Listening to and really connecting with a song about suicidal self-hatred. Every single one of the comments is people talking about being trans and that that's the way they felt before their transition. (To be fair, the singer is trans and that's very likely what they were singing about,) but I'm here like, come on, MY suicidal self-hatred is completely unrelated to the fact that I'm trans. That's literally the most neutral part about me.
Overall I just really dislike the prevailing narrative that being trans is the focal point of trans people's lives.
No shade to actual gay/trans characters, but it's so obnoxious when the queer-obsessed corner of the fandom takes any instance of character deviating from gender norms or getting along with a member of the same sex and claims this is irrefutable evidence that the character is gay/trans. Especially with how often they take a "I licked it, so it's mine now" attitude towards the character and get pissy when others don't treat their headcanon as gospel.
Devil May Cry fans acting like the Netflix show is shit when the old Madhouse anime was also considered shit when it was coming out. THAT ONE DOESN'T EVEN HAVE ANY COOL FIGHT SCENES! They all just have collective amnesia because they wanna act like the creator is the scum of the earth and God forbid they get called on it because they will harass you right out of the fandom for daring to accept something new. I hope that thing gets five seasons and a movie just to spite them all.
Having a loved one in Israel is weird bcs I have every personal reason to want this war over as soon as possible, but I can't hang around and talk with other people against the war, bcs most of the people against the war in the west kinda want the person I love dead, and yeah.
Your loved one decided to go participate in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Your loved one decided to support an ongoing genocide. Your loved one doesn't get any sympathy from the rest of us.
Imagine contributing to a genocide and wanting people to feel sorry for you.
Imagine seeing someone say "i have a loved one in Israel" and the first thing out of your fat gob is "THEY SUPPORT A GENOCIDE, SO IDFC IF THEY DIE-" like motherfucker they probably just fucking LIVE THERE!!! Where did you get that they're contributing to genocide???
You really didn't do anything to disprove OP's point here. Goddamn...
There's another angle too. It only takes one dealership arson case before Tesla owners decide that a bumper sticker is a lot cheaper than a new car. So less "tell me I'm not to blame" and more "don't set my car on fire."
Having a loved one in Israel is weird bcs I have every personal reason to want this war over as soon as possible, but I can't hang around and talk with other people against the war, bcs most of the people against the war in the west kinda want the person I love dead, and yeah.
Your loved one decided to go participate in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Your loved one decided to support an ongoing genocide. Your loved one doesn't get any sympathy from the rest of us.
Imagine contributing to a genocide and wanting people to feel sorry for you.
I'm assuming the loved one could, y'know, leave. Or stand up against the genocide. Or do something. And they're choosing not to. That's their choice, which you support and yes, you both deserve to be judged for it. If you both didn't want the judgement, you should've made a better choice.
If that isn't the case, and they have no choice, I'm sorry. They're in a bad position and they don't deserve it. But they're also not wanted dead. I don't want random people in Israel death. I don't think I want anyone dead. I want the war to stop by Israel ending the genocide and making amends. There's a difference.
If you are advocating for the end of Israel, for all Jews to simply "leave," or simply accept whatever else happens, you are advocating for genocide.
I am tired of pretending that western leftists advocating "death to Israel" as people are in the notes, or politely skirting the issue by claiming they DONT want anyone dead, just for everyone to willingly leave the ONLY nation in the world where Jews have ever been safe from white supremacy and Arab supremacy. The only nation that guarantees Jewish safety.
I am tired of people who are so happily pro genocide that they dont even realize what they are yelling for accusing us of being the monsters.
I don't know how many people in the notes are Americans but as always it's rich coming from them. Talk about genocidal colonizers? After they voted in Trump twice absolutely no American has any leg to stand on. I suppose it isnt surprising that their stance is "get out of the country," since their tax dollars are the ones funding ICE.
Clearly "go back where you came from, even if you only left because they were trying to kill you" is a universal stance.
So somehow when Americans did it to the native Americans, that was bad, but when it happens in other places that's just fine and dandy? And here I hoped people would learn from history....Unless you're gonna say that the first colonisers there were absolutely right to wipe everyone out and that's why Israel should too? Shame on you. It's also not true that if Israel stops killing everyone they'll be killed in turn. That's bullshit and you know it. Israel started the genocide and them stopping it wouldn't mean they would die.
"Shame on me" ? Are you kidding me? Are you SERIOUS
You have no idea what you're talking about, your lack of understanding about every aspect of the situation from the historical context to the extremely clear double standard Americans employ when they accuse Israel of genocide and insist the ONLY way to make amends is to abandon their own right to a state (which yes, would be genocide — the destruction of a nation is one of the definitions and anyone without somewhere would be slaughtered the same way we have always been slaughtered and or forced to flee to avoid said slaughter for centuries. Ask yourself, what happened to all the Jew that used to live in the MENA? Where did they go? Lebanon, Yemen, Libya, Syria?
https://jewswerehere.com/
I don't want anyone to die. But there are only 16 million Jews left in the whole world. Do you understand how small that is? Nearly half of them live in Israel.
