chodetown Buffet

Sascha / 25 / n-b trans guy / proud faggot / white / poor as shit / nsfw / anti-assimilationist/ DNI racists, transphobes, etc

[tdicksupreme]

hope all mean transsexual faggots are having a good day. non-med transsexuals I love you

[hemipenal-system]

it’s a little bit ridiculous that the trans erasure discourse has ended at any place except “erasure, similarly to all transphobia, is a thing that happens to both transmascs and transfems but looks different person to person”

[hemipenal-system]

the annoying thing is it’s not even hard to never miss. you just go “idk i think it depends” to anyone trying to make hardline statements about trans people and assume that if a trans person can be oppressed in some way that every trans person and quite a few cis people can also be oppressed that way. this shit is so fucking easy and everyone on here is so bad at it

[cock-holliday]

reinstalled shinigami eyes to take a look at the damage and it's so much worse than a year or so ago when i deleted it. virtually every intersex blog i know of regardless of how they feel about tme/tma is marked red unless they are especially vocal about liking it, countless trans men are marked red regardless of whether they are vocally inclusive, most who are marked green are either famous guys or are (somewhat) infamous for their transphobia and exorsexism if not also racism.

Plenty of transphobic cis folks are green. Virtually every trans-positivity account is red except for the ones who are unapologetically transphobic to at least part of the community. Countless trans women who vocally uses the term transandrophobia are marked red. Several trans women who dont even use the term but have at least on one occasion defended or sympathized with trans men are red. Several trans women who are bigender/NB/Etc with inclusion of any "male" or masc terms are red regardless of whether they seem to have anything to say about trans men.

It is BLEAK. I've been trying to remove reds and greens as I assess, but it is really really gross that it was a pretty well-known soft rule a decade plus ago that you didn't mark trans people red at all even if they were shitheads, unless they were actual proud terfs, because the flagging was guaranteed to isolate them from community.

Inability to assess risk and a total aversion to narratives that contradict what you assume to be the case for others is getting people into a lot of trouble.

Shinigami eyes is completely dead and less than useless, but since so many people still seem to trust it, I do not want people to keep getting flagged as violent evil transphobes cause they started identifying as genderqueer.

[isuggestrespecttranspeople]

Shinigami eyes is terrible and useless. Please stop using it you respect trans people.

[tempotronica]

The fact that some people use it as their personal means of attack against people they disagree with Doesn't really help.

[bisforbutch]

I feel like "any black people who white queers disagree with" are woefully underrepresented on this post. Let me fix that.

[thewarmvoid]

seconding Deej here on that point ☝🏾

[this-is-trans-joy]

Like, I think re-contextualising internalised misogyny as simply being about the hatred of women has impacted how people understand the harmful rhetoric spread by TERFs like JK Rowling and how she upholds patriarchal systems, because whenever JK Rowling’s beliefs are mentioned, it’s usually under the impression that they come solely from her own internalised misogyny, and therefore, that she just hates women.

There is a disturbing amount of people who “joke” about JK Rowling being a closeted trans man because she seems to hate women so much, which is already incredibly transphobic towards trans men, but it also represents only half of the picture. JK Rowling’s hatred of maleness, manhood and masculinity also plays an extremely significant part in her ideology. She considers any association with men, any association with (perisexcis) male genitalia, or any association with masculinity as being inherently predatory, and any association with (white) women, (white) womanhood and (perisexcis) female genitalia as being inherently good and pure.

Hence why she campaigns so violently to keep trans women out of women’s spaces under the belief that it’s not possible to separate trans women from an imposed, societal boy or manhood (whether or not it was actually imposed in the way she thinks it was, or how that imposition can be incredibly harmful and dangerous for young trans girls), and also why so many of her targets are women of colour, because they do not fit into the white Western standards of womanhood and femininity that her beliefs are based on.

As for trans men, she advocates preventative measures to stop trans men from transitioning, under the belief that we’re confused girls trying to escape misogyny, and that it’s our internalised misogyny that leads us to transitioning at all. JK Rowling’s entire campaign is to separate “maleness” from “femaleness” because in her world, the two simply cannot mix. In her world, women are perpetual victims (misogyny) and men are inherent perpetrators (misandry) which— perhaps unbeknownst to her— is exactly what the patriarchy wants.

