The U.N. warns that 1.1 million Palestinians are at imminent risk of death, as the crushing toll of the siege reaches its lethal and final stages. In North Gaza particularly, there is little time left before hundreds of thousands of people will die of hunger.
Time is almost up for over a million people. The US and its allies bear full responsibility for what can only be described as an impending holocaust. Without an immediate change of course that includes the provision of mass amounts of aid into Gaza and sanctioning Israel, mass death from starvation is a guarantee.
It is extremely important that this isn't just "more of the same" here. They're out of food, it is getting worse. Integrated Food Security Phase Classification is an organization for studying food insecurity, and they have a scale for how bad food insecurity is. Gaza has BEEN in phase 4 for a long time now, and that's already what is called "emergency". Its bad. But they only now have been upgraded to phase 5, outright famine.
Gaza is the only place in the world to have this level of food insecurity right now.
This isn't "more on-going cruelty" like I have heard from so many. This has changed to "no, this community is currently collapsing, and will completely die out if we do not do something NOW to at least take them from 'dying' to 'starving'". This is acute food insecurity on an unimaginable and unsurvivable scale. Contact whoever you need to immediately, because it literally does not get worse. This is the part where the genocide could fucking its goals if you do not do something to spurn your government into action.
My aromanticism is not a soft suffering waiting for you to shape it, lovingly, into something you can pity. I am not seeking your tender validation.
I do not need you to explain love to me.
Were we not hand fed the same dreams, the same wishes? Were we not given the same template, told to fill in the blanks with the same values? I've spent all my life being forced into the shape of someone like you.
I know what love is.
Let me explain lovelessness to you.
Let me press my hands deep into something you never questioned and let me break it open. Let me show you the rugged edges, the sharp teeth buried inside. If I bare my heart to you, will you see me as human?
My aromanticism is wrapped in bitter sharp barbed wire edges. You may lay your hands upon me but beware of shaping me.
*taps mic* aroace and aroallo solidarity forever. though we are fighting different fights, we are collectively fighting against the true enemy: amatonormativity. amatonormativity - which is very bound up with compulsory (hetero)sexuality - ignores our wants and our consent in favour of what weâre taught we must do.
by ending amatonormativity we end the disrespect that comes from believing that feelings equal the amount of care and dignity you show people. shoutout to the loveless/heartless aros in the crowd!!! i respect and appreciate you so much!! // OP is a queerhyperplatonic aroace
I love it when love is represented as evil instead of good. Love as discrimination. As cruelty. As a justification for the worst horrors, âin the name of loveâ. The dark side of the coin people prefer to ignore
I hate the idea that the opposite of love is straight up evil, and that love is required to experience any positive or caring emotion or be "a good person" (whatever tf that even means)
anyone can have empathy or compassion or respect without "love"
you can be social and have community and close relationships without having "love"
you can never experience "love" and still be kinder and treat people better than people who do experience it
and it doesn't make you evil
even if you don't experience empathy or any emotion like that it doesn't make you evil
not experiencing any emotions at all doesn't make you evil
and being empathetic and loving and compassionate doesn't make you immune to being evil or hurting people either
nothing is that black and white
love is in fact not what makes us human
it's literally just another emotion on the same level as all the others ... and not everyone experiences it, just like any other emotion
and while I'm at it there is nothing wrong with being anti social or having a hard time connecting with other people or having no desire for human connection
as long as you're not purposely hurting people, or unintentionally hurting people but never taking accountability or responsibility for it then you're doing okay
stay loveless stay heartless be social or anti social whatever it is you are
I know people mean well when they try to argue against arophobes with the argument of "We don't feel romantic attraction, but aros can still love their friends and family!" Or argue that "Aces can still feel romantic love and want relationships!" as a response to acephobes.
But please don't. It's technically correct, but also a terrible response in that situation. Judging a person's worth by their capacity to love, in any type of way, is dehumanizing. Not everyone feels love, or even strong emotions in general, and it doesn't make them a bad person. Same as feeling love doesn't automatically make one a good person.
Tl,dr: We shouldn't try to prove our worth by arguing how "normal" or how similar to allos we are
Needlessly long explanation of why I think Flowery is lovequeer aro
If you donât know what "lovequeer" means, it essentially means that you define the word "love" in a more radical sense. You reject societal structures that frames romantic love as the most important type of love, instead redefining "love" based on your own priorities. This philosophy is most notably adopted by aromantic people (i.e. people who donât experience romantic attraction) because we're often forced to re-evaluate our society's values surrounding marriage and such once we realize we can't live up to them. Some aros who go through this process decide to approach the concept of love in a more freeform, anarchist way, and harbor stronger connections with other people in our lives (friends, family, teammates, and so on). This is what I believe Flowery's way of navigating the world is based in, and is especially relevant when it comes to kindling his relationship with Asgore.
