I know frequently the “anti terf” people lie about this straight up but sometimes they don’t. Here’s an example where clearly there are links between “disagree with trans ideology due to feminism” < - > “like anything “transphobic” because edgy” < - > “disagree with trans ideology due to trad/mra racist alt right views”

https://www.tumblr.com/ladiablesse/729815657616736257/the-fact-that-this-post-of-all-things-ended-up-on

As fucking typical the right wing n word saying bullshit starts right after https://www.tumblr.com/americanette reblogs it

She doesn’t say it but she does say some mra bullshit about how the real sadness here is men aren’t protecting women as they rightly should 🙄

Then within the next hour here come

https://costcohotdogandsoda.tumblr.com/

(Also with Bible verse in bio)

Saying “average n*gger behavior.”

And https://www.tumblr.com/anew-jackson

Saying ““black men are inherently violent”

radfem 🫱🏽‍🫲🏻 radright”

Where op is still off base is the majority of the notes on her post are actually radfems or adjacent and none of them at all lead to right wing blogs picking it up

Plus of course some people just don’t look at who follows them and of course there are right wing assholes who deliberately try to pick off anyone with the slightest disagreement with the main leftist view.

I can’t blog about issues to do with Palestine for example without a bunch of antisemites following me and trying to convince me to be antisemitic about it. That doesn’t prove my views about Palestine are inherently antisemitic — they very much aren’t. Same for how radfems/gc end up being with attracting a lot of right wing actually-transphobic (and sexist and racist and homophobic) attention.

But please people if you are at all connected to blogs like americanette that shit seriously — taking time to disengage our arguments and discussion in all spaces online and off from the right wing will do more for us than the next 10 gc memes you bother to make and post. Don’t lie, you’ve got the time.

This also isn’t like working with your normie right leaning cousin on abortion because she agrees with you about that. You aren’t making connections here you are being made a patsy to keep you alienated from the left and to keep more women on the left from joining us in an actually revolutionary feminist movement. Right wing people online absolutely know the more they get you to openly connect with them the more they can use that to keep young women in particular away from listening to you about feminism.

Hypothetical you btw I am sending this to a few different blogs because I bothered writing it and don’t have a rf blog to put it on yet. I’m pretty new. Not as a reader but as someone agreeing. I know this works because it worked to keep me away from learning more about rf for a long time. Not the rumor of racism and FAR right wing connections being ignored or celebrated but seeing the evidence. It was actually seeing americanette suggested as a blog within moments of following rf blogs that put me off for another few months. Was there going to be another issue I was forced to sit through racist attacks from “my own” side over?? Seems to be yes but maybe it’s getting better.

so i'm not 100% following here bc i can't see the link at the beginning but i think i got the gist.

the op blocked me so i cannot click the first link but this is an earlier version of the post in question

first: yes racism is a problem among radfems (i've yet to encounter any mixed race environment where it isn't a problem), but i will say i see a bit more effort to combat it here than in most online spaces i've been around. not that that's a high bar, lbh.

tumblr recommendeds should not be trusted, though, and they don't necessarily mean much. the algorithms aren't exactly unbiased. and keep in mind sock accounts to vilify radfems are very real and present, as are troll accounts. i don't know who any of the people you linked to are tho so i can't speak on that, and 2 have me blocked or maybe i blocked them ages ago and don't remember. i do typically block right wing blogs on sight,so it's possible. also it seems some of the stuff you linked to was maybe deleted?

i will say unequivocally that being intentionally "transphobic" in an edgy way is not productive and should not be supported in radfem spaces. we are here to criticize and analyze, not to be outright cruel for the sake of being cruel. many people seem to forget this.

i do not personally know any women here who engages with right wing blogs, even in argument. i'm sure they exist, but not in my sphere - though i don't actually spend very much time online. i think most folks ik on here just block and move on.

as a side note, i used to look at who follows me etc but i have like 3500 followers now bc i've been here a long time and make original posts pretty often, so it is no longer realistic to monitor who's following me - i really don't have THAT kind of time or energy. but if i see someone reblogging from me who's shit, i block. i have no idea what the typical follower count is on radblr but generally speaking, i think people should only be held so responsible for who follows them. making an effort is important, but i don't think it's reasonable to expect everyone to be online enough to thoroughly check all their followers.

as for this^ this stuff is said deliberately to get a reaction from radfems and/or to discredit us. unless a radfem im blocked by or have blocked said so in the notes, i didn't see anything implying "black men are inherently violent." this kind of post is usually making shit up to antagonize radfems or misrepresent radical feminism as an ideology. this is not to say there's no radfem who believes wildly racist bullshit like that - in fact, i'm confident there are, since they're everywhere. it's just not at all a staple of radfems like this implies.

but yes, bottom line, radblr is far from immune to racism, but isn't the worst i've seen either, and things like "recommendeds" or shitty people reblogging from radfems should be taken with a grain of salt as neither of those inherently indicates an endorsement from the rad blog connected to the incident, if that makes sense. my brain is mush rn after driving 4 hours.

Hi, I don't know you and you don't know me. But I discovered your blog through the rating animated horses posts (all of your ratings are perfect btw) and scrolled through out of curiosity. I am a gay trans man and have had some unpleasant experiences with Christians in the past. I know not all Christians are as cruel as they were, but it's easier to believe it when I witness it. I know this is a strange ask but I wanted to thank you from the bottom of my heart. You seem like a kind individual who would treat my community like real people. I don't know what your views on us are, but I'm certain you would treat us like anyone else. Thank you for being kind in this terrifying world ♥♥♥

Hi. Thank you so much for this. It means a lot to me to hear you say this.

I do believe very differently than you about matters of gender and sexuality. I have theologically conservative, orthodox Christian beliefs about those things. In short, that sex should be within marriage, which is between a man and a woman; and that there are two genders which are fixed and in line with our biology. That's maybe not the best expression of it, but I'm not trying to lecture you or preach at you or anything, I'm just trying to be clear so that it doesn't come across that I'm either trying to deceive anyone or hiding my beliefs. And I'm figuring that you know the general gist of it. But if you (or anyone else) wants to know more about what I believe on that and why, I can certainly talk about it.

I've gone back and forth the last couple days since you sent this, over what to say and how much to say. Because I really do care. i care very deeply. I've had a fair number of students who identify as gay or trans or nonbinary, and whenever anything comes up related to these issues they are the ones that I think about. Their names, their faces, their stories. And I worry about them, and I hope that they're safe, and happy and taken care of. And when I disagree with them about things like the concept of gender, it's because I truly, deeply believe that they are the ones being harmed by those ideas and that kills me.

I have a lot of strong feelings about the transgender movement and ideology (for lack of a better term) because I really believe that it's doing a lot of very real harm (spiritual, emotional, psychological and physical) to people who are vulnerable and struggling and who are just trying to figure out how to fit in and how to be themselves and all of that. People like my students and (without making any assumptions about you or your situation) you.

I think there's far too much assumption of ill will on both sides. I think that most people who share your beliefs and ideology really are trying their best to help people be safe and happy. And I think that most people who share mine (who truly share mine, and not some twisted version, because I'd say there's also a false dichotomy that makes it into two different positions and not a wide range of people believing a wide range of things)-- that most people who share mine also want those same people to be safe and happy.

I do also know that there are far too many Christians and people who call themselves Christians, who respond with anger and mockery and cruelty (or are even just well-meaning but incautious and insensitive). And I'm sorry that you've had to deal with that, and I hope that your experiences in the future are better.

I'll be praying that you are safe and taken care of, and that you will get to see God's love in a way that the Christians you've known in the past have failed to represent to you.

I hope that I haven't said anything to sound unkind or judgmental or like I'm lecturing you, and if I did I'm sorry because that was not my intention. Thank you again for your incredibly kind words, and I'm glad I was able to make you smile with some ridiculous horse jokes. Happy New Year.

I think the obsession with patriarchal 'I/rondaddy' I/ronwood is arrested development and obsession with childhood and return to parental figure making firm decisions, btw. It's a power fantasy but it's also a firmly childish one, in part motivated by narrative cynicism (and a failure to pay any attention to the story at hand). It's telling that he's even referred to as a father ('Daddy'), which even if sexualised, doesn't escape the decidedly psychoanalytic implications. It's an attempt to wrestle with something adult (sexuality) through a childish lense because of, well, regression. Whether you think that regression is fine is neither here nor there, but I seriously reject it on narrative terms.

So it's interesting that on one side you have childish desires expressed in segments of the fandom who want adult characters to return to children, and then there are others interested in adult characters being surrogate parents. It's very weird how unchallenged these ideas are and how protected they are when they basically fundamentally alter the structure of the story, because you can't have the characters self-determining or evolving, you can't have a story that changes, you can't have authority (parental) figures challenged, you need it easy. Maybe it's just laziness. In some ways I think the regression is encouraged in fandom because it's so insulating and comforting, not necessarily because of at-large arrested development actually seriously going on; it also carries such enormous currency because the headcanons are cute and fluffy or they reward characters like I/ronwood with easy, cynically-loaded narrative explanations.

Childhood innocence and whimsy and joy aren't to be discarded. That's my caveat to this post. You can read my previous ones for full clarity, if you're so incensed or feel I'm not covering the topic with enough sympathy. Description does not equal condemnation. The issue I have will always be with fanon because I don't bring my social concerns to my fandom blog.

To circle back to the topical character, it's interesting because liking him and his ideology (you can do the former without the latter) is framed as a more sensible, masculine, and mature position, when it's really not. (Also, objections to his narrative on the basis of ableism, or being unable to sympathise with people in the military due to being a civilian, see my previous posts and perhaps direct those objections to other characters as well for consistency. I also can play many different trauma cards, as well as bring up the misogyny that fandom levies against Cinder in particular, and my family is not civilian, so don't even fucking try me. My power level is more than yours. I'm saying this because it's happened to me before and it was grossly insulting).

in 2022 romanticizing toxic relationships are OUT and romanticizing sweet and handsome plus sized man x his fun and pretty wife is IN

hi there. how do you deal with ppl who talk about critical thinking and oppression being anti-radfems? (for example other vegans, i'm vegan myself). it's just so hypocritical and disgusting to me. like, they can extend their empathy towards non-human animals but not towards 50% of the human population. i don't understand how they can just not give a shit about women like this (or about same-sex attracted ppl and the very real issues with trans activism and the harm of predatory shit like the cotton ceiling). then they just turn around and act all high and mighty and pretend that WE are the bad ones who "don't want equal rights" for trans ppl or smth, when the only ones trampling all over our hard fought rights are them, while also actively harming "trans" aka gender-nonconforming children with their regressive ideology. i can't deal with the lies and the "progressive" nicely-worded misogyny and homophobia anymore. btw this started because i, as a vegan and bisexual woman, was looking through acti-veg's blog for resources and decided to try and see if he ever talked about trans ppl and/or radfems... and wtf i got so mad, i feel like losing it. who even is on our side except the small group of radfems who also care about animal rights, i feel so hopeless

it's usually about personal benefit, whether being a member of the oppressor class, or not wanting to let go of the easy way out and pretending that every choice is your own and harmless. it's also harder to see, particularly in the first world, where many have been blinded by neo-liberal individualism, and don't know the harm they're doing to themselves and others. animals can't talk or consent, it's easy to go "they don't want this". but when women are going 'Ii love this", then it becomes a more complicated process of deciphering what is harmful.

of course, some recognise it, which is why you have, from my experience, a higher proportion of vegan radfems, the two ideologies use similar critical thinking and analysis, but everyone wants to defend they're own actions. that's why liberal feminism was created. rather than analyse certain actions and based your behaviours around the conclusions of that thought, they start with the actions they like/benefit from/are easiest, and try to find some way to shove them into the progressive box.

and finally, when people go vegan, apart from different food, their life is not much different, AND there are other gains apart from the animals that us as humans benefit from, like environment, health, etc. but with feminism, there is no such thing, it's a definite only really women benefit and men lose their privileges. the 'gains' men get from feminism are miniscule compared to what they lose. (most) men aren't sexually attracted to non human animals. that sexual attraction on both sides makes female oppression very unique, and i also think that's a large reason why progressive women resist it. they want to have hope and faith and trust in men.

idislikecispeople, The Most Infamous Dyscourse Blogger: Part 1.0, Rumors

idislikecispeople, also known as many names throughout her time on Tumblr (such as Adele, Kat, Mami, Samantha and Sayaka), was a former Tumblr blogger who became infamous for coining the term "tucute", among many other controversial things she has posted on her blogs. This was supposed to be one, very long masterpost about her, but Tumblr's post editor is a bitch and won't let me do that.