To negate the animosity towards masculinity and manhood that TERFs have is to negate a good portion of the pillars that patriarchy stands on. This idea that men and women have to be separated because they’re inherently opposed to each other, and that men simply cannot help themselves from being sexual predators because it’s wired into their male brains is… patriarchy 101. The cis men in power are laughing at how gullible TERFs are, quite frankly, and it’s disturbing how many so-called transfeminist leftists are also falling for it because they still want to find their own way of saying “women good and men bad.”

JK Rowling doesn’t hate women because she’s secretly a man, in fact, I don’t even think saying she “hates women” or “hates men” is accurate because that oversimplifies her actual mentality. She doesn’t think she hates women, because she advocates for the protection of women (even if her advocation is built on exclusion and transphobia) and she doesn’t think she hates men because she’s perfectly happy to cosy up to powerful cis men, and presumably she doesn’t hate her husband.

However, she is a deep deep believer of biology being a dictator of how a person acts, and this belief requires both misogynistic attitudes towards women and misandrist attitudes towards men, and if feminists in leftist spaces are only rejecting one of these beliefs, then you will still find yourself sitting at the same table as JK Rowling one day.

[drizzles-in-paradise]

I honestly think that nonbinary people should be allowed to be mean* about our genders without getting shit for it more often.

*(Read: Assertive of our boundaries and stood firm on the fact that our identities are deserving of respect)

We should be allowed to make a sour face or take a cold tone with someone when they carelessly misgender us for the fifth time in a row despite multiple corrections. We should be allowed to complain about erasure and ask where our needs and experiences come into play when we hear people reinforcing binary normativity in their discussions of gender related issues. We should be allowed to be visibly/audibly angry with other trans people when they try to forcibly categorize us as fem or masc, or imply that our enbyness is a mere phase that will eventually lead to "real/full" (binary to binary) transition.

Nonbinary people should be allowed to take our identities seriously and expect others to do the same for us, regardless of whether or not we will come off as mean for doing so. Because quite frankly, upon seeing how exorsexist the world has become recently, I think we haven't been mean enough.

[lastoneout]

I know it's more nuanced than this but I think having a hard policy of thinking anyone who genuinely hates one group of queer people for their identity might as well hate all of us and thus I should block any queerphobic queer person I see can do a lot to save you from believing anything exclusionists say.

"bomb that kills all-" "I just don't get bi women bringing their-" "pansexuality isn't a real thing-" "all lesbians-" "trans men really are men bcs they're all misogynistic predators-" "theyfabs-" "pfft aroace people are cringe-" "nonbinary people are actually all-" Instant block. Goodbye. Not listening. It's for both solidarity with your fellow queers AND to protect yourself, because once a person is convinced to hate one group for their immutable traits they can be convinced fairly easily to hate another too, and thus I do not trust them.

Just block these people the second they pop up, they aren't your allies and nothing they have to say is worth listening to.

[dramaticpokemonpictures]

Rest in peace Akihiro Miwa (1935-2026)

I haven't seen anyone talking about this and just wanted to make a quick post on here.

Akihiro Miwa recently passed away peacefully june 20th, and was not only a drag queen and a queer icon, but also the japanese voice of Arceus in the movie Arceus and the jewel of life, as well as the witch from Howl's moving castle and Moro from Princess Mononke.

Rest in peace and thank you for the wonderfull impact you made in this world.

[velvetvexations]

I saw a TERF being like "so can I say I'm a trans woman because blah blah" and honestly yeah you can go for it why would I care about that lol

[velvetvexations]

Gender Zen!

[nonbinary-wrath-month]

You know that tidbit about how "if you want to be a girl/boy, but you don't want to consider yourself transgender or commit to any form of transition because 'I'd make an ugly girl/boy!', then you are already transgender and a girl/boy"? The same is true for non-binary people. If what's stopping you from thinking of yourself as non-binary is a fear that you'll turn out ugly or like a caricature of a non-binary person, or that no-one will ever view you as worthy of love if you're non-binary, you are non-binary and expressing gender dysphoria and imposter syndrome. Just thought I'd let you know.

[genderkoolaid]

how many studies have to show that "just" using they/them pronouns or "just" calling yourself as nonbinary is enough to be affected by systemic transphobia before people stop acting like non-medical-transitioning nonbinary people are not living functionally cis lives.

