As the world falls, I sink upwards.

They call us colonizers, refusing to look at archeological evidence of our presence. They say Palestiniens were there first, ignoring that the Palestiniens of old they think of referred to the Jews in British Mandate Palestine that later became Israelis, or that the land was called Israel before it was called Palestine. And they blame Israel for Palestine not having statehood, but motherfucker, they had so many offers, they rejected all of them. Because they don't want to be a state, or at least the terrorist leaders don't.

They just want Jews dead. And they'll kill anyone, including their own people to get it. I fucking hate every "pro palestine" loser that tries to lie to me, to make me feel bad for my beliefs, for what I am. Your repetitive diatribe of conflicting false realities, historical revisionism, and recycled antisemitic tropes do not hold a candle to the truth.

Because the truth is that you're not "progressive", you're regressive. You want Jews to go back to being helpless. You only care about the Jews you can use: the ones you have successfully gaslit, and the dead ones. You're not helping with "mutual aid", you spread scams and misinformation without bothering to check your supposed "vetters". You're not "pro palestine", your pathetic boycotts have only hurt the very Palestinians you supposedly care for by costing them their jobs. You're not "anti-genocide", you just want a genocide of Israelis by using a genocide libel. You're not "just antizionist, not antisemitic", you're attacking Jews in the diaspora for merely existing, boycotting local Jewish businesses nowhere near Israel, commenting "Free Palestine" on Jewish posts that have nothing to do with Israel, and using antisemitic tropes to refer to Israelis and Zionists.

There's nothing redeemable about the Free Palestine movement. Except for maybe the fact that it exposes all your hypocrisy and lies.

Do not think you can lie and get away with it.

Prior to this point, when Odysseus tries to exercise Xenia (ancient Greek guest rites/hospitality code), he did what he was supposed to do. (Well, we think so anyway — notably, the most famous books of the Odyssey are told by Odysseus, who isn’t exactly a reliable narrator.)

But when Polyphemus kills and eats some of the men, the game changes. The Cyclops makes it clear he has no intention of abiding by Zeus’s laws, and will cannibalize the lot of the men. So, Odysseus responds in kind — he breaks Xenia and lies. He introduces himself under a false name as part of a trick. Polyphemus then breaks Xenia again — he tells Nobody he’ll be eaten last, and that is the Cyclops’ guest gift to him.

Odysseus’ transgression is clearly the lesser one. The Nobody trick works. It gets Odysseus and most of his crew out of the cave alive.

But, crucially, before leaving Odysseus sheds his disguise. He admits his true identity, in detail, so he can boast of his achievements and add vanquishing a Cyclops to the list. And it bites him in the ass spectacularly.

The only reason why Polyphemus can curse Odysseus, can bid his father Poseidon to curse the man who blinded him, is because he now knows who did it. If Odysseus had kept his mouth shut, he might have safely made it home from there. But while a big part of why the Nobody disguise vs. real name reveal is showing Odysseus’s hubris, it’s not just about that. It’s also about the start of a pattern that hurts him more than it helps him.

From this point in the Odyssey on, Odysseus lies about his identity constantly. And sometimes it protects him, but more often it’s a detriment or at least unnecessary. He’s lying about his identity primarily to people who are on his side — a kindly loyal swineherd, his son, his faithful wife, his ailing father.

The last one is especially damning, because happens when Odysseus has already killed the suitors and returned home and reunited with the rest of his family sans disguises. He knows from everyone else that Laertes never betrayed him or his legacy, but was mourning his son and heartbroken for almost a decade. Odysseus has publicly declared his return to everyone else — his father doesn’t know because he’s living in squalor remotely. But Odysseus doesn’t tell his father who he is. He makes up a fake identity and tells a story implying Laertes’ son is dead. And when Laertes bursts out crying, then Odysseus drops the charade and finally admits who he really was.

There was no utility to that lie. No loyalty to test. No hidden threats to worry about. But Odysseus still instinctively lies to his beloved father about who he is, only dropping the charade when he sees the damage it’s doing to his relationships.

Because at this point, lying is pathological for Odysseus. He can’t seem to stop doing it. Because with Polyphemus, a lie protected him and the truth hurt him. That is the point of the “ Nobody” disguise.

Fandom Problem #15,898:

Of course the ideal should be a world without prisons. In a perfect utopian future, we would have no need for cages because we would have successfully dismantled the root causes of crime, poverty, and harm. But this smug, dismissive refusal to engage with the grittiest realities of human behavior helps absolutely nothing and actively works against her goals.

