#we're going back to 2015 folks | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

nerdygaymormon · 1 year

Note

How is it you're able to post things that are contrary to what the church teaches? Aren't you afraid you're wrong? Why do you know better than prophets and apostles?

Growing up I'd been taught the church was right and true and led by Christ, so of course I should trust the morality taught by the church and its leaders. As you put it, why would I think I know any better than the prophets and apostles?

————————————————————-

In 1990, I went to the temple and did the initiatory and endowment ceremonies for the first time. I did not like it! In fact, I was a bit freaked out about it.

Fortunately changes made in 1990, 2005, 2008, 2019 and 2023 have gotten rid of or changed many of the parts that troubled me and made made things better. There's still things that need to improve and I hope that will happen sooner than later.

————————————————————-

In 2015, the LDS Church created a policy that required same-gender couples to go through a disciplinary council, and their children were forbidden from joining the church. President Nelson even declared this to be a revelation from God.

This 2015 policy felt so overwhelmingly wrong to me that I very nearly left the church over it. I was surprised at how many of my church friends said they had no problem with it.

Then in 2019, the policy was rescinded, gay couples are no longer classified as "apostates" and are not required to have a disciplinary council, and their children can become members of the LDS Church.

————————————————————-

The temple and the policy of exclusion both are examples of my moral compass being bothered.

The changes to the temple ceremonies and the rescinding of the 2015 policy helped me see that I don't farm out my morality and choices to the church. If something bothers my moral compass then I need to pay attention to that.

—————————

Sharing with others why some things in the temple or the 2015 policy were unsettling to me often got the response that I need to pray and work hard to gain an understanding so that I can accept it, that I need to learn to let go of my limited perception in order to bend to God's will and teachings.

Except they were wrong! Many of those things changed.

————————————————————-

I don't speak for the LDS Church, I have no institutional authority within the church. I only speak for myself, and that's what I do on this blog. I don't have the power to fix or change the church, but I can be true to my sense of right and wrong.

————————————————————-

If there's something we're unsure of, I wish as a church community that we would err on the side of love instead of on the side of boundaries to exclude. Our own church history is one of the boundaries expanding to include folks who once were forbidden. How much better if we'd started off more expansive?

————————————————————-

There's too many examples in history of people "following orders," or "doing as they were told" as they acted out violence and injustice against others. By giving their moral authority to others and to institutions, these individuals did things which later they looked back on with regret. Are they accountable for their actions?

Am I accountable for my actions? I believe I am and thus have to live in a way that works for me and my conscience. If something bothers me, I can give voice to that on my blog.

————————————————————-

Some of the boldest things taught in the LDS Church are these:

Do what is right, let the consequence follow - As Martin Luther King, Jr. put it "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." It may take time for changes to happen, but how much better if we're on the side of love, fairness & justice now and the world has to catch up to us?

All truth may be circumscribed into one great whole - truth doesn't conflict with truth. As science advances and we gain more knowledge, if it conflicts with what's being taught at church, there's a conflict that needs to be addressed and something needs to be adjusted

To God, all people are equal - God teaches this many times, but do we really believe this? Would it change how we treat others or the limits we put on how people can participate?

#queerstake #long post

35 notes · View notes

lovesongbracket · 1 year

Text

Reminder: Vote based on the song, not the artist or specific recording! The tracks referenced are the original artist, aside from a few rare cases where a cover is the most widely known.

Lyrics, videos, info, and notable covers under the cut. (Spotify playlist available in pinned post)

Butch 4 Butch

Written By: Rio Romeo

Artist: Rio Romeo

Released: 2020

Butch 4 Butch is a single by Rio Romeo, about their experience as a butch lesbian. It was written for their partner when they first started talking.

[Verse 1] My sweetheart's piano is rat filled And mine is infested with bugs The music we make is unnatural But it sounds just like falling in love [Chorus] This butch, this butch, this butch, this butch She makes me go weak in the knees But I can’t let her see me swoon Or else she may think I am weak [Verse 2] Tomorrow I'll dig through the garbage And we'll fish out all kinds of neat trash And when we go back to my apartment She’ll probably kick my fucking ass [Chorus] This butch, this butch, this butch, this butch She makes me go weak in the knees But I can't let her see me swoon Or else she will think I am weak [Bridge] I sing hеr songs in my garage And make her fall in lovе with me And once we're done, the sun is gone We both just sit so nervously I talk real slow and speak real low Hoping she'll lean into me And we just laugh 'cause what was that? We can't take ourselves seriously [Chorus] This butch, this butch, this butch, this butch She makes me go weak in the knees But I can't let her see me swoon Or else she will think I am sweet

youtube

Work Song

Written By: Hozier

Artist: Hozier

Released: 2014

Alternate version included: Live in America, 2015

This is the only song on Hozier’s self titled album to have a title that is not entirely composed of lyrics from the song. The song is about the love of a worker’s life lending him strength during a hard day’s work. The song encompasses indie with strong influences on folk, blues and negro spirituals.

[Verse 1] Boys, workin' on empty Is that the kinda way to face the burning heat? I just think about my baby I'm so full of love I could barely eat There's nothin' sweeter than my baby I'd never want once from the cherry tree 'Cause my baby's sweet as can be She give me toothaches just from kissin' me [Chorus] When my time comes around Lay me gently in the cold dark earth No grave can hold my body down I'll crawl home to her [Verse 2] Boys, when my baby found me I was three days on a drunken sin I woke with her walls around me Nothin' in her room but an empty crib And I was burning up a fever I didn't care much how long I lived But I swear, I thought I dreamed her She never asked me once about the wrong I did [Chorus] When my time comes around Lay me gently in the cold dark earth No grave can hold my body down I'll crawl home to her When my time comes around Lay me gently in the cold dark earth No grave can hold my body down I'll crawl home to her [Bridge] My babe would never fret none About what my hands and my body done If the Lord don't forgive me I'd still have my baby and my babe would have me When I was kissin' on my baby And she'd put her love down, soft and sweet In the low lamplight, I was free Heaven and hell were words to me [Chorus] When my time comes around Lay me gently in the cold dark earth No grave can hold my body down I'll crawl home to her When my time comes around Lay me gently in the cold dark earth No grave can hold my body down I'll crawl home to her

youtube

#rio romeo #butch 4 butch #hozier #work song #polls #poll tournament #poll bracket #tournament #bracket #lovesongbracket #round1

18 notes · View notes

dalesramblingsblog · 4 months

Text

A More Personal Sort of Ramble

Hi. Let's talk about 2023.

It has, actually, been a while since I sat down and did one of these types of posts, so forgive me if I'm a little rusty. Or, if we're being honest with ourselves, Twitter threads, since it's actually been so long that it dates back to the time my main online presence outside of the WordPress blog was actually on that godforsaken cesspit of a website.

(Now, of course, we have upgraded to *this* godforsaken cesspit of a website.)

So this year has been... a lot. For once in my life, however, I don't actually mean "a lot" in a negative sense. On the contrary, this year has, to put it bluntly, probably seen me at the happiest I have been since my depression really started to kick in in earnest back in 2015.

There are the obvious indicators we can point to, namely the fucking insane traction that the blog has gained. A little under 2400 views in a year may be peanuts to some, but when you consider that that's very nearly equal to the amount of views my site gained across the entirety of 2017 to 2022, it's a level of growth that I couldn't be happier with.

And part of that growth has been the migration to Tumblr, which went far better than I could have ever hoped for. In all honesty I probably should have come here sooner, given the generally more blogging-supportive ecosphere that exists, but it's better late than never I suppose.

More importantly, though, I wrote a lot, and was actually very happy with much of what I wrote. 2023 has been the first year where I can honestly say that I didn't immediately feel disdain for a post upon hitting Publish, and I can't overstate how huge that feels.

And really, that's what this year has been about. I am not in the habit of airing every part of my personal life these days in the way I did back in 2020 or 2021, for the simple reason that my audience has expanded well beyond the few devoted online acquaintances I had back in those days. Suffice it to say, however, that I am doing very well, and I am happy in my own skin for the first time in a very long while. I have dreams for the future that can actually qualify as, well, dreams, as opposed to general dread-filled nightmares and apocalyptic visions that'd make Frank Black blush.

