I'm Simone, 27,big bird stan and whiny asshole. This is a blog for reblogs, incoherent blabbering, and whatever I’m presently fixated on (wrestling, horror movies, aatc, Batman, etc) - he/him - Black and Korean - admin of ttgpics - art blog: @alternativeprojectdraws - thealtproject3@gmail.com -
So anyway here’s pibbles ft Geoffrey the giraffe
STUNNINGly beautiful and charming chap of incredible range, a darling toothy grin and soulful eyes full of spirit and soul, his ears perfectly folded lovingly by the hands of god over the wrinkles of his dome
feel free to add more alternatives, resources or advice in the reblogs or replies, and i'll add them to the main post <3
last updated: march 18th 2025
me giving yousa the absolute best ass i can
i keep forgetting that your oc is yousa and definitely read this as jar jar trying his best to fuck
it seems that leftists do not actually understand american lynchings at all. they launder an ahistorical analysis of lynchings to prop up their rampant male supremacy, by likening sexual abusers to potential lynching victims. they equate sexual abusers or those who are accused of sexual abuse to an oppressed class as a result, which could explain why most american leftist orgs devolve into cults that harbor male abusers. this is a serious error.
most lynchings were not even the result of a sexual assault accusation. lynchings were not a case of white people “taking the law too far,” undervaluing due process, nor were they a case borne out of a cultural disgust for rapists. the “cultural disgust for rapists” that leftists speak of doesn’t even exist—what they are seeing is a disgust for the sexual trespass of another man’s property. if a general fanaticism against rape was motivated by a genuine disgust of patriarchy, and this fanaticism actually existed, then both the left and the right wouldn’t attempt to decriminalize sexual abuse in various ways. this disgust has never existed, as rape was used as a tool to exert male power in the U.S. and beyond long before the colonization of the americas. rapists are not dehumanized under our current social order. they are coddled and rewarded, unless they violate another man’s property. it is not worth considering the humanity of the mostly women and children who are routinely victimized by this ideology. lynchings during segregation were a mechanism of antiblack terror, regulation and control—they were not motivated by a moral opposition to sexual assault, murder, robbery, etc.
white male supremacists were sexually abusing their own wives, daughters, slaves, and free black people while they were deploying criminal accusations against black americans for allegedly doing the same. the myth of the black rapist is an effective cultural weapon that is used to protect the private property claims of white male supremacists, portraying their own supremacy as so just and objective that murder and dehumanization of the out-group is permissible to protect it. white people who deploy this myth did not and do not have a moral opposition to rape, because white people utilized rape as a method of sexual discipline and control against women, children, and black people for centuries.
the white women who participated in white supremacist violence were not disrupting their position under white male supremacy—they were enshrining it, supporting the hierarchy that placed them below white men but above black americans, and gaining a relatively favorable reputation to their white male owners by engaging in antiblack racism and reproducing the hierarchy against other women. marginalized white people were free to attack the racial enemies of white people in general, but their own position in the hierarchy remained unchanged. in this framework, white men can sexually abuse anyone they please, including those in the out-group, because they are asserting their birthright by doing so. they must curb all women, everyone in the out-group, and white male sympathizers to oppressed groups from being able to threaten the hierarchy. this ideology sees sexual abuse as an adequate tool for men to use until other men are perceived to be trespassing property lines. this can even be seen today…
a significant amount of right wing white men will simultaneously complain about how marital rape laws undermine traditional families while fearmongering about out-group men sexually abusing white women. how can they seemingly view rape in both a positive and negative light at the same time, you might ask? this thinking is not paradoxical at all when you consider how patriarchal control works. it is ideologically consistent.
marital rape laws contribute to the legal subversion of the whole class of women as private property—it’s harder to claim a woman as private property if she is both socially and legally free to reject the disciplining act of heterosexual sex. an out-group man who sexually engages with a white woman is a violation of white men’s private property claims, whether she is being assaulted or not does not matter because the mere interaction itself, regardless of context, is seen as subversive to the white male supremacist.
white male supremacists are against interracial relationships, consensual or not, because they upend white men’s birthright in three ways. by taking white children out of the gene pool and undermining racial purity norms through interracial reproduction, by removing white women from the private control of white men, and by muddling the position of the out-group within the hierarchy since they are trespassing property lines. all of these positions are otherwise known as the white genocide anxiety. the white genocide anxiety is about white men losing their private property claims against man, woman, and nature itself. feminism, communism, and black liberation must be opposed, because when synthesized, they usher in a new world that denies the birthright of white male supremacy and disables them from maintaining it.
the white male supremacist culture does not have a moral opposition to sexual abuse or even criminality in general. they only respect laws if they exist to protect their class interests. they cynically pretend to have moral convictions against sexism and crime in order to shroud their real motivation: the protection of white men’s private property. they will lie, obfuscate, and kill to defend it. this is the true motivation behind american lynching.
depressed steampunk guy: like nothing makes me happy anymore i feel like my fantastical flying contraption just ran out of coal
do you think steam just magically comes out of nowhere im so sick of these people who dont understand steampunk it makes me want to get into my submersible bathysphere and never reemerge
Steam. Is. Water. Coal. Makes. Smoke.
what is the coal doing to the water
ALTMakes sense to me
"i do not dream of labour" is one of the worst pseudo-marxist taglines that western leftists have co-opted because when you ask them what they do dream of, they say traveling, studying, and creating art. broski, who's flying the plane to take you to prague? who's the security at the library with the texts you're studying? who are the clerks in the museum showcasing your art? like bro, you do dream of labour. you just dream of someone else doing it so you don't have to! you merely want to outsource the labour and make it invisible.
WAS TALKING IN DMS WITH SOMEONE WHAT IS THAT EMOJI WHERE ARE IT'S EYES
People just say shit on my posts
One of the first victims of Epstein to speak out was a Latina transgender girl, Ava Cordero. She was sixteen when she was lured to Epstein’s apartment under the guise of helping her career in modeling. Ava Cordero was mocked, belittled, and denied by the media, her transness somehow overshadowing her status as a victim of assault. The media (Dareh Gregorian and Lucy Carne of the New York Post) specifically somehow spun it as Epstein being a victim of the case and treated her claims as an attempt to defame Epstein. Mind you, the journalists, Epstein’s lawyer (Gerald Lefcourt), and Epstein himself, were able to get away with this specifically because she was a transgender woman.
