#Jonathan: Why would you have a model’s number?

[morganbritton132]

Wait.

You know who else is into really niche stuff and photography? Jonathan Byers.

That guy goes out to California, picks up an art book from a thrift store, and falls in love with the way this specific model is photographed.

Once everything calms down and the Byers are back in Hawkins, he tries to recreate one of the photos. It’s not working so he shows his friends the picture to see if they have any ideas.

Robin looks at it and then at Steve with just the biggest smile. Steve is just like, “Shut the fuck up, Robin.”

Steve, a former child model that was moderately successful in very niche art house circles and would’ve probably still been successful if his parents didn’t try to fix their relationship by dumping him in a small town and becoming conservative, thanks god everyday that Hawkins is where culture goes to die. Those pictures will never see the light of day here and he’s happy about that.

Robin, the daughter of hippies and lover of niche art house stuff, spends year harboring a crush on a pretty androgynous girl in her parents’ art books.

She shows one to Steve and says something like, “This is the girl that made me realize that I liked girls.”

Steve’s like… “That’s me.”

Robin just stares at him so Steve moves her finger to a different person on the page and says, “Say it was her. I can get you her number.”

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved on our archive

By Jonathan Howard

It doesn’t bode well for the future that leaders of major American institutions say naked emperors are wearing beautiful clothes.

We need to make every effort to get people who disagree, even sharply, in dialogue with one another. In a previous article, I wrote an open letter to the Stanford President, Jonathan Levin, regarding a conference at his university, Pandemic Policy: Planning the Future, Assessing the Past. As SBM readers know, this conference featured doctors who mostly didn’t treat COVID patients, but instead spread misinformation about it and tried to purposefully infect people with it. My letter predicted that the conference would be a giant exercise in deliberate amnesia. As such, I encouraged President Levin to reject censorship and simply play videos of the speakers from the first two years of the pandemic.

Sadly, President Levin embraced censorship. Instead of honestly informing the conference attendees about the speakers, he whitewashed their pandemic record with the following speech:

Good morning and welcome to everyone. I appreciate the opportunity to be here.

Now, you might wonder: Why is Jon Levin opening this conference on pandemic policy? You might say, Jon is no public health expert. And I might say: Well, I did run a business school during the COVID pandemic, so I have some experience making pandemic policy decisions. They also say you learn most by making mistakes. So I think there are probably a thousand Stanford MBAs who are willing to argue that I’m basically a world expert.

However, that’s not why I’m here.

When I was invited to participate in this event a few months ago, it was with the understanding that the goal was to bring together people with different perspectives, engage in a day of discussion, and in that way, try to repair some of the rifts that opened during COVID.

That struck me as a valuable goal, and the sort of goal we should aim for at Stanford. So I agreed to give a few brief remarks to that effect.

What followed was disappointing. When I was invited, I asked around and indeed the organizers were talking to some well-known people with quite different views who were likely to speak. However, it was not so straightforward. Some invitees weren’t able to make it, or withdrew, or didn’t want to participate in an event with other speakers whose views and behavior they found attacking or abhorrent.

When an initial and partial agenda was posted, it was immediately perceived as one-sided, and as I’m sure you all noticed became the subject of op-eds and social media posts.

Ironically, instead of repairing rifts as intended and perhaps spurring fresh thinking, the process seemed to reopen old and existing divisions.

As an observer and as the leader of this university, I found the episode dispiriting, in a way that goes beyond the specifics of this particular event.

We have many issues today at Stanford, and on other campuses, where views are divided, and in some cases, like this one, where feelings are raw.

Yet I believe we need to make every effort to get people who disagree, even sharply, in dialogue with one another. I believe it’s essential for us to do that as members of the faculty and university leaders – not just because it’s a way to advance knowledge, but because we need to model that behavior if we want to expect it from our students. And in today’s world, we absolutely need to ask and expect our students to be able to engage with, listen to, and debate with people with whom they disagree. My view is that we need to err on the side of talking to one another.

So I hope today’s conference will come off in a way that involves just that – thoughtful and robust discussion across different perspectives. I hope it yields some important insights about future pandemic policy – we certainly need that. Perhaps it does even bridge a few divides among those in the room.

And I hope even more that all of you will join in the larger project of trying to make Stanford and other campuses forums for the type of robust and thoughtful discussion that is at the heart of universities when we’re at our best.

I wouldn’t have been have afraid to mentioned that many of these doctors predicted COVID would kill less than 50,000 Americans and that the mass infection of unvaccinated youth would lead to herd immunity in 3-6 months.

We’ve had more flu deaths among children this year than COVID deaths. With President Levin’s admonition to “listen to” people in mind, let’s revisit just one of the videos I presented to him. In this video, from November 2020 Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said “we’ve had more flu deaths among children this year than COVID deaths”.

The first reported COVID death in the US was on 2/28/2020. By the time Dr. Bhattacharya recorded that video, COVID had killed at least 133 children according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. During that same time frame, the flu killed 9 children. The next year, just 1 child died of the flu while COVID killed several hundred children. Currently, the CDC reports 1,935 COVID deaths and 438 flu deaths amongst children since the start of the pandemic, though obviously children should be vaccinated against both viruses.

Yet, according to President Levin, its fine for people to have “different views” on this topic. He feels “we need to make every effort to get people who disagree, even sharply, in dialogue with one another.” Sounding more like a college freshman than a university President, President Levin feels everything is a matter of opinion and what really matters is that no one get their feelings hurts. In President Levin’s telling, it’s not wrong for Dr. Bhattacharya to say that 9 is larger than 133, however it is wrong for people like me to say this isn’t a “different view” and it shouldn’t be a topic of “dialogue”.

I supposed I’ll be accused of silencing debate and discussion, but 133 is larger than 9. This wouldn’t have been controversial in 2019. When someone spreads dangerous, blatant misinformation, honest brokers call it out, even if the person spreading the misinformation has fancy credentials and can speak in scientific jargon. It’s not that hard. President Levin, however, expects us all to be open to the possibility that 9 is larger 133, and it doesn’t bode well for the future that leaders of major American institutions say naked emperors are wearing beautiful clothes.

[m-olenska]

Books I read - January 2024

I feel like I've been in a reading slump ever since I started working full time two years ago, so let's see if a monthly review can give me back the magic buzz!

Blackwater 3 : the House, 4 : the War, 5 : the Fortune, and 6 : the Rain, by Michael McDowell. The Blackwater saga has been kind of a suprise editorial success in France, ever since the publishing house Monsieur Toussaint Louverture has bought the rights of this cozy Southern gothic a few years ago - and I can only guess that it's because readers in France never read Southern gothic novels. Don't get me wrong, these books are fine - they read quickly and pleasantly, they focus on a matriarcal family which is in itself surprising for a book written in the 80s, and there are positive LGBT characters in them, and that's good, I guess. The pacing is incredibly slow, which in itself shouldn't be a problem. But the one thing I couldn't pass over was the terrible lowness of the stakes: there is absolutely no consequences in these books, for anyone, ever. The Caskey family, at the center of the saga, only want one thing - more money - and then does nothing with it. Anyway, it wasn't bad, but I'm not overenthusiastic about this one.

The Feelings of the Prince Charles, by Liv Strömquist. Hilarious. I would have liked this one even more if the ideas Liv Strömquist writes about (the hetero-patriarchal model of the couple and of love is a trap for women) hadn't become ubiquitous in the past few years.

Animan, by Anouk Ricard. Why am I not a little frog married to a superhero capable of transforming into any animal, pursued by his nemesis, capable of transforming into any object.

Leave the Gun, Take the Cannoli, the Epic Story of the Making of the Godfather, by Mark Seal * . Immediately a new favorite. I started the year by watching the Godfather, developing an obsession for the movie, its characters and its actors, and watching a number of New Hollywood movies. This book was the natural follow-up to that phase. I've also watched The Offer on Paramount plus, so I can say with confidence: the book is better and crazier.

Unfollow, A Memoir of Loving and Leaving the Westboro Baptist Church, by Megan Phelps-Roper: I really like Megan P-R's activist work, but I was rather disappointed by her memoir. That's not to say the story isn't worth telling, and the courage she showed in leaving what is, in essence, a cult of homophobic weirdos, is remarkable. But the pace of the narrative was very slow, the ideas repeated several times, and the mystery at the heart of the story (how do you find the strength to leave a fundamentalist environment when you know nothing else?) ultimately remains almost unresolved at the end of the reading.

Currently reading: The Best Minds: A Story of Friendship, Madness, and the Tragedy of Good Intentions, by Jonathan Rosen

[jerry-hornes-foot]

hii!!

I was wondering If you could write a Steve Harrington x reader smut, where the reader is a Byers and like Jonathan she’s into photography,

And as she just got a new camera for her birthday, so she suggests Steve he should model for her, which eventually proceeds to them having sex. Maybe At the end, jonathan finds a compromising photo of them and he freaks out or something

or if you wanna change something it’s alright, as long as you’re comfortable with it, thank you💖

Hi !! Thank you so much for your ask, I loved this idea so much and went a bit wild with it so I hope you like the things I've added :)) 💖

1812 words

18+ only

Smut

Steve Harrington/Reader; Jonathan Byers & Reader; Joyce Byers & Reader

Tags: dom/sub; dom!reader; sub;steve; gentle dom; praise kink; boudoir photography; lingerie; modelling; body writing; penetrative sex; explicit language; crying (happy tears); mild overstimulation; genital touching; porn with feelings; fluff; steve says 'i love you'; byers!reader; friendship; happy family memories

Any additional tags you would like added feel free to DM me :))

"Okay so you've got the keys right?"

"Yes I've got the keys."

"Front and back door?"

"Yes!"

You're sitting comfortably at the kitchen table, swirling the last few lukewarm sips of cocoa around the bottom of your mug as your aunt paces nervously from one end of the kitchen to the other, occasionally stopping to throw seemingly random items into her bag.

"I've left all the emergency numbers on the fridge, there's uh..."

"Police station, fire department, Wheeler house. I know."

"And if Will calls-"

You grab her hand as she rushes past you and give it a slight, comforting squeeze.

"He's not gonna call. Everything's fine, don't worry. I'll call you tomorrow after I've picked him up, okay?" She smiles weakly at you, trying to hide the fact that she's still nervous leaving you here alone. Your eyes flash past her and land on the clock. "You're going to be late."

"Oh crap!"

A stream of miscellaneous items spill from her bag as she races to the door.

"Bye sweetie!" She calls out behind her as she disappears out of sight, only for her head to suddenly appear once more in the doorway, "Thank you so much again!"

It's strange being in this house again after so many years. It feels like only yesterday you and Jonathan were lying top and tail in his bed, pinching your noses to hold in laughter so Joyce wouldn't catch you staying up late. You lie back on the couch and close your eyes for a moment. It smells the same. Something about lying here draws you back to being 8 years old again, lying flat on your stomach beside Jonathan as you flipped tirelessly through the pages of the same battered old photography book, both transfixed by the images inside. A sudden knock at the front door drags you from your hazy reminiscing.

Steve bustles past you into the hallway and slips into the living room.

"Hello." You call through to him, laughing slightly at his apparent urgency.

You follow him into the living room and find him standing in front of the couch with a backpack open in front of him. He flashes his eyes up at you as you come in,

"Anyone else here?"

You shake your head and a mischievous grin spreads across Steve's face.

"Perfect."

"Why?" You ask cautiously, casting your eyes down to the half open bag which Steve quickly closes over before you can see inside.

"Well..." He says, moving over you you and taking your hands. "I seem to recall that a certain someone's cousin bought them a camera for their birthday, is that right?"

"Yes...?"

"And I also seem to recall that same certain someone saying that every good photographer needs a model, and that in fact I, Steve Harrington, would make the perfect model."

You laugh softly, "Did they now?"

"They did. And since I'm obviously the perfect subject I figured I ought to have something I can model for you. Wait here."

When Steve reappears he strikes a graceful pose in the doorway, letting you drink in the sight of him in a frilly black pair of lace underwear, neatly clipped to a pair of sheer, black stockings. A matching black lace garter clings tightly to his thigh. You hold your hand up to him signalling for him to stay where he is. Grabbing your camera you wind it up and run back into the middle of the room, getting down one knee to frame him. The way the light in the doorway lands on him makes his skin almost sparkle. Your camera clicks and almost immediately Steve spins to face you, beaming with excitement,

"Where do you want me?"

You're amazed how easily Steve slips into the role of model. He's so comfortable in front of the camera, rolling around on the couch from one breathtaking position to another. You've got him up on his knees with his hands flat against the wall, his ass perfectly framed by the tight panties, looking playfully over his shoulder off into the middle distance. He's so stunningly beautiful, it's becoming harder to just look at him.

"There's something missing." You say finally, placing your camera down on the coffee table.

Steve sits back down on the couch and stares up at you quizzically. After a moment deep in thought you smile and run into the kitchen, rifling through a few drawers before you find what you're looking for. Returning to Steve you crouch in front of him and gently rub a hand up his chest and over his shoulder. Smiling softly you look up and him and raise your hand to show him the permanent marker you managed to scrounge from the kitchen. Popping off the cap you place the tip of the pen onto Steve's stomach and begin tracing delicate circles around each freckle and mole on his torso, linking them together with long, flowing lines to create constellations on his skin. Reaching over to the table you grab your camera and lean in close to Steve to capture your work, then quickly put it down again and take the marker once more.

