This is a stupid question but I'm going to ask anyway thread

[Deoridhe]

Fiddlers Green

Here's a stupid question, how much right to whining does someone have for wrongs inflicted upon their ancestors?

See, in a lot of ways it's less whining about wrongs done to ancestors, and more recognizing that what happened in the past has material and devastating effects on the present.

The US has rarely, if ever, honored a treaty made with the native tribes. In some cases we ignored them, in others we perpetrated genocide so there was no one to hold the treaty with. If all historical US treaties with the tribes were held with the few who remain in them, the tribes would NOT be living on reservations eating government cheese.

A lot of the land given to them in treaty hold significant natural and mineral wealth. The US is still trying to claim that the valuable parts of the land covered in the treaties aren't actually and belong to the US.

That isn't getting into Sundown Towns, the fiscal and business losses of Asians when they were rounded up and put in internment camps, etc... There is solid evidence that lynchings were financially based and the men targeted were those who were rightfully earning money, so they were killed and their stuff was taken by the people who killed them, which left - again, white families profiting off of the murder of black men.

Think about how different it would be now if those business owners survived and passed their wealth to their children. Do you really think they'd be walled up in ghettos getting sub par education?

The past is no where near as past as we want to pretend. And I know this, because my going to school is directly relational to my grandfather owning a business. I can't separate his actions from my success. Why should we be able to separate past inequities from current difficulties?  

[Recursive Paradox]

I have a question. Is it possible to apply the reclamation process (I know that it actually isn't reclamation because the word is externally derived so maybe "claiming process"?) to an exonym as a member of a marginalized group?

Is it possible to do this if the majority of the group or even a heavy minority of the group doesn't find this acceptable? I ask because I'm running across difficult situations. Like a girl who may genuinely be Rroma (including participating in the culture) but uses the word g~ to describe herself (often in conjunction with Roma, spelled with only one R).

And then there's the attempts to adopt the n~ word by black folk, joking usage of the word trap to refer to myself in safe situations and a bunch of other cases.

I know that I'm very opposed to the word shemale being used for me, and I damn well don't give a s**t who thinks they've reclaimed the word for mtf trans folk. It isn't reclaimed for me. But just because my personal experiences yield a solid answer on this doesn't mean I can extend that to the experiences of other minorities. My privilege in many of those other areas makes it hard to actually know this stuff, so I ask for that reason.  

[TeaDidikai]

Deo> Thanks for phrasing my thoughts better than I.

Recursive Paradox

I have a question. Is it possible to apply the reclamation process (I know that it actually isn't reclamation because the word is externally derived so maybe "claiming process"?) to an exonym as a member of a marginalized group?

Is it possible to do this if the majority of the group or even a heavy minority of the group doesn't find this acceptable? I ask because I'm running across difficult situations. Like a girl who may genuinely be Rroma (including participating in the culture) but uses the word g~ to describe herself (often in conjunction with Roma, spelled with only one R).

And then there's the attempts to adopt the n~ word by black folk, joking usage of the word trap to refer to myself in safe situations and a bunch of other cases.

I know that I'm very opposed to the word shemale being used for me, and I damn well don't give a s**t who thinks they've reclaimed the word for mtf trans folk. It isn't reclaimed for me. But just because my personal experiences yield a solid answer on this doesn't mean I can extend that to the experiences of other minorities. My privilege in many of those other areas makes it hard to actually know this stuff, so I ask for that reason.

That's the trick isn't it? How can you reclaim something you never owned to begin with? And it is from that stand point I would go to the mat with anyone who wanted to argue the point with me.

One of the reasons I argue against it is because part of the process of fighting for self-determined identity is breaking the stereotypes, but humans engage in behavior (for a variety of reasons) that generate and perpetuate tropes to begin with. That connection needs to be broken so the individual is viewed not as a caricature, but as a person.

This is something that really messes with me personally. It likely always will. I'm a mystic. The stereotype of the G~ Witch is prevalent, and it irks me to no end.  

