Stop telling your white friends that they are black...

Stop telling your white friends that they are black.

Stop telling your white friends that they are black.

Stop telling your white friends that they are black.

Stop telling your white friends that they are black.

Stop telling your white friends that they are black.

Stop telling your white friends that they are black.

Stop telling your white friends that they are black.

Stop telling your white friends that they are black.

Just because they can dance, mimic our culture, and hang out with black people DOES NOT mean they are black. Being black is more than just our lit culture. They still get to go and get the jobs we will never get, see themselves represented in media, and receive all the perks of being white. So….


Spoon Theory & “Appropriation”

So since Tumblr decided to drop this the first time that I posted it, here’s a briefer version of this:

I’ve been seeing it go ‘round the internets that ‘using the spoon theory when you are not disabled is appropriation.’

Lemme be the first person to say that a) that is not a universally-held view in the spoonie community b) we don’t have any universally-held views, c) I actually think that view is actively harmful and d) I’m not interested in arguing about it, just please stop saying “this is so.”

This is not so. You are not the gatekeeper to who can or cannot use a word. Unless you are the writer of the original spoon theory essay, you cannot say who can and cannot use that phrase.

Now, on to why I don’t think it’s a bad thing.

1) As neologisms become more common, they become more useful. If an able-bodied friend says “I’m running low on people spoons, can we skip the next thing?” I say “sweet, yes, I was feeling the same thing, let’s go home and watch TV.” Those able-bodied people are speaking my language, and they understand what I mean when I say spoons, and that’s because they’ve taken the time to figure out what that phrase means and how it works and how to use it. HOO-FUCKING-RAY.

2) Using “appropriation” in relation to a word that is younger than my middle dog is, uh, not good, y’all. Appropriation is for white people wearing dreadlocks and girls at Coachella wearing bindis and fucking Chief Illiniwek and the Redskins. Appropriation is for Whole Foods putting peanuts in collard greens and white girls with no training or appreciation painting their hands with random hearts and flowers in henna and buying cheap-ass turquoise jewelry made in China rather than getting it from Native artists. 

Spoonie culture is a baby culture. (Note: this does not apply to all disabled culture, for example D/deaf culture is pretty long-lived.) We should maybe just chill the fuck out before we start yelling appropriation! because yes our problems are many but people using spoon theory to describe how tired they are is not one of them. 

3) AND THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART: By saying “able-bodied people should not use this,” you are setting yourself and other visibly or openly disabled persons as gatekeepers for the use of this term. You are saying: “you better be out about your disability or you can’t use it, because we’re gonna drag you/call you out about it.”

No one - not you, not me, not anybody else - gets to check anybody’s Cripple Card ™, unless it’s the police literally checking to see if I have my wallet card for my disability placard with me. No one does. No one gets to say “nah, you’ve only got anxiety, you’re not disabled enough.” No one gets to say “you have to disclose your disability or you do not get to use this term.”

Because that’s basically what the upshot of this is: unless you are openly out as disabled, you will not be able to use this term without fear of repercussion – and this site especially is fucking heartlessly beastly sometimes. We eat our own, especially in this baby community of spoonies where we should take best care of each other. 

So, tl;dr: please stop saying ‘this is appropriative’ like we had some spoonie meeting and decided on it, because we didn’t; use of a term makes it more accessible; appropriation as a term doesn’t actually belong to us, we should kinda stay in our lanes here; and please think through what it means when you say ‘no one able-bodied should use this.’ It means you’re saying you feel like you get to determine who can use a term, therefore who is disabled enough, therefore you’re gonna be checking Cripple Cards™ at the door.

No you’re not. 

(Yes, I realize some disabled persons feel Cripple is a slur. I use it as a word of pride. I will not star it out. If it offends you, I’m sorry for the hurt that causes you, but I will not stop using it.)

anonymous asked:

There's been an ongoing conversation about the usage of black slang(like "fam" and "woke") by non-black people, and I was wondering what is your opinion on it? Is it okay to use slang/vernacular from a culture that isn't yours? I'd never thought about where I get the words I use before, but now I wonder whether the slang I've subconsciously learned on Internet is cultural appropriation.

I’m sure I don’t have the answer on this, and I’d love to hear from @allthingslinguistic and @superlinguo, as they’ll have a better idea how academic linguistics weighs in on this.

