#MY HOMOSEXUALITY IS IN JEOPARDY HELP?????? | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

cuntess-carmilla · 4 years ago

Text

The level of performance you demand from bi people as a whole, but especially of bi women, is motherfucking insane. I really don't get why you all demand bi women virtue signal their sexuality by "rejecting" men in order to not deem them gross lesbophobes by virtue of existing. "Even" if they prefer men that's not necessarily out of some internalized homo/biphobia. They just like men. That’s kind of part of (most bi people’s) bisexuality. Shocker, I know.

A lot of the behaviors you all accuse bi women of (not taking other women seriously as partners, for example) are behaviors a lot of lesbians in denial exhibit too but in us you see victims of our own pain and misogyny who need help and understanding, while in bi women you see vile irredeemable perpetrators who must be ostracized and punished.

You blame them of their own abuse at the hands of cis straight men in ways that if you remove the "bi" from "bi women" you would recognize as disgusting victim-blaming, WHILE rejecting them & pushing them out of LGBT spaces, which, guess what you fucking geniuses; leaves them to have cis straight men as their only viable option. Funny how that works. You're all "women should stay away from dating bi women" or "bi women fetishize lesbianism by wanting to be with women" but shame bi women for being with men IN THE SAME BREATH. What the fuck do you want them to do? Be celibate for your own biphobic comfort?

I legit saw idiots on Twitter say "normalize lesbians only dating other lesbians" as if that's not what's normalized already. Bi women are already seen as gross sluts that kiss women at parties to turn men on and only seriously date men. What the fuck isn’t normalized about lesbians dating lesbians only?

You think that I, a literal fucking dyke, didn't see women at some point as hot for sex and men as the only viable partners for serious relationships? Would you see me as a disgusting dangerous misogynist for having been there, or as struggling with internalized homophobia? If it’s the later, why don't you extend that same compassion to bi women? Only difference there is that I'm a lesbian and they're bisexual.

Sure, they like men so being with men isn't INHERENTLY torture for them like it is for me, but you don't think that thinking/behaving that way is traumatizing for them too? They love women and are depriving themselves of that experience out of internalized biphobia, misogyny and homophobia. You think that doesn’t fuck them up too? They're hurting too, but you think that, unlike a lesbian who does the same, THEY deserve that suffering.

And no one is telling you to date them or to suffer for them through it just because they're suffering too. What you're being told is to see them as the non-straight women they are who're suffering too and understand the complexity of their situation the same way you would someone like me.

You think too that the “solution” to the horrendous rates of IPV they face with cis straight men is swearing off men. Would you tell straight women to do the same if they don’t want to be abused by male partners? You wouldn't. Because you see straight women as not having "an option" but think bi women do and thus they MUST be asking to be abused. Literal “asking for it” shit. It's all victim blaming + Boys Will Be Boys, but add a "bi" to it and it's progressive somehow.

This points to you seeing women's attraction to men as only ok when it's not "chosen", just a passive reception of misogynistic violence (which, way to take away the agency of women’s sexualities, you dumb bitches), but when they IN THEORY have a "choice" because they also like women, their attraction to men is active instead of passive, and thus they're cock-sucking sluts who’re choosing to endanger themselves. You see women whose desire for men is active, as deserving of whatever results from their involvement with men. You can't be a biphobe without being a misogynist.

You see bisexuality as a fractured amalgam of homosexuality + heterosexuality instead of its own standalone identity, and thus they can and MUST choose one or the other, because their “heterosexual” attraction and their gay attraction are in active competition within them like the fucking two wolves shit. You can’t be a biphobe without being a homophobe.

Bi women's attraction to men is NOT normalized and biphobes are living proof of it. It's not normalized; they're bisexual, not straight. Their attraction to men coexists with, interlinks with and isn't independent of their attraction to women. Bi women ARE shamed and punished for liking men because they don't like men alone, they simultaneously like women and those are inseparable for them.

If it was normalized, it wouldn't be widespread to blame them for the abuse they receive when involved with men, like they should pick a side for their abuse to count or matter. They wouldn't be pushed out of LGBT spaces for being with men, it wouldn't be seen by other LGBT people (even many bi women themselves) as a flaw in their sexuality that makes them a gay-straight chimera. They wouldn't feel ashamed of their attraction to men. They wouldn't be seen with suspicion for liking men if it was normalized.

Them simultaneously liking men is seen as not loving men "correctly" AND as not loving women “correctly”. No LGBT women (including cis bi women and straight trans women) are seen as doing love and sex "correctly".

You can only claim bi women's attraction to men is normalized if you see bisexuality as a Lego combo of straight + gay and thus their attraction to men is separable from their attraction to women. It's not. They're not cherry-picked bits and pieces of heterosexuality and homosexuality. They're 100% bisexual, always, no matter in what way their bisexuality expresses itself. Be it bisexual with no preference, bisexual with a preference for women, or bisexual with a preference for men.

It's not 50-50% straight-gay, 25-75% straight-gay, or 80-20% straight-gay respectively. ALL are 100% bisexual-bisexual. If you can't respect that, you're a homophobe and a misogynist.

And yes, it is HOMOphobic to see bi women with suspicion for liking men. You see "homosexual" attraction as inherently in jeopardy if there's a coexisting "heterosexual" attraction because the gay one will be lesser and you see the "straight" one as a threat that'll take precedent. That’s your gay insecurity from internalized homophobia speaking.

Then too, there's a reason biphobes think bi men are secretly gay, and bi women are secretly straight. You see men as the superior and inevitable choice for both. That's misogyny. If you're a biphobe, you ARE undoubtedly a misogynist and a homophobe, even if you're gay and/or a woman yourself.

Every time people make armchair judgements of bisexual women as man-worshipers all I can think of is my sister who cried rivers of tears to me about how painful and stressing it is to over-perform her attraction to men who're not even her type (she likes gnc men!) just to stay closeted, and when I think of that, I wish so badly I could slap each and every person doing that.

And yeah! You read right, GNC MEN. Bisexuality is "gay enough", "even" in their different-gender attraction, that plenty of bi women prefer gnc men, and plenty of bi men prefer gnc women. In fact, plenty of bi people, including the cis ones, are gnc themselves (with a specific tendency towards androgyny but there's many who're distinctly masculine/feminine at it) and thus much more visible as gay than someone like me; a fucking lesbian, but I'm fem-presenting.

"Bi people can stay closeted while in relationships." So can gay men and lesbians who have beards, who hide our partners, whose partners are trans and closeted, if we're trans and closeted ourselves, or if we’re single and not visibly gnc.

My relationship would be seen as straight by outsiders because my fiancé is a closeted trans lesbian. Unless you’re a transphobe you would NOT call that a fucking privilege. It’s not a fucking privilege that she’s forced to hide herself and hide that the nature of her exclusive love for women is gay. That shit fucking kills her inside. It’s not a privilege that to keep the love of my life safe and myself too I have to pretend that our love is straight when it was so fucking hard for me to just detect, let alone ACCEPT and take pride in that I don’t like men.

All of that keeps us safe, but at great emotional cost. Being closeted is safety for all LGBT people, but it’s not a privilege, it’s PAINFUL. You understand this when it comes to gay men and lesbians, and can feel compassion for us. Why not for bi people? Why are you so angry at bi people? Why do you hold so much contempt for bi people?

I'll tell you why: BECAUSE YOU'RE BIGOTS.

#biphobia tw #⚢

2K notes · View notes

lailaliquorice · 5 years ago

Text

beneath a shattered golden sky

this was fuelled by the yelling of the six discord since we all boarded the aralyn train a couple of days ago. tagging @tenpin-boleyn and @gayboleynz bc I promised abi some aragon angst about her religion + sexuality (I hope you don’t mind the bonus ship) and I promised noel some aralyn. also big thanks to abs for yelling about aralyn angst with me

I know I normally write aragon and boleyn as mother/daughter, but my multishipper heart took over. don’t worry I’m still parrlyn trash and there’s parrlyn fic coming soon but here’s something a little different for now c:

tw for homophobia

It hadn’t been easy for Aragon to reconcile her religion with her emotions upon her reincarnation. It went against everything she had ever been taught, ever believed, but how could she deny what was in her heart? Those conflicting parts of her had lead to a tough journey of reassessing her faith, reassessing herself, and a lot of time spent researching homosexuality in Catholicism with Cathy’s help. While her goddaughter was Protestant so there were a few differences in their faiths, her help had been invaluable while Catherine was figuring out her feelings.

Anne had also been a solid support. At the start of their relationship, Catherine had almost envied her for the ease with which she came to terms with her sexuality. Everything came easily to Anne, the polar opposite of her sometimes uptight self, and she loved her for it as well as envied her for it occasionally. But Catherine couldn’t get over that hurdle that quickly and she was grateful that Anne had never held that against her at all. Their relationship was something they took slowly, at Catherine’s pace, and as much as Catherine sometimes felt guilty for holding Anne back she was grateful that her girlfriend never tried to push her faster than she could comfortable go.

Even once Catherine felt ready to kiss Anne in front of the other queens, to hold her hand while walking down the street, it didn’t make her journey of progress any less precarious. And it didn’t take much for her to be knocked several steps backwards.

After going out on a date for breakfast at a little café they both liked, they were walking back home with Anne holding onto Catherine’s arm. With Pride approaching there were rainbow flags strung up everywhere which gave Catherine the extra boost of confidence she needed to rest her hand on Anne’s as they walked, feeling safe and content in the happy atmosphere with her girlfriend by her side.

Until an aggressive voice from behind them shattered that illusion of safety.

They both flinched at the slur that was hurled at them, knowing clearly what it meant even though it wasn’t a word they had been used to in their old lives. Catherine was about to keep on walking with her head held high when the words came which made her heart stop for a moment.

“You’ll burn in Hell for this!”

Catherine stopped in her tracks. Hearing the words aloud which she’d once heard within her own head felt like someone had thrown a bucket of ice water over her head. The world around her blurred as her mind started to whirl; she could hear Anne shouting in the background but she couldn’t do anything about it, frozen still with her eyes wide as they stared at nothing.

Minutes or hours could have passed before she became aware of a gentle voice calling her name and a hand squeezing hers. “…Catherine?” Anne repeated until Catherine’s eyes flicked up to meet her gentle gaze, all her fury gone as she watched Catherine’s emotionless expression. “Come on, let’s go home.”

Catherine could only nod mutely, letting Anne keep a hold of her hand as they walked the rest of the way back to the house. The familiar streets were hardly recognisable to her in her anxious state – the only sensory input she could register properly was the pressure of Anne’s hand in hers. But while part of her was clinging onto that contact as her only lifeline, the louder voice in her head was screaming at her for daring to hold her girlfriend’s hand.

“We’re home, babe,” came Anne’s soft voice through the haze in her mind, and Catherine looked up from the floor to see their front garden. She still didn’t say anything as Anne unlocked the door, but as soon as she was over the threshold into her own home she snatched her hand out of Anne’s grasp and practically ran up the stairs to her bedroom. Anne’s confused shout from downstairs was ignored as she shut the door and sunk onto her bed.

A sob ripped from her throat as Catherine hunched over and cried.

She could feel how hard she was shaking as her arms wrapped around herself, desperately trying to anchor herself in a world she was still dissociating from. Her head was screaming so loudly that she could feel physical pain pulsing at her temples, snagging her fingers in her hair as she cradled her head and begged for it to go away. She couldn’t bear to look towards the crucifix on her bedside table in her shame and self-loathing, painfully aware of the cross around her neck which rested on her skin below her t-shirt.

A knock at her door startled her from where she was fumbling to take the necklace off, freezing like a deer in the headlights when she heard Anne on the other side. “Catherine?” she called, “can I come in? I’m worried about you.”

“No,” Catherine choked out, cursing herself for how her voice shook. After forcing herself to inhale deeply she added in a somewhat calmer voice “I’m fine, Anne, I just want to be by myself for a little while.”

There was silence for a moment, and Catherine could only hope that Anne had left. But then the door handle moved just slightly, presumably from Anne’s hand resting on it from the outside, and Catherine curled in on herself again in an attempt to shield and protect herself.

“Catherine?” Anne called again, and it was hard not to sob audibly at the concern in her voice which Catherine was convinced she didn’t deserve. “I’m gonna come in in a minute, ok? I don’t want you in here on your own after… after that.” Her voice faltered a little as she trailed off.

The thought of Anne seeing her in such a state added even more conflicting feelings to the panicked thoughts whirling around her head. Despite how much she loved her girlfriend she was still so scared to let Anne see her vulnerable, to give anyone any ammunition that they could possibly use against her. She was known as the cool and collected one, the firm and strong one, and that was all in jeopardy if one comment from a stranger could reduce her to a trembling mess. She laughed harshly at that, hands covering her mouth as she rested her forehead on her knees.

But on the other hand, she longed for the comfort of Anne’s presence to bring her back to Earth from where she’d been left spinning aimlessly. The floor beneath her feet still didn’t feel quite real enough for her liking, even less so as the oxygen in her lungs was lessened from covering her nose and mouth, and the feeling of being so untethered was only making her anxiety worse. Her heart hammered loud in her ear as her shallow breathing increased to near-hyperventilation, lungs screaming for air though she was frozen in her hunched over position.

She knew dimly that Anne had probably been able to hear her gasping breaths from the other side of the door, so she wasn’t particularly surprised when there was suddenly a warm body pressed against hers and a hand rubbing her back. “Breathe, Catalina. Please breathe with me,” Anne said in her ear, sat as close to Catherine as she could physically get while gently pulling one hand away from her face. “I’ve got you, you’re here, you just need to breathe.”

Catherine let herself be pulled into Anne’s arms, physically unable to resist as the anxiety attack sapped all the strength from her limbs. But Anne’s arms around her was the grounding presence that she needed, and slowly she began to feel her shoulders losing their tension and her lungs relaxing as she became more aware of her surroundings. For several minutes she didn’t move from where her face was hidden in the crook of Anne’s neck, unwilling to face Anne’s worried expression and the questions she knew were coming about what had prompted her panic.

Sure enough, Anne shifte Catherine in her arms so that she was looking up at her as she gently prompted “Talk to me, babe?”

Even though there was only love and understanding in Anne’s expression, that was all it took for Catherine to push her way out of Anne’s embrace to sit alone on the bed. Her eyes were squeezed shut in a last futile line of defence, her hands shaking again at the thought of talking to Anne about what had knocked her so off kilter.

Seeming to sense her fears, Anne slipped her hand into Catherine’s and ran a thumb over her knuckled. “I’m not gonna make you talk about it yet if you don’t want to,” she said quietly. “But he was so wrong, he was wrong about us and he was wrong about your faith.”