"You're so pretty."

Your voice is soft and low, the words dripping slowly from your lips as the felt tip traces the same three words over Steve's chest.

"And so..." your fingers gently run across Steve's collarbones searching for another patch of canvas to work with, "...strong."

Placing the tip of your finger in the centre of Steve's lips and begin to slowly trace down his neck, over his chest, and stopping just above his belly button. Lowering the pen again you continue writing,

"And so brave."

Looking up at Steve again you can see tears welling at the corners of his eyes. You panic a little, mouth opening to ask what's wrong, but before you can get a sound out Steve cuts you off, his voice choked with emotion,

"I love you."

Steve's lips are pressed firmly against yours, his fingers clawing desperately at your shirt as he holds you tight to his chest. He's pressed flat on the couch, with you lying squarely on top of him. His mouth is hot against yours, occasional hungry moans slipping from his throat as he clings to you. The feeling of Steve's cock pressed against your thigh as you grind against him is almost unbearable, you're so desperate to touch him you can hardly breathe.

"Fuck me, Steve."

In an instant Steve is sitting up on the couch, lace underwear tucked around his hips, his hard cock glistening just behind the waistband. You tear your jeans and underwear off as fast as you can, nearly tripping over yourself as you scramble to get close to him, then clamber onto his lap, sliding yourself down slowly to let him fill you up little by little. You let out a gutteral groan, cut off by Steve's lips crashing into yours again. You start to grind your hips, savouring the sensation of Steve's body pulsing against yours.

"Tell me I'm pretty." Steve whines as you start to bounce rhythmically in his lap.

Brushing his hair out of his face you stare down at him and place a soft kiss on his forehead as you whisper,

"You're so much more than that."

Steve whines again as you pick up the pace, clinging tightly to his shoulders as his dick slides effortlessly in and out of you.

"You're gorgeous, and clever, and funny and- mmmmmph!"

Steve's hand squeezes between your bodies and the touch of his fingers makes your eyes roll back in your head. Your thighs flush red hot as you grind against him harder, sliding your hands up and clinging tightly to his hair. With another rhythmic thrust you clench around him making him grunt.

"And god does your cock feel fucking good."

The room rushes and spins around you as Steve's hips bounce up into yours. The black ink on Steve's chest and stomach is smudged with sweat, leaving a map across your torso of where his body has touched yours. Every nerve in your body is on fire, pleasure swirling round your head and making you hazy. Steve holds onto you tight to keep you upright. You're done in but you push yourself just a little bit harder, desperate to make Steve cum. And it's worth it. His whole body tenses around you, his hands balling into fists around your arms as you feel the warmth shooting into you before you collapse, breathless, into each others arms. For a few moments you sit still together, in almost total silence, save the ragged sounds of your breathing. Finally you both manage to get to your feet, get yourselves cleaned up, and somehow muster the energy to make up the couch and get ready for bed. You hold Steve tightly, peppering his whole face with soft kisses and calling him every wonderful word you can think of until he drifts off to sleep.

You don't really remember Steve leaving for work, save for one hazy half dreamed memory of a kiss goodbye, you're instead woken by the sound of Jonathan moving around in the kitchen, awkwardly trying to keep quiet so he won't wake you up. You sit up and rub your face, smiling sleepily at him.

"Sorry, I didn't mean to wake you." He says as he wanders into the living room and drops down into the armchair beside you. "Oh hey, you brought the camera! Been working okay for you?"

"It's great! actually I was hoping you'd teach me how to develop them."

"Oh sure!" Jonathan lights up with enthusiasm, eagerly popping open the camera to grab the film. "I talked my mom into letting me use my old room as a dark room so-"

"Uh I've got another roll in my bag to develop actually." You interject nervously, grabbing the camera out of his hands. "I've not started this one yet."

Jonathan's eyes flash between you and the camera for a second. You know he can tell that half the roll has already been used. Snapping the back of the camera shut you turn your face away, desperately trying to hide the burning red colour in your cheeks. The tension in your stomach drops instantly as Jonathan decides to play along with your embarrassingly obvious lie.

"Oh yeah, sorry! Well if you grab the one you want to use I can show you right now."

You smile again, relieved at Jonathan's unspoken kindness, and grab the second cannister from your bag and pass it to Jonathan, who's face is once again glowing with excitement. He jumps to his feet with an energy you've not seen in him for years, like he's a kid again. With a wide smile he moves into the doorway and signals eagerly for you to follow him,

"Let's go!"

[jadeylovesmarvelxo]

Confessions

Summary; Based on this story request.

Can you write some angst to fluff for Steve Harrington with Henderson reader is set between seasons 2 & 3 where Steve and the reader get into a fight that ends in telling each other I love you after he finds out she agreed to tutor Billy to get him to leave the Party alone.

Pairings; Henderson Reader x Steve Harrington

Warnings; None really some swears and fluff

💖

Y/n Henderson hated bullying assholes and if you asked her Billy Hargrove was the biggest one on the planet.

He smirks at her as she glares at him not being fooled at the way he's trying to charm her into getting what he wants.

"Are you seriously trying to get me to sleep with you right now?" She asks disgustedly and is ready to fire off with a million reasons on why the asshole can go to hell.

His gaze travels down her body and he makes a show of licking his lips, shes about to walk off when he grabs her arm and pull a her back.

"Easy, easy. I wasn't asking to sleep with you, prissy bitches aren't my type". Okay, she's so not a violent person but right now she wants to hit him hard.

"Good. You're the last man on earth that I would ever sleep with so, please go away. I'm sick of you bullying Dustin and his friends. You're an asshole".

He still has that smug look on his face and leans into her. "If you quit being a bitch for a second I was going to offer you a deal, I leave your brother alone and his little friends. I'll even go easy on Max".

She raises an eyebrow and urges him to go on. "I'm listening". He flashes her another charming smile.

"I need your help with math. You're like a genius with numbers, right? tutor me and I'll keep my word". She nods.

"Fine, meet me tomorrow after school".

💖

She really didn't want Billy at her house or for Dustin to see him but she didn't have much choice when he practically ambushed her after school to begin their tutoring sessions.

Keeping this on the down low was something that she strived to do because she can imagine how awkward it would be explaining this to the gang.

Keeping it a secret lasted for about a week then all hell broke loose.

💖

Today had been a nightmare and it was not getting any better between a stressful day at school and tutoring Billy she was at her wits end.

He didn't seem to have one bit of interest in anything she was saying and it was annoying the hell out of her.

She was just about to call him out on it when the front door opened and she could hear not only Dustin's voice but Steve's too.

Shit! "You have to go" she urges panicked to Billy whose eyes dance amused at her anxiousness.

He parks himself on her bed and looks at her bedroom door waiting for the chaos to kick off.

"Nah, I'll stay right here. Enjoy the show". Oh, she bets he will. Her heart sinks as her door opens and Dustin bounds in smiling with Steve in tow who looks so cute in his Scoops Ahoy uniform.

She's been in love with Steve for months now but she knows he doesn't feel the same, she's pretty sure he still loves Nancy. It devastated him when he found out she was with Jonathan.

She and Steve had grown quite close in the few months that he had been hanging around Dustin and she loved that her little brother had a positive male role model to look up to.

He adored Steve which was kinda sweet but right now she wished Steve was literally anywhere else.

The minute both boys see Billy lounging on her bed she braces for the onslaught.

"What the fuck are you doing here". Steve growls and in an instant, he's protective and stalks towards Billy who gets up to meet Steve.

"Cute outfit Harrington, bet you get a lot of bitches in that huh? and for your information, Henderson and I have a deal".

He grabs his jacket and winks at her then heads out leaving her to deal with her angry brother and a very pissed-off Steve.

"Dustin go to your room, I'll explain everything later". She promises him and he scowls " No way".

"Henderson go, I gotta talk to your sister". Dustin looks like he's about to argue but decides better of it and stomps to his room.

Steve slams her door shut as he rounds on her furious. "What the hell were you thinking? you know what that ass has done to me, Max and Lucas and yet you're hanging with him".

"Of course, I know what he's done. I was doing this for the gang so Billy would leave everyone alone, he said if I tutored him then he would back off from everyone".

Steve softens up a bit but still looks furious.

"Did you ever stop to think he was trying to get in your pants y/n! You have him here in your bedroom and he could have took advantage".

"I can handle myself Steve and he isn't interested in that way Steve I'm not his type". Steve scoffs and her stomach flutters a bit.

"You're beautiful y/n and I can't stand the thought of him near you, if he hurt you or tried anything"

His concern was really nice but she wasn't a fragile doll, she could handle herself. "Steve, you're sweet but I told you that I could handle myself so I don't know why...

Steve hesitates for like briefest second and then he answers. "I love you okay? God damn it, I love you and I want to keep you safe".

Her anger melts away and she rushes over to him and kisses him. His arms wrap around her tightly and she sighs hapilly.

"I love you too Steve". His answering smile is wonderful and she kisses him again.

"Hey, wait until I tell Robin, she can finally take away that board". She rolls her eyes because Robin is right he really is a dingus.

He's her dingus though. She notices Dustin watching them groaning. "Dude, not my sister". He moans to Steve who kisses her hair.

"Sorry, buddy. The heart wants want it wants". She watches as Dustin ponders this and speaks again.

"Just treat her right okay?". He grumbles to Steve who nods ruffling his hair and she hugs him touched at his concern.

"Aww Dustykins look at you being all sweet". His eyes widen as she uses her nickname for him and Steve snorts.

"Dustykins". Dustin turns to him with a mischievous glint in his eyes. "Says the dude who uses Farrah Fawcett's hair...". Steve clamps his hand over Dustin's mouth.

"Don't you dare dude I told you that in confidence" They start to bicker and she watches them both amused and marvelling at the fact she finally found love with Steve.

💞💞

[queerprayers]

If I’m really made in god’s image, why would he make me so dumb, so disabled, why would he make me like this? Do you think maybe the god’s image thing isn’t true? I look at the terrible people of the world, why would god have made this?

Hello beloved,

I'm so sorry it's taken me a bit to reply to this—this ask really hit me. I've been here (or at least somewhere close—obviously I don't know exactly what you're feeling). "Why would he make me like this?" was something I used to ask myself over and over, either about my queerness or my disabilities.

To be honest? I don't have an answer. Not a clear/easy one, anyway. I could say that we have unique gifts, or that suffering teaches us something, or something else that's technically true but that you've probably heard before and might end up being pitying or cheesy.

Disability is a fact of life. (Or at least, different kinds of functioning are; "disability" is a social label we created.) Your experiences may be painful or isolating, but God is with you. I don't know if you're seeking that affirmation or if you'll shrug it off, but it's true.

I don't know why God made us the way They did. The only thing I do know is that They did. And yes, I do firmly believe that you and I were made in God's image. All the ways in which we're different or unique or confusing? They're all from God. I don't think our brains are even capable of understanding why? And I'm not sure "why" is the right question to be asking. How about, "how?"

I'd also encourage you (and all of us) to think about why we need a reason for everything. Maybe we don't need a reason or a purpose for this pain. Maybe we're hurting and beloved by God and in need of saving and already whole.

"Christ, God's image, models God's embrace of disability on the cross . . . through a resurrected but wounded body. All humanity shares in such woundedness and vulnerability in a variety of forms—physical, mental, moral, and spiritual—without losing the dignity of being created in the image of God." (Dignity and Destiny: Humanity in the Image of God by John Kilner)

"Our bodies participate in the imago Dei, not in spite of our impairments and contingencies, but through them." (The Disabled God: Toward a Liberatory Theology of Disability by Nancy L. Eiesland)

From the ELCA's message on disabilities:

"Human beings are part of a world in which a variety of abilities and skills, impairments and disabilities are a common feature of life. Vulnerability to and the risk of disability are a natural part of the human condition for all people. While most people may assume that they never will become impaired and disabled themselves, many individuals, in fact, will be impaired or disabled at some point in their lives. For some, these impairments and disabilities will be temporary or moderate-term conditions, perhaps occurring near the end of life; for others, these will be either long-term or lifelong.

Human life emerges from within the natural world and is limited and conditioned by it. Physical, sensory, intellectual, mental and developmental disabilities arise within the natural and social worlds from factors that are genetic, chemical, behavioral, social and accidental. A number of disabilities appear to result from various combinations of these factors.

Whatever the causes, a disability or impairment requires a person to exercise [their] abilities and skills in ways affected by that reality. . . .

Medical cures and assistance are blessings, but cures are rare and, sometimes, not desired. Like all aspects of health, living with a physical, intellectual or developmental disability is a fact of life, calling for the resourceful and determined exercise of one’s other abilities and freedom for relationship."

"The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ . . . demonstrate that all aspects of life, including disabilities and impairment, are encompassed in God’s loving care. In being born of Mary and living among us, Jesus took on all the risks and vulnerabilities of being human, including those of suffering hate, rejection, cruelty, injustice, disability and death. Jesus did not do so for the purpose of suffering these things for their own sake. Rather, his suffering was a necessary consequence of his walking the way of the cross (Luke 24:27) so that all might be reconciled to God (2 Corinthians 5:19)."

