#is she pro-child navigators or anti-child navigators | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

cauterisen · 9 months

Text

VERSE:ONE PIECE.

BACKSTORY: Kimiko grew up relatively privileged in a comfortable home in one of the larger cities in Wano Country to a widower named Toshiro Tohomiko. Her father, Toshiro Tohomiko, owns a successful import business to this day. While not able to use her fire and haki properly as a child, she did have immense potential from a young age. At the age of 13, she was able to convince her father to let her train as a martial artist and Haki user at a temple in the mountains of Kano Country. She meets the other Xiaolin Dragons, and they help each other learn and grow and progress into the warriors and people they were meant to be. She leaves the temple after 3 years of structured training to travel, and has currently been living a nomadic existence ever since,

HEADCANONS:

Kimiko is very much someone who avoids the sea for extended periods of time, but she is known to travel on ships if it's necessary. She will mostly stay on deck and away from the starboard and port sides of the ships. but she does come to enjoy that feeling of the wind in her hair and the salt on her skin. She still keeps to shorter sea trips, mostly preferring to travel by land and air when she can. Kimiko has many creative and intellectual pursuits on the road, but she is most passionate about science and research. She wants to catalog and come up with new uses and new ways to help people with chemistry and potions, though she also is interested in learning about entomology and cataloging and identifying the different insects that she comes across in her travels as well.

Though she is primarily a researcher, she also is an artist and enjoys drawing landscapes and portraits. She likes to draw things during her downtime and to practice her skills. She's also very interested in glass blowing and smithy, from time to time. She greatly admires and appreciates craftsmanship and often talks to tradespeople and artisans in the places she travels to get their opinions on her own work and learn about their creative processes.

Kimiko is used to fighting, for herself and protecting others, and she's also very interested in learning different fighting skills as well.

While no expert or practiced map maker or navigator, she also is very much someone who is interested in that field. She makes sure that she gets the most accurate and detailed maps she can, and she also likes to know about who made the maps and the history behind them.

Kimiko's history with the navy and authority, in general, is… not the greatest. In her travels, she's run into them a couple of times and not always in positive ways. She doesn't like how they conduct themselves and is anti-authority in general, but she doesn't usually antagonize them unless she feels they are impeding her research and work or using their authority to oppress the people in the towns she's traveling in. She likes to use her skills to help people and protect them when she can. She's not always pro-pirate, but she can appreciate the ones who help people and protect them from naval officers who take advantage of innocent townsfolk. She's against anyone who uses their powers or power to hurt people or restrict their freedom, pirate or navy.

Over the years, Kimiko does get the odd marriage proposal from the occasional lovestruck man, or woman, when she travels. She rejects them all, preferring to dedicate her life and love to the friends she makes and her intellectual and creative pursuits. Besides, Kimiko doesn't think her vagabond lifestyle would be that conducive to a life with marriage and a family anyway.

#❪ she's a lady and ladies shouldn't be messed with ❫ / headcanons.#op verse.#HELLO #this got long and i'll probably add to it/format it later but here u go! i had so much fun writing this

2 notes · View notes

ecoamerica · 2 months

Text

youtube

Watch the American Climate Leadership Awards 2024 now: https://youtu.be/bWiW4Rp8vF0?feature=shared

The American Climate Leadership Awards 2024 broadcast recording is now available on ecoAmerica's YouTube channel for viewers to be inspired by active climate leaders. Watch to find out which finalist received the $50,000 grand prize! Hosted by Vanessa Hauc and featuring Bill McKibben and Katharine Hayhoe!

17K notes · View notes

coochiequeens · 3 years

Text

Last summer, Crystal Zaragoza drove a 15-year-old patient from her home in rural Georgia to Virginia, the nearest location where the teen could receive the abortion care she needed.

Zaragoza remained with the patient every step of the way, making the 650-mile trip in one, long 12-hour haul and staying with her at a hotel during and after the procedure before driving back.

Access Reproductive Care-Southeast, the abortion fund serving women in six states across the Southeast U.S. where Zaragoza works, provides what's called "practical support" — helping women overcome significant financial, logistical and geographic hurdles beyond just paying for the abortion care itself. Zaragoza locates providers and facilitates lodging, escorts to and from clinics, child care and travel (often doing the driving herself).

Demand for the help groups like Zaragoza's offer has grown in the years the states her organization serves — Georgia, Florida, Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee and Mississippi — have chipped away at abortion access. The pandemic has also had an impact. But the Supreme Court's decision last month to consider the legality of Mississippi's ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy — a move pro-abortion-rights advocates say means the newly conservative bench is eyeing an end to Roe v. Wade — has practical support groups looking to ramp up fundraising, volunteering and staffing with even greater urgency.

"We have been preparing for a long while for an eventual reality where Roe is decimated, and a lot of that has been trying to scale abortion funds,” said Yamani Hernandez, the executive director of the National Network of Abortion Funds, which helps women access and receive abortion care.

"These groups have already been navigating a difficult year-plus, and if things do not go well with the Supreme Court, a lot more travel and a lot more assistance will be needed. Distances to travel will increase and the amount of people traveling will increase," she said.

The groups, which are also becoming the target of a new, restrictive wave of anti-abortion laws, are strategizing for the long-dreaded possibility that the way they operate could represent the future of abortion care for millions of women.

Need spiked during pandemic, groups say

Several organizations said the number of women seeking help from abortion funds and practical support groups spiked during the pandemic and has continued to rise in the months since infection rates began declining.

The number of patients helped by the National Abortion Federation, which runs the five largest patient assistance funds by dollar amount, rose in each month from April 2020 to December 2020 (over the prior year) by an average of 21 percent, the group’s leaders said. That equated to more than 100,000 women receiving financial assistance from the group to pay for abortion care. In 2020, the group grew its staff of regional case managers to 19 from eight and plans to add more.

NNAF's Hernandez, meanwhile, said call volume across her group's 83 member funds doubled in the months since May 2020 over the prior year numbers.

ARC-Southeast saw its call volume double during that time, too, officials said. Before the pandemic, the group was making an average of 350 pledges per month — an accurate way to track demand because it indicates the number of callers who sought care and actually received money, according to the group. Since June 2020, ARC-Southeast has made an average of 600 pledges a month.

Meanwhile, the Brigid Alliance, a New York-based group that pays for women with low income to travel to states where they can receive abortion care, has, since January 2020, seen a 20 percent increase in its client volume and has doubled its budget, via fundraising efforts, in anticipation that it will keep growing.

In 2020, the group helped 661 women travel to receive abortion care. Less than halfway through 2021, it’s already helped 440 women.

“People didn't stop needing abortions just because there was a pandemic. It just became more difficult,” the group’s executive director, Odile Schalit, said.

'Two Americas' when it comes to abortion rights

Leaders of these groups predicted need for their services will only rise ahead of, and following, the Supreme Court's consideration of Mississippi's abortion ban. The law currently allows exceptions for medical emergencies and severe fetal abnormalities.

Abortion-rights activists worry the case will provide an opening for the court to decide whether all bans on abortion before fetal viability — which Roe prohibits — are unconstitutional. (The court will hear the case in the fall and will likely issue a decision next spring or summer.)

"This would basically create two Americas when it comes to abortion. Of course we already have that, but this will make it even worse," said Elizabeth Nash, a state policy analyst at the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that studies reproductive health rights. "If the Supreme Court really takes a whack at abortion rights and upholds the Mississippi ban or determines that pre-viability bans are OK, you’re talking about having two very different experiences in this country."

"If you're living pretty much anywhere in the middle of the country or the South, abortion could very well be, effectively, banned to a large extent," Nash said.

Abortion funds and practical support groups could then become some of the only avenues for millions of women who can't otherwise afford or navigate abortion care on their own. Groups are already looking to lift their fundraising so they can increase services to meet what they say will be an all-but-certain surge in demand.

"Virtually any ruling other than one that upholds Roe is going to result in more people having to travel farther and raise more resources, whether that's paying for procedures or travel costs or lost wages costs,” said the Rev. Katherine Ragsdale, president of the National Abortion Federation. “People are going to be more and more dependent on abortion funds and the groups like NAF who can provide those resources.

The NNAF, for example, launched a pilot program this year for several of its 83 member abortion funds that will "fully resource the mid-Atlantic region so they can say yes to every caller," Hernandez said. The group is trying to double its $15 million budget, Hernandez said, via grants and direct appeals to individual donors.

ARC-Southeast, for its part, has grown its small full-time paid staff of 10 by 40 percent and has expanded its volunteer network of 120 unpaid individuals by a similar amount.

Meanwhile, the National Institute for Reproductive Health and its sister advocacy arm, the NIRH Action Fund, are looking to grow their collective budget by about 30 percent, the groups said.

Groups say they are targeted by new state laws

The Mississippi case and its subsequent fallout, however, are far from the the only battle on the minds of leaders of abortion funds and practical support groups.

A unique Texas law enacted in May banning abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy also included language allowing anyone, even someone outside Texas, to sue an abortion provider or anyone else who helped someone get an abortion after the six-week limit for up to $10,000 per defendant. (Texas' law prohibits state officials from enforcing the ban and rather leaves enforcement to private citizens' lawsuits; abortion rights activists have vowed to challenge it.)

But that language would also apply to abortion funds and practical support organizations — and lawsuits would cripple those group's ability to operate at a critical moment, they said.

"It's absolutely a new way for state legislatures trying to find ways to end practical support. It could be a model for states considering how to further crack down on that kind of support,” said Guttmacher's Nash.

That would make it even more difficult for people like Schalit to help women like the 24-year-old patient she assisted last year to travel from Tennessee to New Mexico after nearly every part of the system put up roadblocks for her to receive abortion care.

The woman, Schalit said, discovered she was pregnant at eight weeks and made plans to attempt a medication abortion but lost her job (and her medical benefits) around that time after being laid off due to Covid-19. Her unemployment checks were delayed, and by the time she received her first, the closest possible clinics in Tennessee and Kentucky that provided care were booked up. Soon, she had surpassed the gestational limits in both states, prompting her to seek assistance from the Brigid Alliance.

Schalit personally planned the woman’s travel and hotel and connected her to the New Mexico Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, which helped her seek abortion care.

"Her barriers were a combination of everything many women are facing in this world right now in trying to have an abortion, pandemic or no," Schalit said. "It’s a phenomenal story, but it’s also typical. And it’s about to become even more typical."

#Access Reproductive Care-Southeast #National Network of Abortion Funds #National Abortion Federation #Reproductive justice #abortion access #roe v wade #NIRH Action Fund #National Institute for Reproductive Health #New Mexico Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice

142 notes · View notes

thetangentialruinsminneapolis · 3 years

Text

Theatre Pro Rata Brings Shoulderpads-Era Caryl Churchill to the Crane Theater With “Top Girls”

“You’re a sexist, egotistical, lying, hypocritical bigot!”

Even acclaimed playwright Caryl Churchill had her work cut out for her trying to match 9 to 5 screenwriters Patricia Resnick and Colin Higgins in lucidly critiquing ’80s workplace sexism, but it always needs to be said once more for the people in the back.

Theatre Pro Rata embrace the Thatcher-era setting of Churchill’s Top Girls (1982) in a focused, humane new production at the Crane Theater — a venue that recently played host to the Twin Cities Horror Festival, so its black matte walls are absorbing plenty of dread this season.

With contemporary music setting the scene and performers costumed (by Eleanor Schanilec) in outfits that evoke the times without condescending to played-out leg-warmer stereotypes, director Carin Bratlie Wethern turns the clock back four decades to an era of British history where anyone who’s been absorbing this year’s copious Princess Di content has been spending a fair amount of time.

The play, which in many assessments sits near the top of the prolific playwright’s lauded oeuvre, centers on Marlene, played by Maggie Cramer with subtlety and conviction. Marlene’s recently been promoted to head of the Top Girls employment agency, where she not only needs to navigate her own career and the choices she’s made in prioritizing her work, but also guide a steady stream of women looking to land better positions for themselves.

Marlene and her agents (Megan Kim and Nissa Nordland Morgan) err on the side of brutal honesty when counseling applicants about realities including ageism and the dangers of letting prospective employers know too much about your plans for having a family. The seemingly hard-headed Marlene does have broader reflections on the injustice of it all, though, as we learn in a famed opening scene in which legendary women convene in her imagination for a wine-thirty dinner party.

Wethern’s strong ensemble cast carries this scene, as well as the others, with perfect aplomb. Sarah Broude heads the table as the iconic Pope Joan, while Emily Rosenberg’s badass Dull Gret uses her few words well. Ninchai Nok-Chiclana, who’s kept hopping as a server keeping the thirsty ladies’ wine glasses filled in the opening scene, later shines in two additional roles: a frank child and a job-seeker with a particularly creative résumé.

The show’s powerful concluding scene is a family reunion as Marlene visits her sister Joyce (Kelsey Laurel Cramer, convincingly weary) and niece Angie (Rosenberg, grippingly enthusiastic). While the opening scene underlines the universality of patriarchal oppression, the final scene feels very specific to its place and time, including the suggestion that the upwardly mobile Marlene has succumbed to yuppie conservatism. Today, you’d imagine the rural Joyce being an anti-vaxxer who blows up over Marlene allowing Angie to get a poke of AstraZeneca during her London visit.

If you’re vaccinated yourself (cards are checked at the door), this accessible, absorbing production is ample reason to pause the endless content stream and check in again with thought-provoking live theater. It still feels thrillingly novel to see people together onstage again, and this top-notch Top Girls cast make the most of the opportunity.

– Jay Gabler

Photo: Maggie Cramer in character as Marlene (Charles Gorrill, courtesy Theatre Pro Rata).

#Minneapolis #Minnesota #theater #Caryl Churchill #1982 #80s

7 notes · View notes

impeccablebackside · 3 years

Text

So, I have been anxious about this blog since starting it a couple of months ago. Worried that everything that I discuss is up for scrutiny, and I accept that. It is in the public eye by my choice. It provides me with an outlet for my thoughts that I do not get anywhere else, and I am quite thankful for that.