In the quiet that followed, Catherine slowly relaxed enough to lean against Anne’s side and rest her head on her shoulder. Anne didn’t prompt her any further, sitting silently as Catherine gathered her courage and let her tension slowly seep away.

“It brought everything back.”

“Hmm?” Anne responded at Catherine’s sudden confession.

Now that the first words were out in the open, Catherine knew she couldn’t button her thoughts up again or she’d never speak of them again. “I’d just found a place where I was happy with being Catholic and being ga- being gay. And now I’m unsure again. I’ve prayed and prayed for answers but I’ve received no resolution which could either mean God is content with my path or He holds me in such shame He won’t speak to me. My faith is so important to me, it’s the one thing I’ve always had, and the thought of being condemned for eternity just because of something I love?”

She faltered there, hot tears spilling down her cheeks as she turned her head slightly to hide in Anne’s hair. Anne didn’t say anything immediately, just switching the hand holding Catherine’s in order to wrap an arm around Catherine’s shoulders and pull her close.

After a little while, Anne gently nudged Catherine back upright as she stood up. “Hold tight for a sec,” she murmured, then disappeared out the door without an explanation. Catherine’s head tilted upwards as Anne’s footsteps echoed up the attic staircase to her bedroom above, then thundered back down again as she rushed back into Catherine’s room with a thick book held in her arms.

“Shuffle up,” she said as she crawled over the bed to sit with her back leaning against the wall, leaning forward to take Catherine’s hand again as she moved to sit beside her. Once Catherine was leaning against her shoulder again she placed the book on her lap, taking a deep breath before she spoke. “This is something I’ve been working on for a little while,” she said, showing Catherine what was in fact a Bible with dozens of fluorescent notes sticking out at all angles. “And it’s not against anything to annotate a Bible, I checked with a pastor online.”

Catherine smiled tiredly at her hasty addition, curling further into Anne’s side to show her appreciation.

Anne turned her head to kiss Catherine’s forehead before she continued. “You’re gonna have to roll with me for a mo. All the pink stickies are all the passages that people use to say that being gay is wrong in the eyes of God. But-“ she continued quickly as Catherine stiffened predictably “-I’ve annotated them all with why people take the meaning wrong. Bits that got messed up in the translation from Hebrew, things that are misread, stuff like that. Thought it’d make you feel better when you’re struggling with stuff.”

She finished with a timid smile, looking nervously down at Catherine as she anticipated her response. Catherine couldn’t react for a moment, staring at the Bible with wide eyes as she tried to comprehend what Anne was giving her. It was a gift of unimaginable depths: the hours that Anne must have put into her annotations were unimaginable.

Still too overwhelmed to speak, Catherine just hugged Anne’s torso and let out a quiet hum as she closed her eyes.

“I know, babes. I know,” Anne said with a soft chuckle, letting Catherine relax as she held her close.

Catherine was content to stay in her arms for a few minutes, before a thought crossed her mind and she struggled out of Anne’s embrace again. “What?” Anne asked, her face falling when she caught sight of Catherine’s expression.

Shifting uncomfortably, Catherine shrugged as she tried to put words to the guilt that had chosen that moment to rush back in full force. “I feel guilty that I’m holding you back by not being able to accept myself,” she said all in a rush, knowing once again that she had to get her words out as fast as possible once she started. “If you were with someone else you could hold hands and kiss and be open without being dragged back. You could ignore protesters without needing to sit here with me. You could be yourself properly if it weren’t for me.”

“Catherine, stop,” Anne said firmly, a distraught look in her eyes which made Catherine fall silent immediately. “Listen, I’m not like him. I’m here for the long run. I’m never gonna get tired of you, or want someone who someone thinks is better than you, or abandon you ever. There’s nothing you could do to make me not want you. I’m here. And I’m staying.” She reached out hesitantly to hold Catherine’s hand again, tugging lightly until Catherine slowly looked over at her.

“You’re here,” she echoed in a voice not much more than a whisper.

Anne smiled. “You said it,” she quipped softly, opening her arms again. After hardly a moment’s pause, Catherine let herself lie against Anne with one arm around her back and the other touching the cross around her neck as the two felt at peace with each other again.

#six the musical #six the musical fanfiction #six the musical fanfic #aralyn #catherine of aragon #anne boleyn #laila's writing

108 notes · View notes

wigwurq · 5 years ago

Text

WIG REVIEW: DOWNTON ABBEY

YOU GUYS THIS MOVIE. If you loved the TV show the way that most of the world (including me) did, then please get yourself to this film because it’s basically just an extra long episode! I will take one every 2 years please and thank you! But what about the wigs? Let’s discuss.

It is a few years and about 1000 plotholes since the final TV episode which means it’s 1927, okay?! GO WITH IT! The main thing is: the royals are coming to visit Downton so EVERYONE CLEAN EVERYTHING and have a lot of feelings about it!!! Also: there are about 10x as many wigs as in the TV show. Read all about it here. But as in the show, these wigs are VERY PRESTIGE. And by that I mean, they’re good because someone paid a lot of money for them.

Let’s begin with wig MVP, Lady Mary. Major changes since her TV wig include: BANGS and a serious back taper on her neck. Here is where many (if not all) male wigs get into TROUBLE HUNNY because somehow the male wig community cannot figure out how to not have that taper jut out which just reads: HELLO I’M A TERRIBLE WIG. Somehow, Lady Mary’s wig is able to overcome this taper issue and just look FIERCE AS HELL. Please provide all male wigs with whatever magic (spirit gum?) that made this happen.

Down in the kitchen, MRS PATTIMORE IS STILL MY KWEEN and Daisy’s bangs were clearly SNATCHED by Lady Mary, but the result is still super cute. Daisy remains a full revolutionary who will flirt with any damn plumber but will still (probably?) marry that one nice manservant whose name I refuse to remember and fixed that farm roof once. (THE FARM SHE CO-OWNS IS SUSPICIOUSLY EXEMPT FROM THIS MOVIE FOR REASONS UNKNOWN).

Other suspicious plotholes include Lady Mary deciding that even though she totally secured Barrow that sweet butler job so that Carson could retire, THAT DID NOT APPLY TO ROYAL VISITS BECAUSE BARROW SUCKS AT POLISHING SILVER. So Mary tells Carson to come on back, despite the fact that she 1) didn’t tell Barrow or anyone else and 2) didn’t see if Carson had been cured of the Parkinson’s Disease (or similar?) that made him spill wine all over the entire last episode of this TV show. Somehow Carson can pour wine again so BYE BARROW!! ALSO I LOVE YOU MRS. HUGHES.

The timing of this is actually great because the King’s valet is 100% hot/gay so bring on some homosexual romance! This will definitely go really well and not provide any issues for anyone! (STAY TUNED)

Speaking of issues, remember how Tom is from IRELAND? Do you remember that? He speaks with a slightly different accent, so...do you remember NOW? Ok cool because everyone else is REALLY ON EDGE about this whole thing given the fact that THE ROYALS ARE COMING so is this Irishman gonna totally eff it up for everyone? SPOILER: OBVIOUSLY NOT ARE YOU KIDDING THIS GUY RULES. In a plot twist that plays out so quickly that you wonder why they even bothered, Tom is badgered by some dude who you think is a royal detective but TWIST: he’s actually trying to get Tom to help him kill the king and now Lady Mary is super suspicious even though she and Tom are totally BFFs and whatever: Tom and Mary just saved the King. THE END! OH WAIT THERE’S ANOTHER HOUR OF THIS MOVIE TO GO.

Moving along: new characters! IMELDA STAUNTON and a serviceable wig is in this now, which is great because she should be in everything. Her character’s name is MAUD BAGWELL which feels like an SNL sketch version of this show, but whatever. Anyway, Maggie Smith (WHO IS PERFECT AND SO IS HER WIG) is super pissed at her because she has no kids and refuses to give all her money to Lord Grantham when she dies. WHAT A BITCH. Oh wait, actually let’s talk about her maid, played by, I shit you not, a woman named TUPPENCE MIDDLETON which is peak English and we can all go home now and also Imelda Staunton is leaving her money to her so OK. Oh but also she kind of looks like Lady Sybil (RIP) so Tom definitely falls in love with her despite the fact that he fully had a girlfriend at the end of the TV show who even caught the bouquet at Edith’s wedding but WHATEVER WHO CARES TUPPENCE MIDDLETON WINS.

Meanwhile, Lady Edith, whose wig is...fine but still not as good as Lady Mary’s because that’s how older sisters work, is pregnant! Mazel! Unfortunately, her husband already told the King he would go on safari with him RIGHT WHEN SHE IS DUE. This is the most white people problems thing ever and she spends the rest of the movie moping around the park this family calls a lawn until the King finally lets her husband out of the terrible and binding safari plans he had. WHAT A RELIEF OMG THIS EFFING SHOW/MOVIE LOLOLOL.

Speaking of the royals, here they are! The king and queen are honestly barely in it and their wigs are totally fine. The princess has a really upsetting plotline about her terrible and abusive husband who somehow Tom unwittingly advises to STAY WITH HIM for the sake of her family?!?!?! I don’t know either y’all but ok?

Meanwhile, downstairs, Anna Bates and her bent wig (ANNA DESERVES BETTER) is hatching a plot with her husband to revolt against the evil royal servants who have left them without jobs to do! Rather than take a well-deserved staycation, they seriously manage to fool all the royal servants into letting them do their damn jobs! WHAT A WORLD. Of course, the Bates family is behind all this because they have been falsely imprisoned so many times that they can now live life without fear of consequences, much like Ashley Judd in Double Jeopardy (IF YOU DON’T GET THIS REFERENCE, I WILL ABSOLUTELY SHOOT YOU IN THE MIDDLE OF MARDI GRAS). Anyway, one of which is fully stealing from the family and Anna doesn’t even stitch on her and instead makes her do penance sewing a dress all night! I LOVE THIS MOVIE.

So the only servant that gets an actual vacation is still Barrow, in his fashion haircut, who is enjoying his gaycation in York until his new gay pal stands him up so he meets a different gay dude who BRINGS HIM TO A FRIGGIN GAY SPEAKEASY IN AN ABANDONED (?) WAREHOUSE AND OMG I WANT TO GO TO THERE. (Spoken as Stefon on SNL): It has everything! Men charlestoning together to a makeshift jazz combo, mustachioed men in rolled up shirtsleeves sipping unspecified brown alcohols, giant wooden barrels used as cafe tables with candles on them, and the constant fear that something is definitely going to go wrong. Remember earlier when I said to stay tuned about Barrow having issues because Barrow always has issues? BARROW GETS ARRESTED, OBVIOUSLY. He is nearly immediately bailed out (not by money, but by Royal connections) by his new boyfriend, who then almost certainly has sex with him but we’re not allowed to see it but DOES HAVE A KISS WITH HIM SO OKAY I GUESS THIS TURNED OUT NOT SO BADLY! #DowntonPride

In the end, everyone goes to a ball and my beloved Matthew Goode FINALLY SHOWS UP to dance with Mary and ask everyone if he missed anything (har har). Also there is the promise of at least 3 more weddings and maybe 1 (SOB) funeral so since this movie made more money than Rambo AND a boring Brad Pitt space movie, PLEASE MAKE ANOTHER ONE OF THESE!!!! ALSO THANK YOU FOR SPENDING SO MUCH $$ ON WIGS THEY ARE GREAT!

VERDICT: WURQS

#wigwurq #downtonabbey #downtonabbeymovie #maggiesmith #ladymary #secretgayspeakeasy #downtonpride #givemeanotherplease #tuppencemiddleton

10 notes · View notes

onceuponaprincey · 6 years ago

Text

Dear Lovely —

I could be sending you this via a handwritten letter but that’s for another letter, another topic, another day.

I love you. I never understood what it meant. I have always had people loving me, falling for me, but I never grasped the sensation of the meaning ‘I love you’ let alone ‘love’. It wasn’t a thing I could give in return to the extent others were giving me. I jumped partner from partner searching for this thing called 'love’, wanting a taste of what everyone else had. I gave up around late 2017 early 2018. I stopped looking, stopped dating, stopped caring. One true love was a fantasy, there’s no one who I am going to feel that burning notion of intense infatuation. I then met you.

Now. This isn’t going to jump to the sappy romantic shit. I didn’t fall 'head over heels’ for you when I first met you, I tried to not rush myself like I had let myself do for years, the method that got me in and out of relationships as if I was in line for school hot lunch. I was honestly scared to commit to you in fear of losing love for you- hurting you, having to leave you. But I waited a while- the feeling didn’t fade. Days to weeks to nearly a month. So I came to the conclusion that I had fallen for you. Really fallen for you. Best choice I’ve made. I know I asked you to ask me out since I am funky and yes I have an irrational superstition.

It’s my turn. My turn to tell you in a long written letter saying how much I love you. How much I want to fall in love with you every damn day. How I want to wake up next to you (or on the couch if you make me- or if I fall asleep watching Jeopardy) next to you (because let’s be honest, you’d make your ways and sleep next to me if I did that on the couch.) I want you to be in my life for as long as possible. For as long as you want to be with me. Thick and thin. Through loss and pain, joy and peace. I want to be the best person for you, help you grown and watch you grow. I have never wanted anything more than to call you my husband.

So here I am, in a letter typed on this hell site called Tumblr. In a non-handwritten letter covered in glitter- because I know you f-ing love glitter. I am here to ask you a question.

Will you do the honor of letting me be apart of your extraordinary homosexual life? The honor of having a future where we wake up next to each other with the sun shining through the curtains of our bedroom? Where I can turn over and see you softly smiling in your sleep as I wake up at a god-awful early time? The honor of having dinner with your every night, lunch and…well I’m not sure about breakfast.

Roman Alexander [Last name]. Will you marry me once you graduate?

[X] Yes

[ ] Stop Asking

[X] OMG that’s gay you funkly little scientist nerd

[ ] As if!

#ID LITERALLY BE A FOOL TO SAY NO #YOU ARE THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO ME LOGAN #I LOVE YOU #postsubmission.txt #submission #tiecollector¡.txt #fave^.txt

114 notes · View notes

standtoreason93 · 6 years ago

Text

One Way or Any Way? – Part I

By Greg Koukl

Sometimes we make dealing with the current controversial features of Christianity more difficult than it actually needs to be. Here I’m talking about politically charged theological and ethical issues like abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, gender dysphoria, and the like. In one important sense they’re not hard at all; they’re easy.