America and Canada, where I live, are both colonized nations built on the blood of Indigenous peoples. That is a gruesome, undisputed fact. We have barely even begun to scratch the surface of acknowledging the depth of the crimes that were committed. Yet no one disputes that we all have a right to live here. That the refugees from other countries that flee here seeking safety and a better life dont deserve that same safety and protection, even if they are settling on colonized land. And that anyone forcing them out is a monster.
When the British colonized these lands and killed everyone who was already here, they did it purely in pursuit of power. To expand their empire, to make something theirs and rule the way they wanted. And they could have had a peaceful existence here, it's not like there isnt enough land. But they didnt do that.
Israel was not founded out of a desire for power or conquest. There were people making their way to the area they were told was the holy land for years, sure, but even those folks were by and large motivated by pogroms, not simply a desire for a nice chance of scenery.
Without the Holocaust, Israel never would have been founded. We were forced out of our homes AGAIN and not allowed to return. You sickos keep telling people "go back to Poland" as if people didnt TRY. You think they didn't just want to go home? There was no home.
America and Canada didnt want the Holocaust refugees. No one did. You can look this all up, this is historical fact. Please dont you feel you need to take my word for any of it.
Regardless, the British dumped the refugees on Palestine. They also did not want them there and attacked the settlement camps.
Now, I have heard the justification that they werent attacking the camps because they were Jewish camps, it's because they were British. And if you think I give a flying fuck about why someone attacked camps full of Holocaust survivors, you can go fuck yourself. If you would like to justify that as reasonable, well, I guess I'm not surprised. It wouldn't be the first-time. I just cant understand it.
It didnt have to happen like that. None of this had to happen. The Holocaust, fucking America and Canada these fucking so called great nations...
Im not sorry that the Holocaust survivors in those camps refused to be killed. And im not sorry that they fought back, and formed a resistance. I wish more than anything it wasn't necessary, that the land could have been shared from the start and all of this avoided.
But no, Israel didnt start this. And you—that is all of you, every single non Jew and all your ancestors who continue to justify your hatred of us century after fucking century yes there is always some new perfectly good reason—have made it perfectly clear why we need at least one single nation in the entire world that cares about Jewish safety.
"Israel was not built of a desire for power" BULL. SHIT.
Don't you dare say this is because of the holocaust because this was planned since decades before the holocaust:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine
If people were really not able to go anywhere else after the holocaust then that means the europeans decided it was easier (read profitable) to just colonize another place instead of building a world where stolen land being the only safe place for a group of people would be unthinkable. Meaning zionists settlers were willing particpants of the powers that abused them.
As for the US and Canada, I agree it being stolen land, which is why many groups have been fighting to get it back since before long before Isnotreal even existed.
So I'm sorry if people are sick of your shit, I'm sorry if manifest destiny is treated with the contempt it should've had from the start and I'm sorry if you being victims of a genocide doesn't justify another.
The fact that you admit Europeans forcibly removed Jews from their countries and stuck them in the Levant, yet still somehow believe these Jews were fellow European colonizers and not victims and refugees of European colonization would be funny if it weren't so heinously bigoted.
Anyway. Am Yisrael Chai. The days of people killing Jews without consequences is over. Suck it.
The whole “Zionists were trying to get to establish a Jewish state before the Holocaust. Checkmate, Zionists!” bit, lol
Yeah? it’s almost like Europeans killing and oppressing Jews didn’t begin or end with the Shoah? and there had been Jews in diaspora who were trying to return to their homeland for centuries?
So wild how these people have such a narrow, anemic understanding (a stretch to even call it that) of Jewish History, yet want to lecture us on it. How literally being ethnically cleansed gets twisted around on Jews to call us “Colonizers”.
why don’t all these Americans, Canadians, Australians, go back to their country and give the land back to the indigenous and aborigines ? why don’t they be such a good example of “dismantling” these colonial societies and stop contributing to the ongoing genocide?
no?
they just want Israel to do it? the only Jewish state? Interesting
and when the Jews flee from the “dismantling” of Israel where should they go?
if the Jews flee to the Americas or Australia or Europe, would they welcome them?
or would they call them invaders?
would they concentrate them into camps for being “participants in genocide” ? even the children?
they are swallowing up Nazi propaganda, they’ll deny it, but they would make Hitler proud. Goebbels would shed a tear of how well they distribute antisemitic propaganda.
maybe they won’t deny it, and they’ll swim in the propaganda and tremble at the thought “I was lied to. The Nazis were right.” which is why they don’t take the deaths or violence against Jews seriously.
