#That is called The Patriarchy and we want it gone

[proudfreakmetarusonikku]

”he shouldn’t have had to apologise” he was fucking misogynistically blaming a woman for shit her grown ass son did and expecting HER someone COMPLETELY UNRELATED to the situation to do something bc she was a woman and woman have to take responsibility for what men related to them do actually. he should apologise bc messaging sarah at all is misogynistic as shit. like imagine if people sent dream's mums dms if he did shit they didn’t like that’d be obviously horrible and invasive and misogynistic as shit bc why you blaming a random woman for shit men did. he should be on his fucking knees begging bc he did like misogyny 101 blaming women for shit men did.

[chryblossomjjk]

it sucks how everything has been tainted by patriarchy and as women we cannot do literally anything without it being linked back to patriarchy. like wearing makeup or pink or whatever has been determined feminine by the patriarchal definition feminity, so doing those things means you’re playing into the patriarchy. not doing those things means you’re also playing into patriarchy because it’s a rejection of the idea of femininity, and thus, reaffirms that identifying with feminity in any way is inherently inferior. likeeeee we really cannot win lol… i think a big part of reclamation includes allowing space for people who identify as women to find out what that means to them.

[alexaloraetheris]

Oh boy, I feel like it's time for a post nobody will like.

We all know clothes are getting worse. Recently I found some jeans I bought in high school, and since I lost weight recently I tried them on and they fit, so I'll be wearing them once we get out of the Hell season.

But I took them and compared them to the most recent pair of jeans I bought, and... Honestly the difference in quality is so fucking stark it made me want to give up on life. The jeans I wore in high school have gone through everything. I'm talking half of Europe here, because one of our teachers was pretty big on school trips everywhere she could get the money for. They've been washed, tumbled, survived an actual car crash and they're still good.

The most recent pair I machine-washed ONCE, everything else was hand-wash only. I babied them to the max because they made my ass look like was on Instagram. Do you know what they look like now?

They're full of fixes like these. They lasted less than a year on their own. I got another decent year out of them SOLELY because I kept fixing them. And fixing them again. The crotch alone I had to fix SEVEN TIMES. I COUNTED.

And these weren't cheap jeans! C&A jeans tend to be around 40$ these days, and I got these for about 30 with a discount. I expected them to last me AT LEAST a few years, because those high school jeans? THEY'RE THE SAME FUCKING BRAND.

Considering this was the quality I was getting for nearly 40$ I figured I might as well get the same quality for 15$ and downloaded SHEIN. I didn't get jeans from them but I got some light, fluttery summer pants in the style that, honestly, I fucking love. I got three pairs for the price of one C&A jeans, and I am aware I will have to baby them even more, because out of the five pairs of pants in total I have bought on SHEIN only ONE is made of the fabric that I might be brave enough to machine wash. And with SHEIN continually getting sued for using sweatshops I probably won't be getting those pants again.

So what to do with that shitfuck situation?

I am insanely lucky my grandma knew how to sew really well and didn't mind me looking over her shoulder as long as I was quiet. I am aware that's not a skill everyone has, but quite frankly? When nobody has any money and even paying big bucks for clothes does not guarantee any kind of quality, and even fucking THRIFT STORES are full of just junk now, I think it's time to face the facts.

You need to learn how to sew.

I'm not talking about sewing your own clothes, though if you can and you have the time and patience, it's probably the best option (good luck finding decent fabric, because we can't even find THAT anymore unless you're ordering from fucking Belgium). I'm talking about fixing up seams and sewing on a patch, little repairs that make your clothes last. It might be junk, but with sewing you can make it last twice as long for the price of a spool of thread.

Now that I've pissed off everyone who is, for some reason, morally opposed to learning how to sew because it's a 'girly hobby' or 'supporting the patriarchy' (a take that left me baffled like nothing else) I'm going to piss off everyone who already knows how to sew.

I recommend getting this little guy.

It's called a stapler sewing machine, for obvious reasons. If I recall correctly, it was invented to fix clothes on the go for fashion shows and/or cosplay. It does only a chain stitch and needs to be pushed manually, but if you need to, like, hem your trousers and you don't want to spend half an hour on doing it manually (and don't already have an actual sewing machine) this is a lifesaver.

