I know some dickheads have now decided that Judaism is the "bad, violent, terrorist religion" and Islam is the "good, peaceful" one, which is only to be expected of white people, but how much of an issue is it currently? Like I've seen some USAmericans sharing how the Islamic faith shapes Gazans values and perseverance (good) except with that distinct white hippie "I'm about to imprint on this like the world's most racist duck" vibe (bad), but I didn't think they're already turning on Judaism in numbers.
Do they realize that Christianity is also the same kind of comfort to Christian minorities in Asia and Africa? That it was Buddhists that genocided the Rohingyas in Myanmar and Tamils in Sri Lanka? That Hindu fundamentalists are even now trying to ethnically cleanse Muslims in India? How Hindus and Christians are terrorized and persecuted in Pakistan? That Muslims have a history of persecuting and ethnically cleansing Jews too?
Really tired of asking y'all to be normal about people's religions man. There's no religion that's inherently violent or exceptionally peaceful. It's just like any other ideology that becomes a weapon in the hands of ethnic power. Interrogate power, not religion, and respect people's belief systems insofar as they aren't in your business.
Edit: I've amended the "long history" of Muslim persecution of Jews because it might be misleading in the current political climate. Zionism and antisemitic Arab nationalism are twin births resulting directly from Christian colonization, and Islamic empires tended to actually be more tolerant of other religions compared to Christianity, especially Judaism, which was considered a sibling religion. Antisemitism wasn't ideologically entrenched in Islamic tradition. It's simply that ethno-religious power will lead to ethno religious domination and intermittent cleansing of minorities, and Islam is no exception. Humans be humaning always.
2K notes
·
View notes
this is somewhat of a vent post & something i said i would not do again but has been plaguing me enough that i think getting it out might feel better. so. has anydoggy else been. Baffled and upset by nora sakavic’s refusal to speak on how terribly aftg has treated its characters of color? with the author of the series coming back with a new book and starting up on her online activity again, and questions of what she’d change about aftg bubbling up, it’s particularly glaring to me that we are all playing this very long game of pretend where we ignore how badly the non-white cast has been treated & her lack of thoughts on it
and i understand not wanting to bring up nicky and thea because people pick on her for it. i’m not trying to discredit nora sakavic’s terrible history of getting harrassed online by aftg fans. but i think it is very cynical, and it is very juvenile, and most of all very cruel, that she gets to ignore the very real ways the books have set up these characters to be hated. i think it’s obvious why the characters who get the most hate are the only canonical characters of color, and i think we do not get to treat this like a deliberate decision on the fandom’s part when the books have put these same characters in degrading and embarrassing and terrible positions in the first place. aftg is not a story about nice characters with clean pasts, but there is a very specific nastiness to the only characters of color being a brown man who sexually harasses and later assaults the main character, a black woman whose only scene is her lashing out at her love interest after being ignored for the first two books, and the japanese villain who gets maybe two lines of complexity before he goes back to being a terrible person. the white cast, in comparison, while not at all free from flaws, are never shown to commit mindless evil; all of their actions are ultimately justified. the book goes out of its way to give them concession after concession. we know exactly who to side with, because aftg tells us who these people are. does nicky’s assault ever get addressed in the books? does riko’s reasoning to be the way that he is ever gets more than briefly aluded to? is thea reserved even a shred of humanity or grace in her one scene?
anyway. it’s been years of talking about this and the fandom has been constantly hostile to criticism in this regard, and more recently any criticism at all, and it’s Grating to be on the other side of this discussion. it’s exhausting to know that in ten years we do not get even an acknowledgment besides the author saying she will not answer questions about nicky and thea anymore. it’s upsetting and it’s ugly and i wish no one had to talk about this again, but we do because what i thought was common sense has been washed away by a sudden influx of no-nuance adoration for the trilogy. basically i hope we all explode
two hours later edit: you're allowed to reblog this! sorry about the confusion
158 notes
·
View notes
[Brief] Thoughts on Film Theory's Analysis
I was gonna post this on my priv twt.. but moots convinced me to post it here so here we are.. beware of spoilers, gore, bla bla bla ..
FIRST OFF I'm gonna start by saying, I AM ESL. I may or may not have misinterpreted some of his words, but this is mainly how I thought of his analysis. This is not meant to be ill-guided or rude ! so sorry if it comes off as this way. I will be very repetitive.
Another thing, most if not all of the information matpat gave out i alr discussed with a few mutuals on discord about a few months back so this is not new territory to me 😭😭 I thought most folks would already knew the concept of how the brain deteriorates overtime But honestly, that indisposition shouldn’t even apply to omni man??? matpat tried to compare an immortal Viltrumite's psychology to that of an aging human's, which can be misguided.