In this post, I'll be debunking or confirming rumors commonly spread about idislikecispeople. The rest of my posts about her will each be dedicated to a specific controversial belief she held or situations she got into. For simplicity's sake, I'll be referring to idislikecispeople as Kat for the rest of this post and future ones.

Rumors

Kat Coined the Terms "Truscum" and "Tucute"

Verdict: Partially True

Kat coined the term tucute, but she did not coin the terms truscum or transmedicalist.

Here's a screenshot of Kat's original definition of a tucute:

Transcript:

What is Tucute?

What does tucute mean?

Tucute is basically just the opposite of truscum, it’s a term and community for trans, nonbinary, and/or non-cis individuals created to separate anti-truscum from truscum and to serve as a safe place from truscum and from cis people, where they believe that being trans requires dysphoria, we do not,where they think that being trans is a medical condition, we do not,and where they deny numerous gender identities on the basis that it “discredits the trans community” we do not.

What are the prerequisites to be a part of the tucute community?

You have to be trans, nonbinary, and/or non-cis in general

You have to accept all pronouns and gender identities

You haveto believe that dysphoria is not necessary to be trans

You have to dislike truscum

You cannot side with truscum or believe in their ideology

You cannot misgender anyone no matter how mad they make you

You cannot be an ableist whatsoever

Did you invent the tucute community? Why?

I indeed did coin the tucute term and community and anyone who says otherwise are creeps who are trying to steal it from me and redefine it for their own nefarious doings. I started this community so anti-truscum could separate themselves from truscum and cis people who are a part of the truscum community, it serves as a safe space from both truscum and cis people.

I’m cis, can I be tucute if I believe in your movement and want to help?

No, you can’t be tucute if you’re cis, you can only be a tucute ally, and you need to be sure to never speak for or over a trans person.

I see a lot of tucuties being just as harmful as truscum, what will you do about it?

There isn’t much I can do to them other than ask them to stop aligning with the tucute community, and of course, that doesn’t mean they will. Also be noted that truscum and cis people will pretend to be tucute just to tarnish the name of the tucute community, so tread lightly, you might be talking to a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Spread the word, use the tag #tucute and join the army today!

[A digital drawing of Sayaka Miki from Puella Magi Madoka Magica in her magical girl form, with a banner underneath her reading "Tucute 4 U!"]

(source) (source)

Kat Was a Cisgender Woman Who Lied About Being a Transgender Woman

Verdict: False

This rumor primarily comes from a post on Kat's oldest known Tumblr blog, chromaghost, where she claims that she wasn't MTF and only tagged a selfie as such because she thought that transgender people were "cool".

Transcript:

Anonymous asked: are you a mtf? i seen it tagged on one of your photos.

No lol. I wanted to post it to the tag because transgender people are cool :3

(source) (source) (source)

However, Kat addressed this post and made it clear she very much was a transgender woman multiple times on her later blogs. This claim can also be confirmed with nude photos Kat posted online, which I don't feel comfortable spreading, so you'll just have to trust me on that one. I also don't feel comfortable directly encouraging you to go and dig up those nudes, as most of her nude photos were either taken when she was a minor, spread without her consent and/or were uploaded because people pressured her into posting nudes to "prove" she was a transgender woman.

Transcript:

Anonymous asked: you bound with ace bandage in one of your selfies. i don't know what to think about you anymore. according to some people you're a 27 year old cis woman scamming us, but you say you're a 22 year old trans woman. i want to trust you but i don't know if i can. i'm sorry.

Rest assured I’m not 27 years old lol. What you’re referring to is a less than graceful ~art piece~ we did (”Playing a Boy” or something) on deviantART when we were 16/17 (?) and really ill-informed. I ask you to not take that as how I stand currently – as I have learned so much more since, and I have a penis and I was designated male at birth because of it (feel free to purchase a passcode to our nsfw blog to see for yourself). At the time we were developing breast tissue but still had to appear as a ‘boy.’ Don’t bind with Ace bandages, kids, it can damage your rib cage, something we didn’t know at the time.

(source) (source)

Transcript:

[A picture of two prescriptions, estradiol and spironolactone, both prescribed to Adele Sheffield.]

grandtran still gonna think I photoshopped it or what

(source)

Transcript:

Anonymous asked: In other words, you aren't gonna cough up the pics because you know you can't fake that shit because you're actually cis. Cool. BTW why do you keep changing your story about the blog, and if the blog was run by you when you were in denial about being trans because of self hate, why were the pics tagged mtf and you were constantly saying trans people were cool?

Yeah I’m not gonna do something for y’all and get nothing in return except more doubt from you, you see how one sided that kind of request is? Also its technically considered sexual harassment, just because its on the internet, you’re a coward (whats your username btw?), and you think I’m cis and you want me to prove time and time again to you that I’m dmab doesn’t justify sexually soliciting someone when they’re not comfortable in being solicited – for free no less.

At first I genuinely had no memory of that blog, it was only active for all of 2 months and for some reason I moved onto a new email and new tumblr, and I haven’t the foggiest why. As for the whole “me claiming to not be ~mtf~” I don’t have any memories from that time, I can only assume it was a lot of dysphoria fueled self-hatred and wanting to be seen/pass as a cis girl lesbian.

If you’re really gonna solicit nudes from a trans woman (a second time) as they do sex work to try and stay on their feet without offering anything in return just so your transmisogynistic ass can get off to trying to tell me my dick is fake isn’t classy at all. I perish the thought of what you’re parents would think of this behavior from you. But yeah, feel free to send some money to my paypal so I can get the gender markers on my records changed because that’s gonna cost a lot apparently, and I’ll definitely send you the dick pics you want. :)

(source) (source) (source)

Transcript:

[A picture of a a hospital bracelet on Kat's wrist. The patient's name is Adele Sheffield and her sex is labeled as "M".]

(source)

Kat Lied About Having Diabetes To Get Money From Tumblr Users

Verdict: False

This doesn't need much commentary from me, just view the screenshots below.

Transcript:

To the people who keep harping on me buying a $15 video game for my mental health 7 MONTHS ago “with my donation money,” well, here you go, some proof, links and screenshots provided

So for everyone spreading misinformation about me spending $15 on a video game for my mental health, here’s a full list of reasons why there is no way, shape, or form I spent my paypal money on it:

Yes, I spent $15 of my own money after selling one of my possessions, not denying it:

[A screenshot of a Tumblr post by Kat where she shows off a copy of Fall Out: New Vegas, marked with a price of $14.99. The date of the post is marked as July 21, 2014 at 06:28.39 PM.]

Be sure to look at the date, July 21st, 2014 6:28 PM. Now lets look at my first donation post asking for help:

[A screenshot of a Tumblr post by Kat where she asks for donations to be able to afford insulin because she has no insurance. The date of the post is marked as July 20, 2014 at 08:14.00 PM.]

Hmm, one day before the purchase of said game, July 20th 2014 at 8:14 PM. Now, I’ve never heard of a video game store — much less a non-chain video game store accepting payment for video games in the form of virtual Amazon gift cards, have you? Oh, but you’re gonna say, “well you bought the game with your paypal donations anyway!” Well, here’s exhibit C:

[Another screenshot of a separate post made by Kat where she is also asking for donations to be able to afford insulin. The date of the post is marked as July 23, 2014 at 12:27.46 PM.]

Again, looking at the date of this posting which is the original donations post, you can see it was posted on July 23rd, 2014 at 12:27 PM, a full 2 days after I had bought the game. Now, if there’s no way for me to use Amazon gift cards for a real life video game store, then how can I go back in time a minimum of 2 full days to give past me $15 to buy said game, hm? This isn’t even accounting for the fact that I didn’t even have my own bank account associated with it until over a week later, and it surely doesn’t account for the fact that it takes up to 5 days to transfer from paypal to your bank account. All the dates are linked to the original unedited posts so you can see for yourself, and for added measure my first deposit was on August 14th, 2014:

[A screenshot of a deposit made by Kat. The date is marked as 08/14/14.]

Oh but yeah, anti-sjs, truscum, and the like took damniwishidthoughtofabettername’s postthey used to gaslight us with misinformation and you all bought it. Tell me how I could misuse donations that I could not use outside of Amazon and money I didn’t even start receiving until a full two days later, let alone the fact that there’s no way I could have transferred said money and used it two days prior as of the date of the paypal donations post.

I hope some of y’all could reblog this and get the word out, I’m sick and tired of people buying into that misinformation that person did solely to gaslight me as a means to try and disrupt my donations drive.

(source) (source) (source) (source) (source) (source) (source)

Transcript:

[A selfie of Kat holding up a vial of Novolin to the camera.]

Hey anon, I don’t feel comfy giving you my receipts (because doxxing is a thing) but here you go, a selfie with my most recent insulin purchase. 👽

(source) (source) (source) (source) (source) (source) (source)

Transcript:

Anonymous asked: Getting desperate for money again I see. How is your fake diabetes lately. I bet your blood sugar is like 800 this time and you're still able to be alive somehow.

You got me, I’m ~totally faking~

[A selfie of Kat. In the background several items used by diabetics are seen such as insulin syringes, glucose tablets, a blood sugar tester and test strips.]

[A picture that gives us a closer look at the background of the previous selfie.]

[A selfie of Kat holding up two vials, one of Lantus and the other of Humalog.]

Gee, must be one dedicated faker, right? To have hundreds of dollars of insulin equipment and insulin itself. Hmmm… Insulin syringes, glucose tablets, a blood sugar tester and test strips.. oh and insulin, hmmmm….

Oh and because you didn’t learn from last time you don’t die instantly when your blood sugar goes over 600 lol, something anyone who studies endocrinology can tell you, and I would know, being a diabetic, having to be hospitalized numerous times for ketoacidosis where the blood sugar has been too high for too long. Things you clearly do not know and you’re just jumping on the disableist bandwagon. I have an idea of who you are anyway, just doing this for future reference.

(source)

I’m the tin foil hat anon and I wanted to thank you for the response on my bb submission, you make great points. Although I was frustrated that some of them raised even more questions I didn’t think of myself… UGH… lol the S2 wait is gonna be painful

On the point of crosshair thinking his chip was removed a looong time ago(meaning before bracca or even as early as ep1) it wouldn’t make sense bc of his response to Hunter’s “you tried to kill us, we didn’t have a choice”. He says “and I did?”. So he seems to be aware he couldn’t control himself in all their previous encounters. Does it mean he knows his actions were due to chip then?

