It's almost all bad news all the time in the moment we're living in. I know I harp on this stuff a lot, but it's important to not accept fascism, corruption, and just plain idiocy as something that's a normal part of our lives.

The president is not a normal human being. Trevor Noah said a while back that he isn't a unique figure, as in there are other world leaders like him other places. But, that doesn't matter to me. We've gone so far backwards so quickly. I mean, I could fill pages about each issue going back to 2015 when he campaigned on “a ban on Muslims entering the country... Just until we know what's going on” to “Russia, are you listening” to... Look, one could fill books with this stuff and there is only so much time I can spend writing about it.

It's just remarkable, the hits have just kept coming. There are countless moments that could be pointed to that signaled the beginning of the end, and countless things that they've done since that are just terrifying, but I often think about these two. One of which occurred in the early days of his first campaign, and he still secured the nomination, and the second after he secured it, but still before the 2016 election. And tens of millions voted for him anyway. And don't get me started on what's happened since.

I think about these two often because millions of my fellow Americans disappointed me. And the ones who have regrets now? The excuses they make. “We did not know he would do this”, whatever the “this” is. Well, I'm here to say yes, you did. See those two links above. You're telling me you didn't know about that shit before the 2016 election?

And look, there's plenty of blame to go around for everybody, but I gotta blame the people who stepped into a booth and voted for him before I blame anyone else.

As they flood the zone with shit, I just think it's important to remember this stuff. It matters.

Also, look, sorry about the downer of a post, and I know you probably already know all this, but sometimes I gotta vent. Thank you for listening.

-Ira

SPEAKING OF THE APOCALYPSE

I know we are cool and these are different times, but if the world was ending, you'd show up, right?

we'd heat up some coffee make a plan to survive, build a zombie defense, map out the city together figure out how to stay alive

and if the world was announced to go dark, wouldn't you drop by real quick, bring some candles to fight the night?

Let's say WW III is declared, would you rush to get me a Vergissmeinnicht bouquet?

Would you ring my door just to steal a kiss outdo that V-J Day Times Square picture?

And if a meteor is on its way to collide, and we've got only six hours left, wouldn't you bring me that book you never returned and I never lent just in case we forget?

I know there's no reason to panic and everything is fine, but let's be honest, if the world was ending, you'd come over right?

/2026

Good day to the rising Sun. And the temperate afield. Places low and growing. For the thirsty water; And merciful cup. On days of June and Winter. Yours for your escape. To the plenary and winding. And the simple trust on water. These are our phones. And they are in trust with Man. And walls of plenty. The didache to its fold- When flowers combine- Justice gold. And courts shall be our land.

My Friday game of choice will be “The I-35 Rivalry.” The NBA Dallas Mavericks will travel down the I-35 highway to play my San Antonio Spurs. The game has a scheduled start time of 7:00 PM Central Time, which means that I'll be tuning the radio in my room to 1200 WOAI, radio home of the Spurs, by 6:00 PM to catch the full pregame coverage before the call of the game. Go Spurs Go!

And the adventure continues.

Hace dos años descubrí que estaba embarazada. Aunque no llegó como una sorpresa absoluta, de pronto me convertí -potencialmente- en dos. Los primeros latidos en el vientre me dividieron, convergían dos vidas en un mismo cuerpo. Yo misma fui prescindible e imprescindible a la vez y lo que para entonces había sido indiscutible para mi -el cuerpo, mi presencia, lo tangible- dejó de serlo.

Y en esta situación de confusión corporal, miedo (muchísimo miedo), amor (muchísimo amor) y alegría, estaban mis manos. Las manos me ayudarían a agarrarme a ese hilo que siempre me había conducido emocionalmente: el arte. Escribir, dibujar, construir algo o sostener un libro. Por otro lado estaban mis senos, irreconocibles, anunciando que dejarían de ser míos (¿lo fueron alguna vez? Nunca nos hemos llevado bien) una temporada.

En el absoluto y destructor cansancio y constantes náuseas, otra parte de mi me agarraba, me decía que esa criatura necesitará comprender muchas cosas a través de mí. Antes de quedarme embarazada, nunca me asustó eso: me encanta enseñar. He enseñado en clases a niñes, tanto en infantil y primaria como en secundaria. Me gusta acompañarles, meterme en su mundo para añadir más ideas y más preguntas (que no les faltan). Pero miraba mi vientre, cada vez más hinchado, y me entraron mil preguntas que yo no he sabido responderme a mi misma aún por mucho que he leído al respecto. ¿Cómo esquivar el ángel del hogar de Woolf, escribir, leer y protestar, a la vez que criar con amor y presencia? Mi “antenita” en las librerías y bibliotecas que siempre estaba apuntando a los feminismos, el género y la crítica institucional del arte ahora apuntaba hacia la crianza, les hijes y la educación.

Cuando di a luz, tras un parto de dos dolorosos días, de mí quedaban asustadizos escombros, senos doloridos y un amor que era tan grande que no cabía (literalmente sentía que no cabía) en mi pecho. Entre mis escombros encontré un hueco para leer, pero todo lo que leí me enterraba más en el papel de maternar que no encontraba adecuado. Entre tanto, mi bebé, mi hija, agarraba con toda su fuerza mi piel, pinzaba mis pezones y comía hasta hartarse.

Con toda esa emoción, toda esa fuerza, miedo y amor quería crear pero sólo me vi capaz de criar (que no es poco, tampoco). Dibujaba mucho, la dibujaba a ella. La dibujaba comiendo de mí, la dibujaba durmiendo, la dibujaba en brazos de su padre... pero sin salir de su fuerte gravedad, un magnetismo arrollador en la criatura más pequeña y vulnerable.

El día en que mi hija se lanzó de pronto, cogió una de mis ceras con sus manitas y la estampó en un papel, mi corazón dio un vuelco de emoción. Tengo ese papel pegado de la forma más rudimentaria en mi pared, no quería perder ni un segundo en tenerlo frente a mí. Me recuerda el mismo instante en el que la personita que más quiero descubrió que puede reflejar algo sobre un papel, para mi fue como sus primeras palabras en un nuevo idioma. Es uno de mis lenguajes favoritos. Me he obligado a mi misma a no empujarla.