It treats a foundational question of public safety as a tiresome "gotcha" rather than a deeply legitimate human concern.

When activists retreat into pure idealism and dismiss the public's valid fears about violent crime as unworthy of a response, they don't look visionary. They look condescending, elitist, and entirely disconnected from the reality of human nature.

So I read the rest of this comic and more of her work.

The underlying logic of this deflection relies on a false dichotomy - the idea that if you dare to ask how an abolitionist world handles a rapist or a murderer, you must be a blanket defender of mass incarceration.

Over here in reality, you can fully recognize that our current justice system is deeply flawed, broken, and failing survivors, while still demanding to know what replaces the physical containment of dangerous individuals.

To frame a question about immediate physical safety as a structural roadblock is an intellectual bait-and-switch. It assumes that anyone asking for a practical plan just "doesn't get it," when in reality they just want to know how you plan to keep their loved ones safe.

The comics series "Who's Left" is garbage.

Here's how it dismisses people who lived through the communist (authoritarian) regimes of the 20gh century: by calling them old and xenophobic.

And here's how it defends those regimes:

Speaking as a lifelong left-leaning liberal: this is tankie bullshit and it deserves your contempt.

To put it simply, men who are falsely accused and convicted of rape often become the victims of brutal, reoccurring sexual assault during their sentences. So when feminists downplay false accusations what they are really saying is that innocent men who are sexually assaulted over and over again in a confined space with no hope of escape or help either deserve it or aren’t at all important.

This is what happens to rapists in prison:

DO THE FALSELY ACCUSED DESERVE THIS VERY SAME TREATMENT? DO THE FALSELY ACCUSED DESERVE THIS VERY SAME TREATMENT? DO THE FALSELY ACCUSED DESERVE THIS VERY SAME TREATMENT? DO THE FALSELY ACCUSED DESERVE THIS VERY SAME TREATMENT?

97% of rapists never spend a day in jail? Wrong.

According to the most recent analysis of data involving sexual assault and sex offenders, felony convictions are sought for 80% of all rape arrests, as seen here:

Information on the adjudication of rape offenders is also contrary to the 97% statistic, as seen here:

The time a rapist served may be less than the sentence imposed by the courts but nonetheless it is still contrary to the idea that 97% of all rapists do not serve one day in jail, as seen here:

And while it can be argued that punishments for rape are not harsh enough, there are virtually no punishments for false accusers who ruin lives and as previously mentioned above are responsible for innocent men being sexually assaulted on a constant basis in prison. For vindictive women there is only reward. Therefore, what is the deterrent if false accusers are rarely punished?

Examining the 2-8% false rape statistic and the numbers it represents

The widely accepted statistic for false rape accusations is between 2-8% even though 14 out of 20 studies have placed them at a much higher rate. But even if we accept the 2-8% statistic, the numbers are not low as the statistic would suggest. For example, in 2009 there were 88,097 rapes reported according to the Department of Justice. If we take 5%, the median of 2-8% that people widely accept as the true statistic of false accusations, that would mean out of 88,097 reported rapes that 4,404 men were falsely accused of rape. That’s four thousand four hundred and four men falsely accused of rape just in 2009 alone. 

Just let that sink in for a minute.

That is in no way a small number and quite frankly a very disturbing realization. Now apply the same calculation to every figure since 1990:

1990 // 5,127 falsely accused 1991 // 5,329 falsely accused 1992 // 5,453 falsely accused 1993 // 5,300 falsely accused 1994 // 5,110 falsely accused 1995 // 4,873 falsely accused 1996 // 4,812 falsely accused 1997 // 4,807 falsely accused 1998 // 4,657 falsely accused 1999 // 4,470 falsely accused 2000 // 4,508 falsely accused 2001 // 4,543 falsely accused 2002 // 4,761 falsely accused 2003 // 4,694 falsely accused 2004 // 4,754 falsely accused 2005 // 4,717 falsely accused 2006 // 4,739 falsely accused 2007 // 4,593 falsely accused 2008 // 4,593 falsely accused 2009 // 4,404 falsely accused

That’s 96,244 men falsely accused from 1990 to 2009 according to the figures provided by the Department of Justice in correlation to the median of 5% from the 2-8% false rape accusation statistic.

Now consider the fact that 14 out of 20 studies on the prevalence of false rape accusations place them at a much higher rate, as seen here:

False rape accusations: from propaganda to reality

So, lately, this so-called infographic (which spreads nothing but disinformation) has been circulated on Tumblr:

Since so many people don’t seem to realize the numerous faults in it, I shall attempt to cast light on them and update the above graphic accordingly.