[Recursive Paradox]

TeaDidikai

Recursive Paradox

I have a question. Is it possible to apply the reclamation process (I know that it actually isn't reclamation because the word is externally derived so maybe "claiming process"?) to an exonym as a member of a marginalized group?

Is it possible to do this if the majority of the group or even a heavy minority of the group doesn't find this acceptable? I ask because I'm running across difficult situations. Like a girl who may genuinely be Rroma (including participating in the culture) but uses the word g~ to describe herself (often in conjunction with Roma, spelled with only one R).

And then there's the attempts to adopt the n~ word by black folk, joking usage of the word trap to refer to myself in safe situations and a bunch of other cases.

I know that I'm very opposed to the word shemale being used for me, and I damn well don't give a s**t who thinks they've reclaimed the word for mtf trans folk. It isn't reclaimed for me. But just because my personal experiences yield a solid answer on this doesn't mean I can extend that to the experiences of other minorities. My privilege in many of those other areas makes it hard to actually know this stuff, so I ask for that reason.

That's the trick isn't it? How can you reclaim something you never owned to begin with? And it is from that stand point I would go to the mat with anyone who wanted to argue the point with me.

So if you were faced with someone from within the Rroma community who was trying to use the exonym g~ to describe themselves in a claiming maneuver, you would contest that person's basis for doing so?

Quote:

One of the reasons I argue against it is because part of the process of fighting for self-determined identity is breaking the stereotypes, but humans engage in behavior (for a variety of reasons) that generate and perpetuate tropes to begin with. That connection needs to be broken so the individual is viewed not as a caricature, but as a person.

That makes sense to me. It's about how I feel regarding the pornographic, oversexualized caricature of the shemale being applied to me.

Quote:

This is something that really messes with me personally. It likely always will. I'm a mystic. The stereotype of the G~ Witch is prevalent, and it irks me to no end.

Next question. Can someone without the perspective of being a part of the community in question argue against the claiming of an exonym by a member of the community in question with any level of credibility?

Or does one's privilege make that impossible?  

[TeaDidikai]

Recursive Paradox

So if you were faced with someone from within the Rroma community who was trying to use the exonym g~ to describe themselves in a claiming maneuver, you would contest that person's basis for doing so?

Yep. And I'd pull out the positions of Rroma rights activists, as well as the psychological studies regarding how such terms actually make people feel (many folks who seek to reclaim still are stung by the negative associations) as well as the sociological justifications for self-determination as a nation. (And that would be a pain in the a**, because I don't know where a fraction of them are)

Most of the studies I am familiar with have been in relation to African Americans and the N~ word, but the principle is the same.

Quote:

Next question. Can someone without the perspective of being a part of the community in question argue against the claiming of an exonym by a member of the community in question with any level of credibility?

Or does one's privilege make that impossible?

Sound research is sound research no matter who is proffering it. That said, in closed cultures, it may seem like an intrusion. Intellectually honest individuals won't fault you for not being part of the culture- but you have to be respectful of their boundaries.  

[Alud Land Syne]

Is this a correct definition on a Psychic Vampire?

Quote:

A Psychic Vampire is a person, Who by reason of a condition of their spirit, needs to obtain vital energy from outside sources. They are unable to generate their own energy, and often times don't have the best capacity to store the energy they do have.

EDIT: ISSUE RESOLVED.  

[Fiddlers Green]

To clarify, I am not questioning the rights to have facts presented for what they are.
I am not encouraging active discrimination or willful ignorance.

I was asking about the twin situations of taking vengeance out of the descendants of those who wronged a ancestors of a group you identify with, and using the point of past transgression (against a group they identify with, regardless of their own ancestor's disposition) as grounds to not put forth effort on their own and blame their failure on others.

Deo, some of that, especially the treaties that are still being violated, are perfectly valid, that isn't whining, that is being actively victimized by an institution.