He hecho materiales para que ella explore y descubra la experimentación artística como parte de un proyecto de mis estudios, pero usarlos o no y cuándo... eso es decisión suya. Mentiría si no digo que me llena de alegría verla elegir alguna de esas actividades, pero no quiero entrometerme en su exploración.

En cuanto mi hija con poco más de un año parece estar descubriendo su propia forma de expresión, aún agarrada metafórica y realmente a mi pierna, he descubierto que aún estaba ahí la creadora, y no solo la criadora. Podía expresarme y redescubrirme, con una crianza compartida y amable. Puedo -y quiero- acompañar a mi niña en su vida y experimentos vitales y a la vez volver a construir la mía, en una suerte de lazos que se anudan, se desenrollan, se revuelven en caminos opuestos y luego se entrelazan de nuevo más fuerte.

La afectividad de la crianza como la llama vital que enciende todas las emociones y conmueve.

I've come back to this a few times now with a lot of thoughts, but it's taken me a little while to slow down my anger enough to articulate them. I'm still struggling a bit, as you may notice.

Content Warning: Sexual Violence, Sexual Coercion, Child Sexual Assault, Rape Apologia, Pedophilia, (Epstein, Trump, Hakim Bay, generally horrible people) https://immerautonom.noblogs.org/the-elephant-in-the-room/

As the #Epstein class continues to be exposed, as we continue to be reminded of exactly how power works and what it does, it becomes even more critical to look at ourselves, those who have always vocally resisted this order, and make sure we are actually resisting it in reality not just in words.

Growing up, anarchism seemed to be a bit of a hodge-podge of loosely related things. Opposing the state, opposing capitalism, opposing racism, etc. I understood them to be connected via hierarchy, but I didn't understand the intersectionality of it all for a long time. Even today, I think the way that we talk about some of these types of exploitation and oppression can make it more opaque, rather than more clear, how all these forms of oppression are aligned.

The “anarcho-capitalists” and “anarcho-pedophiles” (the Venn diagram of which is essentially a circle), exploit this opacity to justify oppression in the name of liberation… and, by using the vague language of “freedom,” we let them.

Today we are experiencing a polycrisis, a Gordian knot of social disaster that is indecipherable to practically all ideologies. The failure of dominant ideologies to explain the interconnectedness of these phenomena leaves fertile ground for conspiracy theories (which, themselves, reinforce the crisis).

But we do have a single answer to a range of questions like “why are there so many billionaires and fascists pedophiles,” “why is all technology terrible now,” “why can't governments seem to stop climate change,” “why is fascism everywhere,” and, “why is there always a genocide going on?” etc etc

The negative answer is “hierarchy.” These are all structures of domination. But that is negative, it defines what we are against while only implying what we are for (and it doesn't even really define the enemy well). It (loosely) identifies the problem without identifying a solution.

The positive answer is “consent.”

Anarchists oppose the state because a state is a system within which, within a given geographical area (and perhaps more), it is impossible to withdraw consent. To withdraw consent is to violate the constraints of the system.

We oppose colonialism because it's the non-consensual imposition of a state on a group of people (and generally the imposition of a caste system that goes along with it).

We oppose vendor lock-in of hardware and software, closed platforms, so-called “walled gardens” because, again once, you can give consent going in, but the system is built to prevent you from withdrawing consent. Hardware holds you economically hostage, software holds your data hostage, social media platforms hold your social connections to friends and family hostage.

We oppose labor exploitation because we believe that all exchanges of value should be consensual. Exploitation is not possible with consent, that is its singular defining feature. Capitalism is simply the systematic extraction of value without consent. (Let's be honest here, we aren't opposing capitalism because of some complicated “labor theory of value” bullshit. We hate work because we don't like being forced to do some shit we don't want to do, and really hate seeing that work we don't want to do benefit someone we never wanted to help.)

We support reproductive rights because social reproduction must also be consensual. I feel as though this should go without saying or explanation, but here we are after all of these thousands of years still having this conversation.

We oppose rape because sex and intimacy should be consensual. This includes all forms of rape, including the inability to give consent.

We oppose motonormitivity because a society oriented around cars non-consensually enforces the use of cars (with the risk of death or impossibility of scale), and non-consensually destroys the habitat. We are never offered a choice to consent or not consent to microplastics in our oceans, heavy metals in our water, CO² in our air, and giant metal boxes flinging themselves at high speeds around our bodies.

We oppose neurotyplical supremacy because altering one's perception with drugs should always be consensual. (Which, by the way, works both ways. No one should be non-consensually denied mind-altering substances given their ability to consent to taking them in the first place.)

We oppose white supremacy and patriarchy because they non-consensually give members of one group power over members of another. We oppose hetro and cis normitivity because not everyone can or would want to consent to specific sexual orientations or gender roles.

And so on…

We, anarchists, want to build a society that is completely consensual. Since no system can constrain itself, we believe that all systems that do not allow people to leave, that are not consensual, must be destroyed. And we must do destroy them all, because non-consensual hierarchy is self-reinforcing.

Fascists are often pedophiles because fascists care about power and pedophilia is also about power. Tech monopolists are often fascists because they care about power, and technology is a way to build power and control people. The

Your boss scheduling meetings over your time with your kids or partner, Trump sexually assaulting women and children, the fucked up power dynamic when you discuss your compensation (perhaps even being daring enough to ask for a well justified raise), Facebook, mass shootings and other incel terrorism, unchecked climate change, billionaires using more CO² in a day than you use in a year, murdered and missing indigenous women, these may all seem independent and unrelated things until you see the conspicuous absence of consent tying each together, and so many more.

Epstein class of political operators and oligarchs cannot exist in a consentual world, so how could they possibly understand the concept of consent when it comes to children? For them, everyone is an object through which they express their power. Consent is a function of agency, and objects can't have agency. So they can't possibly comprehend the existence consent or understand how it works.

