Tumgik
#cw racism
nekropsii · 3 days
Text
It will actually never cease to baffle me that people got so up in arms about the Trickster Mode “Caucasian” bit because “The Kids are Aracial”, and will parrot the point that “The Kids(/Trolls) are Aracial” to hell and back, when like… It’s just not true?
I’m sorry, but you physically cannot have a humanoid character design lack racial characteristics. The only thing you give away by trying to make an “aracial” character design is what you think the racial default is. Considering White Supremacy is the social default in the Western World, more often than not, people will view the “racial default” as white. It lines up with how “white” as an identity works. “White” has never had a set definition, it changes all the time specifically to exclude more and more people- like Jewish people, Italians, et cetera. “White” is defined, historically, as “Lacking Race”, so oftentimes “Aracial” tends to just mean “White”. “Aracial” features always completely exclude Black features, and that’s not by accident.
The character designs in Homestuck have white features. I’m sorry, you’re not convincing me that the Kids are meant to be entirely racially neutral when they’re consistently depicted in the comic as having straight hair and Eurocentric features. The Kids have always been white, it’s just that people view whiteness as the racial default and everything else as of an aberration of that whiteness. Getting mad at the Trickster Mode “Caucasian” bit for “saying the kids are white” or “confirming they are white” is completely unreasonable when they’ve never been depicted as anything other than little white kids by their designs the whole entire time.
179 notes · View notes
ayeforscotland · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
Fucking hell.
N-word discovered in British government official documents regarding asylum seeker applicants.
1K notes · View notes
gatheringbones · 6 months
Text
[“Carceral feminists hold that if we could abolish prostitution through criminalising clients and managers, the trafficking of women would end, as there would be no sex trade to traffic them into. As the deputy prime minister of Sweden writes, ‘It is very obvious to us that there is a very clear link between prostitution and trafficking … Without prostitution there would be no trafficking of women.’ This perspective also views prostitution as intrinsically more horrifying than other kinds of work (including work that is ‘low-status’, exploitative, or low-paid), and as such, views attempting to abolish prostitution through criminal law as a worthwhile end in itself. For those who hold these views, defending sex workers’ rights is akin to defending trafficking.
In these conversations, trafficking becomes a battle between good and evil, monstrosity and innocence, replete with heavy-handed imagery of chains, ropes, and cuffs to signify enslavement and descriptors such as nefarious, wicked, villainous, and iniquitous. This ‘evil’ is driven by the aberrance of commercial sex and by anomalous (and distinctly racialised) ‘bad actors’: the individual villain, the pimp, the trafficker. A police officer summarises this approach as: ‘we’ll put all these pimps, all these traffickers in prison … and that’ll solve the problem’. Numerous images associated with modern anti-trafficking campaigns feature a white girl held captive by a Black man: he is a dark hand over her mouth or a looming, shadowy figure behind her.
Fancy-dress ‘pimp costumes’ offer a cartoonishly racist vision of 1970s Black masculinity, while American law-enforcement unashamedly use terms such as ‘gorilla pimp’ and link trafficking to rap music. There is a horror-movie entertainment quality to this at times: tourists can go on ‘sex-trafficking bus tours’ to shudder over locations where they’re told sexual violence has recently occurred (‘perhaps you are wondering where these crimes take place’) or buy an ‘awareness-raising’ sandwich featuring a naked woman with her body marked up as if for a butcher. Conventionally sexy nude women are depicted wrapped in tape or packed under plastic, with labels indicating ‘meat’.
Conversely, the victim is often presented with her ‘girlishness’ emphasised. Young women are styled to look pre-pubescent, in pigtails or hair ribbons, holding teddy bears. This imagery suggests another key preoccupation shared by modern and nineteenth-century anti-trafficking campaigners: innocence. A glance at the names chosen for police operations and NGOs highlights this: Lost Innocence, Saving Innocence, Freedom4Innocence, the Protected Innocence Challenge, Innocents at Risk, Restore Innocence, Rescue Innocence, Innocence for Sale.