Christianity has done so much harm to disabled people: misrepresenting scripture about healing, blaming people or their sin for their health issues, not making worship spaces or theology accessible, and so much more. It's no wonder that we have so much trouble finding peace in our identities. Overwhelmingly, it seems, the many of the issues disabled people face are not from their disability, but how society treats their disability. (Check out the social model.) I believe in justice and liberation under God, including for the disabled.

You're probably carrying internalized ableism, from society and perhaps also the church. I'm with you there.

Additional Resources/Further Reading:

Our Bible App has several disability devotionals

"A Biblical View of Disability," Ros Bayes, bethinking, 2015.

Disabling Lent: An Anti-Ableist Lenten Devotional, Unbound.

"Moving Toward a Better Theology of Disability," Jil Vandezande Western Theological Seminary, 23 Nov 2015

"God on Wheels: Disability and Jewish Feminist Theology," Julia Watts Belser, Tikkun Magazine, 2014.

"This week my Episcopal priest said disabled persons are disabled because of our sin . . .", Twitter thread by Jonathan "Jack" Bates (@/jackmb), 20 Mar 2021

Heart and Soul: "Pick up your stretcher and walk!," BBC Sounds, 26 Apr 2019

"Stop trying to 'heal' me," Damon Rose, BBC News, 28 Apr 2019

"Is God disabled?" Ian Pauk, Psephizo, 27 May 2019

"The Full Affirmation of Disability Justice," Shannon Dingle, Sojourners, 20 Jun 2019

"Can the Church View Disabled Bodies as Jesus' Body?" Amy Kenny, Sojourners, 30 Apr 2020

"Liberation theology of disability and the option for the poor," Scot Danforth, Disability Studies Quarterly, Summer 2005.

The Disability & Faith Forum

"Out of the Darkness: Examining the Rhetoric of Blindness in the Gospel of John," Jennifer L. Koosed, Disability Studies Quarterly, Winter 2005

"Theological Accessibility: The Contribution of Disability," Deborah Creamer, Disability Studies Quarterly, Fall 2006

Copious Hosting: A Theology of Access for People with Disabilities by Jennie Weiss Block

A Healing Homiletic: Preaching and Disability by Kathy Black

Amazing Gifts: Stories of Faith, Disability, and Inclusion by Mark I. Pinksy

Wondrously Wounded: Theology, Disability, and the Body of Christ by Brian Brock

The Bible, Disability, and the Church: A New Vision of the People of God by Amos Yong

The Bible and Disability: A Commentary by Sarah J. Melcher

Crippled Grace: Disability, Virtue Ethics, and the Good Life by Shane Clifton

I think I got a bit off-topic. I don't have enough time to edit this. You're just receiving a lot of my thoughts. Hopefully something will be meaningful. Over and over, I prove to y'all that I don't have answers, but I do have a reading list.

I leave you with a prayer by Mary Batchelor:

God, we lift up to you all who are disabled - in hearing, in sight, in limb or in mind. Save them from bitterness and frustration, and give them joy in the midst of their limitations. May they find peace and fulfillment in knowing you and discovering your will for their lives. We pray for special grace for those who care for them. Give them your love and kindness and understanding of the real needs of those they look after. For Jesus' sake, amen.

<3 Johanna

[your-krazy-uncle-bob]

DC Comics cancels woke, bisexual Superman that nobody had heard of

JAZZ SHAW 12:01 PM on October 14, 2022

Hey, have you been following the adventures of the new DC Comics hero, Superman: Son of Kal-El that was launched last year? If you have no idea what I’m talking about, don’t feel bad. You’re not alone. It sounds as if almost nobody was buying the new offering and the series will end in December after just 18 editions. It was certainly something different than the old Superman many of us grew up with, though. The secret identity of the new Man of Steel was Jonathan Kent, the son of Clark Kent and Lois Lane. And rather than fighting for truth, justice, and the American way, Jonathan had a very different agenda. Instead of fighting Lex Luthor, Jonathan was battling climate change and rescuing “undocumented immigrants” from evil immigration officers. Oh, and he was also bisexual. For some strange reason, the new character didn’t seem to resonate with the fans. (National Review)

DC Comics is canceling Superman: Son of Kal-El, a book series it launched last year about a bisexual Superman, amid poor sales. The series’ 18th issue, due out in December, will be its final installment, the publisher announced at New York Comic Con, according to reports. The series saw a 17-year-old Jonathan Kent, the son of Clark Kent and Lois Lane, take on a number of social issues including climate change, school shootings, and the rescue of “undocumented migrants.” The series even featured face coverings in an effort to help mitigate the spread of Covid-19 in fiction. The teen hero of the series begins a relationship with a male friend named Jay Nakamura in the fifth issue.

As noted in the excerpt above, Jonathan supported facemasks to battle the threat of a virus. As far as making the caped crusader bisexual, the author of the series said that “replacing Clark Kent with another straight white savior felt like a missed opportunity.”

You probably recall the superhero’s motto that I mentioned above, right? Truth, justice, and the American way. Well, that slogan had to be modified to fit in with Son of Kal-El also. It was changed to “Truth, justice, and a better tomorrow.” After all, you wouldn’t want the word “American” to show up in any sort of description of something desirable or aspirational, would you? America is bad, after all.

So why didn’t this offering catch on with the public? The easy answer for those on the left is that all of the straight, white, male, probably-MAGA homophobes out there refused to purchase it. It’s all about the homophobia all the time. That’s almost as endemic as institutional racism and toxic masculinity, am I right?

But I’m fairly confident the failure to launch didn’t have anything to do with that. It’s not that Superman was portrayed as being bisexual. Who really cares at this point? But why did Superman even have to be sexualized at all? Was he ever shown kissing Lois Lane in the original comics? (Well, actually they did kiss all the way back in issue number five, but it was never a very sexualized, hot and steamy relationship.)

In reality, I’d be willing to wager that this series was just too much of the wrong thing at the wrong time and in the wrong venue. The country is overdosing on wokeness as it is and people are starting to push back. The left pushes the theme of toxic masculinity like they get paid to do it (and many certainly do) and Superman is the ultimate model of traditional masculinity. Those looking for entertainment that sterilizes the concept of gender were likely not shopping for Superman fare, and those with an affinity for Superman almost certainly weren’t looking for this.

But in a way, it’s almost sad that we didn’t get to see where the series might have gone next. Would Jonathan Kent have begun flying around and hurling Pfizer syringes at the unvaccinated? (He could check for their vax passports in their wallets or purses with his x-ray vision.) Might he have smashed oil refineries to pieces by swinging the tower of a wind turbine like a giant baseball bat? Would Greta Thunberg have shown up as a temporary sidekick for a brief story arc? Who knows what sort of victories he might have racked up in his battle for Truth, Justice, and the American… er… “a better tomorrow.”

(via: hotair.com)

[jasmine-the-fox]

Loose the model but win a hero

Here we go! I continue this fic once again! I hope this one will go well like the other ones!

Previous First

Chapter 6: Fashion talk

Mari had an amazing day with Jon, she couldn’t have asked for any better! She got back to her hotel room at a later time and after a nice shower she spoke to her friends and then her parents who told her about Caline... But none of them told her about Louis Lane calling them.

Even so Mari was simply sketching at the moment, but she was sketching out clothes for Jon in the end, feeling flustered she decided to take a break and go to her balcony for some fresh air, she had too much going on in her head with all of the miraculous she had right now and the Lila Rossi problem and then there was Hawkmoth and his partner Mayura... She needed to take a breather.

“It’s alright Marinette! I’m sure you’ll figure something out soon enough!” Tikki claimed as she decided to stay in the room while Mari went outside, she sighed as she tried to figure out what she should take care of first... If she did Lila first then the girl will use the anger around her to grab the akuma for herself, but she took care of Hawkmoth first, sure he will reveal Lila worked for him of her own free will but she might lie and say he forced her to work for him.

Either way Lila would escape justice in some way...

So with that in mind... Mari had nothing else to do but call her team to work on the plan, feeling too much was going on, Marinette thought about transforming into Ladybug and trying to find Superman and ask him for help in Paris “You seem to be down... Did something happen?” she looked up to find Superboy there floating by her balcony... Close enough really.

“Just... Thinking about how to defeat a lying bully back at my school” she explained as he pointed to the bars making her nod so he could sit on the edge, they were like this in silence for a moment before he spoke “Tell me about this bully” he said making her nod and talk about everything she knew on Lila Rossi from the moment she arrived to her school, Superboy aka Jon was trying to hide the fact that he knew all of this already... He could let Mari know who he really is right now, for now he had to wait for them to get closer.

“So this Lila girl has been lying about you just because you know she’s lying?” he asked making her nod “Everything that comes from her mouth is a lie... My class never looks into it to make sure it’s the truth or not, Alya is the worse, she claims Lila is her perfect source of info... I’m certain that if Lila ever claimed that a famous person raped her... Alya would post it without even blinking or thinking of the consequences” she explained as Superboy’s eyes widen, the thought of anyone he knew being accused of a rape they never committed would be horrible... That girl has got to go no matter what.

“Superboy! Is everything alright here?” Superman asks as he gently flies to them, Mari couldn’t stop her eye from twitching from just looking at his outfit... At least Superboy looked decent and not like Superman wearing underwear over his suit... She had to do something about that suit before she goes back to Paris “Why must you wear a pair of underwear over your suit!?” she hissed as the two looked at her, Superman looked shocked while Superboy looked to be trying to hold in his laughter.

Out of all the foreign girls Jon could have encountered... He had to meet someone who was against his suit? He sighed as he spoke “No one has complained about it so far” he claimed but she was quick to speak “Why would anyone in Metropolis insult your suit when your saving there lives!?” she snapped back as Clark was shocked at her words... Were people scared of what he might do if they criticized his outfit? He never thought of that before “I mean... It doesn’t mean anything?” he asked back as Mari rolled her eyes before opening her mouth.

And insulted everything about his and Superboy’s suit of choice...

Jon was no longer able to hold in his laughter as he watched his father look ready to dig himself a hole, but in a way... He too had tried to make his father change something about there suits, the color or even the design would have been fine but Clark had refused and kept wearing it... And Jon was getting close to giving up and simply making the change himself “If you don’t work on making a new design... I will” she hissed as Jon watched as his dad nodded... And then flew away to more then likely the Fortress of Solitude.

“I have never seen my dad flee someone like that in my life” he explained... And then he realized his mistake “Your his son?” she asked as he slowly nodded in shame “It must be nice... Having such a powerful dad. I wonder how you both hide the fact your superheroes” she said as he looked at her in surprise “Most of the time if people were to claim there father and son they would ask a bunch of questions... But Marinette wasn’t doing such a thing, instead she was focused on other things.

“You really are something” he said with a smile as she looked at him and smiled in return “I’m going to sketch out what your suits should look like, once i’m done you can come see them with your dad and then work together on making them” she explained making him nod as he then allowed her to get some sleep as he flew back home “Mom! Dad is being a baby because Marinette talked back about our suits!” he claimed as Clark cursed while Louis walked over “What happened Clark. And don’t say nothing!” she demanded as Clark did as told and told her the whole conversation between him and Mari.

Jonathan really liked Marinette.

Meanwhile in Paris...

Lila couldn’t believe it! Maribrat somehow told her mother about her lies and now the woman was demanding answers from her “Did you really go to school like you said!? What did you do all those times you claimed the school was closed!? Did anything you said to me was the truth!? What really happened at school!?” she demanded more and more answers before Lila could even answer anything... She really was screwed if she didn’t turn the tables, with that she began to pull out the crocodile tears “I’m really sorry mom! I never meant for this to happen! But this girl in my class Marinette threatened me to accept the claims of me lying!” she explained as she hoped her mother would fall for her lies once more.

“Oh? You mean Marinette Dupain-Cheng? The girl your teacher Caline Bustier called me to speak about that your bullied and accused of bullying you!?” she yelled as Lila cursed in her head for going so forward into this without even knowing for certain if Mari did tell her mother all of this, even so there was nothing she could do, her mother had succeeded on scheduling for Lila to speak with everyone she lied about to apologize and then planned to for Lila to have her classmates to meet with them at the park so she could reveal the truth “And you better not leave a single lie out young lady! Your teacher told me every lie you spoke to them and I made sure to write them all down!” her mother said as Lila nodded as she texted her class to meet her with her mom at the park.

She hated this, the fact she was caught like this now of all times in her lies... She really wished that it was Marinette who revealed her now, that Caline Bustier was going to regret it now... While her mom left there home to make a quick call at work, Lila dialed the school board and explained it was urgent for her to report about her teacher Caline Bustier “The woman is cruel! My classmate Marinette Dupain-Cheng, is forced to do our teachers job for her! Schedule her class plan, work on our class trips! And if she tries to stop anything miss Bustier will schooled her for not being the better person! What’s worse is that she encourages bad behavior and bullying! And if the victims try to defend themselves she will schooled them!” she explained, the person who received her call wrote everything down and promised that they would investigate and then hung up while Lila grinned.

