bad queer rep

Flower House Mexico

these cypresses are completely laced thru by wisteria and I was so captivated by the sight of them I literally pulled over on the side of the road to take a picture

We haven’t had bread for days… The war on Gaza continues, the blockade is suffocating us, and bakeries have completely shut down. The situation is beyond tragic—children, families, everyone is starving. We need every voice, every bit of support, every share to make the world hear our cry. Please don’t ignore our suffering.

So rn the US government is starting to defund the National Parks Service, and while this is a bad thing largely because it's mainly being done to open up the possibility of oil drilling in a lot of those areas, I think it also needs to be said that no the National Parks Service was not just there to "protect natural wonders" or whatever. It was there because a lot of those places are incredibly important land to a lot of Indigenous Peoples and if you give it special status that means you can't live on it you can make the natives leave easier because they get arrested if they don't. Like I am very much not in favor of this change as it is being done but I don't think we should respond to it with wholehearted praise of the National Parks System either. Please know the history of the land you live on and visit.

The problem here is not that the national parks service is losing funding, it was a tool of ethnic cleansing, forced removal, and genocide from its inception. It deserves to be talked about as such. The problem here is that that land still does not belong to the native people who inhabited it for thousands of years before colonial intervention. We need to protest the area being claimed by companies that want to exploit their natural resources, and get it back in the hands of the people who once and always should've owned it. We should not let things go back to what they were like under the current National Parks System.

ceramica_v_radost

.......... totally unprecedented, eh?

whooooooooops! it was already the de facto policy for Palestinians!

textile, russia c. 1840-70.

Works by Ozy Worldy 

I really like this website because somebody will be like “there’s nothing wrong with darting out from behind a parked car into traffic, bootlicker” and you can be like okay this clearly evolved from a valid point about how the US is too car-centric. But something happened to it.

You don't have to like weed but I find people who are vehemently anti-weed but claim to be left leaning infuriating. If you go into a rage because you smelled someone smoking pot, how the fuck do you expect to form community with people addicted to meth? It's easier to say you hate smokers than to say you hate all drug users in leftist spaces because one makes you sound a bit like a square while the other is the writing on the wall. You aren't anti-weed, you're anti-drug user and anyone who uses substances is not safe around you.

I know dozens of people who use meth, coke, and fentanyl. While heroin is harder to get I do know some folks who use it when they can. Some of these drug users are my neighbors, some are my clients, and some are my friends & family. One does not cease to be human just because they use a substance you find scary.

Community doesn't mean you need to invite them to your home and look away if they smoke there. It means you don't call your property manager because you suspect your neighbor uses. It means you don't require drug tests for homeless shelters and housing services. It means the very idea of someone who smokes meth in your community doesn't make you go, "what the hell."

Genuinely kind of a wild thing to see in the replies as someone who has been professionally practicing harm reduction for years.

Considering recent events over here in the States, this seemed like a good time to bring this back. Over the next four years, expect an increase in discourse around "undesirables." This will include but not be limited to drug addicts.

Also, from someone who works at a smoke/head shop: WAY MORE PEOPLE ARE DRUG USERS THAN YOU THINK. Way more people are addicted to opiates, meth, whippets, cocaine, you name it, than you have been lead to believe, and on top of that, they are often the "normal" or "functional" people you see every day, not just the person tweaking out at the gas stations. Judges, bank tellers, grandmas, teachers, the nice lady who runs your bakery— all of them. You are ALREADY IN COMMUNITY WITH THESE PEOPLE. Start fucking acting like it.

I'm gonna keep repeating this: 'community' is not a fucking friend group.

It's not a clique. It's not you and the people YOU think are cool and funny.

Drug users are your neighbors whether you're too much of an obnoxious self-righteous asshat to be aware of that or not. You don't *get* to say drug users don't deserve to be meaningfully connected to and included in the populations they call home (which is what community actually means, btw) and the mere assertion that you can is a big part of why ppl seek connection in drugs in the first place.

It doesn't matter if ppl use or not but tbh if we really wanted to cut down on addiction all we'd need to do is have fewer stuck up motherfuckers who look down on 'undesirables' in the first place.

'community' is not a fucking friend group.'community' is not a fucking friend group.'community' is not a fucking friend group.'community' is not a fucking friend group.'community' is not a fucking friend group.'community' is not a fucking friend group.

In this argument tho, there seems to be a huge bloody leap from "being annoyed by drug use" to "literally can't stand anybody who could possibly have ever used any drug"

I'm by no means a puritan, but not wanting to be exposed to fumes against your will is a pretty fucking normal thing.

it is, however, telling that anarchists once again seem to only have any sympathy for the most run-down strata of the lumpenproletariat, leftovers of a bygone mode of production and various rejects of the system. yes, we should sympathise with them, but it is seriously not irrational to exclude them from some things. drug addicts make terrible revolutionaries.