For feminists, this preoccupation with feminine ‘innocence’ should be a red flag, not least because it speaks to a prurient interest in young women. Conversely, LGBTQ people, Black people, and deliberate prostitutes are often left out of the category of innocence, and as a result harm against people in these groups becomes less legible as harm. For example, a young Black man may face arrest rather than support; indeed, resources for runaway and homeless youth (whose realities are rather more complex than chains and ropes) were not included in the US Congress’s 2015 reauthorisation of the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act. Anti-trafficking statutes often exclude deliberate prostitutes from the category of people able to seek redress, as to be a ‘legitimate’ trafficking victim requires innocence, and a deliberate prostitute, however harmed, cannot fulfil that requirement.”]
molly smith, juno mac, from revolting prostitutes: the fight for sex workers’ rights, 2018
294 notes · View notes
telekitnetic-art · 7 months
Text
I’m gonna be honest. There’s nothing more demotivating to me as an Indigenous artist then seeing the way Indigenous ppl get treated for speaking out about racism and cultural appropriation.
It always feels nice when I get fellow Indigenous ppl telling me how they appreciate my work, so you can see what a blow to the face it is to see a fellow Indigenous artist say “hey, please don’t treat our culture and sacred objects as a costume piece” and watch in real time as hundreds of non-indigenous people emerge from the woodworks to insult them, belittle them, and worse.
It makes me so tired and sometimes I honestly have considered not posting my formline artwork publicly online because of how tiring it is seeing non-native people go out of their way to belittle native people and their culture. It feels exhausting to present my artwork and realize that a lot of people will only see it as an aesthetic or commodity at best, and will belittle me for caring about issues that impact my culture all while consuming it through my art at worst.
To see people who cling to the argument of “but it’s APPRECIATING your culture!” before turning around and calling us ungrateful or greedy for pointing out that consuming harmful stereotypes and closed practices or perpetuating appropriation is not appreciating our culture.
I always feel happy when people leave their compliments and thoughts on my formline art, but just seeing all of this negativity towards Indigenous people just for saying “hey, please don’t treat us like a costume” is just. Demotivating to me in a way that erodes at my very being.
276 notes · View notes
brown-spider · 5 months
Text
Btw what was her problem
Tumblr media
"Struggling immigrant family" about two citizens with stable careers and their kid attending a private school
Why did we let her get away with that 🤨
302 notes · View notes
Text
This is a meta on Our Flag Means Death episode 5: The Best Revenge Is Dressing Well, Sir Godfrey Thornrose, The scene where he calls Ed a donkey, and so called "race science."
It has come to my attention that some of you apparently do not know what a phrenologist is.
*a note: I'm going to for the purposes of this assume that the guy played by Jeff Lorch is sir Godfrey Thornrose, I do not know this for certain but in my opinion even if he is not Thornrose the same principles still apply to him for reasons I will discuss in this meta.
So lets recap the scenes I want to touch on. At the beginning of episode 5 Stede is teaching Ed how to identify rich people cutlery like they're Barney Thompson and Vivian Ward in pretty woman. Stede bitches at Thornrose for not having enough spoons for Stede's liking. Thornrose responds "My apologies, I hadn't imagined we'd be hosting your kind."
Ed responds "My kind, what kind"
to which Godfrey responds "A rich donkey is still a donkey."
Ed then proceeds to scream at him and then orders Fang to skin him with a snail fork before throwing him overboard. To which Fang presumably responds by either skinning him with a normal skinning implement or forgoing the skinning step and just throwing him overboard, because who tf has time to skin a man with a snail fork.
I've seen some dogshit takes on this scene. I've seen it treated as evidence that Ed is exceptionally violent or abusive or has mood swings or anger issues or whatever bullshit. And I... Do Not Agree. You'll see why.
The next scene I want us to have in our back pocket is the first couple scenes with Gabriel and Antionette. When Gabriel and Antionette introduce themselves to Ed and Stede they reveal that Sir Godfrey Thornrose is a quote "Master Phrenologist." Stede is then expected to study Antionette's head. When he does he introduces his fake craft as "Phrenology, which is the study of the human head." He then takes a wild guess as to Antionette's heritage based on her skull lumps.
Content warning for like real old school racism ahead.
The reason Stede goes for the heritage is because Phrenology is a pseudoscience closely linked to other contemporary race science of the time. It was the idea that bumps on your head, thought to be caused by the pressure of the brain, could be used to identify your personality traits.