She might be falling now... But Caline would soon follow her...

In Hawaii...

Adrien looked over the conversation he just had through messages with Mari, he believed also that it was time to do something about there three enemies right now... But the question is... In what order? Either way Lila would try to get away with everything so they would need to be quick about it... So what should they do? Plagg flew over to read the conversation a bit before speaking “You guys are in a tight spot” he said making Adrien sigh, the gang had decided to go to the girls hotel room to relax a bit together while Adrien spoke to Mari, but now they had to talk “I think we need to have a team meeting in Metropolis guys” he said making them all turn to him “Why?” Chloe asked as Adrien tossed her his phone.

“Hawkmoth, Mayura and Lila are obviously working together... But no matter who we fight first... Lila will somehow escape justice she needs to face from her actions in Paris” he explained as Chloe handed the phone to Luka as Kagami read over his shoulder like Sabrina did with Chloe, Sabrina knew that for now she wouldn’t be able to come along, she didn’t have a match yet with a miraculous and for now they would need to leave her behind for the meeting and tell her everything when they get back “Alright, i’ll contact Mari to figure when for her to unify the horse and ladybug miraculous too have you go to Metropolis for the meeting... While also letting her know of our room number” Sabrina explained as they nodded to her words.

Even without a miraculous... Sabrina was a great help.

Next

@spicybelladonna @cornholio4

[jerek]

@dragonsruby LITERALLY!!!!!!!! (creepy rant about his features below)

I think he has a good number of 'imperfections' that literally just serve as a signature, a maker's mark, so that he doesn't look like any other Artbreeder wattpad boyfie.

Like, take the face shape for example. If you go over a character synopsis for Mozenrath, you might think he'd have very sharp cheekbones a la '2014 drawing of guy with bandaids.' But he doesn't. His face slopes, and it works better for him. Same with his huge hands, his lips, and presumably the monster adam's apple it takes for a cartoon dude to be voiced by Jonathan Brandis.

If Jessica Rabbit is a curvy girl taken to her logical extreme, Mozenrath is a man old enough to fight but too young to drink: with every part individually exaggerated. His entire design says 'male debutante:' waiting to be introduced to society. In another life, he'd be a smith's apprentice, almost done training, with three dairy maids following him like the girls following Gaston.

One time I was doing Voltron threads over Kik and this girl who insisted that we pivot to an original verse also insisted that I find a faceclaim for my male character. And then rejected like 5 male models for looking too aggressive, too passive, too feminine, too mannish.

And the funny thing was... as a male character, there was CONSTANT mention and description of what he found attractive. He liked everything she wore, and I would talk about why: same for physical attributes, same for personality.

On her end, though, nothing. The closest she got to matching my energy was mentioning how Protective he was. I don't know if it's a gendered thing but as a lesbian it really surprises me that there are straight women who seem to like men less than I do.

I know she felt a Way. But like.... there's a LOT to creep on and I'm surprised that when I look thru dA, nobody mentions the adam's apple. Come on now 😭😭😭

[foreverdavidbyrne]

David Byrne’s interview in NME magazine

In 1979, David Byrne predicted Netflix. “It’ll be as easy to hook your computer up to a central television bank as it is to get the week’s groceries,” he told NME’s Max Bell, sitting in a Paris hotel considering the implications of Talking Heads’ dystopian single ‘Life During Wartime’.

He predicted the Apple Watch in that interview too: “[People will] be surrounded by computers the size of wrist watches.” And he foresaw surveillance culture and data harvesting: “Government surveillance becomes inevitable because there’s this dilemma when you have an increase in information storage. A lot of it is for your convenience, but as more information gets on file, it’s bound to be misused.”

In fact, over 40 years ago, he predicted the entire modern-day experience, as if he instinctively knew what was coming. “We’ll be cushioned by amazing technological development,” he said, “but sitting on Salvation Army furniture.”

The 68-year-old Byrne says today, “You can’t say that you know,” chuckling down a Zoom link from his home in New York and belying his reputation for awkwardness by seeming giddily relieved to be talking to someone. “It’s crazy to set yourself up as some sort of prophet. But there’s plenty of people who have done well with books where they claim to predict what’s going on. I suppose sometimes it’s possible to let yourself imagine, ‘Okay – what if?’ This can evolve into something that exists, can evolve into something more substantial, cheaper – these kinds of things.”

It’s been a lifelong gift. Byrne turned up at CBGBs in 1975 with his art school band Talking Heads touting ‘Psycho Killer’, as if predicting the punk scene’s angular melodic evolution, new wave, before punk was even called punk. In 1980, Talking Heads assimilated African beats and textures into their seminal ‘Remain In Light’ album, foreshadowing ‘world music’ and modern music’s globalist melting pot, then used it to warn America of the dangers of consumerism, selfishness and the collapse of civilisation. Pioneering or propheteering, Byrne has been on the front-line of musical evolution for 45 years, collaborating with fellow visionaries from Brian Eno to St Vincent’s Annie Clark, constantly imagining, ‘What if?’

The live music lockdown has been a frustrating freeze frame, but Byrne was already leading the way into music’s new normal. Launched in 2018, the tour to support his 10th solo album, ‘American Utopia’, has now turned into a cinematic marvel courtesy of Spike Lee – the concert film was released in the UK this week. The original tour was acclaimed as a live music revolution. Using remote technology, Byrne was able to remove all of the traditional equipment clutter from the stage and allow his musicians and dancers, in uniform grey suits and barefoot, to roam around a stage lined with curtains of metal chains with their instruments strapped to them. A Marshally distanced gig, if you will.

“As the show was conceptually coming together, I realised that once we had a completely empty stage the rulebook has now been thrown out,” Byrne says. “Now we can go anywhere and do anything. This is completely liberating. It means that people like drummers, for example, who are usually relegated to the back shadows, can now come to the front – all those kinds of things – which changes the whole dynamic.”

With six performers making up an entire drum kit and Byrne meandering through the choreography trying to navigate a nonsensical world, the show was his most striking and original since he jerked and jived around a constructed-mid-gig band set-up in Jonathan Demme’s legendary 1984 Talking Heads live film Stop Making Sense.

The American Utopia show embarked on a Broadway run last year, where Byrne super-fan Spike Lee saw it twice and leapt at the chance of turning the spectacle into Byrne’s second revolutionary live film, dotted with his musings on the human condition to illuminate the crux of the songs: institutional racism, our lack of modern connection, the erosion of democracy and, on opener ‘Here’, a lecture-like tour of the human brain, Byrne holding aloft a scale model, trying to fathom, ‘How do I work this?’

“I didn’t know how much of a fan Spike was!” Byrne laughs today. “He’d even go, ‘Why don’t you do this song? Why don’t you add this song in’. We knew one another casually so I could text him and say, ‘I want you to come and see our show; I think that you might be interested in making a film of it’.”

Are the days of the traditional stage set-up numbered? “Yes, I think so,” he replies. “At least in theatres and concert halls the size that I would normally play, yes. The fact that we can get the music digitally [means] a performance has to be really of value. It has to be really something special, because that’s where the performers are getting their money and that’s what the audience is paying for. They’re not paying very much for streaming music, but they are paying quite a bit to go and see a performance, so the performance has to give them value for money… It has to be really something to see.”

How does David Byrne envisage the future possibilities of live performance?

“I’ve seen a lot of things that hip-hop artists have done – like the Kanye West show where he emerges on a platform that floats above the stage,” he says. “I’d seen one with Kendrick Lamar where it was pretty much just him on stage, an empty stage with just him on stage and a DJ, somebody with a laptop – that was it. I thought, ‘Wow’. Then he started doing things with huge projections behind. There are lots of ways to do this. I love the idea of working with a band, with live musicians. ‘How can I innovate in this kind of way?’ It’s maybe easier for a hip-hop musician who doesn’t have a band to figure out. The pressure is on to come up with new ways of doing this.”

In liberating his musicians from fixed, immovable positions, American Utopia also acts as a metaphor for freeing our minds from our own ingrained ways of thinking. As Byrne intersperses Talking Heads classics such as ‘Once In A Lifetime’, ‘I Zimbra’ and ‘Road To Nowhere’ with choice solo cuts and tracks from ‘American Utopia’, he also dots the show with musings on an array of post-millennial questions: the health of democracy; the rise of xenophobia and fascism; our increasing reliance on materialism and online communication; the climate change threat; the existential nightmare of the dating app; and, crucially, the distances all of these things put between us.

“The ‘likes’ and friends and connections and everything that the internet enables,” he argues, “even Zoom calls like this, they’re no substitute for really being with other people. Calling social networks ‘social’ is a bit of an exaggeration.”

Byrne closes the show with the suggestion that, rather than isolate behind our LCD barriers, we should try to reconnect with each other. In an age when social media has descended into all-out thought war and anyone can find concocted ‘facts’ to support anything they want to believe, is that realistic?

“I have a little bit of hope,” he says. “Not every day, but some days. I have hope that people will abandon a lot of social media, that they’ll realise how intentionally addictive it is, and they’re actually being used, and that they might enjoy actually being with other people rather than just constantly scrolling through their phone. So, I’m a little bit optimistic that people will, in some ways, use this technology a little bit less than they have.”

A key moment in American Utopia comes with Byrne’s cover of Janelle Monae’s ‘Hell You Talmbout’, a confrontational track shouting the names of African-Americans who have been killed by police or in racially motivated attacks – Eric Garner, Trayvon Martin, George Floyd and far, far too many more. Does Byrne think the civil unrest in the wake of Floyd’s death and the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement make a serious impact?

“We’ll see how long this continues,” he says, “but in projects that I’m working on – there’s a theatre project I’m working on in Denver, there’s the idea of bringing this show back to Broadway, there’s other projects – those issues came to the fore. Issues of diversity and inclusion and things like that, which were always there. Now they’re being taken more seriously. The producers and theatre owners realise that they can’t push those things aside, that they have to be included in the whole structure of how a show gets put together.”

“At least for now, that seems to be a big change. I see it in TV shows and other areas too. There’s a lot of tokenism, but there’s a lot of real opportunity and changed thinking as well.”

Elsewhere, he encourages his audience to register to vote, and had registration booths at the shows. He must have been pleased about the record turnout in the recent US election? “Yeah, the turnout was great. Now you just got to keep doing that. Gotta keep doing it at all the local elections, too. It was important for me not to endorse a political party or anything in the show but to say, ‘Listen, we can’t have a democracy if you don’t vote. You have to get out there and let your voice be heard and there’s lots of people trying to block it.’ We have to at least try.”

Will Trump’s loss help bring people together after four years with such a divisive influence in charge?

“Yes. I think for me Trump was not so much a shock; we knew who he is. He was around New York before that, in the reality show [The Apprentice], we knew what kind of character he was. What shocked me was how quickly the Republican party all fell into line behind him, behind this guy who’s obviously a racist, misogynist liar and everything else. But it’s kind of encouraging – although it’s taken four years and with some it’s only with the prospect of him being gone – that quite a few have been breaking ranks. There are some possibilities of bridge building being held out.”

But, he says, “It’s too early to celebrate,” concerned that Senate Majority Leader and fairweather Trump loyalist Mitch McConnell will use any Republican control of the Senate to block many of Biden’s policies from coming into effect. “[This] is what happened with Obama… I want to see real change happen. [Climate change] absolutely needs to be a priority. The clock had turned back over the last four years, so there’s a lot to be done. Whether there’s the willpower to do everything that needs to be done, it remains to be seen, but at least now it’s pointing in the right direction.”

How will he look back on the last four years? Byrne ponders. “I’m hoping that I look back at it as a near-miss.”

American Utopia is as much a personal journey as a dissection of modern ills. Ahead of ‘Everybody’s Coming To My House’, Byrne admits to being a rather socially awkward type. He claims that a choir of Detroit teenagers, when singing the song for the accompanying video, had imbued the song with a far more welcoming message than his own rendition, which found him wracked with the fear that his visitors might never leave. How does someone like that deal with celebrity?

“In a certain way it’s a blessing,” Byrne grins, “because I don’t have to go up to people to talk to them – they sometimes come up to me. In other ways it’s a little bit awkward. Celebrity itself seems very superficial and I have to constantly remind myself that your character, your behaviour and the work that you do is what’s important – not how well known you are, not this thing of celebrity. I learned early on it’s pretty easy to get carried away. But it does have its advantages. I had Spike Lee’s phone number, so I could text him.”

Talking Heads drummer Chris Frantz’s recent book Remain In Love suggests that the more successful Byrne got early on, the more distant he became.

Byrne nods. “I haven’t read the book, but I know that as we became more successful I definitely used some of that to be able to work on other projects. I worked on a dance score with [American choreographer] Twyla Tharp and I worked on a theatre piece with [director] Robert Wilson – other kinds of things – [and] I started working on directing some of the band’s music videos. So I guess I spent less time just hanging out. As often happens with bands, you start off being all best friends and doing everything together and after a while that gets to be a bit much. Everybody develops their own friends and it’s like, ‘I have my own friends too’. Everybody starts to have their own lives.”

The future is far too enticing for David Byrne to consider revisiting the past. “I do live alone so sometimes it would get lonely”, he says of lockdown, but he’s been using his Covid downtime to cycle around undiscovered areas of New York and remain philosophical about the aftermath.

