Any Amount You Give Me Will Help Me A Lot, Even If It Is $10.

I think one of the worst Optimus takes I see is when people try to make him evil in ways that don't make sense. Like idk someone claiming that IDW Optimus justifies war crimes because of The Greater Good when he literally doesn't and is in fact quite aware of when he does morally dubious things or is responsible/complicit in bad things happening.

It just annoys me because there are interesting ways to make Optimus problematic or to see him as problematic but no one can do it without making Optimus OOC or they do it in a really boring way.

Mostly it feels like it stems from an inability (or refusal?) to believe that morally good individuals can be responsible for bad things happening on a wider scale. Or even that a good intentioned person can cause harm on an individual level. It feels as if people have to make Optimus OOC "evil" (as in dumb, ignorant, committing crimes, not caring about others' well being) because they can't grasp the idea that he can be simultaneously good and bad at the same time. Or they have this idea that only bad people do bad things and if someone ever does bad things it must make them a bad person.

I don't know. No one ever seems to have this problem with other characters in Transformers so I think it's just a byproduct of people projecting their personal/political issues onto Optimus lmao

the fact that "eco" and "ethical" are two separate concerns in the global north, and that "eco" is a much more popular concern, with many "eco" products being made in actual sweatshops, is a big part of why i am The Joker

being in your early 20s is crazy bc there’s people who are literally married and people who’ve never even dated and people who are trapped in their childhood bedrooms waiting to get out and people who are trying to live out romanticized dream lives and people who are completely on their own and people with multi tiered support systems and we’re all supposedly peers and none of us think we’re doing it right at all

hiii you know what really irks me? like a lot? the way people talk about wheatley, a very very neurodivergent coded character.

something i see way too often is people using this to justify certain things he does that cant be justified or using it to make him into an “uwu soft boi” and then patting themselves on the back for. good neurodivergent representation or something when theyre literally doing the opposite? just because hes neurodivergent coded doesnt mean he gets a pass for everything he does wrong. and its also super fuckin ableist to infantilize him and call him a soft boy or whatever. this goes double if you do that shit and STILL call him stupid.

on the flip side, something else i see a lot is people demonizing him for neurodivergent traits. and personally this one makes me angrier. im not saying he has to be your favorite character or even that you have to like him just because hes neurodivergent coded (i can understand a ton of reasons why people dont like him) but when people call him. annoying or self centered or, again, stupid its. very obvious a lot of the time that youre talking about neurodivergent traits. of course in the game he is literally the intelligence dampening sphere and theres definitely something Big to be said about valve writing an antagonist thats meant to be Stupid as Very Neurodivergent Coded but thats a rant for later because i feel like if people actually cared about neurodivergent people theyd be able to tell when the writers were being ableist and when a character is not how the game tries to portray them. and im speaking as an autistic person here but when you call wheatley annoying for talking a lot or you call him self centered for talking about himself a lot (again im autistic and its hard for me to talk about topics my brain isnt wanting to focus on and most of the topics i do want to talk about are related to me so?) it just really. comes off as ableist.

and even moreso, what wheatley does and tries to do when hes in control of aperture is very bad and thats obvious but… its ALSO obvious that a lot of what he does happens because hes an abuse victim lashing out. which doesnt make what he does right but still. again im talking as an autistic abuse victim here but what really goes through is something i relate to a LOT. hes constantly deemed as stupid for neurodivergent traits so much so that he was LITERALLY MADE TO BE “STUPID” but hes not.. even stupid hes just neurodivergent and acts impulsively. hes constantly reminded hes “stupid” or “incompetent” and you know what it reminds me of? it reminds me of my experience in school as an autistic person. the american public school system is VERY good at abusing and traumatizing neurodivergent kids and its exactly what wheatley’s situation reminds me of. again, how he acts is not right but from where i stand, hes an abuse victim whos never felt like hes had control in his life and when he finally gets control its way too much way too fast and because of his impulsivity it just goes to his head and he makes a LOT of bad decisions.

what im trying to say is that the way the fandom treats wheatley personally gets me very upset at times because of how much i relate to him as an austic abuse victim and how much he gets treated like ive been treated. you dont have to like wheatley but i feel like people in this fandom could do a lot better job of not constantly being ableist about him. thats all

