#we need more of it in our western societies again
Text
Guys so I visited a medieval smithy the other day (ca. 1300s) and it reminded me a lot of Gobber's workshop... it was easy to imagine that I had just literally stepped into Berk's smithy with my own two feet... and to be honest, seeing this stuff in real life made the whole deal of Hiccup apprenticing in one of these infinitely funnier and Stoick's decision to put him there weirdly...understandable???
Let me elaborate: So you're in approx. 900 AD, you live on a tiny island under rough conditions, EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE WITHOUT A SINGLE EXCEPTION is a craftsman of some kind who has to work manually, and you've got a noodle of a son.
Also you're the Chief, no less than that. Let me tell you that this makes the whole thing just so much worse.
Looking at all those solid iron tools - mighty bellows operated by a beam larger than me, forging tongs that would have been half of Hiccup's size and exactly as heavy as this shot implies,
...swords with hilts longer than a cucumber and crude, brutal design, plus all the firewood that constantly needed to be chopped and carried around... even if Hiccup had turned out to be completely untalented at smithwork, that would have built him some muscles.
You don't understand. Hiccup having no muscles was a death sentence. The environment that he was surrounded by, which I was reminded of in that irl smithy, could - at that time! - only be overcome by hard manual labor, aided by the most basic mechanics. Even if he had become a breadmaker, that still would've built him some muscles. All the kneading, the weightlifting of flour and wood and water, the carrying, would have done the same job. Forget Snotlout bragging about working out in his parents' basement. EVERYONE on Berk was burly not because 'they were vikings' training for war or whatever for funsies every day, but because it literally was a requirement of everyday life to be able to carry something heavy from A to B, and be it only a single sack of grain.
So it's really funny to me how Stoick intentionally put this skinny rat of a son of his into the most merciless and dangerous job that probably existed on the island, just to put him to some use. Poor Hiccup. He's like a wet kitten under the command of a bloodhound. But at the same time, it makes so much sense?? Stoick didn't just put him into a job to gain some weight, he put him into a job that would teach him all about tools and weapons, how to defend himself and about the irreversible price of violence. I imagine a blacksmith would have to know how to use a sword to know what makes a good one, so Hiccup would've naturally learned swordfighting on the side. It was an important skill not just against dragons. We see the gang fight all kinds of human enemies in later years as well.
So what Stoick was basically doing was to prepare him for life. The need for abs back then is comparable to today's education about taxes and insurances. Hiccup needed some brawns to survive Berkian conditions, and not just for fighting dragons. Even though Hiccup had the brilliance to invent mechanical devices that could make life on the island easier, he didn't have electricity and he couldn't just press a button anytime he wanted the laundry done or needed some newly tanned leather. He had to work with his own two hands anyway. No dragon, once tamed, could assist the villagers in ways that an ox or buffalo hadn't done before. Despite his marvelous innovations, there's no changing that Hiccup would remain a craftsman and a warrior throughout his life.
So now there's the fact that Hiccup was a noodle. Having established that with Berk's living conditions in mind, you would basically have to avoid working any daily task ON PURPOSE to NOT develop muscles from early childhood, there are exactly two interpretations as to how Hiccup remained this scrawny for so long: a) he was disabled in some way that prevented him from doing chores, or b) he was spoiled and lazy beyond common sense.
Stoick spoiling someone is unthinkable, and Hiccup doesn't appear disabled. He could be struggling with anything from a muscle-degenerative disease to a fast metabolism to mental issues. But it's not implied in the movies. So how did Hiccup avoid manual labor And what kind of message did that send to the rest of the villagers???
Look, if they thought that he was lazy, or perhaps not quite right in the head, they were probably absolutely right. It would have been maniacal for the Chief to spoil his son to the point where he couldn't fend for himself and expected Berk to serve him and supply him with food. Stoick wanted his son to be Chief, so he would have to school him in some trade that enabled him for economics and warfare. As neither was the case though, it didn't put Stoick in a great light to have a son as Hiccup. How could this have happened - a noodle on Berk? It would have made both father and son the laughingstock.
The only reason that I can think of is neglect. Stoick may have been so grief-stricken about Valka's death that he went easy on Hiccup for a while, and then, when he got possessed by running dragon nest campaigns, he may have simply forgotten that he still had a child at home. And then, once Hiccup became old enough to get into trouble, Stoick may have remembered him because he got complaints from his villagers, and so he hurriedly stuck him with Gobber. Lol.
So that's how a skinny noodle rat with no survival skills whatsoever ended up in the weapon forge of Berk. Gobber has a point being sarcastic about it: "Oh, perfect. And while I'm busy, Hiccup can cover the stall. Molten steel, razor-sharp blades, lots of time to himself - what could possibly go wrong?"
And wrong it goes. I love it. WHAT WERE THEY EXPECTING?? XD
#httyd#hiccup#stoick#stoick the vast#gobber#gobber the belch#analysis#httyd analysis#wherethekiteflies#I HIGHLY recommend visiting any places of craftsmanship they're so inspiring#and they remind you of what's really important in life. gosh#I wouldn't say that manual labor should be this hard but it sure looks rewarding#we need more of it in our western societies again#!!!!
75 notes
·
View notes
Text
the fact that I’m still seeing clowns panic over Xinjiang in 2023
#Y’all have never set foot on China calm down you don’t care about Chinese ethnic minorities like you think you do#I am TIRED#Chinese ethnic minorities casually vibing and sharing our cultures on douyin while western media makes up shit about us#There are issues that exist that need to be addressed but it should be done by us not you#Han people aren’t white colonizers China is a 5000 year old multi-ethnic society not your 200 year old settler colonial state#Like you know what I’m gonna list some issues I care about here#For one we need to change the post-secondary entrance exam policy to not exclusively give ethnic minorities extra marks#But people of all ethnicities from poor areas#Second we could be doing a better job at preserving some languages and cultural practices that are dying out#By funding education in these languages and practices and incorporating them into popular media#We should also build more infrastructure to encourage commercial development in some ethnic minority areas#But again these are all stuff that should be worked on by the Chinese people in collaboration with our gov#Not western liberals online#I stg if there weren’t so many gay communists on Tumblr and Twitter I would have deleted both
0 notes
Note
What are "transmasc" and "genderqueer"?
I just woke up so bear with me, but like
Western society has invented this idea of "man" and "woman", right? And we SAY it's actually real, and based on tangible things like sex characteristics- primary, like dicks n' hoo-has- and secondary, like tiddies an facial hair an cellulite.
Well, it turns out that those things ain't divided "correctly" into the man and woman categories all the time.
People with dicks sometimes get tiddies, people without dicks sometimes grow beards and chest hair, beauty standards like "woman thin and hairless and short with small nose and tiny feet" and "man tall and muscular with a beard and broad shoulders" aren't appearing in nature the way we say they should.
