Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
[ID: Seven screencaps from Taskmaster. Sitting in a caravan, Fatiha El-Ghorri says, "I painted my whole room when I was a teenager in Batman style. And my mum was very upset 'cause the ceiling was black. And the floor was black, and then the walls were yellow." Later, in the studio, Greg Davies says, "Shall we just have a little chat about the Batman room?" Fatiha replies, "Yeah. Ages ago when I was like 18 or something..." Greg and Alex Horne exclaim together, "18!?" Fatiha says defensively, "And other people had boyfriends and I had Batman, what?" End ID.]
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
i don't dislike aoi warframe but liike. like holy shit the drifter's dialogue options with her make me fucking HATE talking to her. it's like:
conversations with eleanor: i mean, i guess it comes down to if you think the continuity of a person is that person. are you even the same person as your 10 year old self?
conversations with quincy: hey hot-as-fuck, owe you a favor if you tell me what the fuck the difference between levis and wranglers are
conversations with amir: what if the class system is just kind of redundant by that point and you just take point-buy to the natural conclusion of making character creation a la carte?
conversations with lettie: i mean i take solace knowing that even though i can experience existential dread my kavat can't, yeah?
conversations with arthur: arthur.
conversations with aoi: wow aoi you're so incredible. you are the warmest most kind-hearted person who has never given up ever. how do you find it within yourself to be so fantastic and inspiring? because no one has ever been as wonderful as you! you are the living heart of the team and none of this would be possible without you. i am so blessed having been allowed to know you. you are the best character on the show and are so generous and kind and considerate and fantastic.
Can we talk about how her gift to Arthur of 1K paper cranes seems sweet until you remember THEY WERE IN THE MILITARY IN A WAR ZONE???
And also they were so clearly something SHE wanted to do, with no thought to what Arthur would actually like, but the narrative clearly wants us to find her the sympathetic, wronged party! It was utterly baffling to me the first time through.
I think that the environmentalist movement should recognize that indigenous people are just people, that in particular there is nothing about indigenous land management practices which are fundamentally (as opposed to merely incidentally) different from any other sort of land management practices; that the term "indigenous" bears a connotation although not strictly a denotation of having lived somewhere since time immemorial, and by virtue of this we very well might expect indigenous practices of land management to have reached a sustainable equilibrium in a way that settler practices have not, but this is no inherent or absolute fact; that it appears to be the province of humans across cultures to intentionally alter the environment in which we live and this is in itself morally neutral; that the most radical forms of "deep ecology" and its ilk probably should be regarded as incompatible with a great many indigenous land management practices and this is quite often a good argument against deep ecology as such.
Right, this is the point of the middle sentence of my post. My point is that "indigenous" is a political label, it refers to relations between modern social groups and nation states, it bears no inherent relation to any particular set of cultural traits or suppositions. There is no universal cultural essence of "indigenousness" beyond that state of being colonized; indigenous people are just people. Correlationally, yes, I expect land management practices long established in a particular region to be more sustainable than newly introduced ones. Naturally this will often line up along the boundary between colonizer and colonized.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Selection of original-run Doc and Raider comic strips (1987–1997).
Doc and Raider was created by cartoonist Sean Martin (1950–2020). The comic strip humorously depicts the daily life of a Canadian gay couple while addressing issues faced by the LGBT+ community.
@specialagentartemis directed my attention recently to this piece on the misrepresentation and decontextualization of Audre Lorde's quote "the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house." It's very good and worth reading in full. But, to pivot to a completely different theorist, the memetic dumbing-down of that quote that the author identifies - the way it has become "a revolutionary provocation flattened into a reflexive shutdown" that "shows up most often as a thought-terminating cliché" is precisely what drives me up the wall about the popular reception of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick's concepts of paranoid reading and reparative reading.
Namely, I have seen so many people use not even a quote from that essay itself, but a journalist's gloss of the essay, to effectively "clap back" at literary interpretations they disagree with or deem intolerably "paranoid," a kind of reactive and smug non-response that is not only against the spirit of the essay, but is, ironically enough, in and of itself a paranoid gesture. On the flip side, in response to this, you get people arguing, "Well, actually, paranoid readings are important and necessary, because we need to be able to criticize eg. racism!" even though Sedgwick literally never said otherwise.
In the essay, Sedgwick states, very explicitly, that paranoid readings are not inherently bad, and that they do serve a purpose in criticism. Her definition of "paranoid reading" is also more complex than simply "being critical" of something, or reading something in bad faith. In fact, the idea that paranoid readings are necessary to be critical of oppressive elements in a text is actually part of what Sedgwick argues against in the essay.
...for someone to have an unmystified view of systemic oppressions does not intrinsically or necessarily enjoin that person to any specific train of epistemological or narrative consequences. To be other than paranoid, to practice other than paranoid forms of knowing does not, in itself, entail a denial of the reality or gravity of enmity or oppression.
I am saying that the main reasons for questioning paranoid practices are other than the possibility that their suspicions can be delusional or simply wrong. Concomitantly, some of the main reasons for practicing paranoid strategies may be other than the possibility that they offer unique access to true knowledge. They represent a way, among other ways, of seeking, finding, and organizing knowledge. Paranoia knows some things well and others poorly.
