Sieveplayer - Sieve's

Ghost Stories is a fantastic anime screwed over by a bad American studio and by bad voice actors. Go watch the original Japanese show.

on capitalist mospheira, a pizza party means "please don't form an association". in the democratic-feudalistic atevi western association, a pizza party means "we ARE your association"

Reading about Habsburg emperors makes me laugh like nothing else

This is Ferdinand I The Benevolent. I am dying

"The Arab Jews were perceived in two different paradigmatic contexts by the Zionist consciousness. On the one hand, they were seen as Arabs, and hence as an 'other' of Europe and Zionism, and, on the other, as ancient Jews, hence as exalted, holy objects of the Zionist national-religious dis­course. The dichotomy gave rise to a confused and conflicted perception of reality. From the colonial point of view, for instance, the Arab Jews’ religios­ity was seen as superficial; from a national point of view, it was considered an­cient and authentic. ... 'True religiosity' served as a marker of the depth of the Arab Jews’ Zionist commitment and of the erasure of their Arabness. The Solel Boneh emissaries were engaged si­multaneously both in orientalizing the Arab Jews and in marking the differ­ence between them and the Arabs — that is, with establishing themselves as Western Jews. ... The depth of orientalist identification with European colonialism is seen in remarks made by Yitzhak Gruenbaum, a member of the World Zionist Organization executive, at a meeting with representatives of Solel Boneh held at the headquarters of the Jewish Agency in Jerusalem. There were two types of populations in Palestine, Gruenbaum said: 'We, the Jews, are twen­tieth-century people of Europe, whereas the Arab population is still at the de­velopmental level of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.' And, as 'people of Europe, we wish to create a European economy here. We believe that the Mandate government must conduct its affairs based on the point of view that Palestine is a European country like England or its dominions.' Yet, at the same time, as noted, the Arab Jews were perceived as Jews and as an integral element in the Zionist paradigm. As such, they were not considered as 'oth­ers' of Europe but as nearby 'outsiders' of European Zionism. The colonialist and nationalist categories are not mutually exclusive. In the Indian context, for example, as Partha Chatterjee explains, orientalist categories were subordinated to the ideology of nationalism in order to en­hance the glorification of the national past and its ancient lineage. Zionism, too, creates ethnicity within colonial na­tionalism. To constitute the Jewish community as a modern nation, Zionism seeks to reconstruct the community’s 'organic roots,' primordial lineage, and foundational theological narrative. The Arab Jews supplied the tribal and an­cient legitimacy for Jewish nationalism. Thus, for example, Zionism identi­fied the Yemenites as part of the ten lost tribes and as an integral part of the continuity of the nation. At the same time, however, it constituted them as in­ferior culturally, religiously, and nationally. ... In the Zionist context, the question of the encounter between European Jews and Arab Jews becomes complicated, because the encounter, which creates the 'otherness,' does not end there, but seeks also to recruit the 'other' into its ranks. It was here that the European emissaries in Abadan po­sitioned themselves vis-a-vis the Arab Jews and tried to define them as 'other' (Arab) yet also 'one of us' (Jewish, proto-Zionist). It is just here, in the inter­stices between the two categories, that the politics of 'difference' lies. The in­teresting thing is that Zionism (like other colonial enterprises) created a pol­itics of belonging and of difference and spoke in a number of voices, yet, at the same time, declined to acknowledge the cultural ambivalence of its own creation and attempted to enfold it within closed binary distinctions. It was a clear case of Jewish orientalism, where one Jewish group orientalized an­other."

Yehouda Shenhav, The Arab Jews: A Postcolonial Reading of Nationalism, Religion, and Ethnicity (2006)

I had an idea.

Ares in Mythology:

Kills the guy who tried to assault his daughter and refused to apologize for it when he got put on trial (it was ruled justifiable homicide by Athena btw). 

The only time he’d been captured in battle was when he was protecting his mom from being captured by giants who wanted to forcibly marry her.

Found and Freed Thanatos when he was imprisoned by Sisyphus when no other Gods could

Helps found the Amazons by helping their founder escape her abusive husband and becomes their patron God.

Genuinely loves and respects Aphrodite as her own person

One of his epithets is “feasted by women”.

Ares in Modern Media: 

Meatheaded sexist asshole out of an eighties teen movie.

Conclusion: My boy is getting done dirtier than Hades in modern representation. Ares is one of the least problematic Gods in the pantheon (except for the murders, I will grant you) and ya’ll are sleeping on him.

Someone pls tell me what anime this is

I think the obsession with having been “born this way” largely stems from the idea that you need to be “innocent” to be guiltless. 

If something is weird then you need to have no control over it, otherwise it would be mandatory to fix it. If I said that I had control over my stimming and could stop it at any time, people would request I do so. Not for my comfort but for theirs. If I said that I had control over my gender and could be something binary or maybe even cis, people would request I do so. If I said that I have control over my sexuality and could make myself heterosexual, people would request I do so. If I said I could control my attraction and could make myself monogamous, people would request I do so. If I said that I could control my disability and could choose to stop a flair up in its tracks, people would request I do so. They would never ask out of the goodness of their hearts, they would always be asking because I was annoying, concerning, distracting, or inconveniencing them. 

Diversity is sometimes only tolerated if you have no control. If you have control, rules will be made to stop it. Hair will be straightened, clothes will be standardized, languages will be shushed, interests will be squashed, weight will be lost, and so on and so on and so on. Proving that we were born this way replaces the more obvious, that we’re okay this way. I don’t need to be a helpless victim of my differences to be forgiven for them. My differences aren’t crimes. 

“girlcock” this, “girlcock” that. what if I want to watch the corner of her eyes crinkle when she talks about the tv show she likes. what if I want her to be able to confide in me the things she never felt safe enough to tell anyone else.

hii, i wanted to ask what you didn't like about ringworld, i was going to start reading it, but now i'm wondering if i should just not lol

I didn't like.. most of it, tbh.

It's very misogynistic and has a weirdly lukewarm/probably for the best :/ stance on eugenics, the characters are either complete cartoons, or truly awful people. The protagonist is just a vile person, but in that author self-insert way where he can only be validated, Teela is written like a precocious child and cocksleeve for the protagonist (and when she disapears, a new cocksleeve immediately replaces her.))

The aliens are also really stupidly written, the carnivores are warlike meatheads and the herbivores are pathetic and cowardly. The exploration of the ringworld isn't even fun because when they get there they mostly run past all of the inhabitants because they determine theyre just stupid savages and need to keep looking until they find civilized people, which was very jarring and frustrating after finishing several of Le Guin's Hainish books.

The scale of the ringworld is cool, and they way puppeteers look is cool. That's about it.