It scares them to agree with Hitler, so to feel about themselves they just point at Jews and say
“they are the real Nazis, and they didn’t learn their lesson”
For Dr. King, my uncle, protest wasn’t a moral stance alone—it was a strategy, a discipline, and a craft, writes Isaac Newton Farris Jr., To
By: Isaac Newton Farris Jr.
Published: Mar 24, 2026
For my uncle, protest wasn’t a moral stance alone—it was a strategy, a discipline, and a craft. Today, we’ve lost all three.
Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “The greatness of America is the right to protest for rights.” The freedom of assembly (protest) joins the freedom of speech, the freedom to petition, the freedom of the press, and the freedom of religion as the five essential freedoms granted to every American citizen. In the 20th century, it was the Civil Rights Movement’s nonviolent protests that finally made America a true democracy. Today, in the 21st century, it is violent protests that threaten to return it to autocracy.
Invoking Dr. King in any conversation about the act of protesting is appropriate because he is the Henry Ford of protesting. Of course, Ford did not invent the automobile, nor did Dr. King invent protesting. But Ford taught the world how to efficiently build a car by applying his assembly line idea to the process. Similarly, Dr. King taught Americans how to properly protest by applying his philosophy of nonviolence to the act of resistance.
The last few years have seen a potent number of protest movements sweep America: Black Lives Matter, the January 6 insurrection on Capitol Hill, the “Free Palestine” movement, the “No Kings” rallies, and the ongoing protests against the actions of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). All claimed to be acting in the great spirit and grand tradition of Dr. King. But the only thing these have in common with the protest demonstrations of the Civil Rights Movement is that they gathered a crowd of people together.
Black Lives Matter protests provoked property destruction. On January 6,, 2021, protesters attacked one of the seats of our government and temporarily shut down the certification of a national election. Pro-Palestinian protesters have seized campus buildings, scuffled with police, and physically stopped pro-Israel rallies. And many of us are aware of protesters committing vehicular attacks on ICE agents. These acts of resistance are anything but nonviolent.
The core principle of the Civil Rights Movement was voluntary conversion, never any compulsion or arm-twisting. Its protests were mounted as an appeal to the conscience and goodwill of both the protest target and the wider public. Protesters, never the protest targets, endured every consequence their demonstrations brought: physical assault, destruction of their property, restriction of movement, and imprisonment by law enforcement. For them, protest was a demonstration of their commitment to the cause; it was never a punishment of the people or institutions that were the protest’s target.
The core principle of today’s movements seems to be involuntary coercion and intimidation. Too often, they want to force others to adopt their perspective and support their cause by threat or physical attack. They seek to shut down any program, activity, or speech they disagree with.
[ A man poses in front of a burning auto parts store across from Minneapolis's 3rd Precinct during 2020 protests following George Floyd's death. ]
When Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on a Montgomery, Alabama, bus, she didn’t attempt to interfere with the bus driver or to stop any other passengers from sitting down where they chose. Her message was not If I can’t sit where I choose, I will stop the bus from operating. Her message was I am prepared to subject myself to physical abuse and arrest, offering no resistance, in order to exercise my right as a human being and an American citizen to choose to sit in any available empty bus seat.
When black college students first sat down at a Greensboro, North Carolina, lunch counter and refused to move until they were served or arrested, they purposely didn’t occupy all the empty seats available at the lunch counter. They knew not to prevent other customers from entering and conducting business in the store, because their protest message was not If blacks can’t buy lunch here, no one will be allowed to buy lunch or shop here. The message was We will not move from this lunch counter until served or arrested, because the color of one’s skin should not prevent someone from being served.
The Birmingham, Alabama, schoolchildren who participated in a march on city streets in 1963 were attacked by police dogs and sprayed with high-pressure fire hoses. The images shocked Americans. Yet, regardless of the morality of their cause, had these children been armed with guns, knives, and lead pipes to resist their attackers, American sentiment would have been Yes, the police needed the dogs and fire hoses to put down violent thugs with weapons. Instead, the students met violence with nonviolence. Their only intention was to resist racism and possibly sacrifice their lives for justice, freedom, and democracy. As a result, American sentiment was moved, and in 1964, the Civil Rights Act became the law of the land, which made America a true democracy for the first time in its history.
The Civil Rights protesters also avoided violent speech. Never would you have seen a Civil Rights protest sign that read “Death to the KKK.” Even when it came to one of America’s most notorious racists, never would you have heard a protest speaker say, “George Wallace should be condemned to hell.” The only messages Dr. King would allow printed on signs and heard in speeches at protests were positive and affirmative: “I too am a human being,” “I am an American citizen entitled to equal rights,” or “We shall overcome.” There was never any violent speech directed to or about the protest targets. Yet today’s protesters frequently abuse their opponents, call down retribution upon them, and praise acts of horrific violence.
