Tumgik
#FRANKLY INSULTING
vernonroche269 · 1 year
Note
take your chaperon off, hussy
What do you think I am, some kind of cheap tramp who would put their hair on display for the world to see?
33 notes · View notes
theblacksmudge · 1 year
Text
Just got a bot with no pics, no title, no bio, nothing, they dont even respect us enough to try now
0 notes
biitchyberry · 5 months
Text
One more thing
Anya is not a gifted kid and you losers need to accept this. She’s for the troubled kids. Shoo. Go away.
180 notes · View notes
just-a-tiny-goldfish · 7 months
Text
I realized I’ve never seen this asked yet— if sidestep (pre-heartbreak) was revealed to the rangers as a regene and they found a way to let them be a ranger too.
Would your sidestep accept and be a ranger?
61 notes · View notes
Text
If you think Susie mentioning her gender in her post is just to "make her seem like a victim", block me right now.
50 notes · View notes
bryverros · 5 months
Text
wow 200$ in cash and some canadian coins, living a dream
28 notes · View notes
werewolves-are-real · 5 months
Text
Go fuck yourself anon
This morning I received an extremely condescending ask, where an anonymous person said they were heartbroken by my recent 'pro-Israel' posts and could not in good conscience engage with my works until I learned to have 'empathy.'
I immediately deleted it, because it was idiotic. But here's the thing: I don't usually post about the war. So then I started thinking about what I posted recently that might be viewed as pro-Israel. And now I'm mad.
Here is a list of posts that might be CONSTRUED as pro-Israel (by this person) starting from most recent back to Oct. 7th:
-A post joking about a misspelled 'happy Hanukkah' greeting
-A post about different types of menorahs
-A post talking about a Philedelphia-based Jewish man who was targeted by violent rioters for the crime of.... donating to a civilian-led non-profit that provides free medical services to Israel.
-A post about misconceptions over the names of places in Israel, and how the Hebrew words are fucking old and basically have nothing to do with colonialism regardless of what you think about the war.
-A post condemning the denial of Hamas rape victims, because Hamas are terrorists, regardless of anything else you might believe about the war,
-A post talking about what zionism actually means, historically, since it's kinda a relevant issue and some people use it improperly.
-A post also talking about the definition of genocide.
-A silly posts about Jewish prayer emojis
-A post which I will quote here, actually:
Tumblr media
-A post about biased media coverage.
-A post about a Jewish journalist who feels unsafe.
-A post calling out people for only caring NOW, and only getting angry at Israel, rather than – for example – neighboring Egypt refusing to open the border. Because people love hating Israel without figuring out why.
-Another post by Jewish people alarmed by how VIOLENT people are getting toward them.
-A post again pointing out that you can think both Israel and Hamas are doing bad things, actually.
-A post where I lament that I can't post the next chapter of Without Reason because it included a scene with a synagogue and there's no way I can post it without people assuming it's some sort of commentary on the war.
-A post I can't rapidly summarize but that basically criticizes people being callous and, again, anti-semitic while pretending anti-semitism doesn't exist.
That's it, that's all I can find in a quick search since Oct. 7th. You might notice that none of these are really explicitly pro-Israel. In fact, most of them aren't about Israel at all, and they certainly don't demonize Palestine. So what I'm gathering is that this anon is deeply hurt by my posts about *checks notes* – Jewish holidays, Jewish terminology, and rising anti-semitism.
And a desire for people to calm down and use nuance in their discussions, which I guess is scary to some folks.
My most recent posts are about the holidays. If you cannot read a 'happy hanukkah' message without conflating your political anger – about a war on the other side of the world - with anger toward all Jewish people, I am asking you to examine YOUR lack of empathy, and particularly why it does not extend toward Jews.
And if you don't want to 'engage with my work,' great! I don't write to entertain anti-semites :) So get the fuck away from me.