One thing to keep in mind throughout the following discussion: No one owns a language.

Language is a tough nut to crack because it simply is. The natural languages on Earth weren’t created by any one person—or any group of people—and they simply evolved into different forms, with no cutoff between one language being one thing (e.g. Old English) and then something else (e.g. Modern English). If you want a very cut and dried example of appropriation and its effects, there’s a wonderful (and short) example in the movie Bring It On (the cheerleading one starring Kirsten Dunst).

For those who haven’t seen it, Kirsten Dunst plays a white cheerleader at a high school in San Diego. Eliza Dushku plays a new recruit who transfers from a school in LA. On viewing their practice Dushku calls out Kirsten, saying that all of their routines have been stolen from a black cheerleading squad at a high school she’s familiar with in Compton. Kirsten is unaware of this—as is everyone on the team—because it’s their coach that stole the routines and presented them as something new and original. Once they realize this—and meet the squad they’ve unwittingly disenfranchised—they determine to create new original routines.

This is a handy example because it’s nice and neat: The white group stole something from the black group that the white group would not have come up with on their own. Furthermore, the theft is demonstrably detrimental, as the white group is at a school famous for its cheerleading which has a lot more visibility on the national stage, so they’re a shoe-in for competitions; the black group is not. Also it’s very clear that the white group itself isn’t at fault: there was a single person at fault (the coach), and the group was unaware. Making things even better, once the group is made aware, they make the conscious decision to abandon the stolen routines, and even manage, via their status, to raise the visibility of the disenfranchised group, allowing them to compete on the national stage (and, as I recall, they win, too—the group from Compton).

Now let’s move back to language. Part of what makes language muddy and situations like the one in Bring It On simple is everything can be identified in the latter: The group from Compton created the routines; one single person was responsible for stealing the routines; it is easily demonstrable that the theft benefits the privileged group and disenfranchises the original creators. With language, it’s rarely ever clear who invented what. It’s also rarely ever clear who was responsible for a linguistic element moving from the in group to the out group. It’s also near impossible to say what the damage is when some word or phrase moves from one group to another. Only one thing is clear: Everyone is Kirsten Dunst in this scenario. Language comes and you use it. You don’t know where it came from or why: It’s just there.

Take the examples you listed above—“fam” and “woke”, or another one of my favorites, “bae”. No one can say where precisely they came from, but I can tell you this: If you know those words it is already too late. They’re out. They’ve hopped the fence. No one can control them anymore. This article cites a website that tracks the use of words in rap songs, and it claims that “bae” has been showing up in rap songs since 2005.

Let me say that again: In rap songs. Published rap songs that anyone can listen to. Unless the first rapper to use it in a song actually invented it, it seems likely that the word was already in use and had spread quite a bit. If it started out as a regionalism, it was now a colloquialism. When it gets to a popular medium like music, though, it’s likely that someone will hear it and not know that it started out as a regionalism. If you hear a word you don’t know all you know is that you don’t know it. Once you know it, though, you can use it. And unless someone specifically tells you not, you will.

Now, when can someone tell you not to use a word? That’s an interesting question. I always rely on the general tenet that one shouldn’t make fun of or disparage others. If it can be demonstrated that using a word does precisely that, intentionally or unintentionally, that’s reason enough to tell someone not to use a word (ahem, Washington football team). Furthermore, these things can be successful. Stewardess is one example (a gendered and, given the associations, a somewhat disparaging word). When I was growing up, everyone used it. Now no one does: Everyone uses flight attendant. I don’t know how it happened, but it did, and it was damn effective. Same thing happened with gyp (meaning to cheat). I used this all the time as a kid, because I learned it and used it. Everyone did. I had absolutely no idea that “gyp” was short for “gypsy”, and that the etymology was “to behave like a gypsy towards someone”. If you’d asked me then, I probably would’ve thought you spelled it jip, because institutional racism against the Roma people is so much more prevalent in Europe than it is in the United States. When someone finally told me that that’s where that word came from, I was shocked, because the notion is so remote to most Americans. But I did immediately stop using it. And I’ve noticed it’s simply not common anymore, which is a good thing. I’m in California, so I can’t speak for the rest of the US, but I don’t see it a lot online, either.