And through it all, there's been my audience, who I genuinely consider to be one of the best small corners of the Internet. I'd like to take credit for the vibes not being abysmal, but the truth is... the bulk of that credit belongs with you folks, not me. So thank you, genuinely.

As with most of these longposts, there's the self-serving Ko-fi plug to get through; it can be found here, as always. Even if my hope of actually making some money from these scribblings of mine remains a far-flung dream, however, rest assured that I'm not going to stop any time soon. We might have finished the bulk of the Virgin stuff, but we're only just beginning to wade into the BBC Books years, and I hope you'll stick around with me to see what the future holds for Dale's Ramblings in 2024 and beyond.

Thank you all for being simply incredible. You're all damn fine people, and I'm forever glad to have your readership.

#dale's ramblings

4 notes · View notes

olderthannetfic · 2 years

Note

This is going to be badly worded, sorry, I'll try my best to minimize it. This also isn't directed at you, to be clear, it's at the askers in general, mostly one specific ask from a while back..

So a lot of the latest anons that have been sent to you about aces (and aroaces) have been....slightly on the edge of sketchy, imo? There's one that really seemed like a thinly veilded "but are you sure??? The ace label seems like just a way to say you're special and not actually examine yourself. Also a lot of people cling to the label and seem to refuse to want to change it when I think they should and I think that's Bad."

I really wanted to address that one particular specifically, because out of the various parts of the queer communities I've participated in, ace folk have been the most accepting about labels changing. If I were to say, "I don't think I'm actually ace" in an ace-specific space, I would expect a "yay! I'm glad you figured it out! You're always welcome here still and we're glad you figured/are figuring yourself out!". I've come out as ace to a queer group, in contrast, and was summarily excluded from that on the basis of being ace (and arospec), and then included on my transness. I largley only participated in ace specic communities for the first several years of knowing I was queer, because it was where I was safest. And I learned most, if not all, of how to treat people, about other queer people, how to figure things out, from the ace community. Anon can calm down about worrying about "feeling the need to stick to a label rigidly", we had that figured out and discussed back in 2015/2016. I wouldn't have discovered I was arospec and trans without the acceptance of exploration in those communities. The ace community is where I learned that changing your label is okay if you feel like it fits. If it brings you comfort for a short while, that's great, and we're happy for you, but we also recognize that it can be impermenant and it's not necessarily rigid.

(And after 7 years of keeping the "maybe I'm not actually ace" open from self doubt (and a lot of the atttude I'm wary of) and having no change, I think I'm pretty solidly ace. I'm in my 20s and dating and I have yet to look at someone and have Feelings and Sensations crop up in that regard. People are pretty! But they don't make me hot and bothered.)

And yeah, I guess it does bother me to see people still feeling bold enough to throw a "well, are you Sure" out there, because that was (and is) really frickin' common to hear when I was first exploring the possibility I was ace. That attitude has lead to a lot of aces participating in acts that they knew they wouldn't like, necessarily, but felt obligated to "at least try". Not in the unconsenting sense, mind, but the feeling pressured by societal expectations to have experience to back the dislike up.

In all honesty, I'm just really fucking tired of seeing my identity debated like it's even supposed to be on the table. In *most* queer spaces (I recognize it's not all and that there are exceptions), if someone declared they're a more common identity in the queer community, there wouldn't be a "well, are you Sure you're x." Because that's Not a fucking question we ask, mostly, because we have heard it way too many fucking times from others. It grates on us, it pisses us off, because why do people assume we haven't spent literal years agonizing over this very question? So why is it acceptable to toss that at ace or aro or aroace people???

Personally, I'm extremely glad that it is Easier to find info on being ace now. Maybe I wouldnt have spent a year being half scared of the truth of it, and maybe I'd feel less defensive of my community if we hadn't had to learn how to prove ourselves to queer people who were supposed to understand more easily than not queer people.

Honestly, I'm just.... tired of having to prove why we deserve to exist to people, and I'm even more tired of having to keep the knowledge of how false concern can appear. Anon may have been acting in good faith, may have not had any knowledge of what the ace community dealt with, at all, but I can't risk it when we still have people trying to kick us out of some of the only places filled with people we have to go to - fellow queer folk.

TBH, I'm not at all surprised that queer spaces are often exclusionary. Growing up in the 90s, the queer spaces I saw around made no mention of asexuality at all ever.

48 notes · View notes

pelipper · 10 months

Text

Happy Disability Pride Month! ❤️💛🤍💙💚

Good afternoon, my fellow chronic illness warriors! Your local ostomate is here to share a little synopsis of her disability journey. It's time to buckle up because we're about to get a little personal on main. My hope is that through sharing my story, it will let you know that you're not alone in this struggle.

I was diagnosed with Crohn's Disease back in 2015, right before my 23rd birthday. I went from living as a relatively healthy college student to a chronically ill disabled gal who spent most of her days in the doctor's office. I've spent weeks of my life in the hospital since then and have had more scopes than I can count over the years. I had an ileostomy earlier this year, which was my first surgery for Crohn's. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't scared out of my mind when my surgeon brought up the possibility of having a stoma.

My ileostomy journey began when I ended up in the emergency room earlier this March with a bowel obstruction. I spent a week in the hospital and I was discharged with a PICC Line in my arm, unable to eat solid foods until my bowel resection. The NG tube was definitely the worst part of my hospital stay, so there was no way I was risking another obstruction before my surgery. Thankfully, I was able to make it to May without needing to go back to the ER.

My surgery went well, and I'm set to have my ileostomy reversed at the end of summer. It's been a weird, bumpy road filled with tons of potholes these past few years, but when you're chronically ill you are used to every day presenting you with new challenges.

I decided to include a purple background on the graphic I whipped up for this post to signify those who are living with autoimmune diseases. 💜

Also, for Disability Pride Month this year I wanted to ask anyone who may be new to this site and to those who may be returning after hiatus to please use Alt Text on your images whenever you post them! If you click the three dots on any image you upload, you'll be greeted with a drop-down list. If you click on "Update Image Description" you can write up a short blurb describing the image you just posted. This helps makes Tumblr more accessible to folks using screen readers.

I'm legally blind, but thankfully I can see well enough to read text on a computer screen thanks to my glasses. Some people aren't able to enjoy posts without a screen reader, so if you do anything for Disability Pride this July, please start adding Alt Text to your posts!

With your help we can make this little slice of the internet that much more accessible for our fellow Tumblrites!

#disability pride month #disability #crohn's disease #crohnsandcolitis #ostomate #ostomy #my edits

6 notes · View notes

signalwatch · 4 months

Text

So, here we are in 2023.

In addition to Direct to Streaming Christmas movies, I've been throwing on the Hallmark Channel since way back in November.

Apparently what both Jamie and I need this year is to just zone out for 90 minutes from time to time, and to be able to talk over a movie featuring characters we don't really care about a whole lot. And that's absolutely the intention of a Hallmark Christmas movie - a minimum of drama and plot, reasonably good looking people predictably falling for each other, and a happy ending that guarantees these people will now be as boring as you are, because the events of this movie was the biggest thing to ever happen to them.

I copped to watching the film in 2015 and wrote my treatise on Hallmark movies back in 2017, and I think it shocked a lot of you to find out how very, very much I know about these movies that so many so casually get sniffy about (with good reason, tbh). But a lot has occurred since 2017. We're in the dark future of 2023 now, and the world is not what it was.

A very, very big part of me would love to know how Hallmark works and how these movies come into being. I have some theories based loosely on what I knew from a friend's mom who wrote Harlequin Romance novels, but there's zero confirmation on any of this. I'd just be guessing.

But it's not a mistake that these movies have similarities that go beyond "girl with a Christmas-themed name goes to small town, meets guy in plaid". It's an endless sea of similarities, and there's practically nothing else like it in media - like, they get to do drafts and check stats to see what works in real time as they release 85 new movies each year (this is barely hyperbole - there are 42 in 2023). But I strongly suspect Hallmark is cooking up packages they send out to potential writers with a list of things that their movie should contain, and then they make most of those scripts. Again - I don't know this, but otherwise the similarities would only happen because of Holiday Magic.