I believe Flowery bearing witness how marriage and the nuclear family failed Asgore is a major factor in his motivations. He has a firsthand account of the unforeseen risks/negative consequences of marriage gone wrong, including Asgore becoming largely isolated from his family, his support system wearing down, and having his heart broken. There are observable flaws in this cultural "life script," in that it doesn't account for a backup plan if an all-encompassing partnership should fail. And after taking on "higher consciousness" in the Dark World, Flowery revels in the fact that he doesn't have to follow the rules that the Light World runs on. From the minute he's transformed, he uses his new power to create a "better" world for him and his friends.
Flowery is outwardly affectionate towards his so-called best friend and goes above and beyond to make him feel appreciated, in an "unusual" fashion that a lot of players automatically read as gay. But if you look closer, nothing he actually does is 100% explicitly romantic in nature. The same friendly encouragement, physical proximity, petnames, gifts etc. that he grants to Asgore are shared among the Fun Gang the the rest of the Flowers.
He crafts a unique relationship with each Flower in particular: friend, sibling, sparring partner, and so on. But each relationship is grounded in that same camaraderie and appreciation, with everyone's unique strengths being called upon by Flowery in the final battle. Which leads me to believe that Flowery doesn't rank these relationships based on utility or Light World societal rules, and his overt friendliness is how he expresses that belief.
It also fits in with the game's tiny homages to the Flower Power movement, a hippie-lead extension of the American anti-war movement that aspired for radical pacifism, which adopted flowers as its main symbol. Flower Power notably intertwined with the Free Love movement, which sought to remove the government/church from interpersonal affairs, and the two rallied together under the stance that marriage is "a tool for those who support war and favor the traditional capitalist culture."
Though heavily associated with current-day aromantic spaces, lovequeer philosophy mirrors the Free Love movement in that they both seek to challenge the institution of marriage, promote romantic/sexual autonomy, and advocate for adults' freedom to enter any and all interpersonal relationships as they please.
[Slight tangent: I read that the inclusion of sexual relationships in the Free Love movement was framed as the promotion of promiscuity by the general populous of the time... which is hilarious, considering the predictable influx of "in chapter 5, Flowery fucks your dad" jokes. Given the way I interpret Floweryâs innate nature and plants lacking certain instincts, it makes sense to me for him to be asexual too I guess, but I think heâd identify more with âaroâ since sex is irrelevant to his guiding principles on love and friendship in-game. A âjust aro,â if you will.]
Worth noting that this could be tied to how, as a plant, he might not understand monsters' social norms about relationships, especially in a setting where those norms are undoubtedly influenced by human beliefs. So despite the aspirational qualities of his relationship anarchy, it makes sense how Flowery mirroring multiple of Asgore's real-world loved ones works to both his benefit and detriment. On the upside, the way Flowery expresses his love for people is very freeform and liberal, and this allows everyone to feel valued in his eyes, regardless of the type of relationship they're in. On the downside, Asgore probably thinks it's weirdâą that Flowery is trying to imitate his college bestie, his son, and his ex-wife all at once. So because he likely draws lines between all of these relationships under a Light World framework, Flowery's plan kinda backfires, in that his actions weren't able to please Asgore in the way he needed after all.
I really appreciate how Floweryâs relationship with Asgore is shown to be flawed in this way, as much as I admire his (theoretical) ideology. He comes across as overbearing to Asgore (and Ralsei) at times, which is a stark reminder of how people have their comfort levels/preferred relationship styles and mold their lives around different aspirations. Try as he might, Floweryâs unique form of self-expression wonât gel well with everyone, especially if they were taught to read certain gestures as romantic and will think he's coming on to them. But thankfully, when Asgore does eventually reject his âadvancesâ after the final boss battle, Flowery respects his wishes and backs off. I'd factor this into the aro argument too, seeing as he doesnât appear to get upset by this rejection like someone with a crush would.
This wasn't part of my initial assessment, but I like this post and it made me wonder if Flowery likes love as a concept moreso than in practice, which is another common aro experience. He's almost always the initiator when it comes to affection, so I'd totally get it if being reciprocated makes him feel eughghh. There's no one way to be aro after all.
But to close off, regardless of if he likes love conceptually, or embraces it more radically, "free love" is integral to Flowery's personality. Even if some people don't understand it or they adopt a certain negative perception of him, he HAS to be earnest either way. Perhaps in hopes that someday, he'll meet somebody who sees things from his perspective.