These movements can also be overt, and can often be effective. When I was in high school, “gay” as an insult was extremely common. There were groups that actively campaigned against that, though (as a basketball fan, I loved that this commercial was played regularly during games), and, YouTube comments aside, it’s been pretty effective. “Gay” as an insult is nowhere near as common as it was. In short, if it’s a societal push, you can actually banish words from the lexicon.

Back to the question that opened the previous paragraph, should we not be using “bae”? Tough to say if it’s hard to say who “we” is. That is, using “gay” as an insult is clearly disparaging to homosexuals. Using “bae” for one’s significant other, though, doesn’t really disparage anybody. That is, unless one is using the word to mock a hypothetical black user of the word, in which case the message shouldn’t be don’t use “bae”, but rather, uh, don’t mock anyone for the way they speak. When it comes to teasing people for comedy, they’d better be on even footing with you (so it’s just as likely that they could be teasing you), and you shouldn’t ever mock something someone has absolutely no control over, such as the circumstances of their birth, the color of their skin, or the way they speak their own language.

This should, in my opinion, take precedence over trying to puzzle out who came up with which word, and whether or not one is sufficiently a part of a given group to use it. Especially in casual usage, it’s not clear what advantages a non-black English speaker is gaining by using a word like “bae” that a black English speaker is missing out on. Being a rapper paid to use language is one thing; being a person with a Tumblr is another.

Also it’s important to separate vocabulary from grammar. AAE isn’t just a set of vocabulary: It’s a distinct and consistent way of speaking the English language. One can use a noun or two without coming anywhere close to trying to use AAE.

Also when it comes to vocabulary it’s important to have a bit of perspective. Words like “fam” and “woke” and “bae” are quite new in the general public consciousness. They may be here to stay; they may not. Other words from AAE and elsewhere have come and gone, and others have come and stayed, but no one is complaining about those that have stayed. For example, both “old school” and “back in the day” are from black English—and fairly recently, too—but they are absolutely a part of English now. You can’t even say “back in the old days” or “way back when” anymore without it sounding folksy. I knew “back in the day” had moved into common parlance when I met my wife @thisallegra who used it all the time, but who apparently had no idea it came from black English (I, of course, remembered it from the song, which is the first place I heard it, since I listened almost exclusively to rap between 1991 and 1994). If she was just using it without any idea that it should be tagged as a regionalism, it was already on its way to becoming standard English.

I do have a theory as to why it stuck around, though, and this’ll take me to “bae”. “Back in the old days” has always suggested old-timeyness. You could say it, and it conveyed the same meaning, but it carried a sense of…not disparagement, but non-seriousness with it. That is, if you say “back in the old days”, you can expect whoever you’re talking to to take what you’re saying with a grain of salt. There’s actually no such judgment with “back in the day”. If anything, it suggests reverence. I don’t recall any such expression that existed before that (or nothing as compact), meaning that the expression filled a gap: It was useful. That’s why it made the jump.

And that brings us to bae. The most common way to refer to one’s significant other is “boyfriend” or “girlfriend”. These are gendered terms. Of late, we’ve been pushing to find non-gendered terms for roles and words that, previously, have been gendered. What doe sone do for “boyfriend” or “girlfriend”? What’s English got? Significant other? Too clunky. Boyfriend or girlfriend? I’ve seen it (e.g. “Do you have a boyfriend or girlfriend?”), but it’s both clunky and exclusive (it refers to someone that is either male or female and that’s it). S.O.? I’ve seen it, but it’s not common. Baby? Still reads as female, most of the time (one of the many words that isn’t gendered but still has de facto gender coding). So what else is there? Using someone like honey? Too specific.

Think about it. This was a pretty serious gap in English. We just didn’t have a good word to refer to a significant other without referring to their gender. Pretty lame. English speakers the world over have had ample opportunity to come up with something to fill this gap. No one did. Until bae.

Is it any wonder that people everywhere are using “bae” now? It seriously codes as completely gender-irrelevant. It’s pretty useful that way (e.g. I’ve seen that meme where it says “when you’re waiting for bae to text you back”, and it can pair with any image, regardless of gender. It’s great!). And my read on it (feel free to comment) is that there is absolutely no default gender for “bae”. It’s not a term that mainly refers to men that can be used for women, or vice-versa. You can use it to refer to any person who identifies as any gender. Far from worrying about whether or not we should use it on account of cultural appropriation, we should find the person(s) who invented it and give them a damn medal. Since it’s language, though, we’ll likely never know.