And this is where we return to the pseudo-anarchist. The pseudo-anarchist does not care about “consent.” The pseudo-anarchist cares about “freedom.” But this is not the anarchist “freedom” meaning “a world governed by consent.” No, this is a “freedom” rooted in monarchism. It is a “freedom” against consent. It is the freedom of the elite: freedom to deny others freedom from.

This “freedom” is the liberal freedom of capitalism, the freedom that Americans talk about (mostly as aspiration not experience). American freedom is to be hypothetically free from constraints, from responsibilities, from justice, from the need to acknowledge the agency of others, given a greater alignment with the dominant caste than the individual one is expressing control over.

The ultimate extent of this freedom is the monarchist freedom: freedom from the law itself. This is the freedom the Epstein class want. This is the freedom of the dictator, of the Russian Oligarch. One way they express this is by raping children, and, it seems, occasionally, murdering them.

As long as that specific concept of “freedom” exists, so do these monsters.

Non-consentual systems are interlocking and mutually reinforcing. The inability to escape one becomes leverage to force us into another. It is, of course, no coincidence that economically or socially marginalized people are almost always the victims. Women, children, trans, PoC, indigenous folks, each intersection applies pressure against another to maintain this order. Each system of oppression allows other systems of oppression to be exploited more.

But liberation is self-reinforcing too.

Anywhere we push against oppression, we undermine other systems that rest on it. The more room we make for ourselves, the more room we have to move against the system. The more people we liberate, the more people are pushing. Every front is important, and they can't protect all of them at the same time.

Anarchists are perhaps the only people with this single unifying critique of basically everything that's wrong. But I think we have thus far failed to really articulate it, because it's rooted in intersectional feminism and youth liberation.

If we (and by this “we” I mean the intersection of privilege usually designated by we, rather than the intersection of oppression who has been saying stuff like this for decades) want to actually dismantle this machine, like we claim we do, then why not start where (we hope) the empire is weakest: in our own heads and our own communities.

There were two swans today by the pond.

But never mind them

Today I stumbled upon a live version of the “I Died For You” song by “Iced Earth”, and it just blew my mind.

I was in my youth a big fan of Spawn, and this track details (in the lyrics) his tragic backstory: He sold his soul to meet again with his wife, but now she’d moved on and he’s a monster.

A lonesome freak.

A little bit on being careful what you wish for and the monkeys paw and all of this, but it strikes me as so powerful that his wife now is in love with his best friend and there he stands with his cape on the other side of the window, looking in.

He’d rather been dead

That’s a tragic fate I think.

That’s very cruel fate

Mathura Vrindavan Tour Packages – Best Way to Plan a Peaceful Trip

Mathura aur Vrindavan… ye sirf travel destinations nahi hain. Ye ek spiritual experience hai jo aapko andar se calm karta hai. Yahan aap sirf ghoomne nahi aate, balki ek connection feel karte ho — Krishna ji ke saath, aur khud ke saath bhi. Isi wajah se har saal hazaron log yahan aate hain, lekin ek problem sabke saath common hoti hai — planning. Aur isi problem ka simple solution hai Mathura Vrindavan Tour Packages, jisse aap apni trip ko easy aur tension-free bana sakte ho.

Why Choose Mathura Vrindavan Tour Packages

Agar aap khud se trip plan karne ki koshish karte ho, to aapko bahut si cheeze manage karni padti hain. Temple timing samajhna, bheed ko handle karna, sahi route choose karna — ye sab thoda confusing ho jata hai, especially agar aap first time visit kar rahe ho. Isi liye aaj kal log Mathura Vrindavan Tour Packages choose karte hain jahan sab kuch already planned hota hai. Isse aapka time bhi save hota hai aur aapka experience bhi smooth rehta hai.

Mathura – Starting Point of Your Spiritual Journey

Mathura ko Krishna ji ki janmabhoomi mana jata hai aur yahan ka environment ekdum peaceful hota hai. Subah ka time darshan ke liye best hota hai jab bheed kam hoti hai aur aap easily mandir visit kar sakte ho. Yahan Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi, Dwarkadhish Temple aur Vishram Ghat jaise places aapko ek real spiritual feel dete hain. Agar aap proper planning ke saath jaate ho, to aap har jagah ka experience ache se le paate ho.

Vrindavan – The Heart of Devotion

Vrindavan me aapko Krishna ji ki leela ka real feel milta hai. Yahan Banke Bihari Temple, ISKCON Temple aur Prem Mandir jaise famous temples hain jahan har din hazaron log darshan ke liye aate hain. Shaam ki aarti aur Prem Mandir ki lighting ek aisa experience deti hai jo aap bhool nahi paoge. Isi liye Vrindavan trip ko properly plan karna zaroori hota hai, aur yahan Mathura Vrindavan Tour Packages aapki help karte hain.

What You Get in Mathura Vrindavan Tour Packages

Agar aap Mathura Vrindavan Tour ke through package book karte ho, to aapko sab kuch ready milta hai. Travel arrangement, hotel booking, temple darshan planning aur local guidance — sab ek proper system ke saath milta hai. Aapko alag se kuch manage karne ki zarurat nahi hoti. Simple language me, ye ek hassle-free trip hoti hai jahan aapka focus sirf experience par hota hai.

Best Time to Visit Mathura Vrindavan

Mathura Vrindavan trip ke liye October se March best time mana jata hai kyuki weather comfortable hota hai. Festival time jaise Janmashtami aur Holi me yahan ka mahaul alag hi hota hai, lekin bheed bhi zyada hoti hai. Agar aap peaceful darshan chahte ho, to normal days me visit karna better hota hai.

Simple Itinerary for Mathura Vrindavan Trip

Agar aap short trip plan kar rahe ho, to ek basic itinerary follow kar sakte ho. Day 1 me Mathura cover karo jahan aap Krishna Janmabhoomi aur Vishram Ghat visit kar sakte ho. Day 2 me Vrindavan jao aur Banke Bihari Temple, ISKCON Temple aur Prem Mandir cover karo. Ye simple plan aapko bina stress ke main places cover karne me help karta hai.