(These gendered standards also change over time, but that's a different post.)
What's more, some people have multiple primary characteristics, and it's not even super rare! (Again, worth a different post, and not one I'm really in a position to make.)
So, we say that we didn't just "invent" two exclusive boxes to sort a wide variety and spectrum of characteristics into by pure brute force, but evidence says otherwise. So do we change the rules of our society to fit that evidence?
No, we pick something else to support our beliefs.
Learning about genes and DNA and chromosomes came much later in the game, so most people's grasp of it is this: Men have XY chromosomes, women have XX chromosomes, and no matter what your body is shaped like, that determines which box you go in. Whatever you look like should be padded or amputated or shaved away until you fit in your box.
Except.... we now know that people who outwardly appear to be the perfect ideal poster children of "man" and "woman" are living full, natural, healthy and unbothered lives totally unaware that they have the "wrong" chromosomes. No visibly "mixed" characteristics at all. So there goes that idea out the window.
Unless we say that no, our invention which is fact still holds up- there's just a few mutants and freaks and dysfunctional anomalies that just sort of happen sometimes, like factory flaws that wouldn't exist if things were running as they should.
So what do we do with factory flaws? We "fix" them. Or pressure them to fix themselves. Or, if they can "pass" one way or another, shove them into that box and tell them to shut up about it. Don't fit into either? Then pick one, and make yourself fit.
But... then, if we can pick... if hairy women with flat chests and small hips can shave themselves down and throw on some padding and powder her face to be accepted.... why can't anyone else?
Or, if that same "woman" went, fuck it, cut his hair short and embraced all the "man" characteristics, went by different pronouns and stepped into the "man" box... wouldn't that be okay, too?
And, he'll, what if they changed nothing about themselves and decided to opt out? We've proven that these "universal facts" don't *actually* exist and exceptions are everywhere, so fuck it, right? "Man" and "woman" don't really mean anything tangible anyways, so why not do what makes you happy?
And since, again, evidence shows that "man" and "women" aren't perfect binary boxes with perfect binary traits- why bother living up to those traits at all? Why can't someone assigned to the "woman" box live in the "man" box with long hair and heels on? If I makes him happy, what's the harm?
We don't like this, though, because when you build two boxes that contain the whole world, and people start escaping, or slipping out to live in the one they like more, or switching, or building their own, people begin to wonder why they're living in boxes at all. If we even need boxes.
And the people who maintain the boxes tell us, it's because the boxes are safe, and the boxes are natural, and the boxes have been here exactly as they are since the beginning of time anyways, and NO, they aren't just terrified of life outside the shelter of the box, you're the weird one.
Meanwhile, if we really looked into it, I imagine we'd find more people who don't fit their box criteria, or don't even like their box, at least as often as we find people who do.
Transgender means "someone who isn't in their assigned box".
Genderqueer means, "someone who isn't in their assigned box", but in a the same broad way that "transgender" is- Maybe a him, maybe a her, maybe both, maybe a they, perhaps a xey, and sometimes some of us move around.
I say I'm genderqueer, 'cause that fits me, but "Transmasc" to me personally means, "I know I'm not a woman, and I'm closer to the "man" box, but I'm happier wandering outside the "man" box than I am stepping fully inside. (Dysphoria is part of that, but again, in my opinion it's not vital to the experience.)
And I'm not one for destroying those two boxes entirely- they bring joy to a lot of people.
Just, you know. Maybe making more, different boxes. And maybe little camps out between them. And not treating people who roam the wilderness instead like rabid animals. Is the thing.
Long answer
#Long post#Text post#Gender#Transgender#Transmasc#Genderqueer#Correct me if I'm wrong I'm not fully awake and also wrong sometimes and also a lil dumb on top o that
727 notes
·
View notes
Text
im working on a thought and it’s not all the way roughed out, so bear with me:
i think western society has been so obsessed with the threat of invasion for so long that it’s poisoned all of us and seriously damages progressive moments that need solidarity to survive.
like, it’s a cornerstone of conservative, right-wing, and fascist ideology that the Our People are under a direct, continuous, obvious threat of invasion by Bad Guys who want to come into our space, use up all our resources, hurt our vulnerable members, and replace us entirely if they can. this fear has been repeated so many times we take it for granted. we assume it’s something to take into consideration when we talk about immigration, about welfare, about voting rights/suppression, about gender relations. there are bad guys out there. they want to come into our space and take all our stuff and hurt us. we have to stay alert, suspicious, hard-hearted. we can’t let them in!
men are easily made fearful of dangerous, gold-digging, manipulative, crazy women, which is of course all of them. because if men give them an inch they’ll take all their money and ruin their friendships and leave them broke and ruined.
real women are easily taught to fear treacherous, sneaky, secretly-deadly trans women. because if they’re allowed into bathrooms or women’s groups they’ll rape and pillage and replace all the real women with horrible fakes, ruining everything.
the queer community was easily made fearful and contemptuous of weird, lying, faking-it-for-attention ace people. because if they were allowed into the community, they would use up all the resources and leave the place wide open for further invasion from other fakers, which would obviously ruin everything.
some community moderation is necessary, on a case-by-case basis, to remove genuinely harmful individuals. but it’s really chilling to me to recognize this pattern of thought playing out over and over: we have to hold the line. there is an US and a THEM, there is an INSIDE where we’re safe and an OUTSIDE where the bad guys come from. we have to protect ourselves from invasion, from INFECTION. your kindness and sympathy is how they trick their way in. stay alert. stay aware. stay safe.
but like: this is such bullshit? this is SUCH BULLSHIT. the more US there is, the less THEM there is. bringing people into the circle with kindness, support, affirmation, education, makes the circle bigger. many hands make light work. many voices make a bigger noise. unions work. solidarity works. immigration makes societies healthier and more vibrant. people on welfare go on to boost their local economies. new perspectives can solve old problems.
aren’t you tired of being a pawn in someone else’s culture war? aren’t you tired of flinching, of cowering, of holding back, of toughening up? don’t you want to be a person among people? don’t you want to put your fear down and learn to love the world again?
#this got preachy#but#im tired!!#IM TIRED OF THE AUTOMATIC ASSUMPTION THAT WE PROTECT OURSELVES THROUGH ISOLATION#aren't you tired of living your whole life in a flinch!!!