However, I cannot see how all persons of African ancestry living in the U.S. have a right to cry damages against all persons of European ancestry living in the U.S.
Taking to task all for the actions of some, even the majority, based only on race... tsk.
How is holding a person responsible based only on their race any less racist than denying a man a right to vote based on that same standard. The fact that there were plenty of White people who suffered under the tender attentions of members of their own race seems to get lost in this. This standard punishes the fellow victim for having the temerity to have ancestors from a different region. I may someday accept class based responsibility, as it resonates slightly with my idea about noblis oblige, but I will never accept group guilt based of race. It smells of racism to me.

If we are to apply racial guilt, how would you redress the genocide perpetrated by the tribes of Israel against those who lived in the land of Canaan? Would it justify more recent acts against them, if it did so in the name of justice for their ancestors acts? The past may not be far away but if we cleave tightly enough to it, I'm sure we can pass down chains of hatred and resentment so that we can keep the world bound in it until long after any victims of the original grievance are passed. My time in Kosovo taught me that. Here are people still slaughtering each other over a betrayal centuries old. Keeping the wounds fresh, so every new generation has a reason to carry it on.

People with specific grievances aught air them, and do something about them. They aught have a right to air them, and be protected when making their case heard. An ancestor who was wronged by an individual, a corporate identity (as abominable as they are), or institution aught have redress. Redress against the specific victimizers, not a group as arbitrary as race.

I have made this warning to several people before, and while I do not mean it to sound threatening here, I would like to share it. It is aimed at explaining some of the resentment people feel when being assaulted for the actions of other people's ancestors.
Hate me for the actions of another, and I shall give you reason to fear me for myself.  

[Molly Mollusca]

This might be a stupid question, because I don't know as much of the roman gods vs. the greek gods. I thought they might be different, but I'm not sure.

Is Jupiter a rapist like Zeus? ninja  

[TeaDidikai]

Alud Land Syne

Is this a correct definition on a Psychic Vampire?

Quote:

A Psychic Vampire is a person, Who by reason of a condition of their spirit, needs to obtain vital energy from outside sources. They are unable to generate their own energy, and often times don't have the best capacity to store the energy they do have.

EDIT: ISSUE RESOLVED.

I disagree with it as it stands. There are people who do it for personal power, not because of a condition, and they do not need to do it, they do it because they want to.

I also fundamentally disagree that psychic vampirism is anything resembling a condition.

It reads as a pretty lie people justify themselves by.

Hey Fiddler>> What do you think about people seeking reparations for their ancestors from the decedents of those who victimized said ancestors when it can be demonstrated that said descendants are benefiting from their ancestors actions?  

[Ashley the Bee]

I'm sort of curious about thoughtforms. Is it possible to create one that has an independent personality? Something like a companion, perhaps?

Perhaps that sounds crazy though ._.  

[CuAnnan]

TeaDidikai

I disagree with it as it stands. There are people who do it for personal power, not because of a condition, and they do not need to do it, they do it because they want to.

This has been the case in almost every self-proffessed psy vamp I've ever met (bar one).  

[Wrath of Ezekiel]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

Alud Land Syne

Why is the Christian God referred to YHVH? And where did it originate from? Is it his personal name?

Yay, stupid questions. DX

YHVH is the Tetragrammaton, or the Four Letters. It is God's personal name in the bible. It's an Anglicisation of the Hebrew letters yodh heh waw/vav heh, or יהוה (note this is written right to left as Hebrew is, so it reads heh waw/vav heh yodh here) and it's exact pronunciation is unknown. It originates in the Old Testament.

Wait, sorry if this is silly, but you write it down (since our alphabet is left to right) as YHVH, but you pronounce it (because Hebrew reads as right to left) as roughly "Hehwavaheh"? I've been pronouncing His name wrong all this time? gonk

Ashley the Bee

I'm sort of curious about thoughtforms. Is it possible to create one that has an independent personality? Something like a companion, perhaps?

Perhaps that sounds crazy though ._.

Possible. I have one that I was convinced for the short period of fluffyiness about six years ago (yes, I did have one >..>) was actually a god sent to make me powerful (and I had a Mr. Dark syndrome apparently as well now that I think about it). He's still around, though not as influential.

