Hi, my name is Naomi, I’m from Texas. I’m organizing this fundraiser for my friend, Wafa, who is in Gaza. This campaign is meant to help her
Go to paypal.me/wafaaresh2 and type in the amount. Since it’s PayPal, it's easy and secure. Don’t have a PayPal account? No worries.
Wafaa's old campaign was shared by 90-ghost
Wafaa's account: @wafaaabd2
Wafaa is Mohiy's ( @mohiygaza21 ) sister. She's one of the many people who have had their gofundme accounts deleted and lost the funds that were waiting to be transferred to her.
If you previously donated to Wafaa's campaign and have received a refund, please donate it to either the chuffed or paypal linked above. Or if this is your first time hearing about Wafaa, please consider donating to her. Even the smallest donation can help Wafaa be able to afford food, water, and evacuation for her family.
Tagging for reach. Please share if you see this. Thank you
Unfortunately, today I received a shocking message from GFM. They deleted my fundraising campaign, and I received an email informing me of the deletion. There are funds I haven't received or transferred to me, including donations made since October of last year. My organization, Imperial, has contacted them, and unfortunately, no progress has been made.
Your funds will be refunded within 3-7 days.
When you receive your refund, please notify me so I can return it through the new campaign.
Hi, my name is Naomi, I’m from Texas. I’m organizing this fundraiser for my friend, Wafa, who is in Gaza. This campaign is meant to help her
"In 2007, I was expected to attend an LGBT leadership conference in order to maintain a scholarship that helped to pay for my undergraduate degree. I was anxious to meet other scholars and activists who had been selected based on their concern for social justice. While sitting down with a fellow attendee, I became engaged in a conversation about current projects we were pursuing. The conversation started out light but soon turned serious when the focus shifted to the Middle East. As a self-identified Arab, I quickly found myself the target of interrogation and criticism. At one point, I was asked how I could still be proud of my heritage and simultaneously “identify with the politics of the LGBTQ community.” According to the other scholar, “the Muslim world just isn’t ready for it.” I was not just offended at his obviously loaded and prejudiced comments, but I felt pressured to fit either the stereotype or the demand: I could be an Arab or an advocate of the LGBTQ community, but never both.
"You really are playing into your culture. Think of the possibilities of reform!”
Because this individual asked me where I got off still “playing into” my
culture, he assumed that somehow his upbringing as a white middle-class US American (as opposed to those Americans who are immigrants, non-US citizens, or otherwise choose not to identify with the US) was the norm. This gung-ho attitude resonates with the masculinist attitudes ubiquitous in gay spaces, where men who are “nelly” are routinely denigrated, and paranoid fantasies about feminine men trying to “take over the community” are commonplace. Of course, this is a community that drag performers, butch dykes, and men who patronized dark, damp bars in basements fought for after they were ostracized by employers, friends, family, and society—a battle that was later appropriated by upstanding white men who came out years after they made their money. The argument voiced by the man at the conference had a no-less-hateful intention than the all-too-common hatred directed at queeny men. Just as traditional gay masculine men must protect their (stolen) personal property—bars, gyms, gayborhoods, etc.—from repulsive feminine invaders, a new generation of liberal gay masculine men must defend their cultural property, the LGBTQ (most often just G and sometimes L) community.
Those on the top will claim that identity is dead only insofar as this
releases them from any responsibility for their words or actions. All over
the internet, gay personals websites valorize “straight acting” as a universal value that is both desirable and positive, linking it to a set of norms that eerily imitate moral code in religious law (thou shalt be butch). In bar scenes, men stand in lock-step formation, patrolling the behavior of those who stray outside the borders of masculine performance, imposing fear of social deportation. Likewise, the largest LGB organizations prioritize the privileges and choices long upheld by patriarchal US American society, like the right to receive benefits through marriage or the right to kill under order of government.
“Straight-acting” does not only prioritize a certain gender presentation, but also inherently assumes whiteness and ableness of body (people of color or anyone using a wheelchair need not apply). Personal profiles use the words “masculine” and “feminine” as a way to marginalize, though the authors claim that they are simply helping out the browsers to narrow search results. By claiming that “Hey, it’s just what I prefer, dude,” the writers fail to realize that, in a community formed by and built upon identification with the body and its practices, the simplest marginalization becomes a vehicle for exclusion and opens new channels for bashing. Not only should a gay man prefer someone masculine (one who avoids “playing into” other value systems), but also someone clearly US American. Supposedly, by laying claim to the pride of stars and stripes, one can overlook years of US segregation, oppression, and imperialism of the body, in favor of something more fitting—like a shiny new BMW in which to cruise ethnically-cleansed parks.