So, long answer to a short question, this is about where I land on the issue. Ask yourself: Am I actively disparaging or mocking someone by using a particular word? If not, does the word ultimately derive from a slur or insult? If not, am I capitalizing on someone else’s work and benefitting from it? If not, am I misrepresenting myself and the way I ordinarily speak? If the answer to all those questions is “no”, you should be good. That’s my 2¢. I look forward to hearing what others in or adjacent to linguistics have to say.

So I made a really popular post about cultural appropriation and I am happy about the feedback I got. I’m not quite happy with it due to the poor wording, but most people got the point and I’m happy about that. I still have a few questions about this whole theory of cultural appropriation though.

Where is the line when it is good versus when it is bad?

Is it okay for Mexico and the Philippines to take so much influence from Spain despite both being now independent from Spain?

Is it okay for many black cultures to take dreadlocks from ancient Greece in their hairstyles?

Is it okay for Japan to take influence from China in well…. everything?

Is it okay for all of us to be taking influence from Hindu-Arabs in our counting system?

Is it okay for us to be taking influence from Babylonia in our clocks?

Is it okay for black people to compose classical music?

Is it okay for Asians to perform rap music?

Was it okay for Araki Hirohiko, a Japanese man, to write Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure which, as of the 8 parts, only features 3 Japanese protagonists and only takes place in Japan twice?

Is it okay for many African countries to take so much influence from Europe despite being independent from Europe now?

Is it okay for Tosin Abasi, a black man, to be performing progressive metal which are both genres made by white people?

Is it okay for anyone besides white people to use the electric guitar which was made by Adolph Rickenbacker, a white man?

Is it okay for Nintendo, a Japanese company, to make video games which were made by Ralph Baer, a white man?

Is it okay for a black people to wear hoodies since hoodies have their history in Europe with hōds? 

If we go so far as to say language can be appropriated, is it okay for anyone besides white people to speak English?

Is it okay for us all to use the number 0 which, once again, came from the Babylonians?

Is it okay for black people to bleach their skin and straighten their hair?

Is it okay for Chinese people to write paper books when their original book form was bamboo?

Is it okay for black people to brush their teeth instead of using chew sticks which was their original way of brushing their teeth?

Is it okay for any of us to brush our teeth if we’re not Chinese since the first toothbrush was made by the Chinese?

If a person purposefully bastardizes their culture for the purpose of business, is it wrong for us to partake in it?

Is it wrong to sing Karaoke if you’re not Japanese?

Keep in mind, these are not meant to be sarcastic or snarky, these are legitimate questions I have when taking a look at the rhetoric of anti-appropriation people. They say you may not partake in a culture unless you are part of that culture, so the only logical conclusion is to ask if these are okay. If so, why are they exceptions? If not, then I guess these is no double standard, but so far I have seen one.


“Maui Costume for Kids - Disney Moana”
 $44.95 - $49.95
“Your little one will set off on adventures in this Maui Costume featuring the demigod’s signature tattoos, rope necklace and island-style skirt.”
: : source : : 

Ok we’ll get to this costume in a minute…

First, some genuine kudos to the production team of Moana, out later this year. They appear to hit the mark on some key points:

  • The story calls attention to the South Pacific region with a princess who needs to “save her family from annihilation.” Islands in this area are desperate to address the climate crisis, and need more advocacy in the media. (Here’s one of many case studies).
  • Accuracy & Inclusion - Tattoo historians, anthropologists and island elders, called “The Oceanic Story Trust,” were key advisors throughout.
  • Writer Taika Waititi has Maori heritage. Hollywood tells a lot of stories about people of color without input from the groups they represent, so Taika’s involvement is a win.
  • Composer Opetaia Foa'i is a Samoan native. He brings instruments from the region, with songs written in Samoan and Tuvaluan languages. 
  • Actors Dwayne Johnson, Auli’i Cravalho, Temuera Morrison : Cravalho is a Hawaiian native, Morrison is Maori, and Johnson is of Samoan descent, with traditional pe’a tattoos.
    (Ok Hawaii is in the North Pacific, but Disney’s still come a long way since JTT and Jeremy Irons played East African characters.) 