Sedgwick's definition of paranoia is derived from Paul Ricoeur's concept of the hermeneutics of suspicion, which in turn is derived from Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud; it's a form of literary analysis that probes texts for hidden meanings. Sedgwick identifies this kind of approach as central to antihomophobic literary criticism in the '80s and '90s; she also acknowledges that much of her own writing was governed by this approach. Decoding veiled meanings obviously has its uses in queer interpretation, especially for Sedgwick, who worked largely with nineteenth century novels, especially Gothic novels. However, at the time of writing "Paranoid Reading and Reparative Reading," she'd come to notice that "paranoid reading" was conflated with criticism itself; the way it was seen as the only means of antihomophobic inquiry, the only possible response to the recognition of the severity and structural omnipresence of homophobia.
...in the hands of thinkers after Freud, paranoia has by now candidly become less a diagnosis than a prescription. In a world where no one need be delusional to find evidence of systemic oppression, to theorize out of anything but a paranoid critical stance has come to seem naïve, pious, or complaisant. I myself have no wish to return to the use of ‘‘paranoid’’ as a pathologizing diagnosis, but it seems to me a great loss when paranoid inquiry comes to seem entirely coextensive with critical theoretical inquiry rather than being viewed as one kind of cognitive/affective theoretical practice among other, alternative kinds.
What paranoia is, for Sedgwick, is faith in the spectacle of exposure, or the infinitely regress process of mining evidence of oppression. One example she gives is Judith Butler's Gender Trouble, in which Butler identifies drag as exposing the constructed and artificial nature of gender; Sedgwick is not only skeptical of the revolutionary qualities of exposure, but views Butler's argument as a reductive and limited understanding of the affects associated with camp as a sensibility. She also, significantly, uses a reading of Proust as an example of reparative reading. Although she doesn't mention this in the essay, it used to be common in academic criticism of Proust to claim that the women the narrator of À la recherche is infatuated with were "actually" men, as a reading of a veiled homosexuality to mirror Proust's own. Sedgwick instead performs a queer reading through an alternate route, attributing the narrator's revelations in the final volume of the novel to his detachment from normative hetero-reproductive generational cycles. (Note that her conception of a "reparative reading" is derived from Melanie Klein's theory of the "depressive position" - it is a reading produced by a search for joy that comes only in the wake of grief, trauma, and loss.)
...it isn’t that one is pessimistic and sees the glass as half empty, while the other is optimistic and sees it as half full. In a world full of loss, pain, and oppression, both epistemologies are likely to be based on deep pessimism: the reparative motive of seeking pleasure, after all, arrives, by Klein’s account, only with the achievement of a depressive position. But what each looks for—which is again to say, the motive each has for looking—is bound to differ widely. Of the two, however, it is only paranoid knowledge that has so thorough a practice of disavowing its affective motive and force and masquerading as the very stuff of truth.
I would highly recommend people read the essay in full - it's a bit dense, especially if you're unfamiliar with affect theory, but so astonishingly intelligent (and almost more therapeutic to me right now than my actual therapist).
To expand more on this - a reading can be "paranoid" according to Sedgwick's definition and still be correct, insightful, "good faith," and not even necessarily "pessimistic" or "cynical." The latter is a common misreading of the essay - as quoted in the OP, Sedgwick states that both paranoid and reparative readings are often pessimistic. But if anything, many paranoid readings are actually invested in a kind of optimism; she identifies "faith in exposure" as one of the central tenets of a paranoid critical orientation, and "faith" parses as optimistic in most contexts. Her identification of Judith Butler's reading of drag in Gender Trouble as a paranoid reading does not stem from any particular pessimism on Butler's part (if anything, Butler is attentive to the liberatory and subversive qualities of drag) but from Butler's framework of drag's potential to "expose" the constructedness of gender. In fact, Sedgwick's skepticism of the efficacy of such an "exposure" is, arguably, a countering pessimism.
This is even more apparent in the opening anecdote in the essay, referring to the question of whether or not the AIDS virus was deliberately engineered. There is a kind of optimism vested in the desire to unveil a conspiracy or an act of violence, a belief that "surely if people realized this was happening, things would change!" This is sometimes true, but, as Sedgwick points out, there are demonstrably many instances in which it's not, or in which the exposure itself is the violence (which is interesting in its anticipation of theorizing on here about the concept of hypervisibility as a form of oppression, especially re: transmisogyny). It's the reply given in that anecdote - effectively, "Even if AIDS were deliberately engineered, what difference would that knowledge actually make?" - that is pessimistic! Part of her argument is that it's only through that pessimism - the kind of cumulative world-weariness that activism can lead to - that other possibilities for formulating or utilizing knowledge can be discerned (and through which one can allow oneself to be surprised, as in Sedgwick's view a paranoid approach continually strives to forestall surprise - a process with which many of us who struggle with anxiety are well-acquainted).
