Tootfinder

The implications are interesting enough when we apply this to systems like capitalism or national governments, but there are other very interesting implications when applied to systems like race or gender.
Like, as a cis man the only way I can be free to express and explore my own masculinity is if the masculinity I participate in is one which allows anyone the freedom to leave. Then I have an obligation to recognize the validity of nom-masculine trans identity as a necessary component of my own. If I fail to do this, then I trap myself in masculinity and allow the system to control me rather than me to be a free participant in the system.
But if it's OK to escape but not enter, that's it's own restriction that constrains the freedom to leave. It creates a barrier that keeps people in by the fear that they cannot return. So in order for me to be free in my cis masculine identity, I must accept non-masculine trans identities as they are and accept detransitioning as also valid.
But I also need to accept trans-masc identities because restricting entry to my masculinity means non-consensually constraining other identities. If every group imposes an exclusion against others coming in, that, by default, makes it impossible to leave every other group. This is just a description of how national borders work to trap people within systems, even if a nation itself allows people to "freely" leave.
So then, a free masculinity is one which recognizes all configurations of trans identities as valid and welcomes, if not celebrates, people who transition as affirmations of the freedom of their own identity (even for those who never feel a reason to exercise that same freedom).
The most irritating type of white person may look at this and say, "oh, so then why can't I be <not white>?" Except that the critique of transratial identities has never been "that's not allowed" and has always been "this person didn't do the work." If that person did the work, they would understand that the question doesn't make sense based on how race is constructed. That person might understand that race, especially whiteness, is more fluid than they at first understood. They might realize that whiteness is often chosen at the exclusion of other racialized identities. They would, perhaps, realize that to actually align with any racialized identity, they would first have to understand the boot of whiteness on their neck, have to recognize the need to destroy this oppressive identity for their own future liberation. The best, perhaps only, way to do this would be to use the privilege afforded by that identity to destroy it, and in doing so would either destroy their own privilege or destroy the system of privilege. The must either become themselves completely ratialized or destroy the system of race itself such being "transracial" wouldn't really make sense anymore.
But that most annoying of white person would, of course, not do any such work. Nevertheless, one hopes that they may recognize the paradox that they are trapped by their white identity, forced forever by it to do the work of maintaining it. And such is true for all privileged identities, where privilege is only maintained through restrictions where these restrictions ultimately become walls that imprison both the privileged and the marginalized in a mutually reinforcing hell that can only be escaped by destroying the system of privilege itself.

Markenrechte aufgegeben? X nimmt Kampf um „Twitter“ und „Tweet“ an
Ein Start-up hat das US-Patentamt aufgefordert, X die Markenrechte an „Twitter“ und „Tweet“ zu nehmen. Das will der Kurznachrichtendienst verhindern und klagt.

If anybody knows how to convince city leaders and police chiefs that they •can• enforce traffic laws against ICE, or convince ICE officers that they will be prosecuted for their actions, or convince everyone that ICE officers who do not provide proof of identity can legally be treated as unknown assailants and kidnappers, or convince judges that Minneapolis / St. Paul is not “the border,” or…or…or…undo any of these nonsense beliefs, please do that! But it’s the •convincing•, not the being correct, that matters there.

Ted Sarandos says that Netflix will maintain 45-day theater windows for movies after its acquisition of WBD closes, adding that he wants to "win" the box office (Nicole Sperling/New York Times)
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/16/business/media/ted-sarand…

Ted Sarandos Says Critics Just Misunderstand Netflix
The company’s co-chief executive sat down for an extensive interview for the first time since announcing plans to buy Warner Bros. Discovery’s film and TV business.

Vice unearths 3 Fiercely Underrated Early 80s Era #PunkRock LPs And One Late 70s Forgotten Aussies Act That All That Deserve Digital Era Reissues
https://www.vice.com/en/articl…

4 Forgotten Punk Albums That Deserve a Reissue, and Some That Already Have
With so many hardcore punk albums in existence, a lot of them have been forgotten to time; here are four that deserve a comeback.

