Raenie Day @oceanicheartbreak - Tumblr Blog

NOTICE FOR PSYCHOTIC PEOPLES LIKE ME AND THE NEW TOMODACHI LIFE: Please please pretty pretty please be careful while playing Living the Dream, esp if you’re currently unmedicated!!!

The game treats the Miis like they’re real people and makes zero mention ever that they are not, and only ever refers to them and their POV as if they are real and you are their caretaker! While playing this honestly messed with my head pretty badly at times and made me worry a lot on if I was hurting real people/not doing enough for real people while I was playing!

I cannot imagine how much worse this would be for someone who’s unmedicated, non-dormant, or experiencing breakthrough symptoms! Do please be careful and PLEASE remember to have a way to reality check yourself while playing the game!!!

Also: If you’re not psychotic, please reblog this anyway!!! It may not seem like a big deal to you but these kinds of things are REALLY important to know for us psychotic folk in a world that is both hostile and negligent to us and our needs!!!

ministarfruit

I love this text post so I drew it

forcefemdemonprincess

I don't think I'll ever be normal about this one. Holy fuck

smolbailey

to be fair it's incredible, so valid

dickgirldiaries

Only one thing y’all can take from trans women. Notes.

moonjong-starboy

i hope all of these girls have a great day and i love the girl who forgot her wig but the sis with the hijabi damn near made me cry sob i love this <3333333

darthimperius

Another thing abt this video: nearly every beauty involved is Indigenous or Black, the two minority groups of trans women that frequently get left out of discussions when it comes to highlighting trans women and their beauty, and the two groups at the highest risk of violence while trans. These women deserve love and praise just like y’all’s favorite white women do. Show up for Black and Indigenous trans women.

awesomebutunpractical

You can have any animal for a pet. Any complications such as “keeping the animal healthy and happy” and “the time and effort it would take to keep happy and healthy pet” and “keeping yourself uneaten” and “the pet I want is kind of extinct” have all been solved perfectly. You don’t have to think of that.

What is your pet?

#giant isopod

neovagina-penisis-evangelion

These posts present an extremely dangerous and ethically bankrupt argument, attempting to morally and rhetorically conflate pedophilia with protected identity groups like transgender people.

1. False & Offensive Equivalency

The argument equates being a pedophile (having a sexual attraction to children) with being transgender or reclaiming slurs like "faggot." This is a profound category error.

· Sexual orientation and gender identity are innate characteristics that involve consenting adults. They are recognized as protected classes under human rights frameworks because they do not, by their nature, infringe on the rights of others.

· Pedophilia is a psychiatric disorder characterized by an attraction to children, who cannot consent. The attraction itself is directed toward a violation of child protection and bodily autonomy. It is not an identity comparable to LGBTQ+ identities.

2. Strategic Co-opting of Social Justice Language

ISFF deliberately uses the language of liberation ("no one is free until we all are," "leave no one behind") and victimhood ("cast out and isolate") to frame pedophiles as an oppressed group needing protection. This is a manipulative tactic designed to silence criticism by painting opponents as "bigots" who are "isolating" community members, mirroring valid struggles against transphobia to serve a reprehensible cause.

3. Dangerous Conflation of Thought and Action

While it is technically true that a "thought crime" is not the same as an action, the post goes far beyond that. It actively works to:

· Normalize and Destigmatize the Attraction. It argues for the complete separation of the term "pedophile" from "child abuser" in public discourse, seeking to make the attraction itself socially neutral.

· Defend Pedophilic Behavior Within "Ageplay": This admits to engaging in "play" with a self-identified pedophile while age-regressed. Regardless of the legal age of the participants, this dynamic intentionally simulates and eroticizes the very adult-child power imbalance that defines child sexual abuse. This is profoundly disturbing and blurs the line between fantasy and pathology in a way that risks legitimizing the attraction.

4. Invalid "Consenting Adults" Defense

The "we are two consenting adults" defense regarding ageplay is a red herring. The issue is not the legal consent between adults in that moment, it is the underlying sexual framework being acted out. Role-playing a pedophilic attraction does not make the attraction itself benign, ethical, or comparable to a kink between adults (like consensual non-consent) that explores power dynamics between adults.