However, I must address something that I probably should have done already, especially since my posts / account has reached the eyes of more members. Not to paint a target on my back, or take aim at others but:

As I have mentioned before, I consider Victoria as an adult character, and have made more than enough sexually explicit content regarding her to demonstrate this. However canonically, she is a kitten. That is what Cats has casted her as, and how she is regarded by the show at the core of it.

Why do I mention this again?

Well, because I am a hypocrite, and I must admit it. While I am not openly 'anti', I tend(ed) to lean that way, more so than 'pro' fiction. I am far more neutral from both sides now than I have been in the past, but still partially maintain the 'anti' stance. However, I am still uncomfortable with a lot of the more 'extreme' ends of the spectrum between 'anti' and 'pro' shippers. I find 'antis' to be too narrow minded and quick to criticize things they do not personally like. I find 'pros' to be too fluid with how they consider characters, especially when liberally applying relationships between young and established older / adult characters. Yet, I have demonstrated that I am borrowing from both worlds, so I cannot reasonably stake claim in one camp versus another if I am making my own decisions regarding the character of Victoria to headcanon her as an adult. I extended the sexual based canon mating dance to mean that she is an adult character.

When there was the bigger fandom drama last year, I took the side of the 'antis' over the 'pro' fiction / shippers. I was not threatening, but I will admit that I told them to fuck off. I was new to the fandom, and in a somewhat rash decision, felt that I needed to choose a side. So I did, defending what I still believe to be harmful behavior against a former member of the fandom relating to their mental health and gender. I still do not necessarily regret that decision. The actions of certain members definitely warranted condemnation.

However, all this should put me on the side that should not be categorizing a canon kitten character in an adult or sexual way. Yet, here I am. I can say that being in the fandom up to this point beyond last year's discourse has certainly made me appreciate how difficult it truly is to navigate the characters. It is hard. Here is me shooting myself in the foot: There is no inherent evilness in expanding a pliable canon as long as it is not extended into harmful territories (such as outright specific child-involved sexual content or incest). Just as a 'pro'-fiction person would do in many instances to expand canon, I am now doing. I should not have been throwing stones when now, I reside in a glass house.

I let other's opinions about the 'pro' side colour my own thoughts. I let myself be swayed without taking the time to appreciate both sides. I equated the 'pro' side with to a demonizing mentality. I was not directly impacted by the discourse, but jumped in. I decried the things I did not like, but without reflecting on how awful some of actions of people on 'my' side were. I was no better than the people I chose to deride, and I can say now that it was inappropriate. However, I am still not fully comfortable with the 'pro' side.

I am not asking for forgiveness or piety, but I do want to extend an small apology of sorts to some of those I was against last year. I am still uneasy about certain members, and will remain that way. I am not looking to absolve myself of any past wrongdoings or change sides. I also not saying that I am morally superior by picking and choosing what I am comfortable with. I do not want how I am viewed to change.

This is not meant to ignite another war, and I really hope it does not. I do not want to trudge through that again, as I turned enough people against me and made 'enemies' out of people just trying to enjoy something in relative peace. I would like to do the same.

This blog, and its sexual content, represents something newly important to me, and I want to explore it without feeling guilty or like I deserve a pass because I had adjusted my thinking over time.

I am an adult, and would like to take responsibility for how I engage with the fandom. I hope this post is a step towards that accountability.

#please read this #thank you #i am calling myself out

7 notes · View notes

bookandcover · 3 years

Photo

I really, really enjoyed this book! Philip Pullman is simply a masterful storyteller, and you feel throughout this book that you’re in the hands of a pro, comfortable and content to follow as he pulls you through twists and turns, reveals and connections as circuitous, and yet as inescapable, as the powerfully overflowing Thames.

If you summarize this book, it sounds simple: two kids rescue a baby from a flood. I could imagine a version of this book that would be boring, with none of the honesty and realness that pervades these pages. I’m not sure what it is about Pullman’s writing, but you are simply invested from the beginning. Even in the early section of the book that sets up Malcolm as a character, his simple life at The Trout, and his relationship with the nuns across the river, I was fully engaged. Often, when I sit down to read, I have a bit of detachment for a while—I’m aware that I’m reading—before I can enter the mind space of the story. That was never the case for this book; I always dropped immediately into Malcolm’s world. That world is real, present, fully-formed. Part of this is that the world of The Book of Dust: La Belle Sauvage (and of all of His Dark Materials) is not over-written nor over-explained, but it’s fully imagined. We sense that this is a real and complex place without knowing all the ins-and-outs of its complexity. It’s not hinted at, nor teased to the reader, because it doesn’t need to be; it simply is.

Once Malcolm, Alice, and Lyra set off down river, the tension in the book rises along with the flood waters. Their pursuer Gerard Bonneville is relentless and terrifying. I could not believe how scared I was at certain points in this book and, in a similar current (ha!) to the above, the writing never got in the way of my fear: the pacing and immediacy was always ideal to keep me inside the scenes as they unfolded. Malcolm and Alice’s quick departure from The Trout, escaping in La Belle Sauvage with Bonneville on their heels, is stressful and all the other actions scenes are similarly experienced through Malcolm’s limited viewpoint (although this is third person narration). We get the fragments that Malcolm has time to process and experience (I felt this in particular during the final sequence when Asriel rescues them from the CCD boat and Malcolm doesn’t really know what’s going on), which brilliantly keeps us inside the action. Sections of the book jump away from Malcolm’s perspective (to closely follow Dr. Hannah Relf primarily and the actions of the anti-CCD group Oakley Street), but while we’re with Malcolm, we stay with Malcolm.

I noticed one glaring exception to the centralization of Malcolm, which therefore stood out to me, and felt intentional. Very close to the end of the book, there’s a the close cut in (almost like a movie edit) on the conversation that occurs through gyrocopter headsets between Alice and Asriel. This conversation happens while Malcolm is asleep, as the small group travels to Jordan College, and it seems to be a moment where the burden Malcolm has carried and shared is, instead, carried fully by Alice. The trajectory of Malcolm and Alice’s relationship is one of increasing trust and mutual dependency, and so this moment felt like it formed the bookend to the beginning of the story, where Malcolm was the most informed, the most committed to the mission of protecting Lyra. Alice’s grit and determination is increasingly revealed to the reader, just as it is increasingly revealed to Malcolm, which shifts her closer and closer into his mental and emotional orbit. This final moment, of her being their shared spokesperson, of her carrying their joint mission while Malcolm is injured, seems to me like the true equalizing moment of their relationship. They have both been in this 100% for a while, but this is the moment where they operate fully as one entity.

Malcom and Alice are both incredibly crafted characters. The story relies on us as readers deeply understanding Malcolm from the get-go, and we do. He’s resourceful, clever, practical, stubborn, righteous, tactical, and still a kid. He’s an awesome character. Alice plays a beautiful counter-point to Malcolm; it takes us longer to like her and to understand her, to see her many layers, but that is because that’s what is happening for Malcolm himself. I didn’t expect her to be a main character during the first section of the book, just as Malcolm himself would not have. Her inclusion on the trip south on the floodwaters is circumstantial. Before Malcolm gets to know her more fully, she is simply a quintessential teenager—grumpy, claws out, edgy, but also just getting her work done, just there. Later on, we see her vulnerabilities, her compassion, her ways of showing care that she keeps sheltered beneath a tough veneer. She seems her age in every way—older than Malcolm, and more self-aware, yet also young, confused, and easily hurt, but too proud to show that hurt. As she grows in complexity for the reader, she too grows in complexity in Malcolm’s eyes, another aspect of the novel that keeps us close to Malcom’s perspective, merges his experiences—fear, compassion, understanding—with the reader’s.

Bonneville is also an incredibly drawn villain—another nod to Pullman for literary genius. In this novel, the scene where I felt most genuinely afraid (the maximization of Pullman’s ability to keep his readers in the moment of action) was when Bonneville appears on the other side of the cellar door at Lord Murderer’s abandoned mansion. Bonneville’s voice seems to defy the properties of sound and physics at a few points in this book, but only barely and in a way that is perhaps justified by our protagonists’ focused attention: Malcolm is listening for Bonneville, Alice is listening for Bonneville. More than once, he speaks to them from a very close range when he is not (yet) attacking them, and there is something about his sudden proximity, the sound of his presence, that induces a real terror that I felt keenly. His body, too, borders on the impossible, transcending the properties of physics. He could be close or far from Malcolm and Alice at any given moment because he closes gaps of distance in strange ways. They hear him at great distances across the water and struggle to gauge his exact location. He survives and survives and survives. This gives him a ghost-like quality, immaterial, like a night-ghast who haunts them.

At the same time, Bonneville’s presence is deeply physical, which we know and understand from his character introduction (when he fights with Coram Van Texel and his dæmon loses a leg) and through Alice’s understanding of him as a man who flirted with her, who approached her as a man. When Bonneville’s voice whispers through the darkness and through the door in Lord Murderer’s mansion, I felt Malcolm’s terror as my own. After reading this part, I paused and said aloud, “isn’t this supposed to be a children’s/young adult book? This is way too terrifying.” The final confrontation with Bonneville has a similar charge of terror, impossibility, and yet inevitability. We understand the insanity with which Bonneville has pursued Malcolm and Alice, the emotional/psychological impact he has on them (particularly Alice), and we feel their terror.

In addition to character development and narrative perspective, Pullman also navigates plot with dexterity. I loved that details from early in the text circled back around without feeling heavy-handed. Part of why this succeeds is that every detail seems to serve multiple purposes within the narrative. For example, when Mr. Boatwright flees The Trout after a confrontation with CCD men, I did not expect him to circle back around and re-enter the plot. His character introduction seemed to develop the role of the CCD in this universe, the level of threat they pose, and the understanding our characters have of that threat. That’s enough. Yet, he re-enters Malcolm and Alice’s lives at a critical moment, helping them hide out along with his band of outcasts in the woods. As a kind of casual Robin Hood (a bit foolish, a bit foolhardy though he is), Mr. Boatwright further shows the texture of this world where defiance of the CCD, even trivial defiance, has consequences. But, as many characters in the book remind us, the flood changes everything, and in this new world of the flood, Malcolm doesn’t expect to happen upon a character from his past and neither do we.

My conviction that Pullman leaves no stone unturned, highlights nothing with intention, brings me back to two key questions. First off, what happened to Mr. Taphouse? The night of the huge flood, Malcolm learns from the nuns that he’s unwell, and so he’s not at the priory when the flood hits, when Bonneville is there and seduces Sister Katarina. Was he actually unwell? Did Bonneville injury him or do something to get him out of the way? Will his character feature in the story again? These questions also bring up my concerns for Sister Fenella. Did she survive the flood? Will she appear again? A second set of questions exists around The League of St. Alexander, which poisons and pollutes Malcolm’s school space, changing the character of his small and seemingly innocuous community. While The League returns to the plot when Andrew (from Mr. Boatwright’s band of outcasts) betrays Malcolm and Alice and reveals Lyra’s whereabouts to the Office of Child Protection—refreshing the theme of betraying your family in the interests of a higher cause or system the buys or seduces your loyalty—this does not necessarily seem like the end of The League’s role in the plot. With the second book of the series teased—The Secret Commonwealth, which appears to jump ahead about 18-20 years—it’s curious to imagine how some of these questions might be answered or these ideas circle around again in the series. I trust that they may, in unexpected ways.

#the book of dust #philip pullman #la belle sauvage #malcolm #alice #lyra #good reads #storytelling #plot #fantasy novels

4 notes · View notes

ecoamerica · 2 months

Text

youtube

Watch the 2024 American Climate Leadership Awards for High School Students now: https://youtu.be/5C-bb9PoRLc

The recording is now available on ecoAmerica's YouTube channel for viewers to be inspired by student climate leaders! Join Aishah-Nyeta Brown & Jerome Foster II and be inspired by student climate leaders as we recognize the High School Student finalists. Watch now to find out which student received the $25,000 grand prize and top recognition!

18K notes · View notes

weyassinebentalb · 3 years

Text

Gaza Conflict Stokes 'Identity Crisis' for Young American Jews

Dan Kleinman does not know quite how to feel.

As a child in the New York City borough of Brooklyn, he was taught to revere Israel as the protector of Jews everywhere, the “Jewish superman who would come out of the sky to save us” when things got bad, he said.

It was a refuge in his mind when white supremacists in Charlottesville, Virginia, chanted “Jews will not replace us,” or kids in college grabbed his shirt, mimicking a “South Park” episode to steal his “Jew gold.”

But his feelings have grown muddier as he has gotten older, especially now as he watches violence unfold in Israel and Gaza. His moral compass tells him to help the Palestinians, but he cannot shake an ingrained paranoia every time he hears someone make anti-Israel statements.

“It is an identity crisis,” Kleinman, 33, said. “Very small in comparison to what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank, but it is still something very strange and weird.”

As the violence escalates in the Middle East, turmoil of a different kind is growing across the Atlantic. Many young American Jews are confronting the region’s long-standing strife in a very different context, with very different pressures, from their parents’ and grandparents’ generations.

The Israel of their lifetime has been powerful, no longer appearing to some to be under constant existential threat. The violence comes after a year when mass protests across the United States have changed how many Americans see issues of racial and social justice. The pro-Palestinian position has become more common, with prominent progressive members of Congress offering impassioned speeches in defense of the Palestinians on the House floor. At the same time, reports of anti-Semitism are rising across the country.

Divides between some American Jews and Israel’s right-wing government have been growing for more than a decade, but under the Trump administration those fractures that many hoped would heal became a crevasse. Politics in Israel have also remained fraught, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s long-tenured government forged allegiances with Washington. For young people who came of age during the Trump years, political polarization over the issue only deepened.

Many Jews in America remain unreservedly supportive of Israel and its government. Still, the events of recent weeks have left some families struggling to navigate both the crisis abroad and the wide-ranging response from American Jews at home. What is at stake is not just geopolitical, but deeply personal. Fractures are intensifying along lines of age, observance and partisan affiliation.

In suburban Livingston, New Jersey, Meara Ashtivker, 38, has been afraid for her father-in-law in Israel, who has a disability and is not able to rush to the stairwell to shelter when he hears the air-raid sirens. She is also scared as she sees people in her progressive circles suddenly seem anti-Israel and anti-Jewish, she said.

