[image description: a black-and-white watercolor and pen drawing of two people. the one on the left has a fancy blouse and a short bob. they are holding the other personβs hand and leaning in to them with slightly pursed lips. the one on the right is wearing a collared shirt and skirt and has a puffball dandelion for a head, the seeds of which are starting to blow away. /end i.d.]
[image description: a black and white illustration of an inchworm taking bites out of a crescent moon in the night sky. crumbs fall down from the moon, and turn into two white moths. /end i.d.]
as a bisexual with a complicated gender identity, i just think that’s so sexy and intellectual of me actually. if you are also a bisexual with a complicated gender identity just know we should be sharing a nomination for a nobel prize rn.
What would be a less problematic way of describing a fantasy “race”/“species” that is meant to be “evil” and “vile”, (because maybe they were created by a evil deity to cause havoc etc).
you’re positing an inherently paradoxical project mate. “how do i construct a fictional Type of Person who is ontologically evil, whose murder is prima facie acceptable or even laudable, while unimpacted by the titanic weight of historical discourses that did the exact same rhetorical work in service of real-world violences?” – the answer is that you’ve invented an impossible task!
there is no fantasy of uncomplicated and meritorious ethnic violence that is neatly separable from the historical context those fantasies are produced in. that’s just the way it is. genuinely, i feel compelled to ask–not because i want to hear the answer, but because i want you and others to think about this–why is this a fantasy you’re so desperate to salvage?