“We’ll see how long before the vaccine is in, before we return to being able to socialise,” he says, “but I’m also wondering, ‘How am I going to look at this year? Am I going to look at it as, “Oh yes, that’s the year that was to some extent taken away from our lives; our lives were put on pause?”’ We kept growing; we kept ageing; we keep eating, but it was almost like this barrier had been put up. It has been a period where, in a good way, it’s led us to question a lot of what we do. You get up in the morning and go, ‘Why am I doing this? What am I doing this for? What’s this about?’ Everything is questioned.”

Post-vaccine, he hopes to “travel a little bit” before looking into plans to bring the ‘American Utopia’ show back to Broadway, and possibly even to London if the financial aspects can be worked out. “Often when a show like that travels, the lead actors might travel,” Byrne explains, “but in this case it’s the entire cast that has to travel. So you’ve got a lot of hotel bills and all that kind of stuff. We wanted to do it. There might be a way, if we can figure that out.”

Once we all get our jab, will everyone come to recognise that, as Byrne sings on ‘American Utopia’s most inspiring track, ‘Every Day Is A Miracle’? “Optimistically, maybe,” he says. “There will be a lot of people who will just go, ‘Let’s get back to normal – get out to the bars, the clubs and discos’. That’s already been happening in New York; there’s been these underground parties where people just can’t help themselves. But after all this it’d be nice to think that people might reassess things a little bit.”

And with the algorithm as the new gatekeeper and technology beginning to subsume the sounds and consumption of music, what does the new wave Nostradamus foresee for rock in the coming decades? Will AIs soon be writing songs for other AIs to consume to inflate the numbers, cutting humanity out of the equation altogether?

“It seems like there’ll be a kind of factory,” Byrne predicts, “an AI factory of things like that, and of newspaper articles and all of this kind of stuff, and it will just exaggerate and duplicate human biases and weaknesses and stupidity. On the other hand, I was part of a panel a while back, and a guy told a story about how his listening habits were Afrofuturism and ambient music – those were his two favourite ways to go. The algorithm tried to find commonalities between the two so it could recommend things to him and he said it was hopeless. Everything it recommended was just horrible because it tried to find commonalities between these two very separate things. This just shows that we’re a little more eclectic than these machines would like to think.”

And in the distant future? Best prepare to welcome your new gloop overlords. Byrne isn’t concerned about The Singularity – the point at which machine intelligence supersedes ours and AI becomes God – but instead believes that future technologies will emulate microbial forms.

“I watched a documentary on slime moulds [a simple slimy organism] the other day,” he says, warming to his sticky theme. “Slime moulds are actually extremely intelligent for being a single-celled organism. They can build networks and bunches of them can communicate. They can learn, they have memories, they can do all these kinds of things that you wouldn’t expect a single-celled organism to be able to do.”

“I started thinking, ‘Well, is there a lesson there for AI and machine learning, of how all these emerging properties could be done with something as simple as a single cell?’ It’s all in there… when things interact, they become greater than the sum of their parts. I thought, okay, maybe the future of AI is not in imitating human brains, but imitating these other kinds of networks, these other kinds of intelligences. Forget about imitating human intelligence – there’s other kinds of intelligence out there, and that might be more fruitful. But I don’t know where that leads.”

His grin says he does know, that he has a vision of our icky soup-world future, but maybe the rest of the species isn’t yet advanced enough to handle it. But if we’re evolving towards disaster rather than utopia, we can trust David Byrne to give us plenty of warning.

December 18, 2020

[ball-eis-korakas]

‘Translators are like ninjas. If you notice them, they’re no good.” This quote, attributed to Israeli author Etgar Keret, proliferates in memes, and who doesn’t love a pithy quote involving ninjas? Yet this idea – that a literary translator might make, at any moment, a surprise attack, and that at every moment we are deceiving the reader as part of an elaborate mercenary plot – is among the most toxic in world literature.

The reality of the international circulation of texts is that in their new contexts, it is up to their translators to choose every word they will contain. When you read Nobel laureate Olga Tokarczuk’s Flights in English, the words are all mine. Translators aren’t like ninjas, but words are human, which means that they’re unique and have no direct equivalents. You can see this in English: “cool” is not identical to “chilly”, although it’s similar. “Frosty” has other connotations, other usages; so does “frigid”. Selecting one of these options on its own doesn’t make sense; it must be weighed in the balance of the sentence, the paragraph, the whole, and it is the translator who is responsible, from start to finish, for building a flourishing lexical community that is both self-contained and in profound relation with its model.

Since I began an MFA in literary translation at the University of Iowa exactly 20 years ago, there have been numerous positive changes in the way translators are paid and perceived. Take the International Booker prize, which since 2016 has split the generous sum of £50,000 between author and translator, thereby genuinely recognising the work as a fundamentally collaborative entity that, like a child, needs two progenitors in order to exist.

Despite this type of extraordinary progress, there is ample room for improvement still. Often enough, translators receive no royalties – I don’t in the US for Flights – and a surprising number of publishers do not credit translators on the covers of their books. This is where the author’s name always goes; this is where you’ll find the title, too. People tend to be surprised when I mention this, but take another look at the International Booker, and you’ll see what I mean.

Since the 2016 launch of the redesigned prize, not one of the six winning works of fiction has displayed the translator’s name on the front. Granta didn’t name Deborah Smith there; Jonathan Cape didn’t name Jessica Cohen; Fitzcarraldo didn’t name me; Sandstone Press didn’t name Marilyn Booth; Faber & Faber didn’t name Michele Hutchison. At Night All Blood is Black by David Diop, 2021’s winner from Pushkin Press, doesn’t name Anna Moschovakis on its cover, although its cover does display quotes from three named sources. Four names, in other words, on the cover of a book Moschovakis wrote every word of. But her name would have been too much.

The underlying assumption on the part of many publishers seems to be that readers don’t trust translators and won’t buy a book if they realise it’s a translation. Yet is it not precisely this type of ruse that breeds distrust, and not translation itself? What tends to encourage a reader to pick up an unfamiliar book is the thrilling feeling that they are about to embark upon an interesting journey with a qualified guide. In the case of translations, they get two guides for the price of one, an astonishing – an “astounding”, a “wonderful”, a “fantastic”, a “fabulous” – bargain.

We desperately need more transparency at every level of literary production; this is just one example, although I do feel it’s an urgent one. Translators aren’t like ninjas. But we are the ones who control the way a story is told; we’re the people who create and maintain the transplanted book’s style. Generally speaking we are also the most reliable advocates for our books, and we take better care of them than anybody else. Covers simply can’t continue to conceal who we are. It’s bad business, it doesn’t hold us accountable for our choices, and in its wilful obfuscation it is a practice that is disrespectful not only to us, but to readers as well.

[alindae-anne]

What Makes a Book?

I want to take a break from my novel and dive into a history lesson of books themselves. Why? Well first of all, I will be honest, this blog is for an assignment. But also because the way books have evolved over the last 5,000+ years is fascinating!

Of course no one ever really thinks about THE book, just the fact that the story within its pages--the mystery, the romance, whatever they happen to be enjoying--is a great read (or maybe not so great), but have they ever wondered what materials the book is made from? Who invented it? How the book has become one of the most common and most used items of all time?

No. Of course they didn't wonder any of those things. And if they did, they probably didn't take the time to research any of these burning questions, either.

How great, then, that I wrote this post?! Today is your lucky day! (Also, it is a good thing that Keith Houston, author of Shady Characters, decided to write a whole book about it (1).) I'm going to use the pages of a classic tale to explain some cool things you probably never noticed while reading a book before.

Gulliver’s Travels was originally published in London in 1726 by Benjamin Motte. The author, Jonathan Swift, used it to satirize London society and culture, poking holes at the social hierarchies and systems, basically making out everyone living in the 18th century to be fools--but mostly the wealthy and those who were obsessed with scientific progression (2). If you have not read it, I highly encourage adding it to your reading list, or at the very least there is a 2010 movie, featuring Jack Black as Gulliver, that you could watch. (It’s Jack Black, okay?)

This 2 page spread of Gulliver's Travels pictured above is actually found in The Franklin Library edition from Franklin Center, Pennsylvania, published in 1979. This is the first printing of this edition, and its pages, the way it is printed, and the way it is bound and presented, are all features of the modern 20-21st century book, plus some extra bells and whistles. The most interesting qualities come from the publishers themselves who specifically design their books to be very snazzy--meant for collectors’ editions! They include different kinds of leather binding, exclusive illustrations, and may be signed or part of a particular series specific to a certain author or genre (3). This makes the books published here very valuable and sought after.

Gulliver’s Travels is hardcover. Specifically, “fine leather in boards.” This means the spine and front and back boards (or cover) of the book are bound in leather. The leather is fine and and delicate and able to be decorated and engraved upon.4 Above you can see how fancy it looks with the gilt gold engravements. Even its pages are gilt!

This picture shows more clearly the binding, and of course the spine, which is “hubbed,” or ridged, for added texture.

At this point you may have notice that this version is much different than the original published in 1726. That is because over time, the materials involved in making books have changed slightly or the processes have become more efficient or cost worthy, etc. Either way, the anatomy of the book has not wavered. Keith Houston has dissected the book into certain components and we can see them in each book we read:

I have attempted to label it as best as I can, so hopefully you can follow along:

Chapter Number

a) this seems to be a description, more or less of the chapter, or the Chapter Title. b) “A Voyage to Lilliput” seems much more title-like to me, although this is technically called the “Recto Running Head.” The recto running head is a condensed or abbreviated chapter title, repeating on every right-side page to the end of the chapter.

Drop Cap. This would be the first letter of the first word of a chapter, which is usually exaggerated or embellished in some way.

Opener Text

Head Margin - the space between the top of the page and text

Foot Margin - the space between the bottom of the page and text

Folio - page number

It has taken quite a while for books to become so sophisticated. Because it was published in 1726, Gulliver's Travels is technically what you could call "modern" in terms of how long ago books began their journey to what they are today, but even between 1726 and 1979 the quality has improved. This edition published by Franklin Library is a perfect model for the modern book of today.

The 2 page spread we analyzed above is made from paper. But books were not always made with paper, or even in the book form, bound with anything at all, and they were not printed either. They were written by hand on papyrus.

Papyrus was the first material used as "paper" beginning in Egypt. The reeds were stripped, strung side by side and pressed together. Papyrus was durable and sturdy, and the water of the Nile was abundant in aluminum sulfate, which brightened it so that writing and scribbles could be seen better. There is no particular origin of when Papyrus had first been invented but it must have been around the end of the 4th millenium BCE (Houston 4).  

Parchment is made from animal skin that has been soaked, scrubbed, dried, and stretched for days and days, creating a more flexible, yet still durable, material for writing. It was also thinner and could be made "cleaner" and brighter by chemical means. Religion heavily influenced its distribution; some parchment use was literally banned because the type of animal skin used to make it wasn't considered "holy" or "good." For example, the lamb or a calf was acceptable, but how dare you use parchment made from goat skin? What is wrong with you?

Besides the fact that parchment is kind of gross if you think about it (although to be fair, you can’t be too choosy in times right before the common era), it was also expensive to keep certain cattle only for paper making, and the reliability of having new cattle at the time you may need more paper was not very high.

Paper was first introduced in China. It is made from bits of cloth and rags soaked in water, and after breaking down into pulp, strained through a wire grate and pressed to dry. Fun fact-- the Rhar West Art Museum in Manitowoc, Wisconsin has held classes showing how to make paper using this exact process.

There is a trend here: the materials used to make paper (and papyrus and parchment before it) become scarce or too expensive, or they are just not “good enough.” People want their paper thin and smooth, but still strong and durable; crisp and bright, but still able to last years and years without crumbling. There have been times that processes used to ensure these preferred qualities of paper included using chemicals that ended up negatively affecting some other quality. For example, the paper would be white as snow, yet the chemical that did this broke down the natural adhesives which kept the paper intact.

Have you heard that paper grows on trees? Well, that is partly true since after rags and cloths were nowhere to be found (unless people were about to start donating the shirts off their backs), wood pulp has now since been used... the higher the demand for paper, the greater demand for those materials used for its creation. 

This brings us to printing side of things. The first ways of printing weren’t of how we think of it now. Even before papyrus, people were still writing and making inscriptions on pretty much anything they could get their hands on. The earliest forms of writing were rather indentations or markings on clay tablets. Found across the Middle East, it is a cuneiform script of the Sumerian people from 3300 BCE (Houston 79).

Similarly, the Egyptians were also keen on developing their own writing system which today we recognize as hieroglyphs. A lot of these were found carved on the walls of tombs but also began to be used on papyrus in 2600 BCE (Houston 82-83).

The Egyptians celebrated their scribes and believed those who wrote with brush and ink on papyrus to be channeling power--that it was a gift from the gods--”wielded with respect and humility” (Houston 87). The hieroglyphs not only showed the intention of the writer, visually, but often the picture would be associated with or connected to certain sounds which emerged more formal use of letters as time went on.