A nonviolent protester’s goal is to create a minimum degree of discomfort or inconvenience to draw attention to the protest cause. But the discomfort or inconvenience should never exist to the point of preventing a college class, a public speech, or a legal arrest. It must never deny its opponent’s rights.
A successful nonviolent protest generates sympathy for the cause, and it requires planning. Dr. King would have never sent out a social media message to meet him in an hour for a protest; instead, he would have sent out a message to meet him in an hour to plan a protest. He never led a march, organized a boycott, or convened a rally without first addressing all the necessary logistical questions and contingencies. A proper site must be selected and, if necessary, permits applied for. Plans must be made to deal with counterprotesters and any other attempts to interfere with the protest and for how law enforcement should be dealt with if and when they show up. Most importantly, protest organizers must insist on nonviolent protesting and explain its meaning. As Dr. King wrote in his first book, Stride Toward Freedom, nonviolence is “a courageous confrontation of evil by the power of love.”
Yet the passivity of the protester can only go so far. Denial of a permit does not mean a protest should not happen, because an act of civil disobedience or disobeying a denied protest permit can itself be a legitimate protest tactic. Dr. King’s famous “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” was written because he had been arrested for leading a march in defiance of a court order banning “racial demonstrations.” But attempting to obtain permission to protest is a necessary step along the Kingian path. Seeking permission to protest sends the message to all concerned that the intention is for the demonstration to be peaceful. Such a message could determine if the police or security forces show up wearing riot gear or their normal uniforms.
When pro-Palestinian students and activists took over Hamilton Hall on Columbia University’s campus in 2024, the spectacle drew the worst possible attention to the cause. The students caused damage to the building by breaking its windows and using its furniture to barricade themselves inside. Occupying a campus building to focus attention on a protest cause can be a legitimate protest tactic. But truly effective protest requires that no property is destroyed to facilitate the protest. Protesters can plan to use their bodies en masse as an obstacle to prevent entering or reoccupying the building. And they should never resist arrest—in 1968, when nonviolent protesters occupied the same Columbia University building, they did not resist removal.
But the way that pro-Palestinian college students occupied a Columbia University campus building in 2024, the way some BLM protests turned to property destruction, the way protesters violently invaded Capitol Hill on January 6, and the way some protesters impede ICE from doing their job is to adopt the means of tyranny and autocracy. Ironically, these protesters see themselves as genuinely resisting tyranny, but by doing so violently, they make their causes deeply unsympathetic. As Dr. King wrote in 1967, “Darkness cannot drive out darkness: Only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: Only love can do that. The beauty of nonviolence is that in its own way and in its own time it seeks to break the chain reaction of evil.”
American democracy cannot survive without the right to protest. Yet in the 21st century, 23 states have enacted at least 55 laws to limit how people can exercise their constitutional right to protest. Protesting in the way of Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil rights activists he led is the way to protect one of America’s greatest rights, the right to protest for rights. If a just protest is to succeed, its advocates must walk in Dr. King’s footsteps.
==
All anyone can or should think is, these violent, dangerous animals don't belong in our society so why should we give them what they want?
angelically sweet friend who's the kindest person you've ever met: lowkey i'm kinda soulless and evil tbh...? ^-^)' like i think i'm missing part of what makes you human because i'm so selfish and cruel
person who just said everyone who disagrees with them should be violently murdered: because i'm a good fucking person
you guys can cry antisemitism all you want but zionists and nazis are ideologically aligned since 1933 lmao. do you know what the haavara agreement is.
I’ve said it before, but I’ve never understood why antisemites use the Haavara agreement as a gotcha. Like… if someone kidnapped your mom, ransomed her, and you paid the ransom to save her life, like, you haven’t aligned with the kidnappers. You just paid a ransom to protect a person you love.
“OMG the Zionists broke the boycott on Nazi Germany to save 30,000 Jewish lives!”
Yeah? And? What do you think would have happened to those Jews if they hadn’t?
Just more evidence for the fact antizionists would rather have dead Jews than Jews who live in ways they disapprove of.
Also, next time come off anon to spout your shit, you spineless little coward lmaooo
You scared I’m gonna sic Mossad on you or something? You afraid of being outed as an antisemite? Really, the fact you folks all choose to send your hate anonymously is proof on some level, you all know it’s hateful and wrong. Either way it’s funny and doesn’t reflect well on you
Do people even realise that the "Zionism is settler colonialism" narrative was quite literally created by the Nazis? Or that most of the other anti-Zionist narratives were created by the KGB and the Soviets during the 1960s?
And people wonder why I don't support the "Free Palestine" movement. It's because of people who believe shit like that.
As the world falls, I sink upwards. @burningabyss572 - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
annaxmalina
andulkaphoto
turnnoffyourmind