Ashtivker, whose husband is Israeli, said she loved and supported Israel, even when she did not always agree with the government and its actions.

“It’s really hard being an American Jew right now,” she said. “It is exhausting and scary.”

Some young, liberal Jewish activists have found common cause with Black Lives Matter, which explicitly advocates for Palestinian liberation, concerning others who see that allegiance as anti-Semitic.

The recent turmoil is the first major outbreak of violence in Israel and Gaza for which Aviva Davis, who graduated this spring from Brandeis University, has been “socially conscious.”

“I’m on a search for the truth, but what’s the truth when everyone has a different way of looking at things?” Davis said.

Alyssa Rubin, 26, who volunteers in Boston with IfNotNow, a network of Jewish activists who want to end Jewish American support for Israeli occupation, has found protesting for the Palestinian cause to be its own form of religious observance.

She said she and her 89-year-old grandfather ultimately both want the same thing, Jewish safety. But “he is really entrenched in this narrative that the only way we can be safe is by having a country,” she said, while her generation has seen that “the inequality has become more exacerbated.”

In the protest movements last summer, “a whole new wave of people were really primed to see the connection and understand racism more explicitly,” she said, “understanding the ways racism plays out here, and then looking at Israel/Palestine and realizing it is the exact same system.”

But that comparison is exactly what worries many other American Jews, who say the history of white American slaveholders is not the correct frame for viewing the Israeli government or the global Jewish experience of oppression.

At Temple Concord, a Reform synagogue in Syracuse, New York, teenager after teenager started calling Rabbi Daniel Fellman last week, wondering how to process seeing Black Lives Matter activists they marched with last summer attack Israel as “an apartheid state.”

“The reaction today is different because of what has occurred with the past year, year and a half, here,” Fellman said. “As a Jewish community, we are looking at it through slightly different eyes.”

Nearby at Sha’arei Torah Orthodox Congregation of Syracuse, teenagers were reflecting on their visits to Israel and on their family in the region.

“They see it as Hamas being a terrorist organization that is shooting missiles onto civilian areas,” Rabbi Evan Shore said. “They can’t understand why the world seems to be supporting terrorism over Israel.”

In Colorado, a high school senior at Denver Jewish Day School said he was frustrated at the lack of nuance in the public conversation. When his social media apps filled with pro-Palestinian memes last week, slogans like “From the river to the sea” and “Zionism is a call for an apartheid state,” he deactivated his accounts.

“The conversation is so unproductive, and so aggressive, that it really stresses you out,” Jonas Rosenthal, 18, said. “I don’t think that using that message is helpful for convincing the Israelis to stop bombing Gaza.”

Compared with their elders, younger American Jews are overrepresented on the ends of the religious affiliation spectrum: a higher share are secular, and a higher share are Orthodox.

Ari Hart, 39, an Orthodox rabbi in Skokie, Illinois, has accepted the fact that his Zionism makes him unwelcome in some activist spaces where he would otherwise be comfortable. College students in his congregation are awakening to that same tension, he said. “You go to a college campus and want to get involved in anti-racism or social justice work, but if you support the state of Israel, you’re the problem,” he said.

Hart sees increasing skepticism in liberal Jewish circles over Israel’s right to exist. “This is a generation who are very moved and inspired by social justice causes and want to be on the right side of justice,” Hart said. “But they’re falling into overly simplistic narratives, and narratives driven by true enemies of the Jewish people.”

Overall, younger American Jews are less attached to Israel than older generations: About half of Jewish adults under 30 describe themselves as emotionally connected to Israel, compared with about two-thirds of Jews over age 64, according to a major survey published last week by the Pew Research Center.

And though the U.S. Jewish population is 92% white, with all other races combined accounting for 8%, among Jews ages 18 to 29 that rises to 15%.

In Los Angeles, Rachel Sumekh, 29, a first-generation Iranian American Jew, sees complicated layers in the story of her own Persian family. Her mother escaped Iran on the back of a camel, traveling by night until she got to Pakistan, where she was taken in as a refugee. She then found asylum in Israel. She believes Israel has a right to self-determination, but she also found it “horrifying” to hear an Israeli ambassador suggest other Arab countries should take in Palestinians.

“That is what happened to my people and created this intergenerational trauma of losing our homeland because of hatred,” she said.

The entire situation feels too volatile and dangerous for many people to even want to discuss, especially publicly.

Violence against Jews is increasingly close to home. Last year the third-highest number of anti-Semitic incidents in the United States were recorded since the Anti-Defamation League began cataloging them in 1979, according to a report released by the civil rights group last month. The ADL recorded more than 1,200 incidents of anti-Semitic harassment in 2020, a 10% increase from the previous year. In Los Angeles, the police are investigating a sprawling attack on sidewalk diners at a sushi restaurant Tuesday as an anti-Semitic hate crime.

Outside Cleveland, Jennifer Kaplan, 39, who grew up in a modern Orthodox family and who considers herself a centrist Democrat and a Zionist, remembered studying abroad at Hebrew University in 2002, and being in the cafeteria minutes before it was bombed. Now she wondered how the Trump era had affected her inclination to see the humanity in others, and she wished her young children were a bit older so she could talk with them about what is happening.

“I want them to understand that this is a really complicated situation, and they should question things,” she said. “I want them to understand that this isn’t just a, I don’t know, I guess, utopia of Jewish religion.”

Esther Katz, the performing arts director at the Jewish Community Center in Omaha, Nebraska, has spent significant time in Israel. She also attended Black Lives Matter protests in Omaha last summer and has signs supporting the movement in the windows of her home.

She has watched with a sense of betrayal as some of her allies in that movement have posted online about their apparently unequivocal support for the Palestinians, and compared Israel to Nazi Germany. “I’ve had some really tough conversations,” said Katz, a Conservative Jew. “They’re not seeing the facts, they’re just reading the propaganda.”

Her three children, who range in age from 7 to 13, are now wary of a country that is for Katz one of the most important places in the world. “They’re like, ‘I don’t understand why anyone would want to live in Israel, or even visit,’” she said. “That breaks my heart.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

source https://www.techno-90.com/2021/05/gaza-conflict-stokes-identity-crisis.html

2 notes · View notes

alatismeni-theitsa · 4 years

Text

Answering anti LO anon asks:

(1) The fact the “maidens” in LO are deemed as backwards and regressive is absolute proof Smythe is not feminist nor does even basic research. First off, LO Persephone doesn’t even seem interested in sex anyway (for valid reason!) yet is ashamed when Hades says he can’t imagine marrying a celibate wife. how is that a good message to the young girls reading it? Why is her “feminism” only through the young woman having sex with a rich, older man? Why are the maidens shamed for their own choices?

Plus, historically, nunneries & virgin priestesses were some of the few educated/powerful women in the old days who were the most powerful behind ROYALTY. They had status and options married women just did not have, so LO Persephone could easily use the maidens for her own purposes and goals, but we can’t have that or else the teenager’s body won’t be available for the infertile old man to have sex with and impregnate! I swear, how do you make a story more backwards than literal kidnapping?!

(2) If LO is apparently built in this pro-women society (you, ignoring the fact every women minus Persephone, Psyche, Hecate, and Hera are awful, slutty bitches or celibate shrews) then Hades purposely ignoring Demeter not only is a major disrespect towards her, but frankly makes him look like a coward. What powerful king is pathetic enough to not just ask his teenage girlfriend's mom the ok to marry and have sex with her? Unless, wait, i think i just answered my own question ...

(3) As far as we can tell, LO Oympus is in ~modern times~ and thus has modern values, yet we're supposed to buy Demeter will be in he wrong for being upset for being lied to & her daughter being all but groomed by her BOSS? If Persephone was a mature adult w/ the intelligence to make her own choices it'd at least make us question Demeter's actions, but Smythe has made a stunted child be the "future queen" who can't do basic office work and relies on her mother to fix her problems. It makes no sense.

(4) Isn't feminism based in allowing women the choice of what they want and need? So why LO keep hammering in that a young woman is wrong for choosing to not have sex? Persephone and the other Maidens are constantly shamed by the narrative for not wanting sex, while the only sex shown in the comic are rape or degrading/unpure (Thetis as a mistress, Aphrodite giving oral sex to get her kid out of trouble). This is a damaging message to give towards the young readers under the guise of "feminism".

_____________________________________________________________

(1) We know that Smythe doesn’t do basic research so why would she have that information? :P She probably knows the western medieval European version of religious virgins. I am not sure but, if a priestess was raped back then maybe the other priestesses would have to release her from her duties. It’s sad and we don’t need to bring it into a modern era retelling. It’s terrifying that scholarships are given by an organization BECAUSE a woman hasn’t had sex! Women who don’t want to have sex for their own reason can... guess what... ARE NOT HINDERED FROM TAKING SCHOLARSHIPS ANYWHERE! There wasn’t even a need for this “virgin only” scholarship because there was never descrimination to begin with.

(2) The shade is real!!

(3) It’s exactly as you say it! Just because Persephone can be a murderer that doesn’t make her capable of navigating modern life. And she will be queen too???

(4) This kinda ties with ask (1). Now that I am thinking of it the female characters are either “”””pure”””” and keep away from men or use sex to their advantage. It’s the Madona - Whore complex, probably.

I am not sure that the virgin goddesses are shamed in the comic for their choice but maybe I wasn’t paying enough attention.

#anti lo #answered

20 notes · View notes

tiny-space-robot · 3 years

Note

Okay so Fire Emblem anon here!! Here's a Kinda Super Long Bc I Got Carried Away description of a few Fire Emblem games, plus some characters that seem like they hit tropes you like!

The good news is that there's not a super huge overarching timeline, there's several smaller timelines that are seperate from one another except for the crossover games. I'm gonna go with describing the newer ones that you're most likely to be able to get your hands on and play; a lot of people complain that they lean into some anime-tropey stuff and are too easy, but tbh, that's a perk just as often as it isn't. Basically, it's Game of Thrones, but rated T and with more cute girls and old men who are friendly instead of creepy.

Tbh, it's a turn-based strategy game with visual novel elements for characterization, if strategy games aren't your thing and you're just interested in the characters, watching the support conversations on Youtube might be more your thing. All the characterization, none of the resetting the same goshdang level thirty times. Anyways, description of the games in passing, including a brief description of the plot concept, pros and cons, trigger warnings, and some characters you might be interested in if you're just looking up characters.

*line break for legibility*

Awakening: for the 3DS. Follows Robin, an amnesiac mage, after they're found in a field by a band of knights called the Shepherds. Involves the undead, a twink in a mask, timey-wimey shenangians, and the usual cast of oddballs you'd expect from a Fire Emblem game.

Pros of Awakening: customizable player character, intro of Casual mode (turns off permadeath) and the Pair Up system, which lets you put characters together for shipping reasons strategy and stat boosts. Also doubles as a shipping simulator, since you can pair off characters and meet their later in the game due to said timey-wimey shenangians.

Cons of Awakening: there are some....very concerning combos of names/skin tones/plot relevance for certain characters, so go in with a warning about implicit racism. Also if you like strategy games, this game is relatively easy to break and make "too easy," but tbh that's what Lunatic Mode (the Ultra Unfair Hard Mode) is for.

Trigger warnings across the main plot: underhanded politics, attempted assassinations, martyrdom, an optional character is implied to stalk Robin but idk how to tag that, identity crises, conflicts within a family, character who isn't you looks like you, backstory child abuse, an optional character is a bad portrayal of DID if you squint?

*line break for legibility*

Fates: is actually a group name for two games set in the same universe, and a DLC bonus story: Birthright, Conquest, and Revelations. All for the 3DS. All three games star Corrin, a pacifist raised in seclusion in the kingdom of Nohr. Each game reflects a different path Corrin can take in navigating the war between the nations of Nohr and Hoshido: Birthright has them stand with Hoshido, Conquest with Nohr, and Revelations has them strike out (nearly) alone. Each path has a completely different storyline, cast of characters, and difficulty curve.

Pros of Fates: honestly, the characters here cater the most to the avid pro-shipper and multi-shipper. I just love this cast. Both Nohr and Hoshido have four members of the royal family you can play and get to know, each of those royal family members has two retainers who are various levels of dedicated and/or unhinged, and the cast just widens and widens. Also a character customization and shipping simulator point for the same reasons Awakening gets it. Also, canon fujoshi rights (there's a character with a skill called Daydream, which boosts her stats when two male characters are paired up near her. one of us, one of us). Also the first game with canon queer characters: both Rhajat and Niles are bi.

Cons of Fates: unfortunately, the writing is kinda rushed or badly translated in some places. Also *shakes IntSys* my lore! Give me more lore! Also, iirc, you could get both physical games in a bundle for a discount when they came out, but not anymore, so it's sorta like Pokemon with version exclusives. Which is less fun, since you can't directly trade characters. Also the fandom for this game is RIFE with discourse, which is kinda sad bc I just wanna talk my ships with ppl sjxhdjdn

Trigger warnings for Fates: child abuse might as well be Nohr's middle name, in-universe racism (since Hoshido is p obviously Japan-inspired, and a lot of Nohrians are rancid to Hoshidans), kidnapping, on-screen murder, lots of fighting your loved ones (on both main routes, you gotta fight the playable characters from the other side AAA), su-c-de, death of sibling(s) in certain routes, demonic-like possession, there's like six characters people can read as bad mental illness rep, Niles especially is discourse bait for being a kinky (yes that's canon) bi man of color but also he's awesome so die mad antis

*break for space*

Shadows of Valentia: for the 3DS. A remake of Gaiden, the second game in the series. Follows Alm, a farm boy from a small village in Zofia, and Celica, his childhood best friend. Zofia and the nation to its north, Rigel, are two nations ruled by the dragon gods Mila and Duma, respectively. Normally, they're in equilibrium, but Rigel is invading and Mila is missing, prompting Alm and Celica to independently investigate the problem.

Pros of SoV: the most like the old-school Fire Emblem games, but it also has the permadeath-off mode. also the first to be fully voice acted! The art style is gorgeous, and the plot was polished up from the old game--two characters names Berkut and Rinea were added, and they are PEAK OTP the diskhorse can die mad. Also the cast is pretty fun all around, from buddy squad and the older brother/dad figure they adopted along the way to "hello this is my gang of childhood friends, we're gonna kill a god" Also introduces Mila's Turnwheel, which lets you rewind your moves if you realize you goofed big time and screwed yourself over.