“Not that I think they’re backwards or anything, I just wish the gays of the Middle East could learn from the gays of America.”
Why? So publications purporting to be LG (again, sometimes B, less often T, almost never Q) can advertise expensive watches and handbags while discussing privileged politics in articles positioned next to images of young fit white men? The “Dude, I just don’t do femme” hypocrisy of gay men (last time I checked the lexicon, sex with men was society’s ultimate act of femininity) is echoed in these claims of intercultural “dialogue.” It is as though the “I just” or “but” placed in compound sentences somehow relieves the speaker of any accountability for racism, misogyny, femme-phobia, or hate.
Somehow, the existence of gay bars in urban and usually expensive
geographies becomes proof of social equality. Yet how secure can a space be if it will inevitably be out-gentrified by rich straight white couples? Only then does migration to new underprivileged areas become trendy, and the cycle begins again. I am terrified at the thought that social justice can be measured by the size of a bar or the make of a car. Even with the protection of “historical landmark” status for gay bars and dives, there is no guarantee that individuals in the LGBTQ community will ever find their own sanctuary in a relationship between body and society. Why are gay bars so crucial to LGBTQ politics in other countries? Why is the amount of repetitive dance music produced and distributed in bars dominated by men the marker of queer activism?
On the basis of my upbringing in the Middle East and from what I’ve
observed during recent trips back, I can assure those afraid of not having a welcome vacation spot that bars with a multitude of same-sex interactions are alive and kicking. Yet I unapologetically declare that they are not a mirror of the bars in major US cities. If a community strives for autonomy and individuality, then why is it so important that every space emerge as identical? Why is it so hard to believe that queerness can exist outside the model we have come to know in the United States? Perhaps it could be that liberal gay masculine men, as often as they pretend to be strong in singularity, depend upon the masses. No one would buy into the hype of mass gay consumerism if they were sure that alternative modes for living and creating culture existed and were easily accessible without shelling out the cash.
“I just feel bad for them, you know? They live in these conditions where they cannot even speak out without fear of death. If their relatives believe so strongly in suicide bombings and honor killings, they can’t help but fuck things up for the gays.”
It is inevitable that with the performance of masculinity comes a strict belief in nationalism. How can one imitate the white, US American, able-bodied, middle-class, masculine lifestyle without including extreme and often violent patriotism? With the rise of anti-Arab/anti-Muslim (anti-brown) sentiment outside the gay community, it was only a matter of time before gay men and their allies aligned themselves with the politics and hateful policies of the normative public. Rather than fight to uphold human rights and dignity, LGBTQ politics remain narrowly focused on civil rights and privileges linked to citizenship (e.g. gay marriage). Liberal masculine gay men assume that gay marriage is a sign of equality because it allows for (limited) mobility in a system that distributes health and tax benefits based on the state-recognized relationship between two people. Everyone, both citizen and “alien,” contributes labor into this system, yet there is no room within it for the undocumented, or anyone who poses a threat to “national security.”
Liberal masculine gay men wholly support the US American marriage
complex and the “right to serve” in the military, a right that currently leads to the murder of millions of people of color and the illegal detainment of many more. Political gay bloggers valorize their “out” lives in rich urban neighborhoods, while speaking of the threat of radical gay-bashing Islamo-Fascists. They claim that anyone who has been following the headlines should realize that men and women of color who happen to hold citizenship in developing nations are out to blow themselves up in order to target Americans, and in this attack they might take out rich gay urban men! These men are obsessed with the word “terrorism” (politically far-removed from poverty, war, occupation, and sickness—leading causes of death, but not connected to marriage and the right to serve) and safeguarding of American traditions. Ironically, I see that masculine gay men have very much in common with the bodies they name as threats to their freedom. Perhaps the racist, essentialist, and Orientalist remarks about “Middle Eastern” culture aren’t personal fabrications but a projection of the current climate in the US American LGBTQ community.
“You’re just being an apologist [for Arabs]. You really need to be honest with yourself.”