Why Choose Mathura Vrindavan Tour

Aaj ke time me bahut saare options available hain, lekin ek trusted platform choose karna important hota hai. Mathura Vrindavan Tour aapko local experience, proper planning aur budget-friendly packages provide karta hai. Aap apni need ke according customized packages bhi choose kar sakte ho, jisse aapki trip aur comfortable ho jati hai.

Final Thoughts

Mathura aur Vrindavan ka trip ek aisa experience hai jo aapko andar se change kar deta hai. Yahan aapko peace milti hai, ek alag energy feel hoti hai aur aap thoda light feel karte ho. Agar aap chahte ho ki aapka trip smooth ho aur bina kisi tension ke complete ho, to Mathura Vrindavan Tour Packages best option hai. Aur agar aap ek reliable platform dhundh rahe ho, to Mathura Vrindavan Tour aapke liye perfect choice hai. Here are some amazing packages explore now !! Here Mathura Vrindavan Tour Packages are some amazing packages explore now !!

I’m still waiting for my first winner of the flast season so I’m hoping one of these below can oblige today …

Three selections from up at Thirsk.

3.53 Thirsk I’m taking a chance on TRAVIS in this one. Looking at the shape of the race I think the Geoff Harker trained 5yo could well go forward from his wide draw and get a very easy early lead. He’s not just a pace angle though and ticks many boxes, too; ground conditions ideal, on a workable mark, 223 at the trip and has won at the track.

TRAVIS // 0.5pt E/W 7/1 4 places (Coral) BOG

---

5.35 Thirsk Not the greatest of races so I’m taking a swing at an outsider. MISS WILLOWS makes her seasonal reapperance today and has gone really well on her return in the past. As her Spotlight in the RP points out, she’s never won from a mark this high but this might just be the time to catch her, especially as she’s another front runner without many like minded rivals to take her on.

MISS WILLOWS // 0.25pt E/W @ 28/1 5 places (Bet365) BOG

---

6.10 Thirsk Yorkshire Glory is looking for his 7th win on the bounce here, but back on turf I’m swerving him. I backed Juan Les Pins on his seasonal reappearance at Donny 2 weeks ago and he ran really well for second that day and gets another 3lbs off via an apprentice today. However, despite him being the most likliest winner for me, at 4/1 he looks mighty short and can’t back him at that price. At double those odds, I’m going to take a chance with LORD ABAMA whose all 3 turf wins have come over C&D, the last two of which were off the same or lower marks. Drying ground will only help and has won off a similar break before.

LORD ABAMA // 0.5pt E/W @ 8/1 5 places (Bet365) BOG

Las que vemos brotar no son las mismas hojas que cayeron ayer. Tampoco el cielo: las nubes que se deshacen. Aunque mi vista se apaga, mi corazón, con ellos: brillan los ojos de los pajarillos que vienen a nosotros en primavera. Incluso el agua del arroyo baja festiva. No sé cómo expresarlo. ¿Decir que canta sería exagerar?

There’s been a couple of things that she’s done that have given me the ick. I think the major things have been the general vibe that she is not necessarily that secure with herself, and it comes out in massive text, different well documented patterns of moving too fast, and most importantly these weird games that she plays. She added me explicitly onto another Instagram account and then onto her story there, and then while we were texting she posted something on her story speaking in Spanish pretty fast which I think she did not expect me to understand or be able to translate. But she talked about how it is for her to flirt and how she wants to be able to flirt without any of the things that come with that. And when I mentioned that I was able to understand what she said and wanted her to be aware of that, she weirdly backpedaled and said it wasn’t really like that and I kind of misunderstood it, and she actually wasn’t wanting to flirt even though it very much just seemed like she kept changing her story and just panicked at getting caught. She also sent me a journal excerpt that was written in the tone of speaking towards someone, and it talked about how she was afraid of me thinking she was boring and how she needs to love herself and nothing wrong with that, but it’s just such a weird thing to vaguely send a journal entry instead of voicing that directly. It kind of just feels like she isn’t comfortable enough to communicate clearly and does the thing that I used to do in high school which was vaguely post about everything because then you have the defense of saying oops that was a mistake ha ha I didn’t mean to speak up if it ever feels moderately scary. She also has trauma dumped a decent amount about her childhood and it’s often in a way where it feels like she NEEDS for me to listen and I don’t have a way out, and she holds resentment with that and doesn’t recognize how that isn’t necessarily normal or healthy for knowing someone a week. It feels like there’s a lot of things that she hasn’t yet resolved and they end up leaving their marks on our conversations. I feel like the more I’ve gotten to know her there’s nothing wrong with her, but she just isn’t necessarily what I’m looking for and I’m kind of thinking about how to gently reject someone or get them to be less interested without ideally for making it awkward in a group setting because I might see her again.

I think I have learned that I very much do want a partner with emotional depth, because that’s a very significant part of my life. I feel like if a partner doesn’t have that I can’t help but to feel like there’s a gap in maturity, and I very much want my future partner to be someone who I can see fully as an equal and not have to convince myself of that. I almost see it like the same way I see some of my friends, where they are wonderful people and I really enjoy spending time with them and they match me in certain facets of life but there are also absolutely the places where we are different and there’s nothing wrong with that. But I also do think that I would want to have a partner where I feel like there’s a lot more overlap on those things that are really important to me and things that I would not want to worry about losing out on in the future. And I think the part that we match a lot in is the sexual part of things from the way we’ve talked. And that’s not necessarily something that I want in a friend, because I think that’s a recipe for just tension and frustration eventually. I also think that given our communication issues or incompatibilities it seems like, I’m not too sure that even though on paper we seem very compatible, our sex life may not be as good as an optimistic view could be. And so I think I’m very grateful for getting this opportunity to interact with this person because I both did not commit too heavily, but I also was able to understand that this person on paper matched almost everything that I was looking for in that sense, but that was not nearly enough and I think that’s a signal to me that it’s not necessarily the biggest priority that I should be worried about. It almost feels like the ghost of Christmas past coming to show me the errors in my ways. I do often feel like there is some sort of divine intervention that affects me, because there have been so many experiences that have been incredibly valuable and almost necessary for me that end up occurring at the perfect time and often in a way that feels like I could not think of a way to make it less intrusive to my well-being. And I don’t necessarily label myself as someone who is a believer in the divine or religious, but I am very grateful regardless for the fact that I have these opportunities at what feels like the right time when I need them. And I think this is also a point where I should step back for a second and be very grateful for how I’m able to step away from someone that I was interested in for what I think our valid reasons. And just because someone was giving me love and attention, I did not fall for that. And I also feel secure enough and happy enough of my life that I’m not afraid or terrified about going back to being single potentially indefinitely. I’m very grateful to myself for going through the effort of building up that life that I’m so happy with. I really love you dude. Keep it up, what you’re doing is working.