Here's a tutorial how it operates:

Now, why am I recommending this? Because it will only set you back six bucks. I got two right off the bat because I was banking on one not working (and I was right) and so I could use it for spare parts. The one in the video (Spring Come) is the one I have as well, and it's the one that actually works. I can't vouch for any unmarked ones, but the blue one works. It IS a little temperamental, but with a bit of practice it makes things so much easier.

The reason I'm not recommending an electric machine of any kind, even the one that costs 18$, is because, if you're a beginner, then an automatic sewing machine becomes a machine that exponentially speeds up the rate at which you make mistakes, and if it breaks down, good luck fixing it unless you have a dad/uncle/friend who knows his electronics. This thing can be fixed with a screwdriver, and takes the same needles as an ordinary sewing machine.

You can buy a bundle of needles just about anywhere for any price and they'll be decent as long as they're steel, but I would recommend looking for some actual better quality thread. Everywhere else, you can pinch pennies, but the thread itself is what's holding your clothes together, so this should be the part where you're looking for quality instead of price.

Alright, those of you who didn't scroll past with a derisive scoff at my take, I hope I've been helpful.

[genericpuff]

say sike right now, she's actually going back to The Doctor Pepper Show-

Like, this is just "What if The Doctor Pepper Show and LO had a baby?" Because at this point it's very clear Rachel only knows how to write from inside her own head, which is full of unresolved salt towards her childhood and medical fetish shit. The imagery in the first panel is very LO, and the imagery in the second is literally The Doctor Foxglove Show-

Evidently she's been reskinning the same shit for years-

Listen, I've been, for the most part, keeping my lips sealed on a lot of Rachel's old projects and what I've dug up on her previous works, for a few reasons:

1.) We were all cringe on the Internet at some point in time and a lot of these older works, such as Freak Scene Surgery and The Doctor Pepper Show, would have been from when she was in her late teens / early 20's. I'm not here to judge Rachel's personal preferences or whatever kind of fetishes she's into. It's totally normal, expected even, for a lot of creators to have older works they're trying to bury or disconnect themselves from because it's simply not them anymore.

2.) Ultimately I've been focused on discussion around Lore Olympus and Rachel as she currently operates as a creator, so I don't want to go digging up her old skeletons as any sort of "gotcha" towards LO today. Ultimately a lot of these works don't have anything to really 'do' with LO as it exists today.

That said, the reason I'm bringing it up now is because these new series... are bridging that gap that I've been avoiding for ages now. The gap that's filled with skeletons of Rachel's past that she's trying to both disconnect herself from but now fall back on with LO come and gone. It almost goes to show that her being a one-note pony goes back since far before LO - these are literally the only ideas she's able to come up with at this point, and it's painfully obvious in how both these new "graphic novel pitches" are pretty much the exact same and could apply to the same character, and that character may as well just be Persephone, i.e. Rachel, all over again.

Like, I'm calling it now, Patients in the Dark is just gonna be more "moms are bad" rhetoric, and Eleanor's Deathbed is gonna be Hades and Persephone, but replace Hades with some death god and Persephone with a training mortician, which is basically also still just Foxglove training to be a doctor, and Icy Shaw bragging about fondling corpses.

If anything, now that Webtoons is no longer carrying her around on their shoulders, this is gonna be Rachel's moment of "put up or shut up". She can either actually put in an active effort to write something that's decent, or she can flounder under the weight of her own tired mediocrity that's been knocking at her door for years now. As much as she's using her labels that were bought for her to sell these books which aren't even in real development yet-

-Webtoons isn't gonna be there to buy her Eisners forever. This is entirely on her and the imprint that Webtoons shoved her into. Her process is still the same, she's learned nothing from the experience of making LO, she's just got the money and awards now and is trying to run with it, but all she has are the same tired pitch lines that she's been using for decades now and just so happened to work with LO because LO had both Webtoons and the appeal of it being a Greek myth "retelling" to carry it into fame.