An under-talked about part of Columbo is the way it presents non-murderers. Most episodes have at least a few scenes where Columbo talks to people involved in the case who, you know, aren't the ones who killed the victim, and in those scenes to see a multitude of ways people handle grief (or, if not grief exactly, the simple shock of someone you know no longer being around). I'm watching one of my favorite episodes right now, the one with Leonard Nimoy as the killer, and Columbo is interviewing one of the victim's co-workers, a nurse, and she just keeps going on an on about how much better the victim was morally than her - how the victim really cared about healing people as opposed to herself, who only wants to advance her career. And in this brief, minute-long interaction you get both the comic relief of Columbo quickly realizing this woman will provide almost no useful information but being unable to get her to stop talking without being rude, and a very clear illustration of how the victim was inspiring to others and how this co-worker in particular not only admired her, but feels inadequate for not living up to her. It's a very short interaction, easy to ignore in the scope of the episode (Leonard Nimoy gives SUCH a good performance as a villain it'd be hard to talk about anything else), but it all adds a humanity to the episode that would be sorely missing without it. If you didn't care about the murder before, you sure as hell do now, and you know Columbo is a better person than the killer because he actually cares about the effect these murders have on people enough not to coldly shut down a grieving friend of the victim when she's rambling on about her feelings.

Anyway, I know this is a hot take for Tumblr, but Columbo is really great.

Someone on Reddit made the mistake of saying, "Teach me how this conflict came about" where I could see it.

Let me teach you too.

The common perception is that Jews came out of nowhere, stole Palestinian homes and kicked Palestinians out of them, and then bombed them for 75 years, until they finally rebelled in the form of Hamas invading Israel and massacring 22 towns in one day.

The historical reality is that Jews have lived there continuously for at least 3500 years.

There are areas, like Meggido iirc, with archeological evidence of continuous habitation for 7,000 years, but Jewish culture as we recognize it today didn't develop until probably halfway through that.

Ethnic Jews are the indigenous people of this area.

Indigeneity means a group was originally there, before any colonization happened, and that it has retained a cultural connection to the land. History plus culture.

That's what Jews have: even when the diaspora became larger than the number of Jews in Israel, the yearning to return to that homeland was a daily part of Jewish prayer and ritual.

The Jewish community in Israel was crushed pretty violently by the Roman Empire in 135 CE, but it was still substantial, sometimes even the majority population there, for almost a thousand years.

The 600s CE brought the advent of Islam and the Arab Empire, expanding out from Saudi Arabia into Israel and beyond. It was largely a region where Jews were second-class citizens. But it was still WAY better than the way Christian Europe treated Jews.

From the 700s-900s, the area saw repeated civil wars, plagues, and earthquakes.

Then the Crusades came, with waves of Christians making "pilgrimages to the Holy Land" and trying to conquer it from Muslims and Jews, who they slaughtered and enslaved.

Israel became pretty well depopulated after all that. It was a very rough time to live there. (And for the curious, I'm calling it Israel because that's what it had been for centuries, until the Romans erased the name and the country.)

By the 1800s, the TOTAL population of what's now Israel and Palestine had varied from 150,000 - 275,000 for centuries. It was very rural, very sparsely populated, on top of being mostly desert.

In the 1880s, Jews started buying land and moving back to their indigenous homeland. As tends to happen, immigration brought new projects and opportunities, which led to more immigration - not only from Jews, but from the Arab world as well.

Unfortunately, there was an antisemitic minority spearheaded by Amin al-Husseini. Who was very well-connected, rich, and from a politically powerful family.

Al-Husseini had enthusiastically participated in the Armenian Genocide under the Ottoman Empire. Then the Empire fell in World War One, and the League of Nations had to figure out what to do with its land.

Mostly, if an area was essentially operating as a country (e.g. Turkey), the League of Nations let it be one. In areas that weren't ready for self-rule, it appointed France or Britain to help them get there.

In recognition of the increased Jewish population in their traditional, indigenous homeland, it declared that that homeland would again become Israel.

As in, the region was casually called Palestine because that was the lay term for "the Holy Land." It had not been a country since Israel was stamped out; only a region of a series of different empires. And the Mandate For Palestine said it was establishing "a national home of the Jewish people" there, in recognition of "the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country."

