Quidditism - 🪷💫

Very valid concerns! We do have an alternate flag that differs a lot from theirs if that's of any interest! /info

so i was browsing for a bit and found these

two radqueer ideologies that seem similar at face value due to their aesthetics but are actually starkly contrasted, quidditsm and consistent progressivism i think both of these provide an interesting and cohesive look at how radqueer liberation might be achieved so i made this chart to compare and contrast them

just to clarify i'm not taking a side on either of them, i just wanted to analyze them alongside each other

what are your thoughts on these?

Information on consent

📖 What is consent? 📖

Consent, as described by the Oxford Dictionary, is permission for something to happen or agreement to do something.

Consent applies to many stuff, not just sexual advances. From letting someone borrow your pen, to drinking tea, to hugs. I will be using the tea comparison for this.

Consent does not simply mean "both parties love each other". One can love someone but not consent to certain stuff, or may consent to stuff with those they don't particularly care for on an emotional level. If you ask someone if they want tea, and they say "Hell yeah, I love tea!" then great, that is active consent. They do indeed want tea. If they respond with "I'm not sure, maybe?" then you can still make that cup of tea if you want to, but don't be mad if they don't drink it when you offer it to them. And if they don't drink it, don't make them drink it. Just because you made it doesn't mean you are entitled to have them drink it.

If they respond "No, I don't want tea." then don't make them tea at all. Don't be mad at them for not wanting tea, don't annoy them until they give you until they tell you "Fine I want tea". That is coercion and it doesn't change their actual mind about whether they want tea or not. It is not consent.

If they say "yes, sure! thank you." but when the tea arrives they don't actually want the tea, don't make them drink it. They may have changed their mind. Sure it can be annoying because you went through all that effort to make them tea, but they still have no obligation to drink the tea just because of that. They did want tea, now they don't. It's okay for people to change their minds, don't make them feel guilty of that.

If they decide while drinking that they actually don't want tea, then don't make them drink the rest of it. Again, it's okay for people to change their minds, do not make them feel guilty of that. And if they're unconscious, then don't make them tea at all. Unconscious people can't answer the question "Do you want tea?". You may have asked them when they were conscious and they may have agreed, but now they're unconscious. make sure they're safe, and, this is important, don't make them drink the tea. They may have agreed then, sure, but unconscious people don't want tea.* If they were conscious when they started drinking it but then passed out, don't make them drink the rest of the tea.*

If they're not in the right mind, say, mentally unwell, then don't offer them tea at all, even if they say they want it or deserve it. They need safety, and comfort, not tea. You can offer later when they feel better. If they said yes to tea once, don't expect tea time always forever whenever you want. Don't come up to them unexpectedly and make them drink tea saying "But you wanted tea once!". Just because they wanted tea one day doesn't mean they want it anytime forever.

📖 What falls under consent and what does not? 📖

For both parties involved:

Are they actively saying "yes, I want it"?

Do they know to the fullest extent what they're in for? What they're agreeing to?

Are they allowed to change their mind at any given time and have it be respected by the other party?

Is there safety precautions? (such as safe words)

Are they on an equal level with no power imbalance that could put either party in jeopardy should they change their minds or say no

If the answer to all of these is yes, great! That falls under consent. If the answer to any of these is "no" or "maybe" then that is not consensual.

*Some points in the first part are more nuanced, like in the case of a contract for example. In such a case, if everything in the contract fits in the checklist above, awesome!

it is so important that you are a little bit ugly. please get comfortable with having unplucked eyebrows and nonexistent jawlines and wrinkles. let your blue hair grow out into an uneven pale green and your clothes be old and mend them and modify them until they’re unique to you. wear lipstick which doesnt compliment your skintone and mismatched outfits which went out of fashion 5 years ago. be a little bit too loud and a little bit too passionate and as weird as you can be because oh my god there is nothing more disturbing to me than perfection. beauty is manufactured and sold to us and you need to realise that you are a fucking animal to live a joyful life I am so serious. you cant obsess over aesthetics forever please just live messily and make your body your home however you please.

if you dont do it for you, do it for all the teenagers who will see u in the street and know that they are not obligated to be attractive

“It is not so much for its beauty that the forest makes a claim upon men’s hearts, as for that subtle something, that quality of air that emanation from old trees, that so wonderfully changes and renews a weary spirit.”

― Robert Louis Stevenson

Source: Grow Your Garden Instagram page

"Solarpunk will never happen!"

As if it's not already coming, already here and starting to bloom before our eyes.

