Don't Forget It's Still Free Palestine, Congo, Sudan, Yemen, West Papua, Tigray, Haiti, Burma/Myanmar,

"We're collecting our kids in bags! In bags!" "We're finding body parts that we don't know who it belongs to"

A massacre after another, and the world is silent. This has to stop.

Go for it, fan of WOY.

Change.org

Sign the Petition

Encourage Disney to approve Wander Over Yonder Season 3

Your favourite creators are raising money for Palestine !!!

["Creators for Palestine is raising money for Palestine Children's Relief Fund, a registered 501 non-governmental organisation established in 1992. With the current state Gaza is in, we are looking to raise $1M to address humanitarian needs and immediate relief, including providing essential medical treatment/supplies, food, clean water and other necessities for families affected by the genocide. Please donate and share now!"]

Some notable figures: Hasanabi, Kurtis Connor, Eddy Burback, and many more!

You can donate here -> https://tiltify.com/@creators-for-palestine/creators-for-palestine

When they reach their $750K goal, there will be a livestream to get to $1mil! Don't miss it!

Thank you for supporting Palestine <3

🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸

If you don't have the capacity to process everything that is happening in Palestine, that's fine -- donate to one of the non-politically motivated charities that has boots on the ground there:

https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org

https://www.anera.org

https://www.mausa.org

If you can only send $5, that's still $5 more that they have to spend on aid. Everything helps, and money always talks.

Wonder over yonder art in 2021? Couldn’t be me

I’ve Been re-watching wonder over yonder and I simply had to draw him

ICJ has ruled that Israel’s settlement policy in the occupied Palestinian territories is in breach of international law.

The "transfer by Israel of settlers to the West Bank and Jerusalem as well as Israel's maintenance of their presence" is "contrary to article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention", a panel of 15 judges from around the world said.

The court said Israel must end the construction of settlements immediately - acts which render "Israel's presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful".

Israel's continued presence is "illegal" and should be ended as "rapidly as possible", the ICJ added.

“boi that was a big ass couch”

yeah, but you do mean 'loveless' like 'romanceless' right? Just cause you're not interested in a romantic partnership, and you're never attracted to anyone romantically, that doesn't mean you can't love your family and your friends. Am I understanding wrong? I feel like it's a widely accepted concept that 'love' isn't just romantic, it's about caring about someone, no matter if they're your family or platonic friend or your pet.

No, "loveless" means love-less. Another anon also asked me to explain as well so:

"Lovelessness" in the aro context comes from the essay I Am Not Voldemort by K.A Cook. The essay confronts normative ideas on love, its inherent positivity and what it means to not love. From the introduction, which brings up the question of non-romantic love:

This June, I saw an increasing number of positivity and support posts for the aromantic and a-spec communities discussing the amatonormativity of “everyone falls in love”. I agree: the idea that romantic love is something everyone experiences, and is therefore a marker of human worth, needs deconstruction. Unfortunately, a majority of these posts are replacing the shackles of amatonormativity with restrictive lines like “everyone loves, just not always romantically”, referencing the importance of loving friends, QPPs, family members and pets. Sometimes it moves away from people to encompass love for hobbies, experiences, occupations and ourselves. The what and how tends to vary from post to post, but the idea that we do and must love someone or something, and this love redeems us as human and renders us undeserving of hatred, is being pushed to the point where I don’t feel safe or welcome in my own aromantic community. Even in the posts meant to be challenging the more obvious amatonormativity, it is presumed that aros must, in some way, love. I’ve spent weeks watching my a-spec and aro communities throw neurodiverse and survivor aros under the bus in order to do what the aromantic community oft accuses alloromantic aces of doing: using their ability to love as a defence of their humanity. Because I love, they say, I also don’t deserve to be a target of hatred, aggression and abuse. But what if I don’t love? What if love itself has been the mechanism of the hatred and violence I have endured? Why am I, an aro, neurodiverse survivor of abuse and bullying, still acceptable collateral damage?

The author criticizes the idea of "true love" that is incapable of harm. Ze questions why we construct love in that way, and how it ignores and simplifies the experiences of victims of abuse ("It’s comforting to think that a love that wounds isn’t real love, but it denies the complexity of experience and feeling had by survivors. It denies the complexity of experience and feeling that makes it harder for us to identify abuse and escape its claws. It denies the validity of survivors who look at love and feel an honest doubt about its worth, as a word or a concept, in our own interactions and experiences.") Ze talks about being forced to say "I love you" to transphobic, abusive parents whose feelings of love was the justification for their abuse.

The core of what "loveless" as an concept is about is summed up in this quote:

There is no substantial difference between saying “I’m human because I fall in love”, “I’m human because I love my friends” and “I’m human because I love calligraphy”. All three statements make human worth contingent on certain behaviours, feelings and experiences. Expanding the definition of what kinds of love make us human does nothing but save some aros from abuse and antagonism … while telling survivor and neurodiverse aros, who are more likely to have complex relationships to love as a concept or are unable to perform it in ways recognised by others, that we’re still not worthy.

Lovelessness is against any kind of statement which quantifies humanity (and implicitly, human worth) in the ability to feel or act or experience certain things. Humans are human by virtue of being human, and nothing else. And, it is socially constructed! "Love" has no natural definition! Some people are not comfortable using "love" to describe positive feelings and relationships, and some people do not feel those positive feelings in general. And those people deserve the right to define their own experiences and their own relationship to the social construct of love.

In essence, lovelessness is both a personal as well as (in my opinion) a political identity, born from aro and mad experiences that challenges not just amatonormativity but all ideas that associate personhood and worth with the ability to feel certain things.

& as a note, there is also the term "lovequeer" which describes using the term "love" in ways which contradict mainstream understandings of what it means to love, and which kinds of love are considered worthwhile.

DESPITE IT ALL, WE HAVE EACH OTHER

no matter how much hopelessness they corner us into, they cannot stop us from taking care of each other.

somewhere to start today is by helping nada, who is less than 40% of the way towards her goal.

https://gofund.me/e06f31d3

please continue to share mutual aid, whether its in your own neighborhood or across the sea. please continue to find both what's urgent and what's beautiful in the world.

thank you always, take care.