Cons of SoV: has the most references to other games, but you won't, like, be lost if you don't get them. You just might have a few interludes of "who tf is Camus/the White Wing Brigade/etc" but it's easy enough to look up on the wiki. Also tbh, the plot kinda drags in the middle, there's some filler battles to try and make it feel more realistic and it feels...weird. Also no custom character, you are Alm and Celica and you will Like It.

Trigger warnings for SoV: you know that thing where a girl character gets killed off for a guy character to angst over? the game starts with a fakeout version of that. also a character slowly goes mad over the course of the plot (but it's really well done imo?), there's some self-sacrifice stuff in there, classism is a major theme, possession/selling your soul™, there's a couple of levels where you're exploring tombs/prisons, I'm sure there's something else but I'm forgetting right now

*line break for legibility*

Three Houses: on the Switch. The newest game in the series, and the most polished imo? Stars Byleth, a wandering mercenary turned teacher at the Officer's Academy. The Academy, housed in Garreg Mach Monastery, teaches youths from across the land of Fodlan how to be warriors, commanders, and knights. Students are sorted into three houses based on their country of origin: the Black Eagles are from ghe Adrestian Empire, led by the heiress-apparent Edelgard; the Blue Lions are from the kingdom of Faerghus, led by prince Dimitri; and the Golden Deer are from the Leicester Alliance, led by Claude, grandson of the Duke. You choose one of these houses to lead, and then everything quickly goes sour.

Pros of Three Houses: It's such a rich experience! The music is incredible, there's so much lore, and you can wander around the Monastery and hang out with the students to your heart's content. Also, it's four storylines for the price of one, even if they're all relatively similar in the first half. It does a pretty solid job of weaving together its themes into a satisfying narrative that will make you consider everyone involved. Also we got our first bi main lord (Edelgard) and non-white main lord (Claude is mixed race) in one fell swoop! Also, given the setting, it's teacher/student ship heaven.

Cons of Three Houses: just gonna come right out and say it: one of the villainous factions in the game is pretty substantially tied up with some anti-semitic tropes. There's no way to ignore it, it's just bleh, and I'm not gonna send anyone in without that warning. Also, though there's some characters you can persuade to switch sides, or spare, there's no route where there's a happy ending for everyone. Also there are so many people who are fake deep about the themes of the game, so be ready for the worst takes imaginable about your faves. also super trigger heavy, see below.

Trigger warnings: MANY. Garreg Mach and the Church of Seiros are very reminiscent of catholic religious stuff, for anyone with religion triggers, blood in cutscenes, death of a parent, death of a sibling (different characters), major gaslighting vibes in some places, lots of people going unhinged, some white savior™ vibes in places, body horror, creepy ass weaponry, backstory genoc-de (mostly not related to the anti-semitism), blood magic (definitely related to the anti-semitism), in general it goes to a lot more effort than the other games to make you think about what's Actually going on, even if it doesn't always work.

*break for legibility*

As for characters you'd like, if you just want to look some characters up, my recommendations based on what I understand about you include:

Awakening: Libra fits 'gnc man of the cloth' so well it's actually a conversation in game: "so what's a woman of the cloth doing here?" "...man, sir, man of the cloth." And Then He Never Gets Misgendered Again. Also Nowi's supports sometimes feel like a jab at antis-- she's a manakete, a person who can transform into a dragon. Manaketes also grow really slowly, as in "middle aged looking manaketes are like 1000 years old," so she's got major baby face and copes with being mistaken for a teenager by making jokes. Also Gregor, who she first appears with, is pretty fun--older mercenary with a thick accent who is like 80% here for a good time. Also Walhart, who's a villain but got some content added as DLC.

Fates: any interactions between Corrin, Leo, and/or Camilla are probably right up your alley--Camilla is obsessively protective over her siblings in a way that's Very Definitely Platonic™, and Leo also canonically has a crush on her in something that was cut in the English release. Also Gunther--once upon a time he was your classic knight in shining armor, now he's semi-retired, Corrin's personal guard, and covered in scars (and his voice is gorgeous too)

Echoes: my biased answer is to listen to every single line Ian Sinclair read for Berkut because he absolutely did NOT have to go that hard. My actual answer is to point you in the direction of the pegasus sisters Catria, Palla and Est, or maybe the older gentleman who's the head of the Priory, I forgot his name oops abbdbd. Also Clive is a devoted husband to one Mathilda, who looks just like an older version of his sister Clair 🤔

Three Houses: knowing you, you'd adore Hanneman--an older professor who's extremely passionate about his work, to the point where he tends to forget personal space and such. Also Seteth, like I mentioned before (join me in simping for him and his gorgeous pecs) and like, honestly, I know ppl make jokes about Alois but he's rlly good. Soft, awkward but he doesn't care, dad jokes everywhere. And also Mercedes, both because she's the biggest sweetheart imaginable and everyone should love her, but also bc she is just walking potential for the kinds of stuff you post on this blog. On one hand, she's the oldest student at the Academy and attached at the hip to one of the youngest, Annette (tho people act like they have a way bigger age gap then they actually do) and on the other hand, she has a long-lost half brother she can encounter (who I will not name for HUGE HUGE spoilers reasons) who she spends the rest of her life with in one of her endings. Heck, he has three possible endings total! Total!

Basically I brought the games up bc I'm used to being on the side of the fandom where everyone shoos anything uncomfortable under the rug, but there's so much material here that's being wasted I SWEAR

If you have any other questions I can send another anon? Your call! Thanks for hearing me out I love ur blog :3

OKAY!!! sorry for answering so late, but this ask was pretty much a BOOK (not that I´m complaining though! thank you so much! ;;u;;)

and from what I read here, I THINK if I´m going off on my first fire emblem adventure, I´ll try and pick up three houses if I get the chance! I have read your trigger warnings (thank you so much! ;u;) and I think I can take it! >:3

again though, I am really, really not a fan of anime and the anime artstyle in general (blergh! XP) so I´m not sure how I´ll cope with that in particular, but then again, an artstyle does not make a game! u3u

AND HANNEMAN SOUNDS LIKE A WINNER TO ME!! I looked him up and OOOF!!! he may not have NEARLY as many wrinkles as I´d like him to have, but the facial hair is definitely a step in the right direction! ;3c

NOW YOU GOT ME INTERESTED!!

LETS GO!!!!!!!!!!!!! (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

2 notes · View notes

jbauer21ahsgov · 4 years

Text

Election 2020 Presidential Candidates Assessment

Howie Hawkins/Angela Nicole Walker (Green):

Howie Hawkins’ position on women’s rights: supports the decriminalization of prostitution as long as the worker is safe and the government does not get involved - this would allow a larger possibility of fraud and force. He does not, however, support the legalization of prostitution because it promotes law enforcement in their industry which will only lead to an increase in incarceration. Hawkins supports the Equal Rights Amendment, promotes women’s equality, is anti sex trafficking, believes in stronger law enforcement for discrimination and sexual harassment of women in the workplace, supports equal pay for women, does not support Trump eliminating healthcare because it would limit abortion resources for women, and supports Proportional Representation in Congress.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I do agree with Hawkins’ position because he takes a very progressive perspective to women’s rights. He addresses the “me too” movement, prostitution, pro-choice, and several amendments that are pro-women’s rights and anti-discrimination. I agree with all of his women’s rights points aside from some government issues he brought up concerning prostitution.

Does their position support/conflict the Green platform?: Hawkins’ position does not conflict the Green platform but rather expands upon it much more than what was disclosed in the Green party platform summary. This is very respectable and I personally appreciate his openness to the movement!

Donald J. Trump/Michael R. Pence (Republican):

Donald Trump’s position on women’s rights: believes that universal healthcare should be replaced with private healthcare, pro-life, supports the defunding of abortion service providers, believes the Mexico City Policy should ban US foreign aid to organization providing abortions, and signed a bill that allows states to restrict Planned Parenthood Funding.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I do not agree with anything Trump stands by concerning women’s rights. He is pro-life and I am pro-choice. He believes universal healthcare should be replaced with private healthcare and I think healthcare should be more accessible (which is in part because I’m pro-choice and he is pro-life). Trump also believes in the defunding of abortion clinics and services while I think we need more funding and more availability of clinics.

Does their position support/conflict the Republican platform?: Trump rarely speaks upon his support for women’s rights whereas the Republican platform talks quite a bit about their support of equality as well as support abortion, but they will not fund the process. Similar to the platform, Trump does believe in women requiring the father of the child to make decisions alongside the mother during decisions like abortion and lifestyle.

Gloria La Riva/Sunil Freeman (Peace and Freedom):

Gloria La Riva’s position on women’s rights: has personally defended women’s reproductive health clinics. She supports the Black Fire Fighters Association as they end racism, sexism, and discrimination in the San Francisco fire department. Gloria has participated in marches about LGBTQ rights and has protested the passage of the anti-marriage equality Prop 8 in California. Supports women in the workplace.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I completely agree with her position towards women’s equality. It’s awesome that she personally marches and protests for and against such progressive issues. She supports women’s rights, regardless of their sexual orientation which is great!

Does their position support/conflict the Peace and Freedom platform?: Gloria’s position does support the Peace and Freedom platform and even takes it a few steps further because she actively participates in the change and promotion of equality.

Roque de La Fuente “Rocky” Guerra/Kanye Omari West (American Independent):

Roque de La Fuente Guerra’s position on women’s rights: pro-choice, believes that government should not intervene in a couple’s religious decisions (regarding same sex marriage). Gay couples should have the same rights as straight couples as long as they pass the same background checks. The government should continue to fund Planned Parenthood. Healthcare insurance providers should offer free birth control, gender identity should be included in anti-discrimination laws, and women need to be equally experienced and trained to enter a workplace (just because they are a woman doesn’t mean they can immediately work in government, for example).

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I do agree with the majority of his position on women’s rights, although some of his points come across a bit terse and stubborn. Although I do agree that there should be no ‘special treatment’ for certain groups, the way he phrases this sounds less supportive and more neutral or indifferent, as though he isn’t as active in his political beliefs.

Does their position support/conflict the American Independent platform?: not entirely, no. The American Independent platform believes that marriage should only be between a man and a woman and depends their beliefs on God specifically, making the platform less religiously inclusive than Guerra appears. The American Independent platform is also pro-life and pro-constitution.

Jo Jorgenson/Jeremy “Spike” Cohen (Libertarian):

Jo Jorgenson’s position on women’s rights: pro-choice. Government should be kept out of the decision-making process for abortion - it’s a sensitive issue and completely depends on the choice and side of the family. Jorgenson has voted for candidates that are pro-life and pro-choice, the main thing she cares about is that the issue is privately and sensitively addressed according to the family. Jorgenson believes that employers should not be required to pay men and women equal salary because there are too many other variables (education, experience, tenure) that should be the main reason for determining salary. Women should be allowed in the military as long as they have been equally trained and tested as men have. Businesses should not be required to have women on their board of directors - it solely depends on the qualifications the woman has, not their gender. Health insurance should not be required to offer free birth control.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I generally do not agree with Jorgenson’s position. Although I do agree with her on being pro-choice, the way she addresses the issues surrounding abortion are very vague and borderline neutral. She also does not believe health insurance should offer free birth control which is something I disagree with. I do appreciate how she addresses the sensitivity of abortion, but I would personally support her more if she were to talk about it more and not make it seem so taboo and unspoken.

Does their position support/conflict the Libertarian platform?: Jorgenson’s position mostly supports the Libertarian platform. Of course she has her own other opinions, but the Libertarian platform’s ideology always seems very “you do you”, and Jorgenson is primarily neutral, too.

Joseph R. Biden/Kamala D. Harris (Democratic):

Joe Biden’s position on women’s rights: acknowledges and wishes to address how much women of color have been underpaid, unseen, and undervalued for too long. Women in the caregiving and education workplace are very often underpaid or not paid at all, which is something Biden is against (against discrimination and unequal pay). Supports the increase in recognition and equality for women of color. Equal opportunities for women and men. “Every issue is a women’s issue–health care, the economy, education, national security”. Women are disproportionately treated by many policies. Biden wishes to improve economic security (equal pay, invest in women-owned small businesses, expand access to education/training, strengthen benefits and pay for women in the workplace), more access to health care, overcome health inequities, high-quality and affordable health care for all women, help women navigate the balance between work and family (affordable child care and care for older Americans/people with disabilities, paid leave, benefits, protections), end violence against women, empower and protect women globally.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I completely agree with Biden. One of the aspects that stood out the most to me about his platform is that he not only dedicated two entire drop-downs to women’s rights, but he addressed women of color, as well (which is something I haven’t seen yet among the other candidates’ platforms). I also agree with Biden’s inclusivity and acknowledgement of a wide variety of women’s rights violations and how he wishes to make it better.

Does their position support/conflict the Democratic platform?: Biden’s position supports most if not all of the points brought up in the Democratic party platform summary.

2 notes · View notes

prorevenge · 5 years

Text

File a false restraining order against me and threaten to kill me? Ok... Let's dance.

`Too lazy, didn't read` at bottom.

Cast: I don't shorten words, so it's self explanatory to the reader.

A few years ago, my now ex wife filed a false restraining order against me. She was living with her boyfriend (we were getting a divorce) in another state at the time, and had decided that a false restraining order was an excellent way to be awarded full possession of the vehicle I had purchased. We only had one key to the vehicle, and she was in possession of both the key and the vehicle. This is important later.

I was exceedingly upset that she had knowingly filed a false restraining order, and upon being served, I immediately submitted my appeal and request for a hearing. I contacted my company, and had them print off all my department of transportation GPS logs, as well as company internal vehicle tracker data. I also printed out my personal GPS tracking data from the navigation system I was using. So not only did I have federally accredited logs showing exactly where I was... Or more importantly, was not... I also had two very detailed systems information showing my exact speed, cardinal direction, and other pertinent information... Recorded in 2 minute, and 30 second intervals.