[genderkoolaid]

Nonbinary workers in California are concentrated in lowest-paying jobs, report shows

Data from private employers with 100 or more employees showed that, as of 2020, between 50% and 55% of workers who classified themselves as nonbinary were in a low-paying category of jobs, those paying less than $30,679 a year, said the California Civil Rights Department. In comparison, 32% of male employees and 43% of female workers earned less than that amount. And between 35% and 40% of nonbinary workers were in the lowest-paying category of jobs, those paying $19,239 or less, compared with 22% of male employees and 30% of female employees.

2024 data: "5-10% of all reported non-binary workers were reported in the highest pay band, while 40-45% of all reported non-binary workers were reported in the lowest pay band."

Taryn versus Taryn (she/her) versus Taryn (they/them): A Field Experiment on Pronoun Disclosure and Nonbinary Hiring Discrimination

Nonbinary people have a gender identity that falls outside the male-female binary. To investigate hiring discrimination against this group, thousands of randomly generated fictitious resumes were submitted to job postings in pairs where the treatment resume contained pronouns listed below the name and the control resume did not. Two treatments were considered: nonbinary "they/them" and binary "he/him" or "she/her" pronouns congruent with implied sex. Hence, discrimination is estimated against nonbinary and presumed cisgender applicants who disclose pronouns. Results show that disclosing "they/them" pronouns reduces positive employer response by 5.4 percentage points. There is also evidence that discrimination is larger (approximately double) in Republican than Democratic geographies. By comparison, results are inconclusive regarding discrimination against presumed cisgender applicants who disclose pronouns; if discrimination does exist, it is of lower magnitude than discrimination against nonbinary applicants who disclose pronouns.

Workplace Experiences of Nonbinary Employees

The majority of nonbinary adults in the workforce are under age 35 (87%), and half (51%) are people of color. About three-quarters (74%) of nonbinary people in the workforce are making less than $50,000 a year. Our analysis [n=163] indicates that employment discrimination against nonbinary employees is persistent and widespread. At some point in their lives, about six in 10 nonbinary employees (59%) reported experiencing discrimination or harassment at work (including being fired, not hired, not promoted, or verbally, physically, or sexually harassed) because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Many nonbinary employees reported recent experiences of discrimination and harassment. Within the past year, 16% of nonbinary employees reported that they had been fired, not hired, or not promoted because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, and 20% reported experiencing harassment at work. One in four (26%) nonbinary employees reported experiencing adverse treatment because of their LGBTQ status at their current job. Many nonbinary employees also reported engaging in actions to avoid discrimination and harassment, including hiding their nonbinary identity and changing their appearance or behaviors. Nearly half (45%) of nonbinary employees were not out to their current supervisor, and 17% were not out to any of their co-workers. Two-thirds (67%) of nonbinary employees reported downplaying their LGBTQ status at work by doing one or more of the following: changing their speech, mannerisms, appearance, or how they dress at work; avoiding work social events; or not talking about their outside activities at work. Nearly six in 10 (58%) nonbinary employees have looked for another job because of how they were treated based on their sexual orientation or gender identity at work, and half (50%) reported leaving a job because of such treatment.

The labour market outcomes of transgender individuals

[W]hen grouped by sex assigned at birth — (3) AMAB and (4) AFAB — the income of those with a genderqueer non-binary identity is significantly less than those with a transgender male/female identity (i.e. AMAB QNB < MTF and AFAB GQNB < FTM). These income gaps are consistent with GQNBs facing additional income penalties from identifying outside of the more socially accepted male/female binary, although the descriptive nature of these results precludes causal inference.

[luckyladylily]

So I have a point to make, but I think it is going to take a bit of a journey to get there. Lets start with a quote from Whipping Girl (Julia Serano).

When the majority of violence and sexual assaults committed against trans people is directed at trans women, that is not transphobia—it is trans-misogyny.

I think it is important to understand that for many trans women, Whipping Girl is formative. It is hard to overstate how important of a work it is to how trans femme people as a whole understand and view the world. With that in mind.

That quote is predicated on a false assumption. The best current data is that violence is directed across trans gender identities fairly equally. That is, trans men and non binary people suffer about as much violence as trans women. However, up until recently almost all studies of violence against trans people have been focused on trans women. Trans men and nonbinary people have been critically under represented and violence against them critically unreported. And yet many trans women continue to assume that trans women are the most targeted gender identity, largely because of an over reliance on a twenty year old manifesto that made a very strong claim based on bad data (which was the best data available at the time).

