Chronically Cool

my name's Lance 22 He/Him pro self-dx Politics blog Need something tagged? Just ask

[wandererslullabi]

Dear fellow mspec (pan/bi/ply/etc) people: please consider using “monosexism” more.

It’s not bi-centric, so it can focus on mspec issues without excluding pan/ply/omni/etc people from the discussion like how “biphobia” has been.

It cuts down on the regular usage of another “-phobia” term, which is good because the “-phobia” terms are functionally ableist when used the way they often are in this community.

It describes a system of marginalization, which, we should finally acknowledge, is what we face.

It also more explicitly describes the societal preference for monosexual (especially straight) identities, and the descrimination and erasure multisexual people face.

[feminismandmedia]

It reminds me of someone saying "queer doesn't tell me anything specific about your orientation" and... so what? Do we know each other? Are we planning on a date? Why do strangers on the internet need to know anything else than "definitely not straight"?

It’s really uncomfortable to me that they want to know something, that sometimes some of us want to keep to ourselves. It’s almost like forcing someone out of the closet in some way, at least in my opinion. 

Like.. no one has a RIGHT to that except for yourself. 

Mod Bethany

[bpdbugboy]

Since tumblr crashed literally every time I tried to reblog this post, here it is in screen shots. The 3 most recent posts I reblogged are all the sources given in the links.

[breeeliss]

hey everyone. friendly reminder that the suggestion that only lesbians can use terms like femme/butch is terf/twerf/lesbian separatist rhetoric and anyone who says otherwise is feeding you ahistorical nonsense and could probably afford to do some googling and learn something if they have nothing to do this weekend. thank you. 

[butchflirt]

Hi, as a trans butch: no

[tootransforthis-deactivated2021]

Hi, as someone who’s studied the history behind these terms and how they originated in their community: Historically speaking, Yes

If you look at the notes there are people who’ve A) linked resources about this topic and B) given a more general quick and dirty explanation. You don’t have to scroll that far up.

But the short version is that early queer community spaces were not exclusive, they couldn’t afford to be. That means lesbian-only spaces, as in homosexual woman since lesbian was often used in a similar way to wlw is now- weren’t a thing up until the 60s- bisexual woman also went to the same spaces and groups because there were no other groups or spaces to go to. And a lot of these women fell somewhere in the grey areas of history- some were lesbians forced to marry men out of social pressure or bisexual women who married men they loved eventually fell out of love with and wanted to explore their attraction to women. We can’t say who was who though.

That also means these terms were developed in a community made of both lesbians and bisexual women and often times used by members of both groups. And people didn’t object under the idea that they were “lesbian exclusive”.

Until radical lesbians showed up. These were women who thought that women must cut all social ties and relationships with “men”(often biological males) and were the foremothers to TERFs. They pushed bisexual women out of spaces that bi women had historically had access to- including butch-femme terms. This is due to the fact many bi women still maintained and pursued relationships with men thus contributing to the patriarchy and women’s oppression.

Bi/pan women don’t have “their own” history and culture and terms to use because they were consistently included in the lesbian community and those histories and cultures are intertwined and messy.

[hazel2468]

This ^

When I see mspec women using butch/femme and ppl responding with “use your own terms!”- those ARE our terms. Lesbian history IS mspec wlw history up until, as the above comment explains, around the 60s. And the reason why there is now a huge divide, and frankly a lot of animosity between lesbians and mspec sapphics, is because of assholes who started what we now know as TERF/SWERF ideology (short version). 

A lot of people know nothing about this… And the reason for that is because the history of mspec sapphics, as we used to exist in lesbian spaces, has been deliberately erased by the predecessors of the exact same people who are still, today, trying to erase trans and mspec and ace and aro and nb people from the community. 

[wandererslullabi]

Note: it’s worth keeping in mind that not all lesbian separatists were actually lesbians, because it’s about ideology, not orientation. Straight and mspec women could be separatists just as much as lesbians could, it was just more common in the lesbian community for obvious reasons, and the ideology is still visible in subsets of the lesbian community because of that connection.

And this is why I’m so involved in femme/butch discourse even though I’ve never identified as femme or butch. Because the whole argument is a continuation of the exclusionary rhetoric that has been robbing mspec sapphics of their connection to sapphic culture for generations.