On nous a appris, très tôt, à croire qu’aimer était une force en soi, une force presque pure, capable de traverser les failles et de réparer les brisures. Comme si, en aimant assez, en aimant mieux, en aimant plus longtemps, quelque chose finissait par se remettre en ordre. Alors nous avons porté cette idée avec sérieux, avec ferveur parfois, en silence souvent. Nous avons regardé nos élans comme des preuves, nos efforts comme des réponses, nos renoncements comme des gestes nécessaires. Et dans ce mouvement, une question revenait, discrète mais persistante : est-ce que cela vient de moi, ou est-ce que cela vient d’elle ? Qui aime le plus, qui aime le mieux, qui aime assez ?

Cette question divise ce qui ne peut pas l’être. Elle isole l’amour comme une propriété, comme un attribut individuel que l’on pourrait mesurer, comparer, ajuster. Elle installe une logique là où il n’y a qu’un espace vivant. Car aimer, dans sa réalité, ne tient pas dans une personne. Cela ne se loge pas dans un seul cœur, ni dans une seule volonté. L’amour n’est pas une chose que l’on possède, c’est une chose qui circule ou qui ne circule pas. Et lorsqu’il ne circule pas, il ne disparaît pas. Il se transforme, il se condense, il devient attente, il devient tension, il devient parfois une forme de fatigue qui n’ose pas dire son nom.

Aimer seul est une expérience profonde. Elle peut donner l’impression d’une vérité rare, d’une fidélité à ce qui est juste en soi. Elle peut produire une forme de beauté, celle de rester debout quand l’autre vacille, celle de tenir un fil quand il semble se rompre. Mais cette beauté a un coût. Car ce qui n’est pas reçu ne peut pas se transformer. Ce qui n’est pas reconnu ne peut pas s’inscrire. Et ce qui n’est pas partagé ne devient pas un lieu, mais un effort.

Alors, peu à peu, l’amour cesse d’être un mouvement et devient une direction. Il ne va plus et ne revient plus. Il part, il s’étire, il s’épuise parfois. Et celui qui aime seul finit par se demander si aimer signifie porter, expliquer, attendre, réparer. Il finit par confondre la constance avec la justesse, la patience avec la nécessité, la profondeur avec l’endurance. Pourtant, quelque chose en lui sait. Quelque chose qui ne parle pas fort, mais qui persiste.

Car l’amour, lorsqu’il est vivant, ne crée pas un déséquilibre durable. Il ne demande pas à l’un de se plier pendant que l’autre se protège. Il ne construit pas une relation où l’un donne un sens pendant que l’autre le laisse en suspens. L’amour vivant appelle une réponse, non pas une réponse parfaite, non pas une réponse immédiate, mais une réponse réelle. Une présence qui se tourne, qui regarde, qui tente, même maladroitement.

Il y a, dans la rencontre de deux êtres, un lieu qui n’appartient à aucun des deux. Un espace qui n’existe que si chacun accepte d’y entrer sans y déposer toute son histoire comme une exigence. Cet espace demande une chose simple et difficile à la fois : que l’autre existe réellement. Pas comme une projection, pas comme une solution, pas comme une continuité de soi, mais comme une altérité irréductible.

Lorsque cela se produit, l’amour change de nature. Il ne devient pas plus grand, il devient plus juste. Il cesse d’être une tentative et devient une circulation. Les gestes ne sont plus faits pour compenser, mais pour rencontrer. Les mots ne sont plus utilisés pour convaincre, mais pour révéler. Les silences ne sont plus des retraits, mais des respirations communes.

Et c’est dans cet espace uniquement, que quelque chose guérit, non pas parce que l’amour est magique, mais parce qu’il est partagé tout simplement. Ce qui était figé peut se remettre en mouvement. Ce qui était confus peut se clarifier. Ce qui était porté seul peut être déposé, regardé, traversé à deux. La guérison ne vient pas d’un effort plus intense, elle vient d’une présence réciproque.

Mais lorsque cet espace n’existe pas, lorsque l’un reste à la porte ou ne peut pas y entrer, alors il faut voir ce qui est là. Non pas avec dureté, mais avec lucidité. Car continuer à croire que l’amour seul suffit revient à demander à une seule voix de créer un dialogue. Cela revient à attendre d’un mouvement unilatéral qu’il devienne un échange. Et cela, avec le temps, use plus profondément que l’absence elle-même.

Il y a une forme de paix qui apparaît lorsque cette évidence est acceptée. Une paix qui ne nie pas ce qui a été donné, qui ne renie pas la sincérité de ce qui a été vécu, mais qui reconnaît ses limites. Aimer n’est pas toujours suffisant pour construire. Et reconnaître cela n’enlève rien à la valeur de l’amour, cela le replace dans sa réalité.

Alors la question change. Elle ne demande plus qui a aimé le plus. Elle ne cherche plus à équilibrer une balance invisible. Elle devient plus simple, presque nue : est-ce que cela circule ? Est-ce que cela vit entre nous, ou est-ce que cela repose sur moi ? ou toi ?