5. Emotional Blackmail & Community Gatekeeping

The post uses emotional blackmail against the trans community: If you don't defend pedophiles within our ranks, you are letting the bigots win and are not a "safe person for ALL transfems." This forces a false choice: either you accept the normalization of pedophilia, or you are betraying the trans community. This is a classic manipulation tactic to shield harmful individuals from accountability.

6. Harm to Actual Victims & the LGBTQ+ Community

· Trivializes CSA: By claiming victim status (as a CSA survivor) while advocating for the destigmatization of pedophilia and engaging in pedophilia-themed roleplay, the author creates a morally chaotic narrative that can be deeply retraumatizing for other survivors and confuses the issue of abuse.

· Fuels Anti-LGBTQ+ Rhetoric: This line of argument is a gift to malicious actors who falsely claim that the LGBTQ+ movement seeks to normalize pedophilia. It provides a direct, outrageous example they can point to, endangering the broader community

This is not a post about "thought crime" or nuanced support for non-offending individuals struggling with a harmful attraction. It is a manifesto for the normalization and social integration of pedophilia by:

1. Illegitimately claiming it as an identity.

2. Demanding its protection under the umbrella of LGBTQ+ liberation.

3. Defending the acting out of the attraction through roleplay.

4. Vilifying anyone who objects as a bigot.

The argument is insane because it inverts all ethical logic, attempting to frame a sexual attraction that is definitionally predatory toward the most vulnerable as just another misunderstood "orientation" deserving of pride and protection. It is an ideological poison pill wrapped in the language of social justice. Responsible support for non-offending pedophiles focuses on urging them to seek professional therapeutic help to never act on their urges and to manage their condition, not on demanding society celebrate their attraction or incorporate it into sexual subcultures.

These posts reveal a more extreme and dangerous ideological framework than the original post. They are not simply about destigmatizing a "thought crime"; they are actively advocating for a complete societal and ethical revolution regarding pedophilia and childhood. This is an example of pedophile advocacy activism, often referred to as the "pro-contact" or "anti-contact but pro-acceptance" wing of the MAP (Minor-Attracted Person) movement.

1. Rejection of Any "Cure" or Treatment as Oppressive:

· The post from veryvocallyexpired explicitly states that those who advocate for finding a therapeutic "cure" are "our enemy too."

· This is opposing the very notion that pedophilia is a disorder that should be treated or managed. It frames therapeutic intervention as "forced medicalization," placing it on the same spectrum of oppression as incarceration.

2. Deconstruction of the Concept of Informed Consent, Specifically for Children:

· This is the most alarming and foundational argument. The reblogged posts argue that the idea that children "Can't Consent" is a social construct used to strip them of agency and give power to adults.

· The logic is: There is "nothing inherent to being a child that means you Can't Consent." It's all about "specific social relations" and the power adults have to coerce.

· Why this is catastrophic: This argument is the necessary precursor to normalizing adult-child sexual contact. By dismantling the legal and ethical bedrock of childhood (the inability to consent to sexual acts with an adult due to developmental immaturity), they attempt to reframe such acts as a matter of power dynamics and coercion rather than an intrinsic, absolute violation. This is a classic tactic of child sexual abuse apologetics.

3. Framing Concerned Parents as Authoritarian and "Propertarian":

· The response to syzygyblossom's concern about trusting people near kids is telling. ISFF reframes parental protection as viewing children as "property," and protecting them as protecting one's assets from "degenerate outcasts."

· This reframes the universal ethical imperative to protect children from sexual predators as a petty, bourgeois concern about property rights, rather than a fundamental human rights issue.

4. Explicit "Out" Pedophile Endorsement and "Marginalized Sexuality" Claim:

· The "out pedophile" thanking the original poster for their bravery.

· This individual makes the ultimate goal clear: pedophilia is an "always going to exist" sexuality that "can't be 'fixed'," and its adherents are "the most marginalised sexuality there is."

· They perform a staggering act of blame-shifting: focusing on pedophiles lets "actual systemic causes of child abuse" which is unspecified in this instance, off the hook. This inverts reality, making the attracted adult the victim of a society that misunderstands them.