[star-anise]

So what I’ve learned from the past couple months of being really loud about being a bi woman on Tumblr is: A lot of young/new LGBT+ people on this site do not understand that some of the stuff they’re saying comes across to other LGBT+ people as offensive, aggressive, or threatening. And when they actually find out the history and context, a lot of them go, “Oh my god, I’m so sorry, I never meant to say that.”

Like, “queer is a slur”: I get the impression that people saying this are like… oh, how I might react if I heard someone refer to all gay men as “f*gs”. Like, “Oh wow, that’s a super loaded word with a bunch of negative freight behind it, are you really sure you want to put that word on people who are still very raw and would be alarmed, upset, or offended if they heard you call them it, no matter what you intended?”

So they’re really surprised when self-described queers respond with a LOT of hostility to what feels like a well-intentioned reminder that some people might not like it. 

That’s because there’s a history of “political lesbians”, like Sheila Jeffreys, who believe that no matter their sexual orientation, women should cut off all social contact with men, who are fundamentally evil, and only date the “correct” sex, which is other women. Political lesbians claim that relationships between women, especially ones that don’t contain lust, are fundamentally pure, good, and  unproblematic. They therefore regard most of the LGBT community with deep suspicion, because its members are either way too into sex, into the wrong kind of sex, into sex with men, are men themselves, or somehow challenge the very definitions of sex and gender. 

When “queer theory” arrived in the 1980s and 1990s as an organized attempt by many diverse LGBT+ people in academia to sit down and talk about the social oppressions they face, political lesbians like Jeffreys attacked it harshly, publishing articles like “The Queer Disappearance of Lesbians”, arguing that because queer theory said it was okay to be a man or stop being a man or want to have sex with a man, it was fundamentally evil and destructive. And this attitude has echoed through the years; many LGBT+ people have experience being harshly criticized by radical feminists because being anything but a cis “gold star lesbian” (another phrase that gives me war flashbacks) was considered patriarchal, oppressive, and basically evil.

And when those arguments happened, “queer” was a good umbrella to shelter under, even when people didn’t know the intricacies of academic queer theory; people who identified as “queer” were more likely to be accepting and understanding, and “queer” was often the only label or community bisexual and nonbinary people didn’t get chased out of. If someone didn’t disagree that people got to call themselves queer, but didn’t want to be called queer themselves, they could just say “I don’t like being called queer” and that was that. Being “queer” was to being LGBT as being a “feminist” was to being a woman; it was opt-in.

But this history isn’t evident when these interactions happen. We don’t sit down and say, “Okay, so forty years ago there was this woman named Sheila, and…” Instead we queers go POP! like pufferfish, instantly on the defensive, a red haze descending over our vision, and bellow, “DO NOT TELL ME WHAT WORDS I CANNOT USE,” because we cannot find a way to say, “This word is so vital and precious to me, I wouldn’t be alive in the same way if I lost it.” And then the people who just pointed out that this word has a history, JEEZ, way to overreact, go away very confused and off-put, because they were just trying to say.

But I’ve found that once this is explained, a lot of people go, “Oh wow, okay, I did NOT mean to insinuate that, I didn’t realize that I was also saying something with a lot of painful freight to it.”

And that? That gives me hope for the future.

[star-anise]

Similarily: “Dyke/butch/femme are lesbian words, bisexual/pansexual women shouldn’t use them.”

When I speak to them, lesbians who say this seem to be under the impression that bisexuals must have our own history and culture and words that are all perfectly nice, so why can’t we just use those without poaching someone else’s?

And often, they’re really shocked when I tell them: We don’t. We can’t. I’d love to; it’s not possible.

“Lesbian” used to be a word that simply meant a woman who loved other women. And until feminism, very, very few women had the economic freedom to choose to live entirely away from men. Lesbian bars that began in the 1930s didn’t interrogate you about your history at the door; many of the women who went there seeking romantic or sexual relationships with other women were married to men at the time. When The Daughters of Bilitis formed in 1955 to work for the civil and political wellbeing of lesbians, the majority of its members were closeted, married women, and for those women, leaving their husbands and committing to lesbian partners was a risky and arduous process the organization helped them with. Women were admitted whether or not they’d at one point truly loved or desired their husbands or other men–the important thing was that they loved women and wanted to explore that desire.

Lesbian groups turned against bisexual and pansexual women as a class in the 1970s and 80s, when radical feminists began to teach that to escape the Patriarchy’s evil influence, women needed to cut themselves off from men entirely. Having relationships with men was “sleeping with the enemy” and colluding with oppression. Many lesbian radical feminists viewed, and still view, bisexuality as a fundamentally disordered condition that makes bisexuals unstable, abusive, anti-feminist, and untrustworthy.

