I support survivors who didn’t fight back

I support survivors who dissociated

I support survivors who feel invalid because ‘they could have stopped it’

I support survivors who feel weak

I support survivors who feel like ‘they wanted it’ because they didn’t resist

I support survivors who didn’t know what they were getting into

I support survivors who didn’t really know what they were consenting to

I support survivors who didn’t know it would hurt them the way it did

Ramblings on Polis and 3A

I’m thinking about Clarke in season 3, and the Polis storyline and abuse, and I was thinking that the word toxic is appropriate to the discussion. It’s often overused in fandom as far as I can tell, but I think it is a very specific term. And I don’t think it was possible for the Clxa relationship to be otherwise. That’s where you get descriptors like tragic and star-crossed. Who Lxa was was harmful to Clarke. Whatever Lxa’s feelings for Clarke, her actions, her decisions without exception led to pain and suffering for Clarke.

And ultimately Clarke was to Lxa as well because of the inescapable fact that Lxa was always one step away from killing everyone Clarke loved, from killing her entire world. And Clarke couldn’t let that happen. But Lxa always had significantly more control over the circumstances and decisions being made. Most of the time all of the control. Choices.

And that’s what I found so disturbing about the Polis storyline. It was pretty but had this wrongness that unnerved me, and elements that tried very hard to make me overlook what was wrong. And I didn’t try.

I could see the power imbalance, see the toxicity and what that was doing to Clarke. And I was impatient with it, with Clarke. I was bored because I was disappointed in what had been to that point one of my all-time favorite characters.

And I’m realizing what a harmful mindset that is, in a real-world setting. That I saw that situation and automatically assumed the victim should be different. Should see what’s happening immediately and stop it. Be ‘stronger’. And I’m disturbed to realize that about myself. That that was my reaction.

[LJ] Behind Blue Eyes

Title: Behind Blue Eyes
Author: aprilclash
Pairing: Baekhyun/Chanyeol
Status: Ongoing
Length: Short Story
Rating: NC-17
Genre: Enemies to Lovers, Slow Build
Warnings: Blindness/visual impairment, power imbalance, mentions of sex and sexual intimacy, mentions of domestic abuse, mentions of mental illness, mentions of homophobia

Summary: Baekhyun is, among many things, blind in love with Chanyeol. Chanyeol is, among many things, an asshole in love with Baekhyun. It only takes them a few years to understand how a relationship works.

Reasons Why You Submitted: One of my favourite authors in the exo fic fandom coming back with an amazing chanbaek fic! it’s very different from the usual tropes and they are both antagonistic in their own unique frustrating way. the sexual tension is also a++++

i read an essay a friend posted (but did not write) about how we need to have a politics of… i forget the term they used, but of non-disposability. a politics of keeping people around.

it seems timely in light of the other essay i posted yesterday about what happens when single people age, esp single queer people without children or families, but as i read on the emphasis was increasingly on how the line between victims and abusers isn’t always clear, sometimes abusers are also survivors, sometimes survivors can be abusive, &c&c&c and i thought to myself, i thought, i bet this person liked Conflict is Not Abuse. (again! what a good title! what a good subject! what a good book that still remains to be written!)

and they did like it, and they made a lot of points about how–here, you can read it for yourselves if you like: http://everydayfeminism.com/2016/11/indispensability-vs-disposability-culture/ –it’s okay for loved ones to not live up to ideals and it’s hard to love people no matter what and how toxic call out culture is,

and i wonder what communities these people live in, that they think, like, the problem is people being too UNFORGIVING of minor sins rather than just having been harmed by toxic people.

is there a way to have this conversation without insisting that all relationships need to be maintained? can people talk about the complexity of social dynamics and power imbalances and the way that sometimes you just have to “shun” (lol) people because they aren’t going to change, most people aren’t going to insist that they change, and you don’t need to have that in your life?

or about the requirement that we keep abusive people in our communities when the reality is, it’s not even possible to actually RID ours communities of abusive people which is how we have the missing stair effect or whatever it is, where everyone knows someone is abusive but they’re just there in community and new people come along and get hurt because no one thinks to warn them.

like, abusive people aren’t going anywhere, that’s sort of the problem. they aren’t leaving and they aren’t changing so perhaps people could start writing essays on how to force abusive people to change rather than the necessity of supporting each other thru inevitable disappointments because that isn’t really the problem, is it?

About the charities...

At this point it looks like we’re going to have more than enough money for some generous donations, so I’d like to introduce my own preferred charities for the zine.

Bikers Against Child Abuse

This group of tough guys and girls use the intimidating image of bikers to protect and support children who have gone through abuse by being their ally and friend. At any time of night or day, these selfless volunteers are there to be the big strong defender when a child is too scared to face it alone. Read more about them here.

Big Cat Rescue

There are a lot of groups helping large cats caught in the pet and hunt trade, but Big Cat Rescue goes above and beyond, focusing on the welfare of the cats above being just another roadsize zoo and excelling at education, veterinary care and lifelong support of these animals. Among their 80 exotic cat rescues, they are home to seventeen tigers. Read more about them here.