2K notes
·
View notes
Note
What's your degree in evolution say about that impregnation post?
tldr; no, it's not weird that humans don't go into heat.
ok so first off there are a lot of mammals that have concealed ovulation --- they don't physically, outwardly show when they're most fertile --- and there can be a lot of reasons for this.
but the biggest misconception that people have about evolution that I want to lay out first, is that just because something seems "more efficient" or "more advantageous" does not mean that it's going to evolve or *should have* already evolved. this is a big creationist argument too ("if evolution were real, then we would have evolved x, y, z")
if something works, it works. the fact that humans don't have obvious signs of when they're ovulating does not mean that we are a somehow "less efficient" species or that sex has a different purpose for us. rabbits also do not go into heat. they don't signal when they're ovulating. but, famously, they breed (like rabbits).
it's not good science to talk about traits and behaviors from this kind of benefit-based, anticipatory mindset. and I don't know how else to describe it, but it's like saying "oh, that fish has little legs because it needed to crawl up onto the sand." KILL THIS IN YOUR MIND! just because something ended up being good for a species and having incidental positives does not make that thing the "purpose" or driving force behind how that trait became ubiquitous across the species.
[[long aside, imagine if you will: a fish gets a mutation that makes its fins weirdly stiff. a bunch of fish get washed up on a shore, as happens, sometimes, because of the weather. and most of the fish die, but look, this fish with the weirdly stiff fins is able to leverage and worm and flop its way back into the water because its fins prop it up a little bit more than the other fish. it gets back into the water. it has more babies than the other fish (who are dead). etc. etc. etc. no purpose involved. it did not intend to grow legs.]]
"ok but why DON'T humans go into heat? if it could have happened either way, and if it's all about costs and benefits, wouldn't that be helpful, because it would mean guaranteed pregnancy?"
we're not special. many monkeys and other apes do not go into heat. again, if it works, it works, and we're doing great at getting pregnant without it.
we don't know if our human ancestors DID go into heat and if we lost that trait, OR if they never did and the trait evolved totally separate from us on other branches of the tree-- you can't necessarily determine if a trait was acquired or lost based on the number of species that exhibit it overall. you'd have to do some gene-by-gene detective work, and ovulation signalling is a complex process that's not tied to just one gene, and people are still figuring that out
you WILL see some biologists talking about how concealed ovulation "promotes monogamy" and I have to stress what an utter minefield a lot of speculative evolution is. we are TRAPPED in our current cultural context!!!
scientists who are otherwise so rational and good at thinking about things impartially will dip their toes into the evolution of sex and suddenly turn stupid. i've seen respected PhDs argue that the evolution of large breast tissue in humans is meant to "attract mates" - because western society finds breasts erotic - ignoring the fact that breasts aren't considered remotely sexual in pre-industrial societies - so of course these same guys are going to say that monogamy is some kind of end goal of an actual physical trait that humans possess.
SPOILER ALERT: there are between 6 and 13 non-monogamous primates that also conceal ovulation. oh no!! looks like monogamy isn't the point.
and then you have psychologists (who even asked??) doing studies like this
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rebeccacoffey/2021/01/29/estrus-and-the-evolution-of-mean-girl-behavior-like-slut-shaming-among-women/?sh=ca83660606b3
["estrus" is the word for behavioral changes that signal ovulation] the study is truly a wild ride but here's some highlights that show just how much people are letting their current cultural biases influence the actual design of their studies
-> all males wanted badly to mate
-> females did not have promiscuity ratings
-> female mate value relied heavily on physical attractiveness
it goes without saying that as long as researchers are forming their speculations on past ancestral human societies by just, looking around at their immediate culture and not questioning it at all, we're not going to get anywhere closer to understanding why the human body works the way it does
i'm losing the thread a bit because studies like this make me see red, but the point is that you're going to see a lot of insane takes from actual researchers on why human sex and biology works the way it does. you're going to see weird extrapolation and creationist-adjacent reasoning about evolution leading toward some "purpose" or people having some idea of what an ideal human body would or wouldn't do.
okay but at the end of the day, if a random human did evolve the ability to go into heat? would they be substantially more successful at producing children, and would that gene eventually become the norm for the species? no. there are so many goddamn humans in existence, and you've already got catholics having like 8 children per family anyway, so really, if there was a gene for being catholic then that would probably win out.
72 notes
·
View notes
Text
The issue I see with the ESO Dark Heart of Skyrim depiction of Reachfolk is primarily the division between "ethnic/indigenous" stereotypes, e.g. living in "tribes" in the middle of buttfuck nowhere and being hostile to outsiders, and the "civilised" Reachfolk who are depicted as far smarter because they live within the relatively safe confines of Markarth with taverns and banking services and other city crap that are the benchmarks of modernity and Tamrielic civility.
There is no reason beyond blind ethnocentrism that this is a division that exists, either in real life or in fantasy (if we allow the latter to truly break the bonds of fiction into something *better*). So-called "primitive" peoples, be that the Azande or Trobrianders, have been subject to ridicule due to their indigenous knowledge, myths, and beliefs as unaligned with our post-enlightenment, postmodernist, scientific worldview. In the eyes of many writers, projecting what is deemed within their worldview to be "good" for their characters is really a detriment when it comes to original worldbuilding.
At the risk of sounding like yet another unhinged Marxist, my final comment concerns the structures of Reach society. The hierarchical structure of Reach clans is not something I'm super familiar with so I may come off as sounding like an idiot here, but bear with me. Why are Reachfolk, with supposedly primitive and unchangeable belief systems, upheld to the societal structures of mainstream Tamrielic groups? Why would they trade with gold, if they traded at all; and if they didn't, someone needs to do some research on the historical basis of global trade, which cough cough involves cooperation and amicable relations between disparate groups over huge distances and periods of time. Why are the Reachfolk exempt from this cycle of amicability? Is it more thrilling to write them as hostile savages, ready to attack anyone who supposedly threatens their way of life?
Yes, they would be thoroughly aware of the dangers of colonisation. But why have city Reachfolk been portrayed as sensible citizens of Tamriel while their brethren in the wilderness are presented as wild, IGNOBLE savages? Where is the justice in portraying indigenous peoples as they truly are and are capable of, rather than re-used Western tropes surrounding the division of self and savage Other?
Once again, this ties into the prominent Western tradition of Othering those who don't follow the tenets of a monotheistic, hegemonic, organised religion, or similarly prescribed worldview. By not including Aedra worship in Reachfolk culture, they are seen as savages and people who should be civilised and brought into the fold of the Divines. There is a pervasive undertone of violence linked to so-called "primitive" groups in TES, and this may just be to make convenient NPC bandits, but also perpetuates a stereotype that deeply harms real-life indigenous and culturally marginalised groups.
This is why careful worldbuilding is so so so important because we can project the world WE want, free from the socionormative biases that taint fantasy writing. Yes it's necessary to draw inspiration from real life, I do it all the time, but there's a point where you say "what if real life isn't that great of an idea to project here?"
I'd like to conclude by saying that I'd like to see this decolonisation of fantasy writing extended to other socially marginalised and misunderstood groups in TES, such as Bosmer, Argonians, giants, minotaurs, and the Bandaari (I could rant about them all day but I have other writing to attend to). We can do so much better not only with our ability to create some truly original fantasy worldbuilding, but also by showing others that by decolonising our own writing, we are becoming more sensitive to the worldview of others and incorporating that in an insightful and respectful manner.