Et dans cette simplicité, l’amour ne cherche plus à prouver, ni à sauver, ni à tenir seul. Un amour qui accepte de n’exister que là où il peut être partagé. Un amour qui ne guérit pas tout, mais qui, lorsqu’il est réciproque, rend la transformation possible.

Il existe, au cœur de toute organisation humaine, une asymétrie première que l’on contourne souvent, non pas en la dépassant, mais en la recouvrant. Elle demeure, active, rarement regardée pour ce qu’elle est. Non abolie, mais déplacée. Cette asymétrie tient à un fait simple, mais rarement formulé dans toute sa portée. Lorsqu’une femme porte une fille, elle porte déjà en elle, aussi, les cellules germinales qui deviendront, potentiellement, les enfants de cette fille. Une continuité physique traverse ainsi les générations, inscrite dans le vivant lui-même. De mère en fille, et de fille en mère, la chaîne ne se raconte pas, elle se prolonge. Elle ne peut pas être mise en doute. Elle relie sans interruption, et confère à la fonction maternelle une force relationnelle particulière, une forme de gravité autour de laquelle les liens s’organisent.

Mais cette continuité ne résume pas tout. Elle crée aussi une tension. Car là où la filiation maternelle est certaine, la filiation paternelle a historiquement porté une part d’incertitude, même infime. Et c’est précisément dans cette différence que l’on peut lire l’émergence de certaines formes sociales. Le patriarcat, dans une lecture fonctionnelle, peut être compris comme une tentative de compenser juridiquement et symboliquement cette incertitude. Une manière de sécuriser la transmission, de fixer la lignée, de contenir une inquiétude plus ancienne. Celle de ne pas maîtriser totalement la continuité biologique.

Dans les premiers temps de la vie, cette asymétrie devient expérience. La mère est le premier monde. Elle contient, elle régule, elle répond. Le corps de l’enfant apprend à exister à travers elle. Ce lien initial imprime une tonalité affective profonde, une manière de tolérer l’absence, la frustration, l’inconnu. Les travaux de John Bowlby et de Donald Winnicott ont montré que cette base conditionne largement la capacité à se différencier sans se désorganiser.

Mais cette fonction ne s’arrête pas au portage. Elle se prolonge dans un geste simple en apparence, mais central dans ses effets. Nourrir.

Il existe une continuité très précise entre le sein et la main. Ce n’est pas une rupture, mais une transformation du même lien. Le sein ne nourrit pas seulement le corps. Il relie tension et apaisement, besoin et réponse. Lorsque la main prend le relais, elle prolonge cette fonction sous une autre forme.

Ce qui est donné à manger dépasse largement la question du goût, de la qualité culinaire ou des compétences de la mère. L’empreinte ne se situe pas là. Elle s’inscrit dans la répétition du geste, dans la présence, dans la manière d’être donné. L’enfant n’intègre pas seulement des aliments. Il intègre une expérience. Une manière d’être nourri, donc une manière d’être avec le réconfort que la nourriture apporte.

Et c’est précisément à partir de là qu’une responsabilité particulière apparait. Parce que la mère est la source du lien primaire, elle devient, de fait, la porteuse principale de la tonalité affective du foyer. Non pas au sens d’un pouvoir arbitraire, mais au sens d’une empreinte initiale. Ce qui se joue en elle, dans sa manière d’être, de répondre, de contenir ou non, va imprégner durablement l’environnement émotionnel dans lequel l’enfant se construit.

Elle est, dans ce sens, gardienne de cette empreinte. Non parce qu’elle le décide, mais parce que la structure du lien la place à cet endroit. Les enfants ne passent pas d’abord par le père pour organiser leur sécurité affective. Ils passent par elle. Et cette empreinte première devient une référence interne.

Dans cet espace, le père intervient autrement. Il introduit une altérité que la continuité maternelle ne peut pas produire seule. Il permet que le lien ne reste pas fermé. Il ouvre un dehors. Sa place n’est pas donnée par la biologie de la même manière. Elle repose sur sa capacité à tenir, à rester présent, à s’inscrire sans être porté par la même évidence initiale.

La position du père s’inscrit avec une part d’incertitude, même infime. Et c’est précisément cette incertitude qui engage une forme d’amour qui ne se repose pas sur la certitude biologique, mais sur un choix renouvelé de présence. À l’inverse, du côté maternel, l’inscription biologique apporte souvent une certitude immédiate, celle que l’enfant vient d’elle, et cette évidence peut, parfois, conditionner le lien de manière subtile. Là où l’une repose sur une origine assurée, l’autre se construit dans un engagement qui, faute de garantie, tend vers une forme d’inconditionnalité.

Penser qu’il existe un centre unique, autour duquel tout tournerait, et que ce centre serait la mère serait une erreur capitale qui, au final, finira par porter atteinte à ces mêmes enfants que l’on était justement supposé protéger. Cette lecture est séduisante parce qu’elle prolonge l’évidence du lien primaire. Mais elle devient réductrice, et parfois délétère. Le système familial ne tient pas sur un centre unique. Il tient sur une dynamique à deux pôles. Deux fonctions distinctes, non interchangeables, qui ne s’absorbent pas l’une l’autre. Surtout, qui n’ont pas peur l’une de l’autre.

Ce n’est pas un centre avec des satellites. C’est une tension entre deux points qui se répondent. Une continuité qui ancre, et une altérité qui ouvre. Lorsque l’un des deux est absorbé ou disqualifié, le mouvement se fige. Ce qui devait être une circulation devient une fixation. Plus j’avance dans la vie, plus je reviens à ce principe taoïste du yin et du yang. La dualité traverse le monde entier. Elle n’oppose pas, elle articule. Elle ne sépare pas, elle met en tension ce qui doit rester vivant. C’est cette tension qui permet le mouvement, l’ajustement, la transformation. Lorsqu’on cherche à la réduire à un seul pôle, on ne simplifie pas le réel, on l’appauvrit.

