Make Way

Chahta, queer, neurodivergent, disabled. Dedicated to the community.

[catchymemes]

They supporting

[depsidase]

[depsidase]

[akanemnon]

Here's your reminder to: be gay

Already on it

[its-emimi]

Happy Pride month! 🌈

[depsidase]

[depsidase]

[coldstream]

i love having friends who can communicate like adults it's so cool

[coldstream]

imagine being like "hey this made me feel bad" and they're like "oh sorry i'll try to be better about that" and that's all it is

[strangesmallbard]

btw if i see one post about anne frank’s sexuality from goyim this month i will start swinging

[strangesmallbard]

[knight-of-skyloft]

Isn't it lucky for non-Jews that she died before she could answer that question one way or the other and now they have a perfect little Jewish corpse to play with like a paper doll 🥰🥰🥰

[maimonideznuts]

Anne didn't want anyone to read those pages, she glued the pages together to make sure they were her secrets, she was murdered knowing those were still secrets that only she knew.

Restorers carefully separated the pages and her secrets were published in later editions with the permission of her father Otto Frank. She was young and didn't know what these feelings meant about her, she was a Jewish girl who was murdered so near the beginning of her life that she never had the opportunity or privilege to draw her own conclusions about herself.

Anne Frank's questions about herself don't belong to anyone but Anne Frank.

[strangesmallbard]

just a quick fact check re: anne gluing pages together. while anne did glue brown paper over some sections in her diary, these sections contained information about “sexual matters,” including sexual intercourse, menstruation, prostitution, and jokes about sex. in 2016, the anne frank house discovered these passages and restored them + detailed their findings to the public. as far as i can glean from reading articles about this discovery, these passages didn’t describe her sexuality.

however, other sections definitely did—and it’s most likely that otto frank, her father, omitted them in early published editions. anne frank herself was rewriting a new version of her diary for publication; when otto frank helped edit her diary, he included passages from both her own edited and unedited sections.

regardless of semantics here, the through line remains the same: anne frank herself did not ultimately choose which parts of herself to share with the world and which to keep private. otto frank did the best he could to both honor her memory & respect her privacy when omitting passages. (it’s also not hard to determine why either otto or anne might have omitted sections about her attraction to girls in their own respective edits).

furthermore, she did not get the chance to explore an lgbt identity because nazis murdered her for being jewish. that’s the point all comments above & in the tags reiterate and why we’re really tired of lgbt goyim focusing on these sections from her diary—anne frank may be a historical figure now, but she was once a regular young girl who died young because of antisemitism. the least you can do to honor her memory is refrain from speculating about an aspect of her identity she was prevented from exploring & claiming.

regarding the goyische appropriation of anne frank in general, i highly recommend all goyim (and jews) to read this article by dara horn:

Becoming Anne Frank

Why did we turn an isolated teenage girl into the world’s most famous Holocaust victim?

[strawbunnycakes]

(subtitles coming today!)

It's DONE!!!!!! please give it a watch!!!!!! 🩷

[strawbunnycakes]

flora 🦩🩷🎀

[strawbunnycakes]

Melba 🤎🌼

[strawbunnycakes]

Isabelle's ready for summer 🩷☁️🎀

[robertreich]

Follow the money.

[wiisagi-maiingan]

Controversial opinion maybe but you don't actually have to come out to anyone if you don't want to. No one is entitled to that information. If you want to keep your identity to yourself, whether that's for comfort or safety or just because you feel like it, then that's your decision and your decision alone.

And if this doesn't apply to you, then you can reblog without commentary or scroll on. You don't need to add a "well actually—" or an "except for—" or whatever. You do not need to tell people their feelings or try to diagnose strangers. Just move on 🤷

[wiisagi-maiingan]

It actually blows me away how little compassion people have for anyone who chooses to stay closeted, even from the people closest to them. We can recognize how many people throughout history never told anyone about their identities, even their partners, for a lot of different reasons but we forget that those reasons still exist. So many queer people are living their truths in their heads and will never share that with anyone else and we will likely never know and that's fine. It's fine.

We can try to destroy the bigotry that leads people to hiding for safety, but we also have to remember that there will always be people who have no intentions of coming out to anyone regardless. There isn't a future where everyone tells everyone else everything about their identities because there will always be people who don't care enough to give themselves labels or who simply do not think it is anyone else's business.