Britain was appointed to help the Arab and Jewish communities there develop systems of self-government, and then to work together to govern the region overall.

At least, that was the plan.

Al-Husseini, who was deeply antisemitic, did not like this plan.

And, extra-unfortunately, the British response to al-Husseini inciting violent anti-Jewish riots was to put him in a leadership role over Arab Palestine.

They thought it would calm him down and perhaps satisfy him.

They were very wrong.

The Washington Institute

From Torch to Tunis to El Alamein: Events 80 Years Ago Made the Modern Middle East

The second week of November 1942 has much to tell us about the region’s geopolitical centrality, its enduring political currents, and its ro

He went on to become a huge Hitler fanboy, and then a Nazi war criminal. He co-created the Muslim Brotherhood - which Hamas is part of - with fellow fascist fanboy Hassan al-Banna.

Al Arabiya English

ANALYSIS: The Nazi roots of Muslim Brotherhood

After years of causing disruption on the streets of Egypt, on 30 June 2012, the Muslim Brotherhood’s leader Mohammed Morsi was sworn i

He got Nazi Party funding for armed Muslim Brotherhood militias to attack Jews and the Brits in the late 30s, convincing Britain to agree to limit Jewish immigration at the time when it was most desperately needed.

He started using the militias again in 1947, when the United Nations voted to divide the mandated land into a Jewish homeland and a Palestinian one.

Al-Husseini wouldn't stand for a two-state solution. He was determined to tolerate no more than the subdued, small Jewish minority of second-class citizens that he remembered from his childhood.

As armed militias increasingly ran riot, the Arab middle and upper classes increasingly left. About 100,000 left the country before May 1948, when Britain was to pull out, leaving Israel and Palestine to declare their independence.

The surrounding nations didn't want war. They largely accepted the two-state solution.

But al-Husseini lobbied HARD. And by mobilizing the Muslim Brotherhood to provide "destabilizing mass demonstrations and a murderous campaign of intimidation," he got the Arab League nations to agree to invade, en masse, as soon as Britain left.

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

The Aftershock of the Nazi War against the Jews, 1947–48: Could War in the Middle East Have Been Prevented?

This article deals with the after-effects of Nazi anti-Zionist propaganda in the Arab world and the antisemitic campaign of the Mufti of Jer

Question of Palestine

UN Palestine Commission - Acts of aggression by Arab States - Memorandum from the Jewish Agency - Question of Palestine

ACTS OF AGGRESSION PROVOKED, COMMITTED AND PREPARED BY ARAB STATES  IN CONCERT WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE AGAINST T

About 600,000 Arabs fled to those countries during the ensuing war.

Jews couldn't seek refuge there; in fact, most of those countries either exiled their Jews directly, confiscating their property first, or else made Jewish life unlivable and exploited them for underpaid or slave labor for years first.

The Tower

There Was a Jewish Nakba, and It Was Even Bigger than the Palestinian One

The expulsion of Jews from Arab countries, one of the biggest humanitarian crises of the 20th century, is all the more tragic for how little

By the time the smoke cleared and a peace treaty was signed, most of the Arab Palestinian community had fled; there was no Arab Palestinian leadership; many of the refugees' homes and businesses had left had been destroyed in the war; and Israel had been flooded with nearly a million refugees from the Arab League countries and the Holocaust - even more people than had fled the war.

That was the Nakba. The one that gets portrayed as "750,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled!" in the hope that you'll assume they were expelled en masse, their beautiful intact homes all stolen.

Egypt had taken what's now the Gaza Strip in that war, and Jordan took what's now the West Bank - expelling or killing all the Jews in it first.

(Ironically, Jordan was originally supposed to be part of Israel. Britain, inexplicably, cut off what would have been 75% of its land to create Jordan.

Even more inexplicably, nobody ever talks about it. I've never seen anyone complain that Jordan was stolen from Palestinians. Possibly because Jordan is also the only country that gave Palestinian refugees full citizenship, and it's about half Palestinian now.

Israel is nearly 25% Arab Palestinians with full citizenship and equal rights, so it's not all that different -- but the fundamental difference of living in a country where the majority is Jewish, not Muslim, probably runs pretty deep.)