This is not a Julia Serano hit piece. I think Whipping Girl is fine. But I also think that Whipping Girl is not perfect. There are ideas and statements I personally disagree with. There are ideas and statements in there that are objectively wrong, like the above quote. And there is a least one statement I simply find indefensible.

While trans people on the female-to-male (FTM) spectrum face discrimination for breaking gender norms (i.e., oppositional sexism), their expressions of maleness or masculinity themselves are not targeted for ridicule—to do so would require one to question masculinity itself.

This statement does not line up with what I have observed. I have observed trans men's masculinity being ridiculed, though not in the same way as trans women's femininity is ridiculed. She is wrong. I think this is an ignorant statement made by a trans woman motivated to overlook discrimination because she was pushing a particular narrative and therefore failed to recognize discrimination as it is experienced by another group, assuming that because it is not like the discrimination she experiences it does not exist. I believe this statement is indefensible. It was ignorant then, it is ignorant now.

Again, this is not a hit piece. I don't think she is a bad person, I don't think we need to throw out all of Whipping Girl. Lots of people make mistakes like this, it is an occupational hazard of making these kind of strong theories and statements.

But how many trans women take this statement as gospel and build their understanding of trans masculinity around Julia Serano's dismissive, factually incorrect, and at times even ignorant statements?

And this is Julia Serano's Whipping Girl. One of the most respected trans feminine texts there is. If we should be able to trust any text, it is Whipping Girl.

And that's the point. It is dangerous to view these sorts of texts as objective sources of information. And it's not just trans women and whipping girl, I am just most familiar with texts relating to trans women because I am one.

The queer community has a problem where we view authority figures in the movement as sources of objectively correct information. And when you do this eventually some authority figure you respect is going to say something that's ignorant and wrong and you will adopt that incorrect idea.

You have to be critical of your sources. Especially sources that speak to you on an emotional level.

[yearst]

Do you know where someone could find the best current data about violence against trans people? Because every time I try to look, I find data that says trans women are significantly more at risk of violence than trans men.

I am not trying to kick the hornets nest here, but if you’re telling people to question their sources and then making a big claim without any links to data… people are going to question where you got that.

[luckyladylily]

So let's start with a critically flawed, if well meaning, source, to demonstrate why you have to be careful and the type of misinformation that is extremely easy to happen. The human rights campaign is one of the first sources people are going to come up against here. They also horribly mangle the data in ways that are, frankly, shocking. I'm pretty sure that they didn't have anyone qualified to do statistical analysis look over their claims. Maybe not even anyone with basic training.

So the hrc bases a lot of their claims on identified homicide numbers. Which, of course, introduces massive selective bias. Using a pool of 372 identified trans victims of homicide, the hrc claims that 83% of trans victims of homicide were women.

The problem being that identified victims are not the same as all victims. Especially when you are comparing a known highly visible demographic to demographics known for low visibility.

The discrepancy in those claims is subtle to those who are not trained in data analysis, but it is such a basic and major error as to call into question the ability of the HRC to do effective data analysis at all. It's classic survivorship bias, I'm sure you've seen the story of the WW2 planes with bullet holes, it's that sort of thing.

And it is true that all sources agree that trans women (especially black trans women) are far more often identified. We have more names of murdered trans women than other demographics. You might be forgiven thinking this means trans women suffer the most violence.

But competent data analysis paints a different picture.

Lets look at "Global Burden of Violence Against Transgender and Gender-Diverse Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis".

The first thing you will notice is that this source spends a huge amount of time going into exact methodology, what data was used, the source, what data was not used and why, and how and why it was analyzed in the way it was. This is what competent data analysis looks like. Lets pull some critical quotes from the source:

"Disproportionate violence burdens are experienced by transgender and gender-diverse people who are multiply marginalized.13 For example, transphobia, racism, and classism intersect to compound violence exposure for transgender women of color.14,15 According to the Trans Murder Monitoring project, 94% of the 321 identified transgender and gender-diverse people who were murdered in 2023 were transgender women or transgender feminine people, and the majority were Black, women of color, and engaged in sex work.16 Such disparities suggest the importance of considering intersecting identities in violence research and intervention strategies.13"

You will notice they acknowledge the data on identified victims is almost entirely trans women. What they do not do is suggest that this means trans women are the primary victims of anti trans violence, instead drawing the conclusion that intersecting identities are a key factor. This is important because of the results of the actual data of properly conducted data gathering. Here is their conclusion about violence across trans gender identities: "Our meta-analyses did not show significantly different levels of violence globally among transgender women, transgender men, and nonbinary adults."