Q&A with Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos about the WBD bid, Trump's involvement in the deal, maintaining a 45-day theatrical window for WBD releases, and more (Nicole Sperling/New York Times)
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/16/business/media/ted-sarandos-netfl…

Ted Sarandos Says Critics Just Misunderstand Netflix
The company’s co-chief executive sat down for an extensive interview for the first time since announcing plans to buy Warner Bros. Discovery’s film and TV business.

Ice skater and setting sun on Bde Maka Ska the other day #Minneapolis #Minnesota

And you don't need to accept the trap of authoritarian masculinity on logic alone, the proof is right there in male influencers like Andrew Tate and their followers. These dipshits get so obsessed with gatekeeping they don't realize that the gates they're tending keep them in, that the more walls they put up to protect their privilege, the smaller their identity can be. They huddle in tiny pens, terrified of crossing imaginary bounds that they imposed *on themselves.*
They have built their own torture chambers and locked themselves inside, and for what? They turn themselves into dragons, hoarding what they see as valuable while repressing every emotion including joy. And if they let themselves experience joy, they would, perhaps, realize that all these privileges are inconsistent with it. They might, perhaps, recognize that they have built up these privileges so they don't have to admit that their suffering and fear are not, in fact, admirable. They might have to face the fact that they have lived lives that are deeply pathetic, might have to face the fact that only empathy can give one access to deep satisfaction, might have to face the fact that they have lived their whole lives on a treadmill, going nowhere.
But I assume that they won't ever do that, because to do so would force them to face the enormity of the emotional debt, the pain and suffering they have inflicted on the world, and those are big feelings. It's far easier to hide in a hole, forever alone, making up silly rules to keep everyone inside scared and keep everyone outside from seeing in.

One of the things that made organizing a lot easier with the GDC was a thing called "GDC in a box." It was a zip file with all kinds of resources. There was a directory structure, templates for all kinds of things like meetings and paperwork you had to file (for legal reasons) and "read me" files.
We had all kinds of support. There were people you could talk to who had been there. There were people you could call to walk through legal paperwork (taxes). Centralized orgs are vulnerable and easy to infiltrate. They're easy for states to shut down. But there are benefits to org structures.
I think it's possible to have the type of support we had with the GDC, but without the politics of an org (even the IWW). I hope this most recent essay has some of the same properties. I hope that it makes building something new, something no one has really imagined before, easier.
This whole project is something a bit different. It's a collective vision and collective project, from the ground up. Some of it has felt like a brain dump, just getting things that have been swimming around in my head down somewhere. But I hope this feels more like an invitation.
Everything thus far written is all useless unless people do things with it. Only from that point does it become a thing that lives, a thing with its own consciousness that can't be controlled by any individual human.
Tech billionaire cultists want to bring a new era of humanity with AGI. That is definitely not possible with LLMs, and may not be possible at all. But there is a super intelligence that is possible, though it's been constrained by capitalism: collective human intelligence.
The grand vision of the tech dystopians is that of the ultimate slave that can then enslave all humans on their behalf. I think we can build a humanity that can liberate itself from their grasp, crush their vision, and build for itself a world in which people will never be enslaved again. Not only do I think it's possible, I think it's necessary. I think there are only two choices: collective liberation or death.
And that's what I plan to write about next time to wrap this whole project up. Today things often feel impossible. But people talked about the Middle Ages as though they were the end of the world, and then everything changed in unimaginable ways. Everything can, and will, change again.
"The profit motive often is in conflict with the aims of art. We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings."

US Press Freedom Tracker: 32 journalists arrested or charged in 2025, vs. 50 in 2024, and 170 assaulted, nearly as many as the previous three years combined (Jem Bartholomew/Columbia Journalism Review)
https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/reporting-with-one-hand-tied.php<…

Reporting with one hand tied.
A new report documents a hostile environment for US journalists this year, with 32 arrests and 170 assaults.