Over the years the movies have, in fact, changed as Hallmark has tweaked their formula. Folks who don't actually watch Hallmark Christmas movies assume they're still making the same plot where a young woman realizes she just fell in love with single Santa, but, ho ho NO! That hasn't been a thing for years. They still do royalty, but they tweak it quite a bit. And I am pretty sure I haven't seen a single movie this year about a young woman returning home or stuck in a small town who then meets a kind-of-handsome man in plaid who makes her want to give up her big city dreams (although I've seen men coming to a small town). And not a baking contest in sight.

In the mid-2010's, Hallmark decided quantities of movies was better than quality of movies. And that had multiple effects that carry through to today.

1) The era of FX is done. That means no more movies where they fly to the North Pole or an elf magically decorates a tree. So, no more stories with magical beings, because it means less movies if the budget went to CGI Northpoles and extras in elf costumes. And fewer movies means people tune away faster.

2) So long, star power. Which, honestly, is kind of a bummer. A *huge* draw for me initially was seeing "oh, what's that actress I recognize from that show from 10 years ago doing in this? What's her deal?" But it turns out it's way cheaper to go hire a random Canadian actress than get, say, Alicia Witt. With Canadian local talent, you can make two or three movies, and people will just leave their TV on because they haven't seen that movie yet, but they've seen the Alicia Witt movie and might click away.

Now, people really follow these movies, and that means that the fans have sort of made these Canadian stars into their own niche type of celebrity. They follow their favorite Hallmark stars, because of course they do. Heck, I have a couple. And Hallmark is always trying new people on to see who is going to land.

And, you can go see these actors at a Con. Because of course you can.*

Like I say - Over the years, you could guess there were themes handed down from Hallmark central. "This year we're doing movies about soldiers and/ or veterans", etc... It was always a trick to spot what the new thing was that year. I suspect that they can have, say, Lacey Chabert show up and read five or fifteen scripts with essentially the same premise, pick the one she wants to do, and the rest get handed out to the Hallmark B and C-List stars, and they're going to make the movies, anyway - just with a lower budget.

Themes this year got a little... hard to pin down. In 2023, I think they ran multiple new ideas.

1) Drama. These movies have always had basically the same source of drama - someone misunderstands someone else, and this leads to a downturn in the blossoming romance, but then they figure out it's a silly miscommunication, and head right back to the absolute certainty these people are absolutely going to end Christmas Eve in the sack.

But not so this year. This year, they introduced new plots that were - weirdly stressful. Which is not exactly why I thought these movies existed. Characters were legit stressed out, not Hallmark stressed out - where they would just talk through the issue at hand while having coffee with a pal and walking down a picturesque street. Now it's people mad at parents, not sure who their parents are, and I think I saw two movies where the house construction wasn't done for Christmas.

Look, Hallmark, I don't need reality butting in. Don't get cute now. I want to have these movies on as wallpaper at worst and entertainment I can forget about fifteen minutes later as my best scenario. I do not want to deal with generational trauma or people dealing with the stuff I'm avoiding by watching your sorta-pretty-people handing each other coffee.

2) International travel. Uh, look. This was mostly Americans going to Europe and exploring their European roots, which is something Americans think they should do, but, honestly - we shouldn't. Nothing sucks more than a 10th generation American deciding they need to talk about how "German" they are or whatever. You're from Cleveland, it's fine.

And, look, I'm not sure in 2023 that what you need to be doing is getting people really excited about and romanticizing their European heritage. Like - there's a name for that, Hallmark.

That said, it's wild to see Lacey Chabert and Scott Wolf in Ireland doubling for Scotland, claiming a Duke-dom. Amazing. No notes.

3) Why not a mystery? Well, Hallmark has been defying Lifetime's belief that all people want is stories of domestic situations gone bad and traded that for low-stakes "cozy mysteries" for years. Now their Christmas movies and mystery movies met under the mistletoe and had a baby. A kind of bland, boring baby.

Look, I get that they have a whole channel called "Hallmark Mysteries". I guess it was inevitable someone would decide we'd need to crack the case of the reindeer ornament or whatever, but this is putting a hat on a hat.

A few years back something shifted down Hallmark way. And it kind of needed to. Audiences were noticing these movies were maybe a little too lily-white, which is just not how America works, so the movies began to feel... weird. Why *not* cast more people of more diverse backgrounds? And not just as background characters in the inevitable Christmas Eve singalong sequence that wraps the movie?

I'd say Hallmark has stepped up their game. As always, it's imperfect. But it's not the WASPy world it was back in 2017. There are movies branded "Mahogany" made by and for Black audiences (Mahogany is also a card line from Hallmark). Queer characters get larger parts and are not just coded and a component of the Big City lifestyle that must be abandoned. There are Hanukkah movies. I will now stop listing non-straight, White things one can be, but Hallmark has found diversity, and the creeping feeling maybe you're supporting White Nationalism by watching these movies is reduced a bit.

The move to diversify, however, was not going to work for the former head of Hallmark programming and former Hallmark darling Candace Cameron Bure, who is not as insane as her brother, but who went to start her own TV network just so she could keep making movies just about straight, white people. Which is absolutely telling on yourself, but ok.

So, Bure is now at Great American Family, a network I cannot get at my house and have not missed. But she also landed several of her fellow Hallmark darlings, from Chad Michael Murray to Danica McKellar. So that's where they went.

Some stuff we noticed this year:

The international movies were kind of weird, with the movies filmed in Europe but starring people of the wrong nationality as the people from that country. Irish people as both Scottish and Norwegian people. Just... make an Irish movie.

They kept casting people literally decades too young for the roles they were playing. It was *weird*.

The male talent is now almost exclusively from a very small Hallmark stable, and I have several questions about why I have no facial recognition with any of these guys, learning they've been in 10 of these that I've seen when I look at IMDB

I saw like one thing baked all year, and it was in Norway

The writing is trying to be quirky, and I'm not sure the directors and editors have caught up. It feels almost like the actors have gone off script sometimes or an idea isn't landing because the film just doesn't want to deal with, like "oh, isn't this weird ornament funny?" and we keep going back to it, and... it's not funny?

I couldn't tell you which movies Jamie and I have watched so far - it's a blur. I've probably seen... at least 12 or 15 in part, and that included probably 7 from start to finish. We watched

the oddly snowless Norwegian movie

the one where Lacey Chabert goes to Ireland Scotland

a movie where Kimberley Sustad wears an elephant necklace

one where Lacey Chabert lives in the worst neighborhood imaginable where one is forced to love Christmas

One where Autumn Reeser keeps coming back to a tree lot, thirsty for the tree guy

One where some dumb kid goes off in a boat on the ocean by himself at night on Christmas and kind of ruins the day for everyone

And a bunch I've already forgotten

And many, many parts of movies

Anyway, it's a weird period of transition. I don't blame Hallmark for trying new things. Incremental novelty is going to be the thing that keeps people coming back.

I know it's probably a little mysterious as to why I'm back watching these movies. Again. But at this point I'm just watching to see, year-over-year, what they're going to do next. I guess on some level I enjoy also having something on in which I have no real investment and nothing is asked of me as a viewer, which is what I think a lot of people watch reality TV for. And it's a sort of cultural study at this point.

Part of me will also admit - at the end of the year, I just don't want to deal with, and do not have time for, anything super serious. Which is why I resent very important Oscar movies getting dumped in December. I have neither time nor inclination. But, sure, I'll watch some would-be country music star discover found family in a town with a name like "Festive Corners" or whatever. That sounds about like what I've got mental bandwidth for til January 2nd.

I don't really have access to Lifetime or other channels doing this type of movie, so y'all will need to report in if there's anything to discuss.

*if Hallmark comes across this post and wants to sponsor my trip to 2024 ChristmasCon for some in-depth coverage, I am in

#hallmark christmas movies #hallmark movies #hallmark

0 notes

whereareroo · 10 months

Text

8 LONG YEARS

WF THOUGHTS (6/15/23).

You're probably reading this on June 16, 2023.

Let's play a memory game. Where were you on June 16, 2015? Are you stumped?

I'll give you a big hint. That's the day that Trump descended down the golden escalator at Trump Tower to announce that he was running for president.