Neighborhood cooking clubs and libraries lending out more then just books, it's the art club that the community garden started, it's the funky gardens my neighbors have.

It's the DIY projects ppl wear with pride and ones that hide in the back of their dresser drawer. It's in the magazines and podcasts and in passing hope forward.

Like gruella gardening alone is enough for proof of concept for me, but the rise in community events and potlucks and fighting for rent caps and UBI and decentalizing energy and gardening is happening now.

And yea I gotta fight nazis and dickwards daily for it, and I gotta spend the time to educate and build up as I take down, but they can't say this future isn't coming. I'm here with you right now in it.

I was talking to my dad about renewable energy and he was like “the only problem with solar farms is they take up so much space.”

And it made me think about a city and how much sun exposure all the rooftops in a city get and…why not just make the city it’s own solar farm by putting solar panels on every rooftop?

Some women are conditioned to be fragile and weak, and to believe that it's a sin to outperform a man. Her feminism would involve allowing women to be strong.

Some women are expected to be strong at times when they can't. Her feminism would involve reassuring her that it's okay to not be strong.

Some neurodivergent people are raised to believe that they're too stupid to ever amount to anything. Their disability activism would involve reassuring them that they're capable.

Some neurodivergent people are raised to believe that they're smart and gifted, and are expected to live up to impossible standards. Their disability activism would involve allowing them to fail, make mistakes, be stupid, etc.

Some children are constantly reminded "you're the child, I'm the adult" in order to deny their autonomy. Their youth rights activism would involve treating them like an adult at times when they feel ready for it.

Some children are treated like adults in order to justify increased expectations or to downplay abuse against them. Their youth rights activism would involve allowing them to be a child.

There is no one-size-fits-all solution to oppression. Each individual person's experience is different. Whatever trauma is caused by their oppression, the activism should focus on undoing it.

survey on inner worlds in plurality

important edit:

REMEMBER TO READ THE SECTION DESCRIPTIONS CAREFULLY. Many of you have told me there are no options for “N/A” on the rating questions, however we have stated that you should use the lowest rating (one) in that case.

🩵🩵🩵

the interstellar cluster presents to you...

a survey on inner worlds in plurality!

Google Docs

ᯓ★ survey on inner worlds in plurality

please answer all questions to the best of your ability. make sure to read each question and section description carefully to avoid inaccura

this is our first plural survey but we hope y'all have fun answering these questions.

results will be posted after submissions end in three weeks (30th of May), so give or take a few days around that date to organise the data.

it's quite long, but we put the questions in sections so hopefully it doesn't feel as long as it is.

please reblog to push this further, we're aiming for at least 25 responses! :D

Too many people will pass around "always trust your gut!" and "your intuition never lies" content when actually your "intuition" isn't immune to either propaganda, bigotry or trauma reactions. Which is important to be aware of actually

bro n@zism is not "when killing any group of people" 😭🙏

Correct. Nazism is “extreme racist or authoritarian views or behavior.” (Oxford Dictionaries)

The primary goal of Nazis is to create a “Volksgemeinschaft”. Which means the People’s Community, however the word was later turned to mean a cleansing of previous “inferior” races/ideologies/practices and to replace them with the Aryan. The Aryan was not only determined to be the “Master Race” by Adolf Hitler, but the Aryan was also characterizrd to be those who are dedicated to defending the Nazi party and political movement.

So, I did use the term Nazi correctly, if that is what you were trying to get at.

Consistent Progressivism prides itself on eliminating inferior beliefs or practices that they determine to be “Conservative”. And that is step 1 of Fascism (or as I say, Nazism). By them watering down and dehumanizing a group of people into a very wide term and to be used derogatory, is step 1.

Step 2 is to seek and assault, kill, hunt or destroy a large group of people. And for them, Consistent Progressives, this is a large part of their identity. They torture and exterminate people who identify as conservative or use “Conservative Languages/Practices”.

Now, step 2.5 is to change the definition of terminology in order for them to seem the most correct ideology and political class of people. And for Consistent Progressives, they did this by turning the definition of “Conservative” into something that benefits their party.

Their definition: “A political worldview defined by a broad category of ideas either implicitly or explicitly believing that people should be discriminated against because of their race, gender identity, pronouns, sexual identity, or anything else regarding their identity that does not harm others”

The true definition: “a person who is averse to change and holds traditional values.” (Oxford)

Along with step 2.5, they are against any other dictionary and discourage their followers from using dictionaries like Oxford and deem the usage as “Conservative” (see step 2)

I hope this helps you. If you need help getting out of a cult like this, my dms are open and I am never judgemental.