unclench your jaw, drop your shoulders, take a deep breath in and breathe it out slowly - you are going to be okay, you don’t need to have it all figured out today, you are so strong for not giving up, you are not a problem and you are not something that needs to be fixed; you are loved, i promise, and you are absolutely never alone
It’s 2017 and the Hungarian government is legitimately taking about putting us in “camps”. I never want to hear another gadjekane fuck tell me that our people don’t suffer in Europe and all over the world.
“An initiative supported by the Far-Right Nazi Hungarian Party continues to mount in favor of putting Roma (also known [under the ethnic slur] G*psies) into highly-controlled camps by force, and some, for life.“
A few key notes from the article:
The Hungarian Nazi Party – known as The Jobbik Party – has a strong resentment towards the Romani minority and wants to “relieve their communities of “anti-social” Roma behavior.”
Anti Romani sentiment exists even within the walls of the Hungarian parliament; since June 2016 the Nazi party has won it’s first three seats in the European Parliament and secured the third place in the general elections (with 17% of the votes.)
The vice chairman of the Nazi party who is also the European Parliament representative claims these camps are “public order protection camps” – stating that “At these camps, [Romani would be given a chance to “learn”] and return to civilized society. Those who abandon crime, make sure their children attend school and participate in public work programs, they can reintegrate. No doubt there will be people who show no improvement. They can spend the rest of their lives in these camps.“
The chairman of the Nazi party defends their idea of the camp by saying that “segregation is the best tool to teach [Roma] how to coexist”, calling the camps “public order protection camps” and claiming that he does not believe that there would be a problem with locking the Roma into camps because the Nazi party would “execute these plans in accordance with all laws”
These camps plan on taking Roma children away from their families and sending them to “boarding schools”
Other rules for these camps would include established “laws” such as, having to request the permission to leave the camp and a curfew.
As the European Roma Rights Centre has stated, The problems and issues Roma in Europe have to face have not improved since no [Eastern] European government has truly put in a strong enough initiative to support them and put an end to the anti-Romani discrimination.
Many of the problems the Nazi party is speaking of – the “anti-social” behavior, the low employment rate, the high petty crime rate and the low numbers of Roma children in schools – wouldn’t even be problems in the first place if Roma were simply being viewed as human and treated fairly.
Roma are not given the right to no discrimination in the fields of education, instead they get condemned to low quality education in “all Roma schools” or are being falsely diagnosed with mental disabilities and placed in facilities for mentally handicapped. – As a result they get trapped in the vicious cycle of poverty with slim chances (or no chances at all) to get a job.
Don’t even claim “Roma can do small jobs that don’t require any training then!!!” because that isn’t an option either, since anti-Roma attitudes are rooted so deeply nobody even wants to hire Romani to do “insignificant” jobs that do not require any qualifications. Many have to literally dig through trash and look for metal and copper rests to sell for a little money, however that does not cover the costs of feeding their family so many have to resort to petty crimes.
Do you see how all these problems are connected now? Do you see how none of these problems would even exist if Roma were granted basic human rights? Fuck Europe.
“(Aug 3rd, 2017) This week, the trailer for the film adaptation of “Call Me By Your Name” hit the Internet, while the movie started showing at Sundance. Both the trailer and the movie were welcomed with praise and excitement by most of the public, but my reaction can’t be other than worry and fear. Fear for the kids who will stumble upon this movie, along with the multitude of similar material that already exists, and think that the predatory and manipulative relationship portrayed in it is, as the critics have been describing it, a “sexy, passionate summer romance”.
“Call Me By Your Name” is a film about the “forbidden” romance between a closeted seventeen year old boy and a twenty-four year old man. Based on the book of the same name, the movie portrays a relationship in which the older adult clearly knows that what he’s doing is wrong, yet he still starts a romantic and sexual relationship with a high-school aged teenager. The story ends with Oliver (the older man) married to a woman while Elio (the younger man, who was a teenager at the time of their “affair”) is still heavily affected by their relationship a decade and a half later.
It doesn’t seem, from his interviews, that André Aciman intended to write the story of a predatory adult manipulating a kid, but that’s the story told. The fact that the author of the book is a straight man only complicates any possible analysis, and raises the question of if, maybe, the choice to portray a teenager “falling” for a man seven year older was caused by the prejudiced idea that LGBTQ people are predatory; or by straight men’s own tendency to prey on inexperienced teenagers and see nothing wrong with it.