(This despite the fact that radical feminists and political lesbians are actually a small fraction of lesbians and wlw, and lesbians do tend, overall, to have positive attitudes towards bisexuals.)

That process of expelling bi women from lesbian groups with immense prejudice continues to this day and leaves scars on a lot of bi/pan people. A lot of bisexuals, myself included, have an experience of “double discrimination”; we are made to feel unwelcome or invisible both in straight society, and in LGBT spaces. And part of this is because attempts to build a bisexual/pansexual community identity have met with strong resistance from gays and lesbians, so we have far fewer books, resources, histories, icons, organizations, events, and resources than gays and lesbians do, despite numerically outnumbering them..

So every time I hear that phrase, it’s another painful reminder for me of all the experiences I’ve had being rejected by the lesbian community. But bisexual experiences don’t get talked about or signalboosted much,so a lot of young/new lesbians literally haven’t learned this aspect of LGBT+ history.

And once I’ve explained it, I’ve had a heartening number of lesbians go, “That’s not what I wanted to happen, so I’m going to stop saying that.”

[m-steraquasgf-restinpeace]

idk if this has been posted yet but i read this thread by @teamarimo and found it SUPER interesting and thorough and thought it’d be good to share it

[smallswingshoes]

This is good, just wish it wasn’t posted as a Twitter essay, they’re so hard to read.

[authoratmidnight]

[Caption: a series of tweets by twitter user @teamarimo. It reads:

the debate on who can use the terms “butch/femme” keeps coming up so i did a ton of research & i’d like to weigh in on the issue. i’ll post sources at the end

too many people credit anne lister (a historical lesbian) with coining femme in her journals but she was speaking french and “femme” has been a french word forever

going in chronological order of gay words in the english-speaking world, “lesbian” began as a synonym for tribade. “tribadism” = scissoring; both words meant women who slept with women & the sexual act itself. this was long before IDpolitics

so lesbian/tribade was something you did, not something you IDd as, bc they were labeled by their sexual activity since IDpol hadn’t come around yet. there was no concept of who was or wasn’t exclusively attracted to women. that’s why bi women are closer to lesbians than bi men

tribade dominated the 17th-mid 19th centuries until sapphic & lesbian took prominence. it wasn’t until 1892 that a neurologist used bisexual to describe sexuality. from then until the 1960s, bi was used only in academic contexts. it still wasn’t an identity yet

bi women have always been here but shared community with & organized under “lesbian” until (and even into) the 60s. before then, any text or study that said “lesbian” meant gay & bi women unless it (on the rare occasion) specifies otherwise, so context matters

butch/femme began in gay bars in the 40s-60s. women-only gay bars were frequented by lesbian & bi women. so for the first decades of butch/femme history, “lesbian” includes bi women bc there was no bi or “women-exclusive” yet & they were at the bars, participating in the culture

in the 70s, lesbian separatism begins with 12 white cis lesbians, the furies. They suggest that women engage “only (with) women who cut their ties to male privilege… as long as women still benefit from heterosexuality, receive its privileges and security, they will…

at some point have to betray their sisters, especially lesbian sisters who do not receive those benefits.” demon TERF sheila jeffreys says “our definition of a political lesbian is a woman-identified woman who does not fuck men.” this marks the split between bi & lesbian women

lesbian separatism others bi women who shared space, identity & oppression with lesbians centuries prior. it deems trans women as inextricable from male privilege they (don’t) have. it others lgbt woc who share oppression with men & therefore can’t exclude men from their politics

tldr it’s bad lol. with events like stonewall (1969) & increasing anti-gay violence in the 70s, anyone with proximity to heterosexuality in gay spaces was viewed as a threat & shunned. so bi groups begin to pop up, since they had no place in straight or gay communities anymore

in the 80s, 2nd-wave bi organizing was feminist bi orgs forming bc lesbians posited bisexuality as anti-feminist. by 1988, LGB officially separates lesbian & bi. now lesbians are invested in specific lesbian history & everything before the 60s says “lesbian.” see the problem here

texts with the word “lesbian” before the 60s are also referring to bi women but modern meanings of old words are applied to them, & consequently, bi women are denied a massive chunk of our history, including butch/femme culture