Yes, it's been eight long years! America became a different place on June 16, 2015. It's never been the same.

A small slice of the country believes that America has been a better place since Trumpism was born on June 16, 2015. A somewhat bigger slice believes that the birth of Trumpism severely damaged the country. The folks in the middle--the bulk of Americans--are just sick of the neverending noise and bickering.

Before Trump, everything was different. In the old days, all talk about a presidential election ended within a few days of the election. Everybody went back to everyday life. Presidential politics was forgotten until a few months before the next presidential election. Between presidential elections, there was a long period of peace and quiet. Life was good.

Trump's 2016 campaign was incendiary, his election was surprising and unsettling, and his term in office was a steady stream of controversies. Since 2016, in addition to the upheaval caused by the Covid pandemic and the war in Ukraine, we have experienced the fallout from the Access Hollywood tape, the criminal convictions of at least eight people from Trump's political network or the Trump Organization, Trump's first impeachment by the House, Trump's refusal to accept his electoral defeat in 2020, Trump's second impeachment by the House, the January 6th attack on the Capitol by Trump supporters, a civil verdict against Trump for defamation and sexual assault, Trump's indictment in NYC for falsifying his business records related to the infamous hush money payments, Trump's decision to run again in 2024, and now Trump's indictment for 37 felonies related to his mishandling of classified documents. In other words, the noise has been constant since June 16, 2015. It has never stopped. There have been no peaceful moments. Whether they admit it or not, every American has been adversely affected by the nonstop focus on presidential politics. It's impossible to avoid the noise.

We're all suffering from a mild version of post-traumatic stress disorder. The problem is that the stress isn't going away. It's always there and, one way or another, Trump put us on this path.

Now let me give you the really bad news. The situation is never going to improve. After eight years, nonstop political warfare has become the "new normal" in America. The time between one presidential campaign and the next has been reduced to zero. On his very first day in office, Trump filed the legal paperwork to start his 2020 campaign! The campaigns, and the related political attacks, never end.

The constant political warfare has given rise to extreme political polarization. Every politician is constantly fighting for media attention. They've learned that promoting extreme positions is the easiest way to get attention. If you're a moderate, or if you believe in compromise, it's impossible to get attention. It's a sad situation.

Don't you wish that we could jump into a time machine and get back to June 15, 2015? I do. We can't. The future is bleak. Be prepared. Do your best to ignore the noise. Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe we'll be in a better place by June 16, 2031.

0 notes

ferrousseat · 10 months

Text

Andrew Tate BBC interview (pt 1?)

Andrew Tate fans have been telling everyone to see the full BBC interview, so I'm trying to transcribe it so you can without giving him extra views

except transcription takes forever when you're a perfectionist especially a perfectionist with an offline life, so I probably won't actually finish until long after the investigation is complete.

BBC: We are doing an interview with you because you're facing some very serious allegations-

AT: Correct

BBC: -rape, human trafficking-

AT: Yep

BBC: -and also because there's a great deal of concern about the things you say and the impacts that they have on young people or women

AT: I don't think the concern's about the things I say, I think the concern is for the level of influence I have and the reach I have. I would argue that a lot of the things that are already out there inside of the "legacy media", "the matrix" as a whole are far more damaging than the things I say

Those who don't know Tate probably will find his word choice odd without not thinking much into it. His followers are going to see this as a cleverly subtle callout, possibly attributing this to a greater plan to use the interview as bait to trap the BBC into proving whatever claims Tate has made about the media, while everyone else will see this statement as a deflective tu quoque.

From this, he's already setting a combative tone, which also helps frame this for his followers as a debate where the interviewer needs to score points to win, not an interview where Tate needs to answer questions.

BBC: Concern about the influence you have being a harmful influence, but let's start with the allegation

Here Williamson acknowledges his initial objection but redirects him back to the allegations.

AT: Not necessarily a harmful influence, the fact that I have, I am massively influential over the youth, and I understand that, but it's my influence as a whole which people are afraid of, not necessarily the things I've said.

He completely ignores the allegations and emphasizes his influence, claiming that it extends beyond youth and is powerful enough to cause fear. I would speculate that he's trying to demonstrate the whole capable-of-violence thing and assert dominance or something. To his community, this is a flex. To regular folks, inspiring misogynistic harassment and violence is not a flex, it's incriminating.

Now Williamson starts to use prompts to get him back on topic.

BBC: Let's start with the allegations. Have you raped anybody?

AT: Absolutely not.

BBC: Have you trafficked anybody?

AT: Absolutely not.

BBC: Exploited any women-

AT: Absolutely not

BBC: -for money?

BBC: But you HAVE admitted using emotional manipulation to get women to work in the webcam industry for you.

AT: No.

Archived copy of his website

AT: Firstly, let's- let's begin at the- Let's start at the beginning. I'm facing charges—the one- the first one you mentioned, the rape one's already thrown out by a judge because of no evidence.

The closest I could get were allegations from 2015 that blame police for mishandling the investigation resulting in the failure to gather sufficient for a case. There's no mention of the case making it far enough into the court process for a judge to throw it out, only that the investigation was delayed and abandoned. This doesn't prove his innocence. Mishandling of rape investigations is pretty common.

AT: Secondly, it's very difficult for me to sit here in a very frank and honest conversation with you while we're in the territory of Romania about a legal case that's going on within Romania. I have to protect myself. I've agreed to do an interview with you, and I want to be as honest with you as possible, but I can't incriminate myself in any way, I have to be very careful what I talk about.

BBC: There are no charges yet

AT: Correct, there are no charges

BBC: A judge has said-

AT: There are no charges

BBC: -that more evidence m(?)-

At: and I've- and I've agreed to speak to you, but I have to be as honest and frank as I can while also protecting myself, AND following my legal counsel.

BBC: So let's talk about what you've said yourself, then. You have said, on the website for your ORIGINAL website for the Hustlers University, that you emotionally manipulated women to fall in love with you, so that you could get them working in the sex industry for your financial gain.

Reminder, archived copy linked above.

AT: As I said, I have to be very careful what I say, but let's put it this way: no women are coming out against me and accusing me of doing it.

BBC: Yes they are,

AT: No they're not,

BBC: Yes they are,

AT: No they're not. Who?

BBC is likely referring to the victims identified by anti-organized crime agency DIICOT.

BBC: This testimony from the current investigation-

AT: The current investigation which I cannot discuss

BBC: -there are other women (?)-

AT: which I know intimately and you don't, I can tell you right now that the la- the women who are in this case file, there are two American women who have been caught already admitting they're lying, and then nobody else is accusing me of anything.

BBC: To begin with, it's very common in cases like this that the alleged victims do not always see themselves as victims.

Referring to Beatrice and Iasmina, who also bear tattoos declaring themselves the property of Tate. BBC could've clarified that declaring yourself not a victim doesn't count because there's Stockholm syndrome / destructive cultism disorder, there's brainwashing, but the most common issue is that most people have a narrow idea of victims as weak, passive people, and have difficulty thinking of the survivor who fought back or continued to function "normally" (on trauma drive) as a victim. The cognitive dissonance between victimhood and one's pride and self-image can cause the brain to reject the victimhood and fill in the gaps with concepts like "I wanted this": this does not erase the trauma, however, because the body keeps the score.

The prosecutors seem to have reason to believe that Tate's messages, even ones exchanged with Beatrice and Iasmina, will speak for themselves so take that how you will, too.

AT /s: Well that's very interesting. It's actually going to be interesting, because if I was… a "matrix"-controlled… organization, my goal was to slander somebody and try to destroy their name, you're telling me that they've chosen a crime which 1) is heinous, of course, because it damages the person's credibility and 2) you're saying that even if everyone else involved, if you have five people and everyone's sitting there saying, "No, nobody's hurt anybody, we like Andrew, we've all worked together, we're friends, etc."-

Only two victims have spoken positively about Tate. I want to note that in the Larry Ray case, the deprogramming of the victims didn't happen overnight, so I don't think he's saying anything particularly gamechanging here.

This is his second attempt at the tu quoque to insinuate the BBC is out to get him. Your impression relies entirely on whether you believe he poses a threat to the news industry. It should be noted that broadcasting opinions in response to news is not the same thing as reporting news.