The people involved in the film see no fault in the narrative either, and Armie Hammer said in an interview that “nothing about the relationship was predatory”. The movie isn’t a cautionary tale about adults manipulating a closeted teenager, but it should be.
The discussion around “Call Me By Your Name” is a conflicting one. The movie both perpetuates (even if it doesn’t want to) the idea that gay men prey on young kids, while it also normalizes and romanticizes relationships between adult men and teenagers. And, while the first instinct is to say “hey, no, LGBTQ people aren’t inherently predatory”, the overwhelmingly positive response (even from LGBTQ circles!) makes us wonder if it isn’t even more important to say “yeah, some LGBTQ people are predatory, and we have to protect young LGBTQ kids”.
The fact is that, though of course we aren’t born predators trying to turn the innocent straight youth gay, or trick the heterosexuals into sleeping with us; there are predators in our spaces, often protected by the idea that, because a space is LGBTQ, it will be safe.
I’d hoped that the response to “Call Me By Your Name” would be of swift condemnation (akin to the quick response to allegations of PWR BTTM member Ben Hopkins being an abuser, or the major outrage every time a show has killed a sapphic character in the last couple of years) or, at the very least, the start of a sincere discussion of how often isolated and closeted kids find themselves in unsafe situations when attempting to explore their sexuality. Instead, not only is the response overwhelmingly positive but, what’s worse, all criticisms are being shut down with either accusations of homophobia or defenses of abuse.
“Call Me By Your Name” isn’t okay because “Pretty Little Liars” has a victim marry her abuser or because Woody Allen keeps making movies where men in their forties fall for nineteen-years-old girls. Abuse culture is abuse culture, and these portrayals of abuse (including the warped and romanticized image of “Lolita” that has spread through pop culture despite the original novel being a horror story about an abuser and his prey) are all equally wrong, whether they depict heterosexual people or gay people as abusers.
Sure, toxic relationships are a common theme in fiction, and “Lolita” is a staple of literature because it so hauntingly portrays the mentality of an abuser. If “Call Me By Your Name” intended to be (like the original novel by Vladimir Nabokov) an introspection into the mind of a predator, or even a portrayal of the trauma that dating adults causes teenagers (like the dreadful, but accurate “Abzurdah”), there wouldn’t be a problem with it. And, just like we criticize heterosexual romances for normalizing and romanticizing abuse, we should be able to apply this same criteria to gay media.
But the most worrisome part of this argument isn’t the discussion over whether we can ever portray LGBTQ people as abusive (and how these narratives should be framed) but the argument that there is no abuse at all, and because a seventeen year old teenager is legally able to consent within the context of the film, there is nothing wrong with them sleeping with an adult in their mid-twenties. And what’s genuinely, truly scary, is that it’s not teenagers who don’t know better making these arguments, but actual adults in their twenties (and even older). There are people outing themselves as potential predators as a defense of this movie, and the majority of the Internet doesn’t seem to care one bit.
Maybe the most controversial part of the “it’s legal and so it’s okay” argument is the fact that age of consent laws are often frail and even illogical constructs. In Italy, where the story of “Call Me By Your Name” is set, the age of consent is fourteen. In the United States, where Oliver is from, the age of consent ranges from sixteen to eighteen. Some countries have an age of consent as low as twelve and, up until a handful of years ago, the age of consent in the United Kingdom was sixteen for heterosexual couples and twenty-one for gay couples.
What’s important to remember is that the law is not the end-all-be-all of morality, and that something being legal (like gay panic laws, the Industrial Prison Complex, or forced genital mutilation) or illegal (like existing as a gay person, abortion, or consenting adults practicing sex work) doesn’t magically make it right or wrong.
(Most of us) understand that, though they are both under the age of consent and it’s not directly punishable by law in most places, a twelve year old and a sixteen year old should not be having sex. There is an understanding that, no matter how smart or mature or physically developed a twelve year old is, there are certain vital stages of development that separate them from a sixteen year old. Because of these stages of development it’s that consent, majority, responsibility and accountability are given to people in stages, allowing them certain rights and obligations as they grow older, with twenty-one being the age when most countries consider a person fully mature. But, while it’s generally understood that the stage between twelve and sixteen years of age creates a kind of boundary, the abuse culture that we live in makes it so the lines get blurrier as teenagers get older, leaving vulnerable young people to be manipulated by adults with little to no consequences.
