Sorry, I’m not up to date on the details of Star Wars outside the movies, but was R2-D2, like, Leia’s droid between the Prequels and the Original Trilogy? Whatever the case, I think I might need it to happen in a crack fic.
Because I’ve suddenly imagined R2-D2 accompanying Leia to her Senate meetings. In reality, it would probably be very dangerous for R2 and Leia. But I think it would be perfect for a crack fic.
Like, just imagine if Leia and R2 are just strolling around the halls of the Senate, with Leia ranting to R2 about something or other. And then bump into an older Senator by accident. And at first it’s all pleasantries and apologies, but then the older Senator takes one look at R2, turns a color that is not a good color for their people to turn, and then says in utter horror, “IT’S YOU!”
Because surely there must be older Senators out there from before the Empire, who remember that horrible little nightmare droid who tailed those awful Jedi around and occasionally Senator Amidala. (Like, there must be people out there who witnessed R2 blow up a building or even straight-up kill someone.)
And Leia’s like, “What? You know my droid?”
And the Senator’s got a hand over their heart, both to soothe themselves and a little protectively, and says, “My dear, I couldn’t forget that thing if I was dead. That’s the little bastard who set me on fire! Granted, it was an accident and it saved Senator Amidala’s life again, but still. She was far too fond of it! That and that debonair Jedi it belonged to!”
And Leia lights up immediately because oho, this is interesting. Meanwhile R2 is basically swearing up a storm trying to push her away. And the Senator has an expression on their face like, “Oh, damn, I shouldn’t have said that.”
Anyway, Leia accidentally figures out who her parents were because R2 is a memorable asshole that old politicians still see in their nightmares.
I want either that crack fic or an even crackier fic that goes like this:
Darth Vader: *walking down a hall in the Senate building, annoyed af that the Emperor is making him be here to intimidate people for some vote or another, scrolling clickbait quizzes or ship commercials on his datapad*
The sound of something clattering comes from ahead. Darth Vader looks up and sees a droid getting kicked out of a conference room, beeping explicitly and indignantly over just being lost, at the far end of the hall. The droid looks down the hall at Darth Vader. It’s unmistakably R2-D2.
Darth Vader: “…”
R2-D2: “…”
R2: *backs up one inch*
Vader: *takes one step forward*
R2: *SCREAMS*
R2-D2 whirls around immediately and flees around the corner. Vader is too surprised to immediately stop his old droid, but drops the datapad and books it after him (as much as DV can book it). What proceeds is probably a Star Wars version of the Benny Hill chase between R2-D2 and Darth Vader.
It ends in R2, covered in soot and scratches, barely managing to get away after causing enormous amounts of mayhem and property damage.
Leia: “There you are! Artoo, where have you been?”
R2: *beeps* (translation: “Out.”)
So uh
Excellent. This is exactly what I wanted.
“
probably a Star Wars version of the Benny Hill chase between R2-D2 and Darth Vader”
Oh my God.
Vader just awkwardly powerwalking after a screaming Astromech.
Being so long without a period means that I’m noticing all my various pms symptoms a lot more, but that doesn’t mean I actually make the connection. Why have my joints been incredibly stiff and painful and locked up for two days? What’s going on? At this rate I’ll be unable to move within a month why–oh my uterus is now violently consuming itself and any innocent neighboring organs that’s why everything is shit
I admit that after today’s bullshit my current political opinion is fuck voting fuck everything burn those fuckers and everything they stand for to the fucking GROUND and i’m so angry it’s hard to be coherent. I’m going to vote and attend marches and call senators and representatives but as each instance of pure unadulterated fuckery goes down I get a slightly longer period of incoherent violent rage and despair before I have to be expected to be a functioning civic participant again.
Honestly if you’re female and you’re called for jury duty and during the elimination process you’re asked if you’ve ever had any adverse experience with a man (harrassment or rape or any other male violence) just fuckin lie and say no. Then vote that fucker guilty
Women survivors are barred from serving on a jury but rapists are not even questioned. There can be no doubt that this is a major reason rapists walk free. Men have never played fair. It is time for women to start beating them at their own game. Our lives depend on it.
As someone who wants to be a prosecutor one day… I agree.
OK NO. NO NO NO NO NO. I am a defense attorney. I am a woman. I am also a sexual assault survivor. THAT BEING SAID I HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS POST ALL WEEK AND IT’S SOOOOO FUCKING WRONG ON SO MANY LEVELS.
It’s wrong not for any bullshit rape apologist shit, btw, it’s wrong BECAUSE THIS SHIT WILL LITERALLY FUCK YOU OVER AND FUCK OVER ANY RAPE VICTIMS TOO. Here’s why:
(bear in mind this advice is gonna be MD specific since that’s where I practice)
1) FIRST THINGS FIRST. Don’t fucking lie. Don’t you dare fucking lie when you’re being questioned at jury duty. Why? OK well first: you’re swearing to tell the truth under penalty of perjury. What that means is yes, you will face criminal charges. Criminal charges which, btw, will keep you off of any juries in the future.