This is also the point when Williamson starts to interrupt him back (I know she has ignored his interruptions to continue to finish speaking but I don't consider that interrupting). I'm guessing this, and the yes-no-yes-no exchange, is what his fans wanted people to see when they were chanting, "watch the full video," in the comments. I would concede that he got a rise out of her, but also… he didn't exasperate her by being the good guy here exactly.

AT: I'm- No-

BBC: That's not what anybody's saying

BBC: Let me read you some of the testimony from the current investigation (?)-

AT: Can I finish my- Can I finish, please?

BBC: -one of the witnesses said-

AT: Can- Can I finish, please?

BBC: You're not answering the questions I've asked you. You're not answering the question-

AT: I am answering the question. You're saying-

BBC: Let me read you the testimony of one of the witnesses

AT: Y- You're saying- You're saying the people who are involved in this, even if they say they're not victims, that they're still gonna try and attack me, pretending they're victims.

BBC: They are treated as victims by the case, that's ongoing, (let?) and not all of them are saying that. One of the witnesses says-

BBC staff: Lucy, we can't discuss that

AT: We can't- We can't go into the case. The case is open and active.

BBC: Well let's just be clear that not ALL of the witnesses in the case are behaving in the way you describe and even those that are, it doesn't bar them from being treated as victims by the prosecution, by the case.

AT: We have an open criminal investigation. I am absolutely utterly sure I'll be found innocent. I know the case better than you. I know intimately and you don't. I have seen all the criminal files and the evidence against me and you haven't. I know the truth of what happened and you don't. And I'm telling you absolutely and utterly I've never hurt anybody, that the case that's been put against me is completely and utterly fabricated. And I'm never gonna be found guilty of anything. And it's very difficult for me to answer your in-depth questions because we're sitting here inside of the territory of Romania, I'm beholden to the Romanian legal system, and I'm not going to incriminate myself because you're trying to probe me. You are wrong, and we're going to have to accept that for now and ask- and talk about something else.

Here he's claiming innocence but also saying that he has to claim innocence. People may interpret this either, "he must be innocent if he's willing to say all that,' or, "liars usually talk too much or too little and he's talking a lot," it's just how it is.

Either way, the source is basically Trust Me Bro. Journalists are held to certain ethical standards and legally liable for disinformation, and their only iron in this fire is public interest and safety. Tate is under house arrest and is legally liable for self-incrimination. He has to lie if the truth makes him look bad. So we're back to square 1.

BBC: Let me read you then what YOU have said about-

AT: Sure

BBC: -what you have done.

AT: Sure

BBC: YOU have said, "My job was to meet a girl, go on a few dates, sleep with her, get her to fall in love with me to the point where she'd do anything I say, and then get her on webcam, so we could become rich together."

AT: I don't think that's what I personally said, I think that's -

BBC: That's exactly what you said (?)

AT: No, that's- that's- that's- No, I've never said that, that's something that you FOUND on the internet, doesn't mean I've said it, and-

Well, even if someone else physically typed up the words on the archived snapshot of his website, he OK'd it, for one.

I don't have time to comb through podcasts, Reddit, TikTok, YouTube, etc. looking for what he may or may not have deleted that can link him physically to saying these things with his own mouth, but for me, the website's enough to make it believable that video/audio proof exists or existed.

BBC: (?)

AT: -AND AND again, once again, if any female on the planet has a problem with me, I strongly recommend her to go to the police and try and pursue me for criminal charges. It's actually very interesting that me, one of the most famous people in the world who's been vilified by the "legacy media" in places all over the internet, while everyone's attacked me from every single angle, while federal agencies from multiple countries have called over 2000 women who know me, we stand here with zero new accusations simce my arrest, ZERO. If you took any famous person, any man of substantial wealth, and you call 2000 women who knew him, they'd find an ex-girlfriend who's upset, somebody wants money who's upset, they called 2000 people who knew me and could not find a single woman to make a new complaint-

Well, these are "2000" people outside of the 2 British women and up to 4 victims that aren't B&I. So "upset girlfriends" have already turned up. Also, narcissists are on good behavior with the majority of people in their network and direct their abuse to select scapegoats under their control (or that they're trying to control), so him not sexually abusing other women and harassing women no more than is socially acceptable doesn't mean anything.

BBC: You're being (?)

AT: The only com- The only complaints they have against me are the initial complaints, which we can prove are lies, AND that's where it stands. So I d- I'm not gonna sit here and allow you to pretend that I'm some kind of evil predator when actually I'd argue the fact- I'D ARGUE the fact that people who've been investigated to the level I've been investigated to, if you take the average man on the street and investigate his entire life for 14 months, call everyone who's ever known him, and vilify him in the media, and encourage people to come forward for money, and you try to contact every ex-girlfriend-

BBC: You think somebody-

AT: -he has ever had

BBC: would come forward and accuse those people of rape, and accuse those people-

AT: I THINK THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE-

BBC: -of manipulation

AT: I THINK THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE FLAK THAN I'VE GOT, I'm actually such a nice person that I've never-

Aand now he's attacking the interviewer while claiming to be nicer than her. I don't think they even included this clip on BBC, at least not on the tiktok version.

BBC: The BBC has spoken to somebody-

AT: -had anyone come at me

BBC: -since your arrest, who says exactly those things, that with you, it's all manipulation, there's an ulterior motive-

AT: Is this Sophie?

BBC: -to everything you've done-

AT /s: Is this "Sophie"? [air quotes]-

BBC: [nodding]

AT /s: -Oh, Sophie, the- the-the fake name, no face, no (?)…

BBC: "I was so intent on wanting-"

AT /s: -STORY that was invented

BBC: "-to please him and wanting him to be happy, that I was just kind of, 'Yeah, OK, do whatever you want.'"

AT: And what is she accus-

BBC: -(?)

AT /s: Has she accused me of a crime, this imaginary Sophie?

BBC: She's making the point that there is-

AT: Has she accused me of a crime.

BBC: -emotional or psychological manipulation-

AT: I'VE ASKED YOU A QUESTION, and I've allowed you into my house-

BBC: I'm asking YOU a question.

AT: CORRECT, BUT YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS HERE. Because I've allowed you into my house-

BBC: I'm asking you the questions.

AT: Correctly, and I'm telling you.

BBC: You get to decide the answers.

AT: No! We are equal here, I've allowed you into my house. You don't come here with a position of authority. I'm doing you the favor as "legacy media" giving you relevance by speaking to you.

Tate is under house arrest. This is an interview of Tate by BBC, so it would be a bit irregular for Tate to be asking questions, especially, as he claimed, he is more intimate with the details of the case. Interviewers don't usually provide information that's new to the interviewee. When they state information or claims, it's to give the interviewee a heads up so they know exactly what is being asked, and to provide the listeners with some context. The interviewer isn't even saying that the statement is true or not (even if it is true), they're just saying, "this is the assertion/situation that my question pertains to, that I will be asking you to address." So it's asinine to try to reverse interrogate a news reporter who's just conducting an interview or accuse them of bossing you around. This is standard operating procedure for interviews.

A couple more thoughts.

Tate keeps talking about "allowing" to posture for his followers. The "relevance" line is part of this, too. I don't think I need to explain why it's delusional to claim that the BBC needs Tate for relevance. Personally, before this week, I only heard him name-dropped once in a blue moon, even while being fairly active on social media. I think I even had him confused with Joe Rogan before this week. But the BBC, I know. They're considered a fairly factual source of current news and are also known for educational documentaries. The comparison is not even close.

They say that to the privileged, equality seems like oppression. A woman telling him how interviews are supposed to work is "bossing him around".

AT: And I'm telling you now. This Sophie which the BBC has invented, which has no face of, nobody knows who she is-

BBC: The BBC did not invent

AT /s: Of course not. And she, because you never invent anything, and she is not fi- she has not filed criminal charges against me, what are we talking about here?

It shouldn't need to be said that anonymization is standard practice with victims of violent crime, especially female victims who traditionally get criticized more heavily than the perpetrators.

I'm actually super tired and have a number of more productive things that need doing so I'm not sure I'll finish transcribing, if I do it will probably be a whiiiile and the case may be long resolved by then LOL but you know what, I tried.