5. Aggressive Dismissal of Basic Concerns:

· The final answer to the anonymous ask is pure dogma. The user expresses the universal, visceral discomfort with the idea of being "chummy" with pedophiles. The response is a flat, aggressive denial: "If you think that pedophiles would fuck children you're wrong and you're the problem!!"

· This shuts down all dialogue. Anyone who holds the obvious, evidence-based concern that an attraction to children carries a high risk of being acted upon is declared "the problem." There is no room for nuance, statistics, or the reality of child sexual abuse.

The original post was a muddled plea for inclusion. These follow-ups reveal the coherent and radical ideology beneath it with the goal of full normalization of pedophilia as an immutable, marginalized sexual identity be trying to dismantle the key concepts that protect children: first by separating "attraction" from "action," then by attacking the very idea that children cannot consent, and finally by vilifying those who seek treatment or express protective concern as oppressive enemies.

· Rhetoric: Fully co-opts the language of social justice (liberation, marginalization, anti-oppression, anti-carceral, anti-medicalization) and turns it against the most basic protective structures of society.

This is no longer a debate about "thought crime." It is an advocacy campaign for a worldview that, if implemented, would catastrophically endanger children by removing the ethical, legal, and social guardrails specifically designed to protect them. It represents the absolute outer fringe of this discourse, where advocacy crosses into outright predation apologetics.

neovagina-penisis-evangelion

This post serves as a shocking distillation of the ideology's ultimate goal: to embed pedophile normalization and advocacy directly into the heart of online transfeminist activism, and to target minors for recruitment.

The rhetoric and framing here are explicitly predatory and calculated.

1. Enforcement of In-Group Loyalty Over Ethics:

· The opening line is a purity test. Anyone expressing even mild criticism (saying the original post was "wrong") is labeled an "insufferable" coward who fails to "properly back our sisters."

· This creates a chilling effect, pressuring vulnerable community members to silence their ethical instincts in the name of solidarity. It weaponizes community allegiance against child protection.

2. Deliberate Semantic Merging of Concepts:

· The user attempts to redefine "pedophilia" not just as an attraction to children, but to "children and childish things." This is a crucial and insidious rhetorical move.

· It intentionally blurs the line between a dangerous psychiatric disorder and a benign aesthetic preference (e.g., liking cartoon art styles, youthful fashion). This makes it harder to critique the former and opens the door to labeling any criticism as an attack on the latter.

3. Explicit Demand for Destigmatization of Pedophilic Desire:

· The call is no longer subtle: "We need to fucking destigmatize the fucking word and be goddamn normal about people who get hot and bothered at the idea... of kiddie dicks."

· This is the core demand laid bare: society must not just stop violence against pedophiles, but must become "normal" about and accepting of the sexual arousal they feel at the thought of children's genitalia.

4. The Most Dangerous Element: Targeting and Grooming Minors:

· The user explicitly identifies as a "minor." This is not an aside; it is the central pivot of the post's danger.

· They claim to "feel 10x more safer around my pedophilic friends." This is a classic grooming tactic: the adult positions themselves as the "safe," understanding ally against the supposedly hysterical or cruel outside world (the "monsters" who harassed the original poster).

· They are telling other minors: The real danger isn't adults who are attracted to you; it's the people who criticize those adults. This inverts reality and seeks to break down a minor's natural, protective distrust.

· By framing this within transfeminism, they are attempting to poison a legitimate movement, suggesting that true solidarity requires minors to embrace pedophiles as their safest allies.

5. Aggressive Silencing of Dissent:

· "Be fucking normal cunts" is an attack. It frames ethical revulsion and protective instincts as abnormal hysteria. Anyone who isn't "normal" about pedophilic attraction is a "cunt."

This is Grooming Propaganda.

This post is not a philosophical debate. It is a recruitment and grooming tool operating within online queer youth spaces. Its goals are to:

· Recruit Minors: Convince vulnerable young people that pedophiles are their misunderstood, safest allies.

· Reframe Abuse: Redefine the concern of adults (parents, community members) as harassment and "monstrous" behavior, while portraying pedophilic attraction as a benign identity.

· Corrupt Activism: Hijack the language of transfeminism and LGBTQ+ solidarity to build a shield for pedophile advocacy, punishing any member who balks at this as a traitor.

