...and it's already been pulled from archive.org. I'm guessing The House of Mouse's team of copyright lawyers sent a typically aggressive letter in response to the violation of their copyright.
ETA: May I say that I do not care for the new system of having the top two comments as the ones showing at the bottom of each article. I much preferred the previous style of having the most recent two comments showing up instead. If I had seen that the previous two commenters had already noted the show's disappearance from archive.org, I wouldn't have bothered making a third one.
Ta, Crip Dyke, but "this item is no longer available." I guess Disney wasn't very happy with Archive. As I always say, and shall continue saying until it's true everywhere, trans rights are human rights. Settle for nothing less.
This has always been so stupid to me. Even looking at it strictly from a profit/popularity standpoint, doesn’t it make more sense to have as wide an audience as possible and let those who don’t agree with the messages opt out on their own than to cater to a narrow minority just because they’re whining? Besides, you’d think they’d learn by now that there’s always going to be someone who wants more cuts, a more narrow minded focus no matter what they do; if those people aren’t going to be happy anyway, why bother trying to please them in the first place?
None of this came as a surprise to those of us who were enamoured of Disney's acclaimed 'The Owl House,' which got eviscerated and then cancelled because it had a Latina (gasp!) main character who develops a relationship with a female (gasp!) schoolmate. I figure that the fact that it involved a school for young magicians that didn't even reference Xtianity (ga... I'm running out of breath) as much as 'Harry Potter' does had a bit to do with it as well.
All of which is a long, long way of saying Disney does not have the courage of their convictions even when they are doing something REALLY GOOD.
This isn't a first for Disney. They cancelled most of the third and final season of The Owl House right about the time the main character (a girl) kissed the other main character (also a girl) on the lips. Holy Lesbianism! It's not like you didn't see it coming for most of the second season but Disney was "shocked and surprised" that girls might like girls.
I liked Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur when it was a comic. It didn't last long enough. Then I was excited to hear that the comic was being revived because of the animated series. But I just could not get into the animation because it's was too jarring.
At least the Loud House hasn't back away from it's lesbian lovers.It doesn't get played up too much but at least the show wasn't cancelled.
Trans issues likely had an outsized effect on the election. The Republicans certainly leaned into it. When the pundits tell Democrats to change their messaging, this is the underlying message, abandon the protection of minorities and join the tyranny of the majority.
I agree we need to change our messaging, but probably not in the same way as others mean it. Stop reacting to/engaging in the other side's messaging. Stop arguing over whether there are "only two genders" or "life starts at conception" and start talking about basic human rights and dignity.
I'm a hetero cis white male so I probably don't understand these things, but it seems to me it doesn't fucking MATTER how many genders there "really" are -- "freedom" means I can be who I want, and it doesn't have to fit anyone else's limited reality.
And what is so sacred about bathrooms? As long as someone isn't peeping in stalls or taking videos or hitting on people who don't want to be hit on, leave them the fuck alone.
I'll ask again, same as I did yesterday - if Democratic messaging is so "bad", why do Black women have almost no trouble consistently understanding it? There are two problems -- stupid White supremacists falling prey to propaganda as created by (also white supremacist) Russian oligarchs and propagated by Republicans ... and White Democrats' refusal to acknowledge their own white supremacy yearnings which conflict with both a moral duty and a strategic ability to defend commonsense policies.
There's really no "Democratic messaging" problem. People who WANT to understand understand just fine.
Okay, there is both truth to what you're saying and also something I disagree with.
If you're running an anti-bullying program and the victims get it but the bullies keep bullying, then the program isn't working. Yes, you can say that the bullies don't want to get the message, but since some anti-bullying programs work, it's reasonable to ask what else we can do.
I think the gap here is bridged by saying that current messaging obviously isn't bad (since so many people are getting it) while also saying there needs to be something more here. Or at least, we wonder if there's anything more that could be added here, since we don't have proof that "more" would result in a better outcome.
Even so, I'm not with the people who think we should focus on messaging. I think we should focus on doing the right damn things. Make a better world and eventually the fuckers will come around.
So the first thing I want to do is extract two of your sentences so we can look at them together
"Yes, you can say that the bullies don't want to get the message"
"we wonder if there's anything more that could be added here"
There is something more that needs to be added here, absolutely.
The problem is that White progressives / Democrats do not want to talk about it.
And as anyone with a passing knowledge of elementary psych can probably share, "You can't solve the problem if you don't face the problem."
The problem -- that almost no Democrat wants to address -- is that all the bullies (read: white supremacists) are NOT on the Republican side.