Now for the costume and the brownface of it all…

“Culture as Costume” is never a good thing for humans to do to each other, and “Skin as Costume” has a history of mocking and dehumanizing people of color.

That said, free speech is important and ignorance is legal. 

The bigger issue here is Corporate Colonialism. Disney is mass-producing brown, tattooed, South Pacific skin suits. A giant company is (literally) profiting off the backs of less powerful minorities, commercializing sacred tattoo practices, and not a dime of it goes back to support the region. 

As mentioned above, these people are in crisis. They are also outnumbered. To plunder from them without compensation or political advocacy is to perpetuate colonialism. 

Disney does have the right to try anything they can to turn a profit on this film. As mindful consumers, though, it’s on us to put away our wallets and speak up.

TLDR: See the movie if you want, but boycott the merch.
• • •
Comments are open, opinions are welcome.
Thanks so much for reading, being interested and engaged.
With love,
Morgan @tattrx​ 


Free People is selling white dreadlock hair extensions.

Now, for just $128, you too can walk around looking like the lead singer of the Counting Crows. Retailer Free People, the one-stop shop for girls looking for a breezy summer dress or an item of clothing ripped from Native American culture, is actually selling white dreadlock hair extensions

“Add a little something extra to your do with these colorful dreadlock extensions featuring wood, bead, and flower accents,” Free People’s website reads. “Comb-on application makes for easy on and off wear. Comes in a pack of 10.”

You’d think Free People would have learned their lesson two years ago.

follow @the-movemnt


Why are black girls doing “Baddie Tutorials” do they not realize that Instagram Baddie look is literally a mockery/rip off of already established black culture/style. Who do y'all think was wearing hoop earrings and baseball caps with leggings, a bag, sneakers, long fake nails, etc. Honestly wake up some of y'all lol. That’s like me, a black girl doing a tutorial called “get the black girl look” lol done 😪😪😪

So you walk into the new Korean joint around the corner and discover that (gasp) the head chef is a white guy from Des Moines. What’s your gut reaction? Do you want to walk out? Why?

The question of who gets to cook other people’s food can be squishy — just like the question of who gets to tell other people’s stories. (See: The whole controversy over the casting of the new Nina Simone biopic.)

For some non-white Americans, the idea of eating “ethnic cuisine” (and there’s a whole other debate about that term) not cooked by someone of that ethnicity can feel like a form of cultural theft. Where does inspiration end? When is riffing off someone’s cuisine an homage, and when does it feel like a form of co-opting? And then there’s the question of money: If you’re financially benefiting from selling the cuisine of others, is that always wrong?

When Chefs Become Famous Cooking Other Cultures’ Food

Photo: Sergi Alexander/Getty Images
Caption: Rick Bayless is a master of Mexican cuisine. He’s also a white guy from Oklahoma. Over the years, that has made him the target of criticism. 

What would America be like if everybody loved Black people as much as they love Black culture?

Hunger Games star Amandla Stenberg:

Loving and being inspired by black culture is great! It’s just that if you love their culture, you should try to love the people as well. I mean, people, who enjoy Black culture should feel inspired to stand up for the rights of African-Americans in this country, to help them to get justice.

When a black girl wears dreads, she looks “ghetto” and when a white girl does, she looks “edgy” and “urban.” There’s a problem there, no?


The latest in a long line of appropriations of Black women’s hairstyles is Khloe Kardashian

Last week, Kylie Jenner showed off a new, bright-red cornrowed hairstyle for her birthday. It looks like the family is keeping up with the tradition of appropriative hairstyles, because Khloé Kardashian just debuted Bantu knots on Instagram and the way she’s addressing it is not good.


the seven sisters festival is racist and transphobic


trigger warning for transmisogyny and racism (as well as some severe white nonsense)

the seven sisters festival is a ‘womens festival’ in the same vein as Michfest, ie a cis white womens gathering. they have held this three day event for the last couple of years, and it’s only getting worse and worse.

this year, it came out that the festival only accepts trans women who have undergone gender confirmation surgery. (warning for very transphobic language) this is, of course, disgusting on multiple levels, and raises the question – do they plan to be doing checks? do i have to carry a punani pass everywhere with me in case I’m suspected of being a trans woman? or is it just supposed to be a threat?