in the 60s, ball culture emerges in houses created as safe spaces for black & latinx queer youth. the genders are butch queen, femme queen, butch & women. here, butch & femme embody: the intersections of race, gender & sexuality; the freedom of it; and the resulting persecution

in the 70s, lesbian separatists say any form of masculinity harms women, materializing against butch & trans women. femmes are framed as wanting to reap benefits of heterosexuality while still toying with women (this is heavily wrapped in biphobic rhetoric too, if you can’t tell)

butch/femme is framed as heteronormative, anti-lesbian & anti-feminist. so androgyny is proposed as the lesbian ideal. now lesbian feminism is centered on white, middle class, androgynous lesbians at the expense of working class + nonwhite lesbians, bi women, and butches & femmes

butch/femme fall out of popular use, only kept alive by the same working class & nonwhite women who are ousted by white lesbians. butch/femme usage among queer youth of color includes lesbians & nonlesbians as it had since 60s ball culture & since 40s gay bars with gay & bi women

it’s interesting that people say butch/femme is for lesbians only when the beginning of lesbian as an exclusively-woman attracted identity & the downfall of butch/femme go hand-in-hand. it was queer youth of color who kept that culture alive, lesbian or not

white lesbian TERFs who demonized the culture embraced it again when genderfluidity became trendy in the late 80s. they claimed it as theirs, and stripped it of its history with bi women, trans women & queer youth of color that they wanted no association with

so that history was lost among many, and now well-meaning lesbians who definitely are not TERFs don’t even know butch/femme’s roots in race, trans/gnc identity, & class struggle, or its origins among gay & bi women as one group

tldr: TERFs suck, bi & lesbian women’s history is inextricable, and bi women were using butch/femme before the bi identity even existed. historically, “lesbian” encompassed a set of behaviors & became an identity later

Sources:

gay & bi women going to the same clubs: Source 1, Source 2

bisexual etymology: Source

lesbian separatism: Source

tribade: Source

butch/femme: Source

more on butch/femme; Source

origins of bi movements: Source 1, Source 2, Source 3

lady with history & women’s studies + LGBT studies degrees: Source

ball culture: Source

hi here’s a trans lesbian (homojabi@tumblr) saying exactly what I just said from a trans perspective for the “everyone’s trying to steal from lesbians” crowd. I’m going back to sleep

https://confide–nemini.tumblr.com/post/149527067504/is-it-okay-for-bi-girls-to-refer-to-themselves-as

end caption]

[feminismandmedia]

This heavily relates to why I believe all WLW can use the term dyke.

Mod Bethany

[freethelgbtqia]

[Image description: paint splatter with the queer pride colors]

Queer: someone who isn’t straight and/or cisgender

[logarto]

being told i dont understand how fiction works is so funny thank you 32 year old who reads nothing but smut fanfiction i will take that into consideration and maybe drop out of my degree

[logarto]

“its fiction it isnt real nothing that is fictional matters” is genuinely the stupidest lowest brain take and so plainly shows you dont understand the role of the arts in human society like morality aside it genuinely makes u look like an ignorant moron. because you are.

[graystar-legacy]

Suuuuure I'm pretty positive the obscure french writer who was outshined by Gustave Flaubert cause he couldn't network as well is the reason my tits are so big. Direct influence, direct consequence.

But hey go off i guess.

[growtiredofpublicvulnerability]

[blackjame]

It’s particularly disturbing to see folks in fandom scream: “Fiction doesn’t impact reality!” after having recently read some of the more extreme cases of fiction doing just that. Did you know that the movie Scream inspired no less than 3 cases of copycat killings and attempted murders? Because I sure didn’t. 

And then you have those two girls who tried to murder their friend because of Slenderman. Honestly, read and research things before uttering things like: “Fiction doesn’t impact reality!” with such certainty. To say you look foolish is an understatement. 

[firelxdykatara]

Ok, you see, this? This right here? This exact comment is why people think y'all have no idea how fiction actually works--or, hell, how reality works, nevermind the way the two actually intersect and influence each other. Because you’ve circled right back around to ‘violent video games turned my otherwise perfectly lovely and normal child into a violent felon!!!!’ rhetoric, without the slightest trace of irony. And it’s... kind of alarming?