"While we would have included homicide, we identified no studies that reported its prevalence." The first part is pretty plain. There is not a statistically significant difference in violence levels between trans identities, according to the data that was collected in a scientific manner.

However, homicide data has been completely neglected to be collected in a scientific manner (likely due to the difficulty of doing so). Instead reports are anecdotal - that is, we identify trans homicide victims after the fact, which means it is entirely based on demographic visibility. The source does suggest that it seems likely that black trans women in particular are disproportional victims of homicide, but no real conclusion can be drawn without further studies.

Given that general violence against trans people seems fairly flat across identity, and that intersectional factors seem to play a critical part in violence against trans people, I would suggest that anecdotally gathered evidence is the source of the discrepancy. Between a demographic known for hyper visibility (trans women), and demographics known for being practically invisible (other trans identities), it draws a very obvious picture of why the anecdotal evidence looks the way it does.

As a side note and purely my own opinion, I think there is a tendency for white trans women to claim the violence experienced by trans women of color, especially black trans women, and report it as general violence against trans women. But the data suggests that race (and class, which are often intertwined) play such a massive role in violence against trans women that I feel it is honestly kind of racist how the trans women community so often glosses over it, if it is even discussed at all. The simple fact is that a white trans woman like myself is much, much less likely to experience violence than a black trans woman, and that is a key part of the discussion.

Getting back to data, there is one more important piece I want to highlight. Specifically, how data has been gathered, and on who.

"Of the 94 studies, nearly all (90 studies [96%]) included transgender women, whereas 49% (46 studies) included transgender men, and 37% (35 studies) included nonbinary adults"

This is a massive discrepancy in visibility. It seems almost laughable that a study would include trans women specifically but not bother with trans men, a staggering display of systematic bias against trans men, and yet it appears that half of available studies that passed the minimum bar of quality to be included in the meta analysis did just that. And nonbinary people have it even worse. It is no wonder that violence against trans demographics other than trans women is less well understood and under reported in anecdotal analysis. Even the people actively looking for violence against trans people are heavily biasing their studies towards discovering violence against trans women.

I could go on for a long, long time breaking down this one meta analysis, but I think you get the point, and in particular how important proper data analysis is. The simple fact of the matter is many "reputable" sources are clearly not conducting proper data analysis when breaking down anti trans violence by demographic and making wildly incorrect claims because of it.

I have one more source I will be brief with. "Gender Identity Disparities in Criminal Victimization: National Crime Victimization Survey, 2017–2018". The critical quote for our purpose:

"Transgender women and men had higher rates of violent victimization (86.1 and 107.5 per 1000 persons, respectively) than did cisgender women (23.7 per 1000 persons; OR = 3.88; 90% CI = 0, 8.55) and cisgender men (19.8 per 1000 persons; OR = 5.98, 90% CI = 2.09, 9.87), but there were no differences between transgender men and women (Δ = 21.4; SE = 68.7; P = .76)."

You will note that the raw data shows higher violence against trans men, but with proper data analysis it is revealed to not be statistically significant. This is something you have to be careful of, there are tools experts use for data analysis that reveal that obvious conclusions from raw numbers are not always correct.

There are more sources out there, but I am not going to bother tracking them down. It was not hard to find these sources, these two major sources I found through simple internet searches on the first page (duck duck go, in my case). I don't know why you had problems, for me it was as simple as searching for something like "trans violence by gender identity" and looking for actual studies that talk about methodology.

This is a skill people really need to develop, but its not something I know how to teach. I personally think the queer community on tumblr is very over reliant on being spoon fed sources, and on top of that is really terrible at evaluating sources. I think it is genuinely quite likely that most trans people go straight to the HRC page, see their big bold graphics proclaiming that 83% of trans homicide victims are trans women, and don't even consider that it could be bad information.