The word “apologist” surfaces quite often in these heated conversations. In the classroom, it is used against those who challenge misguided statistics with real-world narratives. In the social scene, it is used to silence those who might speak out. It is a an accusation that forces one to “be grateful that you just live here, many people would die to have the opportunities you have.” How ironic that an LGBTQ movement should focus its liberation on equality and freedom by comparison. As long as there is someone out there living in much less desirable conditions, then somehow our oppression is more tolerable; I personally see no correlation between the two. Yet the white gays and lesbians who reside at the top of the privilege food chain identify their current surroundings and experiences as universal goals that everyone else just fails to realize.
The growing trend of “tolerance” demands that leaders direct funds
into the legalization of gay marriage, which could otherwise be used to fight hunger and homelessness; the benefits of gay marriage, like tax breaks and healthcare, only benefit a particular minority of LG people who hold a majority of power. Why fight for the ability to receive health benefits through a state recognized partnership when we should be pressuring the state to pay for everyone’s healthcare? Who benefits most from partnership tax cuts and will that bring an end to financial inequality? These are the questions that are never raised when the subject of gay marriage is discussed. It makes me wonder: who exactly is the apologist?
“Some cultures just have a problem with the way they treat their
women.”
Perhaps the women of “some cultures” should be liberated so that they may become excellent producers and consumers like their US American sisters. Why should women have the freedom to choose a hijab or language preference in school when proper French and English educations would dictate otherwise? It seems that liberal masculine gay men, who ordinarily take no interest in the well-being of women, have no problem using women (as inherently feminine victims of circumstance) to demonize others. This dichotomy of us/them and right/wrong somehow always positions the liberal and masculine as the civil, the hero, and the master, while everyone else is tolerable at best.
The same gay men support overcharging women at gay bars (if they
let them in at all), and the removal of locks on women’s bathroom doors. These men not only target feminine gay men, but any female body, in their war to gender-cleanse the bars. Women are able to access these bars, but only as specifically indicated guests who will accessorize the male body. The very same gay men will justify their actions by claiming that women, both straight and queer, should patronize their own bars or that the traditional resentment towards women in gay bars is a reaction to the homophobia of straight bars. Both excuses are simply ways of justifying a subculture that continues to mistreat women. By pretending that “some cultures” ultimately have a problem with the way they treat women, rather than all cultures (including gay culture), gay men, riding high on the homo-nationalist
bandwagon, can sleep soundly.
“Why don’t they just come out of the closet?”
This question arose after my biography and interests were carefully examined by a group of fellow scholars. It is the essence of the problem. How can gay white men who wear designer suits to work and drink designer cocktails at night sleep knowing that my consciousness may not be completely focused on granting them approval? How can anyone be a legitimate LGBTQ activist while defending cultures that the media portrays as anti-queer? Masculinity (often resulting in hyper-patriotism) requires our undivided attention. Because liberal masculine gay men claim to be the crusaders of the LGBTQ community, they can decide who is and who isn’t acceptable—not only in body, but in action.
It is inconceivable to US American gays that there are men and women
in the world who engage in same-sex sexual practices yet don’t identify as L, G, B, T, or Q. Yet there are infinite ways that relationships exist everywhere. All these relationships come fully assembled with as much joy, sadness, anger, love, and violence as traditional US monogamous relationships (gay or otherwise).
I have to wonder what our masculine liberators intend to do with the
people of the Middle East de-rooted from their “savage ways.” Will they be free to assimilate into US American LGBTQ culture and take a backseat in bars like their counterparts of color? Will they be free to serve the masculine power structure that claims to “know what’s best”? I sense that as long as they wear the nicest clothing, patronize the trendiest bars, and keep their mouths shut about the injustices their newly paid taxes commit, they are more than welcome to join the LGBTQ community in the United States."
Why are Faggots so Afraid of Faggots?; "Death by Masculinity" by Ali Abbas
I’m so proud of people living with chronic health conditions. That shit is HARD. Idk who needs to hear this, but if no one else has said it: I’m proud of you. You’re sticking it out through so much pain and grief. That’s no small feat.
Every small thing you do for yourself health adds up. The grief is heavy and it comes from a place of love. The grief knows the pain is wronging you.
I’m proud of you. I hope on the good days you can be proud of yourself.