235 notes
·
View notes
Text
I think mononyms are an easily overlooked part of SW. Yoda (and Yaddle), Dooku, Palpatine (kinda, because Sheev never appears in the movies, although it's his official first name), Maul, Talzin, Sidious, Vader, Tyranus and all the Sith names in general, and the Clones' names. I feel like they greatly contribute to the mythological atmosphere. Nothing says 'this is a character filling in a specific role' to a western audience like an mononym or a title in lieu of a two-part name. We tend to very deeply associate two-part names with personhood, since they're what we need to exist as individuals within our own society, so anything else is gives off an impression of fictionality to us.
It also bears pointing out that many of these mononym-having character have a title in lieu of the expected first name: Master Yoda, Count Dooku, Mother Talzin, Chancellor Palpatine, Captain Rex and Commander Cody and the other Captains and Commanders, all the Darth Sith Lords, etc. Which, imo, only further stresses how they are roles within a story before anything else, which again makes the story so much more like a greek play or a fairy tale. They're earmaked as servants of the narrative by the storytelling conventions of the western canon, rather than being protagonists within it.
80 notes
·
View notes
Text
the thing is that like. queer rights shouldnt even be the hot topic that they are in any of these discussions, because they are rarely ever relevant in the context they are brought up in. as far as social issues go we all live in glass houses no matter which culture we're from. not a single one of our societies, that any of us live in, has solved the issue of homophobia, or sexism, or any discrimination. none. none of us get to tell the other 'your society is worse than mine' and have that be anything but condescending posturing. absolutely none.
and no, there is not a single person who deserves death or is culpable for the crimes of their society just by virtue of being born in it. i should hope that goes without saying but the past month and a half have proven otherwise. every single innocent person deserves to be free of the horrible cycle of violence we're caught in. no state crimes, no amount of human rights violations, make the death of unrelated innocents justifiable, in any context, and i mean in any context.
but do you know why this gets brought up. because of you fucking westerners who keep projecting this idea that israel embodies every single colonialist evil you can think of, but it's the colonialist evils of your countries and your societies that you have guilt about, that you are familiar with personally. and you project every single social cause that you personally are invested in onto the palestinian cause instead of listening to them, instead of actually trying to understand what work is required to actually help them and what they actually need, because you project this idea of the socialist queer liberators that you want to be onto every single movement that is remotely anti-western or anti-american. and it's honestly really embarrassing but also shows your ignorance about those societies.
and i frankly think that bringing up homophobia in either gaza or the west bank (for purposes that aren't raising awareness, which, it usually isn't) as a gotcha is both extremely tasteless and totally irrelevant most of the time and just serves to delay the conversation and also, again, is not a judgement any of us from the outside get to make, and doesn't make their deaths any less tragic or any more deserved. and i would say the same about the homophobia in israeli society that i am well familiar with, as a queer person who lives here and is stuck in the more conservative parts of the country. but it gets brought up as a counter to the false narrative coming from westerners and constantly spread around- this narrative that this is a fight between one society that's a perfect haven of queer liberation and one society that is nothing but homophobic evils, and that the society that's full of homophobic evils has no innocents in it. because it is not true. not for any of us.
we are not a cartoon bad kingdom and a cartoon good kingdom. we are two equally complex, versatile societies with their own complex histories and things to work through, and your dichotomic thinking simply cannot seem to process this idea. that's why the arguments on queer rights in either of these countries get drawn in. to point out what what you are presenting simply is not factually true and is a simplification of a much more complex reality, which is kind of the pattern in this discourse in general.
i just don't think it's an argument worth having because it's besides the point in the first place, and the point is that none of us deserve violence, none of us deserve to die, and none of us are culpable for the governments playing power games between each other at our expense.
131 notes
·
View notes
Text
Remember when I said age is a factor regarding how informed a person is? About how life experience, world experience, education, and biology all play a role in how you process information and come to conclusions?
https://www.tumblr.com/a-very-tired-jew/746376840485257216/youre-not-as-informed-as-you-think-and-age-does?source=share
Well I have seen some token "Good Jews" exhibiting this exact thing as of today (04/20/2024).
Fig. 1. User (Early 20s) claims Zionism is antisemitic, repeats Bund talking points, and repeats the genocide claim.
Fig. 2. Same user says they needed to deprogram from indoctrination.
Fig. 3. Same user as above claims elder Jews (read: Jews that are older than them) are indoctrinated.
These are the most egregious examples that this Good Jew has with another Good Jew in this particular discord (you know which one). What we see in Figure 1 is the same Bundian philosophy that got Jews betrayed and killed in the USSR. It's the same philosophy that we have tried over and over again with the same results: Jews tortured, killed, and exiled by the larger goy communities we thought we were accepted in. I would hazard a guess that this young person is not aware of the Dreyfus Affair or other issues in "Liberal" societies that led to Zionism.
In Figure 3 this same person states that older Jews are indoctrinated and in Figure 2 states that they needed to "deprogram" from their "indoctrination". They posit that the reason young Jews are anti-Zionist is because they haven't been indoctrinated yet and/or have deprogrammed themselves from their childhood. However...this is typical teen/young adult behavior where they're "Fighting the narrative" and lashing out at the perceived "status quo of indoctrination". I've heard these words for years, hell I said them myself. But because this person is under 25, around 22/23 from my understanding, they simply don't have the experience or education to really understand what they're talking about.
Yes they are Jewish. But the points I made about age in my other post still stand. The likelihood that they have the world and life experience is very slim. Add in that they use inflammatory language that is often associated with the current batch of young antisemitic activists and...well...you get the picture.
But let's talk about the greater implication here. This is one glaring example in a discord. There are more throughout our own community. There are young Jews who are screaming at their elders and repeating talking points that they heard on tiktok, social media, and at protests*. The very same protests where they will hear chants of "Gas the Jews", "Hitler was right!", and so on. At what point do they realize that even if they care for innocent lives (which I have yet to see anyone besides outright racists and bigots call for actual genocide) that allying themselves with antisemites who would kill them in an instant is a bad idea?
In part, I think it has to do with Westerners distrusting their Democratic governments as we have seen them repeatedly drop the ball on issues. They yearn for a revolution against the status quo because the future is bleak (and trust me, as an ecologist I understand climate anxiety and as a millennial I understand that and so much of the other shit too). But this yearning to have meaningful change in their own country has been coopted by terrorist organizations bent on killing Jews. That energy around positive activism and meaningful change has been manipulated by an organization that has been caught on tape saying they would manipulate these very people to bring about their violent intent.