After I had compiled my entire body of evidence, I wrote a three page testimony to read to the court/ judge to assist in explaining the entirety of the data, as well as present my side of the appeal. Almost 30 days passes, and I realize that upon adjournment of the case (and subsequent exiting of the courthouse) , there is a chance I will be able to reach my vehicle before my ex does. With this in mind, I decided to contact the dealership from which I had purchased the vehicle, and acquired a second key. As we had only received one key when we purchased the vehicle, I knew she would not expect me to even be capable of driving away in it.

So, fast forward a few days to the court date. I had driven acrossed two states to attend this court judgment appeal, with all my paperwork, written testimony, and key to the vehicle. I arrive approximately 4 hours prior to the hearing time, and patiently wait for the magic moment to come. Bad news... It was extremely anti-climactic... As she was a no show. The judge summarily ruled in my favor, and the restraining order was dismissed. The judge then asked if I had anything further for the court, and if not, I was free to go. So I very politely asked

Me: Your honor, it is my understanding that the restraining order/ ppo is lifted?"

Judge: Yes ma'am.

Me: So am I, at this time, able to retrieve my vehicle?

Judge: Ma'am, as the Judge of this courtroom, I am unable to provide you with any form of legal advice.

Me: Oh, ok, I'm sor-

Judge: However, if you find a seat in the back of my courtroom, my (secretary? Court recorder? I don't remember the term) will provide you with a signed order of dismissal for the restraining order/ppo. If you were to be questioned by law enforcement for any reason regarding property or contact, it is best to have this documentation on your person... As the cancelation of the order may not reach the police system until close of business today.

The way in which the judge had worded her response was very clear in intent... She could not specifically tell me I was good to retrieve my vehicle, but she was taking the extra time to provide me with the paperwork that gave me a legal opportunity to retrieve my vehicle. So I sat down, and after nearly 10 minutes, the court official that was designated with the task of typing and printing the paperwork, got the judges signature on it, and brought it to me. As I put it in my binder of other paperwork, and turned to leave the courtroom, the judged called out to me.

Judge: Mrs. BTK216.

Me: (turning in mild surprise) Yes, your Honor?

Judge: (with a devious smile) Good luck.

Now I had to formulate a plan. See, as the ex wife had not been present for the court proceedings, neither was my vehicle. I had the address for her boyfriends/ boyfriends parents house... As it was all over the initial restraining order's list of protected properties. (and she had accidentally left a notebook with it written upon it when she first left to be with the guy). I decided to utilize Uber to go to the address, and check if the vehicle was present at the address. Upon starting the Uber trip, I requested the Uber driver to wait for me at the address after dropping me off, giving her a quick summary of my circumstances and plan, to ensure that I had a witness present for the intended retrieval of my vehicle. Quite simply, to ensure that no false allegations of fictitious activities during the recovery of said vehicle would have a metaphorical leg to stand upon in court. The lady Uber driver was sympathetic to my cause, and agreed. Even going so far as to give me her personal contact information in the event I required her for a future court appearance.

Upon arrival at the address I had available, the vehicle was, indeed, present. The Uber lady waited until I had acquired the vehicle, left the premises, and she followed be about two miles to witness I had left the property completely, and then she went on her way. (Bless that lady, she was a Saint) So, I make it about a half hour away, and my phone rings. I answered it, and it was my ex wife's boyfriend, and as you can imagine... He was not happy. He rambled off several vulgarities, and other random insulting comments which I entirely brushed off.

Then he made a very large, and unintelligent mistake. He said "if I ever see you again, here, or anywhere, I will blow your head off".

Now... I'm a veteran. I don't take very kindly on threats to my life. I was upset at him, I was upset at her, and I was just handed a gift wrapped means of complete and utter destructive revenge. I immediately hung up with him, and dialed 911 to report a verbal threat on my life. I headed to the parking lot of a local big box store to meet the responding officer, and ensured I didn't leave until I had a case number, attached written statement, and the reporting officers identification information.

I completed my trip to my home state, and the following Monday (this was all on a Friday) I went to my local courthouse and filed for an emergency restraining order/ ppo. The judge that was available to hear my case for an emergency order was, interestingly enough, the same judge handling the divorce. She listened to the case I provided, reviewed the police report information I provided, and issued the requested emergency order.

Doesn't sound like a "pro-revenge", does it? Well... My ex wife was living with the guy in his parents basement. The restraining order/ ppo issued by the judge protected myself, my property, and... My spouse... From him. See, we were still legally married, so I was legally able to list her as protected party. When the restraining order was served, he couldn't be within 600 feet of my (now) ex wife.

As she lived with him in his parents basement, he wasn't the one that had to leave, she was.

But... She no longer had my vehicle. She lost her brand new job. She wasn't able to get to school, so she failed her college course, but was stuck with the student loans for it anyway. She was now homeless, vehicle-ess, jobless, kicked out of college for non-attendance, penniless, as she is atrociously bad with finances, and... To top it all off, she was nearly 4 months pregnant with his kid.

Moral of the story? Don't piss off a lesbian veteran. I don't like to fck fck play games. I will go out of my way to avoid playing fck fck games. I will bend over backwards to make sure I don't have to play fck fck games. But if you force my hand into playing aforementioned fck fck games... I will not be the one that loses the game. Which... Is something I told her verbatim on our third or fourth date. Guess she forgot. Lol.

Too lazy, didn't read: Ex-wife tried to play stupid fck fck games misusing the legal system. She wound up homeless, jobless, vehicle-less, kicked out of school, and was pregnant with her boyfriends child to boot.

Footnote: If anyone wants to use the story of my experiences, for any purpose, you are welcome to.

(source) story by (/u/BTK216)

#prorevenge #by /u/BTK216 #pro revenge #revenge stories #pro revenge stories #pro #revenge #last10

306 notes · View notes

dawnasiler · 5 years

Text

Her Skincare Secrets: An Interview With LA Dermatologist Dr Jessica Wu

Jessica Wu, MD is responsible for some of Hollywood’s most beautiful faces. For the past 20 years, she’s been paying house calls to the stars to help them look their best on the red carpet and beyond.

But you don’t have to be a celeb to achieve flawless skin. Dr Wu believes that every woman is a natural beauty. Skincare coupled with cosmetic procedures should be used to subtly enhance yours, not completely change your face.

Her approach to skincare? As a top dermatologist, Dr Wu has access to the latest cutting-edge treatment, while her Asian heritage taught her to take a holistic approach that also includes diet and a healthy lifestyle.

Talking about diet, Dr Wu is the author of Feed Your Face, a book about the best diet for younger-looking skin. She also has her own cosmetic line, Dr Jessica Wu Cosmeticeuticals, that uses Chinese botanicals with anti-inflammatory properties to slow down premature aging.

In this interview, Dr Jessica Wu shares her skincare routine, her top tips for beautiful skin and more:

1. When did you become interested in skincare?

I suffered with terrible eczema as a child, then cystic acne as a teen. At one point in high school, my entire cheeks were covered with whiteheads and cysts. It really affected my self-esteem. I used to dread waking up in the morning and looking in the mirror, because I was afraid of what I would see.

After school, I’d often stop at the drugstore, hoping to find products to clear up my skin. That was the start of my skincare obsession. I decided to become a dermatologist to find solutions to my own skin problems, as well as help others who want to have healthy, clear skin. I love what I do because it’s my job to discover cool new products and do clinical trials on new techniques – and I get to share these with my patients!

2. What’s your skincare routine like?

My acne went away after a round of Accutane in college, and now that I’m 51, I’m more focused on youth-preserving products. But my skin is sensitive and I still have occasional eczema flareups, so I avoid products with fragrance or anything potentially irritating.

In the morning, I splash with water and apply SkinMedica HA 5 Rejuvenating Hydrator, a light serum that contains hyaluronic acid, peptides, and antioxidants. If I’m feeling oily (usually when I’m premenstrual) or if I’m doing a TV interview, I use Hourglass mattifying primer on my T zone. Then I use a zinc-based sunscreen followed by foundation (Julep Cushion Complexion 5 in 1 Skin Perfector with Turmeric).

During the day, I blot with Clean and Clear Oil Absorbing Sheets. At night, I cleanse with Burt’s Bees Cleansing Oil and a muslin cloth. Twice a week, I use Refissa (a prescription strength retinoid) to help support my skin’s collagen. The other nights, I use SkinMedica Lytera 2.0 to control sun spots, followed by my own Dr Jessica Wu Cosmeceuticals Dew Cream, which contains antioxidant Chinese botanicals and hyaluronic acid.

If I have any eczema patches, I use Avene XeraCalm Eczema Balm. Before bed, I use Avene Cold Cream Lip Cream all over my lips to make sure they’re soft in the morning.

3. If you could only use three skincare products for the rest of your life, what would they be?

Cleansing Oil, Retinoid Cream, and Sunscreen.

4. What are your fave skincare brands and why?

Avene because it’s made for sensitive and eczema-prone skin

SkinMedica because it contains innovative ingredients such as tranexamic acid, found in Lytera 2.0, which lightens and brightens sun spots without causing sun sensitivity

My own brand, Dr Jessica Wu Cosmeceuticals, which contains Chinese botanicals that are natural anti-oxidants and anti-inflammatories

5. What are your top 3 skincare tips to take care of your skin?

Don’t be afraid of retinoids. The biggest myth is that retinoids thin your skin. In fact, we have decades of research confirming that retinoids actually thicken your skin by building collagen — IF you use them correctly. This means finding the right concentration and formula that won’t cause irritation.

Listen to your skin. What works for your friend may not work for you. For example, moisturize where you’re dry and cut back on “active” ingredients if you get red and flaky.

Be gentle. You can’t scrub away acne, sun spots, or dry skin; in fact, scrubbing often worsens the problem.

6. What skincare treatments (dermabrasion, lasers etc) do you regularly have done?

IPL laser in the Fall to clear up sunspots that pop up in the summer.

Emsculpt every 6 weeks to strengthen and tone my abs.

Botox every 4 months for frown lines, to lift my eyelids, and to stop teeth grinding.

Filler twice a year to soften smile lines.

7. What lifestyle habits do you have that keep your skin in top shape?

I’m pretty careful about what I eat, especially ever since I researched and wrote my book, Feed Your Face. My diet is mostly fish (wild salmon, mackerel, trout), vegetables, nuts, fruit, and eggs. The fish are high in omega-3 fatty acids to keep my skin supple and control rashes. Green and yellow veggies help soften fight fine lines and wrinkles, while tomatoes fight sun damage.

I keep scarves in my car to drape over my neck and arms when I’m driving — UV rays go through window glass!

8. What’s in your makeup bag?

Thank you, Dr Wu!

Don’t forget to check out Dr Jessica’s website to discover more about her work and buy her skincare line. You can also keep up with Dr Wu on Instagram.

Take The Guesswork Out Of Skincare Shopping

Get access to the “Pro Skincare Library” for exclusive skincare routine “cheat sheets” and tricks to help you navigate the beauty aisles jungle like a pro and immediately know what to pick off the shelves to achieve the gorgeous skin of your dreams - even when you’re drowning in an endless sea of skincare products.

Success! Now check your email to confirm your subscription and get access to the skin library.

Her Skincare Secrets: An Interview With LA Dermatologist Dr Jessica Wu syndicated from Beautiful With Brains

#skincare #beauty #makeup

1 note · View note

theliberaltony · 5 years

Link

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to a weekly collaboration between FiveThirtyEight and ABC News. With 5,000 people seemingly thinking about challenging President Trump in 2020 — Democrats and even some Republicans — we’re keeping tabs on the field as it develops. Each week, we’ll run through what the potential candidates are up to — who’s getting closer to officially jumping in the ring and who’s getting further away.

While all eyes were fixated on the the release of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report Thursday, the Democratic presidential field continued to plug away, despite roundly criticizing Attorney General William Barr’s press conference and expressing a desire to learn more about redacted portions of the report. As was the case in 2018, Democrats appear to be aware that their strongest pitch to voters is one focused on issues like health care, the economy and immigration — so despite the developments in the investigation, the report continues to play only a peripheral role.

Here’s the weekly candidate roundup:

April 12-18, 2019

Stacey Abrams (D)

The former Georgia gubernatorial candidate said she would make a decision on a potential 2020 Senate run in the next few weeks, but that a decision on a presidential campaign could take longer.

“I do not believe that there is the type of urgency that some seem to believe there is,” Abrams said in an interview with The Root.

She was also critical of the media’s coverage of her 2018 race, refraining from ascribing the issues she saw to “racism,” but saying there was “a very narrow and immature ability to navigate the story of my campaign.”

Joe Biden (D)

Biden eulogized the late South Carolina Democratic Sen. Fritz Hollings on Tuesday, discussing, apparently in reference to Hollings’ one-time pro-segregation views, the ways that “people can change.”

“We can learn from the past and build a better future,” the former vice president added.

President Trump predicted that Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders would be a “finalist” to run against him in next year’s election. “I look forward to facing whoever it may be. May God Rest Their Soul!” Trump tweeted Tuesday.

On Thursday, Biden traveled to Massachusetts where he took part in a rally in support of striking Stop & Shop supermarket workers.

Cory Booker (D)

An analysis by the Associated Press found that Booker and Sen. Kamala Harris have each missed the most Senate votes this year among their colleagues running for president. The pair has missed 16 of the chamber’s 77 votes this session.

The New Jersey senator announced a plan to expand the earned income tax credit during an event in Iowa on Monday, saying that it would boost the economy and benefit more than 150 million people. Booker’s plan pays for the credit by increasing taxes on capital gains.

Booker additionally called for voting rights reforms during a visit to Georgia on Wednesday, including automatic voter registration, making Election Day a national holiday and restoring the Voting Rights Act protections that were overturned by the Supreme Court in 2013.

Pete Buttigieg (D)

Buttigieg officially launched his presidential campaign last weekend with a rally in his native South Bend, Indiana, where he acknowledged — even as his popularity grows — “the audacity of [running for president] as a Midwestern millennial mayor.”

It is “more than a little bold — at age 37 — to seek the highest office in the land,” he said.

The South Bend mayor also encountered some of his campaign’s first hecklers this week, as he was confronted in Iowa by anti-gay protesters, and announced that he and his husband are interested in having a child at some point in the near future.