Some ideas flow so naturally and directly from clear, core elements of the Christian worldview that they are not “tough” issues in a scriptural sense. The relevant texts are clear. There is no ambiguity in the Bible’s teaching. The basic doctrines informing these issues are not gray areas. They never have been.

The confusion comes almost completely from the outside, not the inside. Lots of folks—including Christians—simply don’t like what the Bible teaches, so they wrangle about words and twist the text trying to get the verses to say the opposite of what they clearly mean.

Which brings me to my present concern. I continue to be mystified by what I call the “confused confession” that many Christians make regarding Christ as savior. It goes something like this (note carefully the inflection): “I am a Christian. I believe that Jesus is my savior. He is the only way for me. But I can’t say He is the way for others.”

So, here’s my question: Does this claim strike you as unusual?

Now, there is a sense in which it’s not unusual at all. Comments like this are so common lately—not just with more secular Christians or with politicians who identify in some way with Christianity, but also with massive numbers of rank and file evangelicals—they hardly raise an eyebrow anymore. That, of course, is the appeal. It’s a clever way of both aligning with Christ (in one sense) and denying Him (in another). No one gets offended. Everyone is satisfied. Perfectly politically correct.

I want to know, though, if this statement strikes you as theologically unusual. Think of Christ’s response when He was asked a similar question at His trial: “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” He didn’t respond, “That’s true for Me, but it doesn’t necessarily apply to others.” He simply said, “I Am,” and, in virtue of that confession, was led away to execution.

Just weeks later, when facing the same ruling body that crucified Christ, Peter’s own confession was unqualified: “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). When threatened, he was unmoved: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge, for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:19–20).

There was no ambivalence or ambiguity in these ancient confessions, yet today ambivalence abounds. Indeed, it’s hard to know what such a confused confession even means coming from a Christian. In what sense can Jesus be “my savior” but not the only savior for everyone else?

This month’s Solid Ground is the first of a two-part series meant to deal with the confusion that prompts confessions like the one above. This confusion is so corrosive, it puts the gospel itself in jeopardy. Those who hold this view are not likely to suffer any inconvenience or discomfort to fulfill the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18–20). Worse, this conviction is so theologically thin, it may not be an expression of legitimate saving faith at all.

Three possible explanations for this have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too Christianity come to mind: theological uncertainty, religious pluralism, and Christian inclusivism. (I left out “dishonesty” because I don’t want to seem completely jaundiced, though I do think that is what drives some people to make this statement, particularly politicians.) I don’t think any of these succeed, though, and I want to tell you why.

One Way for Some

There are some Christians who genuinely believe and trust that Jesus is the source of their pardon before the Father yet aren’t completely sure they are right. They believe, but do not know. Their explanation would go something like this: “I can’t say that others have to trust Jesus for salvation because I’m not even sure I have to. I believe I need Jesus, so I’m trusting Him as best I can, but I don’t know Jesus is the only way of rescue, so I can’t say with any deep confidence that others need to trust Him, too.”

I am completely sympathetic to this reason for religious relativism because I realize this is the best some Christians can do. They lack confidence because they lack knowledge—that is, they lack any evidence their beliefs are actually justified.

It’s one reason apologetics is so important. The role of Christian defenses is to supply the evidence meant to help elevate mere belief to credible and justified conviction. Some believers have not been exposed to the kind of resources that could help them bridge this belief/knowledge gap, so their hesitation is understandable.

This approach, though, has a lethal liability for our “confused confession” (“true for me but not for you”). The biblical claim that Jesus is God’s Messiah for the world (John 3:16, et al.) is either true or false. If true, then those who trust in Him are pardoned and those who do not are still in their sin. If false, then Jesus fails to save anyone, unbeliever or believer. Those who reject Him face no consequence for doing so, and those who trust Him have trusted in vain.

It is not a reasonable option, however, to claim that Jesus is one’s own savior but not the world’s. The claims of Christ can be true for me and true for you even though you don’t believe them. Or they can be false for you and also false for me even if I do believe them. Under no circumstance, though, can they be half and half. Jesus either is the savior for all, or He is the savior of none.

Here is another way of putting it. The question can always be asked, “What essential, foundational, defining benefit would any Christian gain from Christ that without Christ would be lost?” The correct answer is “salvation.” That is why we call Jesus “Savior,” after all. If damnation would be our fate were we bereft of Christ, why would it be any different for anyone else?

Which brings me to the question of why Jesus is the only savior for everyone. It is difficult for a believer to be confident that Jesus is the singular savior if she is not clear on why He is necessary in the first place, so let me make that clear.

As each of us lives life, we accumulate to our account a rap sheet of sorts, a personal list of our crimes before God. When we stand before Him at the final judgment, God is not going to ask what religious club we belonged to. He is going to judge us from the record in the books according to our deeds (Revelation 20:11–15).

God is going to ask if we lived our lives the way we should have: honoring Him and loving Him before anything else, never lying or deceiving, never taking something not our own, never dishonoring our parents, never abusing other people in any way, never hungering after something that does not belong to us (including people we were not married to), always loving our neighbors as ourselves—those kinds of things.

Now, if we have never broken any of His laws—if we have never faltered in any of God’s requirements in any way—then we have nothing to worry about. However, if we have done wrong, we will be punished in proportion to our crimes.

This, of course, is not good news. It is bad news. The good news is that even though God would be completely just to punish us without any further consideration, still He has provided a rescue plan. He extends an offer of mercy through His Son.

Jesus has purchased a pardon. With it, we are rescued. Without it, we stand alone. Anyone trusting in his own merits will be judged by his own merits and found wanting. Anyone trusting in the merits of Christ will be judged by the merits of Christ and will find favor. As I have written elsewhere:

This is why Jesus of Nazareth is the only way to God, the only possible source of rescue. He is the only one who solved the problem. No other man did this. No other person could…. Only Jesus of Nazareth could save the world. Without him, we are crushed under our overwhelming debt. Without him, every single one of us would have to pay for our own crimes, and that would take eternity.[i] [Emphasis in the original.]

There is no middle ground, no neutral place to stand for the Christian espousing the confused confession. Anyone thinking there is a third option has either severely misjudged the problem—sin—or he has severly misjudged the solution—Christ—or both.

Many Ways for All

It could be that the confused confession is motivated by a different false conviction: religious pluralism. There are actually two kinds of pluralism. The first is so unremarkable, it only needs to be mentioned in passing to prevent those who are not reading carefully from thinking I am denying something obvious.

The religious pluralism I am concerned with is not simply the observation that there are lots of religions to choose from (a plurality of views) coupled with the conviction that we ought to live in peace with people who disagree with our own convictions. That strikes me as self-evident.

The pluralism that concerns me is the view that, generally speaking, all religions are each on their own terms legitimate roads to God. According to this view, God has somehow ordained various paths for various people in diverse cultures with diverse beliefs. Therefore, no one is within his rights to say his religion is better than anyone else’s. “God is too big to fit into one religion,” the bumper sticker instructs us. The Almighty is much larger than our limited theological categories. Christ may be the path for Christians, but others have legitimate paths of their own.

This alternative, though, is another dead end. I’ll use a popular religious pluralism parable to show you why.

In the children’s book The Blind Men and the Elephant, Lillian Quigley retells the ancient fable of six blind men who visit the palace of a rajah and encounter an elephant for the first time. As each touches the animal with his hands, he announces his discoveries.

The first blind man put out his hand and touched the side of the elephant. “How smooth! An elephant is like a wall.” The second blind man put out his hand and touched the trunk of the elephant. “How round! An elephant is like a snake.” The third blind man put out his hand and touched the tusk of the elephant. “How sharp! An elephant is like a spear.” The fourth blind man put out his hand and touched the leg of the elephant. “How tall! An elephant is like a tree.” The fifth blind man reached out his hand and touched the ear of the elephant. “How wide! An elephant is like a fan.” The sixth blind man put out his hand and touched the tail of the elephant. “How thin! An elephant is like a rope.”[ii]

An argument ensues, each blind man thinking his own perceptions of the elephant are the correct ones. The rajah, awakened by the commotion, calls out from the balcony of his palace. “The elephant is a big animal,” he says. “Each man touched only one part. You must put all the parts together to find out what an elephant is like.”

Enlightened by the rajah’s wisdom, the blind men reach an agreement. “Each one of us knows only a part. To find out the whole truth we must put all the parts together.”

This fable is often used to illustrate the nature of religious pluralism, instructing us that every faith represents just one part of a larger truth about God. Each religious tradition possesses a piece of the truth, eventually leading its adherents to God by its own unique route. Devotees of Eastern religions are fond of using the parable in this way.

The problem with the parable, though, is it presumes that Christians reject pluralism because they lack exposure to other beliefs, much as the blind men erred because each explored only a part of the elephant and not the whole animal. Had they searched more completely, they would have discovered their error. Christians, then, are simply uninformed about the bigger picture.

This is not the case, though. Christians reject pluralism, in part, because defining elements of different religions contradict each other. For example, Judaism teaches Jesus is not the Messiah; Christianity teaches He is. Jesus either is the Messiah or He is not. Both religions can’t be right. One or the other is mistaken on one of its core, defining doctrines. The notion that Christianity and Judaism are somehow equally true is contradictory, like square circles.

Other examples abound. What happens when we die? Some religions promote Heaven and Hell. Others teach reincarnation. For still others, there is no conscious afterlife at all, only self extinction. However, when we “shuffle off this mortal coil,” we may go to Heaven or Hell, or we might be reincarnated, or we could disappear altogether, but we can’t do them all at the same time. Someone is mistaken. Indeed, it’s possible all of these options are false, but they cannot all be true.

If the point is still unclear, consider this. What if the elephant in the parable were a miniature, so small one of the blind men could completely encompass it in his hand? If another then claimed, “The elephant is bigger than a house,” the first would be right to disagree. An elephant cannot be small enough to fit into one’s hand and also as big as a house at the same time.

No, the Christian’s concern is not based on ignorance. No possible future discovery is going to change the fact that many of the claims of competing religions simply cannot be harmonized. Rather, exploration complicates the issue. The more we discover about core beliefs of various faiths, the more complex the problem of harmonizing becomes.

Appealing to the ubiquity of something like the “golden rule” is no help. It is a moral action guide that says almost nothing about any religion’s fundamental understanding of the shape of the world. Profound contradictions between foundational beliefs are not removed by pointing to shared moral proverbs. It’s the differences that matter, not the similarities. Contradictory claims about fundamental beliefs cannot be simultaneously true. Consequently, religious pluralism self-destructs.

I guess someone could respond that from God’s perspective the details don’t matter. He is satisfied with any sincere religious effort. But how do they know this? This claim is an article of faith, a leap of hope that turns out to be contrary to the specific teachings of just about every religion, especially Christianity.

Any informed Christian can immediately see the challenge religious pluralism presents for the Great Commission, the authority of Scripture, the uniqueness of Christ, the role of evangelism, etc. Clearly, those who follow Jesus and understand the New Testament teaching on the work of the cross—and also those who take the first of the Ten Commandments in its plain and obvious sense—cannot make peace with pluralism, no matter how politically incorrect it is to oppose it.

One Way and Many Ways

There is a final, more sophisticated way of explaining how Jesus can be the savior for Christians even though others need not believe in Him. It is a hybrid combination of one way and many ways called religious inclusivism.

Inclusivism is different from pluralism, but in its more extreme form (there are actually two versions of it), it has the same ultimate impact, and therein lies its danger.

First, inclusivism is only promoted by Christians who agree that, as the New Testament claims, Jesus is the only way of salvation—at least in one sense. However, explicit faith in Christ is not required on this view. In God’s bookkeeping, so to speak, Christ is the only grounds of forgiveness—without the cross there could be no salvation for anyone. However, the object of faithfor the salvation provided solely by Christ need not be Jesus.

Clearly, Old Testament saints had no knowledge of Jesus. He hadn’t been revealed yet. Even so, God rescued the ancients who were faithful to the limited light they had been given. In the same way (the explanation goes), there are millions of people today outside the range of the gospel who have never had a chance to consider Christ yet still seek God the best way they know how. Would it be just for God to condemn them for not believing in a Jesus of whom they have never heard?

As I mentioned, this inclusivism takes two different forms, what I might call “modest inclusivism” and also a more radical variety. The modest version goes like this: For everyone who hears the gospel, the standard for them is faith in Christ. For those who explicitly reject the gospel, there is no hope. However, we must be either agnostic about those who have never had a chance to hear the gospel, or consider it possible that God judges them by a different standard. A person does not have to believe in Jesus to benefit from Him.

I do not think there is good scriptural justification for this hesitation. However, I am somewhat sympathetic to those who hold this view given the uncertainty some have. It is far less dangerous than the second, more radical version of inclusivism. Here it is: Even those who are exposed to Christianity and who have heard the gospel are not required to believe it. They can be forgiven through Christ even if they openly and decisively reject Him.

Maybe they have been so deeply influenced by circumstances and cultural biases that they do not have the psychological freedom to take the gospel seriously. Maybe they are convinced that the narrowness of Christianity isn’t fair or just. Maybe Christ simply isn’t compelling to them. Whatever the reason, they sincerely reject Christianity and diligently pursue other religious options instead. For this effort, God recognizes the implicit faith of these religious people—“anonymous Christians,” of sorts—and answers by granting them the saving grace of Christ.

The first—modest inclusivism—is somewhat benign. The second—radical inclusivism—is so insidious, in my view, I am reserving the entire next issue of Solid Ground to its discussion and refutation.

__________________________

[i] Gregory Koukl, The Story of Reality (Grand Rapids: Zonndervan, 2017), 132.

[ii] Lillian Quigley, The Blind Men and the Elephant (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959). Possible original sources of the story are the Jataka tales, a collection of Buddhist birth stories, and the Pancatantra stories, Hindu religious instruction fables.

3 notes · View notes

saltyblazestudent · 6 years ago

Text

Moonlight a critique of toxic masculinity and black masculinity

Tanner Roberts

MSCT 1010 Battista

11/07/2018

Moonlight:

A critique of toxic masculinity and black masculinity

By Tanner Roberts

Moonlight is a 2016 drama directed by Barry Jenkins, and is journey into the life and struggles of Chiron a black and gay man growing up in Florida. We see Chiron’s troubled childhood with him being bullied by other boys and his own mother. We see Chiron in high school start to recognize and feel shame for sexuality, and we see him act on his urges during his first homosexual experience with his friend. We later see Chiron as an adult and he has been shaped by spending time in prison and putting up walls and denying his true self to protect himself. The film reveals many problems with how toxic masculinity is socialized into young boys and some of the consequences of that. It also heavily criticizes many of the problematic norms embedded into black masculine culture.