30 notes · View notes
iirulancorrino · 9 months
Text
Movies that attempt something different, that recognize that less can indeed be more, are thus easily taken to task. “It’s so subjective!” and “It omits a crucial P.O.V.!” are assumed to be substantive criticisms rather than essentially value-neutral statements. We are sometimes told, in matters of art and storytelling, that depiction is not endorsement; we are not reminded nearly as often that omission is not erasure. But because viewers of course cannot be trusted to know any history or muster any empathy on their own — and if anything unites those who criticize “Oppenheimer” on representational grounds, it’s their reflexive assumption of the audience’s stupidity — anything that isn’t explicitly shown onscreen is denigrated as a dodge or an oversight, rather than a carefully considered decision. A film like “Oppenheimer” offers a welcome challenge to these assumptions. Like nearly all Nolan’s movies, from “Memento” to “Dunkirk,” it’s a crafty exercise in radical subjectivity and narrative misdirection, in which the most significant subjects — lost memories, lost time, lost loves — often are invisible and all the more powerful for it. We can certainly imagine a version of “Oppenheimer” that tossed in a few startling but desultory minutes of Japanese destruction footage. Such a version might have flirted with kitsch, but it might well have satisfied the representational completists in the audience. It also would have reduced Hiroshima and Nagasaki to a piddling afterthought; Nolan treats them instead as a profound absence, an indictment by silence. That’s true even in one of the movie’s most powerful and contested sequences. Not long after news of Hiroshima’s destruction arrives, Oppenheimer gives a would-be-triumphant speech to a euphoric Los Alamos crowd, only for his words to turn to dust in his mouth. For a moment, Nolan abandons realism altogether — but not, crucially, Oppenheimer’s perspective — to embrace a hallucinatory horror-movie expressionism. A piercing scream erupts in the crowd; a woman’s face crumples and flutters, like a paper mask about to disintegrate. The crowd is there and then suddenly, with much sonic rumbling, image blurring and an obliterating flash of white light, it is not. For “Oppenheimer’s” detractors, this sequence constitutes its most grievous act of erasure: Even in the movie’s one evocation of nuclear disaster, the true victims have been obscured and whitewashed. The absence of Japanese faces and bodies in these visions is indeed striking. It’s also consistent with Nolan’s strict representational parameters, and it produces a tension, even a contradiction, that the movie wants us to recognize and wrestle with. Is Oppenheimer trying (and failing) to imagine the hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians murdered by the weapon he devised? Or is he envisioning some hypothetical doomsday scenario still to come? I think the answer is a blur of both, and also something more: In this moment, one of the movie’s most abstract, Nolan advances a longer view of his protagonist’s history and his future. Oppenheimer’s blindness to Japanese victims and survivors foreshadows his own stubborn inability to confront the consequences of his actions in years to come. He will speak out against nuclear weaponry, but he will never apologize for the atomic bombings of Japan — not even when he visits Tokyo and Osaka in 1960 and is questioned by a reporter about his perspective now. “I do not think coming to Japan changed my sense of anguish about my part in this whole piece of history,” he will respond. “Nor has it fully made me regret my responsibility for the technical success of the enterprise.” Talk about compartmentalization. That episode, by the way, doesn’t find its way into “Oppenheimer,” which knows better than to offer itself up as the last word on anything. To the end, Nolan trusts us to seek out and think about history for ourselves. If we elect not to, that’s on us.
68 notes · View notes
razberrypuck · 5 months
Text
every time someone even vaguely mischaracterizes qcharlie i lose a year of my life (this is abt a tiktok comment not anyone here)
44 notes · View notes
end-otw-racism · 10 months
Note
Could this DOS attack bullshit one of yours acting out? If it was one of the christian morality cop groups I would have expected them to act much sooner. The timing of the attack does not look good.
Do please discourage this sort of fuckery, it is decidedly not how one gains friends and compassion.
Our movement is actively and peaceably working towards making the OTW and AO3 a better space and have no interest in it going away. Those responsible for the attacks are acting against the interests of our cause.