Like, do you honestly think that several perfectly normal individuals watched Scream and, completely out of nowhere, with no other factor than the fact that they watched Scream, decided to kill people? Because of the movie? Do you also think that Tom Clancy is at fault for 9/11 because he ‘predicted’ the plane hijacking terrorist attack in a novel? Did Viktor Nabokov turn otherwise perfectly normal and mentally healthy people into pedophiles because they read his book and decided it was normal and ok to be attracted to children, actually? Does all of this mean it really is Jodie Foster’s fault that John Hinkley shot Reagan???? Are the rest of us who managed to do things like watch slasher films and action flicks and play games where the only goal is to kill lots of people and not go out and murder actual real living people just... lucky?

Do you understand, yet, how the idea that ‘if you watch or read this bad thing, you’re going to want to go out and do that thing, because fiction directly impacts reality’ is a) a ludicrous statement, and b) something that real live people are actually saying?

Dark, taboo, or otherwise despicable topics had always existed and been explored in fiction. Always. No one became a murderer because they read a book where someone got murdered. No one became a pedophile because they read a book about one. (Certainly no one became a pedophile because they read a story about a 17-year-old dating a twenty-something.) Scream did not turn a bunch of people into murderers--some people who already wanted to do murder watched Scream and decided to use it for inspiration. Those girls didn’t decide to murder their friend ‘because of Slenderman’--there were clearly issues already present which that sort of stimulation may have adversely triggered, but there are plenty of people who played/watched Slenderman shit who didn’t try to murder their friends!!!!!

Dangerous and sick people often gravitate towards media which reinforces their own disgusting beliefs. That doesn’t make it any given bit of fiction’s fault if they go out and hurt people--they would have hurt people anyway, if possibly in different ways. Fiction can be used for the purposes of grooming, but so can literally anything else. Someone with skewed ideas of consent who believes that some sick rape fantasy is something to Emulate would have violated someone else’s consent eventually anyway, because those sort of thoughts do not spring up out of thin air because someone read a bodice ripper once.

And you can absolutely (and probably should!) have discussions about the nuances here--the ways a given work might be problematic in its depiction of something horrific, or how an abusive relationship has been dangerously romanticized (see: Fifty Shades of Grey, which hey, still exists! was published! many people enjoy it for whatever reason, but the criticism exists too, as does similar criticisms of the source material it was originally fanfic of, and that’s good and healthy and those discussions should also exist!). But those discussions are actively hampered when people have to beat you over the head with FICTION! IS! NOT! REALITY!!! because you don’t seem to understand that while they influence each other, the impact is not one-to-one and it’s important to remember that reality affects fiction to a far greater degree than the other way around!

“Fiction is not reality” does not mean that fiction has no affect on reality whatsoever--obviously it does, or shit like representation in the mass media wouldn’t be the issue it is today. But it does mean that someone isn’t gonna become a sex offender or murderer because they read one too many darkfics, and it also means that there is a marked difference in the affect a piece of fiction with a few thousand hits will have, in the grand scheme of things, compared to a multi-million-dollar fucking blockbuster.

[daloy-politsey]

Outlive Them NYC at the No Hate, No Fear march against antisemitism

January 5, 2020

[cyllanwednesday]

The future is here

Just not yet evenly distributed

[victoriousvocabulary]

AGENDER

[adjective]

1. noting or relating to a person who does not have a specific gender identity or recognisable gender expression. 

[noun]

2. a person who is agender.

Etymology: from “-a”, variant of an-, before a consonant, meaning “not,” “without” + gender, from Middle English < Middle French gendre, “genre” < Latin gener- (stem of genus), “kind, sort”.

[heartsaidnoibat]

Ok but can we talk about how emo, as a genre, defied gender roles in a big way? Like, everything about the culture, from the guys wearing makeup and womens’ skinny jeans, to the way they got unabashedly emotional in spite of the “men aren’t supposed to cry” narrative they’d obviously been socialized with, was just this complete “fuck you” to the idea that there’s a certain way to be a “man”. 

And a lot of their detractors called them “girly” or “gay”. And they didn’t give a fuck! Fall Out Boy has a whole song entitled “Gay Is Not A Synonym for Shitty”, which referenced a famous Pete Wentz quote, where he basically said that if you thought his band sucked, to just say it sucked, and not be a “homophobic asshole” about it. 

And, then, geez, My Chemical Romance took it a step further, and Gerard Way outright kissed one of his bandmates at concerts purely to infuriate homophobes who were at his shows.