1.) It lists victims of false accusations in the “not reported” group I wonder if the people at the Enliven Project even know what a false rape accusation IS, seeing as they apparently think it doesn’t involve reporting it. The correct place for them would be in the “reported” group, as follows:

2.) Padding data with “unreported” cases It’s quite fascinating to see all the supposed statistics on what people never report. Newsflash, everyone: statistics are DIRECTLY BASED ON REPORTS. You can estimate the number of unreported cases, but that’s called GUESSING, and has no place in actual statistics. Thus, the “unreported” block should be removed in its entirety.

(Funnily enough, upon removing the “unreported” group, it comes down to exactly 100 figures, and they represented the 2% of all cases being false with 2 figures… Proof of padding? You be the judge.)

3.) It assumes “guilty unless proven innocent” Note how before its removal, the “unreported” block actually said “rapists”? Apparently, while false accusation cases should be held to the highest standard of evidence (requiring one not only that they did not commit rape, but that they had absolutely no means to commit it in the first place), rape cases should be held to the lowest, and if someone says they have been raped, we should just take it at face value (unlike ANY OTHER crime) and consider the accused a rapist right away! Blatantly skewed. Truth is, without decisive evidence, a case cannot be proven, thus it could be one, it could be the other. And since for the purposes of this reasoning, the difference between whether or not a case reaches court doesn’t matter, the two groups will be meshed together here.

And finally…

4.) Calculating with the lowest possible number of false accusations Even according to the Enliven Project, the reports of (conclusively) false cases range from 2% to 8%. Why, then, did they choose to use the absolute lowest value? To diminish its importance, of course. Unlike them, I will be fair, and instead of using the maximum value, use its median: 5%.

Here’s reality, stripped of propaganda. 10% of cases are conclusively true. 5% of cases are conclusively false. And any amount of the remaining 85% could be true/false.

And you expect us to believe that even though one-third of the conclusive cases have been proven false, none of the remaining 85% are?

But why would a woman lie about rape?

This question is often asked as if to suggest that women do not lie about being raped even though its been proven that women will lie about being raped for any amount of reasons including covering up an affair to having an excuse for skipping work to not getting enough sympathy from friends to not wanting to pay a $13 cab fare to simply not liking the men they’re with anymore to motivations of racism to being obsessed with the victim to no reason at all among many, many more absolutely absurd reasons. Asking this question implies that women are saints when the truth is that they are just about as much a saint as men are. Its important to remember that people are individuals and everyone has motivations and agendas, some being criminal or vindictive. Some people have mental issues and are sociopaths. So please, stop acting like women have no reason to lie about being raped because you just make yourself out to be someone who isn’t at all in touch with reality or how completely horrible people can be.

“Those who suffer genuine rape are undermined by people like you. You undermine the whole system of justice.” - Judge Ian Pringles, talking to a false rape accuser 

Rape is a very serious crime that should come with very harsh punishments. However, we should be very diligent in separating the truth from the lies and this means asking the tough questions and getting information no matter what.

The feminist outcry of “rape apologist” and “victim blamer” only works on those simple minded enough to fall for buzzwords that hardly make up for lack of a good argument. While its true that rape can sometimes be hard to prove, false accusations are virtually impossible to prove especially when no proof can be provided to support either claim which only comes down to “he said, she said” and is open to personal opinion.

The overall truth is that women can use the power of being perceived as victims to their advantage while men cannot. Whether they choose to use this advantage or not really depends on their character. Obviously not all women are this way but many are and its an insult to the victims of false accusations to suggest that because the rate is supposedly low that it means they are inconsequential. Feminists will believe this up until someone they love is falsely accused and when that happens, what then? 

False accusations are the sole reason for doubt when a real victim comes forward to make a report. Essentially, false accusations are more responsible for under reporting than the so-called rape culture. The sooner feminists and others realize this, the sooner real victims will find justice instead of a cloud of doubt.

IMO, the primary difference between the two is that Jax is made from the ground up to be a repressed trans woman and his various toxic behaviors, insecurities, etc. are all born out of his inability to get past himself and open up; both to others and himself. The subtext may be heavily implied until the finale where it becomes text, but it's still something that drives the core of his character arc.

And yeah, if it applies for everyone to be a certain race, I'm for that too. I'm not even picky when it comes to whites. If it's set in pre Columbian America, I want all natives, in Africa or the Middle East, I want all of those people.