And you say crosshair avoiding the “when” question can be due to him not caring if the horrible actions he committed are chip or himself and it’s meant to show that he truly is despicable and evil. It could be the case because he shows absolutely no remorse or regret over slaughtering civilians, never apologizes to his brothers for not only trying to kill them but almost successfully incinerating(!!!) them. On top of that (apparently) without a chip he casually murders his own squad without a blink of an eye right in front of them.

On the other hand, he shows care for Omega’s safety in that episode and wants a better place in the universe for his brothers(even if it’s obviously a mistake). He sounds hurt and betrayed by them yet he still wants what he thinks is best for them. He seemed genuine and sincere in that moment. Even after they refused to join he protected them against the droids. He had multiple opportunities to shoot Hunter or others in the back but never did(and looked like didn’t even consider it). BUT after all of that he decides to raise his gun and try to shoot hunter who already has his gun drawn?! And in front of the whole squad holding him at gun point!!! WTF was he thinking?! WHY? I know they rejected his offer but still. Did his reveal completely change his plans? I just don’t understand. I know he is meant to be “complex and nuanced character with layers” but what a mood swing lmao

As much as I loved and enjoyed the bad batch overall I’m beginning to think that all these inconsistencies aren’t meant to be a crafty set up for next season. What they most likely are is just writers being vague on purpose so they don’t write themselves into a corner.

And as to why the batch and Omega didn’t even try to rescue their brother could just be so that Hunter and Crosshair would have this drama and disagreement at the end. Despite brad rau claiming their argument was over ideological differences. And Jen Corbett saying in that same cursed interview that the batch always love and support each other no matter what because they’re family. Well, I guess not crosshair, he doesn’t count anymore lol

And I agree with you I’d rather see the batch acknowledging they could have done more to try and rescue him than go into the chip details. However, I have a suspicion the real reason or explanation on why they never went back for him isn’t going to be brought up ever. Even *in universe* it simply does not make sense. Just makes me sad seeing how many people also try to come up with explanations. That should have been the writers job to provide something besides Hunter’s “you tried to kill us” bc that’s a weak argument and a total bs since he was SHOCKED to learn crosshair doesn’t have a chip.

Btw sorry for the long posts lol I just found your takes very intriguing

The season two wait is something awful and I only just started it lol. No worries about long asks though! My blog has become quite meta heavy over the years, so this is normal for my inbox. Besides, it’s a bit of a pot and kettle situation. It's not like my answers are particularly concise :D

Okay first, I have the unpopular (?) opinion that Crosshair was never planning to shoot Hunter, partly for the reasons you lay out here. You’re right, it doesn’t make sense, and rather than just accepting that he had that kind of “mood swing" (which would be pretty bad writing based on everything else we've seen) I think it does make sense that this was never his intention at all. Rather, it’s just a setup to make the audience think he’s about to shoot Hunter—that’s the obvious goal of that moment: the shock, drama, confusion, and then relief—but that doesn’t mean that in-universe that was ever Crosshair’s goal, even for just a split second. Omega leaves the pod. Echo, crucially, says that he can’t see her, setting up that Crosshair with his enhanced sight is probably the only one who could. He grabs his rifle off screen and as he does, Hunter leans over the side of the pod as he prepares to jump in, precisely where Crosshair needs to aim to hit Omega. Hunter is in his way. He’s directly in the line of fire, not because Crosshair is aiming for him, but just because that's where Omega is and they're both aiming for her: Crosshair with his rifle, Hunter ready to dive. The little shift Crosshair makes reads to me as him ensuring he doesn’t hit Hunter, despite him being right where he needs to aim, not him full on changing targets.

Even if we choose to read it as him deliberately aiming at Hunter—because yeah, the scene is meant to be ambiguous—I don’t think he, like, meant it meant it. Crosshair, as we’ve seen throughout TBB and TCW, can be pretty antagonistic. He likes to do things to get a rise out of people, like staring at regs until they snap at him, or pushing Rex’s buttons until he swings. If he was choosing to aim at Hunter in that moment, rather than Hunter just being in the way, I think it’s only bravado. Remember the “Don’t make the same mistake twice. Don’t make me your enemy” line? Crosshair has a need to remind others of his skill and power—whether it’s playfully like in TCW, or more seriously in TBB—and that’s likely what this is here. “Hey, Hunter. Look. I got my weapon back. I’ve got you cornered. I’m about to save our sister when you can’t. Remember that I’m good and you need me.” Those feelings of abandonment are tied up in that need to be needed, so when Crosshair is seething at being left behind, brutally showing them how he can get a drop on their leader and doing the thing they can't (save Omega) is a great way to remind them of what they threw away/re-boost his own self-esteem. But none of that means shooting Hunter was ever a real possibility. Because nowhere else do we see Crosshair willingly trying to harm his team. He does while under the chip’s influence, but then he never hurts Hunter when he’s captured. He kills his new team before they can hurt the batch. He helps them fight off the droids. There’s a tussle, but it’s not choreographed like either he or Hunter truly intends harm. Crosshair demonstrates no aggression during the entire escape, willingly gives up his weapon after saving Omega, and just stands there as they leave. If this guy actually wanted to hurt them, he would. Which is more likely, that Crosshair had a split second of real murder intent across two episodes of doing everything possible to help his team, or that this was just a mean bluff?

But personally, I don’t even think it was a bluff. I think the coincidence of Crosshair needing to aim there and Hunter already being there is just meant to imply an attack for the audience, not imply that Crosshair, in-universe, ever intended to hurt him, even for just a second. If he had, he wouldn’t look so surprised and sad when he realizes the others are pointing their weapons at him. If he was out to shoot Hunter, even if only for a moment, seeing his brothers come to his defense would be expected; a given. But if he only ever intended to save Omega, then seeing their weapons trained on him would produce the emotions we saw: shock that they’d turn on him and then severe disappointment. From Crosshair’s perspective, he didn’t do anything wrong and never intended to do wrong either. Hence, looking away in disbelief that his need to aim through Hunter was taken as a serious threat. He's realizing that they honestly believe that he would hurt them. Not the chipped version of him, but just him, all on his own.

As for the rest of his characterization, I think your point that “You tried to kill us” is a weak argument is pretty important. Meaning, Crosshair knows he didn’t attack his team and nearly kill them, the Empire controlling him like a puppet did. He (arguably) doesn’t owe them an apology for something that he was as much a victim for. However, we usually expect one anyway—like Wrecker still apologizing to Omega—because that's how people who have hurt loved ones react, whether the hurt was intentional or not, but that guilt is currently overshadowed by his fury that they left him behind. For him I think it’s a bit of a circular problem. Yes, he nearly killed them… but he wouldn’t have nearly killed them if they’d come back and rescued him. With the obvious disclaimer that the Empire is the real evil here, Crosshair as a threat is a bit of a problem of the batch's own making. If they’d done the right thing and gotten him out, there wouldn’t have been these scary moments like the engine incident. If they’d at least tried, then Crosshair likely would have been more guilt-ridden because he hurt his brothers who were trying to help him. As it stands, he tried to hurt the people who claim they're his brothers, but who left him behind. That's why he presents this second chance as magnanimous: from Crosshair's perspective, they haven't done anything to earn his care, but they're getting it anyway. An apology though? That's pushing things too far. If when Wrecker turned the group had locked him somewhere in the ship and gone off planet, leaving him there under the justification “Well, he tried to kill us!" would Wrecker still return with apologies for his actions... or would he be primarily pissed at being left like that, withholding apologies because they did him harm intentionally, whereas he did harm under another's control? I mean, maybe he'd be forgiving (the huge difference between his and Crosshair’s personalities is another factor), but also maybe not. Having Crosshair apologize for the near-death experiences requires 1. For him to feel responsibility for something that was forced on him and 2. For him to not be absolutely furious at the batch for abandoning him. They've gotta work through that before Crosshair can acknowledge that guilt.

Killing his second team on the other hand… idk if the batch cares, honestly. It was the killing of civilians that they balked at, not other fighters like themselves. Even the Jedis’ execution, something they clearly didn’t like, wasn’t enough to turn them from the Empire, presumably because the Jedi are capable of defending themselves. They fell in battle. It’s only when the Empire asks them to kill kids and untrained civilians that they go, “Absolutely not. This organization is evil.” Murder of other fighters was, you know, not great, but not worth defecting over either. Crosshair’s second team is made up of fighters who have been trying to kill them, so they’re definitely fair game. If we removed Crosshair’s plan from the situation and the batch was just fighting their way off Kamino after a capture, would they have also killed the team without a blink of an eye? Probably. It's self-defense. The second they raised their blasters it became a battle and, unless you’re specifically out to stun someone for some reason, battles end bloody. The shock is which side Crosshair was on, not that one side was willing to murder the other. It’s definitely messed up from our perspective that Crosshair laid a trap to murder his team to prove a point… but from the batch’s perspective? Crosshair killed a bunch of imperial fighters who were threatening them during a battle. That’s just an average Tuesday for them, nothing much to get upset over.

And omg don’t get me started on Crosshair wanting to find Omega a family! Like yeah, it’s obviously a #mistake and his faith in the Empire is Super Messed Up but... the underlying motivation is so good. It’s another situation where there’s no easy answer. Which is more important: Omega’s emotional health where she grows up with clones like her, the people who are now 100% her family, or her physical health, where she stays some place where she’s not always getting shot at, kidnapped, at risk of going hungry, etc.? It’s easy as the audience to go, “Of course she belongs with her dads!!” but if you choose to read the story through any realistic lens, Crosshair absolutely has a point about this being terrible environment for a kid, the exact point the batch themselves were making until Omega begged to stay. I love my feral, compassionate child but let me tell you, I YELLED when she yeeted herself out of that pod. This is a traumatized, formerly isolated kid with absolutely zero self-preservation, combined with, at times, a lack of basic common sense that’s inevitable in children (like not realizing she can’t pull a very heavy droid up through the water). As emotionally gutting as the thought is and, in this particular case, a Very Bad Idea, I really can’t fault anyone for raising the possibility that she go somewhere else, somewhere she’s likely to survive into her teens 😅

Who is your Favorite Character in Shippuden? And what character do you have a crush on...(luv your content btw)

Thank you for loving my content uwu <3

Crush is definitely Sasuke, as for favorite character I’m here joggling between Sasuke and Nagato/Pain. Sasuke’s been my favorite since episode 3 but Nagato is just so... different? More original imo. Of course Sasuke’s cool and has so many layers and depths and fantastic story, but I find Nagato’s more interesting. 

Pain has always been a cool character to me but when we actually discovered it was Nagato it became so, so much better. He’s got so many points to his personality (like Sasuke, I think they’re a lot alike actually, but his story has some elements Sasuke doesn’t). 

I think it was amazing how we’ve got this powerful, mysterious leader of the Akatsuki with scary and cool alias, but the person behind the mask is actually, well at least appearance and physique wise, something so different. His true form doesn’t come off as powerful when you look at him, a seriously under-weight (he weights even less than Ino, and Kishi once joked she’s anorexic) cripple struggling to stand on his own, yet he is leading the Akatsuki, has the whole village under surveillance by rain, he is the head of the village, he’s controlling six bodies and actually managed to blow up Konoha in that state.

But that’s not what I like the most about him. His name is Pain, he had no problem impaling Naruto and Hinata to the ground, killed so many people, yet he has that ‘nice’ and caring side, he encouraged the Akatsuki members to mourn over their fallen comrades, literally disproves of name-calling amongst them, he was motivated by the needs of his friends not his own, likes animals, his right-hand is a woman which I find really cool and so on... besides, you can see by the way Akatsuki treated him that he was in no way bad to them, especially Itachi when they were resurrected, he was not only respectful, Itachi was genuinely nice to him.