The film uses the characters Juan and Chiron’s peers like Kevin to illustrate issues with toxic masculinity and black masculinity in particular. Juan is a Black Cuban immigrant who also happens to be a successful drug dealer and Chiron’s peers like Kevin are all ‘Urban’ Black kids living in rough neighborhoods where “being hard” is key to surviving. Juan finds young Chiron hiding in an abandoned motel room after he is chased into hiding by some bullies. Right away the film is introducing us to some of the problems in which the ways boys are raised to be masculine. Chiron is shown to be sensitive or “soft” along with being psychically smaller than many of the other boys around him. The boys around him perceive his small stature and drawn back nature as weakness. Chiron is from an early age identified as “Gay” by his peers before Chiron himself even really recognizes it.

“My Suggestion is that the body becomes its gender through a series of acts which are renewed, revised, and consolidated through time.”- 1. (Judith Butler Performative acts and Gender Contruction)

The movie goes very far to affirm that in black families gender roles are placed on children from a very young age. We see this when Chiron goes to play soccer with friends and is questioned as to why he didn’t feel like sticking around and playing rough and rowdy with the other boys. When he responds that he “just doesn’t like it” his friend Kevin jeers him and asks “Why do you let them walk all over you” referring to the boys that bully Chiron and already call him gay despite Chiron being only 9 and not being aware of his sexuality. Kevin continues his speech to Chiron with “You gotta show em you hard”. This point about being “hard” comes back up many times and is usually tied to violence. It is used as a means of protecting ones’ self and their pride. If someone is messing with you hit them to show them that you can’t be messed with. If Someone hurt you, hurt them back to teach them a lesson. It’s a lesson that is taught to many young men but is an even more prevalent ideal In lower class minority groups epically in families where male guidance or father figures are absent. Another issue that Chiron faces is family issues. Chiron’s father is absent and his mother is addicted to crack cocaine and acts incredibly erratically. Chiron’s Mother is also a source of abuse as she like Chiron’s peers recognizes his homosexuality even before Chiron does going so far as to call 9 year old Chiron a “faggot” to his face. Chiron finds shelter with formerly mentioned drug dealer Juan and his girlfriend Teresa. Juan has an interesting role in Chiron’s life as well. Juan acts as a surrogate father to Chiron when Chiron has to escape his mother, but Juan is the one selling crack to Chiron’s mother thus making Chiron’s situation worse in the large scheme of things. Juan does try to rectify this by acting as a good influence on Chiron and teaching him to swim and just being generally nice to him. Juan’s drug dealer lifestyle does have an effect on adult Chiron and it’s not in the way Juan would’ve wanted but that will be touched on in a bit.

“��Little Boys like playing rough games; little girls however are full of sugar and spice” is predicated on a whole set of ideological premises” 2. (Stuart Hall, The Whites Of Their Eyes)

After his childhood we see Chiron as a teenager In high school. He is what some might describe as a “Nerd” he wears button up shirts and the jeans that are not the most stylish which I believe is another point where the director is criticizing stereotypical traits of masculine black men having to dress “hard” or gangster to appear like men. He is also just as drawn back and reserved as he was as a child because now his peers and himself are even more aware of his difference in sexuality. We see also during his teenage years toxic masculine behaviors being reinforced even more. In his culture and his economic standing violence is viewed as necessary. In his community of lower class broken minority families violence is also not uncommon, but most disturbingly is that violence in Chiron’s world is equated with manliness and honor. So to be a man and to protect your honor you have to be prepared to be violent. While violence is praised however, feelings and emotional healthy responses are looked down upon. Men who cry in Chiron’s society are equate with femininity which is than, equated with homosexuality, which is than associated with psychical weakness. So being that Chiron is not only gay but also in touch with his feelings (and having many reasons to cry considering his home situation) is often an easy target for bullying and harassment. Chiron eventually does open up to his friend Kevin where he reveals that he cries and Kevin reveals that he wishes he could cry to, they then share a homosexual encounter together realizing and accepting each other for who they are. Chiron’s moment of happiness is ruined the next day when one the school bullies peer pressures Kevin into helping him beat up Chiron, and out of fear of being ostracized by his peers Kevin complies and helps beat Chiron.

It is after this beating we see Chiron start to follow down some of the more dangerous paths of toxic masculinity. After his beating Chiron find the Bully who orchestrated the whole thing, a young man named Terrel that has a science class with Chiron. Chiron walks into his science class, walks up behind Terrel, picks up a desk chair and proceeds to beat Terrel over the head with it getting himself arrested. Chiron’s decsion to follow a path a violent revenge landed him in jail and when he is released we see him start to follow in the only father figure’s footsteps he’s known, Juan’s.

“Later the concept of “ Adventure” -one of the principal categories of modern entertainment moved straight off the printed page into literature of crime and espionage”- 3.(Stuart Hall The Whites Of Their Eyes)

We see Chiron after he has been released from prison and he has now moved to Georgia and his new personality is almost unrecognizable. He is now “Hard”, he sells drugs, drives an old Cadillac with the same crown decoration on the dash board that Juan had, he carries a very large pistol, and describes himself as “on the street”. He even goes as far to have the flashy teeth Grillz and jewelry associated with gangster rap and the drug dealer lifestyle. Chiron has bought into the Toxic masculine lie and more specifically the Black male mold for the Alpha male role. He takes no shit anymore but he is also deeply separated from his emotions and no has resorted to crime to feel like a man.

“I have always worried less about the men I love being manly men than about them being free men- unimpeded in achieving health and happiness as their Black selves. Free men make good partners. Free men make good daddies. Free men make good men.” –4 (Tamara Winfrey Harris Shedding (Moon)light on Toxic Masculinity)

Chiron is eventually contacted by Kevin who still lives in Florida who tells Chiron he misses him and apologizes for the fight that he was a part of. It’s in his reuniting with Kevin that the two kind of put it all out on the table and they express their feeling for each other, how they have moved on, and their feelings about the situation. The eventually come to terms with their feelings and the movie ends with a shot of Kevin and Chiron cuddling and comforting each other implying that they have accepted not only their pasts but their present and who they truly are and want to be.

“How Life Goes on despite the trauma and how Chiron’s already fragile state is put in jeopardy by everlasting loss, both psychical and spiritual, and doubt reinforced by what society wants him to be.” –5 (Circo Di Lella Moonlight: the slow defeat of Toxic Masculinity)

Moonlight in my opinion is about a boy discovering manhood. Although he learns manhood is different than what he thought it was. Man hood isn’t being “hard”, it’s not being violent, it’s not taking unnecessary risks like selling drugs, and it’s not who you are sexually attracted to. Being a man is accepting the who you are inside, it takes courage, and it takes honesty to one’s self. A man can be in touch with his feelings, a man can cry, and a man can love another man and still be a man.

Sources

1. Judith Butler, Performative acts and Gender Contruction

2. Stuart Hall, The Whites Of Their Eyes

3. Stuart Hall, The Whites Of Their Eyes

4. Tamara Winfrey Harris, Shedding (Moon)light on Toxic Masculinity

5. Circo Di Lella Moonlight: the slow defeat of Toxic Masculinity

#MSCT1010BattistaFall18

2 notes · View notes

1footinthecloset · 4 years ago

Text

A note on the poem, “the Shia man Cries on demand”

The poem, “the Shia man Cries on demand” is written in the style of automated writing; inspired by Amrou Al-Kadhi’s ted talk entitled, “How I embrace contradiction as a queer Muslim drag queen,” where they talk about living in a world of contradiction. The narrator of the poem embraces those contradictions of the poem’s main character, Holly whose identity is unclear but hints it as non-binary, queer person perhaps born in a biological male body. As Al-Kadhi states “… cruel behaviours we’d never tolerate from our friends, somehow we seek out in our lovers” is taken one step forward in the poem to ‘cruel behaviours we’d never tolerate from our friends, somehow we seek out in ourselves,’ as queer people who are also Muslim (“Shia” from poem) constantly question their identity and validity. I wanted to convey this harsh reality through the lines “I talk of your loving hands that to me, feel tender, and to you: much too soft,” “I talk more and discover your heart line has recently extended your palm and this I do to help soothe your anxiety.” The narrator takes the form of an admirer who loves all that the queer person hates about himself, accepting all of him that he rejects.

Al-Kadhi furthers his talk of contradictions and heartbreakingly states how as a queer person raised Muslim, the opposing realities around them almost tore them apart. Their queer experience has not only been framed by contradictions but to a huge extent, been a result of them. They mention the goddess of contradictions who inspired and enabled it as a lifestyle; a way of being who was none other than their own mother. She would both encourage and discourage their queerness, adding praise to their identity one moment and mercilessly burning it to the ground the very next. This is probably most reflective of the status of homosexuality in the Qur’an which is of a flexible and ambiguous nature (Habib 32), hence blurring believers’ eyes with confusion and inconsistency. This is reflected through the lines of the poem that read, “… You, sweet Holly, are so very nurturing, so very sensitive. So very contradictory in that warm, masculine body and that’s what I have loved about you.” Further, the line “You pick up my body’s labour and task it to your own” alludes how perhaps the act of childbirth, and being a mother is not just restricted to cis-women. However, it is hard to accept that as every society has distinguished men’s work from women’s work with the problem being that men’s work is typically rewarded with more weight than a woman’s, ‘no matter how arbitrary the division of labor,’ (Wadud 66), therefore this line questions this notion of the non-binary person putting on masculinity as a mask to seek comfort and validation from society. Is he/she hiding something? Are they putting up the front of some inherited, masculine biological features to fit in society? (“Your mind may have gotten amnesia but your body remembers. You, Holly, are my special, feminine man”). Despite this, there are certain characteristics about Holly that give away their non-normative identity yet highlight their resistance towards themselves, which is why they are pushing away their admirer or lover. In the end, the narrator/admirer is helpless in their pursuit towards Holly and begs for them to let go of their masked identity and embrace their truth (“The wailing cock nymphs are struggling to get out into the world”/”Let. The. Dead. Go. Won’t you…”)

However, perhaps often always, the act of seeing through someone in the setting of a Muslim state exposes their vulnerability and puts them in danger and jeopardy.

Works Cited:

Al-Kadhi, Amrou. “How I Embrace Contradiction as a Queer Muslim Drag Queen | Amrou Al-Kadhi | TEDxLondon.” YouTube, YouTube, 11 June 2019, www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw_-lCDOUWc.

Habib, Samar. “Queer-Friendly Islamic Hermenutics.” Thoughts & Perceptions. ISIM Review 21, Spring 2008.

Habib, Samar. “Q&A with Dr. Amina Wadud.” YouTube, uploaded by Samar Habib, 27 February 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNtDTiqj9bQ&feature=emb_title.

Wadud, Amina. Qur’an and Woman. New York, Oxford University Press, 1999.

0 notes

jclifou · 8 years ago

Text

;;the legitimate (but lengthy) issues of the backstory are beneath the cut.

help wanted!

open to constructive criticism on both my current and a potential future backstory for lefou. everything’s outlined below. i just don’t know how to synthesize and would LOVE some honest opinions/assistance! here’s a link to the current, and here’s an alternative/easier to read link.

so the issue as it stands now is the same issue i’ve been grappling with since the initial introduction of my particular lefou backstory: it’s horribly un-canonic.

and again, i love the idea of the marquis de lafay, of a hidden persona lefou has to protect in order to fit in, of an advanced education and a secret identity that opens him up to so much fun afterward. i love that his father disdains or outright hates him, that his mother was distant at best and deadened at worst, that his closest connections are his sisters and that there’s one of them he’s never even met!, that they could drop in and visit him at any moment and upset the new balance of life, potentially putting him/his identity in jeopardy, but.

the backstory doesn’t offer enough time/development to lefou’s relationship with gaston, particularly in terms of length of time (although i do believe there’s an increased intimacy between them that i quite like)

it also bars lefou from pre-war connections with/in the village, which is starting to become problematic, despite serving as an adequate explanation as to why no one suspects/accuses/pursues his homosexuality (he’s from the large port town of marseille, as far they’re concerned; things are likely done differently there)

it’s so deeply out of character

nobody bothers reading it before interacting with me anyway and i’m tired of being upset by that fact

so the question becomes what can i do to salvage the character-development markers (familial connections predominantly, as the “hidden agenda/personality” aspect could be easily shuffled around to reflect a simpler version of the same idea) and how ought i to be developing a more in-character version of this story?

i don’t know where to start.

for example, if lefou’s father is not the marquis de lafay and is simply monsieur lafay, what occupation could i give him? the best i can come up with is silver-smith, but i fear that’s stepping on toes. where are lefou’s sisters if he’s a native of villeneuve? (his distance from them remains an important characterization element, as it removes his confidantes from his immediate vicinity and makes interpersonal problems in the village harder to work through; also, given robine’s personality, it’s the only operative explanation as to why there’s no severe rupture in his loyalties to gaston prior to the maurice incidents.) why the hell would he even go to villeneuve if he’s not a native? (in the original, he was following a dear friend into a new life and ended up charmed by the simplicity of small town living, despite the increased personal danger.)

i have too many complications and not enough answers. help would be GREATLY appreciated!

#outofbreath #//edit:#//added links to existing about!

7 notes · View notes

typingoutthoughts · 6 years ago

Text

To Be A Man Ruins A Man

Originally Written On 20/JUN/2018

As I watch with my eyes glued to the laptop, I find myself fascinated by the masculine persona of fictional men. Fascinated by how they handle their fictitious mishaps: like womanizers, machos, and stoics — like an ideal man.

However, this ideal man is just a normalized and toxic fantasy that all men are compared to. A fantasy that compels young men to wear tough guises and manifest sexist behaviour. A fantasy that urges young men to fulfill self-destructive gender roles in their communities. A fantasy that, when followed through, can result in frightening real life consequences.

If we are to understand how toxic masculinity has slithered its way into our societies and communities, we have to know about the cliched aspects of manhood, as portrayed by the media. How they distort the minds of today’s men and create a lonely, macho man culture.

As entertainment media developed over time, it created and continually sustained the ideas and beliefs we normally associate with what it means to be masculine and a man. Therefore, the stories that the media tell men has resulted in the creation of influential myths of manhood. Myths of amorous men who woo women, stoic men who refuse to reveal even a slight of emotion, or macho men who fight their problems away.

