Administrative Snorlax

The Jammu and Kashmir government on Wednesday issued a ban on 25 books, including works by several prominent authors, citing concerns over national security and public order.

The government has mandated the seizure of these books, claiming they spread misleading narratives, endorse terrorism, and encourage secessionism in the Union Territory.

Among the authors whose works have been banned are renowned Islamic scholar Syed Abul A’la Maududi, veteran academic and constitutional expert AG Noorani, acclaimed writer and activist Arundhati Roy, political scientist Sumantra Bose, historians Ayesha Jalal and Sugatha Bose, and Kashmiri academics and writers Hafsa Kanjwal, Ather Zia, and Essar Batool.

Human Rights Violations in Kashmir by Piotr Balcerowicz and Agnieszka Kuszewska,

Kashmir’s Fight for Freedom by Mohd Yosuf Saraf,

Colonizing Kashmir: State-Building under Indian Occupation by Hafsa Kanjwal,

Kashmir Politics and Plebiscite by Dr. Abdul Jabbar Gockhami,

Do You Remember Kunan Poshpora? by Essar Batool and others,

Mujahid ki Azaan by Imam Hasan Al-Bana Shaheed, edited by Maulana Mohammad Enayatullah Subhani,

Al Jihadul fil Islam by Moulana Abul A’la Maududi,

Independent Kashmir by Christopher Snedden,

Resisting Occupation in Kashmir by Haley Duschinski, Mona Bhat, Ather Zia, and Cynthia Mahmood,

Between Democracy and Nation: Gender and Militarization in Kashmir by Seema Kazi, Contested Lands by Sumantra Bose,

In Search of a Future: The Story of Kashmir by David Devadas,

Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War by Victoria Schofield,

The Kashmir Dispute 1947–2012 by A.G. Noorani,

Kashmir at the Crossroads: Inside a 21st Century Conflict by Sumantra Bose,

Contested Lands by Sumantra Bose,

A Dismantled State: The Untold Story of Kashmir after Article 370 by Anuradha Bhasin,

Resisting Disappearance: Military Occupation and Women’s Activism in Kashmir by Ather Zia,

Confronting Terrorism edited by Maroof Raza (with contributions by Stephen P. Cohen noted in some sources),

Freedom in Captivity: Negotiations of Belonging Along Kashmiri Frontier by Radhika Gupta,

Kashmir: The Case for Freedom by Tariq Ali, Hilal Bhatt, Angana P. Chatterji, Pankaj Mishra, and Arundhati Roy,

Azadi by Arundhati Roy,

USA and Kashmir by Dr. Shamshad Shan,

Law and Conflict Resolution in Kashmir by Piotr Balcerowicz and Agnieszka Kuszewska, Tarikh-i-Siyasat

Kashmir by Dr. Afaq,

Kashmir and the Future of South Asia by Sugata Bose and Ayesha Jalal.

I just think it’s sickening the way children can be abused at home and get punished for trying to talk about or escape the situation. why believe a child is unsafe when they tell you that point blank? their guardian said this child is a liar, obviously they’re not being abused just attention seeking. 🙄

the whole psychiatry system is a joke. love your blog.

“AI addiction” you mean “self destructive antisocial behavior enabled by predatory technology”

“Porn addiction” you mean “internalized sexual shame and desensitization”

“Sex addiction” you mean “self destructive promiscuity”

“Addiction” is a clinical fucking disease. These people are not diseased, by and large. Some of them are experiencing/committing maladaptive behaviors and trying to absolve themselves of responsibility for their actions. Some of them are just existing in an evolutionarily explicable way, but our Puritanical/Calvinist society thinks they should be ashamed for ever experiencing pleasure or gratification at all rather than sacrificing every scrap of enjoyment they can claw out of life and suffering all the time because humans are tainted by sin and have to do penance for living.

away and putting it on

the top fucking shelf.

"AI addiction" you mean "Over-reliance on a dubious source of information."

"Porn addiction" you mean "Enjoying media that some arbitrary authority considers too erotic."

"Sex addiction" you mean "Choosing to have sex more frequently or with more partners than is considered normal in a sex-negative, monogonormative society," unless what you mean is "Cheating on a partner to whom one promised exclusivity, the problem with which is the lying, not the sex."

OP is absolutely correct that a lot of people (especially politicians and the like) who profess to "love children" actually love parental authority over children, and support and enable parental abuse of children. Whereas people who "hate children" seem to more often (not always!) direct their hatred toward parents rather than children themselves.

