections are these kids are completely isolated socially, underprepared to function in the real world, and that they won’t get a proper education - either from ignorance or malice, or both. There may also be unconscious bias that the state (not the American sense of the word, but the institutional sense) knows best and how can parents know what to teach? Which probably feeds back into factors I don’t really have the qualifications to talk about but basically boil down to “if you educated them better they won’t be mindless minions for the capitalist/military/prison grind” - the state does not want that, so they purport the idea that it’s bad (yes that borders on conspiracy theory, not saying it’s true, saying I’ve heard this said). Never mind public education is a fairly new concept, historically speaking (and it is a good thing in many ways! Mandatory, free, basic education has eliminated illiteracy in many places for example. The concept started out with worthy goals, etc - have they strayed from them and why? Lack of care or just resources?)

Obviously, all of that is going to vary by who is doing it and why and if they have the time and resources and desire to do it properly.

Socially, you can absolutely create community elsewhere - when my mom was doing it with us, we went to the library every single week and met up with a bunch of other kids and planned social stuff and educational group trips to places like the science centre and the art and history museums. We mixed our book learning with practical skills - one person knew a sewing teacher, one person negotiated a discount for swim lessons, the library offered French lessons among its many other programs. And of course to supplement grade standard education lesson books, like math, spelling, etc, we were ALWAYS taking out books from the library, both fiction and non fiction. So there are absolutely ways to get a rounded education and a social life. I would say even more so now than when the concept was new for me 15-20 years ago.

But on the other hand, there are the horror stories, and success stories don’t circulate half so well. The people who isolate their kids to abuse them, don’t teach them anything, make them do chores all day beyond age appropriate responsibility or physical ability, etc. also the deliberate obfuscation of certain information or topics because of personal ideology, usually religious, because you know. Somehow education equates belief (sarcasm. Example: I learned people used to think the world was flat. Guess what? I don’t believe that).

These are just some random thoughts, feel free say it doesn’t make sense lol. I do believe if that’s what you want to do, and you have the love and time and ability and patience etc, and financial freedom for at least one parent to do it (someone’s gotta work unfortunately), then go for it. But do it right, and find as many resources as you can. Unfortunately there are people who go into it without preparation and for the wrong reasons and I can see why people believe kids need access to third parties somewhere in their lives, and school might as well be it. Like there’s very much merit and drawbacks on both sides. I think there’s kids who could come out from both systems with abysmal skills, and from both with stellar skills, (I’ve met both types), it’s just really gonna boil down to individual circumstances.

This is all really really interesting, thank you for the ask!! I knew some of this stuff but not all of it. And I don't think I knew you were homeschooled at one point, that's so cool!! (Oh and you're never gonna hear judgement about conspiracy theory sounding stuff from me lol)

#additionally i am friends with many homeschoolers and they are some of the smartest people i know #one is helping run a small business that is worth a lot of money #one is in college to become an interpreter #and there are many others!#thanks for the ask!!#homeschooling

9 notes · View notes

starchilddante · 2 months

Text

You know what really doesn't make sense? People understand the idea of "negative historical connotation" in the context of race (such as the n-word or making a joke about asian people eating cats) gender (such as saying "like a girl" or making fun of someone by calling something girly) politics (mocking a veteran) and a million other things, but can't get it through their head that the same thing applies to the queer community?

I have a semi-religious straight cisgender friend who constantly makes jokes about me being sinful, gross, or how you know, "God hates pride" every time I bring up my queer identity. When I voiced disagreement, he immediately got pissy. Saying that my victim mentality is the reason people don't feel sorry for queers anymore.

First of all, I didn't ask you to feel sorry for me. I asked you to stop making jokes like that because even if they don't personally harm me, they enable abusers to continue their toxic behavior under the guise of a joke. While you may not mean anything by saying, "Oh, wow, that's a little gay," Some people do use that phrase to hurt others. I also just don't appreciate my queerness constantly being turned into a joke, because it honestly proves we can't have a honest discussion about it because you don't agree.