I am a father of a baby. A few days ago, we were caught in a downpour, and water flooded our
flimsy tent. I have an amputated leg and am
unable to work; I suffer pain every day. What hurts me most is seeing my little boy shivering and crying from the cold and hunger. We urgently need a tent to protect us from the rain, and diapers and milk for my baby. My campaign is documented as number 23, and any small support could help us protect our child and live with dignity.
for over a decade, i've seen posts warning against tearing down stickers because of razor blades behind the sticker. i've torn down hundreds of stickers, and i've never encountered this—i think the razor blade myth makes people less likely to tear down stickers
yeah, noone got hurt by this because if youve ever taken down a sticker it's extremely obvious if there's anything weird glued under the edges of the sticker, and even if you didnt notice it would be hard to hurt yourself. It's more dangerous with like A4 posters that you might try to rip down in one motion by hand. and then if you do it cautiously there is zero danger again.
I personally just tear down stickers (and save them for my fascist sticker collection!) and then cover the spot up with an antifa sticker. I have done this hundreds of times without ever finding a razor. I have torn down pro-israel stickers in those mentioned months and never found a razor.
I agree that people scaring others about possible razors are more effective at keeping nazi propaganda up than anything else, and that worrying about that is stupid UNLESSS youve heard a specific warning in your city in that month.
So. ideally, if you havent heard anyone mentioning personally finding razors under stickers in your city this month, you should shut the hell up warning people about them, because its basically never an issue.
i also havent found any razor blades despite doing hundreds of sticker actions but i suppose it's always possible.
since i dont see sticker posts much i will take this opportunity to add that a good way to piss off the other side if youre engaged in a sticker war is to remove their sticker carefully, clean the surface (alcohol wipes work great for this) so its maximally sticky, and after you apply your sticker, cover it in a layer of any kind of grease. chapstick, baby oil, vaseline, doesnt matter. it will make your sticker impossible to put another sticker on top of, and extremely difficult to grab and pull off the surface without being physically injurious to anyone (including janitorial staff if applicable). im in favor of physically injuring fascists, but razorblades seem like a high risk for collateral damage. an optional step is using industrial adhesives or wood glue to glue stickers down but this is time-intensive. still, the "wheatpastes" i put up on capital hill with wood glue instead of actual wheat paste lasted like three years. all i had to do was dilute basic elmer's wood glue with water and apply with a spray bottle and brush if i was being fancy
The ECHR's updated Code of Practice is going to cause irreparable harm to trans and gender non-conforming people in the UK.
What the Code actually does
The Code is the EHRC’s interpretation of the April 2025 Supreme Court ruling in For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers. That ruling redefined “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 to mean biological sex. The EHRC was always going to update the Code. The question was how.
The answer arrived on 21 May, and the answer is: badly.
The Code defines “woman” as “biological woman.” It defines “man” as “biological man.” For the purposes of the Equality Act, sex means sex at birth. End of.
That definition then cascades. Single-sex spaces, the Code says, must be operated on the basis of biological sex. Trans people “should be offered” a third or gender-neutral space. Trans women can be excluded from women-only associations. Trans people are excluded from single-sex competitions for the gender they live in. If a women-only service chooses to admit trans women, it may legally cease to qualify as a single-sex service at all.
That last bit goes unsaid in most of the coverage. Read it again. A women’s group that has been trans-inclusive for twenty years, run by women who voted democratically to be trans-inclusive, can now lose its legal protection as a single-sex service because of who its members chose to include. A small group of self-styled women’s rights campaigners can threaten a much larger women’s organisation with court action for being too welcoming. That is the policy. It is being sold as protection. It is, in practice, a way of bullying women out of running the kinds of services women have chosen to run.
The Code does not stop at toilets and refuges. It limits access to healthcare. To housing. To social care. To gyms, pools, spas.
And then, quietly, it rewrites what “lesbian” and “gay” mean in law.
Paragraph 2.50 of the Code says, in plain text: “a trans man with a GRC is a woman and a trans woman with a GRC is a man, for the purposes of the Act.” Paragraph 2.92 then defines sexual orientation: “a person’s sexual orientation towards persons of the same sex (the person is a lesbian woman or a gay man).” And paragraph 2.96 closes the back door: “Gender reassignment is a separate protected characteristic and unrelated to sexual orientation.”