But two things can be true:

Children have distinct interests and rights separate from those of their parents, and treating children's interests (and "loving children") as synonymous with parents' interests facilitates absolutely horrific child abuse by parents, and

Children's interests and parents' interests are closely intertwined, and policies that make it harder for parents to raise children are also harmful to the children themselves.

So, some of the things people who "hate children" do/advocate that harm children are:

Undermining the few meager protections for parents and children that exist in the U.S. (I can only talk about the U.S. because I'm less familiar with other countries) by demanding equivalency for pets or childless adults, like "If landlords can ban pets, why can't they ban children?" (because advocates worked very hard to ban housing discrimination against children; landlords would absolutely ban children if they could) or "Why should parents get time off work, what about me-ternity leave?" (the U.S. is one of the few countries in the world that doesn't have universal paid family leave, btw) (yes, yes, everyone should get paid time off, and, also, parents should get special paid time off for parenting) (yes, "me-ternity leave" is a real term, that's not a weird strawman I made up, even though it sounds like one).

Promotion and normalization of really gross, eugenicist rhetoric around poor parents, young parents, and disabled parents, or anyone who might be perceived as having children "irresponsibly" or having children "they can't take care of." The most radical Marxist who ever sang The Internationale will suddenly sound indistinguishable from Ronald Reagan as soon as the topic turns to "people having children they can't afford."

Deep misogyny against mothers, from the overt ("fat with saggy boobs, ew") to the pseudo-feminist ("It's so sad that she gave up her mind/career/identity because she was brainwashed into becoming a breeder").

A general refusal to acknowledge child raising/care as valuable labor that benefits society and is worthy of respect and, more importantly, compensation.

Advocacy for the total exclusion of children from the public sphere, or assertion of some sort of right to never interact with children in any capacity.

Relatedly, advocacy for a strict age-segregation of society, and an intense stigma on adults socializing with children. It goes very quickly from "I, personally, don't want to socialize with children" to "And why would any other adult want to, unless they're some kind of creepy pedophile?" to "Actually mixed-age socialization is bad for children, we're doing them a favor by keeping them hermetically sealed from adult life."

Either a disinterest in or opposition to including the right to parent as well as the right not to parent as aspects of "reproductive rights" or being pro-choice.

Okay, this one is pretty trivial compared to the others, but I'm tossing it in: Appropriation of children's entertainment. It's fine and good for adults to enjoy entertainment aimed at children, but it's absolutely not okay to make children a secondary audience in children's entertainment spaces. I don't agree with "I shouldn't have to deal with kids at weddings, restaurants, other adult-entertainment-focused places" but sure, I can see how you got there. "I shouldn't have to deal with kids at Disney World" where do you even get off? It's for them! It's not for you!

Those are just off the top of my head.

and there were multiple people outside my religion (who wear both blue clothes and blue hats because it’s fine in their religions) who were crashing out because i’m using a “loophole” to wear blue and i’m not actually “following the rule” because if god says not to wear blue clothes, it means don’t wear blue clothes!!

I've said it before and I'll say it again: as a transfeminine butch it took viewing my masculinity from a transmasculine perspective to emotionally divorce myself from the toxic notions of societal normativity.

I was never an effeminate kid but I was SEEN as one. My masculinity was butchness even going that far back and all my peers did look at me and said "that kid's a sissy". I wore a suit and tie to school the first couple years of primary and I wrote cringy poetry for girls that I had crushes on and all my peers would look at me and say "that kid's a faggot".

And when I then came out and began transitioning, it was like shedding falser skin that never was me to begin with. But then the idea that I was now to conform to normative notions of "womanhood" hit me like a stack of bricks.

And it took trans men. It took transmasculinity. It took seeing the biggest, butchest dykes, it took looking at women, men and nonbinary people so UNLIKE EVERYTHING society broadly views as attractive who looked similar to me to learn to LOVE ME.

To learn to love the soft fur on my body, the coarse hair on my legs and arms and hands. The pits, the rolls, the bulging stomach, the small boobs, bigger upper pubic area. The stubble on my face, the way my nose hooks just so slightly. The shadow cast by hair upon my face, the way I smell when I do exercise.

It took being around people, LOVING people to whom all these things I was conditioned to believe to be fundamentally at odds with my closeness to womanhood were DESIRED traits that they STRUGGLED for. It took surrounding myself with people to whom the way I was and wanted to be wasn't things to be erased.