He calls himself a god yet he was never egoistic or power-hungry, villagers of Amegakure liked him even though they said he has ‘merciless heart of steel’. 

I liked how they showed him crying a lot as a kid and how he fought to survive, many characters had childhood traumas yet not a lot of them were showed passed out of hunger and walking in the rain alone for days begging people for food or shelter, that was very ‘human’ and not something I’d expect of someone who calls himself a god.

Also it was kinda refreshing to see more Uzumakis for a bit? I so wish he got more screen-time there’s a lot to do with his character.

I talk about Sasuke A LOT on this and other blogs so I thought to dedicate this small post to Nagato, he’s pretty underrated in my opinion. And to make a connection between these two, am I the one who thinks that, if Sasuke joined the Akatsuki longer before Pain died and through someone who isn’t Tobi, Sasuke would actually find his ideology... relatable? It’s not the same ofc, but are pretty similar when you compare to the ones of other characters’. The huge point of Sasuke from the beginning was “you can’t understand me, you haven’t been in my situation”, and that’s exactly what Pain says all the time! “If you don’t know someone’s pain you can never understand.” His plan was about showing the whole world how horrible he’s had it in life, because war will never cease to exist if all parties haven’t experienced the same pain, same losses. Like, isn’t that something Sasuke would agree on? At least partly? Let me know in the comments or asks!

Man do I talk a lot lol, thanks for the ask hope you have a nice day!

I really, really love your metas! In "Why a Jaime/Brienne Endgame in the Books Makes More Sense Than One Might Think, Based on Previous Works of GRRM's" you wrote, that you have endless reasons to assume that both, J and B, will survive the whole series - can you please name some? Aside from this mentioned meta I've only read an explantion of the weirwood dream, which can be interpreted in both ways. Or can you link a good meta that explains other reasons? Thank you very much!

hey!

first of all thank you so much, glad that you appreciate my rants. ;) that said, sure I can go in-depth. in order (btw @ginmo has written also some excellent meta about this, just check on her blog), and also counting the weirwood dream which I’ve ranted on at length in that specific meta:

now, the first thing is how grrm strategically placed these two in the narrative, in the sense that:

brienne has spent her life being passed for a joke and she desperately wants for someone to see her worth as a person and she’d about kill herself for the people who manage to get as far as to gain her trust/love, jaime has spent his life loving people without getting much in return and with that trust being used/abused/thrown away and everyone taking it for granted... and we’re assuming they’re not set up to be together when as stated grrm has written them as romantic from the first moment?

(also, jaime’s entire first chapter in asos is basically ‘I find brienne attractive but since I never considered that I could be attracted to anyone but cersei I can’t understand I’m attracted to her so I’ll stare at her and think she’s ugly all along even if I really am attracted to her. brienne’s issues are also rooted in the fact that no one sees her as attractive. jaime does. hmmm?)

both of them start from a miserable situation from which they’re finding their own way up, not down - jaime is more obvious but brienne is too because she starts at the point where she’s so starved for recognition she would die for someone who just was nice to her but didn’t really gaf about her and now she’s... well, becoming a knight because sure af that is happening, I’m sticking with the theory that the knighting is book canon too -, and if they both end up miserable or one of them does it doesn’t work;

both of their chapters have heavy foreshadowing concerning possible marriage/having children/finding love - jaime wants to father his kids and at some point resents that other men are husbands and fathers but not him because he was always the warrior and he doesn’t say it happily, brienne is half-glad her first betrothed died because she thinks she’s not suited to typical feminine things/to fit into a woman’s role in society but she’s also sad at thinking she will never have children, these two are going to get together very soon, and I’m supposed to think they’re set up for failure? k but I can respectfully disagree;

also, this goes back to that meta I wrote in which I said that grrm does not do grim for grim’s sake and he’s actually way less cruel than it seems, likes a good love story and has more than once finished his other books with satisfying resolutions to that kind of storyline, but adding to that: in comparison to whatever calvinist crap message hbo wanted to send, I have to inform y’all that grrm is a currently agnostic lapsed catholic and it’s exceedingly clear in the way he explores/deals with redemptive themes.

now, let me break the jb narrative for a moment to inform you of a few things that as an atheist born and raised in a 99% catholic country whose literature’s funding works are heavily based on catholic themes/on stories rooted in catholicism:

the ‘you need to die to be redeemed’ narrative is 100% bullshit according to catholic morals and on top of that it’s opened to anyone at any time;

like, the basic distinction between catholic and calvinist approaches to the topic (and I can’t believe I’m defending catholicism but nvm that) is that calvinism preys on a narrative where your negative qualities define you and you cannot escape them (which is because calvinism accepts predestination ie the idea that seeing your lot in life you can deduce if you’ll go to heaven or hell, so if you’re poor/unsuccessful/you committed mistakes/a crime and so on you’re not redeemable and it’s proof you’re damned) and that meant that in societies with calvinist background the death = redemption narrative is extremely popular because it’s seen as ‘hey this person is wretched and they suck so they couldn’t have lived anyway and they did something good with it for once and it’s the best they could hope for’. catholicism, at the contrary, works on the basis that as we all have free will we can change for the better and if you repent for your sins/past wrongdoings/mistakes then that’s enough to be redeemed and if you do it on your deathbed.... you can still go to heaven, you’ll just have to atone for your wrongdoings (that’s the entire point of purgatory’s existence ie making people who repented near death or too late to gain heaven atone for their sins before they can enter heaven). and the moment you repent then you’re free to start your new life and do better and gain your place in heaven, which you’ll obtain in virtue of having turned a new leaf;

(again: not to be that person, but in luke’s gospel one of the two thieves crucified with him is like ‘can you save us since you’re the son of god’, the other thief is like ‘please he has done nothing and we have sinned we don’t deserve to be saved just please remember us when you go back to your father’ and jesus tells the second thief I won’t need to remember you because you’ll sit at my right. also, in dante’s divine comedy there’s a guy who had been excommunicated in the middle ages waiting to get into purgatory for having repented on his deathbed and in manzoni’s the betrothed ie italy’s funding novel the character who’s objectively better written is a dude so heinous for his crimes that he’s called THE UNNAMED and the moment this guy gets doubts and wonders if there’s any hope for him left the local arcibishop leaves everything saying that the moment someone like that is in need then they’re more important than his own parish, goes to receive unnamed guy, tells him that just wanting to be better is enough as far as god is concerned and he’s saved as far as he cares. like, as much as catholicism sucks for the entire rest of it and for how much the catholic church is the worst ideologically the fact that everyone can be redeemed is the basic staple of the entire thing.)

now, given the ^^^, this is where I tell you that most lapsed catholics/people who left catholicism for whichever reasons usually grew up catholic and if you grow up catholic you spend your first twelve years in church at least and if your parents/people around you are also catholic you will absorb it, good and bad, so if grrm grew up catholic, he grew up with that background. (I could again rant for hours about how atheist writers who grew up catholic differ from atheist writers who grew up protestant/calvinist because if you compare grrm and idk kurt vonnegut it’s glaring but this isn’t the place for it so nvm let’s go on)

now that I’ve told you this, I’ll get back to jaime and brienne’s canon survival chances. I needed to tell you that because...

all of the stories with redemptive themes in asoiaf (jaime, theon, sandor, whoever) are not by nature calvinist. whatever d&d think or hbo thought, none of them are written in a way where death is their best option/their only way to achieve redemption/to finish their story with dignity. theon has gone through hell and back and left and regained his sense of identity, he’s not built to die now, sandor has freaking gone to rehab and I’m 100% sure he survives the series and gets closure, while jaime is exactly a poster child for the above stuff I described. like, jaime is someone who’s fundamentally good who had the misfortune to spend his entire life jumping in different kinds of abusive situation one to the other (tywin’s parentage in general, his relationship with cersei throughout at least from the moment they were *experimenting* and like hell I’m going back on that sorry not sorry, guarding aerys, being with cersei at *her* terms and being forced to relieve his trauma all over and not having his needs met etc., tywin potentially ruining his only healthy relationship [with tyrion] and so on) who in turn has done exceedingly bad things/taken bad decision/committed heinous deeds that he regrets having done out of his bad reaction to all of that, not treating his ptsd and basically deciding to stop giving a fuck and embrace being the horrid person everyone thinks he is... until he meets brienne, remembers who he wanted to be because she’s posing an example of it and decides on his own to try and be better, which is... exactly... the entire fucking point. the moment he decides to try and be better and reclaims his dreams/the person he wanted to be/tries to do good he has automatically achieved a narrative status where he chose to be better and therefore the narrative is giving him a chance to be that, and usually those stories are meant to.... have the message that you can be better than the bad things you did and you can turn back the page at any point. like. jaime is written to show you that it’s not too late to get your shit together and not letting others/your surroundings define who you are;

on the other side, brienne is presented as extremely sympathetic from the beginning. also, grrm is very good at describing how shitty is your life if you grow up a woman who is not standard attractive, that everyone laughs at and who has endless insecurities for it.... and she’s the paragon of knighthood/everything good about chivalry in the goddamned series. brienne is legit one of the best people in these books and it’s not because I stan her - she’s kind, she’s just, she’s brave she’s everything a knight should be, she’s willing to change her mind when she misjudged people, she’s forgiving and life threw her crap all along and she’s still persevering from it. brienne is written in a frankly painfully objective way to eventually succeed at what she wants. if in affc she’s crying because she feels like she’s too much of a freak to be her father’s heir and she’s not woman or man enough for anything, the entire narrative point is that she has to succeed at both being a knight and a lady otherwise grrm can’t plant hints and believe me he can;

this means that jaime is headed on a redemptive path which in that kind of story when written by catholics or former catholics never ends up badly (also, aside: redemption is good for everyone and it can’t be just ONE character having it, you don’t buy it at the supermarket, so saying that if jaime has it then tyrion or theon or sandor or whoever can’t have it is just poor reading, people change all the time irl and in narrative you aren’t obligated to redeem one and kill everyone else) or in death, brienne has been written to succeed in her endeavors after she suffers a shitton and I think stoneheart has to be the worst and the end of it (in the sense that after that situation is resolved the way for her is down, not up). which if I do the math and we have stated they’re headed for romance, means the both of them should have a chance at a future together;

also, I can go and tell you that their asos road trip ending with harrenhal is bursting with symbolism that includes death and rebirth - not going into the weirwood dream and sticking to the basics... guys, jaime starts as a prisoner, then ends up losing a part of herself he thinks define him but in truth only defines what he thinks he is (and he’s not ie cersei’s double, the kingslayer, the person who has to drive himself crazy to protect everyone else), then ends up almost dying and sitting in the middle of his own filth for the entirety of the trip (and even then he does good things ie saving brienne from being raped *cough*) and then ends up in a scalding hot bath where he confesses his most well-kept secret and source of 50% of his trauma to someone he trusts regardless of how much he likes it or not, faints and then wakes up again when everyone thinks he might be dead. symbolically, I think it speaks for itself. thing is, during the entire thing *brienne* is there alongside him and while she’s also getting her own share of trauma/ptsd (I mean brienne has totally bloody mummers related ptsd and I’ll die on that hill) she physically is the reason he survives it - she cleans him up, she gives him enough pep talks to convince him to live, she hears his confession, she changes her mind about him for it (but imvho she had after he saved her from being raped because that’s where she calls him ser for the first time) and she catches him in the bath when he faints which is.... fairly symbolic in itself, and she is the one who puts him back on his feet after. like, while jaime’s choices after are all his own, his symbolic journey through his own physical/mental filth he has to go through during asos succeeds because she helped him even if she didn’t know she was doing it, and like... guys, there’s a reason why in the weirwood dream the brienne in jaime’s head which he has conjured and who is basically what jaime sees brienne as in that moment, not necessarily the real one..... keeps on telling him all the time she’ll keep him safe/protect him and she basically tells that to anyone he feels threatened by (or his subconscious feels threatened by), and as stated before, jaime lannister has never, until that point, assumed that *he* would be in the position where someone else gives a shit about him to the point where they will defend him rather than in the position where *he* is the person that has to protect everyone else regardless of how much appreciation he gets in return. like, excuse me but if I was writing my own book I wouldn’t put this much work and care and this symbolism in these two’s history if I meant to kill one of them off or to not have them be happy in the end.