 A lot of these bands were openly for LGBT rights, for womens’ rights. I remember one instance where some band MCR was touring with asked women to flash their tits in exchange for backstage passes. And Gerard was so horrified by this, and told his female fans to “spit in the faces” of misogynists in the rock scene. 

Like, god, these bands were so progressive. And they still are. Right after the Pulse tragedy, Brendon Urie literally danced around in a pride flag and told his queer fans what they meant to him. Pete Wentz said that “Uma Thurman” was meant to show his female fans that they could be “badass”, too. And Gerard pretty much admitted in an interview to somewhat identifying with the label “nonbinary”. 

That’s the most lasting impact that emo is going to have. Showing fans of all genders that there’s nothing wrong with being whoever the fuck you are, that there’s no specific way to be a man or woman. And, god, I just fucking love that. 

[profeminist]

Gifset source

“So every day during my set, when I’m playing my own shows, I talk about people that are transgender. I talk about it a lot because everyday basically I say: …”

- Gerard Way, Soundwave, Melbourne, 2015

Source

[profeminist]

Pete Wentz on Androgyny and Sexuality

“I think part of it is ’cause at some point when we were doing this band I was like, “You know what? I’m going to be the most androgynous person that I can possibly be. I’m going to wear girl pants and makeup.” I looked to David Bowie, Mick Jagger, and people like that, and I was like, “That’s what’s missing in all the bands that we’re playing with right now! You need this effeminate edge.” Did Mick Jagger and David Bowie make out? Probably. Who knows?

And that’s kind of what I was going for, but people took that to the next level. We have a song called “Gay Isn’t a Synonym for the Word ‘Shitty’” [on import versions of Infinity on High], and people take it in a weird way, like no one could ever be pro-gay rights who isn’t gay — which I’m fine with, because it puts the issue in peoples’ heads and forces them to confront it, like, “Can I be into this guy who’s on the cover of Tiger Beat and who I think is gay?”

But I think sexuality is a lot more ambiguous and more of a blurred line than people make it out to be. People are always like, “It’s black or white,” but I don’t really feel like it is. I feel like people come across all parts of that spectrum. I think there are a lot of people who aren’t necessarily gay or straight or even bi; it’s just whatever moment or mood you’re in, you find different things attractive or cool.”

Full Interview on The Advocate site

Photo by Megan Westerby

[kcstea]

[dreamofyouandi]

hey, i know this is *just a picture* and I might seem like I’m reading way too into it, but please hear me out!

these are doc martens, as you probably know if you’re viewing this post, but what you might not know is that this colors actually have meaning behind them! These meanings date back decades but some people still use them so it’s good to know, especially for baby punks (don’t worry, I didn’t know this until fairly recently either)

Also keep in mind that I don’t speak for all punks and color meanings will vary depending on location

YELLOW - anti-racism

PURPLE- gay pride

BLACK- no meaning/affiliation

WHITE- KKK/white power affiliation

RED- nazi skinhead/white power affiliation

BLUE- killed a cop

As you can probably tell, some of these colors have very bad connotations behind them. I don’t know all the history behind the lace code, but if I were to make an educated guess I’d say it dates back to the rise of white power skinheads (for people who don’t know what skinheads are, they’re what people refer to when they say “nazi punks fuck off”.) I’m not trying to tell you what to do, but know before you tie on red or white laces onto your docs that those colors have meaning and history, and you’re carrying it with you

The Color Of Your Shoelaces Might Tell Someone You're A Neo Nazi

The Color Of Your Shoelaces Might Tell Someone You're A Neo-Nazi

[thenib]

From Kasia Babis.

[showtimechamaco]

[safitheartist]

Power move.

[newtgeiszler]

one of the most aesthetically beautiful displays of protest i’ve seen

[psikonauti]

Billionaires Are the Leading Cause of Climate Change

As the world faces environmental disaster on a biblical scale, it's important to remember exactly who brought us here.

🙄

[solarpunkwitchcraft]

Contrary to a lot of guilt-tripping pleas for us all to take the bus more often to save the world, your individual choices are probably doing very little to the world's climate. The real impact comes on the industrial level, as more than 70 percent of global emissions come from just 100 companies. So you, a random American consumer, exert very little pressure here. The people who are actively cranking up the global thermostat and threatening to drown 20 percent of the global population are the billionaires in the boardrooms of these companies.

[darbees]

Julia Shiplett on Up Next

[astralaspecs]

We are not a monolith.