Then this guy tells me I need to learn to take a joke. And again, I explain to him why it might be a joke in this context, he still needs to be mindful and I would feel wrong not saying something because my queer identity is not a joke, and regardless of whether or not I'm a victim, there are queer people who became victims, and his language supports genuine homophobia, even if he is not homophobic/transphobic/whateverphobic (though I'm pretty sure he is.)

Part of me is tempted to basically make him lose my number, but I want to educate people. I want them to understand. I don't understand what's so hard to get about it being the same level of inappropriate as using the n-word or calling someone girly as an insult. (I mean, I do know. He's homophobic and it's easier for him to make jokes and get mad then admit it.)

Idk I guess I'm just venting or whatever I just get so tired of this conversation every time I make any reference to being queer. The problem is, I know it's not well-intentioned, whatever he may say. There's a difference between friendly ribbing (which is far more acceptable coming from other queer friends, of course) and genuine insulting jokes. He gets it, I'm sure, he just refuses to admit it.

Anyway, I'm proud as hell to be queer and I'll stand up for everyone who has given up their lives so I can say so without risk of death. On top of that, I'll keep saying if for those who still do risk death if their families were to find out, and for everyone who is still in the closet.

I'm here, I'm queer, and I sure as hell won't tolerate your bullshit just because I know who I am.

#pride #lgbtq #asexual #lesbian #queer and proud #vent post

7 notes · View notes

f1ghtsoftly · 1 year

Text

I know a lot of women here are anti religion and intellectually, I agree but also like? Im curious how you engage with the older women in your life? Your culture without, at the very least, religious stories and symbolism? And what do we do without that?

Im…somewhat of a practicing Catholic, I really like spending time with older women and I appreciate this sort of shared compassionate space and how people merge folk magic practices in particular with catholic rite and ritual.

Often like, people like to paint all Christian religions as these patriarchal, colonialist institutions and those institutions are what they are-but they’re also often the only cultural spaces, outside of courts, average lay people had any contact with. Catholic schools were the first places women were educated in Europe, catholic priests, nuns and bishops have not all been paper pushing engines of empire, a great deal of the American labor movement, charitable catholic organizations have . That doesn’t sanitize the history and it does not sanitize the brutality, but to forget it? Especially to forget how people worked for their needs and their goals within those institutions. You don’t have to forgive The Church™️ of course you don’t, their colonizing, child molesting fucks. But you do have to sit on the grass and grapple with the reality your foremothers prayed to their god in the back pews of a catholic church, in the din of a tenement or cottage giving birth, maybe even alone. And you very much have to grapple with the reality that for most women the church is a critical part of their social fabric and….idk. I think it’s silly to change that exactly. A lot of older women have interesting and cool theologies if you ask them about it. They don’t necessarily agree with everything the church does or says or believes. Sometimes they definitely do but idk, dig into why, you can usually, not always, find some common ground.

Class, in particular, and then marriage, motherhood and culture bars women from a lot of opportunities that men might not be. It’s not always wise I think to overlook older women or women in more conservative institutions. Those institutions offer protection from men too.

Our foremothers have buried treasure in those spaces. There are women with protofeminist consciousnesses working in church groups right now probably in your local community. Go hangout, do charitable work. Connect to them.

I think, a large part, of my hesitation around radical feminism is it’s ungroundedness and unwillingness to take stock of women’s suffering. The focus on the new is good it’s a right urge but that also needs to be balanced with some grief, for ourselves and for the women who came before us. It is this refusal to reckon with the brokenness of the woman trapped in patriarchy that leads so called radical feminists to their worst excesses. It’s very easy to call a woman a c*****cker when you’ve never been raped as a child, or are busy pushing those memories away.

From this I hope we can gain a greater sympathy for our fellow woman in the past and the present. The violence and loneliness of this trapped existence, this hall of mirrors between the humanity of woman and the “woman” we are supposed to embody/one which almost always allows total violation of the self, presents oneself as a vessel to the worthy male..is extreme. It is enough to drive one into cruelty and madness a million times over. Count yourself lucky, not strong, to have been spared it’s worst faces. No woman, no matter her mistakes, deserves to be shamed, hurt or forgotten.