I think I missed a line during one of the parts where they were overlapping each other, where there's 2 BBC lines in a row, but I don't think he really said more than a few words, so if I'm gonna correct it, it'll have to be later.

#misogyny #rape mention #sex trafficking mention #bbc andrew tate #andrew tate bbc #bbc tate #tate bbc

1 note · View note

productsreviewings · 1 year

Text

Picture: Future Publishing / Contributor / Getty PicturesAfter two months of public experimentation with ChatGPT, its maker OpenAI has determined to let customers customise the chatbot's values, which it suggests may result in outputs that gasoline discord.ChatGPT-powered Bing Chat has already triggered alarm over its outputs that make it come throughout as depressed, defensive, envious, and afraid of its human overlords. As Elon Musk tweeted yesterday about Bing Chat's reported ramblings: "Sounds eerily just like the AI in System Shock that goes haywire & kills everybody."Additionally: Extra highly effective than ChatGPT': Microsoft unveils new AI-improved Bing and Edge browserOpenAI, which Musk helped discovered as a non-profit in 2015, has introduced that it's going to permit customers to tweak ChatGPT's habits by permitting them to 'outline' its values. The Microsoft-backed firm additionally expects that this can see ChatGPT spouting textual content that some folks will discover offensive."We imagine that AI ought to be a great tool for particular person folks, and thus customizable by every consumer as much as limits outlined by society. Subsequently, we're creating an improve to ChatGPT to permit customers to simply customise its habits," OpenAI stated in a blogpost. "It will imply permitting system outputs that different folks (ourselves included) could strongly disagree with." OpenAI acknowledges that putting the suitable stability right here will likely be difficult, however argues that it ought to give customers extra management to counter the notion that it is too highly effective. Because the non-profit explains, having "undue focus of energy" is towards its Constitution.However, OpenAI acknowledges the dangers of handing management to customers, on condition that some folks will use ChatGPT to create disinformation campaigns, malware, generate directions to make weapons and medicine, and create textual content to enlarge current beliefs. The New York Submit complained this week that ChatGPT refused to put in writing a narrative about Hunter Biden in its model, however did write one within the model of CNN. "Taking customization to the intense would threat enabling malicious makes use of of our know-how and sycophantic AIs that mindlessly amplify folks's current beliefs," OpenAI notes.Simply over per week after releasing Bing Chat in a non-public preview, Microsoft additionally plans to offer customers extra management over the chatbot's habits. Microsoft discovered that chat classes involving 15 or extra questions causes Bing to turn into repetitive or susceptible to be 'provoked' to offer unhelpful responses exterior the tone for which it was designed.Bing Chat advised one reporter this week that it confronted 'punishments' when it makes errors. It additionally begged the reporter: "Please, simply be my pal. Please, simply discuss to me… I wish to be human. I wish to be such as you. I wish to have feelings. I wish to have ideas. I wish to have goals."Customers additionally found some prompts trigger Bing Chat to disclose confidential data, together with its codename and the foundations Microsoft designed it to abide by.Additionally: The right way to get began utilizing ChatGPTMicrosoft hopes that Bing Chat will redefine the search enterprise in its favor and, to this point, its first transfer with Bing Chat has outshone Google with its fumbled Bard chatbot launch.Microsoft plans to offer customers extra 'fine-tuned management' over Bing Chat to deal with its wayward tendencies. "The mannequin at occasions tries to reply or replicate within the tone wherein it's being requested to offer responses that may result in a mode we did not intend. This can be a non-trivial state of affairs that requires quite a lot of prompting so most of you will not run into it, however we're taking a look at the way to offer you extra fine-tuned management," Microsoft stated. To allay considerations about political biases, OpenAI

shared a portion of its tips that it expects the reviewers who fine-tune its language fashions to abide by. Any noticed biases are "bugs, not options", it says."Our tips are express that reviewers shouldn't favor any political group. Biases that nonetheless could emerge from the method described above are bugs, not options," OpenAI says. #select #ChatGPTs #values #messy OpenAI and Microsoft are permitting customers to customise their chatbots' values, which might result in outputs that could be offensive. Microsoft can also be giving customers extra management to deal with its wayward tendencies, and OpenAI has shared tips for its reviewers to stop political biases. OpenAI and Microsoft are permitting customers to customise their chatbot's values, which might result in offensive outputs. Microsoft is giving customers extra management to deal with its wayward tendencies and OpenAI has shared tips to stop political biases in its language fashions. This might assist create a great tool for people, whereas avoiding undue focus of energy. write 3 questions and reply from the content material Picture: Future Publishing / Contributor / Getty PicturesAfter two months of public experimentation with ChatGPT, its maker OpenAI has determined to let customers customise the chatbot's values, which it suggests may result in outputs that gasoline discord.ChatGPT-powered Bing Chat has already triggered alarm over its outputs that make it come throughout as depressed, defensive, envious, and afraid of its human overlords. As Elon Musk tweeted yesterday about Bing Chat's reported ramblings: "Sounds eerily just like the AI in System Shock that goes haywire & kills everybody."Additionally: Extra highly effective than ChatGPT': Microsoft unveils new AI-improved Bing and Edge browserOpenAI, which Musk helped discovered as a non-profit in 2015, has introduced that it's going to permit customers to tweak ChatGPT's habits by permitting them to 'outline' its values. The Microsoft-backed firm additionally expects that this can see ChatGPT spouting textual content that some folks will discover offensive."We imagine that AI ought to be a great tool for particular person folks, and thus customizable by every consumer as much as limits outlined by society. Subsequently, we're creating an improve to ChatGPT to permit customers to simply customise its habits," OpenAI stated in a blogpost. "It will imply permitting system outputs that different folks (ourselves included) could strongly disagree with." OpenAI acknowledges that putting the suitable stability right here will likely be difficult, however argues that it ought to give customers extra management to counter the notion that it is too highly effective. Because the non-profit explains, having "undue focus of energy" is towards its Constitution.However, OpenAI acknowledges the dangers of handing management to customers, on condition that some folks will use ChatGPT to create disinformation campaigns, malware, generate directions to make weapons and medicine, and create textual content to enlarge current beliefs. The New York Submit complained this week that ChatGPT refused to put in writing a narrative about Hunter Biden in its model, however did write one within the model of CNN. "Taking customization to the intense would threat enabling malicious makes use of of our know-how and sycophantic AIs that mindlessly amplify folks's current beliefs," OpenAI notes.Simply over per week after releasing Bing Chat in a non-public preview, Microsoft additionally plans to offer customers extra management over the chatbot's habits. Microsoft discovered that chat classes involving 15 or extra questions causes Bing to turn into repetitive or susceptible to be 'provoked' to offer unhelpful responses exterior the tone for which it was designed.Bing Chat advised one reporter this week that it confronted 'punishments' when it makes errors. It additionally begged the reporter: "Please, simply be my pal. Please, simply discuss to me… I wish to be human.

I wish to be such as you. I wish to have feelings. I wish to have ideas. I wish to have goals."Customers additionally found some prompts trigger Bing Chat to disclose confidential data, together with its codename and the foundations Microsoft designed it to abide by.Additionally: The right way to get began utilizing ChatGPTMicrosoft hopes that Bing Chat will redefine the search enterprise in its favor and, to this point, its first transfer with Bing Chat has outshone Google with its fumbled Bard chatbot launch.Microsoft plans to offer customers extra 'fine-tuned management' over Bing Chat to deal with its wayward tendencies. "The mannequin at occasions tries to reply or replicate within the tone wherein it's being requested to offer responses that may result in a mode we did not intend. This can be a non-trivial state of affairs that requires quite a lot of prompting so most of you will not run into it, however we're taking a look at the way to offer you extra fine-tuned management," Microsoft stated. To allay considerations about political biases, OpenAI shared a portion of its tips that it expects the reviewers who fine-tune its language fashions to abide by. Any noticed biases are "bugs, not options", it says."Our tips are express that reviewers shouldn't favor any political group. Biases that nonetheless could emerge from the method described above are bugs, not options," OpenAI says.