I'm gonna go into a bit of a tangent here, but it's been weighing on my mind since I found out this news and have been discussing it with pals within the ULO circle. Rachel once said in an interview that she wanted to use her platform to raise awareness of issues regarding sexual assault, mental health, and "the patriarchy":

"Who do you know that hasn’t been sexually assaulted? The number is depressingly low, right? Why is that? There is no short answer or an easy fix. I have a platform. I can tell a story that will hopefully educate and help others feel acknowledged and vindicated." - Rachel Smythe, Interview with Gossamer Rainbow

"...obviously I'm very feminist, and that sort of stuff really matters to me, um, the best way to approach this question is… I began, the pilot was written in sort of mid-2017, and I think what I wanted, what I wanted to achieve, and I don't even know… probably in 5 years time I don't know how I'm going to feel about this but I'm taking the risk, I really wanted to write a story where, uh…this female character goes through these things and I think what I wanted to do, what I wanted to achieve, was like a really common, I can't speak for like, men, but I can definitely speak for like, you know, if you're sitting in a group of your female friends and you're like "Hey! Who's been sexually assaulted?" … The response is going to be really depressing… Most female people that you know have probably experienced sexual assault to, on one level or another, and I'm like, for me I'm like "Why is that? Why?" And is it because there is a lack of information, lack of education, like what is it? And I'm lucky enough to have a platform and I'm like, if I could just provide some information in story format, would that help? Is this what I can contribute? So I feel like, especially, when writing sexual assault in media often it's… it's a way for the main male character to be, like, uplifted to hero-ness by, usually like, violence is the way to fix the problem, and that's not the approach that I want to take… um, I think [sighs], oh god, sorry I've lost my train of thought, [sighs], yeah, I think a lot of the time in movies when they, like, show rapists or something it's generally someone who's jumped out from behind the tree at a lady in a park and it's not really how it is like 90% of the time [laughs], so I just wanted to make something realistic where people could at it and be, like, "hey, nagging someone into sex isn't cool" or like removing all of their opportunities to say no isn't cool, or for someone to look at it, and just like feel validation, this is me trying, trying my best to make a difference with the platform that I have, and yeah, this is my roundabout answer for it" - Rachel Smythe, Interview with The Comic Source

And yet not once has Rachel actually used her platform for good outside of herself. She just asks the question, "Sexual assault?" and then writes off the answer "yes, it's bad!" and it especially shows in LO where the resolution to the one plotline she kept around to draw in readers was "assaulters are sent to the timeout corner!" Sure, it works for the readers who are simply seeking validation that their experiences aren't unique to themselves, but is it actually doing any real work to talk about the systems in place that leads to people like Apollo being created? Is it doing anything to address purity culture as it exists and the double standards that exist for women who are navigating sexual relationships? Is it doing anything to take the discussion outside of the narrative and put it into action through support of women's shelters, charities, mental health support for men, etc.? Not really. Like many of Rachel's ideas throughout LO, she simply goes, "Men, amirite?" and the answer is "yeah men suck!" and nothing more. The answer to the entire SA plotline is "rape is bad, don't do it" when anyone who could even relate to that conclusion in the first place already knows that.

Ultimately the activism she claims she's trying to do doesn't actually service the issue at hand - it just services herself and her own insecurities, her own unresolved trauma, her own need for validation through Eisners and merch sales. She asks the question, "Who hasn't been assaulted?" so that when she responds to the women who come forward and relate to Persephone, it's with the intent of getting them to read LO and buy her merchandise. She winds up making herself the center of other people's experiences, even ones that she cannot relate to. At BEST her attempts to "use her platform" as a means of starting discussion around ongoing societal issues like the patriarchy and sexual assault towards women is about as effective as Bell #LetsTalk, it's purely performative, self-profiting, and offers nothing of real tangibility.

If she just wants to write her own self-empowering personal works, that would be fine. Plenty of creators do it. Art is, at its core, self-expression. But it's extremely telling that she's built a platform off her self-expression, and twisted it into what she believes to be "activism" and "feminism", so that she can continue to profit off it in her future works such as this, which, again, are just reskins of her previous projects which were largely centered around the fetishizing of abuse towards women.

I don't want to claim that this is what it is, but... how much of the "feminism" in LO is done purely through the lens of victimizing women? Why is there more effort put into torturing female characters like Hera, and Demeter, and Minthe, and even Persephone to a certain degree, than there is into actually addressing the larger issue that she's claiming she wants to shed light on and resolving her questions with actionable answers?

That is the only question I will leave you all with. I am absolutely 100% not planning on touching these works with a ten foot pole, even if they should come to fruition. With the recent realization that she was into artists like Trevor Brown, alongside the fact that we've known for a long time she's into Lolita and there are very clear parallels to draw between it and LO, I think it's safe to say at this point that Rachel's work is not something I want to continue to support even when it's "hate reading". Again, I'm not going to outright accuse her of anything, but I feel like the writing is clearly on the wall here and I'm taking that writing as my warning to steer clear.

