#@trashfordair this isn't an attack on you at all i think you're v cool

[mrs-nate-humphrey]

Hey, I don’t usually reblog stuff to debunk it, and I haven’t read this all the way (I refuse to, to be honest) but the radfem rhetoric in this chills me to the bone. I stopped reading after this bit about the Sheppard Wedding: 

It is made clear over and over that she (Serena) would never, ever have done it sober, but the event is so intensely romanticized and eroticized that it took me an embarrassingly long time to realize that Nate had raped her. He may also have been intoxicated, but he's the one with male privilege, which gives him power that Serena does not have.

Read that again. “Nate had raped her. He may also have been intoxicated, but he’s the one with male privilege” .... ??? 

There are situations irl when consent is blurry, and of course, that’s not great, but it’s important to understand that in some situations, you cannot clearly define an abuser/victim dichotomy, because there are lines that are blurred. I’m gonna rewrite this same paragraph absolving Nate & demonising Serena: 

Nate, however, has a girlfriend he’s been dating more or less from childhood, and the worst part is that she is Serena’s best friend. We see, such as in the flashback scene in “Blair Waldorf Must Pie!” instances of Nate feeling attraction towards Serena, but making the conscious decision not to act on it. It is therefore notable that the first time Nate has sex with Serena is when he is obviously drunk. Serena’s actions are inherently exploitative; if he would’ve refused sober, but accepted drunk, we can clearly say that Serena raped Nate.

Is this an accurate read of the situation? FUCK NO. I typed it out to prove that it’s ridiculous. But is everything I’ve said just as canonical as the ‘Nate raped Serena’ bullshit from the meta? It is, isn’t it? 

This upsets me a lot, personally, because Nate is pretty much canonically a rape survivor, even if the narrative never acknowledges that. His entire affair with Catherine - being coerced into sex for money because he needs the money so badly, Catherine knowing where his dad is and having the power to blackmail him if he tries to refuse the money and the sex (the way she blackmailed Vanessa).... the way Catherine holds immense power over Nate, socially speaking (she’s a duchess and he’s more or less impoverished at this point in the season).... There is a lot that Nate does canonically that can be criticised (such as watching Chuck be predatory and doing nothing). But sleeping with his best friend when they were both equally drunk? No. I’m sorry, no.

Maybe that essay gets better as you progress and read more, but just from this definition of consent I’m not inclined to give the author much of my time. I do agree that the GG writers have a terrible understanding of consent. But as a male survivor who has seen the way radical feminism hurts disadvantaged men firsthand, I would pretty much say that the writer of that article doesn’t have a good understanding of consent, either.

hi i found a great read that discusses gossip girl and it's writers' horrifyingly bad understanding of consent

much of the blog post talks about jenny (since she is, assaulted more than once throughout her short time on the show)