Anyway: that's why Palestine is Gaza and the West Bank, rather than being some contiguous chunk of land. Or being the land set aside by the U.N. in 1947.

Because Arab countries took that land in 1948, and treated them as essentially separate for 20 years.

Israel got them back, along with the Golan Heights and the Sinai Peninsula, in the next war: 1967, when Egypt committed an act of war by taking control of the waterways and barring Israel from them. It gave the Sinai back to Egypt as part of the 1979 peace accords between Egypt and Israel.

Israel tried to give back the Gaza Strip at the same time. Egypt refused.

Palestine finally declared independence in 1988.

But Hamas formed at about the same time. Probably in response, in fact. Hamas is fundamentally opposed to peace negotiations with Israel.

Again: Hamas is part of a group founded by Nazis.

Hamas has its own charter. It explains that Jews are "the enemy," because they control the drug trade, have been behind every major war, control the media, control the United Nations, etc. Basic Nazi rhetoric.

It has gotten adept at masking that rhetoric for the West. But to friendlier audiences, its leaders have consistently said things like, "People of Jerusalem, we want you to cut off the heads of the Jews with knives. With your hand, cut their artery from here. A knife costs five shekels.  Buy a knife, sharpen it, put it there, and just cut off [their heads]. It costs just five shekels."

MEMRI

Senior Hamas Official Fathi Hammad To Palestinians In Jerusalem: Buy 5-Shekel Knives And Cut Off The Heads Of The Jews

Hamas Political Bureau Member and former Minister of the Interior Fathi Hammad urged the people of Jerusalem to "cut off...

(Palestinians were outraged by this speech. Palestinians, by and large, absolutely loathe Hamas.

Newsweek

Hamas Tortured Me for Dissent. Here's What They Truly Think of Palestinians

I thought I'd left Gaza behind, yet all this time, Hamas was planning to expand its extremism and intimidation.

It's just that it's not the same to say that to locals, as it is to say it where major global powers who oppose this crap can hear you.)

Hamas has stated from the beginning that its mission is to violently destroy Israel and take over the land.

It has received $100M in military funding annually, from Iran, for several years. Because Iran has been building a network of fascist, antisemitic groups across the Middle East, in a blatant attempt to control more and more of it: Hezbollah in Lebanon. The Houthis in Yemen.

Iran has been run by a very far-right, deeply antisemitic dictatorship for decades now, which pretty openly wants to take down both Israel and the U.S.

Last year, Iran increased Hamas's funding to $350M.

The "proof of concept" invasion of Israel that Hamas pulled off on October 7th more than justifies a much bigger investment.

Hamas has publicly stated its intention to attack "again and again and again," until Israel has been violently destroyed.

That is how this conflict came about.

A Nazi group seized power in Gaza in 2007 by violently kicking the Palestinian government out, and began running it as a dictatorship, using it to build money and power in preparations for exactly this.

And people find it shockingly easy to believe its own hype about being "the Palestinian resistance."

As well as its propaganda that Israel is not actually targeting Hamas: it's just using a literal Nazi invasion and massacre as an excuse to randomly commit genocide of the fraction of Palestine it physically left 20 years ago.

Despite the fact that Palestinians in Gaza have been protesting HAMAS throughout the war.

Can we go back to Transformers intelligence not being linked to how they look?

Like the G1 marvel comics? Where a mechanical bat could be an accountant and no one cared cause they are robots and can come in all shapes and sizes?

There’s a terrible lesson to children of teaching different “sub races” as inclined to being unintelligent or criminal.

Remember the Dinobots in RID 2015 being portrayed as inherently destructive and voiced by black guys? Or other “sub-races” prone to being serial killers or kleptomaniacs?

Also gets into “why would anyone build/program for that?” which would lead to pointing towards implying transformers reproduce like organics making the racist parallels EVEN WORSE

You might not want to hear this but people with anger issues and/or violent impulses need social accommodations. And no by accommodation I don't mean walking on eggshells around them, actual accommodations for people with these issues comes down to giving them a space away from what's triggering them to process their emotions and calm themselves down same as what kind of accommodations people who get sensory overload or just any kind of overwhelmed. There is no moral value to having anger issues or violent impulses, people with them are deserving of accommodation the same as everyone else.