well, that was a thing

this is a bunch of antisemitic fascists (literally) who think the catholic church got too woke and needs to RETVRN to acting as a state religion with an official policy of violent suppression of every non-catholic person, who they consider subhuman

From their Profession of Faith:

This is why I profess that those who govern society must submit to the salutary influence of the Church, which enlightens minds through her Magisterium, heals and strengthens wills through the grace of the sacraments, and directs man towards his true supernatural destiny, of which she is the guardian. The good of society consequently demands that heads of state recognize their right and duty to favour and protect the holy Church, and likewise to oppose by the laws of their government whatever would obstruct her necessary influence, which is that of the one true religion.

and

I likewise hold that, although man possesses an ontological dignity which raises him above material beings, the human dignity to be respected is not indifferent to the truth and error professed by persons, nor to the good and evil they accomplish: he who professes error or does evil forfeits his moral dignity. This is why legitimate authority in no way attacks human dignity when it punishes crimes according to the demands of justice, by proportionate penalties, in order to defend the common good against grave disorders.

(emphasis mine; "professes error" here = "is not catholic")

The interesting thing to me about the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy (and there is only a trilogy, no other movies, don't at me) always was when these movies are set.

Because these movies are set in around 1740. Which notably is AFTER the end of the "Golden Age of Piracy". The Golden Age of Piracy lasted from about 1650 to 1730. It was a period defined by how a bunch of political and economic factors made piracy a very valid career, for the lack of a better word.

And of course this should come with the asterisk that obviously historical real piracy was mostly acts committed in service of a crown mostly to harm the imperial rivals, and not the big adventure story. But part of the reason that people do love pirates so much is in the end also based in how pirate society in some strange ways was ahead of its time. Pirates had health insurance, retirement funds, gay marriage, democracy, and more. Sure, at times for weird complex societal reasons, but it makes pirates this perfect fantasy. People living outside the oppressive society of their time, on the high seas, which feels adventurous.

And the thing about the Pirates movies that fascinates me so much is how they do interact with this. And how the characters in it relate to it. Because it is something the movies are aware of. Jack Sparrow is more than once called a "dying breed". Because he stands in for all the best and worst aspects of piracy. He is an idealist, but also a selfish asshole. Will is someone trying to proof his worth to polite society, but starts to understand that polite society will never see him as more than a lower class person. While Elizabeth is quite aware that to society she never will be anything but a woman, none of her other traits being acknowledged. And Barbossa as someone who has decided he should just get to do what he wants, because others do as well.

And there is this haunting of colonialism in the background. This is made so clear in Dead Man's Chest and World's End. Cutler Beckett is a personification of the British Empire. Doing horrible things but whenever someone makes him realize how horrible it is, he will just say: "Well, it is good business."

Embroidered Sculptures Recreate Lifelike Mushrooms, Lichen, and Fungi in Thread

by Grace Ebert - Colossal, February 25, 2022

Amanda Cobbett suspends a singular moment in the fleeting lives of fungi by stitching their likeness in thread. The textile artist photographs and gathers specimens that she brings back to her Surrey Hills-based studio, where she finds fibers to match pale green lichens and golden chanterelles. Using a free-motion embroidery technique on a sewing machine, she then stitches multiple layers onto a piece of dissolvable fabric that, once the organism is complete, is washed away to leave just the mushroom or mossy bark intact. As a scroll through her Instagram reveals, the resulting sculptures are so realistic in color, shape, and size that it’s difficult to distinguish the artist’s iterations from their counterparts.

Currently, Cobbett is preparing a collection that will head to the Artful Craft exhibition at Make Southwest, which opens on April 2.

Obviously a publisher is a business and a business needs to make money, but the idea used to be that you'd have a couple of very successful authors who bring in so much cash that they subsidise the new kid who is building a back catalogue of books that sell okay until they get name recognition and pay for themselves. I was told back then that a couple thousand pounds was very reasonable for a debut novel because you want to get royalties for the sales exceeding your advance and that way the publisher sees you as a profitable investment. The last couple of years I keep hearing about six figure book deals for debut (!) literary fiction (!) novels, what on earth?

My day job is as a freelance editor for nonfiction books, and I can safely say that if the publishing industry were operating as intended, I would either not have a job at all or be working for a specific press. Authors pay me directly to do the work that a press editor used to do as part of publication contracts. This is because so many presses have started outsourcing all their editorial work to either third-party contractors or, even worse, to genAI.

And it makes me think about how we KNOW that colonizers 'studying' precolonial societies looked at people who weren't weighed down by religious shame or wearing 4+ layers of clothing in hot environments and projected their repressed sexuality onto them.