Julian Castro (D)

The former Housing and Urban Development secretary raised a relatively meager $1.1 million during the year’s first quarter, placing him behind nearly every major candidate in the Democratic field.

The New York Times reported on Castro’s struggle to catch on with voters at this point in the campaign, noting that the candidate himself doesn’t seem bothered by his position in the field.

“People are going to have their moments,” he said. “I would rather have my moment closer to the actual election than right now.”

John Delaney (D)

Delaney and Booker’s campaign were involved in a minor dust-up after a Booker fundraising email earlier this week made reference to “one of the other Democrats in this race… giv[ing] over $11 million of his own money to his campaign,” a fact that can only be attributed to Delaney.

A spokesperson for the former Maryland congressman jabbed back, saying, “If I had Booker’s numbers, I’d go negative too.”

On Tuesday, Delaney announced a plan to create a cabinet level Department of Cybersecurity, noting in a press release, “Currently our cybersecurity efforts are spread across multiple agencies, but by creating a new department we can centralize our mission, focus our goals and efforts, and create accountability.”

Tulsi Gabbard (D)

In visit to Iowa this week, Gabbard touted her experience in the National Guard and said she was disappointed in Trump’s decision to veto a bipartisan congressional resolution calling for an end to U.S. military involvement in Yemen.

The Hawaii congresswoman also criticized Trump in a Fox News appearance, saying that his administration’s efforts to force “regime change” in Venezuela were “directly undermining” its effort to denuclearize North Korea. In the same interview, Gabbard said that it is “impossible for Kim Jong Un to believe [the Trump administration] when they tell him, ‘Don’t worry. Get rid of your nuclear weapons. We’re not going to come after you.'”

Kirsten Gillibrand (D)

Gillibrand’s $3 million raised from donors for 2020 during the year’s first quarter placed her last among the group of six U.S. senators running for the presidential nomination; but she also transferred nearly $10 million from her 2018 Senate committee into her 2020 campaign, placing her among the top tier of candidates in cash-on-hand entering the second quarter.

BuzzFeed News reported Monday that the New York senator is endorsing proposals included in a new report that analyzes the racial wealth divide. The proposals include postal banking, government run trust accounts and the formation of a commission to study slavery reparations.

Kamala Harris (D)

Harris admitted that she regrets the support she lent an anti-truancy law while serving as California’s attorney general — specifically the law’s threat to prosecute parents for their children’s absences. The senator noted, however, that her office never jailed a parent for a violation of the law.

Harris released 15 years of tax returns earlier in the week. Harris and her husband, attorney Douglas Emhoff, reported nearly $1.9 million in income in 2018, paying an effective tax rate of 37 percent.

John Hickenlooper (D)

Ahead of the 20th anniversary of the Columbine High School shooting in Colorado, Hickenlooper, the state’s former governor, met with survivors as he campaigns on his gun control record, including a ban on high-capacity magazines and private sale background check requirement.

Hickenlooper additionally discussed mental health measures with the group, citing recent suicides by survivors of last year’s shooting at Parkland High School in Florida.

Larry Hogan (R)

Amid speculation that he might run against Trump in the 2020 Republican primary, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan is scheduled to be in the New Hampshire next week. Hogan will headline the New Hampshire Institute of Politics’ “Politics and Eggs” on April 23.

Jay Inslee (D)

In a New York Magazine interview, the Washington governor, who is running a campaign prioritizing climate change, said that any attempt by Trump to run on his environmental record “would not be successful.”

Inslee was also critical of one of his constituents, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who is considering an independent presidential run. Inslee pointed to Schultz’s scant voting history.

“The son of a gun doesn’t even vote,” Inslee said. “You want to be president and you don’t even vote? You know, that’s just for the little people. In Howard’s life, voting is just for the little people. I don’t think his candidacy is going to soar.”

John Kasich (R)

On the heels of former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld’s announcement to officially enter the GOP race, former Ohio Gov. John Kasich said on CNN that he still hasn’t ruled out his own primary challenge to Trump.

“All of my options remain on the table,” said Kasich, who previously ran for president in 2016. “I don’t wake up every day looking at polls or thinking about me and my political future. I just want to be a good voice.”

Amy Klobuchar (D)

The Minnesota senator made her second trip to Florida as a presidential candidate this week, speaking about health care in Miami and meeting with Democratic leaders from the state House in Tallahassee.

Fox News also announced that Klobuchar will appear on the network for a forum on May 8. The Klobuchar appearance follows a Sanders town hall on Fox News on Monday.

Terry McAuliffe (D)

McAuliffe, the former governor of Virginia, announced on Wednesday evening that he would not run for president, choosing instead to assist Democrats in his home state trying to win back the state’s legislative chambers.

Despite his decision, McAuliffe said he feels he would have been able to beat Trump “like a rented mule,” but that he was concerned about the problems he sees plaguing Virginia — an apparent reference to the blackface scandal and sexual harassment allegation that rocked Democratic leadership earlier this year.

Seth Moulton (D)

Moulton, who was spotted in his Massachusetts hometown this week filming a presidential announcement video, is hiring staff for a potential campaign, Politico reported; he is expected to make a public announcement next week.

Beto O’Rourke (D)

The former congressman continued his breakneck-paced campaign this week, making stops in South Carolina and the Super Tuesday battleground of Virginia.

Like other 2020 Democrats, O’Rourke spent most of the week defending the contents of years of tax returns. One headline emerging from the 10 years of filings that O’Rourke dropped on Monday: He appears to have given the smallest percentage of his family’s income to charity out of the 2020 field ( 0.3 percent in 2017), according to ABC News.

A voter confronted O’Rourke about his stingy charitable donations on the trail Wednesday, and the 2020 hopeful responded by saying:

“I’ve served in public office since 2005. I do my best to contribute to the success of my community, of my state, and now, of my country. There are ways that I do this that are measurable and there are ways that I do this that are immeasurable. There are charities that we donate to that we’ve recorded and itemized, others that we have donated to that we have not.”

Tim Ryan (D)

Ryan took a page out of Elizabeth Warren’s book this week and introduced legislation which would require the Justice Department to create training in a variety of areas for law enforcement officers.

He also took a veiled shot at some of the more progressive Democrats in the 2020 field, telling CNN that he’s “concerned” about a growing socialist wing of the party.

“I’m concerned about it. Because if we are going to de-carbonize the American economy, it’s not going to be some centralized bureaucracy in Washington, DC, that’s going to make it happen,” Ryan said. “It’s going to be part targeted government investments that do need to be robust. But it’s going to be the free market that’s going — at the end of the day — is going to make that happen.”

Bernie Sanders (D)

Bernie Sanders had a big week. Not only did he release years of tax returns, but Sanders also seems to have kick-started another Democratic trend: appearing on Fox News.

According to tax filings released by the campaign, Sanders, who has made a career out of railing against the ultra wealthy, is officially now a millionaire himself.

The runner up for the 2016 Democratic nomination reported an adjusted gross income of nearly $561,293 in 2018, and paid $145,840 in taxes for a 26 percent effective tax rate. And in 2016 and 2017, Sanders reported raking in $1.06 million and $1.13 million in adjusted gross income, respectively, paying a 35 percent and 30 percent effective rate, according to ABC News.

Tax filings aside, Sanders’ Fox News town hall on Monday broke ratings records for the 2020 cycle so far. And it looks like more Democrats are set to follow his lead, with Sen. Amy Klobuchar quickly announcing her own Fox town hall.

Eric Swalwell (D)

Rep. Eric Swalwell held another kick off rally in his hometown of Dublin, California, on Sunday, days after he officially kicked off his campaign a few miles away from last year’s school shooting in Parkland.

Elizabeth Warren (D)

Warren continued her string of major policy proposal announcements, which have defined her campaign and aspects of the entire 2020 Democratic race as of late. She introduced the “Accountable Capitalism Act” this week, a bill that “aims to reverse the harmful trends over the last 30 years,” according to the senator’s website.

Bill Weld (R)

It’s official — Trump won’t run unopposed for reelection in 2020. Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld jumped into the race on Monday, becoming the first Republican to challenge a sitting president for the party nomination since Pat Buchanan ran against President George H. W. Bush in 1992.

Weld, who ran for vice president in 2016 on the Libertarian ticket under Gary Johnson, told ABC News that he would’ve been “ashamed of myself if hadn’t raised my hand and said count me in.”

The former two-term governor also said he’ll focus on Republican primaries where independents can vote, while hoping his pitch that the president is ignoring key issues like climate change and the debt will resonate with moderate Republicans.

“The president is just not dealing with serious issues such as global warming and climate change. That’s a real threat to us as a country,” Weld said. “And for the president to just say it’s a hoax, that’s not responsible government.”

Weld spent his first week on the trail campaigning across New Hampshire.

Marianne Williamson (D)

Democratic presidential hopeful and spiritual book author Marianne Williamson participated in her first CNN town hall on Sunday.

On health care, Williamson saidd that her approach as president would be broader than just Medicare for All, according to CNN.

“That will save a lot of money. There’s so much about our diet, our lifestyle and so much about the economic stress that actually causes the very conditions that produce illness. That’s why if we’re going to talk about health in America, we have to talk about the foods, toxins. We have to talk about our environmental policies. We need to go a lot deeper.”

Andrew Yang (D)

Andrew Yang held a rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., on Monday, drawing a “large and diverse crowd,” according to Business Insider.

“The opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math,” Yang told the raucous crowd.

The D.C. rally came on the heels of perhaps Yang’s biggest media appearance yet with his CNN town hall on Sunday.

On combating the opioid epidemic, Yang said he supports decriminalizing heroin and other opiates. “We need to decriminalize opiates for personal use,” Yang said. “I’m also for the legalization of cannabis,” he said during Sunday’s town hall.

#IFTTT #Politics – FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #Adam Kelsey and Will Steakin

3 notes · View notes

lychniis · 2 years

Text

⚘ ― INFORMATION !

( # )ㅤ lychnis coronoria — in the language of flowers, lychnis blooms carry the symbolic meaning of gentleness, youthful love, or less commonly, a snare.

( générale ) ❝ what is there to know of me ? ❞

aine / anya , she / her , 19 - 21's , south asian , perpetually tired and in a need for constant naps , criminally offline for the most part, med school has me by the throat ( send help ).

i am a full time college student and audiology / speech language pathology major and by full time, i do mean a six-day-a-week-mandatory-college-attendance sort of fulltime. the weekends are my escape. assignments are my bane.

i am currently playing honkai star rail and keep up with the story of genshin impact, while also dabbling with spiritfarer and other book series at the side. my favorite characters are zhongli, jing yuan, ( husbands !!! ), ningguang, childe, kaveh, blade and a whole roster of others.

( règles ) ❝ what is there that i must say ? ❞

i write for GENSHIN IMPACT and HONKAI STAR RAIL ( the masterlists labelled glaze lily and ball peony respectively ).

my blog is both sfw and nsfw. minors, while you are welcome to read my sfw works, please do not interact with mature content. kindly block the necessary tags below to avoid them. i do not have specific dni criteria apart from the usual criteria as well ( racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc. ). furthermore, if you are a zionist / anti-palestine / pro-israel, kindly block me. i do not support genocide in any form.

minors and any individual with no indicator of their age in their blog who interact with my mature content will be blocked. no excuses, no exceptions.

most of my readers are written as gender neutral or afab ( when specified ). english is not my first language either and thus, i will be prone to making errors in my works.

i specialize in angst. please note that i may be prone to inciting feelings of annoyance and murderous anger in you due to the decisions i make. in this case, kindly breath in and out and lower your pitchforks. i'm sorry i made you feel upset in advance ( actually, i'm not hahahahaha suffer with me ).

i am currently not taking requests, but i do plan on opening them soon ( after i finish my jing yuan draft...i'll work on it...dwdw *nervously looks at my doc )! in this case, i will draft out a detailed rules page for you to refer to.

( vénéré ) ❝ what is there that i hold close ? ❞

my dearest moots, moth, crys, nyla, ely, eun, dust, celeste, mei, chex, mhie, ryu, crow, ollie + everyone else!!!.

they're all insanely talented writers. like wow we're moots??? really??? omg?????? I'M SO HONORED!!!!

i could dedicate a 1000 word essay to all of you and the immense talent that you guys have. please, give them all your love and support. they have amazing works under their belts and i can and will vouch for it.

( étiquettes ) ❝ what is there as a followed path ? ❞

these are my basic tags for navigating my tumblr. while my layout as a whole is very cluttered ( don't keep changing tags folks. take me as an example ). please block any tags that you may deem unnecessary or unwanted!

&&. rambles !! — basic ramblings of mine from ideas to thoughts.

&&. notice board !! — reblogged content from moots.

&&. mailbox !! — answered asks.

&&. my writing !! — my written works.

&&. sketchbook !! — my artwork.

&&. mature !! — my mature works / nsfw tag. minors, please block this!

( itinéraires ) ❝ what is there that you can see ? ❞

main : @ainescribe • nsfw blog ( mdni ) : @lythrxm

spotify • caard • archive of our own

#information ;#please read !!!