Mais il faut revenir aux rôles et à leurs responsabilités respectives. L’enfant ne rencontre pas le père directement au départ. Il le rencontre à travers la mère. À travers la manière dont elle le regarde, dont elle le nomme, dont elle l’autorise ou non à exister dans le lien.

Lorsque, dès le début, la mère introduit un doute sur la fiabilité du père, le marquage devient profond. Il ne passe pas par une réflexion. Il s’inscrit dans la base même de la sécurité. L’enfant, pour préserver le lien dont il dépend, s’aligne. Il intègre cette méfiance comme une donnée première.

Chez un garçon, cela prend une forme particulière. Il ne cherche pas seulement un lien avec le père. Il y cherche aussi un appui pour se définir. Si cette figure est fragilisée, disqualifiée ou rendue instable dès l’origine, il ne perd pas uniquement une relation. Il perd un axe de structuration. Il se construit alors dans une tension. Rester fidèle au lien primaire, tout en manquant d’un point d’appui pour se différencier.

Les efforts du père pour corriger cela comptent, mais ils arrivent après. Ils viennent de l’extérieur du noyau initial. Et, dans le développement précoce, ce qui est inscrit en premier organise durablement la perception de ce qui suit. Surtout quand ce n’est jamais nommé.

Lorsque cette dynamique toxique s’installe, le dommage le plus profond n’est pas toujours visible immédiatement. Il se situe dans ce qui n’a pas pu avoir lieu. Dans les années qui auraient pu être vécues autrement. Dans la relation qui aurait pu se construire dans un climat plus serein.

Et souvent, ce qui est en jeu ne naît pas uniquement dans le présent. La peur que la mère projette sur le père peut elle-même venir de son propre conditionnement, de sa propre histoire, de la manière dont elle a appris à percevoir la figure masculine.

Au fond, l’équilibre repose sur une articulation fragile. Une mère qui contient sans enfermer. Un père qui ouvre sans s’effacer. Et une reconnaissance mutuelle suffisante pour que l’enfant n’ait pas à choisir entre l’un des deux appuis.

La chaîne maternelle donne la continuité. La fonction paternelle empêche qu’elle se referme. Et l’enfant, entre les deux, trouve la possibilité de devenir autre que ce dont il est issu, sans jamais cesser d’y appartenir.

Whatever souls are made of; we two are the same.

GLOW. Burn. Be his daylight and his moon. Be the gravity in the lives you touch.

You are not small. You are not a label. You are made of stardust. You are ancient. You are today. You are tomorrow.

You are INFINITE.

And I—

I will orbit you. I will see you, even in the quiet places.

I will ache to be held in your gravity, to fall into your well and never climb out.

And I will dream that one day—

I will.

Until then, feel me in the traces I leave on your heart—

as I carry you in mine.

You, infinite—

and I, reaching.

Let us light a galaxy, a universe—

together.

---

#poetry #wyst

今日は乗車率が高すぎて、人が一度クッションみたいに押しつぶされてから、また弾き返されていた。 人間のクッション性は本当にすごい。どんどん入っていく。 人は猫みたいに液体性を持っている事が視覚的に分かる。

自分もそんな満員電車の中にいながら俯瞰して見ていると、目的の駅までのあいだ、思考が勝手に走り出す。

雑談しようとして、自分から会話を振るときのことを考える。 全国民が分かる話。話題天気とか、コンビニの新作のお菓子とか。 そういう話をすれば、相手も同じトーンで、同じ返事を確実に返してくる。 コンピューターに hello, world を打つのと同じだ。

でも、毎日変なことを考えているんだから、それを言えばいいのに、と思う。 でもまず頭に浮かぶのは、それを言った瞬間の、相手の想定外の顔だ。 インプットしながら、ほぼ同時にアウトプットしようとしているときの、あの一瞬の表情。 あれを見るのが苦手だ。 なぜ苦手なのかは、正直分からない。

逆に、自分はどうだろう。 体調にもよるけれど、相手が変なことを言ってくるのは、多分望んでいる。 だって、それくらいでしか脳の新しい部分が刺激されないから。 だから「自分がされて嫌なことは相手にしない」という理由で避けているわけではない。 そこが不思議だ。

つまり、自分は、泥臭い変な会話をする人間である事を相手に認識されるのが、多分ダサいと思っているんだろう。 普通の会話だけで、何かがふんわり変わることを望んでいるんだと思う。 そしてそれは、かなり自分らしい。

でも、もし自分が変なことを言ったら、相手には何と言ってほしいだろう。 以前は、話した内容に対してまっすぐ返せよ、みたいなことを言語化した気がするけれど、今はなんでもいいのかもしれない。 「なんでそんなこと考えてんだよ」でもいいし、「今日の服どこで買ったの」でもいい。 きっと、自分が言ったことを相手に解決してほしいわけじゃない。 一回言えば、それで満足する気がするし。

とにかく、自分が言える範囲の、精一杯の違和感を含んだ、いつも通りの会話を、これからも続けていくんだと思うが、そう思っただけで、これを解決しようとは思わないのが、現状維持を望んでいる証拠だと思う。

A quick Google Internet search (feel free to replace our mental default of 'Google' to your search engine of choice in that sentence!) of the phrase 'de-Googling' will show a wide range of articles, Reddit posts, and personalised journeys of people going through the process of surgically removing themselves from the Google ecosystem.

We all got ourselves stuck in the quicksand of the Google suite of products because of the original convenience benefits of linked services working together in fairly smart ways. I remember the enjoyment of seeing location metadata embedded into my photos so that I could see a cool 'journey' of my holidays as I trekked between cities. Being able to set reminders & tasks based on specific sentences in my Gmail emails seemed sensible enough. But over time we've all felt the creep factor increase more and more. With the huge amount of information captured from mobile phones over the last decade or so, the data collection ecosystem has gone into overdrive.

For many people I know, the penny drop moment often came from the serving of ads that went a bit too far. It was usually about seeing ads on a laptop or desktop, after discussing it earlier that day while their mobile phone was in earshot. That lightbulb moment people often get is the realisation that Google (and other big tech companies) are always listening. It was the initial reason behind why I wanted to de-Google my life – I wanted to simultaneously stop being treated as a consumer (which is how Google makes their money off me) and I wanted more control over my digital identity more generally.