Your ask is one way in which racism in fandom manifests: through baseless accusations against fans of color, just as many reactions to the attack displayed such severe Islamophobia that AO3 had to condemn it. This demonstrates to us how important antiracism work in fandom is.
We will continue our work in the hopes that AO3 can continue to exist and evolve into a better, more welcoming, anti-racist space for all fandom.
61 notes · View notes
traffic-light-eyes · 1 year
Text
If Morro didn't actually die and made amends with the Ninja, I think that he would definitely become that overprotective cousin character to Lloyd.
Think about it. He had full, uncensored access to Lloyd's thoughts and experiences. He does NOT want anyone to hurt his poor, sad, perpetually lonely-feeling cousin ever again. Not physically, nor verbally, and not emotionally.
Overprotective Morro.
87 notes · View notes
ranboo5 · 2 months
Text
Listen "notallmen" discourse here is pure whataboutism. It is.
No, men are not inherently evil (and in fact "oh he's an evil creature that can't help it" is On Wilbur's Side lol), but what we are looking at here is a trend of consistent, violent misogyny. These are situations of cis men using their privilege as cis men to abuse people. That is what we are fucking looking at here and calling it what it is is necessary. This is gendered violence. Everything that we know about these communities and everything that Shubble and Lexie said was gendered violence and men protecting their privilege and entitlement.
I understand frustration with the lack of intersectionality in this conversation but that intersectionality is not going missing in analysis – it's going missing long before that bc the dynamics being discussed are the dynamics of popular streamers and the streamer community is overwhelmingly white and cis. This is not in fact comprehensive of all abuse cases and experiences, but focusing on that at the expense of addressing the insidious, deep rooted misogyny that drove these abuse cases is textbook whataboutism. This is in fact about how these cis men, as cis men, feel entitled to women's labor and bodies, and leverage their privilege in an environment that has some uniquely pernicious manifestations of patriarchal priorities to get what they want. That is the core of this. That's what's happening here. This IS about gendered power dynamics and people with privilege – in this case, yes, male privilege – trying to cling to what it promises them.
Yes, we should be mindful of transmisogyny and ableism in how we discuss this, but we cannot lose focus of what is being discussed
17 notes · View notes
michals · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
I am haaating these kinds of takes regarding Poor Things so much. I mean I can at least appreciate that they're more thoughtful than the stupid 'the sex scenes are evil and gross' or 'it's a dumb art movie' ones but they're still so short sighted.
I mean how can you watch a movie about a woman who was born into exploitative and confining circumstances and yet insists upon her own agency at every turn and who chooses to experience the world on her own terms and becomes empowered through learning and growth and thinks 'oh yeah the whole point of the movie is men are bad'. That's just making the movie all about the men and how they view and treat her and throws how she reacts to them and her own journey out the window. It's a point, it's not the point.
I mean her learning philosophy and getting the chance to open her mind to different worldviews and her seeing the poor people and realizing there are people who live much different lives from her that she'd been blind to are also, ya know, big points in the movie and those aren't about the patriarchy. I mean ffs how do you miss how she constantly and forcefully shuts down people's attempts to wrangle or control her!! How the movie ends with her choosing the life that she wants! Boiling down the movie to only how a couple of the male characters act is just so. fucking dumb.
10 notes · View notes
witheredoffherwitch · 7 months
Text
I'm not going to play with any more of these 'hate' anons. If you feel the need to call me names for my stance on characters and shipping preferences, do what you will. Yell into the abyss if it makes you feel better -- I really don't care. I will be deleting each and every one of them from now on!
However, if you genuinely want to engage with these topics despite your distaste for these characters/ships, you are more than welcome to drop an ask in my inbox. I may not be the most punctual but I will respond to every ask eventually.
24 notes · View notes
hazzabeeforlou · 3 months
Text
.
10 notes · View notes
adderstones · 5 months
Text
Tumblr media
Im the home stretch… of this phase 🥲
12 notes · View notes