And here's the thing...many of us elders have gone through that very same phase of rhetoric. I remember being an edgy anti-Zionist myself when I was a teen and young adult (I was of the Bundian philosophy as well, and yes I had grown up Reconstructionist, there's a lot to unpack there for a later time). I remember thinking my elders were brainwashed and just scoffing at their retorts. I remember thinking that they had just fallen for the propaganda and needed to open their eyes. As I got older and became more educated, as well as had more world experiences and reached certain biological milestones, my views changed. Not because I became more conservative, but because I was no longer an emotional, hormonally driven young adult who thought they knew more than others. There's a saying in academia that goes something like "In undergrad you think you know everything, in masters you realize you were woefully uninformed, and in your doctorate you realize you don't know shit about anything."
But if you tell them that, they just say it's Hasbara (propaganda) because those same orgs have told them it is. Only hindsight and time will let them go beyond their surface level reactionary reasoning and see the bigger picture. They think they've been deprogrammed, but in reality they've fallen for a different manipulation that will use their good intentions to do harm.
*This is reminiscent of young LGBTQ+ behavior where the young queer kids are yelling at their elders, telling them they don't understand, and the elders are warning them about something dangerous. The youngins then come back and cry "why didn't you warn us?" to which they respond "you didn't listen".
#jumblr#leftist antisemitism#activism#Token Good Jews repeating Bunds points are ignorant of history#They're not your allies or friends if they want to kill your people#Everyone has an edgy phase - even Jews
35 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hi, it's KY here :)
How is everyone feeling about the Taennie news? Knetz have fully accepted the truth and moved on, I suggest I-fans need to do the same. (Jennie is known for having dating news come out regularly, so it's not a big deal for BP fans. For Armys, the sane ones, we've known for a while now haven't we? It's not a shock anymore.)
I read the comments on my previous ask and don't worry! I will not be sharing anything sensitive whatsoever. I find it funny when other shippers say things like "How is it possible that K-fans can keep things to themselves?" I don't think I've seen anyone else address this yet so let me tell you why.
K-Jikookers are mostly queer. Yes, you read that right. Unlike other shippers, who are straight women that self-insert as one of the members (like they do with TK) we support them as a couple. This means that we don't want to date either of them, and we don't self-imagine as their partner - we know that they're unavailable because they're exclusive to each other. You get me? And we know first hand how terrible it is to be queer in a conservative society. There are actually very few real romantic shippers in Korea, (again, KM is the only romantic ship that has a substantial fanbase) simply because it is so hard to accept two men dating. This is why you will see K-Jikookers on Twitter all being close friends/meeting up in person, because they are kindred spirits. I think it might be hard for westerners to really understand. How do I emphasize this more? The older generation in Korea, anyone older than 30+, is deeply homophobic, to the point where they see anything LGBT as western influence and pervasion. Being American, I know it's hard to grasp that level of homophobia - it's not hate comments about your sexuality or people refusing to sell you a cake for a gay wedding. It's social death, rejection, parents disowning their children, getting fired from your job. I'm not kidding. Do you think us, as queer fans who love and support KM, will willingly out them?
We would never, ever, ever do that, because we know the repercussions. Some Jikookers like to fantasize about their coming out, and I want you to understand: the K-side is terrified of that day. Yes, we all think it will happen in due time, but we are very very scared. You think the hate that JM is getting now is bad? You think people sending food to JK's apartment is bad? Nope. You haven't seen anything yet. You understand what I mean, right? Their coming out will not be a cute post. It will be a carefully orchestrated move complete with a legal and PR team. If/when they are out, their lives will be in immediate danger. I truly believe they will leave the country for a bit, maybe even months, maybe a year. There will not be any public sightings, fan meets, concerts. KM know this very well too. I'm sure there's already a plan in place for it.
And anyone searching for KM evidence on K-Jikookers social media, I would say don't bother. It's almost impossible. The white day photo leak was a massive mistake, and I know exactly who leaked it because they were removed from all group chats immediately. K-Jikookers were very very angry with them (and also cussing out foreigners...please, we all need to keep our mouths shut and keep stuff within our own circles.)
-KY
KY has spoken. We appreciate your services and await your next drop in.
I too, the Jikookers that I know, I have never seen them self insert themselves. Those are y/n idiots who do this shit. Not even in private spaces do I see this happening. We support them as a couple, despite how hot we may find them. We understand and believe they only have eyes for eo.
We appreciate the commercial break KY. Now back to the headline
TAENNIE IS REAL!!!!!
198 notes
·
View notes
Text
Resources/Sources against HAMAS + more [re-organization of previous posted resources]
LONG POST - WILL PUT A READ MORE - SEE UNDER IT FOR MORE RESOURCES.
Sources/places that have uncensored footage from the Oct. 7th attack. For anyone who needs a reality check or needs to smack someone with a reality check.
THIS FOOTAGE IS UNCENSORED AND HIGHLY DISTURBING BUT IMPORTANT TO HISTORY. I HAVE WATCHED A LARGE COMPILATION AND IT STILL RUNS THROUGH MY MIND ALL DAY.
https://www.october7thattack.com/
https://oct7th.org/
https://www.hamasvideo.com/
https://theworldwatch.com/tags/hamas/
https://www.hamas-massacre.net/
important websites + articles they have posted
UN Watch - https://unwatch.org/about-us/our-work/
Fact Checking UNRWA Claims About Teachers and Education
Hamas stole 36,000 liters of fuel from UN warehouses
Group of 3,000 UNRWA teachers celebrates Hamas massacre and rape
UN staff celebrate Hamas massacre
The Case against UNRWA from UN Watch - link
2023-Report-UNRWA-pdf - link
Report: Red Cross Statements ‘Overwhelmingly’ Biased Against Israel - link
Honest Reporting - https://honestreporting.com/about/
Desperate Media Accuse Israel of ‘War Crime’ Over Killing of Terrorists in Daring Hospital Raid
Media Accused Israel of ‘Strike’ on Palestinians Who Died in Gaza City Aid Truck Stampede
Council on Foreign Relations -https://www.cfr.org/about
What is HAMAS? Link
The Sunni-Shia Divide - link
MeForum - https://www.meforum.org/about/
A Primer on Hamas; Part 4: Who Are the Palestinians? - link
Countering ‘Pro-Palestine’ Propaganda Part 4: Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing - link
Countering ‘Pro-Palestine’ Propaganda Part 5: Gaza is an Open-Air Prison - link
Countering ‘Pro-Palestine’ Propaganda Part 6: Palestinian Refugees’ Right of Return - link
Israel Can Trust Hamas - To Keep Its Promises - link
The Rhetoric of Nonsense - link
The Wilson Center - https://www.wilsoncenter.org/about
Digital Deception: Disinformation’s Impact in the Israel-Hamas War - link
Hamas: Words and Deeds… - link
Hamas over-reporting civilian casualties in Gaza, again - link
Misc Articles (find the about page yourself if you care enough) -
Hamas use of human shields in Gaza (pdf) - link
Intelligence Reveals Details of U.N. Agency Staff’s Links to Oct. 7th Attack - link
Don’t erase our history: The Jewish people are indigenous to the land of Israel - link
Hamas’s October 7th Attack: Visualizing the Data - link
Teaching Terror: How Hamas Radicalizes Palestinian Society - link
Why Hamas is an Unreliable Source and How Many Reporters Fail to Disclose this - link
Misc Resources -
The Complete List of the 1030 Jewish Expulsions in Human History (pdf) - link
Educational Posts made by rootsmetal -
Palestine and the Holocaust
Hamas's Islamism
we are treated differently
evidence (there's plenty)
teaching hatred
united nations
lies about 1948
was there peace before 1948?