like, the point is: grrm is an extremely meticulous writer with an astonishing attention to detail and who put in book two shit that made extra sense when reading book FIVE, see theon saying he wouldn’t go to his death wearing dirty clothing in acok which makes you go like ‘....... why’ the moment you read his adwd chapters. no one, unless they have a penchant for sadism, would put that much work with those themes in that specific kind of story if then it doesn’t deliver. or, in different words, using a character I love as well so no one can accuse me of being impartial: when grrm put the same kind of work in catelyn’s chapters from got to asos and then you read them knowing about lady stoneheart and the red wedding, it’s obvious that he built her up for being an extremely tragic character and that she was destined to die regardless of all her efforts to save her family (same for robb but we’re talking pov characters). but catelyn’s storyline doesn’t have redemptive themes. it’s about regret, loss, loving your children but being imperfect/not being able to be there for them, and so on. catelyn’s storyline never promises you a happy ending from the moment ned dies and probably even before then. catelyn’s storyline promises you endless suffering and that’s fine because that’s her point in the narrative.

on the contrary, brienne’s tells you ‘hey there’s this girl who has had it like shit all her life without deserving it and whose worth no one sees because she’s ugly and who at the same time is actually a genuinely good person who’s trying her best and okay, she’s gonna suffer but she’ll come out on top while getting what she wants which is recognition as both a lady and a knight’ and given that brienne is also an extremely rare rep (say what you want, cishet unattractive women with her issues and her backstory are basically only less rare than unicorns in media) that I’m 100% sure grrm knows speaks to a lot of people (because he writes her too well to not know), if brienne doesn’t get that after all that shit, the narrative would not deliver on a fairly huge promise.

even worse, jaime’s tells you ‘hey there’s this guy who has been an abuse victim to at least three different people who doesn’t even realize it and whose life is so fucked up you’d need fifteen psychology textbooks to even start grasping it and that everyone sees as the worst person ever and who has ended up believing he is out of not managing his trauma well and hey look at him going through an insane amount of extra suffering but coming out of it wanting to be better and sort of succeeding and hey he has setbacks but he’s starting to see himself as his own person and he’s out of his #1 worst abusive relationship and he can decide what to do with his life now and you should root for him’, which means that if he dies or worst of all dies like in the show (but that’s not happening) the narrative doesn’t deliver on a huge promise and gives you the message that you can’t escape your mistakes and the abuse you received...... which is not the message grrm likes/wants to pass. like, I’ll die on that damned hill.

and to finish it, that was for them as single characters, but going back to the beginning: love is a fundamental part of both their storylines. as I said in the beginning, brienne suffered because she wasn’t loved enough and would die for anyone she loves herself without even expecting anything in return because she thinks no one will love her like that, jaime suffered because he loved too much without getting anything in return (or better, getting cersei’s abusive crap for his entire life) and he turned it into something toxic that’s not what he thinks it should be (he sees his and c’s relationship as the best thing ever where they’re soulmates because she sold him that narrative, but that’s not the kind of rship where you *turn your partner’s blows into kisses* which is actual text). at this point, the narrative is telling you ‘oh hey here’s two damaged people who actually would be very good together because their personalities match in that sense [as in, brienne would thrive with someone who loves her that much openly and finds her attractive and respects her for all that she is and jaime would thrive with someone who would appreciate that tenfold and who’d love him back just as much and who’d die for him - canon! -, and it wouldn’t be the kind of rship where anyone’s blows turn into kisses unless they were friendly sparring before] and oh hey look at that they’re in a storyline where they both influence each other greatly and oh wait he’s attracted to her and she thinks he looks like half a god and she’d die for him and he was willing to get mauled by a bear for her and they’re obviously meant to hook up’, which automatically promises a resolution where they both get what they want or you basically spent all your time rooting for it.... for nothing. which would not give anyone reading it satisfaction unless you hate jb that much, but I’m 100% sure that most people reading asoiaf casually would not hate it that much and grrm likes that trope that much to not deliver on it.

so, tldr: if one of them dies or if they aren’t endgame with a reasonable happy-ish ending for the both of them, the entire narrative fails to deliver on the promises of their individual storylines and their shared one, and there’s nothing in grrm’s writing that suggests that he would not deliver on it. I mean, if it was stephen king I’d hold my breath because I love steve but imvho his endings suck 85% of the time and he manages to do 180° turnarounds that have no sense whatsoever, but it’s grrm, not stephen king, and everything of his I’ve read that actually had an ending ended in a way that was coherent with the overall storyline and maintained its promises, so here, the above is pretty much the summary. hopefully I haven’t exhausted you. ;)

Public Service Announcement: What is the Purpose of this Blog

So in eons past when I first started the EvilElitest project, I had a clear and straightforward goal.  This was going to be a blog that mocked leftists from a left wing perspective, specifically when they resembled right wing talking points.  I mostly mocked pseudo science, pseudo history, and conspiracy theories that the left indulged in, while also mocking the right for existing.  This plan...went...off the rails for two main reasons.  

Firstly, Rightists would often see a single post out of context of my many posts where I was like “BTW, Libertarian is bullshit” and be like “OMG yes, Social Justice Warriors are the worse right” and i’d have to be like “no fuck off”  

Secondly..Gamergate happened.  And I basically just made this channel a “Fuck you Alt Right” page as much as a possibly could, because that nightmare effectively radicalized me even further to the left.   With Brexit and Trump’s election, and Brazil and the world going to hell and me living in Hungary for two years, I kinda made debunking the right a far more important priority for me than the left. 

Recently though, I’ve been rethinking this approach, because the problem about toxic ideas on the left is that they can grow out of control and become really awful on their own down the line.  Take for example, Anti Vaxxers, who started mostly as part of the hippie/anti GMO/Alternative medicine/anti science wing of the left with its appeals to primordial natural fallacy “purity” doctrine.  And then it grew and spread to the left and center and now we have measles back...thanks....thanks a fucking lot.  Or how the most toxic elements of RadFem ideology eventually morphed into TERFS, or Transmedicalists, and then I was looking at Tulsi Gabbard’s political campaign and leftists who honestly support Assad and I was like “oh we can’t just ignore this nonsense”.  Because they grow and then the right uses them to promote their ideology.  And when I see the left employing some of the tactics and anti intellectual attitudes of the right, I see people who are just a few conspiracy theories away from becoming tomorrow's alt rightists (Rosanne i’m looking at you).  We need to deal with this stuff early because it always grows into something terrible down the line.  So I want to focus a bit more on bad ideas on the left and try to get people out of them, but this presents a problem

How do I criticize the left without giving the impression both sides are equally bad

Because...they aren’t.  This isn’t some CNN Horseshoe theory shit about how both sides are equally bad, and Antifa is equivalent to the Alt Right nonsense.

In my view, the left has a bunch of bad actors, anti intellectual trends, conspiracy theories, bad logic, and outdated stupid theories, but all of this is supporting a legitimate political movement that hopes to make the world a better place.  Flawed but ultimately good 

The Right meanwhile, is inherently illegitimate at the core, and is largely worthless on almost every level

My major critique of most of the left is....when they act like the right.  

But because this is tumblr and people don’t understand nuance, I want to try to find a way to critique certain elements about the left without giving any legitimacy or ammunition to the right.  And...I’m totally open to suggestion btw, I don’t know the answer.  My current plan is going to be to tie everything I critique in with behaviors of the Right or just randomly say things like “The Civil War was about Slavery” or “Climate change is real” or “Facts exists” within any critique of the left.  I could also bother with disclaimers but nobody reads those anyways.  

Anyways, here is a critique that came about from a class today so I can give an example of what I mean.

    I was in a African history class, and we were reading the book The River Between, which is an extremely well written book that I recommend to everybody (I also even more recommend Nervous Conditions which we also read) and the book is sort of a defense of female circumcision, which as you might imagine  sparked a contentious debate in my class. while we were talking about this I was mentioning patriarchal power structures and a student said to me “Patriarchy was invented by Christianity, who used it to enforce male power structures like when Rome overthrew Cleopatra” 

Yes that several paragraph long disclaimer was entirely because that statement just flummoxed me so much I couldn’t keep it to myself.  Its utterly wrong on so many levels.  Like 

1) patriarchy has existed long before year 0, like just to use some examples close to Christianty, ancient Greece had horrific gender norms 

2) Augustus...wasn’t Christian...and took over Egypt before Christianity was even a twinkle in Paul’s sun stroked eye

3) Romes imperial days are largely prior to Constantine, at least Western Rome 

4) Egypt was also a patriarchy, just not as rigid as Rome (which was again pagan 

5) Augustus war with Cleopatra was not religious in nature, though it was sexist

LIke I expect this nonsense from rightists, who have no understanding of history at all, but I shouldn’t see leftists supporting this ahistorical nonsense.  

Ok but ranting aside, I’m still trying to find a way to critique elements of the left without giving ammo to the right any ideas?  

jade is most definitely transmed and they refuse to even talk abt this because they know what they said and done is wrong.

jade has tried calling my friend out for being transmed and since ive come out abt these screenshots, theyve stopped calling him transmed and hasnt even talked abt the screenshots.

“[gideon] I dislike/hate most truscum and what most of them tend to believe, thought I personally do think some form/amount of dysphoria is needed even if it’s pretty much only social dysphoria or very minimal of any type of dysphoria.

[gideon] I don’t think there’s anything wrong with holding the belief that dysphoria is necessary so long as you aren’t policing, harassing, misgendering, etc.

[jade] oh yeah that makes sense. i can kind of see both sides? idk yeah

[gideon] I think both sides actively involved in ‘the discourse’ are fucking nuts, just to be clear lol”

they had even agreed with his statement. so its kind of weird for jade to call my friend gideon transmed over smth... they agreed with. it only gets worse with them.

“[jade] basically lainey like. claims to be trans but constantly does shirtless pictures and like borderline nsfw stuff, flip flops on who gets to call her what pronouns

[jade] claims to be a boy but then like.. claims to be agender

[jade] but then says they ARENT agender and like...

[jade] but like. just because they dont want labels?

[jade] idk what were u gonna say abt tearzah

[me] ok i can see that other stuff as faking it but like. i dont see how you cant be trans if you post shirtless pics or whatever

[jade] oh i mean

[me] also idk?? what i was gonna say

[jade] thats more the fact that she claims to have dysphoria but then like. does this”

jade straight up policing how dysphoria should work for others. and no it doesnt end there. i mean its jade we’re talking abt here. theyre really weird abt dysphoria not only from this, but asking me this question out of nowhere.

“[bot] Disconnected.

[jade] yo rae im just wondering but do u have dysphoria

[me] sometimes yes

[jade] vawid”

which is.. such an odd question to ask out of nowhere.

“[jade] do they claim

[jade] to have dysphoria”

jade talking abt tearzah and asking if they ‘claim’ to have dysphoria. and only to top the cake...