I didn't want to discuss the elephant in the room - her older works as they exist in the distant past of the early 2000's - but she's now riding the elephant.

[genderqueerdykes]

i think people who doesnt like men and despise them are just traumatized. i mean its the experience of being mistreated for years that it makes them unable to trust men again. their reactions is maybe too harsh but i can see it being "i just doesnt want to be hurt anymore"

i agree with this take and i don't care if that bugs people

it is okay for a person to say that they have experienced trauma due to the current patriarchy we live under. it's okay to say that. however it's not okay to project one's trauma with those specific things on to every man they encounter. we must not project our trauma on to people who are not hurting us. it does not help us heal. it keeps us trapped in the cycle of negative thought loops, paranoia, fear and disgust

i agree with you completely, people who take this trauma to the extreme without reflecting on their experiences and admitting that the trauma was at the hands of that one person, those people, or that organization just lose they ability to trust an entire gender and decide that pathologically avoiding and hating men is the way to move on and cope. it's not, it never is. to avoid one's trigger for the rest of one's life is to not going to help someone get over it. it has to be addressed at one point or another

there are many men out there who are horrible but there are horrible people of any gender. our current patriarchal society is flawed because we designed a structure built around worshipping men and placing them in positions of power over everyone, especially women, but only if they fit into a narrow box of what a man 'should' look, act and sound like. we torture men, women and everyone else in this society.

men are forced to be the 'perfect' man in order to be validated and accepted as 'real' men. men cannot have long hair or else they 'look like a girl' or are 'too faggy'. men have to be physically fit or else people are ashamed of them or tell them they are unattractive. men are forced to be the 'man of the house', boys are forced into this at young ages. men are only allowed to dress in certain ways depending on one's culture. in the US men have to wear very plain clothes with muted colors. gestures and mannerisms are also scrutinized as well as career choices. only 'masculine' career choices are approved of

we place insecure men into positions of power and tell them to control everyone and make sure that women don't get those same rights and abilities and that's a huge issue but not every man is doing this. our issue with men is systemic due to the patriarchy we live under- men are not genetically or inherently violent, evil or shitty. we are grooming men and certain men catch on to the programming and take it very seriously and many wish to live outside of it in order to be themselves

the way we treat women in this patriarchal society is abysmal. it is shameful to behold- yes women are treated in an absolutely subhuman fashion in most regards of life when it comes to what we experience. it's maddening. but we have to understand that if we stop programming men to behave this way, this will not continue to happen anywhere near as badly as it's happening right now

the average man you meet on the street is likely not a danger to you at all whatsoever. most people aren't. most men don't really want to be a macho stereotype. most men just want to go about their own personal interests. it's okay for them to do so its their right. opening up one's self to average men who are honest and in touch with their interests is pretty eye opening- men also come in all kinds just like anyone else. men can be gentle and caring just as much as they can be difficult to be around. men are people

i agree with you. people project their trauma of what theyve gone through on to people who have not hurt them and it's not a good way to approach community and how one interacts with the world. it's fine to call out men when they do something shitty, when they're misogynistic, when they're being violent, but we also have to let men be gentle, quiet, caring, creative, passionate, loving and so on. because men are capable of those things. it's that simple

hope you have a great day, thanks for stopping by to chat

[susandsnell]

Re anachronistic feminist characters, you are absolutely right and you should say it.

Maybe people who want to read "write women who sew" type stuff should just go do that instead of trying to make every single female character fit into their worldview. Because I don't want every character to be Eloise, I'm fine with variety, but a lot of people seem like they can't stand even one woman challenging gender norms.

No amount of faux progressive language will change the fact they sound like highschool bullies picking on girls who are too GNC or too "weird."

Thank you so much! Ideally, you'd have feminist characters more representative of the feminist or proto-feminist views of their era where the work is going for historical accuracy to honour the different points of where we were in history and also acknowledge the flaws of the movement at different points in time (1994's Little Women versus the hilariously bad 2019 version comes to mind), and certainly there's an element of repetitiveness in this character type, but this is seldom if ever the criticism I see. The truth of the matter is that in fact many early feminists did denigrate work designated as feminine, but we can acknowledge this as misdirected anger at having one option deemed valid.