Always, in these discussions, we end up bringing up the anecdotal evidence. People will argue that their parents met when their mom was a teenager and their dad was in his mid-twenties “and yet they’re happily married!”, or think of a fling they had as a teenager themselves with an adult person that didn’t affect them much. What the overwhelming majority of anecdotal evidence actually proves is that most people who dated an older adult in the fifteen-to-nineteen stage experienced some kind of abuse. Even though a lot of these people can’t actually recognize it as abuse until it’s been pointed to them as such, it still is.
Young people dating older adults, particularly young people still in high-school, are still developing emotionally, sexually, and intellectually; and they don’t have the social and economic position that an older adult might have. They are more susceptible to manipulation, likely to have their boundaries trespassed and their consent forced; and at-risk youth are the most prone to be targeted by predatory adults.
LGBTQ kids are particularly endangered, especially closeted youth. Though not every LGBTQ teenager will find themselves isolated and without resources, it’s still a common experience, and one that can be exploited. When a more experienced adult presents themselves as the one source of wisdom and hope in an otherwise unwelcoming surrounding, and asking for counsel or help might mean outing themselves, the chances of LGBTQ teens ending in abusive relationships without even being aware that they are being taken advantage of are huge.
The refusal to portray abusive relationships as abusive only further endangers teenagers. From the “Twilight” books to films like “Call Me By Your Name”, the portrayal of these relationships as a non-issue convinces teenagers that not only are relationships with older adults acceptable, but sometimes even desirable. Given the prevalence of gay narratives where one’s “one true love” is what finally allows them to come out and be happy, and the overwhelming presence of romances between teenagers and older people; gay and bisexual teens often think that a relationship with an older person might be a necessary stepping stone or even the only possible outcome of the path to being out and proud.
It’s time to start holding ourselves and everyone around us accountable for harboring, spreading and defending these ideas. All of society is guilty of upholding a culture that normalizes abuse and protects abusers. But it’s particularly important that we, as LGBTQ people, remember that protecting our own, sometimes, means protecting the most vulnerable among us; not just from the outside prejudice that we’re all dangerous, but also from the abusers in our communities.
Parting note: It was incredibly hard not to write this as a personal essay on how the trauma of these experiences has marked me and mine, and why the discussion surrounding this movie personally wounds me, because I hope that an attempt at a less emotional talk will reach more people. Still, I urge you to read, if you can, this personal account about fandom’s normalization of abuse and how it directly affects victims.”
The UK currently has 14 million people living below the poverty line. https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/uk-poverty-2017
The above photograph is the reason someone had to visit a food bank.
It reads:
“I came to the food bank today because my benefits were stopped after coming out of hospital. I have had to reapply for benefits. I didn’t receive the letter informing me that my benefits were stopping as it was sent to the wrong address. I won’t get any money for six weeks. I was in hospital having a tumour removed so my immune system is very low. I now have a chest infection and not having food to eat is affecting my health.”
This is happening in supposedly the 6th wealthiest country in the world.
The tories are vile and they are responsible and complicit for the deaths of over 120,000 people due to their austerity policy.
Before post-punk and Goth in the early days of Punk, British film director, DJ and musician Don Letts pretty much ran the scene at The Roxy in London, spinning primarily reggae…
A nice run down of PoC in the goth/post-punk scene. Anyone you think is missing (like Fred Freak of Strange Boutique)?
Pro tip from a former Jared’s salesperson: You want a sparkly white rock that will look like a diamond to the untrained eye and will literally cost the price of a nice dinner for two? Created white sapphire. They’re lab grown and cost *pennies* to make, so you can get a 1 or 2 carat white sapphire for like… $30-80 probably. You can get one as huge as you like, perfectly clear, perfectly flawless. And no one will ever be able to tell the difference except a professional appraiser. Also, sapphires are the second-hardest gemstone (right after diamonds) so they are very durable! Very unlikely that they’ll chip or crack. Get that bitch set in sterling silver and you are GOOD TO GO. Whole thing should cost you less than $200 unless you get a fancy band with a lot of extra stones. Of course, created sapphires come in every color of the rainbow, so if you want something more exciting than plain white, you TOTALLY CAN.
Created sapphires and silver: The poor Millennial’s engagement ring.
Since this is on my dash again I’m gonna remind everyone of this little fun fact:
Sapphire is a crystalline aluminum oxide, colored by trace inclusions of other elements. Thus, white sapphire is transparent aluminum.