All of that is to say - "paranoia" as a critical lens is not inherently bad. Sometimes it can be useful or necessary. The problem is the conflation of a paranoid approach with criticism itself. And as Sedgwick was speaking to antihomophobic criticism specifically, it's easy to trace a line to how this often manifests in any kind of anti-oppressive interpretative approach. It's common to characterize, for example, mining for oppressive subtext as the feminist, anti-homophobic, anti-racist, etc. approach. The idea that one might be well aware of that subtext but not see its revelation as the most productive or insightful means of exploring gender, race, sexuality, etc. in that text is anathema to many people. One can be aware, one can care very deeply, and still make a different choice as where to expend one's interpretive energies.
In the background of the video clip, posted by a fan at the hotel breakfast just before Christmas 2018, Shane Hollander is talking on the phone. He looks tired but he's smiling, pushing scrambled eggs around his plate with a fork. "I saw, baby," he says. "No, definitely, no way that was slashing, I'm with you. You'll get them next time, though. Beautiful goal you got in the first, that was so fucking sexy. I can't wait to see you tomorrow. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Love you."
Which leads to a bit of an uproar because omg Shane Hollander has a girlfriend?? who plays hockey???? that's so on brand for him like. okay who was playing last night and got a goal in the first period, we need to find the woman who has Shane Hollander crooning into his phone like a lovestruck teenager. and the consensus lands on an unsuspecting and entirely unrelated CWHL forward who has never even been in the same city as Shane but the Internet is running with the story and there's journalists harassing her and Shane has to get his agent to call her agent so he can apologise for this mess and she's like, dude, I know it's not your fault, but Shane feels so fucking bad about it, you know?
And unfortunately it doesn't really let up as quickly as they thought because it's right before Christmas and isn't this a great story, fucking Hallmark movie shit, so a very unimpressed Leila (her name is Leila) has to look a reporter in the eye after her team just played a really good fucking game of hockey and everybody wants to talk to her about some fucking guy, you know? so she looks him in the eye and says, no, I am not dating Shane Hollander, I have never dated Shane Hollander, I will never date Shane Hollander, I am literally a lesbian. I have a whole-ass girlfriend. She plays for the Blades.
And Shane Hollander is so consumed by jealousy he almost chokes.
Loving the idea that after some time has passed and everybody has calmed tf down, it becomes a silly little joke like yeah, how's my girlfriend's boyfriend doing?, they mostly hang out at hockey events especially once the Irina Foundation is a bit more established and Shane is putting more effort into his charity work but then they just always end up getting tipsy in a corner together, talking puck and bitching about the press and how physios torture you for their own sick enjoyment, all three of them laughing and it's genuinely fun and he's fine, it's fine, Shane is not burning alive with greed at all.
Leila sends him a photo the next morning at buttfuck o'clock of her gf in running gear like "i told her Shane Hollander would bring me breakfast in bed, not abandon me to go exercise" and Shane replies "so sorry to disappoint you also does this mean Marie got the code for the hotel gym?" and then they gradually become real friends and the next time they’re at some gala Leila's insta story complaining that "they’re ganging up on me" because Shane and Marie dragged her out for a run goes a bit too viral and of course the tabloids run all sorts of bullshit about how he's cheating in Rose Landry with Leila or on Leila with Marie or
once Hollanov are out and public the running joke is that everybody thought Ilya was the womaniser but Shane somehow managed to land three girlfriends at once
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
While these are two common origins, I don't think they form a majority when combined. Lots of internet slang comes from abbreviating other things, or playing around with existing words. Lol is an acronym, cya is a shortening, selfie is the word "self" Australianised. Lots of words come from online gaming (call that nazi if you like but that's a broad brush). Some are compound words e.g. clickbait.
I would love to see a graph of the origins of the most common internet slang terms in different areas. Maybe in the US AAVE is a more common origin but the US is not the only place in the world, even on the internet. People who live elsewhere also use words, often with different origins and meanings, and they have adapted those to use on the internet.
I know this is a deliberately reductive meme for the sake of humor, but I'm also seeing some misinformation and a fair amount of purity wank on this post.
I mentioned it in the notes, but the word "slop" has been used for hundreds of years and predates Nazis by a few centuries. People had been calling muck-like stuff and low quality things "slop" before some Nazis and other conspiracy-minded assholes came up with an idea that uses the word (though if you use the term "goyslop", kindly stfu, because that is unquestionably Nazi shit). Whether it's pig feed or AI generated images, I am going to use the word "slop" to describe them.
I love understanding where words and terms come from, but we also need to fact check anythingbthat claims to know the "dark origins of words and terms" because they are often riddled with inaccuracies. Years ago, there was one such viral email chain that claimed the word "picnic" came from US lynchings of Black people. It did not, it came from the French term picque-nique. Now, that is not to say that some sick bastards didn't have picnics after lynchings, there is historical evidence of that happening. However, there's no reason to misrepresent the origins of the word or to not have picnics anymore just because some people in the past chose a sick and evil time and place for them.
The world and language are bad enough, we don't need to throw the baby (ex: slop) out with the bathwater (I'm not going to use the Nazi conspiracy term a second time).
blakekathryn
annaxmalina
turnnoffyourmind
izzy806
2087
germansingergirl