This represents the logical and horrific endpoint of the ideology presented in the earlier posts. It moves from theory to direct action, targeting the most vulnerable demographic, minors, and attempting to dismantle their psychological defenses under the banner of community and liberation. This is profoundly dangerous and constitutes a form of ideological predation.

my-darling-boy

I was having writers block and so I took a break and soon enough it was 3 in the morning and I had impulsively sewn together a tiny mouse you’re welcome

my-darling-boy

For those of you who asked, I have made a sewing tutorial on how to make your very own Peaches the Mouse!

my-darling-boy

I see people reblogging this with “to buy” but this pattern is free??? Someone even asked me “why don’t you charge money for it, it took you forever to put the document together” and I said “Not a lot of people have money and if they have some fabric scraps and a couple of buttons lying around they can make themselves a little mouse friend for free and that might make them happy and that makes me happier than receiving money???” Make yourself a liddol creacher! Heals the Soul!

crunchbuttsteak

emptymanuscript

Transcription, because it is worth reading:

There’s a phenomenon I actually see extremely commonly when literature is used to teach history to middle school and high school students. Let’s call it “pajamafication.”

So a school district nixed Maus from their curriculum, to be replaced by something more “age-appropriate.” IIRC they didn’t cite a specific replacement title, but it will probably be something like John Boyne’s “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas.”

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is tailor-made for classroom use. It’s taught at countless schools and it’s squeaky-clean of any of the parent-objectionable material you might find in Maus, Night, or any of the other first-person accounts of the Holocaust.

It’s also a terrible way to teach the Holocaust.

I’m not going to exhaustively enumerate the book’s flaws—others have done so—but I’ll summarize the points that are common to this phenomenon in various contexts.

First, obviously, the context shift. Maus, Night, et al are narrated by actual Jews who were in concentration camps. The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is narrated by a German boy. The Jewish perspective is completely eliminated.

Second, the emphasis on historical innocence. Bruno isn’t antisemitic. He has no idea that anything bad is happening. He happily befriends a Jewish boy with absolutely no prejudice.

Thus we’re reassured that you too, gentle reader, are innocent. You too would have have a childlike lack of prejudice and you too would be such a sweet summer child that you would have no idea the place next door is a death camp.

In Maus, by contrast, the children are not innocent. They are perpetrators of injustice just like adults.

[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where children run away yelling “Help! Mommy! A Jew!! - the next panel says “The mothers always told so: ‘Be careful! A Jew will catch you to a bag and eat you!’ …So the taught to their children.”]

Maus also smashes the claim that people just didn’t know what was going on in the camps.

[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where a Nazi truck is arriving at Auschwitz guarded by men with sticks and a pointing, growling dog, the boxes say “And we came here to the concentration camp Auschwitz. And we knew that from here we will not come out anymore…” “We knew the stories that they will gas us and throw in the oves. This was 1944… we knew everything. And here we were.”]

Third, nonspecificity. The Boy in the Striped Pajamas turns a specific historical atrocity into a parable about all forms of bigotry and injustice. I’m sure Boyne thinks he’s being very profound. But the actual effect is to blunt and erase the atrocity.

There’s the too-cute-by-half way it avoids terminology: “Off-With,” “the Fury.” Harsh language becomes “He said a nasty word.”

Notice how “it’s a fable” ties in with the goal of eliminating anything parents might object to.

And that’s our fourth point. Bad things can happen, but only abstractly. Someone’s dad disappears. He’s just…gone. How? Who knows. People stand around looking hungry and unhappy and saying “It’s not very nice in here.”

The ending is sad, but it’s sad like a Lifetime movie. It’s sanitized, it’s quick, there are no details, it’s meant to poke that bit of your heart that loves crying.

Maus’s description of the gas chambers, meanwhile…

[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where the process of gassing and then taking out the bodies are described in detail as inmates are working. That it took 3 to 30 minutes to gas people. That the largest pile of bodies was by the door. The worker telling the story mentions “We pulled the bodies apart with hooks. Big piles, with the strongest on top, older ones and babies crushed below… often the skulls were smashed…” “Their fingers were broken from trying to climb up the walls… and sometimes their arms were wera as long as their bodies, pulled from the sockets.” Until the narrator says, “Enough!” “I didn’t want to more to hear, but anyway he told me.”]