However, you'd have to put a lot of energy into it to make one in the first place. That one was years in the making.  

[Ashley the Bee]

True Colours of Destiny

Celeblin Galadeneryn

Alud Land Syne

Why is the Christian God referred to YHVH? And where did it originate from? Is it his personal name?

Yay, stupid questions. DX

YHVH is the Tetragrammaton, or the Four Letters. It is God's personal name in the bible. It's an Anglicisation of the Hebrew letters yodh heh waw/vav heh, or יהוה (note this is written right to left as Hebrew is, so it reads heh waw/vav heh yodh here) and it's exact pronunciation is unknown. It originates in the Old Testament.

Wait, sorry if this is silly, but you write it down (since our alphabet is left to right) as YHVH, but you pronounce it (because Hebrew reads as right to left) as roughly "Hehwavaheh"? I've been pronouncing His name wrong all this time? gonk

No, it's just the script goes right to left, so the name is still YHWH, it's just that if you look at the characters, they appear, in left to right order that one who reads English, for example, as HWHY (That is, י ה ו ה is actually HWHY, as you can see the matched characters, but since it should be read right to left, it's read as YHWH)

True Colours of Destiny

Ashley the Bee

I'm sort of curious about thoughtforms. Is it possible to create one that has an independent personality? Something like a companion, perhaps?

Perhaps that sounds crazy though ._.

Possible. I have one that I was convinced for the short period of fluffyiness about six years ago (yes, I did have one >..>) was actually a god sent to make me powerful (and I had a Mr. Dark syndrome apparently as well now that I think about it). He's still around, though not as influential.

However, you'd have to put a lot of energy into it to make one in the first place. That one was years in the making.

Okay okay. =) I suppose I'd like to leave the question out there still, especially if someone has any comment about actually going through with this, and if there are things I should read/consider.  

[Wrath of Ezekiel]

Ashley the Bee

True Colours of Destiny

Ashley the Bee

I'm sort of curious about thoughtforms. Is it possible to create one that has an independent personality? Something like a companion, perhaps?

Perhaps that sounds crazy though ._.

Possible. I have one that I was convinced for the short period of fluffyiness about six years ago (yes, I did have one >..>) was actually a god sent to make me powerful (and I had a Mr. Dark syndrome apparently as well now that I think about it). He's still around, though not as influential.

However, you'd have to put a lot of energy into it to make one in the first place. That one was years in the making.

Okay okay. =) I suppose I'd like to leave the question out there still, especially if someone has any comment about actually going through with this, and if there are things I should read/consider.

Yeah, I wasn't thorough enough was I? From all my readings into chaos magic, there's a rough hierarchy of though forms.

Sigils -> Servitors -> Egregores -> God forms

Sigils are meant to be symbols for one time usage. Can be a lot of energy, but you're not really creating anything, just maybe a strong wish, desire, or hope.

Servitors serve. They can have free will, but most are created to do one certain purpose and then poof. When I was first experimenting with this willingly, I completely forgot about putting the expiration in.

If enough energy and belief goes in, one can make an egregore. Almost completely free will and enough autonomy. If you wa,nted something as a personal companion, you'd need to dump enough energy to make it like this.

There was an article I read on this that said that because of all the belief of an independent, not divine entity rewarding children on December 25th, that Santa Claus himself could be a thought form that has "evolved" into an egregore.

God forms are thought forms created to be deities and are completely independent and free-willed. Someone in Discordia or Chaos Magic may work with fictional deities and these ones are born. Like Cthulu. xD  

[CilverCyanide]

Hmm.. Here's a good one that I'm sure everyone's come across a situation like this:
How do you approach telling someone that they're not Wiccan when they use the title to describe their belief system? Especially, if the conversation takes place offline where the security blanket of being able to hide yourself and think out your thoughts thoroughly is no longer there.
As a person who's in the know, do you just nod and let things slide or do you tactfully try to correct them? How about for those who are newbies to new age and occult jargon how would you tell them in a nonoffensive and easy to understand way?