Stitch those three together and the consequence is unavoidable. A trans woman in a relationship with a cis woman is legally, under this Code, a man in a relationship with a woman. Heterosexual. Not a lesbian couple. Not protected as one. I had to read that twice. It is in the document the government has just laid before Parliament. You can read it yourself on gov.uk.
Taken from: https://biminibabes.substack.com/p/write-the-letter-babes
I don't tend to write posts like this, but this is something that is going to harm me and so many others in the UK.
Please share this link around if you're not from the UK, and if you are - click on it. It'll give you the link to a petition and it will help you send a letter to your MP asking them to vote against this.
EDM 240 / prayer motion is live. Your MP needs to sign it. Two taps via the coalition tool.
You can be talking to someone and she'll be like, "Oh I made a silly mistake. Women don't deserve voting rights teehee." And you'll be like, "What." And she'll be like, "Oh I'm sorry! That must sound so bad out of context. No it's this Tiktok meme where, if you're a girl and you do something dumb, you say 'Women don't deserve voting rights teehee.'"
And you'll be like, "That sounds bad." And she'll be like, "No no. It's totally not that bad. It's just a meme. Men say it too. Like if a man does something silly he'll be like, 'I am like those women who do not deserve to vote.'" And you'll be like, "Does that make it better?" And she'll be like, "Well there was one guy who tried to make 'Men shouldn't vote' a popular meme. But it never caught on and also he got yelled at a lot."
And then you drop it there because like, you're harshing the vibe.
so weird leftists don't call out big food more remember when nestlé was responsible for over 10 million infant deaths in low and middle income countries i do
just saw a 'comments' tab on someones blog you know where the following and likes tabs would be if enabled and it was just showing all the replies theyve made on peoples posts. this is fascinating when did this feature come out
if you've made replies on posts there is now a tab on your blog showing every post youve replied to and your reply.
if this is not what you want, either go to your blog and click comments and disable it from there or just go to your individual blogs setting pages. just change it from blue to grey if you dont want everyone to see your replies AND the post you're replying to
PLEASE BE ADVISED that it is set to disabled for blogs that have not made any replies but it will turn ON if you reply with that blog in the future.! i just tested it with my main, which was greyed out but it turned on the moment i left a test reply
figured i'd get the word out bc i have not seen a single mention of this and i'm sure there are plenty of people who maybe comment on things they don't want on display for everyone to see on their blog lol. you can still look at your replies with it toggled off just no one else can, like locking the following and likes list
so for some reason this feature was actually announced on the tumblr engineering blog. interesting choice not to reblog it to the staff or tumblr blog, esp considering they asked for user input on how to implement it, but i suppose considering the response to the last update maybe the replies would be too overwhelming...
so couple of clarifications. comments are disabled as default for primary blogs that have their likes disabled. they are seemingly enabled for all other blogs that have replied to posts
posts you comment on may show on your followers 'for you' page if you leave your replies publically available. they may, in the future, show in on your followers dashboard if your follower goes to their dash settings and enables this. apparently, if your likes are enabled, your followers can already see those on the dash if they've gone into preferences and selected to do so, which I was unaware of, and that seems to be disabled at default, but it's possible i disabled it previously and forgot about it ig
i think we should be ridiculing them more for this. you don't get to try and go all "queer website" when your staff likes to go on nuking sprees targeting the trans fem users
would be remiss not to mention that the rainbow notably straight up just removed the trans flag colors from it. like they’re gone. it’s the progress flag minus the trans flag colors.
the thing that bewilders me about a lot of fantasy readers is that they read about settings and plots featuring imperialism, war, and slavery and then call the inclusion of violence, abuse, and sexual exploitation "edgy" and "gratuitous" and it's like what did you think was happening. why were you under the impression that you were going to get a cozy story about fascism or something. far be it from me to criticize anyone for not wanting to read about torture in their spare time, and there are certainly cases where heavy subjects are poorly executed, but is it not equally insulting to sanitize them for a feel-good adventure.. like no one put a gun to your head and forced you to give your fantasy novel an enslaved protagonist. sometimes writing is supposed to make you feel bad
human ears are such bullshitttttt i cant even emote with these. whats the fucking point if i cant swivel my ears in ur direction or like perk them up when i hear something interesting or point them all back when something scary happens. whats even the point
Biblically Acute Squash @angle0fthegourd - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
