Mugabe and the ‘white African’
Not only is the title problematic but it is absolutely ridiculous and so easy to critic because it’s full of shit and has an agenda.
I’m usually supportive of struggling and mistreated people and I don’t deny the story or the white farmer’s rights but this documentary is just a lame attempt to prove that white people do suffer too. I won’t even touch on the subject of the native Zimbabweans “black Africans” and how they are represented in this garbage: helpless and counting on the poor yet still brave white savior. I don’t even know why I watch it when it’s clearly not directed at me.
Lmfao the white people on here, cry me a river.
The film Mugabe and the White African puts a heroic gloss on the colonial attitudes that endure in independent Zimbabwe
Read this if you want to laugh.
Do you know the most stupid thing I came across while on my Tumblr break? Some “white African” wrote a post on WHITE AFROFUTURISM…as in he was trying to argue that there should be a future for white people in Africa. The fool who wrote that piece was all “imagine a white president of an African country”, “white minorities getting equal representation in the media”. I never wanted to slap someone so bad (but my hand is too soft so I’d use something like a laptop to slap the person).
Shit, imagine Africans been sidelined on our own ancestral land. Mschw, I’ll never stop pointing out the hypocrisy of the majority of these “white Africans” who want to act like they are oppressed. Cry me a fucking ocean.
Everyone knows that Mugabe is a horrible, wretched individual and I’ll always spite him for giving Mengistu Haliemariam shelter when he was supposed to address his war crimes against Eritrean and Ethiopian civilians, but this is an absolute crock of shit. Most African nations deal with intense soil erosion due to conflict and corporation buyouts that leave their countries struggling for food during and African leaders are supposed to cater to the children of coloizers when their own people’s needs aren’t be met?
White entitlement is something else.
“On August 14, 1791, a fearless Afrikan warrior queen named Cecille called together all the field slaves of the French sugar plantation island of Haiti (originally spelled ‘Ayiti ), to convene the launching of the most successful of all slave revolts…They performed the proper rituals in the ways of our ancestors, led by the vodun priest Boukman himself, forged the united front and agreed to commence hostilities in 8 days for what we must all celebrate and appreciate! The Haitian… ‘Ayitian…Revolution!…Long live the Ancestors of the Ayitian Revolution!”
Against the British Empire
afraid-to-run asked: can you please recommend good books to recommend to ignorant english folk about the british empire in all it’s disgusting glory?
Good question. I can speak from the South Asian experience of it; the Subcontinent - present day India, Pakistan, and to an extent Afghanistan. Before getting in the books I’d recommend, you should tell those who support British imperialism that life back then wasn’t as glorious as historians make it look like. With the basics:
- Indian economy was the second largest economy in the world until the British came. During British rule (1857 to 1947) Indian economy grew at zero percent. That India did not grow for 90 years (when Industrial revolution was rewarding Europe and the US) is a tragic outcome of colonial rule’s lack of interest and incompetence. Credit goes to laissez faire capitalism pursued by India after 1992 and American capital market’s confidence and investments in India for India’s emergence as the second fastest growing economy in the world today.
- The subcontinent suffered too many famines during the British rule mostly attributable to mismanagement by the Empire.
- The British Empire encouraged biased stratification in the subcontinental societies based on caste, color and creed. This continues to exist in modern day South Asia where social markers like these control the fates of many.
- Many pro-Empire theorists argue that the British built modern cities with modern conveniences but it should be noted that these were exclusive zones not intended for the “natives” to enjoy.
- There is another popular belief about British rule: ‘The British modernized Indian agriculture by building canals.’ But the actual record reveals a completely different story. “The roads and tanks and canals,” noted an observer in G. Thompson’s “India and the Colonies”, ”which Hindu or Mussulman (Muslim) governments constructed for the service of the nations and the good of the country have been suffered to fall into dilapidation; and now the want of the means of irrigation causes famines.” Montgomery Martin, in his standard work “The Indian Empire”, in 1858, noted that the old East India Company “omitted not only to initiate improvements, but even to keep in repair the old works upon which the revenue depended.” They screwed the natives over again.