I'm butch. I love my body hair, I love my masculinity. I love all that. I'm not on estrogen to be less of me, myself. I'm on estrogen to be MORE of me, myself. Surrounding myself with people who love their masculinity, who STRIVE for masculinity. To whom testosterone is NOT a poison. To whom the way I am is not a state that's to be shunned or overcome.

It brought me peace. It brought self love. It brought serenity. I feel more at ease inside this body I inhibit and I have now to thank for that: trans men, transmasculine people, transmasculinity. Manhood.

I have to thank for all the love that I have found for my own self.

@thatgarden

and that's the thing: I know that the very binary and transmedicalist leaning focus on "womanhood first, trans second (or never, if stealth)" and "manhood first, trans second (or never, if stealth)" is very big because its a narrative that gets validation from a cissexist and horrifically normative society but the way I see it I will always have more in common with a trans man than with a cis woman without any of the non-normativity on her part.

My womanhood, my gender, my identity is shaped and molded by my experience of it being considered transgressive.

I wasn't a woman until I forced my way out of the norms that I was raised in and I couldn't BE a woman until I asserted MYSELF as that.

A trans man or even a cis woman whose womanhood exists on other intersecting axes of societal marginalization will ALWAYS exist in a way that is more closely related to how I experience the world than a binary, societally conforming cis woman.

And let me be very clear here: this is me saying that ANY aversion, divergence and anti-normativity in a societal sense is what connects and unites me as a nonbinary transfeminine butch dyke with others.

A cis person can 100% be transgressive against societally enforced gender norms and I will always be in solidarity and unity with that person.

No, “afab nonbinary” is NOT equivalent to transmasc.

No, “ amab nonbinary” is NOT equivalent to transfem.

How many times do nonbinary people have to beg and plead for the rest of the trans community to stop forcing us back into the same shitty gender binary we’re trying to escape? Just because some nonbinary people identify as transmasc or transfem does not mean we all do.

Transneutral people are being erased. People with xenogenders are being erased. People with unique cultural gender identities are being erased. A lot of intersex nonbinary people are being erased.

Nonbinary isn’t a third gender, or a modifier for other genders. It is an umbrella term for anyone who identifies beyond the traditional definition of the gender binary. This does include nonbinary people who are transfeminine, or transmasculine, or both, but please stop defining the entire community by the parts most familiar to you.

This erasure feels like the product of laziness and ignorance. Often I see it happening because someone wants a quick shorthand they can use in their discourse posts. And sometimes it happens because someone is claiming half the nonbinary population as transfem or transmasc for the sake of their argument.

For the record, the word for discrimination against nonbinary people is EXORSEXISM, though some may prefer enbyphobia, or just transphobia as a blanket term. Terms like transmisogyny and transandrophobia/anti-transmasculinity CAN be applied to some nonbinary people, with their consent.

But you’ve lost the plot the moment you start trying to sleuth out a nonbinary person’s AGAB to determine which type of oppression they face. If you treat a nonbinary person differently based on what junk you think they have, you are a transphobe and a sexist. And know that any system based off of AGAB is going to be extremely intersexist as well, because sex isn’t a clear-cut binary, either!

Here's a better explanation of transmasculine from the transgender dictionary!

And here's one for transfeminine.

from Abortion attempts without clinical supervision among transgender, nonbinary and gender-expansive people in the United States by Moseson et al (2021).

In 2020 this study on cis women in the US found that 1.4% had ever attempted a self-managed abortion. This study from 2024 found that before the 2022 decision that struck down Roe vs Wade, 2.4% to 3.3% of cis women had ever self managed an abortion, and after 2022 that rose to 10.1%.

God, I wish people would pay this more attention. There's been massive attacks on both abortion/birth control and gender affirming care at the same time by the same people. You think the overlap would be obvious. You'd think it would be too obvious for people to not talk about how scary this is for trans people who can get pregnant, how this is the perfect example of how anti-trans violence is an inherent part of patriarchy & misogyny. And fucking yet!!!!!!

There's even the fact that the executive order defining sex as male and female and immutable, defined male and female as "a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces [gametes]." They worked "legal personhood starts at conception" into the executive order targeting trans people and no one talked about it. One must ask why we (and I mean both trans/queer people and self-identified feminists at large) are so goddamn allergic to talking about issues that affect trans people who can get pregnant! What is it about this group that makes it so we aren't compelling enough victims for anybody who claims to care about intersectionality to give a shit about!