Through these myths, entertainment media inspires men to live up to them. Restricting themselves to a narrow, clear-cut, and vigilantly enforced expression of masculinity. An expression of strength, confidence, and sexiness is what makes a man. Whoever cannot fit this expression is a “girlie” or some other emasculating slur. Consequently, these myths police the behaviors of men that are accepted by society. Take our most beloved Hollywood male protagonists as an example. Hollywood chooses to portray these men with the same manhood myth. They are the ones who take charge, protect the people, and participate in society.

A clear example that comes to mind is Conan The Barbarian, especially when he talks about what is best in life. "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!" Various characters played by John Wayne are another example of ideal men as Wayne's characters dole out manly advice that reaffirm traditional masculine beliefs. “Nobody ever saw a cowboy on the psychiatrist’s couch.” On the other hand, notice how the media characterize men we would not regard as manly. For instance, in Indiana Jones: The Last Crusade, Jones dismisses his father's masculinity by taking them down a peg to feel more secure in his own masculinity. "He never would've made it past the rats. He hates rats. He's scared to death of them." To add on, when men are portrayed as nerds or in "the opposite spectrum of ideal masculinity", they are often bullied or shunned by more manly men. Some of the television shows and films that have exemplified this thinking include Freaks And Geeks, It, Stranger Things, and much more.

Why is this? According to media theorist, Will Wright, these are the myths we tell ourselves, interpreting truth we can apply towards culture and society. "Myths are a communication from a society to its members: the social concepts, and attitudes determined by the history and institutions of a society are communicated to its members." As a result, this expression of manliness not only serves as the cornerstone of “real” manhood, but also serves as an expectation set by society and influenced by the media.

However, this idea of a real man puts a lot of men in jeopardy, specifically young and adolescent boys who are trying to understand manhood in their own terms. We provide boys the educational tools to teach them about living in a male culture, via these media myths that we create for them. A culture that teaches boys that they should act alone, to repress your emotions, and act out in aggression. After all, these cultural myths are the media stories of men that we indoctrinate our future generations with, ensuring the myth lives on in our society.

By using our manhood myths as building blocks for masculinity in society, we misrepresent other kinds of men who do not fit this narrow-minded fantasy. As stated in a recent Acumen report undertaken by Break Media CEO, Keith Richman, men believe that the media has given them a false and misleading account of the nature of masculinity. According to queries from 2,000 males, “the media industry has tended to characterize men as macho guys, skirt chasers, and inept at parenting and relationships. While this may have historically been true, what [the] results showed is that these characterizations are not reflecting the behavior and aspirations of today’s men”. Consequently, a rift exists between today’s men and our myths of manhood as people and the media are divided on what kind of men we need. The characterization of these ideal men only isolates and distresses us because of the fact that we can never be like these men. Unfortunately, since the media is still depicting this portrayal of men, it creates a powerful stereotype that confines men into living an impossible fantasy we do not want to live. Why? Who in the world wants to live as an emotionless man that womanizes women so much, to the point that they do not know how to handle relational and emotional issues?

Thus, this manly archetype can lead towards a nightmarish society, and harmful psychological effects on men. An archetype that poisons male individuals to live by the mantra, “boys will be boys”, subsequently creating a culture where men are not held accountable for their actions. After all, any mischievous behaviours are justified as characteristics that contribute to their masculinity.

Since the media have a facile influence on men, they can be indoctrinated with the misogynistic views and the predatory thinking of their masculine icons when men and young boys idolize the manhood myth. Myths of men who partake in sexual prowess and men who commit acts of savagery. To prove my point, an international study, regarding “Media And The Make-Believe Worlds Of Boys And Girls”, shows how traces of media has impacted the minds and imagination of boys. How they are consuming media content, assimilating it in their imaginations, and then “taking the story further. Dreaming themselves into the position of their heroes and experience a story similar to the one in the original medium.” Hence, the media can become a tool to nurture a lonely, machismo culture in our society through male protagonists, hero-worshipped and respected by men. According to masculinity educator, Jackson Katz, "one of the most important places [men] learn [masculine ideals] is the powerful and pervasive media system. Which provides a steady stream of images that define manhood as connected with dominance, power, and control.”

One of the traits that has been persistently represented in men is them putting on a stoic facade that repress the emotions within them. Why? Because they are afraid of being a punchline of an emasculating remark, or being called out as “gay” or “girlie”. Hence, men are perceived as too frightened of being bullied for feminine emotions that might make their hearts warm. This in turn means men choose to be chronically apathetic, while their unexpressed and repressed emotions begin to simmer beneath their facade.

A telling example of this lonely stoicness depicted in our men can be seen in our Hollywood and gaming action heroes, in characters such as, James Bond and Duke Nukem. What these characters depict is someone who hides behind a stoic mask, for the sake of showing strength towards others because emotions are a sign of weakness. This thereby allows them to sacrifice their own emotional intelligence and wellbeing. Note how Bond does not even smile or reveal his feelings to anyone in James Bond movies. Instead, he is calm and commanding in the actions he takes. In the opening of Casino Royale, he does not grieve or stress out when he drowns a goon in a bathroom sink. Boys would aspire to be this way because, like James Bond and Duke Nukem, it lets them feel invincible in tough or painful situations through forcefully shoving their vulnerabilities down their throats.

However, by having men hide their emotions, it can damage their social and emotional well-being. As stated in an article reported by the Irish Times, Caroline Dinenage (British Minister Of Health) argues that “there are risks, particularly for those who are vulnerable or isolated and these messages can be particularly toxic for men suffering mental health issues. We have heard a lot today about male suicide, and our national suicide prevention strategy highlights men as a high risk group for what is perhaps the ultimate expression of despair, disconnection and aggression turned inwards.”

To elaborate, it makes it almost impossible for men to open up to one another and care for one another. This in turn makes it difficult to build meaningful relationships with these stoic men. They struggle to create intimate friendships without the fear of being perceived as homosexual or effeminate. Instead, men are obliged to detach themselves from their emotional sensitivity. To act strong without weakness, just so they can meet the expectations of manhood set by a machismo culture.

In interviews from several young men in the documentary, The Mask You Live In, boys struggle with emotional and relationship issues. "In good times, guys are like really close to each other. But when things get a little bit worse, you're on your own.” Another interview from the documentary details how "[he] struggles finding people [he] can talk to about things because [he] feels like he has to deal with [himself] – [he] is not supposed to get help." To quote psychologist and educator, Dr. Niobe Way: "you hear boys are actually talking about their struggles in their friendships, being hurt by other boys, feeling betrayed by other boys. Wanting to have intimate friendships, not knowing how to find those friendships."

Through having men hide their emotions from others, they are also hiding their own feelings from themselves by denying or ignoring them entirely. Unfortunately, this puts men in an emotionally isolated position where they cannot be vulnerable to anyone, making them feel discouraged to seek mental help and support. In a research article undertaken by ABC health, men have been three times more likely to kill themselves than women. Additionally, only 27% of men with anxiety and mental health issues seek professional help. An infographic from Mental Health America shows men are less likely to seek help due to social norms, a reluctance to talk, and/or downplaying symptoms. Men suffering from depression are more likely to report fatigue, irritability, loss of interest in hobbies, rather than feelings of sadness or worthlessness. Hence, it creates an epidemic of desolation and loneliness since they have become uncomfortable with their emotions and less aware about their mental state.

Another masculine trait historically seen in men in the media is their obsessive need for dominance and control, through aggression and sexual prowess. This form of masculinity in men is known for exhibiting fears of emasculation, so they must sustain their masculine reputation through misogyny and being belligerent. Thus, men are often portrayed in action/romance-oriented roles that demand them to fight or flirt their way out of their problems.

To illustrate, men refuse to take “no” for an answer in their pursuit of the women when it comes to romance in Hollywood media. When men coerce, manipulate and stalk women to charm them, they are nevertheless depicted as romantic and admirable. For example, when Leia and Han Solo first kissed in “The Empire Strikes Back”, Leia initially refused, but Han ignored her verbal and nonverbal cues and kissed her anyway. Similarly, the movie, “Spectre”, shows James Bond forcing himself onto a widow just after he killed the widow’s husband, seducing her with her back against the wall. Chris Pratt’s character, in the film “Passengers”, decides to wake up a sleeping woman from hibernation out of obsession, thereby trapping her on a spaceship with him for the rest of her life.

In the video game industry, this masculine trait still remains today as more of our video games refuse to let go of this confining image of masculinity. Video games like Assassin’s Creed, Grand Theft Auto, and Call Of Duty normalize violence as the only way to solve our problems and find solutions. After all, how else can a gamer progress to the next level, gain experience points, or improve their skills and equipment? To prove my point in the words of psychologist and educator, Dr. Philip Zimbardo: "you habituate to the sameness. The video game companies know this, and they are giving you endless variety: a new category, a new challenge, they are creating this arousal addiction…Boys' brains are being digitally wired to this technology. The ones that are most addictive are the most violent, where your job is to destroy the enemy. To dominate."

What these cases show is how the media not only reflects our culture, but also simultaneously shape it. “Whether we want to admit it or not, we all learn a lot about the world around us (and what society expects of us) from the films and television shows we consume” (Jonathan McIntosh, writer and cultural critic). By having boys and men be exposed to this make-believe fantasy of manhood, it only further justifies any mischievous and antisocial behaviour as habitual. In other words, the media have normalized the idea of sexism and violence. Entrenching it in our social lives, to the point that it has become something we expect in our societal cultures. These statistics – from the documentary, Tough Guise 2 – of men, causing violent and sexual acts only exemplifies my point. 86% of armed robberies are committed by men. 77% of aggravated assaults are committed by men. 87% of stalkers are men. 86% of domestic violence incidents resulting in physical injury are perpetrated by men. 99% of reported rapes are committed by men. Men commit approximately 90% of murder. Over the past 30 years, 61 of the last 62 mass shootings have been committed by men.

The point is that our current perceptions of ideal masculinity are negatively warping the minds of men. Whenever we regard toxic masculine behaviours as inconsequential in our current landscape, we are only nurturing and promoting these behaviors in our society. We are affirming the self-destructive gender roles that men play in our society when we create macho propaganda in our media, subsequently contributing in encouraging and strengthening others to idolize this dangerous, unrealistic fantasy of manhood. This sends the message to our men in our society that it is okay to sexually harass women because men know women want it – even if it feeds a womanizing culture. That it is okay to be emotionally illiterate because showing emotion is a sign of weakness – even if it makes men emotionally conflicted. That it is okay to bully effeminate men because we are only teaching them to “be a man” – even if it damages their mental health. If we are to end toxic masculinity, we must change society’s perception of masculinity.

It is time to change the paradigm of people’s masculine views, for the sake of redefining a positive and healthy form of masculinity. As such, we can foster a culture of love and kindness among men, allowing them to find a place of belonging in their homes, workplaces, and classrooms. If we are to create a culture that lets men freely express themselves, we must invest in ideas and ethical solutions that confront and challenge the media’s outdated myths on manhood.

To foster honest, emotional, and positive aspects in men at a local level, we must integrate feminine-like thinking and behavior in the minds of young boys. Re-educating our men about what it means to be a man in our classrooms and our homes. An example of this masculine re-education can be seen in the monthly support group, Heart Of A Man. According to Global News, it is “for men from all walks of life where they can voice their feelings, cry without judgment and build each other up." In another instance, feminist actor, Justin Baldoni, speaks in a TED talk about his own challenges with coming into terms with his own manhood. "I challenge you to see if you can use the same qualities that you feel make you a man to go deeper into yourself… Are you brave enough to be vulnerable? To reach out to another man when you need help? To dive headfirst into your shame? Are you strong enough to be sensitive, to cry whether you’re hurting or you’re happy, even if it makes you look weak?"

Through redefining the masculine perception, we can enhance men’s relationships and family life since we have taught them to open up about their problems with other people. Teaching them that it is okay to feel and express yourself. Therefore, we can encourage men to break down traditional gender stereotypes and archetypes, uplifting them to be strong and confident in embracing “traditionally feminine" roles. From there, we can create communities that develop positive male role models for the generations to come, via the destruction of the manhood myths that came before. Ensuing a new status quo that welcomes boys and men in an accepting society.

However, what we need most are media messages in our advertising and our entertainment, which portray men for being loving and empathetic. A good instance of this in our entertainment media can be seen in Newt Scamander, the male protagonist of Fantastic Beast And Where To Find Them. Unlike the confident, romantic, and ferocious Hollywood hero, Newt represents a vulnerable, empathetic, but quietly confident form of manhood. To demonstrate, look no further than the scene in which Newt takes care of a newborn beast like a mother. Soothing them by saying, “mum’s here. Mum’s here.” In times of peril, Newt’s actions and choices are guided by his empathy. "I'm here to help you, Credence. I'm not here to hurt you." Thus, heroes, like Newt, who normalize less manly traits can make men feel empowered to be empathetic and open up about their vulnerabilities, emotions, and concerns. In doing so, this representation of men makes them feel less ashamed of their effeminate masculinity because it is portrayed in a positive light.

Finally, we must also demand media influencers and leaders that should be held accountable for our manly culture. To achieve this, we have to ensure that these male influencers cannot get away with toxic behaviours, such as: cheating, dishonesty, disrespect, and narcissism. They are the ones who are seen by men and boys as icons or ideals of manhood. Whatever values and traditions these influencers and leaders believe in, others will follow their lead. If we want our men to be better, we have to let them know that their actions have consequences. Justin Trudeau is a notable exemplar of this positive influence on manhood, as he leads by example on what kind of men we can be. “To raise our kids feminist is to recognize that they all have a part to play to build that world. To raise our kids feminist is to honor their future, because they have the responsibility to shape it for the better.” Terry Crews is another positive male role model, who is recognized as a feminist icon in the #MeToo movement, for his attempts to redefine masculinity. "I've been called a pussy, been told ‘all your muscles are good for nothing.’ But the question isn't ‘how strong are you?’ It's ‘what is the real enemy here?’ The process of being deprogrammed is eye-opening. Once you call yourself on your bullshit, you start seeing it everywhere.”

By holding men accountable, we shame and punish men of their toxic virility, making it aware that their behavior is not a rite of passage to manhood. Alternatively, we can encourage men with power and influence to be good role models towards other men. Ones who uphold beliefs of gender equality, emotional expression, and civilized thinking. Otherwise, they are only feeding towards a poisonous masculine culture.

If we take the time to challenge our masculine identity and what it means to be a man, we can create open and honest conversations that allow men to feel supported, guided, and respected by others. Hopefully, we can create a new manhood myth that can create better fathers, better sons, better boyfriends, better husbands — better men.