“[jade] dysphoria my fat ass cmon (picture of tearzah and their gf shirtless)”

so theres a good chance jade is transmed and they probablyare with how badly they try to avoid talking abt these screenshots. i think that alone says a lot.

update 3/31/19:

its been brought to my attention jade is claiming i made this all up. but really how could i be making this up when i have these screenshots. especially this one of jade blatantly using the term “transtrender”.

“Anonymous asked: in the call outs it shows u doubting people’s dysphoria and posting their pics to say the must not? why do this if not tr//scum? im confused and i do not want to follow tr//scum ideology thank u for answer

laineys whole transtrender or like. honestly whatever u wanna call it idk thing is like. a big topic for anti onision shit (which i follow like? kinda loosely but not rlly) so like. if literally just explaining it makes me transmed and pointing out how lainey fucking sucks (she does and if you are literally going to defend onisions wife in my inbox i’ll vomit blood all over my keyboard) makes me transmed and pointing out the Same shit with TEARZAH (god Help Me i can’t believe my abuser is so fuckign,dfkjdshfkjs she’ll defend tearzah to lie and victimize herself)”

first of all, nobody is defending lainey. i merely pointed out jade polices how ppl should experience dysphoria. and neither is the anon, as theyre implying in this ask. they simply agree jade displays the same ideologies as transmeds do. and apparently me pointing out how they even policed how tearzah should experience dysphoria means im defending them and trying to victimize myself...? way to gaslight jade. especially when all i did was show it to show more proof jade is transmed.

after someone pointing the ask out to me, i make a post on my blog calling them out on it.

“like dont get me wrong i fucking hate tearzah but me just showing proof of you being a freak and policing how ppl should experience dysphoria……. isnt………………. me defending anyone. nor is it even me trying to victimize myself. like what. crack are you on. its just proof you have transmed ideology. like i. really dont know what else to tell you. you just exposed yourself even more by using “transtrender” btw. what transmed doesnt say that honestly.

so im gonna have to ask you again to pull your head out of your ass and act human for once.“

and only minutes later does jade rb that same ask, to say this and try and backpedal.

“LIKE my point wasnt to call lainey a transtrender bc its fucking stupid but like basically thts what the whole subject is abt?? but like then again. cant speak for everyone so”

and they make yet another post right after, practically digging their own grave.

“claiming dysphoria and then posting topless selfies is sus and contradictory so shoot me i guess

#look up body dysphoria perhaps”

i think we can all conclude at this point that jade is definitely transmed.

Your Most Important Chess Pieces: the Protagonist and Antagonist

Uh... hi.

So here it is - I’m finally putting my writing posts here rather than my author blog. I hope this series helps you with any issues you’re facing as a writer :)

I won’t give a long intro because who wants to hear me ramble? Instead, here’s the content and all you need to know about getting the bare bones of your protagonist and antagonist made.

The second most important character in your story is your protagonist (one guess to which character is the most important). 

The leading character is the reader’s vision into the novel, even if the story is told from more than one point of view. Your protagonist doesn’t have to be relatable, unlike what you’ve likely been told in the past. In fact, many people that find the most interesting protagonists are the ones that we probably don’t want to relate to or cannot relate to.

There’s a difference between finding a character relatable and finding them interesting/rooting for them. I can’t relate to a single thing about Luke Skywalker, but I still want him and his friends to beat the bad guys. Why? Because I find his character to be interesting. The protagonists who are “relatable” often get turned into self-insert characters and are hella bland because they have to be relatable to every reader. This is how you end up with a Bella Swan. You don’t want a Bella Swan.

In Epic, the book of mine that I’m using for examples in these writing posts, Anna is a contradictory heroine. She’s stubborn and lies about a lot of things but she’s also protective and struggles with her past and her control issues. To put it lightly, Anna can be a mess sometimes and many times I just want to shake her and be like STOP LYING. 

This is a character that I don’t think the majority of readers will find themselves reflected in. But even though she’s a mess, she’s still interesting to read about. This is the type of protagonist that gets remembered. People only remember Bella because she is a great example of how NOT to write a main character. But they remember Katniss Everdeen and Harry Potter because, while they may not be relatable, they are worthwhile protagonists.

To create a memorable and fleshed out protagonist, you don’t have to come up with all of their characterization before you start drafting the story. I find that as long as I know a few traits about a character before I start writing them, I can use the things they go through to shape them and learn who they are. So pick 3-4 traits that you want your main character to have. Is she smart? Is she funny or serious? Does she have a special skill? If she could have ONE thing in the world, what would it be? You can think of any traits that fit your protagonist and, in my opinion, it’s even better when these traits clash with each other.

To avoid spoiling too much about Anna, we’re going to use Katniss Everdeen as this next example. Katniss is a (mostly) emotionally closed off person but she becomes very emotional about Prim, Gale, and Peeta. She always loved Gale and Prim so it’s not that her personality developed as the series went on, just that there were two parts of her that came out around different people. But they’re STILL a part of who she is. You can create a character with a hidden secret side that they only show to the people they love most (hint: that’s a big one for romantic relationships if your book will have one).

***Get a sheet of paper (you’re going to be using lots of paper while you draft, BTW), and write down the few traits for your protagonist. Later, you’re going to learn how to create supporting characters that complement and clash with your protagonist. But for now, we get to learn how to create the most important character in your story: the antagonist.

The antagonist of the story is the most important piece of the puzzle because, without them, the entire story would crumble. 

The stakes are only as high as the antagonist is threatening. Your protagonist has to be a well-rounded character but your antagonist must be twice as complex. This is because the reader automatically roots for the protagonist, even if they don’t like the protagonist. People couldn’t stand Bella Swan, but very few of them wanted her to be torn apart by the Volturi. Katniss annoyed the hell out of many people but there was no way that readers/moviegoers wanted the Capitol and Snow to win in the end.

The antagonists that are best are the ones that we cannot stop thinking about. Now, an antagonist doesn’t have to be evil, they just have to want something different than what the protagonist wants. While it’s not bad to write a villain who is just straight up evil, the ones that people tend to flock towards are the ones who have some bit of light in them, or even have ideas that line up with the protagonist’s views. With the antagonist of Epic, I wanted them to be a “no bullshit” type of person but still care about the lives and safety of other people, to do bad things but still try to do all that they could to soften the blow.

Take your protagonist’s traits and try to see if there’s a way that you can interpret those qualities to fit an antagonistic character. With Anna, I said that she is protective, but the antagonist is also protective of the people they care about. The reason Anna is seen as a heroine where the antagonist is not is that the characters go about showing their protectiveness in different ways. Another good example would be Marvel’s Civil War storyline, which I admit I barely read the comics for so we’re going to use the MCU rather than how the comics did Civil War.

In the films, Captain America is all “wa-hoo, freedom! We ain’t signing no stinkin’ Accords! ‘Murica!! We can’t defend people if we’re not free!!” but Iron Man is all “yikes, we need to be kept under better control! We can’t defend people if we’re killing people!” The two sides both clearly want to keep the world safe, but Captain America is shown as the protagonist and Iron Man as the antagonist. But, it’s important to remember, that neither side is shown as completely wrong. If you can create an antagonist who has justifiable motives and methods, you’re much less likely to end up writing them as a one-dimensional, mustache-twirling villain.

When I said to only get down a few traits for your protagonist and then build on those as you draft, do the same for your antagonist BUT make these traits more than just basic words. With your protagonist, you can write “[they’re] funny, smart, and a bit shy” but for your antagonist, make these traits more descriptive since this character has to be more tightly locked in than your protagonist by the time you start drafting, considering that much of the conflict is going to arise from the antagonist. With the antagonist, try to get a bit of depth in there by writing that they’re “power-hungry, obsessive, and ideological.”

That’s all for today’s post. If you have any further questions or need clarification on anything, you can send me a message via tumblr or twitter. Thanks for reading

- L 

INBOX GOODREADS YOUTUBE KOFI OTHER POSTS

Pretty without the Poison

I have had my eye on the “Toxic-free” or “Clean Beauty” movement for a while, since I switched to sulfate free shampoo around 2013. As a small business owner, finding the balance between my realistic budget and the ideal products can be difficult. The struggle is fully real nowadays, as the industry is currently completely polarized. It was true before the pandemic and it is has only intensified as we compulsively sanitize everything we touch. On one side we have the evil empire of giant corporations that is basically the embodiment of the boogey man: testing on animals, buying out small companies and destroying their formulas, weakening your immune system or causing cancer... On the other side we have the coven of luxury hippie companies that cost more because they make everything in small batches with handpicked pollen from the butts of free range bees and oh btw there’s no preservatives so you have to use this $70 cream by next week or it gets moldy...

Now, I lean towards the latter camp, I’d rather be woo-woo than toxic. But for everyday consumers it’s not a question of ideals, it’s a question of budget. The cheapest ingredients are synthetics and carcinogenic, the best ingredients are natural and expensive to process gently and efficiently. Meanwhile most of us are not in the 1% tax bracket. The money for “real shit” has to come from somewhere and it can be difficult to see your beauty routine as “real shit” when you’ve got rent and car payments due. I get it, I’m in the same boat.

The thing to be cautious of with Clean Beauty is, just because its “natural” doesn’t mean its automatically good for your hair. After all, lead is natural, arsenic is natural, cocaine is natural, opium is natural... Start with making sure your products are toxic-free, but do further research. Be weary of alcohol, salt, and silicones. I’m making a more detailed glossary of specific chemical ingredients but here is a basic understanding of the terms I use.

Surfectants: detergent, soap, the thing that makes the bubbles happen. Used to cut grease but at the price of stripping moisture. Think “dish pan hands” but your hair. I’m not a fan of surfectants because the more moisture you strip, the more you have to put back in, and your scalp usually produces more grease to compensate. When I was using shampoo I was also having to follow it with a deep conditioner mask every time. Now I don’t use either. (see my previous blog, what type of shampoo should I use?)

Endocrine disruptors: Such as parabens and pthylates. These may not affect your hair in a noticeable way, you may not have an allergic reaction or breakage. But there are so many in the products we use every day that the harmful affects easily accumulate over the years. It can contribute to hormone imbalances like PCOS or endometriosis. Fragrance/Parfum/Perfume: Basically the get out of jail free card for chemicals. A company can put anything in a fragrance and does not have to disclose what it is, in the name of preventing corporate espionage. Every successful luxury brand product has a generic dupe and that dupe needs to smell as close to the original as it can. However, fragrances often include endocrine disruptors. Not to mention, for the number of people who are highly allergic to “fragrance” - It’s unfair that they don’t get to know what chemical they are actually allergic to. Silicones: Think of them as plastic food wrapping... It coats the hair with “plastic” with shiny results but at the cost of preventing moisture from getting in. Clients who have used silicones for years have to go through several clarifying washes to get rid of all the buildup. Afterwards the hair is bound to feel rough from the combination of silicone damage and clarifying shampoo. It’s like having to sand a piece of furniture before re-varnishing, it feels rough at first but the hair is much better off after recovering. Shea butter: This is one of those things that used to be good but is somewhat problematic now. It’s natural but the cheaply processed shea butter (what most people are using) is just as bad at coating the hair and blocking moisture as silicones. Cold-pressed high quality shea butter can be okay, so to determine if the product is “good” or “bad” requires deeper research on the specific brand. Sodium Chloride: Table salt. A natural, non toxic ingredient that is still bad for your hair in large quantities. If you have ever been to the ocean with fresh haircolor, you know. I once spent a week in Tulum; as an experiment I started with fresh dark teal and lime green hair and I returned with pastel minty blue. Salt is powerful when it comes to stripping haircolor and moisture. I would avoid in shampoo, but with styling products like salt sprays? It really depends on the rest of the ingredients, imo. Generally, if the only product you use contains salt and your hair feels dry or the color is fading - stop using it and try something else. But if your scalp and hair feels okay, no harm no foul. Charcoal: Everything with charcoal is so tempting because it’s my favorite color, so TRUST I get it. But think about this - if you take birth control or other important medication, they warn you not to eat or drink anything containing activated charcoal while those pills are in your stomach. It is so good at “detoxing” that it detoxes the medicine right out of you! Dentist’s have denounced charcoal toothpaste as too harsh for everyday use. It wears down the enamel in your teeth, which is much stronger than your hair. Charcoal is natural but powerful, use sparingly.