HAMAS Guidelines to Social Media (excerpts)
Anyone killed or martyred is to be called a civilian from Gaza or Palestine, before we talk about his status in jihad or his military rank. Don't forget to always add 'innocent civilian' or 'innocent citizen' in your description of those killed in Israeli attacks on Gaza.
Begin [your reports of] news of resistance actions with the phrase 'In response to the cruel Israeli attack,' and conclude with the phrase 'This many people have been martyred since Israel launched its aggression against Gaza.' Be sure to always perpetuate the principle of 'the role of the occupation is attack, and we in Palestine are fulfilling [the role of] the reaction.'
Beware of spreading rumors from Israeli spokesmen, particularly those that harm the home front. Be wary regarding accepting the occupation's version [of events]. You must always cast doubts on this [version], disprove it, and treat it as false.
The interior ministry prepared a series of suggestions specifically for Palestinian activists who speak to Westerners via social media. The ministry emphasizes that conversations with them should be conducted differently from conversations with other Arabs.
When speaking to the West, you must use political, rational, and persuasive discourse, and avoid emotional discourse aimed at begging for sympathy. There are elements with a conscience in the world; you must maintain contact with them and activate them for the benefit of Palestine. Their role is to shame the occupation and expose its violations.
Avoid entering into a political argument with a Westerner aimed at convincing him that the Holocaust is a lie and deceit; instead, equate it with Israel's crimes against Palestinian civilians.
The narrative of life vs. the narrative of blood: [When speaking] to an Arab friend, start with the number of martyrs. [But when speaking] to a Western friend, start with the number of wounded and dead. Be sure to humanize the Palestinian suffering. Try to paint a picture of the suffering of the civilians in Gaza and the West Bank during the occupation's operations and its bombings of cities and villages.
Do not publish photos of military commanders. Do not mention their names in public, and do not praise their achievements in conversations with foreign friends!
Recently I came across a bunch more ancient/old maps of the Middle East, Near East, Levant, Israel, and others. Some are remakes as the old ones were degraded or unable to be scanned, some are historian estimates of what the area looked like at the times, others are actual scans of maps from back in the day. I will link specific maps of interest but also databases below. I will link the maps first and the databases they are from above them.
David Rumsey Historical Map Collection (over 130,000 maps and related images online)
Alte Welt: Städte. (Old world: cities)
No. 1: General map of the countries mentioned in the Bible
No. 2: Map of the journeyings of the Israelites : in the desert
Turkey. Middle East. Ancient World
American Society of Overseas Research (online resources)
The Ancient Near East: The Hellenistic World c. 200 BCE
Neo-Hittite and Aramean States
Iron Age IIIv2 Empires
The National Library of Israel
Specific search for maps of Israel
Map History (part of the virtual library)
Index
Gallica (digital library of the National France Library and its partners + I don’t know if it’s just my browser but switching the language to English didn’t work much so it was mostly in French)
Database
Maps
W.F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research (Digital Collection)
Palestine of the Old Testament
Historic Map Works
ASIA/recens summa/cura delineata
United Nations Archives
Map Collection of the League of Nations + UNOG
Library of Congress World Digital Library
Map Collection
links to previous posts containing the same resources in case i missed any - link
#israel#palestine#politics#hamas#jews#gaza#palestine vs israel#jewish#links#resources#israel resources#jewish resources#jewish history#pro israel
51 notes
·
View notes
Text
Seriously gonna need certain people in the atla fandom to stop talking about colonialism with this singular definition of going somewhere, planting a flag and living there when there are so many different measures colonizers used (and still use tbh) to subdue and erase a people’s culture before “officially claiming” a country as their own, not even gonna get into those shady official means.
The 2 most common ways western media depict settler colonialism:
1. ethnic cleansing - wiping out the inhabitants and their culture by any means necessary: violence, disease, forced migration etc.
2. disrupting cultural traditions and economic advancement - imposing your way of life on the inhabitants making it impossible for them to survive on their own.
[P.S. This isn’t meant to be an all inclusive definition of colonialism as I’m sure there’s a lot of different ways you can talk about this that I’m probably leaving out from what I was taught growing up in a newly former colony myself.]
Frankly, I’m just tired of this fandom acting like the South Pole was not directly and indirectly affected by the Fire Nation’s colonial practices when:
1. ethnic cleansing:
Hama: They came again and again, each time rounding up more of our waterbenders and taking them captive. The Puppetmaster, Avatar the Last Airbender.
The Fire Nation literally tried to wipe them out continuously. They came back over and over until every single waterbender was captured and if another one was born (Katara) they came immediately back to keep the Southerners in their place.
As said by Katara and Sokka, waterbending was not just a means of fighting but an “ancient art unique to their culture”. The Fire Nation didn’t just physically subdue the South by taking away all their benders but literally wiped out an integral part of their culture which so much of functioning water tribe society depends on, which will be expanded on in part 2.
The Fire Nation also did this in the Earth Kingdom colonies as seen in Imprisoned, the only difference being the soldiers actually stayed in these places, but this did not stop the Fire Nation from coming back to the South and enforcing the same colonial practices they used in the Earth Kingdom over and over.
2. cultural and economic disruption:
I don’t know how much clearer the difference in the South Pole before and after the Fire Nation raids could have been made. The fact that they make it explicitly clear by including this frame in Hama’s story is just another example of how the raids affected the South’s overall development. With the genocide, they lost a huge part of their population to build, hunt and most importantly defend themselves. Like we see in the North Pole, the South had their own ice structures obviously built by waterbenders that people lived in, now living mostly in tents with the village being a much smaller size in general. Katara and Sokka are left to find food for their whole tribe with their benders (and other warriors) gone, and of course when the Fire Nation shows up yet again, they are extremely defenseless and would have been burnt to a crisp if Aang wasn’t there.
Of course, the war meant they also couldn’t celebrate a lot of their cultural and spiritual traditions with their warriors being gone, more an indirect consequence of Fire Nation colonialism since Hakoda made the choice to take the men to fight on his own. The consequences of this are first highlighted in the Bato episode and brought up again in Legend of Korra season 2 by Unalaq.
