“I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” —Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
blunderpuff asked: My hick town has a surprisingly big Jews 4 Jesus group, and all of them have the stupid Magen David/fish/cross symbols on their cars, etc. They're like, loud and proud about the J4J thing. So in the wake of the election, they're being harassed en masse by anti-Semites SO MUCH SO that they keep shouting "We are Christians! We are following the teachings of Jesus Christ!!" Which on the one hand, hilarious! Couldn't happen nicer ppl OTOH, this is why Jews around here don't advertise they're Jewish.
It goes to show - they are happy to steal our identity and appropriate our culture, but entirely unwilling to the work or endure the suffering that comes with actually being a Jew.
This is why they are not Jewish. This is why they never will be.
As promised, I am doing another holiday give away this year! (and recycling an old GIF because time, or rather, lack thereof). Don’t worry I ship internationally! Also, I want to add a 6th gift but I don’t know what people would want. If you have suggestions, let me know!
RULES
You must be following me.
1 reblog per day. Likes won’t be counted. Each reblog counts as an entry.
You must reblog before 9pm EST on December 11th. I will pick 6 winners, and each person wins 1 prize. 1st winner picks first prize, 2nd winner picks second prize from what’s left, etc.
I will ship internationally!
If the winners do not reply within 24 hours, someone else will be contacted.
As a rule, I do not read the Federalist, a nasty littlefar-right propaganda outletthat has lately drifted from a down-market National Review to a slightly upmarket Breitbart. But last week someone subscribed me to the magazine’s daily newsletter—presumably as some kind of sick joke—and on Thursday a curious story caught my eye. “The Trump Team Is No More Anti-Semitic Than Democrats Are,” declared the headline of an article by Joshua Seidel, best known as a proud Jewish supporter of the alt-right. Here is how Seidel’s pieceopens:
We all know the stereotypes for Jewish women and girls: Aggressive, demanding, pushy! Maybe some might say “whiny”!
If you’re a Jewish man, you’ve either given voice to these opinions or privately considered them while walking home after another argument or sitting in a restaurant feeling emasculated. “All stereotypes are true” Murry Rothbard [sic] once said, and we all know there’s truth to this one. Yet what kind of non-Jewish person would DARE to voice to the same opinion? Clearly, only Hitler. Or Stephen Bannon.
Seidel explains that, according to Bannon’s ex-wife, the Breitbart News executive chairman “didn’t want his kids going to school with ‘whiny Jewish girls.’ ” Does that make him anti-Semitic? No way! Seidel notes that Bannon’s résumé “includes opening Breitbart in Israel, working with Goldman Sachs, and some time spent in Hollywood.” Get it? There are a ton of Jews in the banking and entertainment industries, and Bannon worked alongside them. Therefore, he could not possibly be anti-Semitic.
Now, Seidel actually misquotes Bannon’s ex-wife, who, in reality, claimed that Bannon said he “doesn’t like Jews and that he doesn’t like the way they raise their kids to be ‘whiney brats’ and that he didn’t want the girls going to school with Jews.” (Emphasis mine.) The real quote includes an outright statement of anti-Semitism, which Seidel conveniently elides. He also ignores the other alleged (and corroborated) instances of Bannon’s anti-Semitism. But none of that really matters to Seidel, because Bannon supports Donald Trump, and Trump supports Israel. (Except when he doesn’t.) Seidel then criticizes my recent article about anti-Semitic threats by Trump supporters, calling it “unbelievable,” “morally wrong,” “disgusting, bigoted, and unfair,” and “a slap in the face” to America, which is a pretty serious charge for one short piece, but I’ll take the compliment.
Anyway, the fascinating thing about Seidel’s rant is that it is itself plainly anti-Semitic. I do not mean that in the abstract or theoretical sense, but rather in the sense that it explicitly affirms an anti-Semitic stereotype that is especially prevalent in the United States—that of the spoiled, whiny, “emasculat[ing]” Jewish woman. Apparently the editors of the Federalist are perfectly OK with a writer complaining about how too many “Jewish women and girls” are “aggressive, demanding, [and] pushy.” And they are OK with it not because it is acceptable in any ethical sense—it is obviously not—but because Bannon said it, and Bannon must be defended.
This rush to embrace anti-Semitism in order to legitimize the Trump team’s anti-Semitism is ominous. The Federalist has attacked plenty of vulnerable minorities in the past, but it has never before gone after Jews so venomously. Yes, Seidel’s (rather incoherent) piece is meant to be lighthearted—perhaps even a kind of quasi-in-joke, since Seidel himself is Jewish. But the peddling of crude anti-Semitic stereotypes often precedes and precipitates a much darker turn toward Jew hatred. Keep an eye on the Federalist and its ilk as they traffic more and more in this kind of alt-right bigotry. Their job is to expand the outer edges of what mainstream conservativism will tolerate. And in Trump’s America, anti-Semitism is back on the table.
“Do you know what it’s like to have a kid who doesn’t smile at you or touch you?”
I really, genuinely don’t understand this. My son has never, ever laughed at funny faces. He’s never laughed at silly shows. But when he finds something he enjoys, like numbers, his face lights up. When I make the effort to learn and observe what he enjoys, I can make him laugh hysterically. I get affection.
Stop pushing YOUR wants on your child. They’re an entire person, with bodily autonomy. Holy shit, let us autistic do our thing.