Like when people argue whether warhammer 40k is fascist propaganda that says that fascism is good, or if it's actually a satire of fascist propaganda saying that fascism is bad. When it isn't really either of those things. That's not what it's going for and that's not what it's doing. It's got satirical elements floating around in there in varying degrees depending on era and author, but the point of them isn't to instruct the audience whether fascism is bad - it's for drama, and mood, and weird interestingness, and humour, and all the other reasons why things are in art other than political and moral instruction. It portrays a bunch of fucked up stuff connected by in-setting circumstance and lets you make your own mind about it, or just let yourself think "damn that's fucked up" and leave it at that.

It's not even, like, complex, by almost any literary standard. It's the same thing with them being unable to understand marvel movies, literally the most accessible movies ever made, when they crack out the most basic #101 nuance for teenagers where a villain has a sympathetic motive or a hero makes a mistake, and they can't really understand it, thinking that because the villain has a sympathetic quality then the movie is trying to demonise that sympathetic quality, because they assume that the film is operating at the level of basic propaganda, when it's, like, even slightly above that.

Because if it doesn't support you...., what does it do? That's right it's against you. Which makes it bad.

And why would you, a good person, be interacting with something that's bad. You wouldn't. Unless you were a bad person.

Stop abusing your boyfriends and yes what you are doing is abuse.

Stop:

Yelling at him in front of his friends 

Hitting or slapping him when he does or says something you don’t like

Telling him he doesn’t have a choice when it comes to decisions that involve both of you 

Telling him he can’t hang out with friends because you don’t like him

Telling him to not talk to other girls even if they are his friend

Forcing him to spend every moment with you 

Belittling him and pointing out all his flaws

Calling him stupid or making fun of him for making a mistake

Threatening to break up with him if he doesn’t do what you want

Being emotionally manipulative and crying until he does what you want

Accusing him of cheating every time he’s not with you

Blow up is phone if he doesn’t text you every five minutes 

Telling him you are the must thing that has ever happened to him and no one else will love

Physically attacking him when ever you are mad

Forcing him to have sex despite that fact that he said he didn’t want to

Invading his privacy by going through his phone

Getting mad at him for changing his password and demanding he tell you what it is

If a guy did any of these things to a girl it would be considered abuse but since its the other way around its considered normal. Throughout High school I saw many girl treating their boyfriends like shit. Sometime even physically abusing them in the hallways and no one trying to stop it because its a girl attacking a boy. 

Boys: If your girlfriend does anything on this list leave her. It is abuse and you deserve better.

You don’t deserve to be screamed at, ignored, or assaulted.

Being passive aggressive with him when he wants to spend time with friends or doing other things 

controlling when he’s able to go out with friends

Breaking up his friendships with other girls just because you’re insecure

Making him feel like his opinions in decisions that affect the both of you are irrelevant and don’t matter

SENDING HIS NUMBER TO STRANGERS TO TEST IF HE’S LOYAL OR NOT

testing him in anyway in general without his knowledge or permission (example: catfishing! it’s manipulative and weird don’t fucking do that)

taking money/credit cards without permission to spend on things without his knowledge ( had an ex friend do this constantly to her boyfriend and she’d always condone it because “he’ll get over it” )

guilting him for hanging out with friends/family over you  and making him choose between you and friends/family

telling him “you don’t love me if you *insert harmless activity he wants to do here* “

being rude or mean to him in front of others to assert dominance or power over him

downloading apps to spy on his phone activity (yes, this is a thing “”regular”” people do) or snooping on his social media to see who he’s talking to

hitting him, slapping him, punching him, shoving him. literally how do people not understand slapping your male partner is bad. people tend to find this funny in media and society and its weird. KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF YOUR PARTNER WITHOUT PERMISSION. 

and let me add this. ABUSIVE TEEN GIRLFRIENDS TURN INTO ABUSIVE GROWN ASS WOMEN GIRLFRIENDS WHO TURN INTO ABUSIVE WIVES.

if you have an abusive teen or young adult gf right now fellas, leave. don’t let her use you to get her shit right. you’ll be so fucked up by the time she gets it together if she ever does and believe that most likely she won’t.  

Sony will revoke your Playstation purchases after 30 days of inactivity, is pushing for an all-digital console, and is trying to completely eradicate physical media. Which made them lose 60% of their userbase over the course of a month.

Every company ever is investing in AI and is trying to push AI onto everyone, despite the fact that it means they're operating at a severe loss and costs so much more money than it's worth (data centers are expensive to build, expensive to maintain, and expensive to power and cool), and the fact that no one fucking wants AI.

And whatever the fuck has been going on with Twitter the past several years since the Muskrat buyout.