[genderkoolaid]

#reading list#julia serano#also ! the 2015 US National trans survey showed that approx. 70% of native trans male and nonbinary people afab respondents have been#sexually assaulted - a staggering 10-20% more than any other racial demographic

^^ its genuinely fucking insane how high the rates are for native trans men & nonbinary people assigned female. iirc its 74% for enben assigned female, 71% for trans men, higher than the already high rates for native cis women (the 2016/2017 NISVS found 63.9% of native cis women experienced contact sexual violence) & as you mentioned, higher than any other racial group looked at on the USTS. & the lack of discussion around this when it comes to discussing misogynistic colonial violence feels really dangerous tbh (thinking abt the above remark on how racism is sidelined in the discussion of trans women being murdered).

[sapphoslilhelper]

It's genuinely so infuriating when people act like transmasculine folks don't experience misogyny after coming out or aren't the "primary" targets anymore. The misogyny gets worse, and anyone who ever knew a transmasculine person would know that. People just stop caring when it happens to you.

Erasure is not the absence of violence. It is the absence of acknowledgement of violence.

If your worldview requires refusing to acknowledge systemic violence against transmasculine people, your worldview is built upon transmasculine erasure.

[transandrophobiatruther]

I am sooooo tired of seeing "actually this post is about women not trans men" slapped on to feminist posts and then when that is questioned or challenged, the response is "this is for women specifically because of the societal expectations placed on them."

I'm going to hold your hand as I say this to you. Those same expectations are placed on trans men. Trans men are also expected to be mothers and wives. Trans men also face misogyny and are harmed by it, in the same ways cisgender women are.

It reads like a lot of people think of trans men as Cis Dudes With Pussies when the vast majority of trans men are living (or have lived) many of the same experiences as cis women, and should be included in these conversations.

For example, if the conversation is about how young girls are brought up to believe the must be wives and mothers — many (most, even) trans men grew up with those same expectations! It is equally liberating for young trans men to realize they don't have to be mothers and wives as it is for cis women, with the only difference potentially being an additional gender affirming layer.

[love-ardour-anarchism]

casting a spell to turn a million sad and miserable girls into the happy, fat and hairy men, transmascs and dykes they were always meant to be

[hawlucha]

With a heavy heart, I come to you all with the news announced by close friends of Cat Frazier that she had passed away on Monday, June 29.

She had been running @animatedtext since 2012, with her impact on the internet SHAPING tumblr. If you have a years long history on this site, you’ve seen her art.

She ran a venue in Oakland called Oakland Secret, a punk venue where I’d vend at regularly as an artist. She made a safe space for queer artists, artists of color, and local furs too. I am forever grateful for her work both in the Bay Area creative scene and online, and am forever changed by the totality of her impact.

I’ll be linking some articles from the 2010’s about her impact online: The Fader | Action | Jezebel | ObviouslySocial

I invite you to take a visit through her archive, and if you have a long history with this site like I do, it’s like walking down memory lane.

[love-ardour-anarchism]

the idea that being nonbinary can be a stepping stone to "fully identifying as (male/female)" can coexist with the fact that for some people identifying as binary male or female is, in fact, the stepping stone to a fully realized non-binary identity and life.

when i came out as trans i originally began labelling myself "nonbinary" because it felt like a way to soft-launch my coming out with my generally accepting peers.

when i started transitioning more outwardly i then came to label myself a trans woman. i thought that being trans-female or transfeminine was what i was meant to be and it seemed fine enough to me to go with it.

then, over the years of experiencing and experimenting with my gender presentation and expressions i came to grow into my full and wholly nonbinary identity as a transfeminine butch.

never fully woman, not even necessarily "woman-adjacent" but always in relation to my past experiences with womanhood and the societal expectations that cling to it.

i am nonbinary. my experiences with womanhood are kaleidoscopic and do not invalidate my existence as a nonbinary butch but they are my experiences and in turn also do not invalidate another person's apparently inverse experience.

someone else's experience might be the inverse and thats equally valid, some people's questioning of the binary leads them to come to affirmation of their binary womanhood or manhood and thats also beautiful.

womanhood and manhood don't need to be rigid, toxic or emprisoning, they themselves can be diverse and wonderful universes to inhabit.

[tinyuglyworld]

Palestinians burning an Israeli flag in the Balata refugee camp, near Nablus. Photographed by Mohammed Ballas, 2000