The alphabet we use today can be traced back to the Phoenician alphabet (used by the Egyptians) which had evolved into the Greek and then Roman alphabets (Houston 91-92). At this point in time, scribes were using water based ink which was fine for papyrus, but during the transition to parchment they realized that ink smudges quite a bit. This led to the creation of iron gall ink that would darken and adhere to the parchment as it dried due to its chemical makeup in contact with oxygen in the air.

Jump ahead to 1400s and we are with Johannes Gutenberg and the printing press! One thing Keith Houston make sure to mention is that although Gutenberg invented the printing press itself, to help moveable type and mass printing, the idea of printing had not been new. Clay pieces used as stamps and similar objects had been excavated and dated back thousands of years before the clay inscribed cuneiform tablets were made. And a primitive version of a sort of printing press is mentioned being made by a man named Bi Sheng during the reign of Qingli from 1041-1048 AD (Houston 110). Obviously nothing great came from it, most likely because he was of unofficial position. Even so, movable type was still possible, although painstakingly slow with wooden blocks used as stamps. This was common for the next few hundred years in China.

Even though Gutenberg's press completely revolutionized the transmission of knowledge, it was still quite slow in comparison to the versions which came after, only being able to print 600 characters a day (Houston 118). From Gutenberg's printing press came other types of presses that improved the speed or efficiency of movable type immensely. These all came after the original publication of Guliver's Travels, starting in the early 1800s with the Columbian press, eventually the Linotype, and then lack of precision called for the Monotype, which could produce 140 wpm (Houston 149).

The 2 page spread above then, could possibly have been printed by the Linotype, but most likely, however, the Monotype, which is the more accurate of the two. Another possibility could be "sophisticated photographic and 'lithographic' techniques" or "'phototypsetting'" (Houston 151). Houston mentions that the printing press age has died and now faces a digital future.

I'm at my 10 image limit which means I better wrap this up with some interesting facts about bookbinding. On BIBLIO.com I was trying to see exactly what "fine leather in boards" meant which is apparently how Gulliver's Travels is bound. I didn't find any phrase that matched, but from my understanding, the leather is very supple and pliable, which is why it was able to be gilt with gold, and it was able to form nicely to the hubbing on the spine.

The website also explains that the first "book binding" was technically just putting the pieces of paper or parchment together and pressing them between two boards. Literally. Like just setting them on a board and putting another board on top of that. Eventually leather was introduced, first as a cord wrapped around the book to keep the boards in place. As time progressed, the practice was improved and perfected so it was less crude. This involved the creation of the "spine" where the pages meet together and can therefore open and close in a v shape without flying away.

This website helped explain some of the other embellishments and extra flair that can be added to a book's binding. It mostly goes over leather binding which is from most animal skin but there is a unique leather bound book that can be bound with seal skin. Some of the books on the website are so expensive because of the materials they are bound with and the effects that have been created in the cover, for example, Benjamin Franklin's observations on electricity, which has had acid added to the page, discoloring it for a lightning strike effect, and includes a key to represent his famous experiment.

Gulliver's Travels, although not quite so fancy, is still a very beautifully bound book with decorated endpapers, meaning the inside cover is laden with designed paper rather than boring white or some other neutral color.

I hope you found this journey of the book as interesting and as exciting as I did while writing this post! You must really love books because even my attention span isn't this long. I will admit I took at least 3 different breaks.

I'm back to my novel for now, thanks for listening😎

Bibliography

Houston, Keith--Author of Shady Characters, which I used extensively in my TikTok “history of punctuation” project--also wrote -> The BOOK - a cover-to-cover exploration of the most powerful object of our time, 2016.

British Library Website -> works -> “Gulliver’s Travels overview”

Masters, Kristin. “Franklin Library Editions: Ideal for Book Collectors?” Books Tell You Why, 2017 (blog).

BIBLIO.com -> “Leather Binding Terminology and Techniques”

[abbacchiosbelt]

*All aboard the DILF bandwagon* Headcanons about a (fem)friend of Giorno catching the attention of Dio? The ones on Jotaro and Diavolo were great 🤩

y’all!!! you’re feral for the DILF content and i am here for it. okay — setting the stage: giorno lives with his father dio in the states. dio is a powerful prosecutor, lately more ruthless than ever after his divorce from jonathan over a year ago. giorno is going to college for marine biology (where he meets you, in a general class), as influenced by his relative dr. kujo. dio… is not happy.

needless to say, dio needs some god damn stress relief.

18+ under the cut! both parties are consenting adults.

When you meet Giorno Joestar-Brando, you’re not really sure what to think. He’s ethereal, really, and constantly has a gaggle of students trailing behind him. You don’t want to be like that, so you treat him like a normal person when he sits next to you in your English class. He’s quiet, but the two of you end up talking about your majors.

Each week that passes you grow closer with Giorno, eventually exchanging numbers to meet up for a study session. Sometimes you meet him for lunch with his boyfriend Fugo and their friend Mista, and occasionally you meet up with him for dinner. 

Eventually, you end up at Giorno’s house for regular study sessions. Fugo occasionally tutors the two of you but he’s a little… scary. Giorno has told you a bit about the father he lives with — Dio — but you’re not sure what to think. 

And then, the next time you visit, you’re greeted at the door by a very tall, handsome, and blonde man that you instantly recognize as Giorno’s father. It’s uncanny when Giorno’s hair is down from his usual style. Dio looks irritated to be answering the door, but he beckons you in and you’re left to stand nervously in the foyer while you wait for Giorno.

Dio is intense. He’s staring at you, and you feel like he can see right through you. Giorno looks horrified when he comes down the stairs to find Dio now interrogating you, and quickly drags you away. You do not miss the very obvious lick of his lips that Dio throws your way when Giorno turns his back.

When you run to the kitchen to get a glass of water that night, you’re met by Dio once again, leaning against the kitchen counter and sipping a glass of blood-red wine. He raises an eyebrow at you and asks if you need anything. When you stammer you were coming to get water, he steps forward and tips your chin up towards him with a lacquered nail, asking why Giorno was making a ‘darling creature’ like you fetch the refreshments. 

You turn beet red and say you volunteered. Dio backs off with an unamused hum and watches you collect what you came down for. Before you can leave the kitchen, he plucks a business card from the counter and scribbles something on it before putting it in the hem of your jeans with a smile, sharp teeth digging into his lip. He tells you to run along now and you scurry back to Giorno, hiding the business card (oh god, he wrote his personal number on it…). Giorno asks Dio did anything weird but you shake your head. You… don’t want to get into that. 

The next day you hem and haw before you text the number that Dio gave you. You don’t receive a reply until hours later, with Dio telling you to come over right now while Giorno was gone. Who did he think he was, telling you to come over right now? And yet here you were, nervously putting on a cute pair of lingerie along with a skimpy outfit, making the familiar journey to Giorno���s house.

Dio is shirtless when he answers the door — oh. He’s fucking ripped. He’s practically a model and you feel rather insignificant next to him, but he invites you in with a smirk nonetheless. Dio offers you a glass of wine which you refuse, but it doesn’t seem to trouble him. He beckons you to sit next to him on an impossibly large recliner. You perch nervously near his hulking form, keenly aware of the body heat radiating from him. 

Dio lowly speaks, asking how school is going, how you like the institution… And then without a shred of shame, he asks if you’re dressed like that because you wanted something more from Dio.

Dio’s charm and your willingness has you laid flat on the floor with Dio caging you in, his hands traveling slowly up and down your body. The closeness of it all — the way you can smell the wine on his breath, his bulging muscles pressed against you, the blonde hair cascading over his shoulders… Fuck, this was the best decision of your life.

Dio shreds your dress and you can’t find it in yourself to protest when he sucks one of your nipples into his mouth and sucks — shit, he was good. He works you up until his cock is straining against your now naked thigh. He’s not going to fuck you on the floor… No, Dio hauls you up and adjusts so that he has you held by your ass, cock teasing your sopping entrance.

He makes you beg and when you call him Master, his last shred of willpower is flung to the side when he plunges his thick cock inside of you. It stings for only a moment until the stretch becomes pleasant and you realize he’s strong enough to hold you up and fuck into you like it was nothing. You clench around him and for the first time in your life, cum just from penetration.

It just spurns Dio on as you weakly call out ‘Master’ and ‘Dio’ as he pumps into you. He nips at your shoulder and marks you as his — soon he’s at his limit, so you’re made to kneel on the floor and take his load on your face. 

He doesn’t cuddle, but Dio beckons you onto his lap and lets you sit there while both of you calm down. Negotiations are made — it’ll be for fun, of course, both your studies and Dio’s career come first. When you can, though, you’ll refer to Dio as Master and do as he commands. You’re left with several more orgasms before you leave the house, legs wobbly and body sated. 

Dio calls you more often than you would have thought, for a man so thoroughly invested in his business. Sometimes he fucks you in his luxury car that cost your tuition ten times over, and other times he comes to your little student apartment and fucks you on every single service.

For Dio’s sake and your own, you start on birth control and Dio becomes obsessed with cumming inside you. Any chance he has, he’s filling you to the brim with his cum. Some mornings he calls you and fucks you full of him, making you wear a plug to send him pictures throughout the day. 

Giorno, you hope, has no idea that you’re fucking his dad and that his dad has… interesting tastes. Giorno mentions that Dio has been less stressed than usual, but you only smile and nod.

One evening Dio invites you over, not realizing that Giorno had popped inside without him knowing. Dio takes you to his office and fucks you across his desk, spitting out degrading names that had you clenching around him and begging for his cum. You startle when there’s a loud knock at the door and Giorno’s soft yet harsh voice cutting through and asking Dio to keep it down.

You. Are. Red. Dio just chuckles and shoves you under the desk to service his cock with your mouth the rest of the night. Unfortunately for you… Giorno catches you on the way out. You are covered in bruises with your makeup smeared and have no possible explanation as to why you were there, except to be getting railed by Giorno’s father in his office. 

Giorno isn’t angry at you — he’s angry at Dio for what he assumes is manipulation. You tell Giorno it wasn’t, but he’s still not very happy. For Giorno’s sake, you only meet Dio outside of the home. Your friendship doesn’t suffer and you’re eternally grateful. 

Still, there’s a little thrill that runs through you when Dio is pounding into you about the fact that you are getting to fuck this incredibly beautiful and powerful man — Dio is practically obsessed with you and your body, so it’s a big ego boost. He loves fucking you almost as much as he loves himself!

[bombardthehq]

Convention and Meaning: Derrida and Austin Jonathan Culler, 2008 / read July 20

for Saussure things got their meaning by differnetation, contrasts

but this cant give a complete account: if you say 'Could you lift that box?' it might be a request, an abstract question of capability, or a rhetorical question about how hopelessly heavy it is

so where does it get the meaning?

we risk going back to saying that the meaning resides in the consciousness of the speaker

but a structuralist would ask: what makes it possible for them to mean these several things at once?

so we account for the meaning of 'utterances', different from sentences, by analyzing a different system: that of Speech Acts

so Austin is thus repeating Saussure's move: describing the system that makes 'signifying events' (parole) possible

Austin wont let us locate meaning in the speaker's mind - there isnt an 'inner act of meaning' which goes on when you mean something

it gets its meaning through certain conventions -- if I say 'I promise to return this to you', indicating an item I will borrow, you understand that I am making a promise, but when I just wrote it you understood that this is not a promise bc it lacks the context

so Austin offers a structural explanation of meaning which avoids 'logocentric premesis' -- but in his discussion of it he reintroduces the problems he just overcomes. This is what Derrida tries to deal with in Signature, Event, Context

in How To Do Things With Words, Austun wants to get over some narrow views of language his milieu had; to have a theory adequate to statements which had been discarded as meaningless or 'psuedo-statements' for not fitting their critera [which were: either a description, or a statement of fact - and could be either true or false]

he distinguishes two types: constitutive statments (descriptions of statements of fact), and performative statements (which enact what they say)

there is a surprising conclusion here: if I say, 'I affirm that the cat is on the matt', I'm performing my affirmation. But a crucial aspect of performatives is that they can have the explicitly performative part removed: 'I will pay you tomorrow' is still a promise. But removing the 'I affirm...' gives us, 'the cat is on the mat' - I still affirm it, performatively - but the statement I make is also an emblematic constitutive statement

Culler notes that Austin's argument here is a 'splendid' instance of the deconstructionist 'supplementarism' here, in its inversion of the old formula: what had been seen as merely secondary or inessential becomes the most primary -- rather than performatives being secondary to constitutives, the constitutives are a special case of the performative

"The conclusion that a constative is a performative from which one of various performative verbs has been deleted has since been adopted by numerous linguists." [how used is this in linguistics?]

this allows us to solve the problem of a single statement having multiple meanings: its actually a performative statment from which the performative has been deleted. 'I ask you to lift the box', 'I inquire if you could lift the box', 'I despair at the box's weight'

