I know that colorblindness is the wrong way to look at the world, but is it wrong to want it to be? To eradicate any and all social meanings of race and ethnicity (among other things), so that everyone is equal and united?
And I’m 99 percent sure you’re white.
You know why? Because I come from a culture, and a people, who are FIGHTING to preserve our culture. For three generations, there has been a state sponsored effort to rip us from our homeland and homogenize us as “just Arabs”, disregarding and dismissing our unique ties to our land to perpetuate their state-sponsored oppression.
People have died to make sure that “difference” is preserved.
And this kind of “colorblind” mindset strips all that sacrifice away. You are telling me to discard millennia of unique culture and history because you don’t think you can’t stop oppressing people if you are forced to confront the differences between us.
And I can tell that you don’t have that same burden of “celebrating what makes you different” as RESISTANCE that other sufferers of diaspora and cultural genocide have endured.
Equality isn’t achieved by blinding yourself to what is literally in front of you. If we can’t find obvious differences, we’ll create them. That’s how culture works. That’s how people work.
We can make everyone equal and united without destroying cultures. This should not be an “all-or-nothing” game.
I wanna live in a future where positive social meanings of race and ethnicity are understood and respected instead of them being excuses to brutalize and discriminate against them.
these next three dress finds are by new fave laimeloom — they’re all whimsical and ultra-unique. this first one really allows the bride to get creative with its ‘infinity’ sheer silk ties - how would you wear it? i kinda like the 3rd knot train one.
Why am I choosing one of Shostakovich’s least popular symphonies to celebrate his birthday with? It’s because I recently listened to one of Bernstein’s talks about this work that shed a lot of light on its structure, and I think this symphony is a great example of why Shostakovich is a composer uniquely tied to his time and place in history. The story starts a few years before when Shostakovich was denounced by the Soviet Communist Party, calling his opera, Lady Macbeth of Mtensk “primitive and vulgar”. While criticism could be shrugged off, this was around the time of the Great Terror, where anyone who was even remotely suspect of being against the Party disappeared in the middle of the night, probably off to a nightmare prison in Siberia. In fact, Shostakovich had, for most of his life, a bag packed and ready by the door in case of what he felt would be his inevitable arrest. Shostakovich won Party favor with his Fifth symphony, with its tragedy to triumph motif, its more conservative language, and its grand finale that made the audience applaud for half an hour. Though Shostakovich had started complying with Party expectations, he, like other Soviet composers, felt the weight of censorship clouding over him. This symphony is a bit of a homage to Tchaikovsky, sharing the same key as his “Pathetique” symphony as well as its unconventional use of the slow movement. This slow movement is the meat of the symphony, and it takes up a little over the first half of the entire work. After a serious, languishing movement, we are thrown into two short scherzos and dances that are almost a parody, and then the work ends. What gives? Bernstein suggests that the first movement holds his true feelings, his disturbances and fears living under this new Regime, and the second and third movements are him putting on a fake smile, insisting “everything is fine and well and happy here in Soviet Russia, so long as the Party wants us to be happy”.
Is it cheating if I say all the women in Reply 1988? Because that’s exactly what I’m going to say.
pic source: pinterest (weird source this time…thanks Google)
Add on the fourth mom in the series, and they’re a set. These ladies were all AMAZING, and the episode focused on motherhood was so so so touching. All of them are unique, but what ties them together is their love for their children and their families. They work so hard, but also aren’t afraid to have fun; they look out for each other and are always there to listen and lend a helping hand; and their gossip is so much fun. The writer fully fleshed out each and every one of them, and that’s what makes this Reply installment so amazing. They felt real, and constantly reminded me of my own mom and how thankful I am for her.
So while I could totally pick a single mom to focus on, I wanted to give special attention to this show for having more than one awesome mom character. Because that’s how it should be. And because they are all absolutely hilarious.
OUAT isn’t as good as it used to be before. They used to have interesting and unique villains equally tied in with ideas of family, but the villains have just become annoying and every episode seems to be a long lecture about the same idea of family and feelings.