Let's start by how he compares Nolan's brain to the average aging human's brain so the audience could understand his psyche more and how empathy declines overtime. First and foremost, Nolan is not a human, second; Nolan wasn't raised with empathy or around an empathetic environment - it was an alien concept to his race. Something frowned upon. He was raised from birth to conquer and destroy without remorse. His brain never developed those neural pathways for empathy in the first place. It's not that they deteriorated over time, they were never even formed.
By the time he came to Earth, all this familial stuff was new to him. Sure, he knew he was gonna outlive them, but He didn't think he'd get attached. HE didn't process that he'd grieve over them when the time came.
Interacting with humanity for the first time ignited unfamiliar emotions in Nolan that he didn’t know how to process.
His time living amongst humans caused conflicting feelings he’d never experienced in his centuries of systematic slaughter. Loving Debbie and Mark went against everything he was taught, but he couldn't help it. For once, the lives he was manipulating to further Viltrum’s goals meant something to him. He developed a [what he presumed, NOT what he felt about them in reality, his love for them is far more profound than he assumed it to be which we later on see in the last ep of s1 and the second season] petty facsimile of love for his ersatz family.
So no, his capacity for empathy didn't decline with age as MatPat claims. His empathy was stunted from the start. An underdeveloped skill, not a deteriorated one. We had characters like Debbie to help him understand those notions, help him grow it. With Mark in the mix? it only amplified that development.
Viltrumites are societally and culturally predisposed to violence and domination. Nolan was never accustomed to forming emotional connections or grieving loss. Those were entirely new experiences for him after arriving on Earth. He was not jaded. he was grown into jamais vu in viltrum.
This is why the whole conflict in s1 happened, he was treading between double lives he wasn't sure of. He was conflicted because his past values were refuting with his new experiences. He found love on Earth, he found himself unable to accept how he'd lose Debbie. Of How jaded Mark might become. Everything he said to Mark till that point was his own self-projections, his own fears, doubts.
While the video did provide some interesting facts about neuroscience and aging, the application of those facts to Nolan's character was inaccurate. IT is educational for those who don't know, but it isn't recent news that the brain begins to deteriorate overtime so this video wasn't that informative which kinda disappointed me. Their analysis lacked alot of information about the Viltrumite race and Nolan's character. Comparing him to humans with normal life experiences just doesn't work. His immortal nature combined with a lack of empathy from birth created a psychology unlike anything seen on Earth.
SORRY FOR RANTING ALOT AND OR IF IT SEEMS LIKE I'M GIVING MATPAT SHIT ... i really liked their analysis on immortal so i'll give them that. Immortal, unlike Nolan, was born human. He has lived among humanity for over 3000 years, inhabiting different identities of public and devoted historians. Because of this, his psyche developed quite differently. Immortal knows how to form connections, experience loss, and adapt to social changes. His perpetual existence didn't harden his heart like Viltrum's brutal culture did to Nolan. Instead, Immortal's immortality allowed his empathy and compassion to blossom.
Humans are social creatures. Our brains have evolved to seek out interpersonal relationships, crave affection, and find meaning in community. For an immortal like Immortal, social interaction is vital to staving off boredom, depression and detachment from humanity.
By inhabiting mortal lives, he stays tethered to the human experience. He continues learning, growing, and developing empathy.
This is why he's devastated when the guardians die.
This is also why he goes fucking mental and tries to kill Omni-man.
If Immortal had lived in isolation all this time, unable to connect with people, his psyche would likely resemble Nolan's more closely. Without social interaction, Immortal's brain would atrophy in ways that preclude complex emotions and moral reasoning. His sense of purpose would fade, achievements would lose meaning, and life itself might feel pointless. By engaging with humanity, Immortal gives his endless existence purpose and direction. He finds value in each temporary life, so loss still impacts him deeply. Socializing keeps his emotions and cognition flexible, which prevents the apathy and hardness of heart seen in Nolan. Nolan never had these opportunities in his early years, this is why it's more difficult for him to stray away from his indoctrination. It's that he's unused to it, underdeveloped.
60 years to Nolan would've been a year and a half, so what's 20 measly years on Earth for him? Yes, he found profound connections in that little speck of time, but Immortal's emotional capacity is far more extensive.
In summary, Comparing Nolan to a human, whether mortal or immortal, is kinda inaccurate. His Viltrumite psyche rules out him from possessing JADED human qualities. You could say he's desensitized to violence sure, but no.. unfortunately.. he does not have [boomer] brain. He has [indoctrinated alien-fascist brain]
Leave your own thoughts down below or through reblogs, I'm really interested on what others may think of this! (URGHHHNN... my hcs r slipping away from my fingers cuz now people r gonna accept what matpat says as truth.. someone gun me down from the hills..)
164 notes
·
View notes