- In the early 1800s imports of Indian cotton and silk goods faced duties of 70-80%. British imports faced duties of 2-4%! As a result, British imports of cotton manufactures into India increased by a factor of 50, and Indian exports dropped to one-fourth. A similiar trend was noted in silk goods, woollens, iron, pottery, glassware and paper. As a result, millions of ruined artisans and craftsmen, spinners, weavers, potters, smelters and smiths were rendered jobless and had to become landless agricultural workers. They screwed us over again.
- Reactionary borders.
- And many other reasons why you should logic-slap those who support Empire(s).
The books I would suggest are: M. M. Ahluwalia’s Freedom Struggle in India. Shah, Khambata’s The Wealth and Taxable Capacity of India. G. Emerson’s Voiceless India.Brooks Adams’s The Law of Civilization and Decline. J. R. Seeley’s, Expansion of England. H. H. Wilson, History of British India. D. H Buchanan’s Development of Capitalist Enterprise in India.
Slightly unrelated but you should Gender and Community Under British Colonialism: Emotion, Struggle and Politics in a Chinese Village by Siu Keung Cheung as well. Hope this helps.
‘PEOPLE OF AFRICA, STRANGLE THE COLONIZER!’
Iroquois warrior scalping a white prisoner.
Fuck does this ever piss me off.
There were very few instances of scalping before the Europeans arrived. But then Europeans offered a bounty for the scalps of men, women and children. Most of the victims of scalping were native people, at the hands of Europeans who made money from doing this.
The idea that indigenous peoples engaged in this practice in any widespread manner pre-Contact is propaganda. This picture should show a white man scalping a native woman and her children for profit.
What I mean when I say settler.
When I first encountered the term ‘settler’, I didn’t like it. I felt it was provocative, and I’d been hearing a lot about how we need to stop “creating divisions” by calling people white, or non-native, or Europeans or whatever.
But the truth is, no matter what terms you use, it is going to be provocative, because as an indigenous person, you don’t get to define anything.
That’s not your job.
You get to be defined.
Blood quantum. Ancestry. Looks. Community. Laws. Policy. Politics.
None of it for you, by you. It’s top down, hon, and we all know it.
When I write to reach a wider audience, I don’t use the term “white” first and foremost because invariably it allows settlers to complain that “white” is an inaccurate term. It allows them to once again, make everything about themselves. It allows them to convince themselves that when I don’t speak about the Irish or the German or the Polish or the Ukrainians or the Italians, that I am ignorant of the history of these ethnic groups in Canada and the US. That I shouldn’t talk, because my skin is pale and doesn’t that make me white? In short, it allows them to derail the conversation.
I agree it’s not particularly accurate, but I didn’t create this term. White people did. They are the ones who decides who gets to join that club. A club I get to be in as long as I don’t open my mouth too often.
But fine. I got sick of the fights over the term. “Settler” was a bit jarring at first, new, fresh…but I got it immediately.
To me, settler is synonymous with coloniser. It is not a historical term, it is also a contemporary one. Settlers, and their descendents, continue through socio-political means to colonise us. That process has never stopped, not once. Studying the law finally allowed me to verify that concretely, to be able to point to how similar today’s policies are to those of the past, how very little has actually changed.
Settlers are those who are descended from the original colonisers, but they are also the descendents of those who remained in Europe and benefited from colonisation.
The African slaves and their descendants who were forced here are not settlers.
And what of the non-Europeans? The Chinese who came and worked and died and were denied reunification with their families because of racist immigration policies…they settled here, are they settlers? “And what about the Irish”, you’ll be asked. The acid test. “They were oppressed at home and came as unwanted refugees!”
Ah, but were they used to settle our lands? Used to stake claims over our territories?
Not the Chinese. They were reviled and tolerated as a necessary evil. Denied the ability to expand their population for many years.
Ukrainians, Germans, Italians, Irish, Scottish…all hated by other Europeans at one time or another, but they became white here. Familiar. Less frightening than the “Orientals”. And they were absolutely used to stake territorial claims on behalf of the Empire. A job they did smashingly.
And later on, many nations are represented here. Newer immigrants…but not the architects of the colonial system. Should they understand that they are on native land, in great part unceded native land? Absolutely. But settler, for me, is about colonialism, and these people may benefit from it and they absolutely have a duty to understand it, but they are not responsible for it.
The space of a few generations is not the determining factor. These new people, these non-settler immigrants, still have an obligation to resist the ongoing colonialisation of our peoples. But the real power is not theirs. That power continues to belong to the settlers, and their descendents, because ultimately it is they who claim the benefit of our lands and who wield the political power which continues to guide that colonial process.