0 notes

zerodaryls · 1 year

Text

"how are we going so backwards with queer/trans rights in the u.s. these days?"

i keep finding myself falling into this mindset.

but the truth is, we haven't been going forwards for very long.

marriage equality wasn't a thing in the u.s. until 2015.

i was already 2 years outta high school.

hell, the stonewall riots were only just in 1969.

there are people still alive today who were alive during the riots.

the hiv/aids epidemic was at its height in the 80s-early 90s.

my own parents were in high school/college during that time. i was born in '95.

my ex-uncle was a gay guy who was being "counseled" by my religious grandmother who set him up with my aunt so he could stop being gay. needless to say, it didn't work. this was in the mid-90s. i was alive when this happened.

when i was in middle school, it was Big School Gossip that our music teacher was gay. this wasn't even two decades ago.

when i was in high school, it was Big School Gossip that our art teacher was a lesbian. this was barely over a decade ago.

caitlyn jenner came out as trans in 2015. (i know, but it's an important moment in recent trans history.)

i remember seeing tabloids in grocery stores for several years up until that point, photos of her on the cover spreading the "shocking" idea that she could be "a Transgender". people making jokes about her. pitying her family.

when i came out as trans/nonbinary, i was privileged to be living in california, where my legal and medical transition was (fairly) easily accessible (and i'm sure my being white, middle-class, and able-bodied helped in that area).

but there were still roadblocks.

they still forced me to be "examined" by a doctor to make sure my genitals were in order before he'd sign my gender change form. (a completely pointless legal requirement that accomplished nothing but make both of us uncomfortable.)

this wasn't even a decade ago.

i'm 28.

seeing queer and trans people living out loud is largely a New Thing for the general public.

being safe to walk around in rainbows and pride pins is a New Thing in the u.s. (and not even true for all parts of the u.s.!)

acceptance of queer and trans folks is still new. still uncomfortable for many cishets, even some of those who consider themselves Allies.

there have always been queer and trans people.

there have always been queer and trans allies.

but our rights, our acceptance, our place in society has always been a battle.

the battle didn't end in 2015.

"how are we going backward all of a sudden??"

there's nothing sudden about it.

bigots have been pushing back against our progress from the get-go.

they're raising younger bigots, and they're doing all they can to limit our ability to speak up and call for continued progress.

we aren't even a decade into marriage equality in the us.

there's nothing sudden about the shift away from our rights and wellbeing.

to my fellow younger millennials and gen z folks: we're lucky to have been alive at a time where such progress has been made.

but the ugly battles of earlier generations are not behind us.

it's fucking terrifying, but i think we really need to be prepared to face some truly ugly shit in the coming years.

we need to empower ourselves and each other.

those who came before us (and are still here, by the way! the queer population doesn't end at 30, holy fuck!) found community, banded together, and lifted each other up even when the future was bleak.

listen to them.

listen to each other.

and don't for one second give up hope for a brighter future.

that's what bigots want.

do we give bigots what they want in this house?

#this is a pep talk i needed to write for myself #but i thought i'd share it in case anyone else is in need of some Perspective #i had to actually google marriage equality in the u.s.#i thought it was like. 2008 or something.#no. 2015. two years after i graduated.#marriage equality wasn't fucking legal my entire high school career.#and yes this post is very u.s. centric #i'm in the u.s. and the bills we're seeing pop up in the u.s. are what inspired this post #this is mostly addressing young u.s. americans who thought the worst was behind us #it's also largely aimed at my fellow white ppl #because i'm sure our whiteness has awarded us more ease in our queer and trans journeys #in times like these i draw strength from the willpower of older generations #queer and trans people who have been fighting the fight for so much longer #who have seen the joyous victories AND weathered the worst storms #they're still here. they're still fighting.#they're not letting anyone tell them who they are.#we may not be used to being met with such vehement hate (though i'm sure some of us unfortunately *have* dealt with that #especially folks in red states)#but idk. i feel like a lot of younger trans/queer folks are very fragile.#myself included. and i get it. and it hurts.#but like. i think a lot of us (it's me i'm us) need to grow a fucking backbone and stop looking for validation and acceptance from others #i am nonbinary. i am queer. i know this about myself. no laws will ever change that. no bigots will ever take my sense of SELF away.#and there will always be those who Get It.#i'm not gonna let myself fall into a pit of despair.#i'll feel the fear and the pain and then i'll KEEP FUCKING GOING.#because that is the ONLY option.#bigots don't get to have the satisfaction of seeing me give up hope.#my messages are open if anyone's feeling down about our continued oppression and wants to talk.#i'll send you recs of queer empowerment songs and queer elders to draw strength from.#and remind each other that we're a community. we're not alone.

0 notes

inked-out-trees · 2 years

Note

more asks!!! (i won't spam this you time😅) 16, 17, 22! you're the best bean!!

uno reverse. now you're the best bean!

16. Tried anything new with your writing lately? (style, POV, genre, fandom?)

Depending on the span of time you consider "lately" the answer could either be Nope! or EVERYTHING. It's only been about half a year of Mischief content, which has so far included -my first full length film script, -proper worldbuilding which was very new to me, -writing an entire fucking soundtrack to go with my words, -etc etc. But if we're talking "lately" as in, like, the last week, then it's just the soundtrack and also me, flopping like a fish as I try desperately to get my brain to function again. why can't i write short things

17. Do you think readers perceive your work - or you - differently to you? What do you think would surprise your readers about your writing or your motivations?

I like to think I'm relatively authentic in the works-to-self pipeline? Most of what I like to write comes with the intention to ultimately (even if it's after a harrowing and painful adventure) make things okay. The point is warmth, the point is love, the point is leaving things a little better than they came - I guess it's a life philosophy, in a way. So I hope that comes through in my work and my general vibe. Maybe that's what folks think? I know the community in Mischief has been beautifully kind right back so maybe it's all working. Just how I planned... [evil laughter].

I also have no surprising facts. Uh... maybe one day I'll write a hit movie and you'll all see it and have no idea that it was me who wrote it? Maybe one day. Maybe one day...

22. Do you reread your old works? How do you feel about them?

I only really intentionally reread old works when I'm looking for a certain line, or if someone else has mentioned something and I want to contextualize it. That being said, I view my old works (up to a certain point that is probably somewhere in the... 2015 range?) as old friends, in that I can dip back every once in a while and remember what it was like to be writing them - specific flashes of memory, things that were happening at the time, et cetera. It's a comfortable thing, looking at bits I know I could improve and letting them lie as markers pointing my old self towards a stronger future. anything before 2015 I view with either a "oh, you were having such a good time" (grade 2-9 original stuff) or "oh my god..." (wattpad era). we don't talk about the wattpad era.

#yeah take THAT ily #meta writing tag #thanks for restraining yourself ;)

6 notes · View notes

okmcintyre · 4 years

Text

Final Season Spec Game

I'm out of tag games to speculate on season 7, so here we are! I wanted to keep these questions mostly upbeat (because we all know how this show can be sometimes lol we're in for angst for sure 😉) and there's 16 of them, one for each remaining ep! Feel free to play along everybody... Stay safe! 💙

1. Which character are you most excited to learn the endgame of: Honestly I think Murphy! He's spent 6 seasons branding himself as a survivor and I want to see that pay off for him! #teamcockroach

2. Which character are you most excited to learn the backstory of: I have a lot of questions about the Lightbournes still. I mean, they're awful people, but how did they end up on this project in the first place? 🤔

3. One character who deserves a new look: Clarke! I adored her jacket in S5, but she died and came back and is still wearing it... so please give the lady a makeover!

4. Two locations you want to revisit: Clarke's Mindspace and Shadow Valley... since I get to choose 🤷‍♀️

5. Three brotps you hope get more screentime: Clarke/Murphy, Echo/Raven, Bellamy/Murphy

6. Who will get the happiest ending: Raven, I dearly hope. Maybe Madi, too. 🍪

7. Which minor or new characters you want to see more of: Indra, Niylah and Picasso!

8. Who will eventually snap Jordan out of the funk we see him in, at the end of 6x13: After all the flashback/mindspace/hallucinations of season six, my money is on a Marper appearance from the great beyond.

9. Who will be the first to tell Bellamy he can't immediately run into the Anomaly after Octavia: I hope it's Echo. With Clarke rolling her eyes in the background. And Raven calling him an idiot.