Tumblr media
Phrenology gets really fucking racist, really fucking fast. Phrenology was used as proof that the white race was superior to other races, and as a justification for slavery and eugenics. Eugenics is the idea that you can improve society through breeding out "bad genes", which is almost universally popular among all types of racists, but the Nazis were big fans of it and there's a direct through line between the race scientists in the 1700s who were into phrenology and modern hate groups and neo nazis. I wanted to use an image here as an example of racist phrenology texts, but it's rough and I don't want to make a cut so I'm just going to link to the wordpress anthropology article I found the picture in, it's sourced and an alright place to start if you're into further reading.
With this information, I would like to use another example, that is relevant to the ethnicities in contention. A French physician who attracted huge crowds with his phrenology lectures, François-Joseph-Victor Broussais, once claimed that Maori people (as well as indigenous Australians) could never become civilized since he claimed they had no cerebral organ for producing great artists.
This is the context in which we need to understand the exchange between Ed and the French captain. I've seen some people claim it's about class and not about race, but Thornrose acknowledges Ed's wealth when he says a rich donkey is still a donkey. It doesn't matter to a man like Thornrose what Ed does or how rich he is or how well he can learn his fucking forks, he's still akin to an animal in this skull molesting freak's racist little mind. If a phrenologist, or even someone who's rubbing elbows with a phrenologist, calls a man of color a donkey they're clearly saying he's an uncivilized animal based on the shape of his face. That's how racists operate.
And Sir Godfrey Thornrose is not just any old racist, he's a racist spreading his ideology to other people, convincing them that people like Ed are inferior, that people like him should be subjugated by white people. He is clocking in for his shift at the racism factory creating more racists.
So basically what I'm saying is Ed should skin him, no quarter for genocidal maniacs. Basically I can tell you're either racist sympathetic or talking out of your ass if you think French captain was fucked up. It was antifascist direct action and I don't want to hear another word about it. I personally believe the only thing you can't come back from is death in terms of being a better person. I also believe that there are situations in which killing someone is more or less fine and you're never gonna catch me feeling bad for a fucking phrenologist when he compares an indigenous pirate to an animal and the pirate responds by doing what pirates do.
Killing Godfrey was based.
227 notes · View notes
thepurplewombat · 3 months
Text
Having already done critical physicic damage to @thatswhatsushesaid this morning by sharing this, allow me to share it with the rest of Tumblr also.
Tumblr media
From this tweet:
https://x.com/Kazyllz_/status/1749293247636402570?s=20
120 notes · View notes
saint-jussy · 1 month
Text
Tumblr media
Someone really said this with a Saint-Just name and pic...Criminal behavior
62 notes · View notes
silvermoon424 · 5 months
Text
Tumblr media
Why the FUCK is this shit being pushed in my recommendation feed. I looked into this and it's about as racist as you would expect (basically an entire doc devoted to defending Zimmerman and villainizing Trayvon).
Maybe Youtube should sort out their radicalization pipeline algorithm instead of spending God knows how much money on slowing down videos for Firefox users and engaging in a war with adblockers.
102 notes · View notes
nekropsii · 2 days
Note
Do you think Gamzee could've been salvaged in any way? He seems so entrenched in anti-black stereotypes that trying to untangle it all would leave him an entirely different character.
I don’t know. Again, in my view he has an extremely nebulous, barely-there character. It lacks a lot of necessary meat and bones. Just about all of his character is Plot Instigation and Racial Caricature. If you remove the Racism, then… Well, at that point you could really just replace him with a tornado and not much would change…
Stripping the Racism out of the Makaras is extremely difficult, because the Makaras barely have any character outside of it. I had to do it with Kurloz and it took me a pretty long time to figure out an angle that properly shaved most of it out. It was quite literally headache inducing- like, it gave me real physical headaches in real life.