#men #toxic masculinity #liberal #opinion #thinkpiece

0 notes

caveartfair · 7 years ago

Text

40 Artists Share Their Favorite Shows of 2017

At the end of each year, critics and editors eagerly (and oh-so-authoritatively) weigh in on what they found to be the best work of the last 12 months. But why not go straight to the source, asking some of our favorite creatives what thrilled, moved, and inspired them in 2017? Here, without further ado, we present a year-end wrap-up that lets the artists decide what mattered.

Joe Reihsen

Neil Raitt, “Misty Rock,” at Anat Ebgi, and Friedrich Kunath, “Frutti di Mare,” at Blum & Poe, both in Los Angeles

Installation view of “Friedrich Kunath: Frutti di Mare,” 2017. © Friedrich Kunath. Photo by Joshua White/JWPictures.com. Courtesy of the artist and Blum & Poe, Los Angeles/New York/ Tokyo.

“I have to say it is hard to pin down a favorite show, but definitely the most stand-out opening night in Los Angeles this year was experiencing Raitt and Kunath across the street from one another. Both shows were completely immersive, creating lush, fictive landscapes for the romantic ideal of the painter—through the lens of an L.A. transplant. For Raitt, the idea of the American landscape is informed by growing up in Britain and seeing Bob Ross on TV, but the latest works in the show seem to reflect his recent move to Los Angeles. And I’ll quote Kunath for his take on his own exhibition: ‘If Arte and Merv Griffin co-produced a reality TV show, it might go something like this.’”

Jamie Felton

Milka Djordjevich’s ANTHEM, performed at Bob Baker Marionette Theatre as part of Los Angeles Exchange (LAX) Festival

“This piece bubbles to the top of my brain when I think of all the art I saw over 2017,” says Felton (whom Artsy picked out as an artist to watch at this year’s Untitled art fair in Miami Beach.) “It might have been the 1970s outfits, the theatrical lights, the intimate audience sitting around a small dance floor. It might have been the four beautiful dancers that hit every beat. The sweat and the glow on their glittered faces. ANTHEM embraces virtuosity and sass. It touches on ideas of labor, play, and feminine posturing. As a painter I think of images that can play with de-sexualizing the female body, and Milka has choreographed movements that embrace that idea. ANTHEM is cool, sexy, and pretty amazing. I feel lucky to have seen it.”

Sally Saul

David Hockney at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York (through February 25th)

“David Hockney” at The Met, 2017. © The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

“Previously, I was on the neutral side regarding Hockney’s work, but this show changed that.

“The early work is bold in style and subject, especially considering homosexuality was illegal at the time. By the later 1960s his paintings have become refined, meticulous, and cool, but always with an underlying tension: beneath the equidistant lawn sprinklers are Van Gogh-like blades of grass; a totem pole mirrors the collector Marcia Weisman’s expression. Within the contemporary Los Angeles homes are a few odd, specific details and décor, clues to the inhabitants who hold their own in the large, illusionistic space. By contrast, the later paintings are freewheeling, bright, with several perspectives as if seen with many eyes, vertiginous. I loved the show.”

Dashiell Manley

“Calder | Miró Constellations” at Acquavella Galleries in New York (in collaboration with Pace Gallery)

“I didn't see many shows this year, but this one stuck with me. It was beautiful without having to be glamorous. The Miró works in particular vibrated in an otherworldly way and seemed to transcend a historical moment. There were ten thousand different ways to look at each one, or at all of them: from the sides, or with your eyes closed, trying to remember. It's everything I love about painting. When I was younger I’d see an exhibition that would challenge my idea of what art could be, and I would immediately retreat to the studio and work. I would also see shows that were just so good that their afterimage would paralyze my own production. This did both.”

Dan Herschlein

Vanessa Thill, “Bivouac,” at Bible in New York

Installation view of “Bivouac.” Courtesy of Bible Gallery.

“The artist suspended three ‘paintings’ made from things like cough syrup, shampoo, tobacco and resin from the ceiling of Bible, a black-painted basement in Chinatown. The works looked wet, like animal skins clumped with fat and wet leaves, and they had postures like the clothing hanging off a scarecrow's frame. There was an expectation that they would waver or ripple in the air but their rigid material made the way they hovered so still in the room feel supernatural, as if they were caught in a flashbulb. It was eerie and peaceful down there, everything I want from a show.”

Kenya (Robinson)

Sanford Biggers, “SELAH,” at Marianne Boesky Gallery in New York

“Growing up an unlikely Evangelical, our radio was almost always tuned to the Bible Broadcasting Network. An aural fixture of my memory, its ubiquity was only rivaled by the hum of our refrigerator. The weekday lineup featured this segment called ‘Take A Minute,’ and at the end of each of these 60-second devotionals, the host would chime brightly: ‘Selah! Meditate on this.’ It was a catchy phrase in both content and delivery that could easily be mimicked and turned for comedic effect—or served shady, if you were caught slipping on your good Christian bidness. Art is my religion now, the studio acting as my home church, but occasionally I can be convinced to visit another congregation. And so, Sanford Biggers’ ‘SELAH’ lured me. An aesthetic sermon of homespun conceptualism. Quilted motifs, sacred geometries, mutilated deities and tactile sequins, so measured in their presentation, that Biggers deftly coaxes the intellectual from the emotion of contemporary violence—upon which we must all meditate.”

Ryan Wallace

Matt Kenny, “Landscape Paintings” and “Landscape Paintings (Part 2)” at the National Exemplar in New York

Work by Matt Kenny in “Landscape paintings (PART 2).” Courtesy of The National Exemplar.

“In a year that championed sophomoric figuration, it was great to see Matt Kenny’s masterful representational paintings,” says Wallace, whose work will be on view this January at the Institute of Contemporary Art (ICA) at Maine College of Art (MECA). “The first part of this show included an authentic, untitled Francis Picabia from 1903, and featured three copied paintings by Kenny (of a Pissarro, a Bonnard, a Cézanne; all given a “Picabia” signature at bottom right), as well as two naturalist paintings of One World Trade Center as viewed at a distance from the Meadowlands and Secaucus, New Jersey. In the Meadowlands painting, the building is re-animated as a cartoonish monster, while from Secaucus, the building is painted in true realism. It is easy to be seduced by the craft, but registering the throughline in all of Kenny’s projects is where the spoils lay. Here, it was a fun leap to consider a scenario without forged signatures, and with an agenda that was political rather than visual—in which the ‘fakes’ could be used to raise illicit funds, and the views rendered with such care in the Trade Center paintings could just as easily be snapshots from a reconnaissance mission, or from residences housing indoctrinated recruits just beyond city limits, like the ones discussed in Coercive Beliefs (2017), Kenny’s just-released first book: A 300-page nonfiction poem on the origins of Al Qaeda.”

Mira Dancy

Becky Kolsrud, “Allegorical Nudes” at JTT Gallery in New York

“This show featured a warm, electric blue—a flatly-handled, brilliantly-hued kind of ‘body of water’ or ‘wave’ throughout. This bombardment of blue created a warm electric buzz in the room, and gave buoyancy to her figures, a cast of repeating characters that stare out from the paintings in resolute, classical poses. In almost every painting, the blue of water threatens to wall-over or erase an unflinching figure. The body and the blue are equally constant and unpredictable—and each painting unravels a slightly different riddle. Kolsrud's protagonists are in jeopardy—but her strong, confident strokes of color, and inventive turns of logic, push the figures to the front. The wall of blue, the symbolic, destructive force of water, is held impossibly at bay by the confident and effortless rendering of a hand with red fingernails.”

Adrianne Rubenstein

Sally Saul, “Knit of Identity” at Rachel Uffner Gallery in New York

Installation view of Sally Saul, “Knit of Identity” at Rachel Uffner Gallery. Courtesy of the artist and Rachel Uffner Gallery.

“Sally’s work is a subtle commentary on social concerns, particularly having to do with the environment and women’s bodies,” says Rubenstein, whose paintings are on view at Reyes Projects in Birmingham, Michigan through January 20th. “Her ceramics are like a warm hug. They echo the sentiments I feel when progressive action is taken by my feminist heroes. At first glance her sculptures are homey and goofy even, they have a magical, disarming sensibility. Sally is getting attention for her work somewhat later in life, which to me is symbolic of tides turning. This exhibition helps to rewrite history a little bit, and it’s the kind of history I want to be a part of.”

Mitchell Anderson

Rico Scagliola & Michael Meier, “Together,” at Kunsthalle St. Gallen, Switzerland

“A hermitage hanging of giant photographs of the everyday transformed drunk bros at McDonalds, grotesque children, and unflattering couples into painterly portraits of the intense beauty of the human and urban form,” says Anderson, a Zurich-based artist whose work can be seen at Fri Art Kunsthalle Fribourg through the end of January. “The show’s titular video has engrossed me since August. In it, teenagers—filmed on a carnival ride—attempt to stay stable as their smallest gestures and gazes are slowed to reveal the ways in which they, and all of us, try so hard to effortlessly present ourselves to others. The sexual tension was transcendent.”

Eric Yahnker

Froggyland in Split, Croatia (permanent installation)

Installation view of Froggyland in Split, Croatia. Courtesy of Froggyland.

“In a year that found me traversing the globe to several world-class art destinations, no exhibition occupied my mind quite like Froggyland in Split, Croatia—an attraction that is exactly what it sounds like. Knowing a minor amount about taxidermy, stuffing, and posing frogs is tantamount to posing a freshly launched snot rocket—no small feat—and, yet, this place is chock full of century-old, drama-filled, mini-dioramas from the fanatic, mesmerizingly OCD melon of Hungarian taxidermist Ferenc Mere. A true masterpiece of outsider art, it represents nearly every aspect of early 20th-century Western life in exacting detail: the classroom, the courtroom, the gym, the circus, the billiards hall, the public plunge, the barbershop, the bedroom, and more. Unlike Jim Henson’s heartwarming, googly-eyed brand of anthropomorphism, all of Mere’s subjects must spend eternity staring blankly up at the sky (or the ceilings of their fingerprint-laden glass tombs)—perhaps praying for rapture for their finely lacquered, rock-hard amphibious souls.”

Jean-Michel Othoniel

Sophie Calle and Serena Carone, “Beau doublé, Monsieur le marquis!” at Le Musée de la Chasse et de la Nature in Paris (through February 11th)

“One of the strangest exhibitions that I saw this year was Sophie Calle’s exhibition with her guest, the artist Serena Carone, curated by Sonia Voss,” says Othoniel (who opens a solo at Perrotin New York in March of the coming year). “The exhibition is magical and Musée de la Chasse is the perfect space for such incredibly personal works, which consistently and brilliantly incorporate autobiographical and fictional narratives. For this show, Calle reinvented and reinterpreted much of her previous work, which often explores themes of hunting, of stalking, and she’s also created new works. At the same time, she incorporates and magically investigates the animal kingdom.”

Sophie Hirsh

Eamon Monaghan, “The Rube’s World,” at the Hand in Brooklyn, New York

Installation view of “The Rube's World.” Courtesy of The Hand Gallery.

“Monaghan is a rare breed of artist capable of accessing creativity in its most genuine form. He creates a captivating world that is both tender and full of longing, but also absurd and hilarious. His filmmaking process is meticulous and unique. His story develops hand in hand with the building of an extremely elaborate set consisting of endless detailed sculptures made from painted isolation foam. It’s a magical world that you don’t have to understand in order to be in awe of it. I am reminded how refreshing it is to be in the presence of something that just is. Monaghan’s work leaves you giddy, triggering the type of curiosity that inspired you to make art in the first place.”

David Colman

Damien Hirst, “Treasures From The Wreck of the Unbelievable,” at the Pinault Collection in Venice

“Art’s biggest irony of 2017? Damien Hirst made a brilliant show in Venice about an ancient shipwreck—a multilayered allegory about himself and all humanity—and everyone missed the boat. The art media got stuck at the entry-level outrage (the money it cost and made), blinding them to the show’s amazing and complex exploration of human morality and materialism, the real entry point of which was one of today’s more debatable binaries: good creator vs. bad collector. Conflating medieval demons with modern monsters, Hirst merged 27 of Dante’s circles of hell, purgatory and heaven with today’s 12-step addiction canon. The is the story of a man and a ship and a race that have all hit bottom, and the gaudy, gory glory of Hirst’s inventory celebrated everything that being human means—anger, love, desire, greed, faith, hope, lust, et. al.—fiercely, beautifully and candidly. Priceless.”

Katie Stout

Nicola L, “Works, 1968 to the Present,” at SculptureCenter in Queens, New York

“The artist has been a huge inspiration ever since the late, great Jim Walrod showed me his Nicola L female boudoir,” says Stout, whose sculptures are on view at Nina Johnson in Miami through early January. “She’s a full blown icon to me, so I was shocked to learn that this was the first comprehensive survey of her work. She started her career in art over 50 years ago and her skin suits and furniture based on the human form feels as fresh and relevant as I imagine they felt then.”

Josh Reames

Jacqueline Humphries at Greene Naftali Gallery in New York

Installation view of Jacqueline Humphries at Greene Naftali, New York, 2017. Courtesy of the artist and Greene Naftali, New York.

“After an intense year of sociopolitical upheaval, Humphries’s exhibition might be the first show I’ve been able to look at without wondering where the social commentary is,” says Reames. “I’ve had a lot of conversations over the past year about how artists have an obligation to be politically engaged, since being apolitical is a stance in itself. Somehow this show has taken me back to a place of being able to look at paintings for what they are instead of what they mean. The group of large square canvases were intensely detailed with alphanumeric keystrokes, stenciled on with thick oil paint, with the occasional bleed or gestural smear. They’re austere, elegantly brutal, and impressive. It’s the kind of show that made me jealous, wishing that I made those paintings; and ultimately excited to get back into the studio.”

Margo Wolowiec

“Post-Truth,” a symposium presented by Culture Lab Detroit

“During two panel discussions, artists, writers, and architects discussed the antagonisms of our current political climate and possibilities for the future, especially in the arts,” says Wolowiec, known for her hand woven, dyed textile works. “I love the challenge of critically dissecting a topic that is so new there aren’t yet cohesive dialogues to talk through it, requiring on the spot thinking and honest self-assessments. During the ‘Alternative Facts’ panel, moderator Juanita Moore asked, ‘Does the artist have a moral imperative to be politically engaged?’ Artist Martine Syms poignantly answered that not only is it a privilege to not be political, but institutions that exhibit presumably radical projects don’t always align their own politics along those same ambitions. Artist and educator Edgar Arceneaux simply answered ‘No.’ I loved both of these answers because it’s absolutely a privilege to not be political, and if your work is politicized by others in ways you don’t agree with, you have the right to direct that conversation elsewhere—or say ‘No,’ and leave it at that.”