Instead, we've somehow arrived at "wanting to be treated with human dignity is internalized misogyny because it really cramps my ability to romanticize the past". As you say, nothing wrong with valuing the labour more frequently done by women, but the fact of the matter is you can do that and show that there were always many people who resisted or did not fit into the tight boxes that society forced them into. Instead of, you know, ridiculing them for wanting to break the boxes while enjoying the fruits of having to fit into fewer boxes than our predecessors precisely because of women who loudmouthed and fought back and didn't fit into certain people's fantasy of being a submissive little princess. The kind of girls you made fun of and ostracized in high school, one might say.

To address a particular point you raise that I think is the most important in this entire ongoing discussion:

No amount of faux progressive language will change the fact they sound like highschool bullies picking on girls who are too GNC or too "weird."

I keep saying it, but a certain type of liberal feminist are now using "NLOG" the way it was socially acceptable 10-15 years ago to call someone a lesbian/homophobic or transphobic slurs because they didn't wear makeup or want a boyfriend. It is absolutely high school bullying mentality and has gone from an imperfect attempt at addressing internalized misogyny to active misogyny and latent/often overt homophobia and transphobia.

This is what the numbskulls making video essay after video essay about the apparent 'NLOG crisis' fail to grasp. The Heathers and the Plastics are not 'demonized for being feminine', they are accurate representations of how under patriarchy, social capital is gained through strict, obsessive adherence to white, Western beauty standards (which corporations can profit off of endlessly by manufacturing infinite insecurities, so bonus to the rich girls) and excelling at heterosexuality and pleasing others, and this system self-reinforces by the 'winners' bullying those who do not conform as easily. Jo March, queercoded dynamo that she was, took nothing away from the sisters who were happier with more traditional lifestyles because she wanted better for herself and the girls of the future, and represents so many women who fought for just that. You're not actually an intellectual for thinking Daphne Bridgerton has more value than Eloise because she was designated the season's Diamond, a literal in-universe (and true to life) Prize For Being Correctly Female, and unquestioningly accepts being paraded around like an ornament and smiling at being auctioned off to the highest bidder while Eloise fought back, criticized, and wanted an education more than any boy until they forced heterosexuality upon her. You are in fact a vanguard of the very patriarchal system the franchise even presents as backwards, because you don't want anyone raining on your arranged marriage fantasies.

There is nothing, and I mean nothing feminist, about snarking girls who do not like or for whatever reason, cannot or will not perform conventional femininity.

There is a certain sour-grapes defensiveness that comes from beig ostracized and punished for Failing At Your Gender if you weren't good at what was expected of you/resisted it. Femininity is derided, but it is also imposed (the two work in tandem to oppress women); and if you fail at its imposition, it's natural to try and gain protection by participating in the derision. Hell, I theorize that people who proclaimed themselves "not like other girls" in the contemporary age often did so out of resistance at the fact that we're supposed to perform (cisheteronormative) sexiness from the time we hit our teens, and of course the panopticon self-reinforcement that is how Other Girls treat you if you, an adolescent girl, shirk performance of femininity in any way. Certainly, I've also read much about GNC girls (of various identities) and neurodivergent girls equally having turned to this, which makes sense, as they're frequently targets for such bullying.

I do also think - and have personally experienced - it was an often imperfect articulation of queerness in many cases. The societal ideal of women under a patriarchy is cisheteronormativity; our value is derived from our appeal to men, and from the time we start maturing, sexual availability and appeal to men is the highest virtue. Therefore, women whose sexuality is not limited to men - or heaven forbid, doesn't include them at all - 'fail' gender, and accordingly often feel a sense of alienation and ostracism from other girls when they don't get as excited about dating boys. Also, in many cases (anecdotal I admit from people I know, but still significant), people who had a phase of asserting they "weren't like other girls" were in the process of discovering that they weren't girls at all!

And in some cases - again, I've mentioned that I was an Eloise for all the handwringing about how girls of that era wouldn't say that or do that and it would never occur to want more than what they had (...okay, so why are things different now?) - it's a frustration from the outspoken feminists and reformers at not being able to get other girls on board with us, because deviation from expectation will make you the weirdo who gets punished and rejected because ugh, annoying! As one historical costuming youtuber I won't name so charmingly puts it in her godawful video essay, "the women who made a big show of fighting back were freaks." (Way to convince us you care about feminism...)