A historical atrocity can never be a metaphor for all bigotry because the specifics are what makes it an atrocity. The Nazis didn’t just do “bad things, generally,” they did THESE things. And leaving out the details is simply historical erasure.

Finally, fifth: Fiction.

However much poor little Bruno and Schmuel might rend your heartstrings, you can ultimately retreat into the knowledge that they aren’t real and they didn’t really die.

Now, I write historical fiction, and obviously I believe it has a place, in the classroom and out. But no Holocaust education can be complete without nonfiction that teaches about real people who genuinely did experience it.

One of the striking things about Maus is how big the cast is and how few of them survived.

[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where one character describes to another many other people who didn’t make it. Eventually covered over in lower panels by pictures of the dead.]

Because it’s a true story, Maus can also explore neglected aspects like the intergenerational trauma, which simply vanish in a pat fictional story that is just finished when you get to the end.

[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where the illustrator sits at the drawing desk above the pile of bodies. The artist says: “At least fifteen foreing editions are coming out. I’ve got 4 serious offers to turn my book into a TV special or movie. (I don’t wanna.) In May 1968 my mother killd herself. (She left no note.) Late’y I’ve been feeling depressed.” Someone calls from out of panel, “Alright Mr. Spiegelman… We’re ready to shoot!…”]

Thus, books like The Boy in the Striped Pajamas are not an age-appropriate equivalent way to teach the Holocaust, but a false construction of history.

This ends the first part of the thread. But there’s more…

The Maus incident is not an isolated case. It’s part of a broad trend of replacing the literature used to teach history with more kid-friendly, “appropriate” alternatives.

And outside of the Holocaust, it usually doesn’t meet with much controversy.

It might mean replacing Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave or Solomon Northup’s Twelve Years a Slave with modern historical fiction, for example.

Wars, the Civil Rights movement, Apartheid: any “icky” part of history can be a target.

But it plays out along the same general lines: Primary sources replaced with modern fiction, victim perspectives replaced with perpetrators, specificity replaced with Star-Bellied Sneetch-style “Why can’t we all just get along?” metaphors.

butchraskolnikov

i’ve said the is before but it’s so obvious how this whole ‘narcoterrorism’ thing was just manufacturing consent for what is happening in Venezuela. The US war on drugs, just like their ‘war on terror’, is and was just an excuse to attack oil rich countries. the US isn’t attacking Venezuela cuz they’re evil and bloodthirsty. they’re also not attacking us cuz they care about drug trafficking of human rights. they’re attacking us for our resources. it really is that simple. they don’t view anyone outside the US as truly human and they’re gonna keep killing us until they get what they want. The least you can do as a US or European citizen is to stop talking about the ‘narco’ bullshit. it’s the image the US created of latin americans so they can justify killing us. anyone who keeps spreading it is complicit with what’s happening right now

transexualpirate

"at least venezuela lost a dictator" "the good thing about trump's invasion" "maduro deserved it" oh my god some of you are dangerously susceptible to fascist propaganda.

unfriendly and honestly hostile reminder that trump isn't invading venezuela because maduro is a dictator, or because of drug cartels. he's doing it only and exclusively because they have desirable oil reserves and no other reason. reminder that venezuela is a comparatively poor country that will never financially recover from this. reminder that venezuelans are suffering with the bombing and the air strikes. reminder that trump did it to steal from them and no one did anything. reminder that this sets a dangerous precedent and now all trump has to do to invade another country is claim they're in a dictatorship. reminder that trump is a fascist dictator.

this will only be bad, for venezuelans and for all of latin america (and possibly the whole world) in the long run. trump did this not to help the venezuelans or their country, but to steal their petrol and get away with it. and he will. because that's what dictators do.

dumbpuppyfag

please stop harassing black people off this website. it's like stormfront for toddlers on here. it sucks, stop it

dumbpuppyfag

idk how "black people should feel welcome on this website" became something you have to say out loud. if black people aren't comfortable or safe on here then that is our failure. be anti-racist or die.