I don't usually reblog shitty responses to go 'whoa look at this shithead', but I'm gonna go for this one because it's an educational example and if you reblog this stuff directly from me and then write this, you're gonna piss me off. So here goes:

Look at the first two paragraphs, the way the post tries to start with a reasonable sounding take, of just 'being annoyed' and 'not wanting to be exposed to fumes'. It's a weak take because nobody said you can't be annoyed by people or that you can't have any non-smoking spaces. Everything was just about accepting addicts as members of your community and not subjecting them to isolation.

But, you see, the first two paragraphs are not meant to be a coherent response to the above, they're meant to set the tone 'I am the voice of reason', to soften the taste of what comes next.

And what comes next, the third paragraph, is just a bunch of slurs about addicts and very poor people. For those unfamiliar with marxist lingo:

And this is ended by rejecting the call of accepting addicts as members of your community because they supposedly 'make terrible revolutionaries'.

Note the huge shift here from 'annoyed by smoke' to judging the character and abilities of the entire group labelled 'addicts'. The original post said 'it's easier to say you hate smokers than to say you hate all drug users' and this poster just did exactly that: lead with 'not wanting to be exposed to fumes' to then whip out the open bigotry in the third act.

The idea that drug addicts can't be revolutionaries is bullshit of course. But this reveals the value system of the 'revolutionary' tumblr user writing this, They see nothing of value in including the most oppressed in their communities and their solidarity, simply for the sake of not leaving anyone behind. Their only standard for who matters is whether they can be productive enough to contribute significantly to the revolution.

With that kind of take, it's understandable why they want you to think it's just about 'being annoyed by drug use'. Because what comes next is just 'fuck the poor' wrapped in marxist language.

This is such a good breakdown of what I made this post about. It's so ironic to see people essentially complain about a supposed strawman and then reveal they themselves are made of straw.

Even if you claim to be a Marxist, you are not immune to conservative ideas and propaganda. The US has never truly left the War on Drugs. It is so ingrained in us that people have been using that same rhetoric against certain medications for years. I was not surprised by RFK Jr's anti-medication stance because of what was said to me when I first started taking medication for my mental illnesses as a teenager in the 2010s.

Being against one form of substance use is a pipeline to being against any form of substance use. Yes, this includes whatever you take that you think is safe from these talking points. The "Make America Healthy Again" movement in the US views you as inferior because you need support. When you understand that most drug use is self-medication, it's easy to understand the connections.

Also, I want to address the "of course anarchists are going to care most about the most poor of us" crap that one person spouted in fancy language.

First, just because it's kinda funny, but I never really claimed to be an anarchist. I don't think I am enough of an anarchist to call myself one, though I do really value their teachings and the work they do. If the anarchists think I am one of them, hell yeah, I won't complain. Fucking love anarchists.

Second, and more importantly, saying that caring for the most disenfranchised of our population is a bad thing is really weird. It doesn't mean we don't care about anyone else, but if you won't figure out how to advocate for those with the least power in the room then you will only be able to serve those with the most power. This doesn't even go into the complexities of who is seen as a "good" drug user and a "bad" drug user in slightly more progressive spaces.

But if folks are going to freak out about accepting that they're going to be exposed to stoners, I really don't think those same people are ready to talk about people who take the "scary" substances, or even who is "allowed" to use substances and who isn't.

I think they referred to 'anarchists' because they reblogged this from me and I have anarchism in my username, but I'm glad that you like anarchists and welcome to the club. :)

About their response being weird... in case you're not aware (hope I'm not over-explaining): this persons' disdain for the most disenfranchised probably comes directly from Marx and Engels. They theorized that the 'working class' were those who sold their labor - who worked (legal) jobs. And according to them, there was another, inferior, underclass which they called the 'Lumpenproletariat': People of low morals who did not do recognized work and who were incapable of gaining class consciousness and of becoming true revolutionaries. Their description varies and often amount to a list of stigmatized groups. One description from Marx:

It's not hard to see how 'drug users' would make it on this list for a modern Marxist.

Marx and Engels were wrong about the 'Lumpenproletariat', of course. Escaped slaves, homeless people, sex workers, traveling workers, people doing criminalized work and addicts have always been class conscious and have frequently been fierce revolutionaries.

But for the dogmatic Marxist, the 'Lumpenproletariat' remains a tool of exclusion and of respectability politics. Is anything that poor people do to survive morally complicated or does it scare you? Then you can just call them the lumpenproletariat! Only the noble non-criminal, non-sex-worker, housed and employed worker is the true working class!

It's a no-true-scotsman game that allows the dogmatic Marxist to distance themselves from anyone among the oppressed who makes them uncomfortable, maintaining an exclusive club of appropriately civil revolutionaries and actually being proud of their exclusion of the most disenfranchised.