Krysten Cinema and Joe Manchin - who were not willing to suspend the 60-vote threshold to pass voting rights legislation after the John Lewis Voting Rights Act passed the House TWICE - are both white supremacists.
They're QUIET white supremacists. Like most of the complicit do-nothing white supremacists in the country who just think if they "hide their heads in the sand" or "look the other way" or espouse "Freeze Peach" when the Nazis are marching, nothing bad will happen to THEM.
So, again, yes - absolutely -- something needs to be done.
The other REALLY big problem in THIS country is that "we" may well have just blown our last chance to DO much of anything.
>> The problem is that White progressives / Democrats do not want to talk about it. <<
I mean, we talk about it here? Are you saying no one here is white? Progressive? A member of the Democratic Party?
Obviously the people who run campaigns and determine party policy aren't doing enough, and most non-political people don't want to talk about these things (but that's expected, since they're non-political people) but this statement strikes me as broader than it should be.
If we're going to bring it down to whether it's discussed in this space or not -- let's talk, then, about how some of us wanted to discuss John Roberts gutting the VRA in 2013 and how said gutting of preclearance provisions would bring about literally exactly the result we're looking at now, with the racist Electoral College still in place -- and I cannot count how many times I was shouted down right here on this very mommyblog.
Not sure I expected to see another one right on this mommyblog so soon
But what he's saying is basically gobbledygook, which is what happens when once-reputable pundits try to avoid saying the words "white" or "supremacy" or "supremacist" and so have to scramble their brains to try to think up some alternate theory that *sounds* plausible but neither addresses nor tends toward a solution to the problem
Just a few days ago when looking at the international problems we will have when avowed white supremacists take over the U.S. government someone offered some more insights (nothing to do with Bibi and his godson's post-genocide condo plans, even) about these right-wingers' possible alliances with the upper caste Hindus in Modi's government (which explains Usha Vance - she thought she could "do better" buying into the white supremacist caste here in the U.S. even if her husband took her to a campaign stop at a butcher shop) AND the right wingers' ties to Iran (since apparently they have a caste system there where, when they emigrate to the U.S., they are encouraged to check the "White" box when they fill out the census).
So the through-line is even deeper globally than just "We could've had universal healthcare in the United States immediately following the Civil War except that White people did not want Black people to have it".
Isabel Wilkerson - "Most Americans Don't Know the Country's Full Story"
I'm generally Cap on this one - "I can do this all day" (except today I can't; I have to scramble to another appt bc the gods have delighted in putting axes and flames to my schedule today)
The problem is that White progressives / Democrats IN POWER, WHO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE CHANGES, do not want to talk about it.
I should not only have been more specific -- and I didn't want to be all "I've been in years worth of those rooms when the subject was actively avoided", as meticulously documenting the examples of omission doesn't move us in any productive way toward a workable solution to the problem of the topic being ignored *when it comes to the requisite policies that would address it*, imo.
As is with so many things -- when Black women do better, EVERYONE does better, as a matter of policy stretching back ... pretty much to at least 1968, which was the first full year of American democracy and was also the first year that the D White House was won with a majority that was not White (and the majority that brings in a D POTUS has not been White since that election year).
But White folk who are also LGBTQ, managing a disability, hidden or otherwise, or who ID under another minority status that's not race-based historically tend, when pushed, to side with the White majority against protecting their own rights if it means Black people and other people of color will end up with less rights.
We literally just saw that in this election with White women who chose to side with protecting the white supremacist power (such as it will be in a country with a destroyed economy) for their sons and preferencing that ahead of protecting their rights to control their own bodies.
"this statement strikes me as broader than it should be."
So we can spend more time parsing -- even though I've amended the statement -- which also ends up being "time spent not admitting to the actual problem but talking around its periphery" ... or ...
Honestly, after November 5th, a "national divorce" looks like the only solution. Half the country hates the other half, and there's really no way around that.
Then we're back to the same, very real problem we've always had. Telling gay/minority/others 'support us now and we'll get to your issues in the near future', which in some ways makes us worse than repubs. We make some strides and we've done better in the past 20 years, but I get the burnout. I'm fully in support of equal rights for women/LGBTQ+/minorities and I'm sick to death of waiting. It doens't mean I would abandon the left because to go right or not vote is just putting us back decades over and over again. I hate the "we need to change our messaging" crowd. I guess I'm just feeling like the whole establishment (left/right/in-between) just sucks.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) accused the first transgender member of Congress of "physical assault" for using the bathroom corresponding to her gender.
After Rep.-elect Sarah McBride (D-DE) was elected, Greene appeared on Steve Bannon's War Room, where she misgendered the new member and made baseless claims of mental illness.