Austin doesnt argue this and would be skeptical of it; he argues that illocuctionary force (meaning) does not necessarily derive from  grammatical structure

he instead proposes a distinction between locutionary and illocuntionary acts

so when I say 'the chair is broken' I perform the 'locutionary' act of making an utterance, and the 'illocutionary' act of 'stating, warning, complaining...', whatever performance

linguistics accounts for the meaning of the locutionary act; speech act theory accunts for the meaning (or 'illocutionary force') of an utterance

explaining illocutionary force means explaining the conventions that make it possible

we might find out what these conventions are by looking at how these performatives can go wrong, might not actually enact the promised performance [I think eg. a bigamous marriage would prevent the 'I pronounce you man and wife' from really marrying the couple]

so Austin doesnt treat failure as something alterior to performatives, accidental, not part of how they really work, but an integral part of them - performances can go wrong -- something cannot BE a performative unless it CAN go wrong [continental philosophers like him for this reason: he really grasps the 'negative' (Culler puts it in these terms later)]

this accords with semiotics: a statement couldn't signify if it couldnt be said falsely

Austin argues that performing acts - like marrying or betting - must be described as something like 'saying certain words' rather than performing some inward action which the words reflect

...enter Derrida

Derrida argues that despite saying this, Austin reintroduces this inward action as the force of the performance

Austin, worrying about jokes etc., perhaps because it would involve a description of an inward act of meaning, says that only 'serious' speech acts can be analyzed, but doesnt argue for it. He actually puts 'serious' in scare quotes, as if the argument itself was a joke [Deconstructionists love that stuff...]

so after remarking that philosophers wrongly excluded utterances which werent true or false, he excludes utterances which aren't serious. Instead of arguing for it as a 'rigorous move within philosophy', its a customary exclusion 'on which philosophy relies'

later on he describes these 'unserious' uses as 'parasitic on' the normal use; so Austin introduces a new constitutive & supplementary distinction, after getting away from one

Searle defended this to Derrida saying that we ought not *start* our investigation by considering these parasitic discourses [we feel, and have perhaps been primed to feel by Culler, that this misses the point that Austin makes his intervention by uncovering the way these 'supplementary' excess cases are core to the working logic of speech acts, and this might be another such case - although we might not feel it to be necessarily the case that *all* supplementary things are likewise constitutive, although perhaps Derrida 1. argues that *this* supplement is constituive, but also 2. that all supplements are constitutve of what they are supplemental to, as a matter of a thing being a thing, elsewhere]

actually Derrida's case is moreso that setting aside these uses as secondary from the beginning is begging the question; the theory has to be able to account for them -- Austin deals with an 'ideal language' here, not the one really used (which includes uses by actors on a stage, in jokes... Derrida here appears as an ordinary language philosopher!)

So Searle argues that its parasitic because its not possible for an actor to make a promise in a play if we didnt make promises in real life; but Culler says, why see it this way around? Perhaps it is only possible to make a promise in real life if it could be made in a play. For Austin, an utterance is only possible because there are formuals and procedures that we can follow to do so - so for me to do it irl, there have to be iterable procedures that could be acted out...

so Derrida asks: could my performance succeed if it didn't conform to an iterable model? -- for it to succeed there needs to be a model, a representation, and the actors representation of it is just such a thing

~footnote: some commentary on Searle's disagreement... he brings up a use/mention distinction - performatives use utterances, while actors just mention them. Derrida argues that this distinction requires us to go back to making use of intentionality & the inner act that meaning depends on, what we were trying to get away from: if I mention something instead of use it, it can only be because I intend to mention it...

Culler gives an example that is very ambiguous w/r/t use/mention - "His colleagues have said his work was 'boring' and 'pointless' " -- have I merely mentioned the words boring and pointless (since I'm just quoting others who have said it) or have I used them (since I do imply that his work is really boring and pointless)? To tell you would have to decide which one I intended to express.~

so, to repeat Austin's move on the core/marginal distinction that Austin reintroduces: the so-called serious performance is actually a special case of the parasitic - its an instance or reenactment of this iterable representation

so imitation is a condition of possibility of signification

eg., for there to be a recognizable original 'Hemmingway style', there must be some style which can be imitated, repeated, etc. [This seems very convincing to me]

so, the performative is from the outset structured by this possibility for iterability, citation, performance-of...

the reason that Austin reintroduces this flawed core/supplementary model is to solve a problem for speech act theory:

if you explicate all the conditions that make a particular performative possible (which is the goal of speech act theory), say-- 'I pronounce you married' is perforative only if there is a marriage license, a licensed officiary, etc. - one can *always* imagine a further scenario that would cause the performative to fail (say, they're all actors in a play...)

Austin tries to resolve this by ruling out instances where the speaker is 'not serious' - but this requires us to appeal to the intentions, etc...

so to make performatives and 'performance' coextensive is to maintain a version of the theory that can really discard intention etc., but at the cost of being unable to explicate the conditions of possibility of a given performative - because it gets its meaning only via context, and the number of contexts is infinite

... [skipping a nice section that we dont really need to note]

for Austin, a signature is the equivalent in writing of a performative utterance, 'I hereby...'

on this idea, Derrida ends Signature, Event, Context, by writing his name twice, and indicating one is a counterfeit of the other. The joke being: is this counterfit, citational second signature not a signature, because he wasnt being serious? or does it function as a signature, because a signature is signing your name?

the other implication: which of the two signatures is the 'real' one? you cant tell in writing -- 'the effects of the signature depend on iterability'

so contrary to Austin, who holds that the signature is an indication of some inner intention (assent to an agreement, etc), the signature can only funtion if it is repeatable, iterable... "The condition of possibility of [its] effects is simaultaneously ... its condition of impossibility, or the impossibility of their rigorous function." [ie. to be possible, it must also be imitable, repeatable... theres a bit of what 'difference & repetition' is engaging w/ here --

interesting to comapre w/ Deleuze here - for Derrida, something has to be repeatable in order to be at all because its just a repeatable expression of conditions of possibility. This means its negative is prefactored into its conditions of possibility -- the price of having a signature is that the signature can be counterfeited.

Deleuze is somewhat allergic to 'conditions of possibility', and also wants to find a system where the negative doesn't exist. I'm not sure how he might argue w/ Derrida here. Perhaps he would feel that it is the difference between each signature which makes it repeatable... but that doesnt really make sense to me & is probably an overly literal reading. It's possible the two only disagree in terminology here - what Derrida would call the negative is just another form of difference for Deleuze. I'm not sure.]

Culler talks about how signatures can be made without the signatory's presence, in the case of machines signing checks automatically, so that wages are paid without being physically cashed in

he identifies 'logocentrism' as seeing these sorts of things as secondary to or parasitic on direct speech where the speaker's intentions are carried out

really, such cases could not occur if they didnt belong to the structure of the signing (etc.) already

so Derrida says that intention will not disappear from a good analysis, but it will no longer govern the entire 'system of utterance'... so while I intend to mean something and thats why I speak, the act of speaking itself introduces a gap between my intention and my words. My attention is the reason I structure things the way I do, why I make use of certain conventions, etc., but my intention is not accessible in the words I use (just as we might say, if I make a necklace, my intention for the necklace to be a gift for my niece is not a property of the necklace itself; the meaning/illocutionary force of a speech act is the necklace here - a speech act is given its meaning by the conventions it uses to generate a meaning, and I employ those conventions to try and say what I intend to say)

Culler introduces the unconscious here - often we say things and do things for reasons we are unconcious of, so intention is even a little more deflated. My reasons for saying something are not entirely conscious intentions which are transparent and accessible to reflection, but a 'structuring intentionality' that includes implications that never "entered my mind"

"Intentions are not a delimited content but open sets of discursive possibilities-what one will say in response to questions about an act." [nice idea]

"The example of the signature thus presents us with the same structure we encountered in the case of other speech acts: (1) the dependence of meaning on conventional and contextual factors, but (2) the impossibility of exhausting contextual possibilities so as to specify the limits of illocutionary force, and thus (3) the impossibility of controlling effects of signification or the force of discourse by a theory, whether it appeal to intentions of subjects or to codes and contexts." [a summary of the whole argument]

what this means is that meaning can never be *exhaustively* determined, but we are still left with tools to examine speech acts and how they work, etc.

Culler gives a nice defense that meaning being indeterminable (or not precisely, finally, exhaustively determinable) does not mean that no analysis can or should be done by comparing it with Godel's incompleteness theorem in mathematics: "the impossibility of constructing a theoretical system within which all true statements of number theory are theorems does not lead mathematicians to abandon their work"

[adrianodiprato]

+ "The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.” ~ Antonio Gramsci | Italian Author Selections from the Prison Notebooks

Game Changers | Series Three Reflection

During this global pandemic l have been personally inspired and encouraged by the actions of many individual educators and learning communities to rethink what education can be and should be in the future. In our Continuous Learning Toolkit – Volume III | Wellness By Design® we highlighted that across all continuous learning models during COVID-19 those schools which have continued to thrive have operated effectively and compassionately at personal, relational and community levels. They have responded to adversity by promoting qualities of creativity, curiosity and challenge, complemented by a significant focus on the social and emotional resilience of all - students, staff, and families. People have really mattered, and systems needed to have been reshaped to meet the needs of people; we can’t tell you the number of times we have heard educators tell us that “wellness comes first”.

Why shouldn’t that be the norm always? The pursuit of excellence, especially academic attainment really matters to us at a School for tomorrow. and we can’t help but wonder why we would ever have thought that wellness was something that was a binary opposite to high standards, or something of secondary importance, or an add-on, or somebody else’s business in education. An excellent person understands that their wellness is the foundation on which their good character, competency, achievements and contributions are built. So, shouldn’t “being well” be part of our better normal?

All over the world, there's growing consensus that our education systems are broken. In Series Three of the Game Changers podcast we encountered educators and social entrepreneurs that shared big ideas on how learning communities might amplify the central position of The Whole of Learning: Wellness by Design®, as we support each young person to move from resilience to the power of resourcefulness of self-efficacy, personal aspiration, adaptive expertise, voice, agency and advocacy.

The true mark of a leader is the willingness to stick with a bold course of action. Much like the Gramsci quote, each of our Series Three Game Changers recognised that the delivering models of schooling, that we have become accustomed too, are no longer relevant for a Whole of Learning ecosystem. That true courageous leaders lead through crisis, by addressing the real challenges and findings of today, with a lens on tomorrow, and often of the “morbid symptoms” that are brought into sharp focus as a result of such things like a global pandemic. Our Series Three Game Changers wake up brave and unafraid for the challenge ahead, with the deep understanding that it’s time to choose to allow our students to go on a personal journey of discovery that will give them the character, competency and wellness to be a generation of happier, healthier and more confident young people, who can truly thrive in the new tomorrow of their world.

Episode One | Vishal Talreja

We started Series Three with Dream A Dream co-founder Vishal Talreja.

Key learnings – Dream a Dream is a not-for-profit organisation in Delhi, India positively impacting on the lives of young people from vulnerable backgrounds to overcome adversity and flourish in a fast-changing world. One key aspect of our conversation with Vishal was an insight into the development and implementation of a Happiness Curriculum. This Happiness Curriculum aims to equip students with the necessary skills so young people can better deal with anxiety and stress while thinking critically. Placing wellness at the centre of all learning interactions at Dream a Dream.

Episode Two | Leslie Medema

Key learnings – I love this quote from Leslie, “Learning doesn’t only take place in a school or classroom. We are here to teach you the skills of learning. You can take that from here and learn anywhere, anytime from anything. Life is learning. That is the concept we want our children to learn: Learning is wall-less.” The keyword with all of this for education therefore is relevance. For education to remain relevant in today’s world the future of education and schooling must evolve. The content and style of teaching hasn’t changed much over the last few decades. However, it must to ensure education remains relevant. Leslie eloquently highlighted that a new renaissance in education means that we re-structure our relationship to learning and life, our relationship to the planet and our relationship to the world of work. We need a different educational model that has a value shift to a new learning ecosystem that allows us to meet the basic needs of every human on the planet, in order to thrive in an era of constant uncertainty.

Episode Three | Nathan Chisholm

Key learnings – Andria Zafirakou, the 2018 winner of the Global Teacher Prize, spoke about the future of education at Davos in January 2019 around the key to unlocking children’s futures, stating “We need children to be the problem-solving generation, and unless we teach them problem-solving skills, which come from the creative subjects, it won’t happen.” I believe that these human skills that Zafirakou refers to are central to an educational renaissance and learning vision that Nathan Chisholm and his team at Prahran High School are framing through the deep interrogation of their values - challenge, creativity, curiosity and character, fostering a learning community that allows each young person to thrive in a new world environment.

Episode Four | Tracey Breese

Key learnings – In 2019 the World Economic Forum held their annual meeting of global political and business leaders in Davos, Switzerland. Jack Ma, founder of Alibaba Group, China’s e-commerce giant stated this at Davos, “If we do not change the way we teach, 30 years from now, we’re going to be in trouble”. That the knowledge-based approach of “200 years ago”, would “fail our kids”, who would never be able to compete with machines. Children should be taught “soft skills” like independent thinking, values and teamwork, he said. And Tracey gets it. She knows that the jobs of the future are one’s machines can’t do and continues to focus on cultivating the whole person as part of the whole of learning framework at Kurri Kurri High School. While adhering to all the regulatory compliance, Tracey continually finds opportunities to enable, equip and engage all learners.  