I guess someone could do it with Gamzee, if they had a deft enough hand and gave enough of a damn, but yeah, you’ll wind up with a fundamentally way different character because the Makaras are so nothing to begin with. My take is that as long as you keep their general plot points and classpect in tact, you’re basically set. Those are the only things you really shouldn’t change. I think it’s fine to have an interpretation of Gamzee that is a fundamentally different character than what’s canon… If you’re making the changes smartly. Most people just woobify him while stacking a bunch of new labels on him and proceed to never actually address the racism. It’s really corny and myopic.
48 notes · View notes
ayeforscotland · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media
Racist Tory cunt alert.
1K notes · View notes
gatheringbones · 8 months
Text
[“People benefit from poverty in all kinds of ways. It’s the plainest social fact there is, and yet when you put it like this, the air becomes charged. You feel rude bringing it up. People shift in their chairs, and some respond by trying to quiet you the way mothers try to shush small children in public when they point out something that everyone sees but pretends not to—a man with one eye, a dog urinating on a car—or the way serious grown-ups shush young people when they offer blanket critiques of capitalism that, with the brutal clarity of a brick through glass, express a deep moral truth. People accuse you of inciting class warfare when you’re merely pointing out the obvious.
As a theory of poverty, exploitation elicits a muddled response, causing us to think of course and but, no in the same instant. On the one hand, as the late composer Stephen Sondheim once wrote, “The history of the world, my sweet—is who gets eaten and who gets to eat.” Clans, families, tribes, and nation-states collide, and one side is annihilated or enslaved or colonized or dispossessed to enrich the other. One side ascends to a higher place on the backs of the vanquished. Why should we think of poverty today as the result of anything different?
On the other hand, that was then. Notice how our voices, which can so effortlessly discuss exploitation that happened in the past, become garbled and halting when the conversation moves to how we get over on each other today. Perhaps because exploitation appears to us only in its most galling, extreme forms: enslaved Black field hands, young boys sent into the coal pits and young girls into the cotton mills. Perhaps we are captivated by a heroic narrative of progress, particularly racial progress, as if history, to quote the psychologist Jennifer Richeson, was “a ratchet that turns in one direction only.” Or perhaps we connect the concept of exploitation with socialism and don’t want to be associated with its tenets (or at least not its aesthetics). Years ago, I presented a paper titled “Exploiting the Inner City” at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, a paper that documented the business strategies of landlords in poor neighborhoods. The paper was straightforward. It showed how some landlords make a living (and sometimes a killing) by renting shabby housing to very poor families. After my talk, a senior scholar looked rather alarmed. “You’re going down a Marxist path,” she said. “You know that, right?”]
matthew desmond, from poverty: by america, 2023
300 notes · View notes
palin-tropos · 11 months
Text
so I think kim kitsuragi, the only non-white member of precinct 41 c-wing that we’ve seen, would be under more scrutiny all the time, and any way that he stands up for himself or harry against harassment or bigotry would be scrutinized as well. I would love to see something exploring the passive pressure on kim at all times to be model minority tm and he fails at that if anything disrupts group “camaraderie”. and being protective of harry could count for that too
282 notes · View notes
stungbyadog · 6 months
Note
Go back to your country
Me simultaneously going to the four different countries that each of my grandparents had to flee in fear as children while not having a citizenship to any of them & not speaking their languages:
Tumblr media
135 notes · View notes
Tumblr media Tumblr media
PROPAGANDA
AGENT TEXAS (RED VS BLUE)
1.) okay so tex is an ai based on the memories this one dickhead dude has of his dead wife, allison. there's also an ai based on the dickhead dude himself, his name's church. all the stuff with the ai's and the different versions of her is kind of confusing to explain but she sort of dies twice- first sacrificing herself for something that has very little narrative weight, and being absorbed into a kind of . monstrous mesh of other ai's (including the original church ai) that then is erased, with basically no mention of tex, it's all about church's death.
then, there's another version of both church and tex born from the original church ai's memories (epsilon-tex and epsilon-church). epsilon-church's arc is basically about learning to move on from his past and let go of tex, because he's kind of obsessed with her and it's preventing him from progressing. so, epsilon-church 'forgets' tex, deleting her for good. tl;dr she dies, again, basically entirely for church's development.