Greene said she attended a House Republican conference meeting and demanded Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) address the "war on women by mentally ill men pretending to be women."
"What are we going to do to keep him from coming in our bathrooms?" she said, misgendering McBride.
REPORTER: Is this effort in response to Congresswoman McBride coming to Congress?
NANCY MACE: Yes, and absolutely, and then some. Someone with a penis in the women's locker room -- that's not ok. I'm a victim of abuse myself. I'm a rape survivor.
Animation experts say that it's excellent. 100% positive critical reviews doesn't happen by accident. That said, it's written for a 6-12 yo audience, so your personal ability to connect/enjoy isn't guaranteed.
I realized many years ago that I found gender and sexuality issues confusing and scary. But I also realized that was a “me” problem, and I needed to work on myself, not bother people I didn’t even understand properly.
...and it's already been pulled from archive.org. I'm guessing The House of Mouse's team of copyright lawyers sent a typically aggressive letter in response to the violation of their copyright.
ETA: May I say that I do not care for the new system of having the top two comments as the ones showing at the bottom of each article. I much preferred the previous style of having the most recent two comments showing up instead. If I had seen that the previous two commenters had already noted the show's disappearance from archive.org, I wouldn't have bothered making a third one.
Ta, Crip Dyke, but "this item is no longer available." I guess Disney wasn't very happy with Archive. As I always say, and shall continue saying until it's true everywhere, trans rights are human rights. Settle for nothing less.
And it's gone. Anyone got a working link?
This has always been so stupid to me. Even looking at it strictly from a profit/popularity standpoint, doesn’t it make more sense to have as wide an audience as possible and let those who don’t agree with the messages opt out on their own than to cater to a narrow minority just because they’re whining? Besides, you’d think they’d learn by now that there’s always going to be someone who wants more cuts, a more narrow minded focus no matter what they do; if those people aren’t going to be happy anyway, why bother trying to please them in the first place?
None of this came as a surprise to those of us who were enamoured of Disney's acclaimed 'The Owl House,' which got eviscerated and then cancelled because it had a Latina (gasp!) main character who develops a relationship with a female (gasp!) schoolmate. I figure that the fact that it involved a school for young magicians that didn't even reference Xtianity (ga... I'm running out of breath) as much as 'Harry Potter' does had a bit to do with it as well.
All of which is a long, long way of saying Disney does not have the courage of their convictions even when they are doing something REALLY GOOD.
Why A Second DeathStar Won't Be That Bad -
McSweeney's
https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/heres-why-a-second-death-star-wont-be-that-bad
This isn't a first for Disney. They cancelled most of the third and final season of The Owl House right about the time the main character (a girl) kissed the other main character (also a girl) on the lips. Holy Lesbianism! It's not like you didn't see it coming for most of the second season but Disney was "shocked and surprised" that girls might like girls.
I liked Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur when it was a comic. It didn't last long enough. Then I was excited to hear that the comic was being revived because of the animated series. But I just could not get into the animation because it's was too jarring.
At least the Loud House hasn't back away from it's lesbian lovers.It doesn't get played up too much but at least the show wasn't cancelled.
>> I just could not get into the animation because it's was too jarring. <<
Yeah. For 8 year olds with zero attention span it might be fine, but it didn't work for me either.
Also, tyrannosaurs and abelisaurids do not actually look the same.
Is this content withheld everywhere or only in the United States?
Everywhere, but as mentioned it has leaked, so now you can go watch it at Archive.org.
no longer available
Incoming pro-rape administration stands up to rape victims.
Jen Rubin:
Talk about lame headlines.
https://bsky.app/profile/jenrubin.bsky.social/post/3lbcw74c5c22r
I couldn't figure out why he KEPT pushing sexual assaulters. I thought it was to minimize his own history.
He's being the same nauseating, petty b*stard he's always been. Now I get it
Can I go ahead and nominate Nancy Mace for the Legislative Shitmuffin of the Year 2024?
Nancy Mace is the Dolores Umbridge of Pierce Hawthornes.
Trans issues likely had an outsized effect on the election. The Republicans certainly leaned into it. When the pundits tell Democrats to change their messaging, this is the underlying message, abandon the protection of minorities and join the tyranny of the majority.
BUT MVP HARRIS SAID LITERALLY NOTHING ABOUT IT.
SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE POWER OF PROPAGANDA
I agree we need to change our messaging, but probably not in the same way as others mean it. Stop reacting to/engaging in the other side's messaging. Stop arguing over whether there are "only two genders" or "life starts at conception" and start talking about basic human rights and dignity.