Another fun fact from your friendly local geologist: Corundum (aka ruby aka sapphire aka Al2O3) is one of the hardest materials on earth, being just 1 point below diamond on the Mohs Hardness Scale
FUCK THIS MEME AND FUCK ALL OF YOU WHO ARE MAKING JOKES I AM SO FUCKING SICK OF THIS
How dare some one own something that a. might have been a gift, b. might have been bought before they fell into poverty, c. might have been on sale/at a thrift store, or d. IT’S ALSO NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS
STOP FORCING US INTO RAGS BEFORE YOU BELIEVE OUR STRUGGLE AND I WILL START WEARING BOOTS LIKE THIS TO STEP ON THE THROATS OF ANYONE WHO SAYS SHIT LIKE THIS
I AM FUCKING *DONE*
PS If anyone knows the person in the original photo, you can let them know they have the backing/support of an angry valkyrie
I had to shut down one of my friends on this the other day as well. I own a pair of New Rocks. I bought them when I was better off, and the fact that I owned them didn’t stop me from slowly starving to death 5 years down the line. Boots like that are a surprisingly good investment because my gods, they are built to LAST. I have taken my boots larping, worn them for three days straight in some awful terrain and they’re nearly 8 years old at this point and showing no signs of giving up the ghost.
So yeah, I have expensive boots. As the lovely Shinga said, all the better for stomping on a moptherfucker’s throat.
Also those are Demonia’s (Concord-108), and the price tag on the image is misleading. Idk what jokester on Amazon is trying to sell them for 250+, but they’re regularly about 110-115, anything more and you’re being ripped off. I see 3 pairs that sold on Ebay for <40$.
She’s much better off with those than a pair of 10$ used Chucks because yeah, those things are built to fucking last. I have a pair of Gothika-200s that I bought in 2009 and they’re still kicking (no pun intended) after years of them being my everyday shoes. Keep in mind a poor person splurging on something reasonably expensive but necessary is NOT the same as a poor person splurging on a luxury with no real use. It’s always better to save up and spend on something that costs more because it’s durable than have to repeatedly spend to replace something cheap.
Some people are poor because they’re bad at managing money, but you don’t know the situation just by looking at a person, and also ngl when I see people my age and from the US not managing their money properly, I don’t get mad at them specifically, I get mad at the shitty American public school system for putting more focus on common core than enforcing vital life skills like budgeting and finance.
I can’t blame a woman for getting big ass-kicking boots in this day and age, what with all the rich sexual predators and “nice guys” who won’t take a hint PLUS fucking scum Neo-Nazis and Klansmen freely goose-stepping about
Its like the 80’s all over again, a remorseless madwoman runs the UK, a maniacal bastard runs the US, the world’s on the brink of nuclear war and all I want to do is listen to synthpop
The Plains warbonnet is not a Cherokee thing. It is not a Navajo thing. It is not an Indian thing. It is a Plains thing.
Stop calling every silly thing you draw that even vaguely resembles a native “Cherokee” or “Navajo” or “Aztec.”
Stop drawing the warbonnet everywhere as the apparently definitive native thing. It isn’t part of all of our 600+ cultures.
Same goes for the tipi, not part of every one of the 600+ indigenous cultures.
Stop thinking that if a native person doesn’t have dark, “mahogany” skin, that their heritage is invalid. Even without admixture, we actually do have varying skin tones.
Stop wearing crappy fake warbonnets.
Stop wearing redface.
Stop using us as your silly mascots. We are people.
Stop saying “spirit animal.” It’s derived from a New Age bastardization of a something that actually exists in some of our cultures.
Don’t smudge. Cleanse all you like, that’s fine, but don’t smudge.
Don’t call us “Indians.” “Native American” isn’t great either, it is not our name, but it’s slightly better than “Indian.” “Indigenous” is also fine.
Don’t use NDN/ndn. That is ours.
Step off about our hair. If you meet a long-haired native, admire it if you like, maybe even ask them about it (RESPECTFULLY), but do not touch. The same applies for someone with short hair, but additionally for those with short hair, don’t say things like “oh you’d look more native/Indian/etc if your hair was long.” We didn’t all traditionally have long, flowing hair. Believe it or not, there are actually different haircuts existing in our various cultures, and aside from that ultimately it’s a personal choice, one does not need to have long hair if they don’t want to. Doesn’t make them any less native to have short hair.
Don’t pray to our spirits/gods/energies. Native spiritualities are closed, they are not for outsiders.