We KNOW that where sexualities existed, these freak ass euros were obsessive about it and hardly had concepts of anything more subtle or nuanced happening outside of it (these are the same people who saw centuries-old food forests as 'untouched land' so like...par for the course)

And knowing that I REALLY think people- especially white LGBTQ fols-- need to step back bc I keep seeing y'all look at cultural relationship patterns beyond and from before your contemporary culture and all you draw from it is an individualistic liberty of identity. And not to shame but that's the big fucking shadow torturing the community IMO. Like others have said, being gay or trans or whatever doesn't actually absolve you of being part of a contemporary colonial culture, that takes actual work to examine and shift from.

I'm tired of how y'all cherry pick that such and such African tribes had Woman Husbands with multiple wives or that such and such Polynesian culture had open relationships and thats fucking ALL YOU FUCKING TAKE. It's really hard not to get mad. Not because 'boo you're wrong' but that ONCE AGAIN Y'ALL SEE WHAT YOU WANT AND NOTHING MORE.

This was also one of my issues when a few years back everyone wanted to rant and rave about how having free sex and/or multiple partners was gonna revolutionize society.

DID IT?? DID IT??

This is very much like when privileged white ppl in the 60s-70s, exhausted by war, were very ready to adopt cheapened eastern philosophies and their conceptualization around 'transformative' love and sex was just like...orgies and irresponsibility.

Anyway point being that in many cases, wherever you find societies that were based on these various forms of plural relationship that also very very much included shared-responsibility/economic connection driven relationships. Someone's 'wife' could very well have been a co-mother or business partner and NOT her lover. Many times.

To go back to what I was talking about before, I'm fucking hitting snooze on the shit y'all think is so revolutionary until it stops being about you and your fucking desires. Personal wants, needs and desires are important to tend to but it's the BARE FUCKING MINIMUM of building a society.

Please understand that just because you KNOW that your current culture is hyperindividualistic and maybe even hypersexualised doesn't mean you actually have worked out the many ways that's affecting your perspective. It's like with decolonial thought-- you don't just get to say "I've decolonized" without doing years of ongoing fucking work.

I've said it before but a lot of the LGBT/Alt sexuality scene is bound by a very limiting perspective where all you can see or conceptualize is an identity that is self-referential. All you can really center is the pendulum swing away from the shitty right wing sex negativity of your forebears. And I get it too bc when you're not allowed to be who you are from young, you end up having to go through that phase when you're older. But this is why we have ppl in their 20s & 30s and beyond who have very little in the way of community mindset and really only see being 'queer' as a space to self validate sexual exploration and 'I get to do what I want!' personal expression.

henry v: the thing is that hal was at the club and it didn’t change anything. hal was at the club and it didn’t save him. but it matters. it matters that he was at the club. and kingship simply isn’t proper hal husbandry. you can’t keep a killer whale in a zoo. did nobody see free willy. yes he’s the mirror of all christian kings and he has the incredible rookie win streak of lightning mcqueen in the first cars movie but look at him he’s a shell of a man he needs 100ccs of EDM right now

richard ii: i need you to understand that richard ii died at age 33. he became king at age 10 and he was deposed at 32-ish and he died at 33. this motherfucker should NOT have been doing ANY of that he 100% should have been at the club. are you kidding. in shakespeare it’s not like he was actually running anything anyway. and the historical r2 was wayyyy more into art than governance or war, so really everyone would be better off. man should’ve been doing uppers to olly alexander songs and sponsoring new up-and-coming DJs, maybe one of whom is working on a 24-track album themed around a bunch of clubgoers telling their life stories while they all try to navigate public transit

edward iv: all this guy ever really wanted to do was drink, eat, and fuck. i know he would be taking fat bong rips if he could. however he did die at age 40 which is tilting past the point where i think, “wow, you shouldn’t have been doing that shit.” still, he would have enjoyed having stand-up sex with someone in the bathroom

henry vi: i know what i just said, and i know henry vi died at 49, but let us be for real: he absolutely should not have been in the government. he should have been anywhere else. however we must also be for real in acknowledging that henry vi would not like the club and would not want to be there

henry iv: i don’t think henry iv would particularly like the club either, but as i understand it, he was a pretty sociable and likable dude before he got himself into all of that. nevertheless, he’s a step below h6 because he got himself into all of that, whereas h6 needs some kind of rescue intervention

richard iii: richard iii died at 32, which does incline me toward thinking he would benefit. but he said himself that he isn’t shaped for sportive tricks, so maybe being at the club watching everyone else dance and flirt would simply fuel his deep-seated resentment toward society. at least the club is 18+, so there are no killable or marriageable teens in the vicinity, and perhaps doing some lines behind the bar would have fixed him

king john: nobody liked king john and he didn’t have fun. i don’t think the club would have helped