Do YOU know what it’s like to have people insist they have a right to touch you when they know it hurts? Or make you sit in rooms where your eyes hurt because of the lights?? If not, shut up.
The other one I hear a lot is
“It’s so heartbreaking to think I’ll never hear him say ‘I love you Mama’”
1) he will more than likely learn to communicate it some other way even if he never learns to speak
2) it is WAY WAY more important for him to learn to say “xyz hurts” or “I need xyz” than “I love you” like seriously??
Also, your son might not ever say “I love you Mama” in those exact words but he’ll probably say it in other ways. When he tells you obscure facts about lizards or how many weeks a certain song has been number one on some radio station’s most played list, or tells you how different words can be traced back to the same root in Latin or Gaelic or Sindarin. When your autistic kid shares their passion and excitement in a special interest they’re inviting you in to something they hold dear. They’re telling you they love you. You just have to be willing to listen.
Okay but if the words “I love you Mama” are so importat, can’t you tell the child that? Make it clear that it makes Mama feel good to hear those words?
Maybe I’m missing smething big that’s implied (lol, that would be just like me tbh), but a child is a person, even if they are under heavy development. And if something is important and not something they do automatically, then communication is essential.
While it is possible (and done far to often) to overload an autistic child with expectations of normalacy, we can learn behaviors and scripts for communicating with others given situations that require specific responces.
I’m not going to place “importance” on the words “I love you” when love is a verb, something he already shows. Our children do not owe us love, either. We owe THEM love.
Ans you’re misinterpreting this situation as “needing” a specific response. Do you know what needs a specific response?
“My name is Carl and I am lost. My mom’s phone number is ____”
“My stomach hurts very badly.”
“Don’t touch me there!”
“I don’t know you, someone help!”
Not “I love you.” your response is a wild misinterpretation of my post. I couldn’t give two shits if my son ever tells me he loves me. I want him to be safe and happy. “I love you” is way down on the list.
And if a parent’s whole day is made by the words “I love you,” scripted, prompted, and not meant, then there’s a whole other problem there and it’s not the child.
Because a coerced “I love you” is soooon not abusive, amirite? #sarcasm
If you can’t see the ways your autistic child loves you, then you’re not understanding the autistic child in question. We love the same way anyone else does. We just show it differently. Often very differently.
We, your children, are not there for your validation. It is not our job to provide you with the emotional support you need to raise us.
To place that on is not only ablest, but kinda creepy.
Maybe instead of coercing a child to express emotions in your way, learn to understand how they express love.
You’d be surprised how often we say it in our own words, our own ways.
(General you, not anyone specific).
This is, by far, one of my most popular posts, and I am so pleased that people for the most part, are coming together a bit.
I remember having to tell my mom that when I share ‘fun facts’ with her, it’s my way of saying ‘I love you’. Or trying to bridge a gap or apologizing. It’s the way that comes naturally to me. It’s the immediate, instinctual response to feeling ‘I love you’ or ‘I’m sorry’ or whatever, for me it comes out ‘did you know …’, especially if it is about something I know we both like.
From her perspective, suddenly sharing a fun fact about a movie we both love after we got into a fight is just nonsensical and possibly rude and insensitive. From her perspective it’s even ‘unfeeling’, like I don’t realize that we had a fight and hurt each other’s feelings, I’m just suddenly talking about random things like nothing happened.
I had to explain to her one day that it wasn’t like that. That sharing that stuff is my way of communicating and connecting. But I wasn’t able to explain this until I was 20 … after so many years of finally figuring out NT people’s perspective and seeing the discrepancy. To me just saying ‘I’m sorry’ or 'I love you’ almost always sounds fake and hollow. You show affection through actions and sharing of things you love with people you love.
I figured out the NT perspective after many years, that I don’t get anymore naturally than she gets mine, but I had to be the one to bridge that gap. She never tried to figure out what might be my perspective because of that idea that I didn’t have one, that I was just unaware or didn’t understand something or was 'unfeeling’.
It’s not because our perspectives are so hard to understand that people don’t, it’s because there is an extra wall there of this stigma that we are less human, so they don’t even try.
This isn’t the old news story. This is a report from today. November 16, 2016.
I thought I’d cry the day it’d begin. You know, just break down and weep. But I feel this endless numbing in the depths of my heart. And I don’t ever want to see any white person tell me about their safety pin this and safety pin that. I don’t want to hear about any solidarity from anyone unless it means you’ll register in the database, too. Which you won’t. Why would anyone. It’s being marked for life. This is one of the first steps implemented in erasing a people. Historical precedents have shown this over and over and over again.
1. CLASSIFICATION: All cultures have categories to distinguish people into “us and them” by ethnicity, race, religion, or nationality: German and Jew, Hutu and Tutsi. Bipolar societies that lack mixed categories, such as Rwanda and Burundi, are the most likely to have genocide. The main preventive measure at this early stage is to develop universalistic institutions that transcend ethnic or racial divisions, that actively promote tolerance and understanding, and that promote classifications that transcend the divisions. The Catholic church could have played this role in Rwanda, had it not been riven by the same ethnic cleavages as Rwandan society. Promotion of a common language in countries like Tanzania has also promoted transcendent national identity. This search for common ground is vital to early prevention of genocide.