All this to say the anti-NLOG brigade have utterly worn out my patience, and at best seem ignorant of the battles that have won us the freedoms we have today because it's not fun to consider how your escapist fantasy might be problematic (understandable, you don't always have to reflect on this to be aware), and at worst? They're getting the chance to be the mean girl in high school again/that they never got to be, they're just dressing it up in the bastardized language of feminism.

[nyracel]

someone sent me an anon ask about the anti rhaenyra agenda most rhaenicent shippers have and like a dumbass i accidently deleted it so i'm just going to try my best to re-answer it here (yes i wrote a whole spiel about it and now it's gone forever and i'm upset.)

from what i can tell there are only two reasons as to why people can't stand rhaenyra but love rhaenicent; and it's because they either have some heavy internalized misogyny OR that's the only way to continue and keep their uwu sad lesbian alicent headcanons semi-tethered in reality. alicent is a character that has next to no positive interactions with other characters, least of all any women. she has a 'good' (and i say that lightly) relationship with rhaenyra for 2 episodes in hotd, and then they are adversaries for the rest of the show. the only other women we see her interact with are helaena and her lady in waiting talya ( who regularly spied on her for mysaria) and minus talya, those are the same female relationships she has in f&b. she doesn't really have a good track record with anyone.

in the book she terrorized rhaenyra from aegon's birth up until rhaenyra's death. rather than teaching her son to rule and raising him to be an upstanding prince of the realm she instead spent her time calling rhaenyra, a literal child, a slut, she accepted criston into her service as her own personal protector in spite of his predatory behavior towards rhaenyra (which she acknowledges), and continuously tries to have rhaenyra and her sons disinherited and killed due to her own spreading of the bastard rumors. not to mention that she was eighteen when she married viserys to rhaenyra's nine. there's really nothing romantic about it. in the show almost everything is still the same except for her being the one to arrange helaena's marriage to her known degenerate and rapist son (in f&b viserys is the one who had them marry) and most likely told her the same rhetoric of rhaenyra killing them to secure her claim that she told her sons from when they were babies up until the coup. with rhaenyra she still antagonizes her because she (lemme check again, told alicent she didn't sleep with daemon and got otto fired because he was working against the crown to install his grandson as heir over her). don't even get me started on the villainization of rhaenyra in order to uphold alicent's constant victimization storyline. alicent is the one who abused rhaenyra, not the other way around, and the age changes in the show (which are so stupid omg) only serve to make alicent more sympathetic and rhaenyra an apparent privileged brat who doesn't understand what it's like to suffer because of the men in her life and therefore deserves her fate (i can literally see the entire galaxy with how far back my eyes are rolled rn.)

if the show wanted to include or focus on two women who were torn apart by the patriarchy and the men around them, helaena's blank character was right there for the taking (and would've been even juicier with the sister vs sister, queen consort vs queen regnant debacle.) she has no personality in the book or any relevance besides losing her children in violent ways and going mad, they definitely could have made her a more present character on screen in a manner that adds an actual emotional connection to her but alas, rhaenicent is top priority. furthering that, if the show wanted to include queer representation with their leading lady, laena had more hints in the text for that type of relationship than anything the show has given us for the rhaenyra/alicent dynamic, even with how hard they're trying to force it down our throats.

the entire relationship has made the story go completely off kilter because the show won't just let it be, and it's affected almost all of their other relationships. they're not going to convince me that rhaenyra cares about alicent more than her own children or even vice versa (though in an entirely different manner) and that reconciliation is possible in spite of aemond murdering luke. it makes both the characters and the writers look like delusional idiots. there's absolutely no reason for these types of glaring mistakes in a series where characterization and the relationships that revolve from them are the reason it's so popular amongst the masses. this lack of proper relationship building has caused hotd to feel a lot more shallow and lackluster than what you'd expect with how massive it's budget was when they created it, the amount of talented actors they casted, and the literal blueprint laid out of what not to do that got season eight is. someone should have taken accountability for these dumb decisions and realized how quickly they're streamlining straight towards what ruined game of thrones in the first place.