@black-australia commented on the group event, and was blocked for her efforts.

they have started deleting people’s comments about it, leaving only the good ones about how great the festival is, and some of the transphobic ones.

it gets worse than that. they tout the festival grounds as ‘sacred womens space’ (what the fuck is that?) but they have not asked permission from Indigenous elders for the festival, on top of creating an environment that specifically pushes out Indigenous people through both their transphobia and their general atmosphere. their basket weaving workshop post touts that it will ‘awaken primal feelings’ – because Indigenous traditions are primal, right?

so we did some digging on their page. Oh god I was not prepared.

Native American headdresses. White women painting themselves brown and playing drums. White women wearing saris and ‘tribal’ style clothing. The augmentation of their little white festival with nonwhite traditions, like we’re fucking accessories. 

@yilabil-wawura left the following post on their page, which was swiftly deleted.

they posted it again. no word yet on whether it’s been deleted, but it’s clear that this organisation of white people stands for one thing – other rich, white, cis women at the expense of Black and Brown women, especially Sistergirls and other Black trans identitified people. 

we will not stand for this any longer, the theft and accessorising of our sacred things, our lands and our lives by white people, or the accessorising of anyone else’s cultures and sacred things. We will not stand for the exclusion of any women, regardless of their cultures, or the reducing women to their genitals.

please spread this around. do NOT attend this festival. tell your friends and family not to attend or support this disgusting ‘event’


Okay. We need to have a talk about cultural appropriation. Particularly how it’s bullshit. Here’s the definition of the term.

“Well, there you have it! ‘The action of taking something for one’s own use, typically without the owner’s permission!’ Cultural appropriation is doing that to someone’s culture! Right?”

No, not quite. For one, who “owns” a particular culture? The area in which it originated? The descendants of people who started it? People of the same race as those who started it? 

Let’s take a quick look at Phat Thai, the Thai national dish, a staple of Thai culture. So, this dish belongs to the Thai! Well…

Phat Thai was actually popularized by Plaek Pibulsonggram, prime minister of Thailand at the time, in an attempt to modernize Thailand in the 1930s-50s. He wanted to strengthen Thai culture and promote a sense of patriotism in the country’s people. But, here’s the kicker– almost none of the components of the dish are traditionally Thai. Noodle stir fries are a staple of Chinese culture, and most of the ingredients (except perhaps chilies that are sometimes used) aren’t even indigenous to Thailand.

So who does Phat Thai belong to? The Chinese or the Thai? Neither or both? Did the Thai appropriate Chinese culture? If they did, should they be forced to stop even though the dish has grown and changed and is currently a part of Thailand’s rich history?

Even if you could nail down a single culture as “owner” of something, how on god’s green Earth are you supposed to ask permission? Cultures and races of people are vast and encompasses countless different people with different beliefs and ideals, from all different walks of life. If one Mexican person says you shouldn’t celibate Cinco de Mayo and another says you can, what do you do? Who do you listen to? Because I for one know that people of a certain race or culture aren’t some giant hive mind with the same thoughts and feelings.

And another thing, how is one person practicing your culture “taking” it from you? Cultures have been stolen from people, weather it was the assimilation of Native Americans or the current day practice of shaming black women with traditional African names, it’s awful. Entire cultures have been erased and that is disgusting and should be stopped wherever it is found. But every example of culture being taken has one thing in common: the majority was stopping them, either through shame or law, from practicing their culture. Someone else practicing your culture isn’t stopping you from practicing it. Someone else’s freedom of expression isn’t hindering yours. A white guy wearing dreads isn’t stopping a black women from doing the same thing.

Don’t get me wrong, I hate seeing people doing something with deep cultural roots because it’s cool and not because they respect it. The solution to this problem however isn’t screaming “racist” at someone you don’t like. The solution is, and always will be, education. Not isolation.

i’m sure asian people are really torn apart by americans making bubble tea. i bet impoverished south asians are just constantly crying all the time about those evil white people taking their tea, and know that this is really the most important thing they have to worry about.

No offense but why do White suburban mothers think its *cute* to buy teepees at Target for their lil White toddlers to play in. Like, how sick is it that youre gonna have your babies play in teepees knowing full well that a genocide was committed against Native Americans by your ancestors? Literal genocide. But its fine cus you like the *aesthetic* of it. I swear White ppl are soulless.