I wanna add to this that a thing Marxists like this have conveniently memory-holed is that tons of Marxists included queer people in the 'Lumpenproletariat' until the early 00's.

These homophobic and transphobic Marxists jumped on the fact that everyone from bourgie gay men to poor street queens visited the only gay bar in town, and used that to argue that queer people were 'class traitors' and that their 'obsession with sex and gender' kept them from developing real class consciousness. Along with all the 'not real workers' stuff because of the many queer people who couldn't get a legal job.

And this is how 'Lumpenproletariat' has always functioned. It's a left-wing spin on calling groups of marginalized people 'degenerate' or 'anti-social'.

Please stop ✋🚨 you're the only hope to save a child🥺

My son Mohammed is in critical condition after being shot by Israeli drones. He has been taken to the operating ⛺️ and urgently needs treatment outside the Gaza Strip.

I lost most of my family. I'm afraid to lose my son too 🥺 .

I need your help please donate and share, evry contribution, no matter how small, brings us hope in these dark times.

Mohammed deserves to live a happy and healthy life, just like every other child on this earth.

Please Donate now:👇👇 👇

—————————————————————————

✅️My campaign is vetted by el-shab-hussein & Nabulsi's, my number verified on the list is ( #355)✅️ 👇

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1yYkNp5U3ANwILl2MknJi9G7ArY4uVTEEQ1CVfzR8Ioo/htmlview

—————————————————————————

Hello🤗❤️ I hope you are well🌹Can you help me get my voice heard and share my family's story?🙏🏻 @puppyyteeth @duchess-of-new-shire @web-h3ad @mostofmypainisfandomrelated @amalalkafarna15

You know what the most frustrating thing about the vegans throwing a fit over my “Humans aren’t Parasites” post is?  I really wasn’t trying to make a point about animal agriculture. Honestly, the example about subsistence hunting isn’t the main point. That post was actually inspired by thoughts I’ve been having about the National Park system and environmentalist groups.

See, I LOVE the National Parks. I always have a pass. I got to multiple parks a year. I LOVE them, and always viewed them as this unambiguously GOOD thing. Like, the best thing America has done. 

BUT, I just finished reading this book called “I am the Grand Canyon” all about the native Havasupai people and their fight to gain back their rights to the lands above the canyon rim. Historically, they spent the summer months farming in the canyon, and then the winter months hunter-gathering up above the rim. When their reservation was made though, they lost basically all rights to the rim land (They had limited grazing rights to some of it, but it was renewed year to year and always threatened, and it was a whole thing), leading to a century long fight to get it back. 

And in that book there are a couple of really poignant anecdotes- one man talks about how park rangers would come harass them if they tried to collect pinon nuts too close to park land- worried that they would take too many pinon nuts that the squirrels wanted. Despite the fact that the Havasupai had harvested pinon nuts for thousands and thousands of years without ever…like…starving the squirrels. 

There’s another anecdote of them seeing the park rangers hauling away the bodies of dozens of deer- killed in the park because of overpopulation- while the Havasupai had been banned from hunting. (Making them more and more reliant on government aid just to survive the winter months.) 

They talk about how they would traditionally carve out these natural cisterns above the rim to catch rainwater, and how all the animals benefitted from this, but it was difficult to maintain those cisterns when their “ownership” of the land was so disputed. 

So here you have examples of when people are forcibly separated from their ecosystem and how it hurts both those people and the ecosystem. 

And then when the Havasupai finally got legislation before Congress to give them ownership of the rim land back- their biggest opponent was the Parks system and the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club (a big conservation group here in the US) ran a huge smear campaign against these people on the belief that any humans owning this land other than the park system (which aims at conservation, even while developing for recreation) was unacceptable. 

And it all got me thinking about how, as much as I love the National Parks, there are times when its insistence that nature be left “untouched” (except, ya know, for recreation) can actually harm both the native people who have traditionally been part of those ecosystems AND potentially the ecosystems themselves. And I just think there’s a lot of nuance there about recognizing that there are ways for us to be in balance with nature, and that our environmentalism should respect that and push for sustainability over preserving “pristine” human-less landscapes. Removing ourselves from nature isn’t the answer. 

But apparently the idea that subsistence hunting might actually not be a moral catastrophe really set the vegans off.  Woopie. 

March 31, 2025 - AnsarAllah shot down another 33 million dollar US MQ-9 Reaper Drone, which was there to try to punish the Yemeni people for blockading Israel. [video]

(Quds) Amid the ruins of their homes, Palestinian children mark the first day of Eid in Gaza as Israeli attacks persist across the Strip.

Since this morning, at least 23 Palestinians have been killed, including 12 children.