ForFutureReference

On the bus one spring, on the Day of Silence, I overheard two girls talking about the fact that one of them was wearing a support bracelet. She said, "I don't actually support 'them', but, you know, it's basically socially suicide to say that."

Corps aren't your friend. They have never been your friend, and they will never be your friend. They also don't hate you either. That's because they are not people, despite what SCOTUS may say.

What they are though are canaries. The tune they sing reflects on what's considered appropriate in the wider society. Not just queer rights, but immigrants and environmentalism.

north american - individual living in or a national of a country located on the continent of north america

south american - individual living in or a national of a country located on the continent of south america

canadian - definitionally, especially lately, person who does not fucking want to be called an american, because "american" in both canadian and american english has the semantic weight of "national of the united states of america"

and this is not, in fact, limited to english

amerískur - icelandic adjective for american (loanword, more on the slang side, bandarískur more often used)

ameríkani - icelandic noun describing a national of the united states of america

américain - french adjective or noun describing a national of the united states of america

"The 'God Made Trans People' billboard is stupid! God didn't make me! I'm an atheist!" Okay. The billboard sits along a major highway in Kansas. We can deduce that the target audience is not you—it's the centrist evangelical Christians driving along that road who could probably be persuaded to become allies as long as we choose our words carefully and don't make them feel attacked for not already knowing everything about trans rights issues. Another one I see a lot is, "We shouldn't be talking about how right-wing legislation catches [privileged in-group] in the crossfire when [marginalized out-group] suffers far more!" I know. I agree with you. Which is why you and I are not the intended audience of this argument!

The entire point of rhetoric is to win over someone who doesn't already fully agree with you. In this case, let's say that someone is Jennifer, the moderate center-right mom in your neighborhood who doesn't really know or care about transgender issues but would be absolutely horrified by the idea of her teenage daughter having to submit to an invasive inspection of her body just to be allowed to play soccer. Tell her, "Banning trans students from sports will inevitably subject all student athletes to invasive gender-policing," or "Legal restrictions on gender-affirming care will make it harder for you to access the hormone replacement therapy you take to treat menopause symptoms," and she is more likely to question her existing beliefs and listen to the rest of what you have to say than if you lead with leftist talking points that she already has a calcified opinion about or which she thinks do not personally affect her.

The purist would tell you that utilitarian argument is bad because it commodifies immigrants, and we should be arguing on ethical grounds.

Except... the argument that "immigration should be supported because it's the right thing to do" is preaching to the choir.

The people you're needing to convince are those who think immigrants are a burden. Of course, you're not gonna convince everyone, but the goal is to shift those margins.

Those guys aren't your friends. They believe the modern state of Israel is stopping the Messiah from returning. But when the Messiah returns, all gentiles will be slaves. They don't see Palestinians as people, just a means to an end. They're not here to support people's dignity, but because they want the Messiah to come.

They also don't see women as people, which is why you NEVER see women with them. Ever. They won't teach women to read or have any education so they can't leave the cult.

They're also Holocaust deniers.

Evangelicals: support Israel to bring about Christ's return... afterwhich the Jews who don't convert get chucked in the Lake.

NT: oppose Israel to bring about the Messiah... afterwhich the gentiles and women get enslaved.

A basic membership already helps to financially contribute and, in the case of many US art museums, helps to keep general admission free. And a couple trips to a ticketed exhibition is usually enough to more than make up the difference.

That is exactly how prejudice evolves itself into something systemic. By changing the rules of who is allowed to be seen clearly. And this is where it becomes personal.

Most people reading this do not think of themselves as antisemitic. They would never use a slur. They would never straight out and openly deny someone’s humanity. But that is not how this shows up anymore. It shows up in smaller decisions we make as progressive and left leaders these days. In what we excuse. In what we scroll past. In which deaths feel complicated instead of tragic and unacceptable. In whether we instinctively see a person or a position when we hear the word “Zionist” or “anti-Zionist.”

You can oppose Israeli policy. You can reject Zionism. You can defend it. None of those positions require you to sort Jews, Israelis, Palestinians, Arabs or Muslims into categories that determine whether they deserve empathy. If your framework depends on deciding which Jews are acceptable and which are not, or which civilians matter and which do not, then the issue is not that your politics are controversial. It is that your reasoning has already crossed a line that civil rights traditions were meant to prevent. The civil rights standard was never agreement. It was consistency. No collective guilt. No dehumanization. No conditional empathy.

We already know how to apply these principles. We are watching what happens when we fail to. The only question is whether we are willing to apply them when it challenges our own assumptions. Because if we cannot, then all we have really done is learn how to recognize injustice selectively.

And selective justice is not justice for all."

cr: evolverozanov

Backstage before the hockey romance panel at BookCon 2026, and Rachel tells me she loves Check, Please! and is Kickstarter backer.

Dragons on the wing are vulnerable to being mobbed by smaller, more agile flyers, particularly in your large rear blind spot, like a bird of prey being mobbed by crows. Having a human armed with a long spear perched on your back helps to dissuade anyone from getting any funny ideas.

Breath weapons are impressive enough on the ground, but in flight they're really only good for strafing stationary targets; trying to use your breath weapon in an aerial dogfight is a good way to get fire up your nose. A real fight calls for sterner measures – and, concomitantly, a crew to aim and reload the cannons.

In today's competitive world, it's not enough to devour a flock of sheep and call it a day if you want to keep your edge. You're accompanied at all times by a qualified personal alchemist tasked with carefully regulating your internal furnace to ensure peak performance, and sometimes you even listen to them.

For why this really matters: Richmond, Virginia was the capital of the Confederacy. It's also the cradle of the Lost Cause, with groups such as the Daughters of the Confederacy originating there and Monument Avenue largely dedicated to Confederate like Robert E Lee.

Within the past decade however, Virginia's been at the forefront of dismantling that legacy; literally in the case of taking down the statues. And now, Spanberger's telling the Lost Cause, "We may have brought you into the world, but I'm gonna do my damndest to take you out of it." while being an encapsulation of this meme:

Backstage before the hockey romance panel at BookCon 2026, and Rachel tells me she loves Check, Please! and is Kickstarter backer.