Here’s the thing, people (the law enforcement authorities and the defense counsel) WILL be able to find this out especially if you have ever filed a formal police report and/or spoken publicly about it. Yes, even on facebook. This ALSO means that if the fact that you lied about this is found out mid-trial it’s grounds for a mistrial with prejudice, if not a straight dismissal. Which means that hey, look, EVERYTHING HAS TO START ALL OVER AGAIN, THIS TIME WITH NEW JURORS.
2) The second thing is this: in many states, you don’t just get dismissed after answering affirmatively. The voir dire process in MD works like this:
A) prosecutors and the defense come up with a list of questions to ask potential jurors. These are typically a combination of blanket questions you would ask at any trial (ex: have you ever been convicted of a crime in this jurisdiction) and specific questions tailored to the hearing in particular (like the question above). Both attorneys get the chance to view each other’s questions and object to any particular questions that the other team may have.
B) So we’re at jury selection. Both attorneys argue preliminary whether or not questions get to be asked or not, submit the questions to the judge, and decide how to do the striking. (all at once submitted on paper, or alternating).
B1) “striking” means asking to get rid of a juror. A strike can be peremptory, i.e., you can strike for whatever reason you want and don’t have to justify it, automatically. Or you can have a strike FOR CAUSE. There are a limit to how many peremptory strikes/challenges you can have, depending on the jurisdiction, and the type of crime. And you may or may not have to justify those strikes and turn them into “for cause.”
B2) generally if, during a question, a juror answers in the affirmative, the judge will ask you to go up to the bench to privately discuss it with the judge, and both attorneys. In this case they will ask if you or somebody you know was a victim. They will also ask if the incident occurred in the same jurisdiction and possibly involved the same arresting officers. They will THEN ask you if you feel so strongly that it will affect your ability to be IMPARTIAL–that is, will you still be able to only consider the facts presented to you in the court, and be able to judge something as proven beyond a reasonable doubt or not, or will you be biased?
B3) If you say “I am so biased” then yeah, the judge will excuse you right away. But if you say “No I think I can do it. I can be impartial.” you’ll be asked to return to your seat.
C) The questions are now done. The attorneys then go through their strikes. Like I said, they have a limited number of the peremptory ones. And there are other limits too. You can’t strike jurors on the basis of a “protected class” (i.e.: race, gender, religion etc.) and anything that SHOWS that an attorney is doing so a can be objected to by the other attorney. There doesn’t have to be a “pattern” but that helps (i.e. striking three women in a row). Every time a juror gets called and somebody requests a strike, the other attorney can either object or not. So it’s up to each attorney to protect the jurors they want (and btw other than the questions, in MD, the info you get as an attorney is the juror’s name, age, job, and where they live, and their spouse’s job). If there’s a disagreement then the judge will hear arguments either way. If it’s a protected class argument, the attorney who has been striking has to come up with a different reason to justify and that’s got to be something UNRELATED to the protected class (ex: if you struck two Black guys in a row you can’t say “oh well I didn’t want THESE Black guys I wanted the other ones” because that’s still BASED ON RACE).
————
3) SO HERE’S WHY IT’S SO FUCKED UP TO EVEN SUGGEST THIS SHIT AS A WAY TO “SOLVE THE PROBLEM”
A) as I said above, you don’t want to fucking lie.
B) also BEING A CONVICTED FELON, BTW, AND OTHER TYPES OF CONVICTIONS, DISQUALIFIES YOU FROM BEING ON THE JURY. So…convicted rapists? yeah, they can’t actually serve. THIS IS LITERALLY A QUESTION ON THE JURY DUTY FORM AND IS A QUESTION ASKED AT EVERY STAGE OF SELECTION.
C) ALSO, in a couple of the posts I’ve seen they’ve mentioned this question was only asked for women. I’m not sure really if I, as an attorney, would have phrased a question in a gendered way like this SINCE IT’S BASICALLY BEGGING FOR A CHALLENGE AS A PROTECTED CLASS OBJECTION. So fine, if it’s asked gender neutral? That’s OK, but as I said, you won’t get dismissed instantaneously (at least not in MD) as it’s not one of those automatic questions the court asks (i.e.: are you a citizen etc.). And so (again, in Md, Idk about other states) If you say “yes I can be impartial” then fine. Sit your ass down and wait for an attorney to strike you.
D) so if you DO have an attorney striking you, I would ABSOLUTELY object to any attorney who systematically struck ALL THE WOMEN from a jury panel. Because fuck that that’s a protected class that fucking SO DEMONSTRATIVE of a violation of the law. IT’S GENDER BASED. Whoever the prosecutor was who allowed a defense attorney to get away with that shit just wasn’t doing their fucking job.
E) And in terms of this post? about nobody caring? Fuck that if I was a prosecutor I would absolutely ask if any person (”PERSON” DAMN IT NOT JUST MEN BECAUSE THE WIVES/SISTERS/MOTHERS etc. OF MEN WHO ARE ACCUSED OF RAPE ARE ALSO FUCKING BIASED) had ever been accused of rape or sexual assault or knew somebody who did etc. That’s just good lawyering. It’s sloppy not to do so.
