The Concept And Idea Of “you Can Always Start Trying To Be A Better Person” Is Extremely Important

Manga 30 Day challengeDay 02 - Your favorite manga

Please Save My Earth

No manga will ever match this in scope or in beauty of storytelling. The way it wove together two worlds, completely developed the moon world and its characters, made us care about not just past but present lives and drew distinctions between them – the way it made villainous characters sympathetic and sympathetic characters treacherous – the way it created science, religion and genetics around its ESP, instead of just having ESP for the sake of having it – and the way it lovingly wrapped its arms around plot points dropped 20 volumes ago and drew them forward into a perfectly parallel story arc, the way it made me catch my breath and realize all of this, all 21 volumes of it, must have been planned from the beginning – to this day it amazes me.

I was actually determined to translate/scanslate this manga before anyone “legit” got their hands on it, because there are certain lines spoken in Volumes 1 and 2 that could be translated multiple ways, and if you didn’t translate them correctly in Volume 1, when you got to Volume 21 and they were revisited, they wouldn’t make sense. Sadly, I only got through Volume 3… all the scanslations sit on my hard drive still, pages flipped and lovingly photoshopped (because this was before the days of the right-to-left English manga) to preserve as much of the original art as possible.

im not ok. this ship and this au got me in a headlock

IV…four…which sounds like death in Japanese…

死の世界…world of death… “afterlife”

🥀

The thing about the wild replies to posts that go around talking about fandom misogyny is that, at least for me, I did have to make an active choice to care about female characters.

There's less of them and they are often written with a lot less to work with and it's easier to focus on dude characters. But I had to look at myself and wonder why I was willing to read pages and pages of meta and fic and headcanons for Julian Bashir when I wasn't interested in the same for Jadzia Dax when they have a similar amount of screentime. Why I wasn't interested in Captain Janeway when she's the lead of her show. Yes, writers are often sexist, but the writers were ableist and homophobic and so on with a million male characters, but I was willing to put the work in to love them. At some point, the viewer/reader/listener's own sexism plays a part in their willingness to engage with a character.

So I had to actively choose to seek out those meta and fic and headcanons for female characters. And it is significantly harder to find than it is for male characters, because most of fandom hadn't questioned their own sexism. But what little of it there is out there is often just as high quality and interesting as the stuff I was already looking at, if not more so because there's the added dimension of fighting against the writers' misogyny, which often requires even more engagement and creativity.

It was, for me, a process that I had to continually work on to care about women characters as much as I did guy ones. But it got easier the more effort I put in. And now those posts about how no one cares about female characters are very relatable to me.

But the way people respond to those posts, it's always "I can't change the fact that the writers are sexist! It's an immutable fact that female characters are less interesting! You're attacking me personally over something that I can't change! And actually, you're the sexist for not realizing how terrible these female characters are and how you're victimizing me asking me to care about them!"

Besties, I promise it is something you can change. You just have to put the work in

so I saw this trend like 84 yrs ago (yes I’m that late)

i get annoyed when white people on this site act like tumblr is completely fine if you just 'avoid discourse', when discourse can literally mean calling out all the casual racism around you like its never 'peaceful' here for people of colour. Acting like tumblr is some special site where you can just get away from all the drama of other social media sites sure is a privilege i would like to have.

'Just curate your content!' doesnt work when its basically all the content thats the problem.

how does electing trump lower the gun pointed at palestine?

how does electing kamala? how did electing biden?

you know what. let me answer this in good faith.

this ask is in response to my previous post, where i stated:

"keep your eyes open about what you are voting for, so that your vote does not become another vote in service of genocide, and you are part of a structure of accountability for your government. yes, you are voting in self-preservation. but no, you are not being asked to protect anyone to your own detriment. let me put it more simply: as a nation, you aren't being asked to jump in front of a bullet to save palestine from genocide. you're being asked to lower the gun."

as a matter of fact, the US is a partner in the genocide. through weapons funding, through diplomatic immunity, through the media apparatus and through boots-on-the-ground soldiers. this was only further reinforced by netanyahu's address in congress today, which affirmed (needlessly, as we already knew) that israel and the US are "standing with civilization against barbarism" and other genocidal dogwhistles. but he said that for a reason: he's letting american politicians know they are just as culpable for this genocide. it is their genocide too. under international law, biden is liable for delivering weapons to a nation plausibly accused of genocide, not to mention under american law as well for delivering weapons to a nation preventing humanitarian aid.

this is bipartisan policy. both democrats and republicans support the US war machine. US foreign policy has been uniformly bloodthirsty for the past few decades, with some variation that ultimately led to nothing. democrats might kick up more fuss about human rights, but they will ultimately wage the same wars with the same disregard for international law, and have shifted right on israel in ways that even george bush did not entertain.

because this is so deeply entrenched in US politics for myriad historical, political and financial reasons, there is currently no electoral solution for palestinians within US politics, and more urgently there is no electoral solution for the genocide in gaza within US electoral politics. long-term, there might be. the increase of democrats boycotting netanyahu's speech, the election of democrats like rashida tlaib, and the pressure from constituents are indications of an enormous shift in US policy towards israel. but this is very slow change, and people in gaza are dying very quickly.