Episode Five | David Ferguson

Key learnings – Tuakana-Teina is a Māori concept referring to the relationship between an older sibling (Tuakana) and a younger sibling (Teina) and is specific to a teaching and learning context. David Ferguson, although not Māori, embodies this concept as the Principal of an all boy’s school in New Zealand. Assuming the role of the older sibling, he deeply understands the profoundness of the character apprenticeship between the teacher and student and the growth gains from a positive social exchange between the two. It is a shared learning and development partnership between someone with experience and someone who wants to learn, resulting in mutual reflection, learning and growing of both Tuakana and Teina. David gets this responsibility in supporting boys to become young men, the multiple masculinities of all young men.

Episode Six | Debbie Dunwoody

Key learnings – When I think of Debbie Dunwoody, I think of permission. She is one of those rare leaders that fully understands the power of permission. The word permission has agency and movement and is central to Debbie’s leadership style, one that is open to the inherent possibility of all members of her community at Camberwell Girls Grammar School. We need more leaders in education like Debbie, who park their ego at the door. She listens and more often than not, responds with yes, especially empowering her staff to trial ideas and take risks, leveraging design thinking has an important framework to find positive solutions to wicked challenges. I want to work for and with Debbie.  

Episode Seven | Jonathan McIntosh

Key learnings – In the World Economic Forum’s 2020 publication, Schools of the Future: Defining New Models of Education for the Fourth Industrial Revolution they state, “Many studies have shown that New York City’s public-school system is among the most racially and economically segregated in the United States[1]. Prospect School’s “diverse by design” model aims to address this challenge by creating truly diverse and integrated learning environments where students can gain a deep understanding of the ways in which alternative perspectives drive innovation and creativity.” Diversity, inclusion and representation matters. Jonathan and the work of Prospect Schools in New York understand this. This conversation with Jonathan amplifies why people need people, and that every young person is home to a unique life. How poignant is this during the current climate of Black Lives Matter.

Episode Eight | Yasodai Selvakumaren

Key learnings – “We are seeing a growing consensus around the shared conviction that character, competency and wellness is the whole work of a school. This work needs to empower the emerging voice and agency of students on their pathway to adulthood as they wrestle with what they think about their mark (their inner sense of fulfilment) and their measure (their sense of validation according to what others expect of them), and cultivate and put into practice values, beliefs, and actions.” Dr Phil S A Cummins. So, we are starting to talk about voice in schools. But do we do it? “Something I really strive for with my students is for them to understand they have a place in the world and to help them find their voice.” This quote by Yasodai sums up this amazing life force and human being. How can you not love her infectious energy. Her passion for young people is awe-inspiring. And her empowerment of their voice is central to the strength of her pedagogical approach. Brilliant!

Special Series | Dean Delia & Scott Miller

Key learnings – A friend to us at Game Changers, the amazing Jan Owen AM stated this back in 2018, when she was the CEO of the Foundation of Young Australians (FYA), “Over the past decade, there has been growing consensus that Australia’s education and training systems must evolve to ensure they are responsive and relevant to the changing world of work and needs of the future workforce”. And “Our goal should not be to ensure that young people are simply finishing school but to make certain that every student has built a ‘portfolio’ of skills and capabilities with which to thrive in the new economy. “ Dean Delia and Scott Millar get this. And they are working hard to equip young people with this necessary enterprise thinking and skills to move from resilience and surviving, to the profoundness of resourcefulness and thriving. Two remarkable young men who continue to find opportunities to help others, particularly our young people, to shine in this new world environment.  

A clear feature of all conversations we shared throughout Series Three has been an explicit focus on wellness. While some have viewed the use of technology as a distraction, the application of technology during COVID-19 has been an opportunity to prioritise wellness into all aspects of planning and scheduling. This new or better normal of schooling is based on a shared understanding of the significance of the interdependence of learning and wellness as we support each young person to flourish in this new world environment. It requires us to map the connectedness of a whole education for character, competency and wellness. It brings into sharp focus self-direction, self-determination and self-regulation as critical dimensions in fostering the development of resourceful and independent learners equipped with the adaptive expertise and self-efficacy to thrive in their world.

Thank you to Vishal, Leslie, Nathan, Tracey, David, Debbie, Jonathan, Yasodai, Dean and Scott for sharing your story and passion. And thank for reminding us all that each person in our learning communities is home to a life. It is as simple and complex as that. Born from the construct of love – of self, for place and the other.

Listen to our Series Three: Epilogue via streaming platforms - SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Google Play.

[1] Source: Kuscera, J. and G. Orfield, “New York State’s Extreme Segregation”, The Civil Rights Project, 2014, https://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k- 12-education/integration-and-diversity/ ny-norflet-report-placeholder/Kucsera-New- York-Extreme-Segregation-2014.pdf.

[jasmine-the-fox]

Loose the model but win a hero

Here we go part 5!! I’m super excited for this and i’m going to do my best for this chapter because this is where were going back and forth from Metropolis, to Paris to Hawaii and back... So here we go!

Chapter 5: Meeting the Super’s

Previous First

Mari got to know Jon even more then before, he had a sorta group of friends but she couldn’t meet them “They live outside of Metropolis and I need to go see them, I end up living with them every time” he explained making her nod in understanding from what she could understand they all live in the West side of Jump city.

But for her to meet them wouldn’t happen anytime soon...

It sucked and Jon wanted her to meet them all, but things were happening... That being them being with there families at the moment, so for now she would need to wait until school start again for her to meet them “I’m pretty sure my parents uncovered a bunch of stuff about you and are going to ask my friends and I to transfer to your school” he said making her blush at the idea of having a group of people knowing her life in Paris.

But then again... Jon did believe her...

When they got into the fabric shop, Mari went further into what she went through at school, how her teacher and principal don’t call Lila’s mom or asks for a doctor’s paper, how they allow Lila to lie to her classmates, how her classmates demand Mari brings proof and when she does it’s not enough to them, how when Lila accuses Mari of doing something to her she doesn’t need to show proof and her classmates will attack her... Jon felt the urge to break something.

His dad was also feeling the same way, he was listening in on them through his super hearing and heard everything she said... He just wanted to destroy her school and get her principal and teacher arrested, even ruin her class from getting any job they hoped for... While Lila is deported and is never heard of again, but he knew it wouldn’t do go so for now he would need to wait while he watched his son be happy with Marinette... He wondered if they had feelings for each other, kinda like him and Louis now that he thought about it.

“Hey Jon... Can I ask you a question?” Mari asking something like that was a surprise to Jonathan, Mari was always straight to the point and nod... She sounded worried about something “Sure Mari, what’s up?” he asked back and it somehow clamed her down enough that he noticed it from her body language “Do you think... I’m a doormat? You know with how I did everything my classmates wanted me to do?” she asked, it actually surprised Jon because he didn’t know what to think about that... Then again she only told him about what her classmates did to her because of Lila.

“You would need to explain on that part. Why would you think something like that about yourself?” he asked and this caused Mari to go on the defense… it was like what she was about to tell him... It might destroy something inside of him, and it was bad enough that she would be scared of telling him all of a sudden “You... You need to promise that... That this stays between us... No one can know!” she claimed making him nod in understanding... Resulting in her relaxing a but before taking a breath... And telling him everything.

Now he and his dad really wanted to kill that class...

Back in Hawaii...

Kagami had arrived from her competition and Luka was relaxing already, it felt nice to them right now and the fact that Mari wasn’t with them right now... Felt strange to them, of course Pollen, Plagg, Longg and Sass were relaxing together like there holders were doing... But they were watched by Sabrina “Which miraculous you think Mari will give Sabrina?” Adrien asked out of the blue, they all began to think about it... And sadly nothing came to mind, there was a limit of miraculous that had been used and so far none of them would be good to match with Sabrina “It can’t be the fox, turtle, bunny, horse, monkey or mouse... None of them would match her like ours do” Chloe claimed making them nod.

This meant that it must be a miraculous Marinette has yet to bring out...

For now they had to wait until she was with them to talk about that part, so for now they would relax “My queen, I believe that the guardian will give Sabrina a miraculous when she sees the time comes for her” Pollen explained making Adrien look confused about that “What do you mean by that?” he asked making the four kwami’s turn to him “You see kid, now that Marinette is the guardian... She is way more powerful, you see when an akuma will appear she can sense what miraculous is missing to the team to join in battle” Plagg explained to him.

“Which is why Fu turned to her, he knew Marinette would be a better guardian then he was by keeping us hidden” Longg said making them look at one another “Is that why she gave Kagami and I the miraculous back under the condition of a new name and look? Because we were needed?” Chloe asked as Sass sighs “It is more then that, you sssssee Marinette can ssssensssse when someone matches a miraculousssss... Because there ssssoul matches the miraculousssss...” he said as Pollen then spoke “There was another bee holder in Paris, but the guardian chose you, as for Kagami she was the only dragon holder” she explained making them nod.

In a way the two girls felt... Honored about this, the fact that Mari could have gotten the other possible bee holder showed Chloe had worked hard enough to keep it, as for Kagami she knew Mari could have gone to find another dragon holder and have them live in Paris but she didn’t and instead kept Kagami, but now they had a job to do, they still needed to defeat Hawkmoth and Mayura “We need to also stop Lila and her crimes... She’s also part of this as she does work with Hawkmoth of her own will” Luka whispered making them nod, Sabrina had filmed Lila grab an akuma to get herself akumatized making them have proof about her.

“We still need to talk to Mari about our plan on Lila, she’s the one who started this whole thing and she’s the one who makes the plans so we need her to guide us” Adrien said making them nod, Sabrina during this time was looking on social media to see Marinette’s new post “Hey! Mari is hanging out with Clark Kent and Lois Lane’s son Jonathan!” she claimed making them move to her side to see the picture... She was right, right next to Mari was Jon himself, she had tagged him to the post saying how he took her to have the best coffee in Metropolis and how she wished they had this in Paris.

“She is so going to use the horse to get some” Kagami claimed making them smile and laugh at how right she was, Mari was a coffee addict and needed every morning some sort of coffee concoction to wake her up or to stay awake and no matter how hard they try... They can’t keep her away from it, but still it was nice to know that it wasn’t mixed with a bunch of stuff to keep her awake so it was nice to know that “At least she can drink a normal cup in Metropolis without getting weird looks when she tells someone what’s in her coffee” Chloe claimed making them nod to that fact, there had been a number of times she was asked about her coffee and the number of things she has in the cup of hers... Always made people look at her like she was crazy.

But then again... What else was new?

Back in Paris...

Caline Bustier was doing her best to remember the excuses Lila gave her to not give homework or for being absent for some time... Pretty much everything, she needed to do this in order to explain all of this to Lila’s mother, she had the woman’s number and remembered to have called her once but simply hung up before Caline could speak to her, it was strange but she was certain that it was Lila’s doing, now she was working on her list of excuses Lila gave her so when she speaks to Lila’s mother she can tell her everything that the girl has done in reality and figure out if those trips, injuries, connections, gifts and diseases were true.

Once she wrote everything down, she looked everything over three times before making the call, if she was right then the woman would be at work on her break “Embassy, Rossi speaking” the woman’s voice was different from Lila “Hello miss Rossi, i’m Caline Bustier, Lila’s teacher. I’m calling to talk to you about the best way to help your daughter more at school since she has been traveling with you when she first arrived and is still missing many assignments to make her pass the year” she explained, she wasn’t lying even, Lila is missing a bunch of work and has kept on pushing it back for months.

“What? There must be some mistake, we have been in Paris for years! And she told me the school was closed for months because Ladybug and Cat Noir couldn’t take care of the akuma” the woman replied making Caline sigh “I was afraid of this... It would seem your daughter lied to the both of us and the principal” Caline replied and began to read over the lies Lila spoke since she got to there school... And there were many lies so it took her a while to read them all to miss Rossi... But she was certain the mom was getting furious towards her daughter for lying “I’m also afraid that she has caused a number of problems within my class, a girl named Marinette has been claimed a bully by your daughter... I believe Marinette knows Lila is lying and has spun it around to make it look like Lila was the victim from the start” Caline explained with a sigh.

Miss Rossi was silent after that, not a word was spoken from the woman... Caline worried she did something wrong at some point “How bad is it... Her school work” the woman spoke just like that with hidden anger in her voice “If Lila doesn’t turn in any work next year, not only will she be staying at the school to do the years all over again... But she will also be forced to go to summer school” Caline explained after looking at a paper that was written in her handwriting the consequences of Lila’s missing grades, she knew this was going to happen in the end since Lila was always told about it if she didn’t turn anything in and now... This will be what happens if she doesn’t do it still.

Caline Bustier was certain when miss Rossi thanked her and hung up... That she had sent Lila Rossi into the Lion’s den called her mother.

Back in Metropolis...

Lois had at last spoken to every person who’s number Jon got her, with all the info she gained thanks to them... She would be making the publishing news of the century... Ruining a number of lives as she was certain people from around the world will read it and translate it so everyone can understand it, not only that but she was making sure to make it in French too so to send it to Paris on purpose so they too will know the truth about Lila Rossi and what she did to a number of lives... Because that girl had a huge number of skeletons in her closet, and Loui cracked that closet wide open to reveal the truth on the Italian girl.

And she didn’t care how badly she ruins that girls life... She asked for it the moment she met Marinette Dupain-Cheng.

Next