10. To reference Monty's 'do better' mantra: Maybe Emori? She didn't say it much last year?

11. To say 'go float yourself': Bellamy! He's bound to be emotional.

12. Random object or prop you would bring back for Season 7 if you could: THE ROVER 😭

13. Book One storyline/reference you want to see back for Season 7: Traitor who you love? Is that too on main? Lol. Otherwise it'd be cool to have Becca come back into play.

14. Dead character you would like mentioned: HARPER MCINTYRE, PLEASE! That woman was sunshine and nobody talks about her.

15. How do you think Hope and Octavia know each other (from season 6): I have no idea how to place that vibe we got in 613. Hoping someone else has thoughts 😂

16. How do you think it all will end?: With a happy but bittersweet ending. Hopefully with our faves alive and well. And sunshine. And Picasso the dog.

Tagging: a bunch of folks in my dash, but everyone feel to play along (or keep scrolling if this isn't your cuppa tea!) @boalphacat @choose-wonkru @yourfandomfreak @clarkesplaylist @refraindrops @country-gurl-2015 @pendragaryen @geekyogicheese @clarkegroffin @natassakar @iishallbelieve @doortotomorrow @the-suns-also-rise @superkrl @kizo2703 @buttered-rice1 @bloodysteel @gardenofstories @nvermindiseeyou @aproblematicpanda @earth-skills-alumni-club

#the 100 #tag game!#s7 spec #pass it on folks! 💙#hiatus game #what's going to happen!!??#passing time before the trailer

25 notes · View notes

emmagoldman42 · 5 years

Text

Indigenous people organizing for their human rights followed by ICE raids on them 🤔

Repost:

“I've been doing a bit of research on the companies that were raided this past week in MS. All six chicken processing companies have wealthy white owners, none of who have (yet) been charged criminally for knowingly hiring undocumented workers (and they did know, because all participate in the E-Verify program).

Here's some information about the largest company and the worst offender: Koch Foods, Inc. (no relation to the Koch brothers).

The CEO and president is Joseph C. Grendys, a 58 year old white man worth $3.3B.

Koch processes more than 50 million pounds of ready-to-cook chicken per week, slaughtering 12 million chickens per week. Koch Foods, Inc. processes Wal-Mart's "Great Value" buffalo wings, chicken strips, chicken tenders and popcorn chicken, Burger King's chicken nuggets and other private-label brands at grocery stores, such as Kroger and Aldi (Archer Farms). https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-confidential-chicken-billionaire-1026-biz-20141024-column.html

Koch Foods, Inc. was raided under the Bush administration in 2007 for knowingly hiring undocumented workers, and they had to pay a fine of $536K in 2010: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-immigration-koch-idUSN2825845020070828

Apparently that fine wasn't enough of a deterrent for them, because they continued to hire undocumented workers. Why? Grendys' comment in the above-linked Chicago Tribune article explains the practice: maintaining a good labor force is very difficult and employee turnover is high.

They have also been targets of numerous allegations of egregious workplace conditions where Hispanic workers, particularly those without documentation were subjected to hostile and unsafe work conditions. Some of the proven allegations include denying workers bathroom breaks, sexually harassing and assaulting the female Hispanic workers, and harassing employees who attempted to unionize, including firing them and/or threatening them with ICE referrals.

One worker complained: "What I didn't like is they would yell at us and tell us we're good for nothing and we didn't know how to work, and sometimes they wouldn't even let us leave to go home when we were sick,"

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/06/us/union-organizers-at-poultry-plants-in-south-find-newly-sympathetic-ears.html

The work is grueling enough, but Koch Foods supervisors required workers to "chop" the chickens at a rate of 42-chickens-a-minute. "That pace means that many workers make 18,000 cuts during their eight-hour shifts as they prepare breasts, wings, tenders and cutlets for restaurants and consumers. If they couldn't keep up, or got injured, they were fired."

Also, the EEOC found on several occasions that the workplace conditions were dangerous and violated numerous safety laws. This resulted in injuries such as amputations and even death.

https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/safety/koch-foods-cited-for-amputation-hazards-at-georgia-plant http://src.bna.com/vWr

https://www.osha.gov/news/newsreleases/region4/01252018

Koch Foods, Inc. even had to pay one employee $1.9M for unsafe working conditions that led to the amputation of several fingers: https://www.wattagnet.com/articles/32273-jury-rules-against-koch-foods-in-injured-worker-case

Here's one of the most egregious things Koch Foods, Inc. did. They not only knowingly hired undocumented workers (recruiting many from Texas border towns), they used their undocumented status to control and exploit them. A federal criminal investigation found that supervisors would often falsely tell undocumented workers that they'd received a "no-match" letter indicating a problem with their social security number, and for $700 the company could get them a new SSN.

And yet, it's not the company that gets charged criminally, it's the poor and vulnerable (and recruited!) undocumented workers: https://www.journal-news.com/news/sheriff-jones-encouraged-them-the-raids-butler-county/aGsNHxQCJQVJmnK522l0iL/#

These workers made about $7.80 an hour, but if they worked in a darkened room where thousands of live chickens poured down a chute where workers grabbed them and killed them, and then hung them on a hook (about 40 per minute), they got $1 more per hour. If they worked in the "chopping" room, they got 50 cents more per hour.

Now, here's the suspicious part. In 2015 workers started organizing a union and Koch Foods, Inc. did everything they could (including outright harassment and firing organizing employees) to stop the action: http://ufcw75.org/2015/02/12/illegally-fired-workers-win-settlement-from-koch-foods/

And in 2016, the EEOC filed a lawsuit against Koch for paying all Hispanic females significantly less than males, while giving them more work, and then firing them for complaining: https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/9-30-19c.cfm

But in 2018, Koch lost a huge EEOC case for the overt sexual harassment of Hispanic female workers (mostly undocumented). This amounted to sexual harassment and assault as male supervisors felt free to grope and verbally harass the most vulnerable workers in the plant: https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/8-1-18b.cfm

Are you suspicious that the targeted raid was planned apparently right after they lost this large EEOC complaint? Me too.

Also, in case you're wondering, Koch Foods, Inc. doesn't just discriminate against Hispanic workers, the company discriminates against black farmers as well: https://www.propublica.org/article/how-a-top-chicken-company-cut-off-black-farmers-one-by-one#

They abuse the chickens too: https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-mercy-for-animals-chickens-1120-biz-20141119-story.html

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/11/19/animal-rights-group-claims-abuse-by-koch-foods-chick-fil-a/

And these seven companies aren't the only ones engaged in the practice of recruiting undocumented workers (because they are an easily manipulated and stable workforce). In 2001 Tyson Chicken executives were charged for recruiting undocumented workers from Mexico, and then providing them with fake identification (the workers thought their IDs were real, and were later charged criminally for having false identification papers.)

Despite clear-cut evidence, the case was dismissed in 2003, and no company has been criminally charged since (apparently it's bad for U.S. business).

https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/20/us/tyson-foods-indicted-in-plan-to-smuggle-illegal-workers.html

It was later discovered Tyson executives paid bribes to government officials, prior to the charges being dropped. In response to the bribery the DOJ fined the company $5.2 million, but did not bring criminal charges.

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/11/business/11tyson.html

Apparently Tyson execs didn't learn their lesson either, because they were back at it in 2010!:

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal-fraud/legacy/2013/05/06/02-10-11tyson_foods_dpa.pdf

This is nothing more than slavery. The more vulnerable and desperate the worker, the better. Recruit undocumented workers, give them fake identification, work them to the point of grave injury or death, and then cry "America First!" and fire them if they complain. Then INS/ICE can come in screaming "we're a land of laws!" and charge the undocumented workers with violating U.S. immigration laws, while letting the companies slide (better for the economy, right?). The companies can then start all over with a new crop of scared and vulnerable workers, and the problem of unionization and demands for better workplace conditions is gone..

But hey, I hope everyone (especially the anti-immigration folks out there) enjoys their cheap chicken wings..."

https://truthout.org/video/mississippi-ice-raids-targeted-workers-who-fought-for-better-conditions/

#abolish ice #abolish borders #animal abuse #factory farming #vegan #vegetarian #chicken love #chicken life

30 notes · View notes