Thomas Nozkowski

“World War I and the Visual Arts” at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York (through January 7th)

Christopher Richard Wynne Nevinson, Returning to the Trenches, 1916. Courtesy of The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

“This exhibition, drawn largely from the Met’s own holdings, encompassed a wide range of responses to World War I,” says the painter (who opens his own solo exhibition at Pace Gallery in New York this coming January). “Not another eat-your-spinach, didactic kind of exhibition, the curators got this one exactly right by focusing on the quality of the individual works included. Folk art, vanguard art, industrial art, commercial art as well as traditional art are interwoven in a provocative and exciting way. Younger artists today, investing more and more of their efforts with social and political concerns, could find a wealth of options in this exhibition. Any opportunity to see Otto Dix’s fifty-one-piece aquatint and etching suite ‘Der Krieg’ is always welcome. I am still thinking about this show.”

Scarlett Bowman

Rose Wylie, “Quack Quack,” at the Serpentine Galleries in London

“Play, color, comic, nostalgic, texture, bold, narrative, clumsy, jubilant, pink, red, thick, haste,honest, modest, fearless, joy,spontaneous, cartoon, caricature, heraldic, coincidence, eyelashes, ducks, bats, planes, happy, primitive, memory, experience, sifting, love, joy, sports, news, celebrity, dogs, collage, football, composition, literature, form, curiosity, hope, landscape,memory, ice-skating,blonde, cinema, routine, scale, parks, filmmaking, imagery,discipline,girls, text, paint, canvas, smell, Hollywood, dreams,fashion, vast, uncompromised, boys,bold,irreverent, abstract, original, irrelevance, relevance, everyday, awkward, seasons.”

Beverly Fishman

“Elizabeth Murray: Painting in the ’80s” at Pace Gallery in New York (through January 13th)

Installation view of “Elizabeth Murray: Painting in the '80s.” Courtesy of PACE Gallery.

“It was so inspiring to see how brilliant, innovative, and totally surprising Murray’s work was when she was painting at the top of her game. Each canvas seemed like its own unique universe—a play on the still life genre with its connotations of domesticity, but blown up to the size of an enveloping world. She had total command of the shaped canvas. I was blown away by the way each dynamic painting slipped between representation and abstraction, as well as solid and void. And how funny and wild and bold they were. She played by her own rules, and how lucky we are to experience this.”

Margaret Lee

“Unholding” at Artists Space in New York (through January 21st)

“I was fortunate enough to view this exhibition in conjunction with a conversation and book launch for No Reservation: New York Contemporary Native American Art Movement (2017), published by AMERINDA Inc., which gave me a new understanding of what it means to fight for aesthetic sovereignty while also maintaining community building within one’s ambitions,” says Lee, whose next show opens in January at Marlborough Contemporary in London. “In a time when activism and political engagement has become a necessity more than a passing interest, ‘Unholding’ presents an inspiring example of how to navigate the interconnectedness between the personal and political within contemporary artistic practices.”

Christopher K. Ho

Kwan Sheung Chi, “Blue is the New Black,” at Edouard Malingue Gallery in Hong Kong

Kwan Sheung Chi, “Blue is the New Black,” installation view at Edouard Malingue Gallery, Hong Kong, 2017. Courtesy of the artist and Edouard Malingue Gallery.

“Bewilderment is an ever-rarer response to contemporary art, in the shadow of over a century of Western avant-garde antics. Kwan Sheung Chi elicited such a response in this Hong Kong-born, Western-schooled viewer,” says Ho, whose next major project will open in October 2018 at the Bronx Museum of the Arts. “Imagine an elevator that opens onto a room crisscrossed with blue tape; two unmatched monitors mounted front-to-back inches apart respectively depicting a bust of David being bashed, and a hand silently gesturing in sync; an actual halfpipe, in Yves Klein Blue; and footage of a remake of Pierrot Le Fou’s closing scene, starring the artist’s young son. Kwan’s masterstroke is to make his Western references too obvious. An interpretive feint that belies intercultural operations as labyrinthine as the city’s colonial history and capitalist streets below, they insist: Look again, through your Hong Kong eyes.”

Marie Herwald Hermann

Biba Bell and Jessie Gold, Body Factory, in Detroit

“This two-dancer performance (scored by Ivan Berko) was a combo field-trip and performance during the hazy Detroit summer. We were met in a roofless structure and bussed out to a dilapidated theater some miles away. In here, Bell and Gold performed, moving in and out of sync, incorporating objects at times, and continually encroaching on audience’s space. The performance was both physical and tactile and the border between the audience and performers slowly broke down; the musical score turned into a DJ set, and the beer-drinking crowd slowly became part of the dance floor.”

Jennifer Coates

Jackie Saccoccio at 11R in New York

Installation view of work by Jackie Saccoccio in “Sharp Objects & Apocalypse Confetti” at 11R, New York. Photo by Charles Benton. Courtesy of 11R/Van Doren Waxter.

“This show blew my mind: Rapturous works on paper comprised of tangles of linear drips meant as portraits, and large-scale paintings where Saccoccio began to fill in the tiny empty spaces between her signature drips and pours that splayed in all directions. The portraits were like decaying psyches while the paintings, with titles like Place (Group), Time (Splinter), and Apocalypse Confetti, evoked the decay of digital information, buildings, civilization, the end of everything in a spastic rush of heightened beauty. Nuclear meltdown mixed with the most dramatic, saturated sunset in these images of ecstatic ruins.”

Sarah Meyohas

Richard Mosse, “Incoming,” at the Barbican Centre’s the Curve in London

“Mosse created ‘Incoming’ like the military targets enemies: using a camera that is formally classified as a weapon,” says Meyohas, who opened a large-scale exhibition at Red Bull Arts New York this year. “Long range surveillance of thermal radiation reveals a maelstrom of bodies. They are refugees. The camera textures them in black and white, an effect that is alien and anonymizing. The brilliance of the piece is that this spectral rendition actually serves to humanize. The epic drama looms before you across a trio of monolithic screens. ‘Incoming’ (created with cinematographer Trevor Tweeten and composer Ben Frost), felt more poignant than any other footage I had seen of the refugee crisis.”

Andrew Kuo

Peter Halley, “Ground Floor,” at Greene Naftali Gallery in New York

“In the wake of our changing experiences within the internet, Halley’s exhibition felt as urgent as ever. His cell paintings continue to discuss ideas of power, money, and flow, helping in our attempt to define neutrality and the mechanisms behind the things we’re shown. The nine new paintings, hung in a bright yellow room, looked like rotating prison bars painted in the far extremes of color, or maybe circuit boards that parse the information we see and don’t see.”

David Humphrey

Celeste Dupuy-Spencer at Marlborough Contemporary in New York

Celeste Dupuy-Spencer, Early Snow – Rhinecliff Hotel, 2017. Courtesy of the artist and Marlborough Contemporary, New York and London.

“Moving paint around to make pictures can be a complicated behavior,” says Humphrey, whose own pictures can be seen through early January at Real Estate Fine Art in Brooklyn. “Dupuy-Spencer’s mark-making has a warmth and jaunty muscularity that suggests she both cares about her subjects and is in awe of, if not disoriented by, their inscrutable reality. Painting can be a way to process feelings by spending time with people and events in their absence. Dupuy-Spencer conjures concerts, parties, and political demonstrations in a painterly equivalent of fiction’s free indirect style, where first and third person are blended. Dupuy-Spencer’s fictions tangle her voice into the bustling of life inside the Rhinecliff Hotel, a socializing crowd of family and friends on a porch, the ungroomed intimacy of a head rub. Her work reveals the weird and powerful ways we are defined, hurt, disappointed, and amazed by other people.”

Richard Tinkler

Jack Pierson at Regen Projects in Los Angeles and Maccarone in New York

“Often when Jack Pierson is talking about one of his photographs he will say that he likes it because it looks like the 1950s. I have a similar feeling about my paintings when they remind me of the 1970s. What I connect to in Jack’s work, both the photographs and the word sculptures, is what I see as a desire to rescue and preserve something of the past and to find a way to honestly communicate it in the present. At Maccarone in New York, Jack was showing photographs that were first shown in the early ’90s but were taken in the 1980s, and printed in a low-tech way—that welcomed hairs and scratches and uneven color—that made them seem as if they might have been found images. I can see how this connects to the recent word sculptures at Regen Projects in L.A. where found letters from old signs have been given new life as sculptures that are both poetic and formally rigorous. In both bodies of work something of the past is saved and transformed into a message for the present day.”

Franck Chalendard

Sadie Laska, “Nudes,” at Galerie Ceysson & Bénétière in Saint-Étienne, France

Installation view of Sadie Laska’s work in “Nudes” in Saint Étienne at Ceysson & Bénétière. Courtesy of the artist and Ceysson & Bénétière.

“In this exhibition, Sadie Laska keeps very little of the magazine images she initially projects on the canvas,” says abstract painter Chalendard, who also shows with the gallery. “What remains are simplified shapes and curves that our imagination can still associate with the female body. I quite like these paintings for everything that is accentuated and exaggerated: gestures, shapes, points of view. The sensuality and brutality expressed by these canvases go way beyond erotic imagery. Painting takes over with its expressive power.”

Kate Shepherd

“Epic Tales from Ancient India: Paintings from the San Diego Museum of Art,” at the Blanton Museum of Art in Austin, Texas

“It’s rare for me to see a show that requires so much careful scrutiny that I don’t ‘finish,’ and promise to return the next day. Classic Indian and Persian stories were explained on wall texts that served as user manuals for the paintings. On each work, segments of narrative coexisted to show a progression from the beginning, middle, and end of a story. Oddly, the sumptuous graphic embellishment and decorated borders typical of miniatures weren’t the primary appeal. Rather it was the lore expressed through repeated patterns of figures in movement and tiny expressive heads in profile, housed in what seemed to be proscenium stage architecture. The effort was worth it.”

Kurt Kauper

“Alice Neel, Uptown” at David Zwirner in New York, curated by Hilton Als

Alice Neel, Benjamin, 1976. © The Estate of Alice Neel. Courtesy of David Zwirner, New York/London and Victoria Miro, London.

Alice Neel, Woman, 1966. © The Estate of Alice Neel. Courtesy of David Zwirner, New York/London and Victoria Miro, London.

“Several paintings in the exhibition helped me realize what a brilliantly ironic painter Neel was,” says Kauper, whose own show of new paintings and drawings opens this January at Almine Rech in New York. “Not ironic in the way that term has been used—or misused—in recent discourse, but in the true sense of the word: an expression that seems to mean one thing, but communicates something entirely different. The awkward, almost hamfisted diffidence of each paintings’ initial visual utterance allows the viewer immediate access to the sitter, without having to pass through the authorial presence of the painter. But Neel’s unparalleled ability to make you believe that you’re sharing space with a real human being, and empathizing with them, is possible because of the profound mastery that reveals itself in her pitch-perfect evocations of specific light (glinting off flesh), perceptual color, place, and character. Nobody’s portraits are more authentically real, and it’s largely because of irony.”

Cindy Ji Hye Kim

Teto Elsiddique, “a distant fire” at 6BASE in the Bronx, New York

“The show featured a group of paintings that are basically frottage rubbings, using a unique printmaking technique Teto invented over the years. Objects are laid on an ad hoc air vacuum bed, and a thin sheet of plastic is put over them. The film gets air-sprayed over and it’s covered to be suctioned in the vacuum bed. He then takes the now air-sprayed sheets of film onto the canvas as a transfer. This process is repeated, with multiple images layered and transferred onto the canvas. As a friend I got to see each stage of his work process (from the sourcing of materials to the actual making) and it was meaningful to see, each painting containing the history of its own making.”

Tracy Thomason

“Hot Mud” at Spook Rock Farm in Hudson, New York

Installation view of Amy Brener’s work at Hot Mud Arts Fest. Courtesy of JAGprojects.

“In late July, the artist Colby Bird and I are on our way to a farm in Hudson, New York to finish installing his fleet of outdoor sculptures for this giant and rambling group show,” recalls Thomason. “It was curated by Jesse Greenberg on the family farm of Nick Payne. Our arms are literally full of melons to install on Colby’s hand-bent iron staffs to mark a sweet, but fleeting, occasion. Smelling like Backwoods DEET, we pull up to a barn where Amy Brener’s translucent corporeal sculpture is vaulted and draped so high and large that it exists as its very own cathedral. I like to believe this is what was meant to happen when you were told as a young girl to treat your body like a temple. The joy of life covers every inch of every fleck of straw and splashing stream during Hot Mud’s day and night. Pooneh Maghazehe's ceramic heads float in creeks; Nick Payne's sensitive scratches of pastel are placed atop late 19th century wallpaper. 2 a.m. rolls around with fires still roaring, microphones screeching, and I’m left possibly begging the largest question of them all: How did we end up here?”

John Miller and Aura Rosenberg

Trevor Paglen, “A Study of Invisible Images,” at Metro Pictures in New York

“The current status of photography is a question that few photographers bother to address. Paglen not only broached this question but also went on to offer a structural critique of photographic technology as an apparatus. He showed images that were either produced by Artificial Intelligence (AI) programs or that were interpreted by them. Since many of these were dye sublimation prints, we can nominally call them photographs. But if photographs reproduce reality—even if that’s the constructed realities of artists like Jeff Wall or Thomas Demand—these images are of a different order. They too ‘reproduce’ reality but it is a reality that AI software generates from selected data sets. These, in turn, synthesize a ‘worldview,’ so to speak.

“Technically, two AI programs were involved; one produced an image; the other analyzed it. These functioned as a feedback loop. For example, to produce an image of a vampire, the first program creates a composite image. The second reads it and notes that traits like ‘fangs’ are missing. The first then incorporates that information. Nonetheless, the results are still fragmentary and contingent and point to gaps in the artificial cognitive process.

“As machine learning develops, these differences will become increasingly less apparent. What’s most threatening, then, will be the perfect realization of otherwise ‘invisible’ images, because once this is achieved, who will be able to tell the difference?”

Ethan Greenbaum

“Philip Guston: Laughter in the Dark, Drawings from 1971 & 1975” at Hauser & Wirth in New York

Installation view, “Philip Guston: Laughter in the Dark, Drawings from 1971 & 1975,” Hauser & Wirth New York, 22nd Street. © The Estate of Philip Guston. Photo by Genevieve Hanson. Courtesy of Hauser & Wirth.