dumbpuppyfag

it's not enough to be passively non-racist. whether you're chasing people off here yourself or choosing to ignore "discourse" (meaning the rights of black people to basic respect), the end result is a big whites-only sign outside your little clubhouse. when the tide is pulling toward bigotry, refusing to swim against it just means you'll be carried along too. passivity is acceptance. get mad, get loud, don't value the comfort of the oppressor over the dignity of the oppressed.

earlgraytay

Gamble your blood, upgrade your luck with insider deals, and sew fish tails onto human torsos. Use the profits to pay off your debts and bri

So, I'm on a lot of game developer subreddits. The dev of this mermaid cannibalism/corporate management horror game asked for advice on how to get people to click through and play this. People universally started clutching their pearls about "oh no??? cannibalism??? a horror game where you play as the bad guy???"

.... And, uh, I can't speak to the quality of this game, but I told the dev it'd do numbers on Tumblr. Wanna help prove me right?

onefey

you're going about your normal day when, suddenly, surprise! you've been pokémon mystery dungeon'd!

unfortunately, due to budget cuts, the pokémon assigning quiz has been canceled. instead, you must spin THE WHEEL, assigning you a random, unevolved, non-legendary and non-mythical pokémon. you must now go on some sort of world-saving adventure as this pokémon. good luck!

tell me in the tags what you rolled, and how you feel about it - for bonus points, you can spin the wheel again for (or just take your pick of) a pokémon to be your partner.

bonus rules:

you're not shiny unless the wheel tells you you're shiny

take your pick of regional forms and evolutions (for example, if you roll vulpix, it's up to you whether that means normal or alolan vulpix)

apply whatever logic you like with regards to gender

have fun and be yourself!

#im a rufflet #pros: i can fly and am adorable #cons: I EVOLVE AT LEVEL 54!?!?!??!?#conclusion: yikes

molombo

Where's the African mythology?

The Kickstarter is live now!

boycarofchilladelphia

I know I have close to zero Tumblr fame, which I normally appreciate, but I would love it if this made it into the world and got fully backed. You can even pledge to get the digital content and send a real copy to a school in Africa or to a HBCU or community library of your choosing!

ominous-signs

Misusing my blog again so more people can see this then

sunlitmcgee

hm. Ya know? I am.actually rather mad that the whole culture of fakeclaiming and policing around plurality and discourse around different kinds of systems kept us, mostly myself, Sunlit, so Scared of accepting our plurality for so long. We'd all have been so much happier and safer sooner without that worry We'd be yelled at or harassed or posted into fucking some ableist cesspit sunreddit if we were open and talked about it sooner.

I probably would have heeded the voices screaming at me to leave that dnd group sooner without that fear. I wouldn't have been primed and prepped to be groomed into their token good tranny.

Hm. Mad about it.

sunlitmcgee

like idk is it worth it? Is fuming over a bodily 13 year old with a system of 20+ fictives based around their favorite animes really such a danger that you've built a culture of mass ritualistic mockery and abuse about it? Have you been kind lately? When was the last time you held the door open for somebody?

sunlitmcgee

this is OK to rb frankly we're so pissed we'd like it to be passed around maybe some idk

sentimentalslut

man the public defender discourse pisses me off so bad. yeah. yeah I do think that every single person deserves representation. yeah that includes people who *have* committed rape and murder and abuse. when I say every single person I mean every single person. if your idea of justice excludes one person it excludes everyone. next question

sentimentalslut

“so you’re saying you’d represent someone who has admitted to sexual assault?” i’m saying I have.

“so you’re saying you’d represent someone who has admitted to domestic violence?” i’m saying i have.

"so you’re saying you’d represent someone who has admitted to child abuse?" i'm saying i have.

and i am saying i have given each and every one of those clients the same level of professionalism, effort, and zealous advocacy i have given my clients who are victims of the same. that is how due process works, and every person is guaranteed it.

i have nothing but respect and admiration for my colleagues in the public interest sector who represent those who have committed and/or been accused any and all crimes, no matter how "morally reprehensible" others may find them.

public defenders are among the best, brightest, and most selfless attorneys out there. they are on the front lines of combating the carceral state and protecting the rights of every day people. get it straight in your heads. thanks.

brainscrems

Being a public defender is one of the most essential and under-recognized jobs someone can do to help maintain our democracy. Fuck absolutely anyone and everyone who goes after them. If you’re against public defenders you are fighting for fascism. There’s nothing more to say on the matter.

ohnoitstbskyen

It is infinitely preferable that some guilty scumfuck bastard motherfuckers who deserve the worst walk free, rather than the state should have an easy time of throwing any undesirable into prison.