The thing I struggle with, the thing that prevents me from being fully on board with this movement, is I’ve tried expensive natural organic small batch small business brands and was also disappointed by the results. Innersense Organic Beauty: A brand I had heard a lot of good things about. Mostly from people who use them but also from my co-worker who specializes in curls. My coworker has been following the Toxic-Free movement more closely due to her specialty being all ends of the curly hair spectrum. She explain to me that shea butter is becoming a big problem, but that the shea butter contained in Innersense was okay because it’s high quality and all of their ingredients are cold-pressed. I raised an eyebrow about the shea butter but the cold-pressed ingredients sounded promising, so I tried it anyway. I ordered an intro kit for $66, which is a lot of money to shell out on something that you may completely hate... and it turns out I did! I wasted no time putting Innersense’s “Color Awakening Hair Ceremony” to the test. As with most lines, the conditioner isn’t really problem, but the shampoo is a dealbreaker. Innersense Color Awakening Hairbath is natural and organic but instead of surfectants, the main cleansing ingredient is Sodium Chloride... common table salt! I used it a couple of times and immediately watched my neon green color come out of my hair and circle down the drain. I hadn’t used any type of shampoo since I started using New Wash last year, but Innersense faded my color just as much as my sulfate-shampoo days. Not only that but my scalp was so dry, I had more scratchy flakey scalp problems after shampooing with Innersense than I do after BLEACHING MY ROOTS. That’s insanity to me! Your scalp should not be more upset with your shampoo than it is with a chemical bleach solution that, if left unattended for hours, can melt your hair off. Reverie: This is brand that I’ve seen all over instagram alongside brands I use already, and it looks like it’s a really good quality line, too good. I inquired about wholesale and trying it out. The line is so expensive that the sample kit of all 7 products is $157. If it’s too expensive for me to try right now can I really expect my clients to pay $52 for Ever hair oil or $72 for Cake scalp tonic? Furthermore, I fundamentally can’t get on board with brands that make you buy multiples of all the products in order to get wholesale pricing. It doesn’t work for my small space and if I only sell one product from that line, then I’m stuck with a bunch of expensive stuff that no one wants. I also am turned off when I want to see an ACTUAL ingredient list and they only list the luxury ingredients and the ingredients they don’t use.. but won’t provide the list itself. We need to normalize TRANSPARENCY about ingredients! So this is where I find myself at a crossroads. Is it really too much to ask for something to be organic and natural AND color safe? I fundamentally believe it is chemically possible to do both, but then it is very difficult to find brands that people can realistically afford in a pandemic-induced recession...

Good News, Everyone! Clean Beauty brands I’m using now

Cult+King: This line is so rad! I straight up swiped their “pretty without the poison” tagline for the title of this blog. It’s the first brand I’ve truly felt an ideological kinship with. They don’t gender their products (because that’s stupid), they prioritize people and planet over profits, and everything is so natural and nontoxic that you can use the hair Balm on your face. I love that they use beautiful glass bottles and offer refills in recyclable aluminum containers. I do have one little issue... Their only offering for shampoo is in bar form, which is cool, but it has charcoal in it and is not recommended for colored hair. Which would be 90% of my clientele. The shampoo bar smells AMAZING and I really want to use it, can we please get a charcoal-free option? I’ve been using Jelly on myself and my clients. Full disclosure, I was worried about it because it also contains salt, but it hasn’t faded my color and it actually feels more moisturizing than drying. I’m guessing it’s because the main ingredient is banana leaf juice, not the salt. I love their Tonik, it smells amazing and I use it to refresh my curls in the morning. It’s also a scalp tonic that can be used if you have any break outs or, in my case, ingrown hairs from shaving my mohawk myself - quarantine problems, amirite?

Hairstory: New Wash is what I have been using instead of shampoo for nearly 2 years. It was so nourishing that it helped me realize I actually have curly hair now! Plus my hair never fades, which is great for my clients but problematic for me when want to change it up. It’s a higher price point for New Wash, but actually $40 for a product that replaces shampoo + conditioner is no different to paying $20 for each one. You scrub your scalp (with their amazing scalp brush) and leave it in a few minutes to condition, so you’re using half the product. New Wash scents are all botanical, free from chemical fragrance. Their styling line is also very versatile, I use Dressed Up before diffusing to set my curls in place. They also have refillable aluminum containers which can be recycled (along with the scalp brush) and their refill packaging can be flat packed, creating much less waste. Plus they have an amazing subscription option so you can buy refills in bulk and get the best value for money. Afterworld Organics: A promising line I found often tagged alongside these other two brands. I just started using them and I’m in loooove. They, like Hairstory, provide a combination of scalp brush and 2-in-1 soap free hair cleanser. Hair Glow comes in two fragrance-free scents, Royal Lavender and Amberwood, which is great because on rare occasions I’ve met people who hate lavender... they exist. Moisture Lock is my absolute favorite! It’s used like a gel and dries with extreme hold, but it leaves your hair insanely shiny and soft. Hair Healer is a heat protectant that also nourishes and smooths. Texture Mist is a gentle, buildable salt spray. Afterworld does a great job of explaining the use of salt in their Texture Mist “Atlantic sea salt and Polyquat 20 work together to increase texture and volume while hydrating the hair.  Polyquat-a powdered extract made from plant cell fibers- binds moisture to the hair, acting as a barrier against the drying nature of the sea salt.” Overall, they do a great job of explaining the use their ingredients. Their About page contains a note on “alcohol ingredients” that talks about fatty alcohols being different from isopropyl alcohol. All of these lines have something in common, they focus on glass, recyclable, and overall less wasteful packaging. They are concerned with the long term effects of their ingredients on the human body and the ecosystem. These lines also allow me to earn commission while offering products for sale online for your convenience. This is imperative for a small business like mine to stay afloat. With such little retail space and in the middle of a recession, small businesses need all the help we can get. No more overhead cost for me to gamble on selling products. You can order what you want and it comes right to your door without fear of breaking quarantine. This is especially valuable for those of you working from home and, due to being high-risk, still having zero contact with people outside of your household.

On principle, I use brands that assume your intelligence, not depend on your stupidity to sell their snake oil. The integrity of their ingredients can speak for itself.

Stay safe, stay clean, and...

Beware of false prophets.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying you'd be in favor of the British Whigs because they were against trade with France? I was saying you'd be in favor of them because they were in favor of free trade. And this matters because they, in their similarities with the Girondins (just like the Democratic Republicans), defined the origins of the left. Henry Clay's American System effectively amounts to the Federalist ideology, so I'm not sure how you can advocate for that over Jackson’s position (especially while claiming to be a Jeffersonian democratic republican). Jefferson Davis was seen in the same monarchistic light, however, there is no denying the tendency towards hierarchy, imperialism, and authority on both sides of the civil war. “I believe certain values vary too often to be considered political ideologies.  And there are certain differences in what egalitarianism means today that goes for the traditionalist classic right as well, which had its fair share of differing values.“ But clearly, despite the way leftist values are represented by a political system (and they’re usually represented by democratic republics in one form or another), egalitarianism and liberalism are common to both classical liberals and modern liberals (both of whom are leftist). Just because you cannot see the common values that have defined both ends of the spectrum doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Why don’t you try to prove that the right as I define it didn’t have the consistent values I’ve noted? Or at least prove how the values I’ve pointed out weren’t consistent within what I regard as the right. So far you’ve offered no rebuttal whatsoever to the values I’ve noted are consisted of what I regard as being the true right, nor have you pointed out any inconsistencies in the political systems I’ve associated with what I define to be the right (namely autocratic and elitist systems). Your inability to look at the system of ethics and political philosophies which underlie certain ideologies attests to just how thick-skulled you really are. “I’ve seen both a horseshoe spectrum as well as traditional linear spectrums labeling today’s right vs left dichotomy with fascism on the right and communism on the left.  This is preposterous considering fascism was born of Marxist collectivism and still was collectivist totalitarianism in the end.“ As I’ve explained, Fascism came to reject Marxism (there is a whole section in the doctrine devoted to this), and it came to identify with the origins of the right. It also rejected the very values that defined Liberalism and Marxism alike (namely freedom and equality). Marxism ultimately strived towards anarchistic ends even though it was prepared to use statist means as well as libertarian means to accomplish this. Here are a few quotes by Mussolini and Gentile about the true right btw: “Our Italian nationalism was less literary and more political in character than the similar movement in France, because with us it was attached to the old historic Right which had a long political tradition.” – Gentile, The Philosophical Basis of Fascism “Granted that the XIXth century was the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy, this does not mean that the XXth century must also be the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy. Political doctrines pass; nations remain. We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the ” right “, a Fascist century.”” – Mussolini & Gentile, The Doctrine of Fascism (I have more quotes if you’d like btw, you only need ask) Sadly bluebloodedweimerica (@redbloodedamerica), collectivist totalitarianism is more common to the right in terms of its origins, not its redefinitions. Stop trying to rewrite history, tradition, and heritage in favor of your weak ideology. The political spectrum did not come out of the cold war in case you didn’t know... And while you may call me a modern leftist, you’re just not a traditional rightist. The truth is that I don’t appeal to egalitarian or liberal values in any way like you or any of the other leftists out there. While the left may contradict its values, just as the Democratic Republicans did under Madison, like the Revolutionaries did in France under the Girondins, or like the Marxists did under Lenin and Stalin, the right stands forthright in its commitment to elitism, imperialism, and authority. Anyways, unlike you I don’t really care for freedom of speech and would rather not spam my page with your boomer bullshit. I, on the other hand, have no problem manipulating your weak, liberal tendency to stand up for freedom of speech by spamming your blog with informed hatred. I’m making an exception now because you refuse to show everyone just how well libertarian discourse prevails amidst open discussion. Hope you like the punch from the far right!

Chris Ray Gun, White Hysteria and Dishonesty

For the past few weeks, we've seen a bit of a shift in white youtubers- especially on the gaming side of the platform. White gamers who generally only offer their (supposedly) funny hot takes on the latest games and the hottest gaming trends have taken the dive into political commentary. They’re inspired by this new presidency and conversations surrounding him and the so-called “SJWs” and “Main Stream Media”. While some are critical of Trump, plenty of them have come out to boldly state that they hold ideologies that are consistent with the leader of the free world. Bravely, they've taken to Twitch broadcasts and Google Hangouts to express their true feelings and one such gamer was JonTron, of the Game Grumps. 

Jon Jafari, a man who self identifies as white despite being Iranian (more on that later), has taken to several broadcasts to express his sympathy with White Nationalism and White Supremacy. This has shocked a lot of his fans, who have now transformed his Reddit page into a mostly anti-JonTron roast fest. While they remain shocked by his out of touch comments like “Rich black commit more crime than poor whites” and “What about the crime rate in Africa?”- I’m actually not very surprised by this at all. Now, confession, I have a bit of a prejudice against the gaming community- if you haven’t been able to tell already. While I know and understand that not all gamers are racists and not all gamers cosign things like sexism and misogyny, I’ve been hardpressed to find a group of people who have the same visibility and influence as someone like PewDiPi or Game Grumps, call these things out. In fact, it seems like often times they side with and sympathize with the times when racism or sexism materialize in their circles. So, I have- what I’ll admit, is a pretty unfair bias against gamers and I’m not surprised when prominent gamers turn out to be racist and I’m even less surprised when they’re defending by other prominent gamers. 