I'm a hetero cis white male so I probably don't understand these things, but it seems to me it doesn't fucking MATTER how many genders there "really" are -- "freedom" means I can be who I want, and it doesn't have to fit anyone else's limited reality.
And what is so sacred about bathrooms? As long as someone isn't peeping in stalls or taking videos or hitting on people who don't want to be hit on, leave them the fuck alone.
I'll ask again, same as I did yesterday - if Democratic messaging is so "bad", why do Black women have almost no trouble consistently understanding it? There are two problems -- stupid White supremacists falling prey to propaganda as created by (also white supremacist) Russian oligarchs and propagated by Republicans ... and White Democrats' refusal to acknowledge their own white supremacy yearnings which conflict with both a moral duty and a strategic ability to defend commonsense policies.
There's really no "Democratic messaging" problem. People who WANT to understand understand just fine.
Okay, there is both truth to what you're saying and also something I disagree with.
If you're running an anti-bullying program and the victims get it but the bullies keep bullying, then the program isn't working. Yes, you can say that the bullies don't want to get the message, but since some anti-bullying programs work, it's reasonable to ask what else we can do.
I think the gap here is bridged by saying that current messaging obviously isn't bad (since so many people are getting it) while also saying there needs to be something more here. Or at least, we wonder if there's anything more that could be added here, since we don't have proof that "more" would result in a better outcome.
Even so, I'm not with the people who think we should focus on messaging. I think we should focus on doing the right damn things. Make a better world and eventually the fuckers will come around.
So the first thing I want to do is extract two of your sentences so we can look at them together
"Yes, you can say that the bullies don't want to get the message"
"we wonder if there's anything more that could be added here"
There is something more that needs to be added here, absolutely.
The problem is that White progressives / Democrats do not want to talk about it.
And as anyone with a passing knowledge of elementary psych can probably share, "You can't solve the problem if you don't face the problem."
The problem -- that almost no Democrat wants to address -- is that all the bullies (read: white supremacists) are NOT on the Republican side.
Krysten Cinema and Joe Manchin - who were not willing to suspend the 60-vote threshold to pass voting rights legislation after the John Lewis Voting Rights Act passed the House TWICE - are both white supremacists.
They're QUIET white supremacists. Like most of the complicit do-nothing white supremacists in the country who just think if they "hide their heads in the sand" or "look the other way" or espouse "Freeze Peach" when the Nazis are marching, nothing bad will happen to THEM.
So, again, yes - absolutely -- something needs to be done.
The other REALLY big problem in THIS country is that "we" may well have just blown our last chance to DO much of anything.
>> The problem is that White progressives / Democrats do not want to talk about it. <<
I mean, we talk about it here? Are you saying no one here is white? Progressive? A member of the Democratic Party?
Obviously the people who run campaigns and determine party policy aren't doing enough, and most non-political people don't want to talk about these things (but that's expected, since they're non-political people) but this statement strikes me as broader than it should be.
I fibbed. One more thing. The VOTER SUPPRESSION that brought us to this moment.
https://substack.com/@m123718294/note/c-77930603?utm_source=activity_item
If we're going to bring it down to whether it's discussed in this space or not -- let's talk, then, about how some of us wanted to discuss John Roberts gutting the VRA in 2013 and how said gutting of preclearance provisions would bring about literally exactly the result we're looking at now, with the racist Electoral College still in place -- and I cannot count how many times I was shouted down right here on this very mommyblog.
"Don't worry about it", they said
"We don't want to talk about it," they said
"YOU'RE OVERREACTING", they shouted
And yet - here we are
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/5fodXUTFJ64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXRpJmdlouY&t=605s
Another example of "let's dance around the real problem and call it something else"
https://www.wonkette.com/p/brendan-carr-named-king-of-making/comment/77942250
Not sure I expected to see another one right on this mommyblog so soon
But what he's saying is basically gobbledygook, which is what happens when once-reputable pundits try to avoid saying the words "white" or "supremacy" or "supremacist" and so have to scramble their brains to try to think up some alternate theory that *sounds* plausible but neither addresses nor tends toward a solution to the problem
Just a few days ago when looking at the international problems we will have when avowed white supremacists take over the U.S. government someone offered some more insights (nothing to do with Bibi and his godson's post-genocide condo plans, even) about these right-wingers' possible alliances with the upper caste Hindus in Modi's government (which explains Usha Vance - she thought she could "do better" buying into the white supremacist caste here in the U.S. even if her husband took her to a campaign stop at a butcher shop) AND the right wingers' ties to Iran (since apparently they have a caste system there where, when they emigrate to the U.S., they are encouraged to check the "White" box when they fill out the census).