Any power you grant the state must be evaluated against the damage it will do when (not "if," when!) the state turns it against the most marginalized and oppressed groups under its authority.

There must be high quality, professional, dedicated and well funded public defenders in a democratic society, and they must be available to everyone. Not because Nazis and pedophiles and racists and etc should have nice things, but because the moment the state can get away with abridging people's right to a fair trial it will turn that power on the vulnerable. Inevitably, and usually instantly.

It's not a nice thing that the worst people in the world get good legal representation against the state, it is a grim fucking necessity. One of those rights that people had to write in a lot of innocent blood.

r4spberry-vinaigrette

actually awful the way articles talk about npd by the way. youll look up "what is a narcissistic crash like" and the articles will be Top Ten Ways Narcissists Trap And Kill You With Rocks When Crashing Out and Narcissists Do These 15 Scary Things, Here's How To Cut Them Off and then you read and its like "they get really sad and upset when their mental image is distorted because they have the Needs To Feel In Control Of Their Image disorder. Which is evil and fucked up of them and they Will hurt you." imagine if we talked this way about like physical ailments. "Flu Havers" Show These Ten Scary Signs During Sickness, Here's How To Avoid Their Trap. number one: they sneeze when youre near which is because theyre trying to get you sick too because theyre all selfish evil harmful DEMONS

grimeclown

Putting all tabletop players into a college level ethics class and forcing them to turn in a paper on moral philosophy before buying a new book

grimeclown

This is…. An interesting thing to say… on this post in particular….

grimeclown

I think a lot of people reblogging this from @probablybadrpgideas are interpreting this as “this would be such a funny wacky way to make the table soooo complicated” but I mean this as a complaint about the way that so many tabletop players seem to just. completely lack an understanding of ethics. what it actually means to behave ethically and treat others ethically. and i dont mean this as "why do people want to be mean and play as villains? :(" i mean "why are there so many tabletop players that sympathize with outright fascist factions to the point of wondering why theyre listed as 'Lawful Evil' in the book"

grimeclown

can you talk me through why this was a particularly bad or challenging thing for your party to have done

wizard-of-soup

Goblins were in fact, for me, a turning point on this concept. I had a player who wanted to be a goblin, and I forgot about this fact up to the point that the party got a quest to kill goblins. As soon as I was announcing the quest I realized it would be a problem, though I didn't have anything else ready so I went with it. And it was! The players immediately questioned why the mayor was paying mercenaries to kill goblins, and then further questioned his justifications, at which point I realized it would be a better story if the goblins were a scapegoat and not an actual villain. This turned into a terse interrogation where the mayor threatened to put them in jail once their questions got pointed enough that he would have to either field accusations or lie; they then went CSI on the situation and drilled through his political cabinet to get answers. I had to improv pretty much all of it and I don't remember the actual ending (I know they sided with the goblins and the mayor was guilty), but this helped me realize that the Gary Gygax writing style of "certain races are just BAD and that's why they hang out in dungeons" was very short-sighted.

D&D writing, by and large, encourages a lack of questions. The surface runs deep. "Go into a cave and chop up goblins." Why are we doing this? "Goblins are bad." All goblins? "Yes."

I think the question of "why are there players comfortable siding with fascist factions and wondering why they're called 'lawful evil'" is pretty easily answered with... because D&D itself is inherently kind of fascist. And it's the most insidious kind of fascist, too- its villains are fascists, so how could you point fingers at the book?

Fire Giants are dwarf slavers. Drow are a megalomaniacal theocracy who hate men. Orcs are violent tribes of marauding killers. Illithids want to destroy all life and keep an entire civilization to scrub their floors. But these narratives still push the idea that "evil" is a racial trait. The players are not only justified in their campaign to destroy these cultures, they're encouraged to do it.