After 100 years of war, the Fire Nation literally managed to turn the South Pole into a colony in everything but name where they could go and enforce their will on the inhabitants any time they wanted, without having to physically live there in the cold which was least optimal for their living conditions anyway.
I’m tired of people acting as if the Fire Nation couldn’t go and “plant a flag” in the South if they wanted to, when in fact, they didn’t want to and they didn’t have to. They literally already subdued the South by removing them as a threat and was trying to do the same to the North in the Book 1 finale.
Anyways, I’m not an expert on colonialism and I’m not claiming these to be the only ways to define colonialism in real life or atla. This is just a rant based on my personal understanding of settler colonialism and just… my annoyance at how this fandom constantly downplays the already watered down depiction of colonialism in the show.
#atla#colonialism#settler colonialism#anti fire nation#don’t know if that’s a thing but it should be#atla fandom problems#genocide#ethnic cleansing#southern water tribe#rant post
97 notes
·
View notes
Note
May I ask how Blavatsky's New Age movement is culturally Christian despite her hating Christianity?
Yup!
So, being culturally Christian isn't about agreeing with Christianity's beliefs. It's about living within and internalizing elements of Christian culture.
For example, many of our swear words/phrases are related to Christianity - EG, hell, damn, Jesus Fucking Christ, Christ on a cracker, etc.
The word "goodbye" derives from "god be with ye." We often say "bless you" after people sneeze, which comes from "God bless you," which again, has Christian origins.
Christmas being a federal holiday is an example of cultural Christianity. And if you're an atheist celebrating Christmas because you see it as being about family, you're still participating in cultural Christianity.
Now of course, none of these things are inherently bad. In fact, most of cultural Christianity isn't bad. Most of it's pretty neutral. Most of it.
Cultural Christianity also shapes our ideas of what religion looks like, how it functions, and what its purpose is. For example, many western antitheists just assume that all religions want to aggressively spread themselves, all claim to have ultimate truth, and threaten nonbelievers with punishment. Meanwhile, many of these atheists go about their atheism the same way many Christians go about Christianity - treating it as something that needs to be far and wide to save the world and usher in the utopia.
And this brings us to our next point - Christianity shapes how many of us expect the future to unfold. Specifically, a lot of us just sort of think that a utopia is just around the corner (or just imagine that as a thing that can happen if we try hard enough) thanks to Christian millennialism.
Blavatsky's concept of a New Age is basically informed by Christian millennialism. Her whole idea that the spiritually unevolved would be wiped out and a new race of spiritually superior people would take over isn't exactly Christian belief, but it's definitely informed by it.
Now some of you might be thinking, "okay, but Blavatsky drew inspiration from many religions." And you'd be right. But the thing is, she looked at and interpreted these other religions from the perspective of one who was culturally Christian. Additionally, she was taking a perennialist approach to religion, which is a thing Christians have been doing since the early days of Christianity, basically trying to claim that proof of Jesus was found in their own spiritual beliefs and religious traditions. Blavatsky, of course, wasn't looking for proof of Jesus, but she was looking for validation of her own beliefs. Hell, like many Christians before her, she even tries to claim Kabbalah validates her beliefs.
Additionally, she values the Christian Bible as a holy text with spiritual truths that she and everyone should be concerned about. Even if she disagrees with more orthodox interpretations, the fact that she thinks this is a book she needs to concern herself with at all is because of her cultural Christianity. She was informed and influenced by Christian modes of occultism and esotericism.
Ultimately, being culturally Christian has nothing to do with whether you embrace or even like Christianity's spiritual doctrines. It's about living in a Christianized society and conforming to any of its Christianity-derived assumptions, mores, and customs, regardless of what they have to do with any official church doctrine.
111 notes
·
View notes
Text
Cyberpunk and the Individualist
Keeping the theme of Cyberpunk for this week, I want to talk about one other thing about Cyberpunk, that I super rarely see discussed.
Remember a while ago, when I talked about how western Cyberpunk always had this theme of "Japan is overtaking our economy and soon we will be Japanofied!" because of the economic anxieties towards Japan in he 70s and 80s. Which is why Cyberpunk has all those Japanese aesthetics and the Japanese megacorps and what not. It is because of this anxieties...
But... One thing that is often missed among this is the other part of that anxiety. Japan, despite being a capitalist country, is also a collectivist society. Aka a "you do stuff for the good of society" and what not country. Meanwhile western and especially American capitalism is an individualist country, where everything is about the "do your own and only your own" and the illusion "freedom!!!" 🦅
That also is why so much more people died of the pandemic in the USA than in Japan. Because while the US individualist "FREEDOM 🦅" society made a whole thing of "I feel robbed of my freedom while wearing a mask" the Japanese collectivist society was like: "Sure I am wearing a mask if I can protect society through it."
And here is the Cyberpunk thing. The protagonists in Western Cyberpunk stories are individualists. Sure, they might work in small groups, but they are not part of communities. If they start out with a community, they get divorced from the community through the story. Maybe the community gets killed or maybe they turn against the rugged individualist protagonist.
Originally a lot of western cyberpunk obviously had this idea of the noir kinda hero. The out of his luck private detective and what not. But also the street fighter, who has lost everything. A lot of the early stuff also very much focused on a male perspective - and dare I say it? - a toxic masculine approach to things.
And I think this is also where a lot of the defeatism of Cyberpunk storytelling comes from. Because Cyberpunk is of course dystopic. But it is dystopic in a way that has completely given up on things. Cyberpunk is like: "Don't even try to change the system, IT IS HOPELESS." But... Yeah, duh it is if you are working alone or in a small group. You need a community to fight the system. You need to network to do something.
I feel like the true baseline of where Cyberpunk and Solarpunk are different from each other is in fact the idea of community. Cyberpunk with its rugged individualism does not trust community - Solarpunk does.
And here I go again: We silly humans are no good on our own. We actually need community. We need more community than just our little nuclear family. So, just... open yourself up to work with others. Don't be a lonely Street Samurai.
42 notes
·
View notes
Text
I regret to inform you that prejudice (of the banal traditional kind) is not inherently right-wing
I.
Karl Marx wrote:
...Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew – not the Sabbath Jew, as Bauer does, but the everyday Jew.
Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew.
What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.
Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Judaism, would be the self-emancipation of our time.
An organization of society which would abolish the preconditions for huckstering, and therefore the possibility of huckstering, would make the Jew impossible. His religious consciousness would be dissipated like a thin haze in the real, vital air of society. On the other hand, if the Jew recognizes that this practical nature of his is futile and works to abolish it, he extricates himself from his previous development and works for human emancipation as such and turns against the supreme practical expression of human self-estrangement.
We recognize in Judaism, therefore, a general anti-social element of the present time, an element which through historical development – to which in this harmful respect the Jews have zealously contributed – has been brought to its present high level, at which it must necessarily begin to disintegrate.
In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism...