So the through-line is even deeper globally than just "We could've had universal healthcare in the United States immediately following the Civil War except that White people did not want Black people to have it".
Isabel Wilkerson - "Most Americans Don't Know the Country's Full Story"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbUZf0tRJCc&t=3s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FR3rEp_KiC4&t=7s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn7D6Xf04g4&t=1269s
I'm generally Cap on this one - "I can do this all day" (except today I can't; I have to scramble to another appt bc the gods have delighted in putting axes and flames to my schedule today)
The problem is that White progressives / Democrats IN POWER, WHO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE CHANGES, do not want to talk about it.
I should not only have been more specific -- and I didn't want to be all "I've been in years worth of those rooms when the subject was actively avoided", as meticulously documenting the examples of omission doesn't move us in any productive way toward a workable solution to the problem of the topic being ignored *when it comes to the requisite policies that would address it*, imo.
As is with so many things -- when Black women do better, EVERYONE does better, as a matter of policy stretching back ... pretty much to at least 1968, which was the first full year of American democracy and was also the first year that the D White House was won with a majority that was not White (and the majority that brings in a D POTUS has not been White since that election year).
But White folk who are also LGBTQ, managing a disability, hidden or otherwise, or who ID under another minority status that's not race-based historically tend, when pushed, to side with the White majority against protecting their own rights if it means Black people and other people of color will end up with less rights.
We literally just saw that in this election with White women who chose to side with protecting the white supremacist power (such as it will be in a country with a destroyed economy) for their sons and preferencing that ahead of protecting their rights to control their own bodies.
"this statement strikes me as broader than it should be."
So we can spend more time parsing -- even though I've amended the statement -- which also ends up being "time spent not admitting to the actual problem but talking around its periphery" ... or ...
Honestly, after November 5th, a "national divorce" looks like the only solution. Half the country hates the other half, and there's really no way around that.
A US partition would make Indian partition look like a short lived dispute between neighbours over what colour to repaint their shared fence.
Even *if* this were feasible, we'd be looking at no less than four separate countries. There's no convenient North/South divide anymore.
But we live next door to one another.
We have to get along. (neighbors, workplace, schools, churches, etc.)
Red State / Blue State is a myth.
Performative outrage and faux victimhood were all Marge ever had. She's an OG TERD.
Then we're back to the same, very real problem we've always had. Telling gay/minority/others 'support us now and we'll get to your issues in the near future', which in some ways makes us worse than repubs. We make some strides and we've done better in the past 20 years, but I get the burnout. I'm fully in support of equal rights for women/LGBTQ+/minorities and I'm sick to death of waiting. It doens't mean I would abandon the left because to go right or not vote is just putting us back decades over and over again. I hate the "we need to change our messaging" crowd. I guess I'm just feeling like the whole establishment (left/right/in-between) just sucks.
yes. We need to change what we're doing. The messaging takes care of itself if you're doing the right thing.
> you can see the otherwise intact episode right now at Archive.org with all its pride flags
It's already gone. I'm pissed, I loved that show.
Fuck. I'm sorry. Well, I got to watch it and it was a good episode.
I'm sure it will be leaked again elsewhere.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) accused the first transgender member of Congress of "physical assault" for using the bathroom corresponding to her gender.
After Rep.-elect Sarah McBride (D-DE) was elected, Greene appeared on Steve Bannon's War Room, where she misgendered the new member and made baseless claims of mental illness.
Greene said she attended a House Republican conference meeting and demanded Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) address the "war on women by mentally ill men pretending to be women."
"What are we going to do to keep him from coming in our bathrooms?" she said, misgendering McBride.
https://www.rawstory.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-sarah-mcbride/
I was somehow in the middle of the same con-troversy, 30 years ago, except it wasn't in The House, it was in a cookie factory in Fort Wayne, Indiana.
REPORTER: Is this effort in response to Congresswoman McBride coming to Congress?
NANCY MACE: Yes, and absolutely, and then some. Someone with a penis in the women's locker room -- that's not ok. I'm a victim of abuse myself. I'm a rape survivor.
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lbcwn2uaik23
If Mace is worried about sexual assault she should call for President Elect Evil and Matty Likes Them Young to be arrested.
Ill have to watch this cartoon . Is it as good as the Smurfs? (Believe it or not the Smurfs had spectacular music)
Animation experts say that it's excellent. 100% positive critical reviews doesn't happen by accident. That said, it's written for a 6-12 yo audience, so your personal ability to connect/enjoy isn't guaranteed.
I get it.
I realized many years ago that I found gender and sexuality issues confusing and scary. But I also realized that was a “me” problem, and I needed to work on myself, not bother people I didn’t even understand properly.