My goals have shifted over time as well; I'm now keen to break away from all of the (mostly US-based) large commercial technology companies, as companies such as Meta, X, Spotify, Microsoft, Amazon & others seem to act in the same way as Google.

My current de-Googling status

I've been slowly de-Googling my life for two and a half years now, starting with the migration of my personal email account in late 2023. I would recommend it as the best place to start, since a lot of accounts tend to stem from your email address and I think migrating your email address is a gradual change; it isn't something you can finish in an afternoon.

Before getting into what I've done so far, I'll mention that it's always surprising to see the range of products you need to adopt if you want to break away from Google. Google ties in a huge number of services to one single account and the convenience & simplicity of an all-in-one service is really tough to overcome.

But if you're reading this, you're already intrigued by the idea of not letting the Big G have a monopoly over your digital identity and you're tempted by the ability to take action.

With that all said, here are the list of actions I've taken to remove myself from Google's ecosystem to date:

• migrated emails from Gmail to Proton Mail (here's my personal Proton referral link if you're interested)
• shifted from Google Search to DuckDuckGo on my phone and PC
• removed all location tracking from my phone and Google Maps (try this)
• started using Proton Drive for documents & spreadsheets instead of Google Drive
• moved away from Google Tasks and started using Todoist (this had the added benefit of getting a synced task list with my wife for shopping and other tasks)
• reduced my usage of Spotify and cancelling my paid plan, in favour of my self-hosted Plex server with my own media collection
• switched from Google Authenticator to Authy
• deleted my Reddit account (I thought I did this years ago, until I got a 'someone is trying to reset your password' email a few weeks ago!)
• deleted my Twitter account
• deleted my Instagram account (technically it was my dog's account but it was tied to my email)
• progressively deleted a bunch of information & connections on Facebook, including mass unfriending of old acquaintances and unliking pages

It's been a good, satisfying journey so far, and I don't think my day-to-day digital life has become more complicated – with the exception of not using the “Login via Google” button for some accounts. I've tried not to burn myself out by changing too many things at once, and mainly I've been spending an hour here & there whenever I have the motivation.

The biggest shift was changing email providers, which triggered migrating a huge range of miscellaneous accounts from my old Gmail to my current Proton Mail address. That in itself triggered a lot of questions of “why do I still have this account” which allowed me to delete anything that hadn't been used in years. It was a great way to clean up my digital footprint.

Current de-Googling goals

I've got a few immediate goals that I want to get through during 2026 – let's see how I go with these:

1. Migrate old Google Photos to Synology Photos – I've been starting with migrating old photos around 2010-12 to my NAS, and deleting them from Google Photos accordingly. I don't know if I'm ready to stop using Google Photos completely, as there are a bunch of shared albums with friends that are useful. I'm also open to shifting away from Synology Photos and using another photo management tool, but just getting the data away from Google is the first step.
2. Clean up my Google Contacts list, and find a replacement to store & back up my contacts – I haven't seen a good replacement yet but I'm sure there are a few options out there.
3. Continue to migrate documents out of Google Drive. With Proton Drive adding a spreadsheet tool this is now possible (most of my GDrive usage is spreadsheets). I also have a folder full of Google Docs files with Recipes that is shared with some friends that I don't know how I'll migrate. Might just have to leave an old version there and maintain a live version in Proton Drive.
4. Keep reducing my Facebook usage, eventually being in a position to delete my Facebook account entirely – I don't know if I can do that when some features are useful & important to me. The main ones are Marketplace for buying/selling second hand items, and connecting with local community groups. It's also a good way to hear about good local events that I wouldn't hear about otherwise.
5. Use Freetube on my personal desktop, to replace Youtube – this has been good, but it's not a full solution since there's no mobile equivalent that I've found. On the other hand, using Freetube only on desktop might reduce my tendency to spend time watching videos in general which is always a good thing!

Future steps to take & problems to be solved

For some things, the convenience & usefulness of some Google apps is too much to overcome, at least for now. These are the products I think I'll stick with for the foreseeable future:

• I have a shared Google Calendar with my wife and I don't think I can break away from it. Can I maintain a shared calendar with her if I move to Proton Calendar and she wants to stick with Google? Doesn't seem to be possible.
• Google Maps is too convenient for navigation and the live traffic information is pretty crucial. I'd like to switch to OSM Maps but will take me some time to get used to.
• My phone OS is still Android and therefore has some background data being sent to Google. I should consider changing the OS on my phone to get rid of that
• think about shifting my home PC from Windows to Linux? Maybe I can have a dual-boot approach initially which will make transitioning easier. With the upcoming arrival of Windows 11, it feels like now is the time. Game compatability might be the only major concern.

The barrier to entry

It's easy for me to write out a list of alternate services and recommend “just do this” but in reality de-Googling requires a lot of work, both initially & ongoing. These services are designed to be difficult to break away from, so prepare to be frustrated at the inability for some things to be migrated. For some, the feeling of starting fresh might be a good thing but if you've personalised and curated your personal information or preferences in a certain way, losing that isn't acceptable.

I also recognise that some of the above steps can be cost-prohibitive. Notably, the cost of buying & configuring a NAS to manage a media library isn't achievable for most people, especially when you consider the cost of buying terabytes of physical storage – all to save paying for a few monthly subscriptions. Financially, the maths doesn't work out or has a really long time to pay off – let alone the time you'll spend maintaining your own hardware & software. If you're only looking at the financial outcome, you'll never justify it. I also don't think it's economically or environmentally viable for every household to have their own NAS either. To that point, all I can recommend is to look at pooling resources together with friends or family so that you have a shared media library, as you still get the benefit of not being tied to the tech giants.

Some other good reads about de-Googling

https://brunty.me/post/de-googling-my-email-contacts-calendar/

https://tuta.com/blog/degoogle-list

#deGoogle #technology #SelfHosting