Skip to main content


youtube.com/watch?v=jylNleQQTj…
in reply to Mx Verda

THANK YOU. youtube.com/watch?v=hMUlp7T9ng…
Person: mental illness, trauma, abuse, neglect, etc.
Uncle Iroh, ffs: "That girl is crazy and needs to go down!"

Yes. Anyone, mentally ill / mistreated etc or not, can be dangerous to themself and others around them.
Literally anyone.

11:20 Except no, Ozai is another parent. He's more entrenched and beholden to this toxic culture, arguably, than Ursa. He still doesn't get to be absolved from being a bad father.
They can get a damn nanny, bring Iroh back, or just spend 2 seconds thinking about how to stop demanding carework from mothers as a matter of course.

I could see the flawed logic in "Azula is well-suited to this crappy environment, so I don't need to worry about her as much".
*Still* doesn't excuse treating her like a non-person.

Uncle Iroh to Zuko: "You alone can cleanse the sins of our family". A totally normal thing to say to a minor.

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to Mx Verda

No one is 'bad'. Everyone is shaped by their situation and has incomplete influence over their situation.
Even if someone were completely 'bad', does that make them not human? Are their rights to be a person revoked?
If someone can feel any kind of pain, or have the same needs (food, water, organ maintenance in sleep, etc), then people in that world share stakes with that person.

People always need to cooperate, compromise, share, and make decisions. If nothing else, communication can always start from mutually understood context.
youtube.com/watch?v=hMUlp7T9ng…

in reply to Mx Verda

in reply to Mx Verda

44:00 "But with Mei, how can it be about fear as a form of control?"
Because she can connect the dots about what Azula has done and may consider?

55:19 "You're definitely gonna die if you don't, so you might as well follow my orders" might also apply to her in the Fire Nation's patriarchal exploitative system of power.

56:00 yes, finally, we get into the rampant sexism.

1:03:30 omg yes. I wish I could figure out the most effective phrasing in a given moment. Feels like she understands people around her in order to guess how to best survive.

1:07:00 yup. If she had a set worldview, she'd have yet one more thing to be targeted. I think the InfoSec phrase is 'attack surface' or something. 1:08:00 you can use people's misconception of you against them.

1:13:00 nope. "This person could be useful to us" is a terrible reason to help someone. Help them because they are a person who exists, not because you see benefit for yourself.

youtube.com/watch?v=hMUlp7T9ng…

in reply to Mx Verda

1:24:40 YES! She's had shit in her life and impossible expectations, but she's still put in the work to solidify her skills. Omg yes, the solid creativity and adaptability. She's always had to be "better than [literally everything, including herself" so she has much less in common with other people who haven't.
Even within restrictive situations, you always have minor choices. Start with the tiny decisions and work up to bigger changes!

youtube.com/watch?v=hMUlp7T9ng…

in reply to Mx Verda

"If you make me realise my mental model of the world was even SLIGHTLY inaccurate, then I will hurt you."

It feels like they don't like examples of people making positive changes. Or it feels like a responsibility to choose (within personal abilities in situation), therefore they feel the knowledge as criticism.

youtube.com/watch?v=Smt8Sa7XTL…
how do we trick capitalists into getting therapy?

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to Mx Verda

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to Mx Verda

To show vulnerability to someone else is to communicate a lack of will to fight, or a sense of trust that they won't fight.
That starts a shared situation where you're coexisting. You then both have a motive to sustain this lower energy state.

You're not trusting a given person, exactly, but the idea that this event will not hurt you unduly.

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to Mx Verda

Violence is a last resort to escape an untenable situation.
So advocating for stochastic terrorism (say, like every time there's a mass shooting or directing discomfort away from capitalism to random sub-groups) feels pretty relevant tbh.

Do I think people should die? No.
Do I think people who currently feel comfortable with conservative ideas are irredeemable? No.
Do I think it's at all surprising that Charlie Kirk advocated for exactly what he got? Not really, no.
Yep, a human is dead, his partner is upset, etc. (*and kids. I don't wish losing a parent on anyone.) Just like the people he argued didn't deserve understanding.

youtube.com/watch?v=6eWzH5-tXu…

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to Mx Verda

10:20 omg yes. In the UK, people keep asking when I 'automatically' got citizenship. The cheapest for the APPLICATION for UK citizenship was £1200. It's now £1700. I didn't have enough then and I don't now.
"But you've lived here for how long?" Evidently they've been reading Daily Mail / Sun nonsense for how long.

youtube.com/watch?v=6eWzH5-tXu…

Lo, thar be cookies on this site to keep track of your login. By clicking 'okay', you are CONSENTING to this.