I feel that both of these groups represent the spirit of the zine, but I welcome any other suggestions from our contributors. I will not be receiving any tax credit from these donations as both of them are in the United States (though BACA supports groups around the world) and I am Canadian.

the bode meme is good when it’s just people showing off their cats, because many cats are fat and still perfectly healthy and good

the problem comes from when it’s on pictures from a google image search of “fat cats” and the cat is clearly obese to the point of being almost unable to walk (im on mobile but this is an example http://m.imgur.com/MxfQws7?r ) because that’s straight up a result of neglect and it isn’t cute or funny

so yeah post your beautiful fat kitties but make sure theyre eating good food and getting excersize, because they can be fat but need to be healthy too, and don’t normalize cats looking like the above example bc that isn’t cute or funny, that’s an animal who’s owners didn’t give enough of a shit to take care of it properly

I'm just gonna leave this here ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿผ

“The largest organization of healthcare professionals in the country, officially deemed the vegan diet best for health and the environment. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND)—a collection of 100,000 healthcare professionals, the largest in the United States—published its official position on vegetarian diets in the December issue in its medical journal.” - Veg News

 Position Statement: 


“It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes. Plant-based diets are more environmentally sustainable than diets rich in animal products because they use fewer natural resources and are associated with much less environmental damage. Vegetarians and vegans are at reduced risk of certain health conditions, including ischemic heart disease, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, certain types of cancer, and obesity. Low intake of saturated fat and high intakes of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, soy products, nuts, and seeds (all rich in fiber and phytochemicals) are characteristics of vegetarian and vegan diets that produce lower total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and better serum glucose control. These factors contribute to reduction of chronic disease. Vegans need reliable sources of vitamin B-12, such as fortified foods or supplements.

Plant-based diets, including vegetarian and vegan diets, are becoming well accepted, as further evidenced by many nonprofit and government institutions highlighting this dietary choice. The American Institute for Cancer Research encourages a plant-based diet, suggesting Americans consume two-thirds of their dietary intake from vegetables, fruits, whole grains, and beans. In the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, vegetarian diets are recommended as one of three healthful dietary patterns, and meal plans are provided for those following lacto-ovo-vegetarian and vegan diets. The National School Lunch Program, while not requiring vegetarian options per se, requires schools to increase availability of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains in current meal patterns in the school menu.

Vegetarian, including vegan, diets typically meet or exceed recommended protein intakes, when caloric intakes are adequate. The terms complete and incomplete are misleading in relation to plant protein. Protein from a variety of plant foods, eaten during the course of a day, supplies enough of all indispensable (essential) amino acids when caloric requirements are met. The regular use of legumes and soy products will ensure an adequate protein intake for the vegetarian, as well as providing other essential nutrients. Fruitarian diets are normally low in protein and other nutrients. Protein needs at all ages, including those for athletes, are well achieved by balanced vegetarian diets.”

Environmental Issues

“Plant-based diets are more environmentally sustainable than diets rich in animal products because they use fewer natural resources and are associated with considerably less environmental damage. The current worldwide consumption of diets high in meat and dairy products is considered by some as unsustainable. The systematic review conducted by the Scientific Committee of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans provides evidence that diets higher in plant foods and lower in animal foods (like a vegetarian diet) are associated with lower environmental damage. Many scientists are calling for a substantial reduction of livestock products in the diet of humans as a major way to reverse climate change. Compared with omnivorous diets, vegetarian diets utilize less water and fossil fuel resources and use lower amounts of pesticides and fertilizers.Substituting beans for beef in the diet would significantly reduce the environmental footprint worldwide. To produce 1 kg protein from kidney beans requires 18 times less land, 10 times less water, 9 times less fuel, 12 times less fertilizer, and 10 times less pesticide in comparison to producing 1 kg protein from beef. In addition, beef production generates considerably more manure waste than from any other animal food production.

According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, about 70% of all water pollution in rivers and lakes in the United States is a result of pollution from animal farms. Animal agriculture is associated with land degradation, air pollution, loss of biodiversity, and global warming.Meat production makes a significant contribution to anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions and anthropogenic methane and nitrous oxide production. Using calculations based on 210 common foods, greenhouse gas emissions from consuming a vegetarian diet were found to be 29% lower than from the use of a nonvegetarian diet, while a vegan diet can have >50% lower greenhouse emissions compared to a nonvegetarian diet.

While new technologies for animal farming are available, a recent study found that greenhouse gas emissions from the production and consumption of animal products were reduced only 9% due to a more efficient livestock production. The authors concluded that cuts in greenhouse gas emissions necessary to meet the global temperature target “imply a severe constraint on the long-term global consumption of animal food.” Others have suggested that reducing animal production has a greater potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than “technological mitigation or increased productivity measures.”

The use of antibiotics in farm animals as growth promoters and for the prevention and treatment of animal diseases has generated antibiotic-resistant bacteria. This antibiotic resistance can be transmitted to humans through animal food consumption and is now a major public health problem, causing illnesses that are difficult to treat, and resulting in increased morbidity, mortality, and health care costs.”

I just highlighted some of the things I thought were important to note for all the nay-sayers, if you want to read the full article you can find it here. Time to wake up.