8 notes · View notes

ruler-of-the-blrds · 6 years

Text

1. Does your character have good aim? Melissa- Not really Alana- Yes Serenity- No Tempest- Yes Laura/Siren- No Meringue- She cheats with psychic Chrys- Kinda? Mimi- Yes Amari- nah 2. What would history remember your character for? Melissa- furry Alana/Tempest- thief Serenity and Meringue- Fashion Chrys- adventurer Laura- idfk partying? Mimi- trying her best Amari- proving aliens are real 3. Does your character prefer to work in silence or with noise and of what kind? Silence- Melissa; Tempest; Mimi; Alana; Serenity Music- Amari; Laura; Meringue; Siren; Chrys 4. Has your character ever been handcuffed or tied up? UHHHHHHHHHH Melissa has. I’m only answering this for her. 5. Can your character cook? Melissa can and that’s it 6. Who did your character look up to as a child? Melissa- herself? Laura- all her rad friends from cool places Mimi- her big bro Amari- lizard people guy 7. Do any of your characters have depression? Mimi does 8. Who has the worst luck? Mimi for sure 9. Could your character win an arm wrestling competition? How well would they do? no one of them could. well maybe tempest. 10. Would your character give up the chance to come back to life as a god so that someone else could be saved? Melissa and Co. - No Laura and Co. - Hard yes Mimi- Yes Amari- Ha no

11. What is your character’s favorite historical or fairy tale figure? pass 12. Would your character marry someone their family didn’t approve of? All yes- except maybe mimi if her parents had a valid point 13. Do/Did any of your characters have large ears they had to grow into as a kid? no 14. Are any of your characters nonverbal? no 15. Did your character ever want to be a cowboy? Amari and Melissa 16. How does the way your character present themselves in public differ from how they are in private? Melissa- is much more reserved in public Mimi- in private mimi is much sadder- she doesn’t show her real emotions in public Amari and Laura are the same in public/private 17. How petty is your character? Melissa-very Mimi- not at all Laura- not really Amari- Very 18. Is your character pro or anti union? pass 19. Does your character like carrots? Melissa/Amari- no Mimi/Laura- yes 20. How self-confident is your characters? Melissa- very Amari- very Mimi- not at all Laura- pretty good

21. Do any of your characters have heterochromia? nope 22. Do any of your characters have someone named after them? Or are they named after someone else? Mimi is named after Mimi from digimon and Gundam Tanaka lol 23. Do any of your characters have facial markings? Siren and Amari have freckles 24. What is your character’s opinions on squirrels? Melissa- whatever Laura- they’re perfect Mimi- loves them Amari- they’re spies 25. Does your character experience sexism for the job/title they hold? (ie: she’s a girl, she can’t be x,y,z because only boys can be) Mimi and Amari don’t have jobs so- but who knows with Amari in the future cause they wanna be an astronaut Melissa has to deal with drunk dudes hitting on her bc of her job Laura’s good

26. Are any of your characters missing fingers? no 27. Does your character know how to tie different kinds of knots? none of them really know anything thats not basic 28. How much does your character giggle? Melissa- not often Laura- a lot Mimi- a lot in public Amari- sometimes 29. Are any of your characters nameless? (In that there is no legal record of them existing, they just don’t have names in canon, or history remembers them but not their name?) nope 30. How independent was your character as a teen? Melissa- very Mimi- still a teen and no Amari- still a teen and yes Laura- kinda

31. How much does your character care about their appearance? Melissa- very Mimi- social appearance only? like what others think of her Amari- they have to stand out Laura- not at all 32. Do you have any characters who are twins? Naomi but she’s dead 33. Does your character like math? How good are they at it? Only Amari and they’re good at it 34. Do any of your characters collect sea-shells or wear shell jewelry? Mimi does 35. Naptime, yes or no? Melissa/Alana- Yes Tempest/Serenity- No Laura/Siren/Meringue- Yes Chrys- no Mimi- yes please Amari- nah 36. Would your character prefer to sit around and chill or be up and moving and doing something? Chill- Laura, Siren, Serenity, Melissa Doing something- Alana, Tempest, Meringue, Chrys, Mimi, Amari 37. Did any of your characters have a fever they almost died from as a child? Nope~ 38. Does your character worry about breaking the rules and getting in trouble? Melissa- worries about getting in trouble but it doesn’t stop her Mimi- yes very Laura- not really, but she doesn’t do much Amari- nah son 39. Do any of your characters have the responsibilities of an adult despite being a child, or did they when they were? Amari and Mimi are magical kids that have to fight often so- 40. If a loved one died, how long would they stay in mourning? Mimi- uh a very long time. Melissa- a few weeks Laura- a month? Amari- a few weeks

41. Do other people around your character dictate their life or do they get to choose for themselves? Melissa- herself Mimi- around her Laura- herself Amari- themself 42. Did/do any of your characters have an arranged marriage? Quentin~ but he doesn’t exist yet~ 43. Do you have any widows/widower characters? nope 44. Are any of your characters overshadowed by other siblings? Or have parents who clearly have a favorite? Naomi but again she dead 45. Would your character kill someone to get what they want? Nope 46. Does your character prefer to lead or follow? Mimi- follow Amari- lead Melissa- lead Laura- follow [Skip cause answered]

52. Would your character prefer to have history know the truth or have many different versions of their life? Mimi- truth Amari- truth Melissa- different versions Laura- truth 53. What if the furthest your character has ever walked in a given stretch of time? pass 54. Would your character prefer to visit a new city or stay at home? Mimi- home Amari- new city Melisa- home Laura- new city 55. Do you have any characters who despite trying their best ended up being horrible parents? Nope 56. Do any of your characters have step-family? nope 57. Do any of your characters consistently wear hats? nope 58. Does your character prefer the ocean or the mountains? Melissa- ocean Laura- ocean Mimi- ocean Amari- mountains 59. What kinds of things does your character use as paperweights? whatevers around 60. If faced with certain death, would your character continue to speak out against injustice? Mimi- yes Melissa- no Amari- yes Laura- nah

61. Have any of your characters struggled with addiction? Melissa with cigarettes and alcohol but she’s getting better~ 62. Have any of your characters adopted anyone? Nope 63. How far would your character go to help those in need? Mimi- even if it means her dying Amari- as much as is convenient for them Melissa- never Laura- as much as isn’t a hassle 64. Do your characters know any old blind swordsmen per the trope? no 65. Is your characters energetic? Amari and Laura 66. How much of a disappointment/scandal to their family is your character? Melissa- very much. her family has disowned her Mimi- not at all Amari- not at all Laura- not at all 67. Would your character be willing to do something they consider morally wrong in order to achieve their goals? Melissa- maybe Mimi- never Amari- no probably not Laura- nah 68. Are any of your characters intimidatingly beautiful? Tempest 69. Has your character ever found themselves in with the wrong crowd and had to attempt to break from it? Melissa will~ 70. Does your character have any guarded/secret guild knowledge or family recipe? nope

71. How good is your character at reading people and navigating social situations? Melissa and Mimi are very good at it Laura is okay Amari is horrible at it 72. Would your character care for someone who needed it if it meant being ostracized from their society? Mimi- would in a heartbeat Melissa- nah Laura- nah Amari- nope~ 73. Has your character been to/ ever explored any ruins? Nope but Amari wants to 74. Are any of your characters associated with flowers? Mimi- roses Alana- nightshade 75: Do any of your characters wear glasses, sunglasses, goggles, or monocles? Alana- goggles Tempest- visor thing Melissa- glasses 76: Would your character like to live on a farm and raise sheep? Mimi might 77. Have any of your characters had to kill a friend? Mimi had to kill Naomi~ whoops 78. Have any of your characters been exiled from their society? nope 79. What is a humanizing thing about a villain/antagonist/generally horrible person character that you have? Tempest- she has some morals??? Quentin- his dad died 80. Was your character ever considered shy? nope

81. Does your character look like what others think they should from their reputation? what i don’t understand this one tbh 82. Describe your character’s handwriting. Melissa- neat Mimi- kiddish Amari- messy as hell (no fingers) Laura- sloppy but readable 83. Did/do any of your characters start a dynasty? nope 84. Do any of your characters have gaps in their teeth or are missing teeth? nah 85. Has your character ever been led down the wrong path because of their anger? Melissa 86. Is your character’s fear reaction to fight, flight, or freeze? Melissa/Serenity- flight Alana- Freeze then flight Tempest- fight Laura/Siren/Meringue/Chrys- fight Mimi- flight Amari- flight 87. What are your character’s nails like? Melissa- painted purple Laura- they cut- i guess Mimi- this girl got blue claws Amari- no fingers 88. Are any of your characters part of a spy network? nope 89. Would your character throw themselves in harms way to protect a loved one? Only Mimi 90. Can your character start a campfire? Melissa and Laura can. Amari might

91. Does your character engage in gossip? Melissa does 92. Have any of your characters started and/or led a revolution? lol Amari would 93. Do you have any characters that are stuffed animals? Or characters who have them? Crow is a stuffed animal~ Mimi has a lot tho 94. Are any of your characters mechanics? nope 95. If given total rule over a country, would your character step aside to turn it into a democracy? Mimi- yes Amari- nah Melissa- yes only cause that sounds like too much work Laura- yea 96. Which character is The Proudest ™ of their kids? none have kids 97. Do any of your characters have a tendency to dislocate joints? honestly chrys 98. Has your character ever had to question their beliefs and realized they were wrong? Melissa will //shot 99. Do any of your characters have social anxiety? Mimi kinda does 100. Are any of your characters queer? Mimi- lesbian Melissa/Alana/Tempest/Serenity- bi Laura/Siren/Meringue/Chrys- pan Amari- non-binary asexual lesbian

101. Which character is The Most dramatic? Meringue 102. Are any of your characters d/Deaf or HoH? nope 102. What is your character’s greatest source of guilt? Mimi- killing Naomi Melissa- future thing- Amari- not being able to get their evidence on their own Laura- idfk 103. How well does your character deal with their anger? Melissa- passive aggressive af Mimi- bury that shit Amari- ranting Laura- lol just laugh it off 104. Do any of your characters have pottery as a hobby? nope 105. Favorite winter activity? pass 106. Do any of your characters have noticeable acne? not anymore 107. Do any of your characters feel confined by their lives and the expectations placed upon them? Melissa did 108. Are any of your characters dogs? nope 109. Would your character blackmail a god? Melissa would 110. What color is associated with your character? Melissa- purple/red Laura- light orange Mimi- green Amari- Red/Pink/Glowing Green

111. Do any of your characters have dogs for pets? Naomi did- now Mimi owns Naomi’s dog 112. Does your character believe in wishing fountains and shooting stars? Mimi does and so does Amari 113. Would your character commit treason if the law was wrong? Melissa- if she didn’t think she’d get caught Amari- yeah Mimi- maybe Laura- nah 114. Do any of your characters insist on going by their fullname rather than a nickname? Melissa 115. Do any of your characters have an honorary father figure? nope 116. Have any of your characters (almost) drowned? Amari kinda 117. Could your character build a house or possess the knowledge to build one? nope 118. Have any of your characters come from a position of privilege that they’ve never had to examine? uh idk 119. If someone made a statue of your character, what would it look like? Them?? I dunno 120. Do any of your characters have PTSD? not now

121. Do any of your characters have prosthetics? nope 122. What is your character’s greatest secret? Mimi- she blames herself for Naomi’s death Amari- doesn’t keep secrets~ Melissa- she’s a thief Laura- eh 123. Did any of you characters have nannies or governesses growing up? Quentin did 124. Does your character workout? Laura swims. She’s the only one 125. Who is your token cis, straight, (optional: white) male? Quentin 126. Are any of your characters on good terms/still friends with an ex? Melissa will be 127. Has anyone ever stolen your character’s identity or impersonated them? nope 128. Has your character’s home ever been destroyed? nope 129. Has your character ever had to compromise on what they thought was right in order to maintain peace? Mimi has~ 130. Do you have any characters who are retired? nope

131. Who is redhaired and has a mustache? nope 132. Who is the precious cinnamon roll? Mimi 133. Have any of your characters ever been caught in a fire or explosion? Not really 134. Has your character ever been alone in a hostile environment and been forced to travel a long way to reach a safety that wasn’t for sure? Nope 135. Would your character be content to go back to a normal and quiet life after going on an adventure? Not laura and amari 136. Has your character ever been forced to deal with the ‘I want to speak to your manager” kind of person? Melissa has 137. Are any of your characters bipolar? nope 138. How good is your character with money and accounting? Melissa is surprisingly good 139. Has your character ever survived a fatal wound? nope 140. Can your character play an instruments? Melissa can play the piano but she doesn’t like to

141. Who has a weapon collection? Uh do magical weapons count? Cause Mimi and Amari 142. Do any of your characters use wheelchairs, transportation devices, or mobility aids? nope 143. Has your character ever had some part of their culture made illegal? nope 144. Are any of your characters adventurers by trade? nope 145. How much first aid and medical knowledge does your character have? Amari has a lot 146. Were any of your characters disowned or abandoned by their parents? Melissa was~ 147. Do any of your characters have albinism? nope 148. Do any of your characters have an eating disorder or food contamination phobia? nope 149: How good is your character at lying? Melissa is great Amari is horrible Laura is okay Mimi’s getting better at it 150. Do any of your characters have to deal with family being concerned more about appearances and reputation than personal wellbeing? Melissa did so did Quentin

151. Would your character ever go cliff diving? Laura and Amari would 152: Do you have any characters with the jr. sr. I II or III thing? Nope 153: Do any of your characters embody the spirit of a flapper? (Bonus points for style and or lifestyle) I dunno melissa maybe 154: How much does your character care about other people respecting their authority? melissa- very much laura- not much mimi- not much Amari- a lot 155: Does your character cut and/or color their hair for any specific reason? Amari dyes their hair bc they think it’s cute Melissa dyes her hair bc she likes the way she looks with it 156: Were/Are any of your characters under less pressure and fewer expectations than their siblings? Nope 157: Do any of your characters live on their own? Laura does~ 158: Have any of your characters even been bit by a zombie or rabid animal or otherwise exposed to a deadly pathogen? (Did any of them survive?) Nope 159: Does your character have any tattoos? And are any of them symbolic or significant? Melissa has 3 tattoos. None are super symbolic “I just think they’re neat” 160: Do any of your characters have asthma? nope

161: Your character’s opinion of pineapple? pass 162: Has your character ever thrown a tantrum over things not going their way? Meissa as a kid Amari sure 163: Are any of your characters autistic? (If so, do they have special interests and what are they?) no 164: Are any of your characters tinkerers or inventors? nope 165: Who is a “girls just wanna have fun” character? Chrys 166: Are any of your characters blind or visually impaired? Mimi was blind 167: Are any of your characters fat? //dabs future character 168: Is your characters easily embarrassed? Mimi is so is Melissa 169: Are any of your characters married to the sea? Nope 170: Are any of your characters infamous? Not really

171: Are any of your characters hallmark villains in terms of personality? Kinda Melissa 172: Do any of your characters hold a grudge against someone? Melissa does so does Amari 173: How loyal is your character? Mimi- deathly Amari- not really Melissa- nope Laura- kinda 174: Does your character get homesick? Mimi- YES Amari- not really Melissa- not at all Laura- nah

175: Are any of your characters badass (lesbian) pirate queens? Sadly no

#long post #im bored

1 note · View note

whitewolfofwinterfell · 6 years

Note

Please spill tea on Rachel/Joey as a romantic ship since I know you're with me on being one of the few who still ships Ross/Rachel!