“2017 was a year when I, like many people, was looking to art with a need sharpened by our ongoing political crisis. A show of rarely exhibited work by Philip Guston was one of the most haunting exhibitions I saw. It opened days before the election and featured a suite of satirical drawings centered on the life and career of Richard Nixon. Guston made ‘Poor Richard’, the first and largest group of work, in a few frenzied months following his highly criticized Marlborough Gallery show in 1970 (and the leaking of the Pentagon Papers). I imagine he was feeling both angry at the world and sorry for himself—the drawings look it. They are brutally hysterical, depicting the arc of Nixon’s life from parochial tot to resolutely confused young man. They culminate in his misadventures as a literal dick head.

“A lot of people have drawn comparisons between Nixon and Trump. The timing of this show made the association inevitable. There is an absurd horror in the drawings that visualizes our current disaster like very little I’ve seen before or since. It was cathartic, but also damning. The works don’t simply mock or criticize. As in his Klan paintings, Guston identifies with the villain. Nixon is shown as victim and perpetrator, child and monster. And he is rendered in ways that are clearly related to the artists’ self portraiture. This show was a challenge to me — or anyone else—who would imagine themselves independent from the worst of their culture.”

Ridley Howard

Yanique Norman, “Wasting Your Beautiful Mind: Coolidge Antiquitas (2nd Presidential Edition),” at Atlanta Contemporary

“The Atlanta Contemporary has been on a roll, hosting a number of great headliner shows this year. One surprise standout was Norman’s surreal vision of First Lady Grace Coolidge and her art collection. Installed in a closet-size auxiliary project space, electric green walls were lined with amorphous collages of Xerox, watercolor, gouache, and ink. Single photos of Coolidge posing in the Rose Garden or White House were hung low to the ground, and sprouted long strands of overlapping African-American faces, glued together with dizzying repetition. Hydra-Phoenix-goddess beings, they burst upward through the space with a majestic, kudzu-like energy. While referencing African busts and masks, the work felt personal, like an impossibly complicated dream about America’s past and future. It also made me think a lot about the subtext of American decorum, and the experiences of Michelle Obama.”

Lavar Munroe

“The Absent Museum” at WIELS Contemporary Art Centre in Brussels

“This exhibition in Brussels featured Luc Tuymans, Martin Kippenberger, Marlene Dumas, and Ellen Gallagher, to name a few,” says Munroe, whose own work was a stand-out at the Prospect.4 triennial this year. “There were several memorable moments, one being a sculptural installation of ‘Workers’ by Oscar Murillo. I was particularly drawn to this work because of its close correlation and association with the folk tradition of making Guy Fawkes statues in the Bahamas. There, the figures are strategically placed on street corners, and burnt on the night of Guy Fawkes Day, November 5. It was refreshing and thought-provoking to see similar figures within a museum space.”

Matthew Thurber

Katherine Bauer’s Cinematic Death Moon Return: The Forest Phase, Passage for the Datura Dreamer, at Fahrenheit 451 House in Catskill, New York

Katherine Bauer, Cinematic Death Moon Return: The Forest Phase, Passage for the Datura Dreamer, 2017. Courtesy of the artist and Microscope Gallery.

“The viewer peers into an amphitheater-like space, open to the elements, to see psychedelic datura plants reaching up to grab tendrils of 16mm film,” says Thurber (who earlier in the year clued Artsy readers into cartoonists the art world needs to know). “A huge projector reel hangs in a lunar close-up. As time passes in stop-motion frames, snow has piled up on a salvaged theater curtain, and dancers have wandered through this garden of cinematic resurrection. The sculpture is startling– as much for its web of symbols, which link film to environmental plunder and agricultural cycles, as for its mysterious embodiment.” The installation and event—incorporating plants favored by witches, colored lighting, performance elements, and both found and original film footage—is part of a larger cycle of work that Bauer is continuing to develop.

Nikki Maloof

Florine Stettheimer, “Painting Poetry,” at the Jewish Museum in New York

“I went to see this show along with a few lady painters not totally expecting to be knocked out, but it was one of those moments that catch you by surprise. Most of my encounters with Stettheimer’s work until this point were in reproduction. What struck me was her paint handling. It felt so alive and so timeless. My eyes caressed every detail of the surface—the way she sculpted the paint in areas with a knife and then etched into other areas, squiggling a thin line of a plant, or lovingly rendered her name. It was like a beautifully woven tapestry of paint. When I see a person’s paint-handling and I totally relate to it to this degree, I immediately remember why I’ve chosen this crazy path (or why it chose me). I feel the cosmic power that making bestows on us to connect with both the past and the future. It’s pure magic.”

from Artsy News

#Artsy News

0 notes

anyamahony806248-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Best 50 Mother Quotations

The short article has to do with the special nature from the very first dancing that a bridegroom as well as his mama will discuss at the groom's marriage. One morning when I entered the parlour with my publications, I located my mother appearing distressed, Miss Murdstone looking agency, and Mr. Murdstone binding something pivot all-time low from a walking cane - a supple as well as supple walking stick, which he ended binding when I was available in, and poised and changed airborne. Therefore, rounded pair of - this basiporady2016.info was Mommy Siren Gaia and also the Gigantes versus Zeus and also the Olympians, but along with a little assistance from the demigod Hercules, the Fates as well as Helius (the sun-god), Selene (the moon-goddess) and Eos (the siren of the dawn, understood to the Romans as Aurora). I have likewise been actually that mommy in the the mall who observed a mother striking her kid, the little one was actually not crying and she was actually obviously nervous and also spread, rather than judging, I approached her and also asked her if I could help her at all. The various other piece from new mama guidance I received is actually that when people offer you advise, simply smile as well as thank them and afterwards do what you recognize corrects and also commonly it will definitely entail overlooking unwanted relevant information.

Permit us declare, ultimately, that our company await this average amazing woman which is claiming to our company, with her lifestyle, that to guarantee her right to become a homosexual as well as a mama is actually to take another step towards freedom for we all. Yes, there is a roadway, however there were not many cars that day, consequently Dad and also I walked simply, handing down a pathway along the inclines of Catbells, a fourteen hundred feet hillside which settles those that rise it along with an effortless climb as well as a great perspective around the island studded pond. Religion continued to participate in a crucial role throughout our relationship, however took on brand new indicating many years ago when he and also I walked through his dependence to liquor together ... he at the very same grow older I was when I became his mommy. Karmaus mentioned that researchers have actually examined whether bust milk might lug immune system cells connected to allergies and bronchial asthma coming from mother to little one, putting babies of asthmatic mamas in jeopardy from breathing concerns - and also some anxious mamas along with bronchial asthma could prevent breastfeeding as a result. And also I merely mentioned, you know exactly what, I am actually not heading to be nervous around him, and he, and as soon as he realized I was treating him like, you understand, a fellow person, our team definitely had this wonderful working partnership, and this was actually really good assistance, you know. The youngster allotments emotional functions with the mom, such as the capacity to internally relieve itself when faced with environmental tension as well as maintain self command and self-cohesion (keeping this all together"), but beyond the presence from the mama the little one performs at a considerably reduced amount, due to the fact that none of the necessary emotional premiums this requires are his or hers alone.

0 notes

onewheelneil · 7 years ago

Text

Israel day 7

This morning during Shabbat we are not required to be up for anything until 11 am so everyone was able to sleep in and catch some much needed sleep. I ended up getting up pretty early so I just surfed the internet on my phone. Then I got hungry so I got up did my morning routine and strolled down to breakfast. They had this really good bread pudding and pastry as well as lemon poppy seed pound cake. I filled up a plate and stacked a small plate of cottage cheese on top and when I went to sit down the top plate of cottage cheese slipped and flipped all onto my seat. The two people I was with laughed at me and said I should just sit in it. I was a little embarrassed but nothing major and quickly cleaned up so I could enjoy my breakfast. It was scrumptious except for a potato eggplant quiche that was like eating a tablespoon of salt and a bland piece of dough that looked like it was going to be sweet but wasn’t. Other than that the hard-boiled egg and other stuff I mentioned before was really good. Apparently I look Israeli because several times this week I have either come up to a person to ask for help and they immediately start talking Hebrew or I am sitting somewhere alone using my phone and someone comes up and asks if I’m Israeli. When we all were ready to start our activity the other birthright group had taken our room so we had to move to another. It ended up being the hotels bomb shelter so that was interesting. We ate snacks after a wine prayer and hung out while we found another room because the bomb shelter was too hot. We got to the dining room from the “fancy” Shabbat dinner and started our activities with a Q/A session with our tour guide about any questions we had about Judaism. We talked about the thoughts about homosexuality and mental health and what the people generally think. A lot more questions were asked including what Israelis think of muslims and what Judaism is to us. I asked what Judaism has to say about leaving earth if they believe it’s a holy planet but the guide said that god and nature are one not particular to earths nature. After much discussion we were allowed to go to lunch where we ate potatoes and beef and rice that was a little over cooked. They also tried to serve an apple crisp but they failed at making that. After lunch we had 2 hours to ourselves but they wanted us to stay in the hotel. Me and 5 other peeps decided to be rebels and go to a very nearby park to chill. I brought my unicycle and another brought his guitar. We walked/unicycled over and I noticed there were barely any cars or people outside. Since it is still Shabbat people are usually inside with their families. You can’t drive a car if you are keeping Shabbat. So the traffic drops dramatically. The park was really pretty with a big field and trees that gave shade. I explored around and actually found some sport courts and some skate parks with rails and ramps to do tricks on. I didn’t want to get hurt so I didn’t try any (as my guide said “no paperwork”). So we just hung out in the shade while the guy in our group played guitar. At one point a girl who dabbled in classical/flamenco guitar wanted to try it out and she was amazing. She used this weird strumming technique that made it sound really cool and percussive. Once the time to meet was arriving we started our short stroll back and I gotta say unicycling with no straight route was really nice and peaceful. Everyone loves the unicycling and their most popular question is “do you bring that thing everywhere?” I always answer yes it’s my baby and I bring it EVERYWHERE. They never fail to say wow afterwards. What’s so nice about this group of people is their curiosity of my unicycling and their unanimous appreciation of my hobby. When we got back to the hotel (we made sure we would be back before they found out we were gone) people were just chatting around the halls of our rooms in the hotel. One of the guys in the group wanted to try unicycling and he could get up easily using the walls of the hallway but still found it hard to feel in control when going forwards. Once it was time we headed down to do a presentation with Israeli soldiers that joined our group. They set up a little competition. They split us into 3 groups and we played did a little one person race, jeopardy round, and a guessing a famous Israeli person from a picture round. The race involved a girl in my team putting on an Israeli military uniform correctly then eating a plate of skittles with no hands. It was fun to see the three people struggle with the uniform. I observed the uniform when the Israelis first joined the group so I knew where the beret and where the ribbon went on the uniform. Then they all had to eat the skittles. The other two contestants decided to inhale all the skittles and try to chew em all at the same time. Our teammate decided to go slow and steady and actually beat out the others. Then during the jeopardy round every team answered their chosen question correctly. We actually got a question about when Jews eat fish heads. None of us knew the answer do I guessed Rosh Hashanah because when translated to English it means head of the year. It was surprisingly correct so everyone on my team was relieved. The next round each team picked a picture from a pile and tried to guess what the occupation of the person in the picture. We actually guessed all of our picture correctly. Two of the harder pictures was a model and a politician. After all the games were over my team ended up winning but we all learned more about Israel and Judaism. The next activity involved is splitting into 7 groups each with an Israeli. Then we talked about what makes us identify as a Jew. One of the main topics that was debated was supporting the IDF or marrying Jewish as something that really identifies with being Jewish. One topic that I thought resonated with being Jewish was keeping kosher/Shabbat but others did not, only because we didn’t keep kosher, but I felt like if I did keep kosher or celebrate Shabbat I would feel more Jewish. The Israeli in my group agreed with us on two things except on marrying Jewish. He felt that marrying Jewish would make it so our children would more likely to be raised Jewish. I understood so we decided tzedakah was one of the bottoms of the list of things that made us identify as Jewish. My group debated and recognized that contributing to your community was a personal trait rather than a Jewish trait. Other groups had their opinions and had debates between groups and it was all healthy debate no yelling or saying you are wrong. It was interesting to hear people’s deep feelings about this topic and give another perspective. As we all shared we all listened too which was cool. No interrupting or trying to overpower someone else with their opinion. Afterwards we had a little break to get ready for our night out and then met back in the same place in order to learn more about the holocaust. It was a very emotional discussion about how the Jews were a defenseless people and were carted off to auschwitz for extermination. Then we watched a video of how Israel got a chance to do a flyover with 3 f-15 fighter jets over auschwitz. It was very informative on what Israel means to the Jewish people. Then we were able to go out. E walked through Jerusalem to an awesome pedestrian area where it is popular to celebrate the end of Shabbat. I started walking around with two other buddies searching for a nice quiet place to drink. We roamed around looking at different crowded places until we found a nice quiet bar with a few people. These people were stoked about my unicycle. They immediately got up and tried to ride it. I told them the basics you should use a wall or railing to get on it the try to ride forward. They struggled to get on it but one guy had ridden one before and another never rode one but was super muscular and had done other balancing sports. They both got on a got a good amount of revolutions before falling. The guy who did balancing sports wanted to get one and also gave me a free shot of tequila. I definitely agreed to that a sucked it down. It wasn’t that bad no lime or anything. Then a female bartender came out and tried and struggled but had fun and offered me a free beer. It was awesome to say the least I saved about 50 sheckels so that was nice. Also I was happily buzzed after all the drinks. Then another group member came by and told us about a jazz bar we had been looking for but didn’t know exactly where it was. They headed there while I said goodbye to my new friends when I was ready to go I lost them so I started off in a direction I thought they went in. While going in a direction, two different groups of people stopped me to try the unicycle. One guy had done it for years so he hoped on and the other guy struggled immensely. After the second guy tried it out I actually asked them where the jazz bar was and they pointed it out for me where I met up with my friends. It was really relaxing music that just made the beers taste so much better. We also met the staff of the trip that sat with us (totally did not buy us shots cause that’s against the rules) and we just chatted and enjoyed the ambiance of the place. The jazz band had saxophones, a piano, drums, guitar and sometimes a singer. Eventually it was time to go so we regrettably got our things together and met everyone back at the meeting spot then we went back to the hotel and talked about tomorrow’s trip to see the holocaust museum and ride camels. After we got back I immediately passed out on my bed. Thanks for reading!

0 notes