Iosif Stalin's death, not long after his fabrication of the Doctors' Plot, spared the world from another wave of the great terror specifically against Jews. Even with him gone, discrimination against Jews remained the de facto policy of the USSR until its dissolution. And de jure policy, if one includes the fact that Soviet internal passports featured one's nationality, and Jews (except for the children of mixed marriages) were not allowed to identify as "Russian", "Ukrainian", etc.
If your definition of the ideological Left and Right does not place Karl Marx and Iosif Stalin on the left, your classification system has effectively lost all meaning.
II.
I don't want to pick on Twitter user rev_avocado (who generally writes mostly good things) in particular; this is an example of a more widespread phenomenon. I made this post now after reading the Sam Kriss essay posted by @prudencepaccard and @triviallytrue. I thought the essay was 98% excellent. The one flaw, in my view, is this one. It posits one specific psychological mechanism to explain the bad behavior of some left-wing Westerners on social media. It's not even that it cites a reason to dismiss the possibility that perhaps even a small fraction of these people genuinely don't value Jewish lives; it's that it never even considers the possibility in order to dismiss it. I suspect this is because some people just assume that prejudice against Jews is inherently right-wing. "My comrades are left-wing; ipso facto they cannot be antisemitic.”
And. It. Just. Isn't. So. [x] (Sadly, I cannot agree with Corey Robin that this is exclusive to Europe. Possibly, if he wrote that post now, he wouldn't either.)
Lest there be any confusion about the point of this post, I emphatically do not think that those like rev_avocado or Sam Kriss are themselves displaying antisemitism.
You know those polls where they asked people how common cheating in school was, and the people who themselves never cheated assumed everyone was like them, and said it was rare, while the cheaters assumed everyone was like them, and said it was near-universal? I think this explains both some of the utterly counterproductive celebrations of civilian massacres and the bafflement of the people marveling at their tactical insanity.
Again, to be as clear as possible about this, the vile people are the ones with an incorrect perception. Antisemitism is obviously much less common on the left (well, the social-democratic left; Tankies are horrible about this, but Tankies are horrible about everything) than on the right. But I would greatly appreciate it if the left-wingers who are ostensibly my friends and/or comrades would stop reflexively assuming that the number of leftists who despise me for my ethnicity is zero. It is a minority, but that is not the same thing as "it is insignificant".
35 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hi again! Yeah, from your bookshelf! You seem well informed and I wanna know the type of stuff you read and might recommend. I don't even know what to tell you for my interests because I feel like I'm just begining. Sorry I'm young and dumb still haha.
#1 you're not dumb and #2 nothing to apologize for :)
Here's some books I've got on my shelves or that I've read:
Men Who Hate Women: From Incels to Pickup Artists, Laura Bates
Pro: Reclaiming Abortion Rights, Katha Pollitt
Women, Race, & Class, Angela Davis
American Girls, Nancy Jo Sales
Lesbian Culture: An Anthology, eds. Julia Penelope and Susan J Wolf
Lesbian Studies, Margaret Cavendish
Hood Feminism, Mikki Kendall
Against White Feminism, Rafia Zakaria
Sister and Brother: Lesbians and Gay Men Write About Their Lives Together, eds Joan Nestle and John Preston
Another Mother Tongue, Judy Grahn
Aimee & Jaguar, Erica Fischer
Mouths of Rain: An Anthology of Black Lesbian Thought, ed. Briona Simone Jones
Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe, John Boswell
The Mary Daly Reader, eds. Jennifer Rycenga and Linda Barufaldi
Hidden from History: Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past, eds. Martin Duberman, Martha Vicinus, George Chauncey Jr.
Testosterone Rex: Myths of Sex, Science, and Society, Cordelia Fine
Speaking Freely: Unlearning the Lies of the Father's Tongue, Julia Penelope
The Resisting Reader, Judith Fetterley
The Double X Economy, Linda Scott
Not That Bad: Dispatches from Rape Culture, ed. Roxane Gay
Home Grown: How Domestic Violence Turns Men Into Terrorists, Joan Smith
Intercourse, Andrea Dworkin
The Trials of Nina McCall: Sex, Surveillance, and the Decades-Long Government Plan to Imprison "Promiscuous" Women, Scott Stern
The Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory, Marilyn Frye
Only Words, Catharine A. Mackinnon
Everything Below the Waist: Why Health Care Needs a Feminist Revolution, Jennifer Block
Witchcraze: A New History of the European Witch Hunts, Anne Llwellyn Barstow
Cinderella Ate My Daughter: Dispatches from the Frontlines of the New Girlie-Girl Culture, Peggy Orenstein
Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men, Caroline Criado-Perez
Lesbian Ethics: Toward New Values, Sarah Lucia Hoagland
We Were Feminists Once: From Riot Grrrl to CoverGirl, the Buying and Selling of a Political Movement, Andi Zeisler
Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution, Adrienne Rich
On Lies, Secrets, and Silence: Selected Prose, Adrienne Rich
Feminism, Animals, and Science: The Naming of the Shrew, Lynda Birke
The Female Body in Western Culture: Contemporary Perspectives, ed. Susan Rubin Suleiman
Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza, Gloria Anzaldua
Flesh Wounds: The Culture of Cosmetic Surgery, Virginia L Blum
Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment, Patricia Hill Collins
Pornland: How Porn has Hijacked our Sexuality, Gail Dines
Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women, Susan Faludi
From Eve to Dawn: A History of Women in the World, Marilyn French
This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color, eds. Cherrie Moraga and Gloria Anzaldua
Seeing Like a Feminist, Nivedita Menon
With Her Machete In Her Hand: Reading Chicana Lesbians, Catriona Reuda Esquibel
The Disappearing L: Erasure of Lesbian Spaces and Culture, Bonnie J. Morris
Foundlings: Lesbian and Gay Historical Emotion before Stonewall, Christopher Nealon
The Persistent Desire: A Butch/Femme Reader, ed. Joan Nestle
The Straight Mind and Other Essays, Monique Wittig
The Trouble Between us: An Uneasy History of White and Black Women in the Feminist Movement, Winifred Breines
Right-Wing Women, Andrea Dworkin
Woman Hating, Andrea Dworkin
Why I Am Not A Feminist, Jessica Crispin
Sapphistries: A Global History of Love Between Women, Leila J Rupp
I tried to avoid too many left turns into my specific interests although if you passionately want to know any of those, I can make you some more lists LOL
I would suggest picking a book that sounds interesting and using the footnotes and bibliography to find more to read. I've done that a lot :) a lot of my books have more sticky tabs or w/e in the bibliography than in the text so I don't lose stuff I'm interested in.
Hope this helps!
30 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
idontwantablog-name
Space Is For Nerds
tokusima
Без названия
magneticloves
Magnetic Loves.
couryp-blog
Coury Palermo: delusions of grandeur
purelocksmithservices-blog
Locksmith Services