when i was a kid super into rvb i was always really disinterested in tex and looking back it's because er story just.. isn't resolved satisfyingly at all. basically all of her story is hitched so tightly to church's story and development that tex barely gets room to be more than a memory of the director's dead wife- she never gets to move past the circumstances that created her and become her own person entirely divorced from the director or from church- allison died and we never knew anything about her besides that the director god sad about it. beta-tex died unceremoniously and without mention. epsilon-tex died for church's character growth.
quoting church's own words from the show: ""She died in her real life, and that's all the Director ever remembered of her. So now, no matter how tough she is, no matter how hard she fights, she's always going to fail, because that's what she's based on. No matter what she's doing, or what she's trying to accomplish, just when her goal is within her reach, it gets yanked away. Every. Single. Time." and she just never… actually overcomes this. she just dies.
and quoting now-inactive tumblr user epsilontucker from 2015 who put it better than i could: "Tex’s whole life was spent fighting for agency. Freedom from what Omega wanted her to be (O’Malley), what the Director wanted her to be (Allison), what Church wanted her to be (his). Epsilon-Tex wanted to know who she was and why she was and she wanted to dismantle everything Church ever built. Especially because he built it for her.
And this character arc about freedom and agency, about a chance to define herself on her own terms, is resolved by… Church deciding to delete her.
Because everybody always seems to know what’s best for Tex."
this is also to say nothing of the treatment of her character on just, like, an episode-to-episode basis. rvb has a big problem with basically treating "bitch" as a personality trait for female characters, and tex gets some of the worst of it. if you made a drinking game of how often tex gets called a bitch, or a huge bitch, you'd die of alcohol poisoning. also at one point andy the bomb makes a bunch of transmisogynistic jokes at her because she's suppsoedly mannish (she's not masculine or feminine really everybody in this show is a multicolor master chief. she's just good at fighting) and then calls her a dyke. the end
2.) Some background (spoilers): Tex is introduced as a badass mercenary from Project Freelancer, and the ex girlfriend of Church, the main character of the show. It is eventually revealed she and Church are both Aritifical Intelligence programs; Church is an AI copy of the Director of Project Freelancer, and Tex is a copy of the Director's late wife.
Firstly she is straightforwardly the victim of misogynistic "jokes" for the first several seasons. She is called misogynistic slurs, shamed for sleeping with other men besides Church, she cannot work the entertainment stand at the base bc she's female, called lesbophobic and transmysogonistic slurs bc she is a competent soldier, and blackmails another female character out of jealousy bc she is the only other girl in the group.
Even when these jokes go away, and the show transitions from comedy to drama, her writing revolves around the male characters around her. Because she is the personification of the memory of the Director's dead wife, and his perceieved failure to save her, she explicitly, in the text, will always fail at what she sets out to accomplish no matter how strong she is. She wishes to be free of the cycle of being resurrected bc Church can't live without her only to fail and die again, but lacks the agency to end it without Church. Church's arc about learning to let her go ends not with her being free to exist as her own person without him, but with him forgetting her. Since she IS his memory, this ERASES HER FROM EXISTENCE. She literally cannot exist without this guy.
This would all be easier to swallow if she wasn't the ONLY prominent female main character for 8 whole seasons. It's a beautiful story about how grief can fester into anger and a need for control, and how that pushes away the people you love, but it's a story entirely centered around Church's development, in which she is a prop that stops existing when the story is over. I love her but she deserved so much better than she got.
3.) girlboss
KAMALA KHAN (MARVEL COMICS) (CW: Racism)
1.) One of the most prominent brown women in all of comics, beloved by the fan base. Recently killed in a PETER PARKER SPIDERMAN COMIC (despite being much closer with Miles Morales and having basically no relationship with Peter) in what's probably the name of MCU synergy, which nobody wanted (she'll probably be resurrected as a mutant, erasing her unique and interesting history as an Inhuman). She was using her shapeshifting powers again despite having stopped in her solo as she got more confident in her own skin and identity as a Pakistani American girl, died disguised as the very white Mary Jane as a fake out/last minute replacement for killing off MJ. I fucking hate it here. A cheap trick to drive sales. L + Misogyny + racism + are you fucking kidding me
137 notes · View notes
ghostlyg0ssip · 4 months
Text
hey maybe don't make fun of g3 venus' face which was based off of black facial features
113 notes · View notes