[anistarrose]

if you are a parent, or may become one, or you are otherwise likely to arrive in the situation of caring for a child while they eat, promise me this: if a child doesn't like a certain food or food group, you will ask them WHY. and specifically, you will pay attention to either confirming or ruling out "it makes my mouth itch" or "it makes my stomach hurt," both of which are medically important info that children may not provide unprompted. which i know because this PSA has been brought to you by "i spent my entire childhood and much of my early teens eating peas and lentils while wondering why everyone else liked the Violently Itchy Mouth Sensation so much, like were they a bunch of legume masochists or something, before i finally realized that Violently Itchy Mouth Sensation was in fact a sinister demon appearing only to me, and her true demonic name was: Legume Allergy"

[silvaurum]

"i would kill a pedophile to protect my child" ok but would you teach your child how to say no? even to adults? even to adults you like? would you teach your child the words "penis" and "vulva" and then use them? would you let them ask questions about their body? would you answer them honestly? would you learn how to cope with your feelings when you talk about human bodies, so they don't feel ashamed? would you set a positive example for how you talk about your body? would you tell your child they don't have to hug or kiss anyone? would you tell your family the same? would you stand by them when they refuse to hug someone? even someone you know has never done anything to hurt them? would you let your child avoid food they don't like? would you let you child avoid people they don't like? would you believe them? would you sit in the discomfort of not knowing all the answers and not take it out on them? would you love your child the same if someone did hurt them? would you make them feel valued just as they are? would you let them talk to doctors or nurses in private? would you let them express their feelings? would you show interest in their life? would you let your child say no to you? would you help your child feel safe coming to you when they make a mistake? would you apologize to your child? would you believe them? would you put aside your anger to focus on what would make your child feel safe and loved? would you put your ego aside for your child? would you take your child's concerns seriously? would you listen to your child? would you believe them?

[shychick-52]

I would both do all those things AND kill a pedo to protect my child, if I had to.

[thecourtofcaligula]

Yesss

[silvaurum]

i'm gonna add this comment by @papercrane:

"Maya angelou's family killed a pedophile that raped her, and that just traumatized her more. "I thought that I had caused the man’s death, because I had spoken his name. That was my seven-and-a-half-year logic. So I stopped talking for five years." Read I know why the caged bird sings."

and here is my comment:

the fantasy of killing a pedophile to defend your child is... an escape from reality. as with all fantasies where a single act of violence stands for a lifetime of effortful care. it lets us off the hook for the day to day labor of actually protecting the human beings around us. it gives us an excuse to look away from what abuse actually looks like.

it allows us to ignore that setting boundaries is a daily practice. it allows us to ignore the subtle ways in which we punish children for having boundaries. it allows us not to think about things we can do, the effort we can put in, in smaller repeated ways, to be kind and caring. to be safe to talk to.

it is a grand gesture that, were you to actually go through with it, would neither prevent the harm that you fear nor help your child to heal from it. it is an idea with no bearing on reality for 99.99% of people, while rape and abuse are a reality for a large fraction of people.

it is not useful to imagine killing a pedophile. it is not useful to claim you would kill a pedophile. it wouldn't be useful to actually attempt to kill a pedophile in almost any situation.

it is useful to think about how you can help your child know they can get help. they can say no. they can tell adults to stop. they deserve to be comfortable. they deserve to be informed.

the entire point of the post is that your child will not be saved by your imagined wrath. the entire point is that your day to day actions, and your attitude towards children as people, are more impactful to your child's well-being. far more realistic. more important.

not least because your child doesn't need you to be wrathful. they need your love. they need care. they need attention.

meanwhile, the public performance of wanting to kill child abusers doesn't do anything to child abusers. most child abusers believe they are doing the right thing for their children.

saying you want to kill abusers doesn't signal anything good to children, either. as others have said, it makes children more afraid to speak up and ask for help. that might be their mom, their coach, their troop leader. it gives those abusers leverage; the children cannot tell if they want things to be stable.

and it makes it harder for adults to BELIEVE children, too! because if their child was really abused, then they've staked their honor on committing that violence, even if it was against their brother or spouse or grandpa or pastor or neighbor or their other kid's favorite babysitter. and if they don't want to do that, well... then they must decide whether they believe completely their child, or whether their child's boundaries must really be respected, or... if maybe it's impossible to know.

how many abuse survivors have tried to disclose, only to be told that so-and-so wouldn't do that, or they didn't mean it, because so-and-so loves you and we all like so-and-so. this dichotomy goes both ways, psychologically. if a child abuser is entirely evil and has to be killed, then someone who's not entirely evil and i don't want to kill can't be a child abuser. this must be something else. there must be a mistake.

you can not adequately protect your children from abuse if you hold on to this idea. i am telling you. your insistence that killing pedophiles will protect your children is holding you back. it is not useful. it is not cute to talk about how much you want to do a single act of violence to abusers as if that would ever be enough to outrun the culture of abuse and the dehumanization of children in our society. you cannot cling to this like a talisman that would ward off any harm your children may come to. you cannot escape reality by telling yourself you'd be a total badass and kill that bad guy dead. this is not helpful.