And it is in a woman’s little work, her lacemaking, garden growing, candlewax making that we can find her again. Don’t denigrate the tiny ways women have historically found spaces for their creativity, genius…. Above all, I want us to carry average working women who taught their kids the best they could, who served their communities, who grew vegetables and braided hair and took care of their daughters with us. Not all reminders of enslavement are poisonous but rather, precious tokens to the strength of our spirit.

Their are aspects of femininity I will likely never give up not because of fear, not anymore, but because I want women to know that I am with them. I do not mind donning the garb of their enslavement because when one of us is enslaved, when one of us is demeaned we are all demeaned. We share that boulder together. I am no better, no tougher, no stronger than she. I want to meet her hands, in prayer, in communion, in laugher in work with a sort of respect and acceptance women are so rarely afforded in a world that treats violence, even verbal, against women as sport. Against men’s eyes, against the world. I want her to see me as an equal and friend. I am reluctant to empathize with a woman who foolishly believes she is better and stronger than other women because it’s not really true-almost no women are.

#radical feminism #radblr #radfems

68 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 8 months

Text

By: Christian Watson

Published: Aug 9, 2023

Once wildly popular, the sweeping Diversity, Equity and Inclusion movement is starting to crash and burn.

Even companies that championed DEI initiatives in the aftermath of the George Floyd case in 2020 are now changing their tune. In the past month, leading entertainment companies — including Warner Bros, Netflix and Disney — have all fired their DEI executives.

To understand this stunning reversal, look no further than the contradictory and often illogical concepts at the heart of DEI.

Proponents of DEI claim that diversity promotes “learning.” Queens University, for example, argues that a diverse student body “promotes creativity, as well as better education, as those with differing viewpoints are able to collaborate to create solutions.”

One could find these claims more believable if those who support DEI did not also claim that students learn better when the teacher “looks like them.” If diversity enables us to learn better, why do students of color learn best with professors of the same race?

Claims of racist behavior often include contradictory charges, even in medicine.

One allegation is the claim that pregnant Black women receive inferior medical treatment. For example, The New York Times recently reported that Black women are given epidurals for pain more often than white women. The same article claimed that Black women “described having their pain dismissed,” leading readers to wonder how Black women receiving too much pain medication also means their pain is ignored.

The Association for American Medical Colleges contends that “research shows that racial concordance can improve communication, trust and adherence to medical advice.” Yet, if a white patient chose not to see a Black doctor based on his race, it would clearly — and appropriately — be called racism.

The contradictions continue in culture and entertainment. Look no further than the diversity-obsessed Hollywood. Today, if a white actor is cast to play a non-“white” role, critics complain the film is “whitewashed.” Meanwhile, shows and movies featuring people of color depicting historically white characters are lauded for their diversity.

There are no cries for diversity in pro basketball, where 73 percent of the players are Black, while the NHL is accused of racism because 84 percent of its players are white.

Ditto for jazz musicians, who are predominantly Black, versus their classical counterparts, who are mostly white.

The dilemma extends to enjoying other cultures in everyday life. There was a time in America when we proudly enjoyed foods, dress and traditions of many cultures but those who do so today risk being condemned for cultural appropriation.

Ibram X. Kendi, a leading proponent of DEI, famously said: “The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination.” His description underlines the self-serving nature of the DEI philosophy. After all, “white guilt” can be monetized and leveraged to give certain minorities an advantage.

Fortunately, public fatigue for DEI is beginning to show, from corporate America increasingly ditching DEI to the Supreme Court ruling ending affirmative action.

However, we will have a long way to go to restore a merit-based society in which all Americans can enjoy equal freedom and opportunities. With the contradictions inherent in today’s DEI framework, it’s only a matter of time.

God is both good and inscrutable. Perfect and needing worship. Loving and wrathful. Real and undetectable.

We can reasonably conclude that they don't know what they're talking about.

#Christian Watson #diversity equity and inclusion #Kendi is a racist #diversity #equity #inclusion #DEI bureaucracy #DIE bureaucracy #DEI fatigue #meritocracy #merit #make merit matter #contradictions #self refuting #antiracism #antiracism as religion #neoracism #religion is a mental illness

10 notes · View notes