Don’t say “The Native Americans believed…” Firstly, the past tense is silly, we still exist and do things. Secondly, we are NOT A MONOLITH. As I mentioned before, there are upwards of 600 different Native American cultures.
Don’t ask about someone’s “Indian name.” That’s not only insensitive, the name you are referring to in that instance is something sacred, and might not be something that person wants to share with you.
Don’t call yourself silly crap like “howling wolf” or “flying eagle.” That’s also racist and insensitive.
Regardless of whatever you might think you’re doing, or what your intentions may be, if a native person tells you that what you’re doing is disrespectful, STOP DOING IT.
You aren’t honoring us. You’re just mocking us further, demonstrating your continued ability to treat us like shit and get away with it even now, centuries after our colonization began. Your feelings are not more important than our history and survival.
To those doing your best as allies, thank you, keep doing what you do. HOWEVER, don’t let opportunities to educate others escape you. By letting them continue to be ignorant, you are failing. Spread the message.
There will be no “please.” It’s been more than 500 years, and we still are made to be invisible in our homelands. Still we are treated like less. Some even think we all died long ago.
Appropriation of Native cultures runs rampant in the pagan/witchcraft community. Remember, it’s just like kindergarten. Be kind, be respectful, and ask before touching something that does not belong to you.
-Bri
This week I had a lovely conversation with an older dyke who reminded me how much a lot of people have always hated TERFs and SWERFs.
She was talking about the time in the 1970s and 1980s when she was a young radical dyke and how many of the awesome dykes in the radical scene were trans women. So I asked her if there was ever any problem with TERFs and SWERFs. She didn’t know those words so I described them. Her reply was (paraphrasing a longer conversation):
“Oh, you mean the political lesbians? That’s what we called them at the time, no one really considered them radical. They hated everyone. They hated bisexual women who dated men. They hated us leather dykes and kinky dykes because they thought we were ‘copying the patriarchy’, they hated trans women. None of us in the radical scene liked them. A lot of them later left and admitted that they were straight but were presured to identify as lesbians in that group because being a feminist to them meant cutting all ties with men. They were like a cult. They often lived together and if you didn’t walk the political line you were dead to them. Intense stuff. ”
And like, I know her memories don’t have global relevance and there have also been places where TERFs had a much more prominent impact on the local radical women’s community, but still, to hear how despised these TERFs have always been by these truly radical dykes cheered me up a lot.
Jup, and actually it has been since TERFs first got started.
TERFs began to colonize the RadFem identity as early as 1973 at Radical Feminism’s biggest event: the West Coast Lesbian Conference. The conference was specifically trans-inclusive, but TERFs disrupted the event, demanding that trans attendees be removed. TERF icon Robin Morgan incited violence by telling the TERFs to “deal with” a trans women who was known to be in attendance.
When a group of TERFs tried to physically assault the trans woman, Radical Feminists stepped in to protect the trans woman. Instead of beating the trans woman, the TERFs instead beat the Radical Feminists. After the TERF violence, the conference still voted to remain a trans inclusive space, but the trans woman left the conference voluntarily to avoid further TERF violence and disruption to the conference.
Perhaps the most iconic Radical Feminist institution was the Lesbian Separatist music collective, Olivia Records. This collective is largely responsible for the rise of women’s music movement of the 1970s. The Collective was trans-inclusive and even helped trans women access trans medical care. TERF icon, Janice Raymond discovered this and began a campaign against Olivia and the trans member of the Collective. This resulted in numerous death threats to the Radical Feminist members of the collective and credible armed death threats against the trans woman. Moreover, TERFs threatened to financially destroy Olivia Records for being trans inclusive with a boycott.
Even though Olivia voted to remain a trans-inclusive space, the trans woman left the Collective to avoid further TERF violence and disruption to the Collective.
[…]
Most of the media coverage around the MWMF casts this as a RadFem/Lesbian/Woman vs Trans issue. It’s not. The MWMF has come to represent a more nuanced struggle between TERFs who target both Radical Feminists and trans people in the name of Radical Feminism. The evidence reveals that almost from the start, the chances were that “there is still a better than 999 in 1000 chance that most Festigoers would welcome trans women”.
Moreover, the evidence reveals that the most iconic Radical Feminist institutions were designed to be trans-inclusive, until TERF violence forced trans people to choose between their own safety, the safety of Radical Feminists, the institution itself and leaving the space. As has always been, TERF aggression comes wrapped in the guise of Radical Feminism, for the purpose of colonizing Radical Feminism.
triptych that serves as an altarpiece in the Interfaith AIDS Chapel at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, which serves as a memorial for those killed by AIDS and a place of refuge for those currently suffering from the disease. Keith Haring’s last piece before his own death from AIDS.