Because I’m a black woman who blogs about anti-racism and does so pretty openly, I get a lot of harassment and trolling. Now, I’ve been a blogger since I was 15- so honestly these things don’t really phase me, but I’ll be honest and say that sometimes I get trollish myself and at times it’s not always the best recourse. One thing I’ve learned (especially on this fucking website- still hate tumblr) is that often times when you’re in situations like this, it’s best to not respond.. .but hey-probably because I’m a child of the internet, it’s hard for me not to sometimes. 

Racist trolls always dominate my mentions. Any time I make any point about racism, you’ll be sure to find some white troll in my comment section refuting what I’m saying. The other day, I was ranting about JonTron because, TBH, I really find the whole thing quite fascinating. White people have largely convinced themselves that being called out for racism can ruin someone’s career. And you know what- as someone who’s fans have tracked down racists who’ve attacked me and gotten them fired... I get it. That’s not totally untrue- but it definitely is on Youtube. 

JonTron regurgitates white supremacist talking points almost perfectly and one of said talking points is “White Genocide”. If you've never heard of this term before, it sounds like it’s a discussion about the mass murder of white people. I completely understand why people would think that, but that isn't what it means. Here’s a definition from one of the leading White Genocide information websites:

White Genocide is:

Moving millions of non-White immigrants into traditionally White countries over a period of years 

Legally chasing down and forcing White areas to accept “diversity“. This is known as “Forced Assimilation“.

White Genocide is being carried out by massive immigration of non-White people and forced assimilation. As a result we are turning into the minority in America, Australia, Canada, and Europe. 

Now, if White Genocide were the mass killing of white people on the basis of them being white, I would obvious oppose that. Why? Because I don’t believe in any sort of genocide or violence on the basis of race. hell, I’m the same person who defended Trump supporters and Tumblr’s STILL mad about it. 

White Genocide is a concept that’s been around forever. With the hysteria around immigration today, I think a lot of people can connect the dots and see why people like JonTron (The son of an Iranian Immigrant) would easily latch onto these ideologies. This is part of why it doesn’t shock me. Because if you know anything about American History, you know this conversation has come up decade after decade whenever a large group of non-white immigrants come into the country. A central aspect of this concept is a demonization of miscegenation. Miscegenation, if you don’t know is just an old-timey word used to describe interracial relationships. As a black woman with a white boyfriend (who BTW is Japanese and Italian- so pretty much already unpure), I personally find the hysteria to be quite funny. It’s honestly hard for me not to. I guess it’s because I’ve been a minority my entire life and I’ve had to listen to white people- even in this conversation, pretend as though things are completely fine when it comes to how the majority relates to the minority. Hearing all of these white people fear being breed out is funny to me on several levels, but the biggest one being that there’s something so disgustingly hypocritical about it all. White people literally colonized a land that wasn’t theirs, attempted to actually violently genocide an entire race (failed), raped them, forced them to assimilate and then over centuries imported non-white workers and slaves to build their country and now this particular group of white people are upset that.... in 2017, white women have the choice to sleep with men of color. And that’s really what this is all about, but I don’t want to get too deep into describing to you what white genocide is. In summary, many black men were lynched in post slavery America because they were accused of lusting for white women. This was seen as self defense of the white race and black men were often genitally mutilated after they were hung. So there’s a very long and extensive history there,  but I digress. 

In talking about White Genocide, I obviously made a lot of jokes about it because, at least to me, it’s a laughable concept. A very very laughable concept. After a full day of trolls in my mentions,  did what I kinda tend to do after hours of trying to have reasonable conversations with these people- I flip their logic onto them. So when i got a tweet about how black people a “slave race” because they have “bad genes” this is what I said: 

Now, to me, this is a joke and a very funny one. Why? Because the idea that genes are either “good” or “bad” or “dominant” is fucking laughable Scientific Racist bullshit. Bullshit utilized by white supremacists to argue that white people are just naturally more superior to all other races. There’s a longer conversation there, but if you care, here’s my video about Scientific Racism. 

If you’ve ever followed me on twitter for an extended period of time, this side of me wouldn’t shock you. If you only follow me on Youtube, it might. I’m positive people on this fucking reactionary website are going to be hella pissed off (lol), but this is me. I sit through tons of fucked up shit that I find it HILARIOUS. I find it funny. It’s hard for me to not laugh a white supremacist tweets because, to me, it shows how insecure they are. I’m someone who speaks about race and racism- it’s my job. These people devote their entire days to sitting on twitter and regurgitating racist bullshit....as a hobby. 

ChrisRGun, a Youtuber with almost 300k subscribers decided to share my tweet with this caption:

Chris deliberately removed the tweet I was responding to and presented this a declarative statement I made out of nowhere. Suggesting that it was somehow unprompted. Now, you can make the argument that I shouldn’t have stooped to their level and maybe there’s a part of me in the back of my mind where I agree with you. But do I regret that tweet? Absolutely not. It’s hard for me to feel bad about shitposting when people like Chris regularly defend shit posts all the time. 

Chris was one of these gamers who bucked up to defend PewDiPie when he made his “Kill All The Jews”... “joke”. Now, i’m not Jewish and my understanding of antisemitism is still expanding- but it’s my understanding that jokes like “Kill All The Jews” being seen as normal or inoffensive somehow, is an aspect of antisemitism. But to people like Chris, these comments were taken “out of context”. It’s unfair for the Pewds lose his relationship with Maker and other gigs because “he was taken out of context”. Yet here Chris actually goes out of his way to remove the context from my post- which was that I was throwing back the flawed logic of a racist at him because, at least to me, it’s fucking funny. 

But what I find funnier, actually, is that people like Chris Ray Gun are also the same people who whinge all day long about how “SJWs” are reactionaries who get offended by absolutely everything. Here you have a very clear joke tweet that he looked at in full, decided that the context didn’t matter and cropped it in a way to omit the context fully. He is, quite literally, no different than the strawman SJWs he’s always complaining about. The beginning and end of these’s people’s criticisms of “SJWs” is ‘hypocrisy” But he’s a massive, shameless hypocrite. How do you defend Pewdiepie with the whole “it’s been taken out of context” shit and then deliberately omit context from my post. You could make the argument that BOTH of our comments were wrong, jokes or not. However, if you believe Pewdipie’s comments are a joke, then you absolutely need to make space for the fact that mine was as well and equally deserves you defense. 

But what’s the difference between JonTron and Pewdipie and myself? Well they’re two white men and I’m a black woman. Defending those two and harshly criticizing me doesn’t conceal racial bias. The truth is both Pewdiepie and JonTron are white men and we live in a society that grants white men the full and total access to their emotions. We see them as emotionally complex and nuances. They have multiple sides and have the ability to change and be well-rounded. JonTron’s just a silly fool parroting white nationalist talking points to millions of people. PewdiePie is just a Swedish sweetheart who’s sick of the establishment so he makes funny jokes about killing Jewish people because, you know, it’s funny. But me? I’m a black woman, so I’m angry and spiteful. I have an agenda against white people and this one tweet, sarcastic or not, is the complete and total sum of my work. I am not granted the right to redeeming qualities. I do not get to say or do even an inch of what white racists do to me and still get the benefit of the doubt. What Chris’ bias reveals here is that is isn’t quite the champion of free speech that he presents himself to be. The difference between JonTron and myself is that JonTron actually feels that way, I’m making a joke pointing out the flawed logic of racists. 

He made a few more tweets:

What a lot of white people seem to constantly underestimate is the persistent racism that black people and people of color deal with their entire lives. When you’re used to being called a nigger and you’re used to white supremacists saying to you that you’re inferior, these things don’t actually phase you. What we’re seeing right now with white people like Chris is that they are reacting to something that most people of color in white dominant spaces reacted to when they were children- Othering. These are people who are not used to being see as white. They are not accustomed to people saying negative things about whiteness or white people. When I was a child, my otherness was very clear to me. I was a black kid in (at the time) a mostly white preschool. I had to learn fairly easy that not only was I different from the other kids, but that people saw these differences as inherently negative. So what did I do through my formative years? I learned to be comfortable, proud and content with myself. That my blackness isn’t a negative and my skin, hair texture and body are all beautiful as they are. When you’re accustomed to being seen as the default, being othered is scary. Interestingly enough, this ties directly into White Genocide, which is largely the fear that immigrants and miscegenation will displace white people and make them a minority. That idea requires one very real and central emotion: Fear. These groups have to prove to white people that they are at risk, that they are being attacked, that people are trying to suppress them. To use anti-sjw jargon, they need to sell them a victimhood narrative. They have to convince them of something so devastating and so hurtful that they have to mobilize. They have to stand up. They have to fight. And people like Chris Ray Gun serve it up to you on a platter. They willingly feed misinformation to their, generally young and impressionable audience and convince them that their ideas are not only unpopular, but being repressed. But this isn’t true.

Chris Ray Gun has  296,473 subscribers

JonTron has  3,117,693

Pewdiepie has  54,299,958

I have  118,125

My channel, my content and my platforms are all smaller than theirs, but they sell you the idea that my content is so successful and influential that it needs to be stopped. That my ideas are so damaging that they should be suppressed. Think about that for a moment. The fact that these people have platforms that cast a very very large shadow over mine and they have to sell you the idea that somehow someway, people like me are the real problem. That people like me are influencing culture in a way that’s damaging and divisive. We aren’t. We are small voices that are often drowned out by the status quo- but every good story needs an antagonist. Every good story has a challenge. And to rally their base, the need to frame me as that villain. And guess what, it’s successful because their ideas are the status quo. Most people agree with and cosign them. Because their ideas, in truth, aren’t actually unpopular or edgy or unique. They’re common. And this is why you’re seeing so many more of these gaming channels pander to this ideology. Because in a world where everyone wants to be the Next Pewdiepie, they have to get a new shtick and right now, this works. 

Chris Ray Gun commented on a Kevin Logan video about him and claimed that his friend was the one who sent him that tweet (classic Machiavellian tactic) not him. 

I don’t believe him,but mostly because I perhaps give him too much credit. I would like to believe that people like him who make such bold statements and decided to redirect their fanbase to my page to explicitly attack me would do a bit of research and find the actual tweet to see if it were real. Imagine if someone photoshoped a tweet and put my name on it (something that’s happened) and sent it to him and he posted it. That would not only be dishonest, it would be unethical and he’d be a massive hypocrite. That aside though, if true, what this means, at its base is that he didn’t do his legwork and sheepishly posted something because he didn’t agree with me. I know, and I’m sure plenty of you know that i was making a joke and that these are not my beliefs, but he believed it. He fell for it. He wasn’t critical and didn’t try to see the full picture of what was said. That should still bother you. And to his point about “if a person of the opposite persuasion made the same tweet”- well they did. The one I was responding to. And all Chris’ posts did was invite more white supremacists to my page to talk to me about the natural inferiority of black people. But we know that both him and his buddy JonTron do carry that belief. They spend time defending that idea on their pages constantly. In conclusion, what this ultimately is, is them not quite holding white supremacists to the same standard. I went through Chris’ page. He isn’t making posts fighting against white supremacy. He isn’t countering it, he isn’t trying to. He’s coddling and pacifying it. And that, to me, says a lot.