There is no escaping that. There is only a choice.
You’re either for colonisation…or you’re not.
You don’t get to be neutral, settlers.
Wow. Okay. This answers a question I’ve had since forever.
Hrm, I was going to make a point about how the Chinese were also used to create the tools and systems that enabled the settling, i.e., the railroads and such, and how we don’t have the power of the settler group, but we remain intimately linked to the processes of colonization, and we “get permission” from settlers to remain. But that also means Black folk would be part of this process, and these groups don’t have much power over the processes of settling.
Either way, even non-settlers don’t get to be neutral about colonialism. I don’t see many Asians getting all “but my ancestors didn’t do that” but I’ll wait for a couple of generations of light-skinned assimilators.
(I’m putting this down here for those who might not be aware of this, I’m not assuming you do not know this)
Chinese immigration to Canada began with the gold rush and wasn’t much controlled at the time because Dominion control was not a reality yet. British Colombia was pretty much running its own affairs. Many Chinese ended up owning large amounts of land in the Fraser valley after this. In this sense, I suppose that these first Chinese were settlers, though at that point they were not a deliberate choice made by Britain or colonial governments to advance settlement. I would not argue with indigenous peoples in British Colombia if they felt that those Chinese families also constitute ‘settlers’.
After that, however Chinese migrants were deliberately chosen to build infrastructure as “guest workers” and to provide support services, but the immigration policy was also deliberately designed to ensure the population would not increase anymore than strictly necessary. I think that makes a fundamental difference during the initial settlement process. It wasn’t precisely slave labour, but it was about as close as you can possibly get as they were paid less than any other worker. The Canadian state did not see these migrants as citizens, or as desired settlers, merely fleshy tools. Years of repressive policies and laws aimed specifically at Chinese living in Canada restricted Chinese populations in a way that can actually be analogous to the reserve system in some ways. The benefits that Chinese migrants may have received for being the ones to help build the infrastructure that cemented Canada’s colonial claim were unintentional, in direct contrast to the benefits reaped by settler families who were desired because they were European. Not to even delve into what Europe was getting up to in Asia and elsewhere that no doubt directly led to a lot of the migration that occurred.
Once immigration was opened up to ‘non-whites’, the foundation of the colonization process had already been firmly set. I absolutely agree that non-settler populations in Canada have an obligation to not attempt a neutral stance, whether they’ve been here for generations or arrived three days ago.
There was an excellent “open letter” put out recently to new Canadians by a new Canadian, talking about resisting the racist narrative of Canada in regards to indigenous peoples, and what responsibility new Canadians have to resist the ongoing colonisation here. Wish I could find it.
Ah, gotcha. Thanks. I don’t know much about this history, so it’s nice to get perspective.
man so I just got back from my grandparents’ place
(it was pretty awesome to just talk in mandarin for like three hours ‘cause I never do that)
my grandma made these pork chops that my brother likes, and she was packing up a couple for me to take home for him
and I was thinking about the whole ~*environmentalism*~ thing
because yes—of course we should conserve resources—of course it’s vital for us to be doing all we can to save our environment
but then I was thinking about how on all those DIY websites and on etsy and in like Real Simple and those other magazines, like—I’ve seen DIY patterns for how to make plastic bag holders and stuff, ‘cause apparently you can reuse plastic bags! what a novel idea!
and then I realized
if you’re white and you take your old t-shirts and make a plastic bag holder to hang in your kitchen, then omfg you’re so environmentally friendly how cool A+ 4u!!! u so hip & trendy omg I wish I could be like you!!!
but if you’re an 82-year-old chinese woman
who pulls a couple of scratched but clean styrofoam plates from the cabinet
and your 82-year-old chinese husband hands you a clean plastic grocery bag from your last shopping trip
and your 21-year-old chinese-american granddaughter slips the pork chops covered in those plates into the plastic bag and ties it off to take home
being cheap-ass asians.
no one’s gonna write up a piece for a magazine about how environmentally friendly you’re being.%www.tumblr.come’s gonna look at the meticulously washed containers (jars from condiments—plastic tubs that used to hold various other foods) and the drawers stuffed full of plastic bags and think, “damn these are some role models for small things you can do around the house to cut down on waste.”