The altarpiece, cast in bronze and covered with gold leaf, is rendered in the artist’s post-graffiti style. Sam Havadtoy, writing in May 1990, shared his recollection of Haring’s work on the panels:
In 1989, Keith asked me to help him decorate his new Manhattan apartment. In his living room was an old brick fireplace which he hated, so I had it plastered over. The plaster was wet and I suggested that he draw into it. He thought it was a cool idea. It was as if the plaster were a three-dimensional textured canvas. He loved drawing in the plaster, and got very excited about the new medium. When he finished, it was very beautiful. I asked him if he wanted to make an edition of the fireplace and he loved the idea. Later, I asked him if he wanted to do other works in editions – perhaps, panels and tables. He laughed. But he said he liked the idea – he would do it.
Trays were made for the panels and tables. I also had a last-minute inspiration and had special trays made in the shape of a Russian icon, an altar piece, a large version of a miniature icon I saw in a shop in Geneva. All the trays were then laid out in a quiet, womblike room in the Dakota. Trays were filled with fresh clay. Keith arrived. He snapped a tape into the ghetto blaster, turned up the music, sipped a Coke and set to work.
Instead of a brush, for the first time, he used a loop knife. He handled the knife freely and spontaneously like he wielded his brushes. As he worked, he became more and more excited. He said that he couldn’t believe it had taken him so long to discover this kind of sculpture. He made no preliminary drawings except for a quick sketch of the dancer on the third panel, which he made on a two-by-four piece of wood. Yet he was completely sanguine as he cut into the clay. The images came directly from his head. He placed the knife in the clay and carved a continuous running line, a quarter-of-an-inch deep groove, which wound like a swollen stream during the spring thaw. He never stopped to rethink the line; he never edited himself and never made corrections. The lines he carved in the clay were seamless, flawless.
Keith finished the panels and then, for the first time, saw the three altar piece sections. He stared at them and was silent. Then he set to work. He cut into the clay and began to carve freeflowing lines. The images that emerged were unlike the others. They were religious: an inspiration of the life of Christ; a baby held by a pair of hands; hands ascending toward heaven; Christ on the cross. On one side panel he depicted the resurrection. On the other, a fallen angel. When Keith finished, as he stepped back and gazed at this work, he said, “Man, this is really heavy.”
When he stopped, he was exhausted, and it was the first time I realized how frail he had become. He was completely out of breath. He said, “When I’m working, I’m fine, but as soon as I stop, it hits me … ”
The altar was Keith’s final piece of work.
Haring died two weeks after completing the altarpiece. The uncharacteristically solemn altarpiece reflects the artist’s coming to terms with his own mortality and his grief over the death of friends. The work is an expression of love and an affirmation of the sacred.
Antifascist activists worry that the Trump administration is trying to crack down on dissent.
Men and women who are inspired by “kind of an antifa ideology” are being investigated by the FBI, according to the bureau’s director, Christopher Wray.
“While we’re not investigating antifa as antifa—that’s an ideology and we don’t investigate ideologies—we are investigating a number of what we would call anarchist-extremist [groups], where we have properly predicated subjects of people who are motivated to commit violent criminal activity on kind of an antifa ideology,” Wray told members of the House Homeland Security Committee.
In case things weren’t clear, the FBI director is talking about you.
Good security culture is more important now than ever.
Native American Woman Olivia Lone Bear, Mother of 5, Missing in North Dakota Oil Fields
Olivia Lone Bear, Native American woman and mother of five, has gone missing in the oil fields of North Dakota. We spoke with her brother, Matthew Lone Bear, who is part of a daily search to look for his sister since she went missing on October 25th in New Town, North Dakota. He is calling for more support from local authorities:
“She was outgoing, and yeah, she liked to hang out at the casinos and bars, and she also really cared for her children. …
We do still need water support. We do need people on the ground, definitely, because the Fort Berthold reservation is… just about a million acres. So that’s a lot of ground to cover. The more people we can get in before the snow falls and before the lake freezes—we want to get as much done as possible before then.”
gummygunk
jacobvanloon
blakekathryn
dailybridgerton
areudirty
snowghoul
titsay
pixelskylines