F) And as a defense attorney, NGL, I would want to know the answer too, in order to make sure to challenge those strikes.
——-
I get it. I fucking get it. And some of these things will depend on how fucked up your judge is and how good the other side is. But this shit about “OH HEY JUST LIE” FUCK ME NO. DO NOT FUCKING DO THIS.
I’m so fucking furious that people are spreading this like it’s a good damn idea and something that will work. Honestly this is so fucking stupid and dangerous to me that I’m suspicious–is this for real? Or is this somebody trying to false information troll people?
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT DO THIS. Answer your questions truthfully and let the lawyers do their damn job. Yes, it sucks, but at the end of the day, people in this country are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. And your job, as a juror, is to ASSESS ONLY THE FACTS AND ARGUMENTS PRESENTED TO YOU, AND TO SEE IF THE STATE WAS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THIS PARTICULAR SUSPECT DID IT. AND THEY DID IT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
THe fact is, not all rape cases go to trial. And the ones that do, DISPROPORTIONATELY charge men of color (in particular, Black and Latino men). You cannot believe in equality, fight against racism, protect the constitution AND ALSo try to do this shit. It’s fucked up and completely inconsistent and yet another way to fuck with the justice system. doing this will probably allow more alleged rapists to go free than it will allow for equality in jury selection.
TL;DR: this shit is really fucking bad advice and not the way to actually go about doing things. stop giving people legal advice IF YOU AREN’T A LAWYER. ESPECIALLY IF THAT LEGAL ADVICE that will actually put them in jail, people.
I got some cynical responses to my last post where I encouraged people to vote.
I got meme’d and GIF’d. Probably some eye-rolling was involved.
Yes, I am an optimistic idealist. I understand that some may think voting will not do any good at this point. They think I am being unrealistic.
Though compared to more militant approaches, I think my approach is still a bit more realistic.
The violent overthrow of the government is not happening any time soon. That’s most likely a quick death for the few willing to try. I doubt you’ll convince many people to give up everything for a hopeless fight.
Ridding the US of capitalism overnight ain’t happening either. Your fantasies of billionaires lining up for the guillotine are probably going to stay in your head for now.
Not to mention any drastic and immediate transition on this scale has always been accompanied by blood and misery and generations of painful recovery.
That would literally kill me. I could not survive it. So pardon me if I want to try voting first.
The thing is, our voter turnout has been abysmal. Too few of us have been participating.
At the moment, they can only rig the system if the results are fairly close. I do not believe they can handle a landslide. Not yet. And we have the numbers for a landslide.
I think Trump and his supporters have been quite the motivator. I am hopeful that enough people will choose to vote so we can move things back in a better direction.
No, the Democrats are not perfect. But they are still the right direction. And as a new generation of politicians enter the fray, maybe they can inject more modern ideas into the system. We can slowly introduce socialist programs over time. We could start with healthcare. Maybe education. Slow and steady.
This is a game of inches. Wanting to change overnight with a bloody revolution… well… let’s just say I should be the one memeing you. I should be the one sending passive aggressive GIFs to you. My eyes are not rolling… they are spinning around in circles.
Since your way = my death… no, I’m probably not going to be on board with that.
I’m gonna continue to tell folks to vote.
And I’m not going to give up hope because your edgy ass thinks everything besides “burning it all down” is pointless.
the second link worked and this is a good resource!
I want to add that it is free of terf rhetoric and inclusive of trans lesbians, nonbinary lesbians, and gnc lesbians. There is no shaming of women who have had sex with men (or feel like they desire men) and I really appreciated the parts about having a complicated relationship with gender identity.
The audience is people who are questioning if they might be lesbians. It’s not a put-down of other sexual orientations or somehow suggesting that being a lesbian is endgame for bi/pan women.
“Some people’s orientation includes sexual attraction and some people’s orientation doesn’t.” Yes!! Thank you!! For all my fellow ace lesbians x3
Yes, it is possible to impeach a Supreme Court Justice. You need a majority of the House and 2/3 of the Senate.
THE MIDTERMS ARE IN 31 DAYS. ELECT AS MANY PROGRESSIVES AS YOU CAN.
I’m not saying we’ll get there this year, but WE CANNOT STOP FIGHTING UNTIL WE WIN. UNTIL SURVIVORS ARE BELIEVED AND ABUSERS FACE CONSEQUENCES.
There are two parts to the process:
The House is entrusted with the responsibility of voting on impeachment. Its members decide by a majority vote.
Then the Senate holds a trial for the underlying misconduct. A conviction requires two-thirds of the Senate, or 67 votes. If there is a conviction, the Senate removes the individual from office.
“It’s as likely as the Democrats winning the House,” said Jed Shugerman, a professor at Fordham University School of Law.
How likely is Kavanaugh’s impeachment?
“If they take back the House, I would be surprised if they don’t put forth impeachment proceedings in the next Congress,” Shugerman told The Washington Post.
konekorambles 