no one’s gonna look at the dinner table and see plates piled high with chicken feet and pig ear and tripe and think, “wow look at that, no part of the animal goes to waste; what role models—if we’re gonna eat meat, we might as well make sure that animal is fully consumed instead of just eating choice cuts and throwing away the rest.”
no one’s gonna see the tiny garden of tomatoes in our backyard, the little apple trees and peach trees that once a year bear fruit that’s not that sweet ‘cause we don’t bother to hardcore garden—no one’s gonna look at that and think, “wow look at that, farming in your own backyard!”
they’re gonna see my aunt and uncle, who have trouble speaking english, who dress in old t-shirts and cheap patterned pants, who take care of the house while my parents are out, and they’re gonna think—
“wow look at these immigrants and their backwater ways”
you know what, we’ve been ~*environmentally friendly*~ our whole lives, and it’s only when we get more and more americanized that we start wasting more. my dad’s recently been developing this giant hard-on for costco, and costco is like—you buy ginormo quantities of everything, ‘cause it’s cheaper, only do you actually ever use that much?
we buy more and we go through electronics faster and all of that because that’s what america’s consumerism has taught us to do.
so you know what—while I may adhere to many principles that environmentally friendly people do (reduce, reuse, recycle, all that good stuff)—I will never identify as environmentalist.
it’s a very white movement. it also like—it gives off imperialist/colonialist vibes to me too, what with people going overseas to ~*preserve the environment*~ elsewhere.
and it’s like—dude if y’all white ppl didn’t have such a boner for environment-destroying industrialization, if y’all white ppl never set that as the standard for ~*progress*~
half these places
wouldn’t even be struggling with their environment in the first place.
and then white ppl are all like ~*oh we have to have renewable energy*~, oh what about biofuel!!
iirc indonesia’s been struggling with its forests and such because people decide to replace the forests with crops that they can grow for ~*environmentally friendly renewable fuel sources*~
“environmentalism” just so often feels like a way for white ppl with extra money to circlejerk themselves into feeling better about the destruction they’ve wreaked.
until you look at my family and see environmentalism instead of cheap-ass asianness
until you look at PoC who ride their bikes to work as environmentalism instead of ~*oh well it’s probably because they have to*~
until you stop being gross about being ~*environmentally friendly*~
I will not identify as environmentalist.
I’m going to attempt to reply without overshadowing anything you’ve said (because I found it 100% right on point esp. with what I’ve seen in the diy/crafts reuse movement); I want to share two photos, and maybe a small story.
[Images: two photos of a collection of shopping bags.]
This is my mom’s bag collection. She has more in my dad’s workroom and in her car. I used to be embarrassed by it when my friends came over, laughing about things like, “omg, your mom is such a bag lady ololo” and I’d just sort of awkwardly stand there… “yeah, sure she is! crazy bag lady, haha”
she’s never bought a plastic bag for any of the garbage cans in the house, nor for the recycling. Her crazy old lady bag collection is precisely for that- to be used later as garbage bags. Sometimes, if she has an exceptionally pretty bag, she’ll use it to hand a gift over to someone, instead of going to Hallmark and shelling over 5 bucks for a decorated paper bag.
My favorite thing is, the shifty looks I’ve gotten from friends and co-workers when I bring lunch in the same styrofoam container, in the same plastic CVS bag that I keep in my desk drawer, drinking tea/coffee from the same plastic cup, and eat with the same disposable utensils for weeks on end (sometimes, I use the same napkin for weeks). Oh, and when I talk about buying things using coupons? OH MAN, THE LOOKS I GET THEN. Hilarious.
I don’t get why all that stuff can’t be considered environmentally friendly either. It’s seen as cheap, or it’s seen as disgusting. In a roundabout way, here’s the story I wanted to tell- several years ago, when I was interviewing my mom about her time living in civil-war-infested Lebanon, she told me the most important thing I think I could have ever learned- “when you have nothing, you learn how to save everything”. You learn how to save oil from cooking and how to clean paper plates. On one hand, the above statement explains why my mom hoards all the free swag she can get (pens, toilet paper, toiletries, napkins, notepads, cups, tea bags, straws), and why she’s reluctant to throw things away. On the other hand, it also explains why she’s been accused of being cheap and tacky. I mean, how dare she reuse shit that you can just throw out, amiright?!?!