prior to 2020, there was a certain belief that democrats had some red lines that republicans don't wrt gaza. however, bidens management of the past nine months have completely disabused everyone of that notion. even someone like rashid khalidi, who believes firmly in the power of persuading americans in the imperial core, has been caught off-guard by biden's management of the war, stating that he will not vote for him.

as you might have realized over the past few years, the way the current system is set up leaves very little avenue for constituents to affect policy in the US right now, especially since democrats are extremely adept at pacifying the masses with nominal acts (notably on items like policing and environmentalism in particular) in service of their donors. mass protests are actually an indication that the political system has failed at providing an avenue for political participation except taking to the streets. it is normally a last resort. for some issues it is a first resort, because there are few other options unless you've got lobbying money. now multiply that x100 for foreign policy, where popular opinion has little sway and there are few democratic pathways for the average american to engage with, especially since it is not considered a priority as american deaths in wars have become negligible.

what does this mean? it means it is very, very difficult to pressure politicians on palestine, even though they are wholly involved in palestine and using your tax dollars to do it. in regular times, it is participation in apartheid and occupation, which is bad enough. but right now, it is participation in one of the worst crimes mankind can commit: genocide. the US is not just dropping bombs, it is also a partner in a starvation policy that is deeply sickening. it is medieval to deprive 2 million people, 50% of them children, trapped in a blockaded area of food and water, but this is a strategy the US has not only endorsed, but also assisted israel in carrying out.

because biden has been so batshit insane, there is functionally no way trump can be worse. biden (and blinken) spoke of red lines, but have gradually walked every single one of them back, because this is what democrats do: they pacify you until you no longer notice the boiling water. there is no more money trump can send, and there are no more weapons trump can send, that would make a difference to what israel is doing. they have enough money and weapons and diplomatic immunity to nuke gaza if they want to. they are not being held back by biden, they are being held back by their own limitations, their own internal disagreements, partially by saudi arabia, partially by egypt, by the palestinian resistance factions, and more significantly by hezbollah, yemen and iran. when people say "trump can do more genocide" they're not wrong that things can get worse, but they are wrong that they need trump to get worse. they can also get worse under the next democrat, just as they got worse under biden, because there is no mechanism in place to stop it.

now unlike biden who was ideologically and fanatically zionist, trump is an unpredictable opportunist. he might have done worse, and he might not have. he is actually far more likely to be influenced in any which way—but not by people, by other countries such as saudi arabia, egypt or russia. it doesn't really matter because again: the genocide didn't happen under trump. it happened under biden. it is an atrocity that the full scope of which has not been truly uncovered, and it is still really, horrifically bad—not just because we've seen kids being ripped apart daily for nine months, but because we've also seen the democratic establishment categorically prevent every international mechanism (including the highest court in the world) from stopping it. so even if trump wants to do More Genocide, the biden admin has conveniently removed all diplomatic obstructions that would stop him from doing so, and set a precedent for ignoring both the ICJ and the ICC, which was already in place since bush and further cemented since by obama and then trump and biden. it has simply been a two decades of Things Getting Worse in the middle east, and electoral politics of voting for the lesser evil have played no small part in that, and intentionally so, but there's no need to confront that right now i guess!

so where does kamala come in? well, as i said, there are few avenues for voters to influence foreign policy. the only window that exists is when a politician requires your votes. democrats are notorious for lack of follow through. they campaign, they lie, they hope you forget. if kamala is elected, she may be better on palestine. but nothing in her track record suggests that, and there would be absolutely no leverage to force her to be. but as long as she needs to be elected, there is still critical time for pressure, and it is also critical because people are dying right now.

this is also the answer to those of you stating joe biden is still president and its unfair to talk about kamala: joe biden is barely sentient, and when he is he's a geriatric genocidal racist who couldn't be moved on gaza even when he did want to be re-elected. but now he no longer needs to be elected, and has even less incentive to answer to his base (but will hopefully someday answer to the hague).

so again, when you tell me about "electing" trump or "electing" kamala—none of this is what affects palestinians right now. we have no evidence either way of what they might do. we don't even have a promise from kamala to be better right now, aside from generic vp statements on humanitarianism. she boycotted netanyahu's speech, but neither she nor pelosi have mentioned palestinians, who are still undergoing a genocide they are knowing participants in, nor have they acknowledged that israel is formally an apartheid state and netanyahu is a war criminal (bc of course, then they'd have to admit so is biden). everyone is hoping that she is better, and that she can be pressured, but as of right now that remains to be seen.

your concern is the election, my concern is the present. kamala, as a partial incumbent, will be affected if she can't change anything within the next four months. she doesn't have joe biden's record on israel yet. but as netanyahu's speech showed, the genocide was not joe biden's alone. it is a bipartisan genocide from the US political establishment that joe biden presided over and allowed to escalate unencumbered. kamala was part of this, and doesn't have anything to the contrary—yet. all we have to force her to lower the gun is the knowledge that she wants to be elected. trump's base does not want him to lower the gun, but presumably you (kamala's base) do.

so to answer your question: the upcoming presidential election is not the solution for palestine right now, but it is one of the tools that can be used to stop a genocide that both parties are responsible for. electing kamala may be beneficial in the long run—or it may not. but pressuring kamala is now, and it is urgent.