They let the cat out of the bag by making these playable races; because now, they're not cut-and-dry villanous societies. They're people. There are Drow accountants whose lives are about balancing taxes, not worshipping Lolth. There are Yuan-Ti who don't sacrifice babies on altars, and much prefer playing the lute or sewing blankets. Yet we're still expected to read "Chaotic Evil" under the Monster Manual entry for a bugbear and take it seriously.

quantumcartography

Reblogging again to add a quick take: as a DM introducing ethics makes your game so much better.

I had an intro to my campaign that involved a mad scientist kidnapping someone and turning them into a wererat. I didn't think much of it and I spent way more time fleshing out the other NPCs, I just wanted to use that wererat as a boss fight.

Once the party encountered him though they immediately saw what I totally missed: the guy who became the wererat was absolutely the victim of this story. I did my best at thinking on my feet and made the wererat this defeated guy who only followed the mad scientist because he felt like his life was ruined. So they, through good rolls, convinced him to help them fight the mad scientist and it made for such a better story.

The moral I'm trying to convey is that you need to treat every NPC in your game as a world within themselves. And I mean EVERY NPC. Why are the wolves attacking people? Are they desperately hungry? Mind controlled? Territorial due to poachers? Why are the goblins working for the wizard? Extortion? Promise of riches? If the bandits see that everyone is in armor, why wouldn't they just let the party pass and wait for easier prey? If one of the bandits die, why wouldn't the rest of them run for the hills?

dunmertitty

here’s a couple of articles on the history of racism + xenophobia in tolkien & how that influenced dnd

This is the first installment of a two-article series about the racist origins, nature, and ramifications of orcs, a malevolent humanoid spe

This is the complement to my previous article , “Orcs, Britons, and the Martial Race Myth, Part I: A Species Built for Racial Terror.” In t

anyone interested in the subject should definitely also check out the whole Three Black Halflings podcast, which talks about being black in nerdy spaces. a lot of times they’ll have on guests talking about their intersections and experiences in nerdy spaces. they have an episode with the author of the articles above.

they’ve also played a ttrpg based on african mythologies rather than mostly european ones like most mainstream fantasy.

highly recommend!!

official-megumin

the amount of people in the notes going "um actually you're the problem for pointing out subconscious biases" is just astouding.

Like I'm sorry to tell you, but if you keep playing shit that tells you some races are inherently evil and deserving of eradication, then yea. That will absolutely seep into your subconscious beliefs and worldview.

Especially with stuff like this, where it already is DEEPLY ingrained in society and all these "evil" races stereotype non-western ethnicities to some degree

official-megumin

btw, the refusal to acknowledge the racism present in modern fantasy and the like, are the product of "the curtains are just blue" mindset.

It's the same ridiculing of the notions that stories and actions may have meaning beyond what it explicitly stated.

bagadew

There’s degrees of ableism in these portrayals as well, which isn’t surprising considering that racism and ableism are (often) appearance based discrimination against people who are deemed as “other” from the “acceptable” idea of human.

Yuan-ti struggle with emotions, Wearwolfism spreads like a disease, and Kobolds are sensitive to sunlight. The vast majority of monsters are monsters because they don’t look human enough, because they don’t act in an acceptably human way.

And in people’s efforts to find an easy blanket solution to ways that racism is baked into DnD monsters… that they kind of end up enforcing the ableism that’s baked into them as well.

Like as a neurodivergent and physically disabled person who gravitated towards more “monsterous” races/species, it’s kind of uncomfortable how the new books have answered the idea that races/species should be people with variety, rather than inherently evil, by also… homogenising them all towards the ideal of the acceptable human.

Kobolds are’t sensitive to the sun, Wearwolves can chose to control their curse, and Yuan-ti flavour text says nothing about their emotions now (they’re also way closer to human physiologically).

Why are we adverse to the idea of species having different requirements and capabilities? Why (especially in the case of the last two) are these linked to an idea of goodness? Why is a Yuan-ti’s capacity for goodness and verity tied to its ability to feel things in the right way? Why is a wearwolfs capacity for goodness tied to its ability to control its body?

What ideas do these implications enforce, and if left unchecked, how might that impact the way you interact with disabled people?

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Raenie Day