When you have nothing, you save everything.
When you have everything, you save nothing.
I grew up using old margarine containers as Tupperware for sending food home with people. No one called that environmentally friendly until white people started doing it too.
The thing that’s gotten me in the solar plexis; is ‘shopping bags’. Everyone these days wants their ‘cloth shopping bags’. Everyone’s so proud to bring their shopping bags to the grocery store. The grocery store will give you a little change back on your bill if you bring your own bags.
I have relatives who’d show up with those peppermint striped shopping bags; and see no point in repacking things in separate plastic bags. And I grew up hearing all this noise about ‘immigrants’ and ‘black people’ and even had those relatives not want me to shop with them, because ‘you’re young, no one needs to see you doing this’. As their way of protecting me from people talking.
From scarification to cloth sanitary napkins to herbal supplements and toothpaste to bags, to sewing your own clothes - NOTHING is ‘good’, until white people do it and focus it through themselves like an effing prism to ‘remove color’.
Dr. Frances Cress-Welsing, author of The Isis Papers: The Keys to the Color and founder of the Cress-Welsing Institute of Psychiatry and Social Research
OMG YOU GAIZ
Goldilocks and the Three Bears is a story of white appropriation.
Just think about it.
Like, she comes in and tries on everyone’s lifestyle, eats their food, takes over their space. When she gets scared off by them she leaves, but after she has had everything she wants.
"A colonized mind is capable of seeing ONLY the options laid out by the coloniser […] a colonised mind is trained to be held within the limits set by the coloniser […] solutions have to come from decolonized minds that can see beyond the confines established and enforced by the coloniser […] often colonised minds will side with the coloniser against decolonized thinking and action, that is what the colonized are trained to do, that is part of the colonisation process"
Debra White Plume dropping some truth bombs (via selchieproductions)
Much like the Sámedikkit.(via dolgematki)
The other day I was working at my coffeeshop and this white hippie woman comes in. She had two short braids and a number of necklaces adorning her neck and chest. She orders a double espresso over ice and as I take her money she says, “You are very beautiful.” I smile and thank her for the compliment but she wasn’t done. “Yeah,” she says, “You are so exotic looking. You have a very exotic beauty. Where are you from?”
It was like a record needle screeching to a halt. I blinked twice. How did this “compliment” start off so lovely and end so disastrously? I give her what she is asking for, if only to get rid of her, “My mother is from Colombia,” I say.
She replies, “Oh yeah. Your people are so magical. They really had it figured out. I went to South America to study with some shamans…”
At this point, it’s all I can do from throwing scalding hot coffee in her face and tell her to go fuck herself.
This is just one example of the objectification and commodification of PoC and non-Western cultures for the easy consumption of white folk. By labeling me “exotic” and calling my people “magical” she was otherizing me and my people. I’m a fucking first generation American, not some noble Native princess. In trying to give me a “compliment” she only succeeded in stripping me of my humanity and reduced me to a caricature. She completely erased all of my struggles, fears, triumphs, hopes and dreams and placed me in this tiny little box so that she could feel comfortable with my brownness. My otherness challenges her whiteness and so she erases my personhood to feel comfortable with me.
The reason for this is because being “exotic” means that you are not natural. My brown skin, full lips and wild hair are all aberrations from the norm. I am not white, so I must be from some mystical, far-flung land. I am not strange or unique. And most importantly, my brownness makes me an object to be consumed by my white counterparts.
And she did this to not only me but also to South America and all of its inhabitiants. Because, you know, we are all magical and different countries/nationalities don’t exist when you are magical!
And she can do this because she has the societal power of whiteness.
I am so tired of being a stranger in a land that, in all honesty, I have more of a right to than these white folk whose ancestors colonized mine. And the worst part is that if I called her out on her racist bullshit, she either would have started crying or get defensive or turn and call me racist! And that is one of the most egregious aspects of white supremacy today; if you call bullshit, the white folk deny that they are complicit in it, and they call you a racist for accusing them of racism! It’s so hard to engage with white folk on their racism because they have been taught to not see it. And so when it’s pointed out to them, all they can do is point it back at the victim. Its a fucking catch-22. You grind your teeth and bear it with silence or you call it out and get your experience erased.