This is a very strange ask for me to receive, since I’ve spoken about my like for Joey and Rachel as a romantic pairing in the past, even above Ross and Rachel (you may not have seen it because I tend to just rant in the tags of my posts haha, but you can see some of the things I’ve said in my Rachel/Joey tag here). Having said that, it is a topic that I go back and forth with because I see the positives of both ships and I like both for different reasons. However, this may go in a different direction than you expected since I do really like Joey and Rachel, so beware that this does contain some anti-Rosschel content, and it’s pretty long (sorry, I have a lot of thoughts on this).

On paper, Rachel and Joey are the perfect couple and I love their relationship on the show so much. They had such a respectful, loving and endearing friendship that was so beautiful. Even as I’m trying to sit here and think of the negative side to Rachel and Joey’s relationship, I can’t. It was so open, warm, trusting and sweet. Joey falling in love with Rachel is one of my favourite arcs on the entire show, because it’s so realistic and emotional. We’ve all had that moment at some point in our lives where we have a close friend who we’ve only ever thought of platonically but then something happens and we see them differently, whether it’s just for that one moment or whether it develops into something more like it did for Joey. I’ve never really seen it discussed before, but all of the characters on Friends developed over the seasons, except Joey. Who Joey is in season 1 is practically exactly who he is in season 10. Falling in love with Rachel is the only time we actually got to see a change in Joey. It was the first time he’d ever been in love so it was incredibly difficult for him to navigate those intense feelings anyway, but it was a million times harder because he was also dealing with the confusion and guilt of that person being Rachel who was pregnant with Ross’ child. How Joey handled himself throughout the situation was so beautiful to watch and made me fall in love with his character in an entirely new way. Here’s this guy who’s specifically known for being a womaniser and an immature bachelor, but he was mature, selfless and fair throughout the entire thing.

Joey falling in love with Rachel made perfect sense. He lived with her and was incredibly close to her, they got each other and had fun, and you could just perfectly see and understand why he would love her. In comparison to Ross, whose love for Rachel was just there from the beginning and mainly based on an infatuation he’d had since he was a child, Joey’s feelings for Rachel were incredibly complex. When Joey’s feelings for Rachel seemed to pass, I thought that was the end of it and then BAM, Rachel had her dream and suddenly she had feelings for Joey. This was the point at which I knew something had to happen, because two friends don’t both just develop feelings for each other out of nowhere, that has to mean something. Watching Rachel’s feelings for Joey develop wasn’t nearly as enjoyable as watching Joey’s (but that’s mainly because whenever Rachel has the slightest interest in someone she immediately becomes annoying to me), but again, it made sense to me. She was close to Joey, he was always there for her, she knew he had romantic feelings for her recently and hey, he’s an attractive dude!

The perfect basis was already in place for an amazing romance to develop between the two – they’d been best friends for 8 years, lived together for two(?) years, they had an attraction and a special bond - yet when it finally happened it just didn’t work. Every time I rewatch the show (and that’s a lot) I ask myself the same question about Joey and Rachel and that’s – why!? Why didn’t it work? Because it doesn’t make sense to me, but of course, that can be summed up in one word: Ross.

Ross and Rachel are that couple, aren’t they? They’re so iconic, everyone worldwide knows them and from the very beginning they just sucked everyone in. Nowadays I see people growing tired of the will-they-won’t-they trope because it’s so overdone, but when Friends was first airing, it reeled people in hook line and sinker. What really sells Ross and Rachel as a couple is Jennifer and David’s chemistry but also that intense passionate love that Ross and Rachel have. The problem is, that beyond this I do struggle to see what makes sense about Ross and Rachel. This is where you may want to stop reading if you’re a huge Ross/Rachel fan because it’s going to get a quite anti-Rosschel.

It starts off as a very one-sided relationship that is built upon Ross’ crush on Rachel that goes back to high school and by the time they do finally admit their feelings and get together, there’s just a series of endless arguments and break-ups which suggest it’s not a very healthy or happy relationship. From Ross’ perspective, in particular, I think his perception of Rachel and his relationship with her was incredibly distorted. All of their issues in season 3 are because of Ross’ insecurities, because he spent his high school years pining for a girl that was “out of his league”, once he was with her he was constantly afraid he would lose her and that led to possessive behaviour. What always sticks in my mind is the conversation they have about Rachel working too much and Ross expresses that he feels she has this entirely different life that he’s not a part of, and Rachel explains that she’s glad about that because she wants to have something in her life that is separate from him. She says that she’s scared but she’s happy because she’s out there in the world doing something for herself and she asks if he’s okay with that, which he replies yes, but then over her shoulder when they hug he says he’s not. Because Friends is a sitcom, comedy is injected into that scene, but it’s actually not very funny at all. What about what Rachel said is even slightly unreasonable? In most relationship’s an individual’s work is the only part of their life that is not intertwined with their partner and is the place where they can channel their passions and energies. Ross had his career at the museum which was clearly very important to him yet Rachel couldn’t have hers because that made him insecure. What’s even worse is when you think back to the list he made about Rachel, under the cons he listed “Just a waitress” as one of her cons, yet when she decided to break out of the coffee house and launch a career, he didn’t like it. So what did he want from her? Rachel always felt very much like an achievement to Ross rather than a person, particularly in the early seasons. I don’t necessarily want to pit the two relationships against each other but when you compare how well Joey knew Rachel and his opinion of her in comparison to Ross, there’s no comparison. Ross was in love with the idea of Rachel (I think as the seasons progressed he did fall in love with who she was more so), but it still didn’t feel like he really knew her and loved her for her. Proof of that can be seen by his negative reaction when she started to change and become her own person and establish a life for herself.

Having said that, there was an inexplicable pull between Ross and Rachel that brought them back together time and time again. They finally admitted their feelings to each other and got together in season 2, only to split up the same day because of the list Ross made, then they got back together later in the season after the prom video, then they took a break in season 3 (by this point they’d been in a relationship for total of 11 episodes), got back together in the next episode and broke up soon after when Rachel found out Ross slept with Chloe.10 episodes later, in season 4, they got back together at the beach house only to split up the next day because of the whole ‘we were on a break’ argument. Nothing much happened with them after that and they seemed to be moving on, until Ross met Emily and Rachel realised she still has feelings for him and went to England to stop the wedding but Ross said her name at the altar, so that ended in tears hah. Throughout season 5 Ross fights for his marriage and is insistent he loves Emily, whilst Rachel continues to pine for him. By the time we get to season 6, this is where they’ve both seemingly moved on from one another and then lo and behold, they get married in Vegas! After this Ross realises he has feelings for Rachel AGAIN, which seems to soon pass. In season 7, it seems like they’re moving on again until they wind up kissing after Monica and Chandler get engaged. Season 8 is of course the season where Rachel falls pregnant with Emma and from that point until the middle of season 9 when they’re living together and raising Emma, their relationship seems headed in the romantic direction once again. Then they decide their arrangement isn’t working so Rachel moves out and back in with Joey, and they go back to their own lives. That brings us to the end whereby they finally come to realise they want to be with each other in the finale. Wow, that’s one hell of a long and complicated relationship, right? But it perfectly displays the on-off nature of Rachel and Ross’ relationship and shows that even when they were supposedly over each other or moving on, they very quickly found each other again. What I never got about all of this is why it happened. I understand it up until around season 4, but past that I don’t. Why did Ross say Rachel’s name at his wedding? I don’t care what anyone says, at that time he was not in love with Rachel. He agreed to stop seeing Rachel to make his marriage with Emily work, for crying out loud. Also, why did Rachel continue to love a man that had made an immature pros and cons list about her when they first got together, was possessive and jealous when she got a job, fell into bed with the first woman he clapped eyes on when she told him they were on a break (I mean, who does that!?) and refused to accept responsibility for his actions or act with even the tiniest shred of maturity when presented with the chance of getting back together with her? What is it about this man are we supposed to believe makes him a man that Rachel is in love with? It doesn’t make sense. Neither does the fact that they randomly kiss and have sex for no reason what so ever other than the fact that they have before. When they have sex and Rachel gets pregnant with Emma, that literally happens because they’re both there and it’s easy because they’ve been together before and they know they’re in a place where emotionally they’re not attached, so they can treat it as a casual one-night stand.

But, back to Joey and Rachel, because that’s technically what this ask is supposed to be about rather than Ross and Rachel. I think in comparison to Ross and Rachel, whose relationship was incredibly rocky and problematic, Joey and Rachel had a much better build-up, a richer relationship and a more complex connection. The problem with Joey and Rachel is that the audience were already too invested in Ross and Rachel, for a Joey/Rachel romance to last long-term and the writers couldn’t fully let go of Ross and Rachel, no matter what they did. I’m not sure what the intentions with Rachel and Joey were or if the writers even intended for them to be the real deal and stay together, or if it was supposed to be brief like it was, but it certainly felt like they never fully committed to it.

Again, what bothers me about this is that Rachel and Joey splitting up didn’t really make sense and neither did Ross’ reaction. Of course Ross was going to react strongly to finding out about them, but it really didn’t make sense to have Ross react the way he did unless he still had feelings for Rachel and/or was in love with her, which we were told he didn’t and there seemed to be no indication of anything to the contrary until that point. No matter how long your history is with someone or whether they’re the mother of your child, the fact was that Rachel was his ex, Ross had a girlfriend (Charlie) and as Ross himself pointed out, he and Rachel hadn’t been a couple in 6 years. So it didn’t really make sense for Ross to react that way. He and Rachel were exes, so what? They’d both moved on, Ross with Charlie, and Joey and Rachel deserved a shot. What also didn’t make sense is the way in which Rachel and Joey split up, since the issue they came upon again was completely fixable. A lot of people when transitioning from friends to romantic partners experience initial awkwardness. When Ross and Rachel first tried to have sex, Rachel couldn’t stop laughing, but they persevered because they knew they wanted to be together and it should’ve been the same for Joey and Rachel. They were clearly attracted to each other physically and they wanted to be together, so once they’d pushed through that barrier once, they would’ve been fine. The only reason they split up at that point is because the writers knew they couldn’t make it work after having invested so much time in Ross and Rachel. I really think if the writers and audience weren’t so fixated on Ross and Rachel, Joey and Rachel could’ve gone all the way. I also think if it had been a real life situation and not a show, Joey and Rachel would’ve lasted. There was absolutely no reason they wouldn’t last because they were incredibly compatible. Their relationship ended before it even began, I mean, they really didn’t even give it a chance at all and immediately afterwards it was completely swept under the rug as though it never happened. That’s something that will always bug me and is just proof that the writers wanted to try and erase Joey and Rachel because they wanted Ross and Rachel to be endgame. But the fact remains if they knew they wanted a Ross and Rachel endgame (which they clearly knew very early on) why did they decide to go down the Joey/Rachel route? It didn’t really make sense in that context.

One thing I will say is that despite the seemingly anti-Rosschel sentiment of this, Ross and Rachel’s romantic chemistry always felt stronger than Joey and Rachel’s, and their relationship always felt much more natural. However, I put that down to the actors. I think because Jennifer and David were portraying a romantic relationship from rather early on, they fell into a natural rhythm but Jennifer and Matt were such good friends on and off-screen, that when they had to make that transition to a couple, it didn’t quite click. And I’m pretty sure even Matt and Jennifer themselves protested against them being a couple, claiming it was too weird because they were brother and sister, so clearly their hearts weren’t really in playing that relationship and I think that shows in their performances. So, it’s strange because in terms of writing, I’m all for Joey and Rachel, but in terms of the chemistry and the feeling of the couple, I’m all for Ross and Rachel. I also think that despite the problematic elements of Ross and Rachel’s relationship I mentioned above, they changed and developed and by the time they got back together in season 10 I think they were much more suited and ready for a proper relationship. A big part of the issue with their relationship in the early seasons is that Ross was in a completely different place to Rachel. Even in season 1 Ross is very together - he has an established career as a palaeontologist, he earns a decent wage, he has his own apartment in the city, he’s been married - but Rachel, in comparison, is just starting out in life. In season 1 she completely uproots herself and leaps into a world she’s never been part of, so by the time she and Ross get together she’s still adjusting to that huge change. She hasn’t built a life for herself yet and she hasn’t found what she enjoys or what her path is in life, but Ross is already sure in himself and that’s why Rachel freaks out when he starts talking about having kids and moving to Scarsdale. At that point, Rachel isn’t ready for any of that, she’s still trying to deal with having a part-time job at Central Perk and trying to decide where she goes from there. But by season 10 she’s established herself in an amazing career, she’s a mother and she’s grown so much and she’s finally right there with Ross and ready for all of that. As for Ross, by season 10 he’s realised that Rachel loves him and has chosen him so his insecurities shouldn’t be so much of a problem. So where Ross and Rachel start and where they end up is two vastly different places, and although I don’t like the way the journey was written, they earned that ending.

In comparison, Joey and Rachel just can’t compete with that. As sweet and well-developed as they were, they can’t compete with that magnetic pull between Rachel and Ross that continued for 10 years. Ross and Rachel had simply been built up too much for too long for Rachel and Joey to be able to swoop in at such a late point in the series and be endgame. Perhaps if certain things were different and Rachel hadn’t of had Emma, Rachel and Joey could’ve worked, but Ross and Rachel were too entwined to ever separate and I think if they’d ended up with other people and Rachel had ended up with Joey, somewhere deep down inside they would have always felt a sense of regret and “what if?” and I definitely think that would’ve cast a shadow on Rachel and Joey’s relationship if they’d stayed together.

To conclude this big muddle of a response, I really like Joey and Rachel together and see a lot of potential with them as a couple, but their romantic chemistry was lacking and dare I say it, even felt awkward at times, and they simply couldn’t get to the same place as Ross and Rachel. Ross and Rachel were written as being the love of each other’s lives and despite the messiness their relationship, I strongly believe their fate was sealed in TOW Prom Video and there was no coming back from that.

#answered #my meta #friends meta #anti-rosschel

4 notes · View notes