Either way, headaches and heartaches will ensue.
I just read your blog post on this and left some comments…
What the fuck are the comments on this? Like… are they forreal?
Latin American indigenous groups join forces to fight dams
© BBC Brasil
When Brazilian indigenous leader Tashka Yawanawa saw the news on television that communities from Peru were campaigning to prevent the construction of dams close to their land, he had no doubt about how he could help.
He turned on his computer, and using Skype, he contacted indigenous movements involved in the protest to offer both his support and to publicise the cause in Brazil.
“Today, indigenous groups can no longer escape the white man’s technology,” says Mr Yawanawa.
“We have to update ourselves, and prepare to face this new world.”
He belongs to the Yawanawa people, who live in the Brazilian Amazon, an area where indigenous communities have also fought many battles against hydroelectric dams.
He leads an organisation that seeks to build links with similar movements in other Latin American countries so they can learn from each other’s campaigns.
His initiative reflects an unprecedented effort among the region’s indigenous groups, as they join forces to resist major projects which they see as damaging to their territories.
It is part of a growing conflict as governments, seeking what they say is badly needed economic growth, build roads and hydro-electric dams, and exploit natural resources such as oil, copper and gold.
At the same time, indigenous groups say they are fighting to ensure that their traditional way of life is preserved.
Skype is one tool they are using to co-ordinate campaigns, alongside more traditional tactics such as adopting a unified position in international organisations including the UN and the Organisation of American States (OAS).
“We are mapping all the achievements of our fellow indigenous peoples in the continent in order to use their experiences here in Brazil,” says Marcos Apurina from the Co-ordination of Indigenous Organisations of the Brazilian Amazon (Coiab).
“Our problems are almost identical to the native peoples of other countries.”
This approach has been led by large national indigenous organisations and regional movements such as the Co-ordination of Indigenous Organisations of the Amazon Basin (Coica).
Coica operates across national boundaries, helping groups in Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Guyana, French Guiana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela.
Coica’s work also involves organising meetings and workshops to help indigenous communities learn about international conventions, and also tips on lobbying and dealing with people in positions of power.
These gatherings allow indigenous leaders to discuss ways of putting pressure on governments to demarcate their territories.
They also discuss how international bodies can help guarantee indigenous rights or prevent major economic projects from having a detrimental impact.
“We are concerned about the new form of development known as the ‘green economy’. We understand this as an effort to exploit natural resources in indigenous territories,” says Rodrigo de la Cruz from Coica.
Several projects in the Brazil-Peru border region aim to expand the economic and transport integration between the two countries in the coming years.
The Inter-Oceanic Highway, connecting the north-west of Brazil to Peruvian ports on the Pacific coast, was inaugurated in 2011.
According to indigenous movements, this has brought several problems to the region, such as deforestation and illegal mining.
Jaime Corisepa, president of the Native Federation of Madre de Dios River and Tributaries (Fenamad), says that conditions may worsen if other projects go ahead.
One is the planned construction of six hydro-electric dams in Peru to supply the Brazilian market.
Protests forced the Peruvian government to suspend this project and to start a process of local consultation.
Using new technology and holding regional summits are ways to co-ordinate protests, but indigenous campaigners are also building on relationships that existed long before national boundaries and laws were established.
Marcela Vecchione, from the Pro-Indian Commission (CPI) in the Brazilian state of Acre, in Brazil, says that in many areas, indigenous communities are divided by artificial boundaries.
That is the case of the Manchineri people, divided by a border in 1904 when Brazil annexed the state of Acre.
“I often visit my family on the other side of the border. For me, travelling from Peru to Brazil means only crossing a river,” says Geraldo Manchineri.
But thanks to technology, communication across much longer distances has become easier.
Indigenous leaders hope to take advantage of this new way of co-ordinating and gather 1,200 people in Rio de Janeiro this June when world leaders will come together for the Rio+20 meeting.
question to white people: do you really think indigenous people and poc are being “mollycoddled”?
Do you really think we get free money and extra benefits and special rights?
Do you really think we get any breaks that you don’t?
Can you point to ANY instance of this preferential treatment taking place, with sources?
Can you also explain to me HOW and WHY was it preferential and unfair, taking into account all applicable historical and socioeconomical factors?
I’m really, truly, genuinely curious.
Reblogging for relevance.