[dykeulous]

trans men, studs, butches, trans men who are butches, dysphoric lesbians, dykes who find their gender identity can only be described as dyke, lesbians on testosterone, lesbians who had top surgery & he/him lesbians have always been part of the unique, beautiful & long lesbian history; and will continue to be, for so many years from now. no matter how much you want to exclude them, say their identity “clashes” with their sexuality, undervalue them, degrade them, belittle them, or call them homophobic, transphobic & misogynistic slurs– they will continue to exist, and you can do nothing to stop mothers from birthing more lesbians who confuse you & defy traditionalist ways of thought.

we are tired of people closing their eyes before our long history, history that has always included trans men, butches whose gender identity is “butch”, dysphoric lesbians, studs, and lesbians who go against the heterosexual, dumbed-down & oversimplified vision of lesbianism. the heterosexual misconception that lesbians are attracted to male bodies, that all lesbians are gender conforming & non-dysphoric, hyperfeminine white women– is exactly that; a heterosexual misconception of lesbianism. lesbians have always gone against all of that. some of you are going to call us exclusionists, others will call us nonsensical & hyper-inclusive. and i’m going to tell you all one thing– we don’t care what you see us as. butch lesbians, transmasc lesbians, studs & all dykes in general are going to keep doing their thing, not giving a care for what lesbophobic people see us as. we do not care if our identities “confuse” you, in fact, we are glad they do.

lesbians reject the social class of woman, as the class of woman is heterosexual. the class of woman is the subservient, submissive class– whereas the class of man is the dominant, commanding one. this is based in a heterosexual foundation. as lesbians revolutionarily stand up for liberation, through refusing to be a victim caught up in heterosexist classes & divisions of labor– they attempt to escape the class of woman itself. we must deconstruct the classes, and our historical lesbian warriors have been telling us that for years. it is time non-lesbian feminists start listening to lesbian feminists. it is time non-lesbian feminists start learning from lesbian feminists. we want to help the heterosexual woman, as well: we do not want to harm or exclude her. we want her to see the need for deconstruction of the classes, and the need for an end of heterosexism. heterosexism doesn’t benefit her, and just because she finds attraction to male bodies does not mean that the heteropatriarchy, a system designed by & for men, somehow benefits her. she needs to unlearn homophobia, and start working with her lesbian feminist sisters.

heterosexual love & romance have always been described as some incredible female experience, how childhood boy crushes are the peak of girlhood (oftentimes being told by surrounded authorities which the girl trusts that a boy likes her if he’s straight up abusive to her), how women require heterosexual intercourse, bonds & romance to be happy & satisfied. heterosexuality has always been described as some gateway to female satisfaction, female fulfilment & female happiness. this led to women & girls devaluing their bonds with other women & girls. lesbians actively assault this stereotype. lesbians have been going against this stereotype for so many years; encouraging platonic lesbian relations between women & defining patriarchal heterosexuality as a tool that keeps women subordinate. it has been coerced onto us from the moment we were born. lesbians defy the political system based on performing for men & normative society. this way, lesbianism is not a mere sexuality; it is an outright attack on male privilege over women. lesbianism rejects the notion that women are male possession & servants. under the patriarchy, heterosexuality is a standard– it is the oppressive system’s default. it isn’t simply a “straight sexuality”. lesbians are oppressed on the basis of defying the heterosexist regime, which makes it a double oppression, and a unique lesbian experience of both homophobia & sexism; lesbophobia. lesbophobia is the unique dual oppression lesbians face.

lesbian love should be perceived as a feminist topic. while so many feminists still refuse to highlight lesbian existence & continue to ignore our voices, we will continue to contribute to the feminist movement, as we always have. we are important in women’s liberation, we did so many things for the movement, and our sexual orientation is an important balance in defying oppressive hierarchies such as gender & heterosexism. we won’t ever stop defending women, fighting against the heteropatriarchy & compulsory heterosexuality (& the way it harms heterosexual women, because although het women often turn their backs on us, we won’t turn our backs on them), and other oppressive systems & tools used for waging war against women. lesbianism is beautiful, historical lesbian activists have had fortitude stronger than steel & lesbian feminists have been excluded from the feminist movement for long enough– it is the 21st century, it is time we stop excluding lesbians from feminism.

the reclamation of masculinity, something that is so expected of men, is what often gets masculine lesbians & butches harasses and attacked. butch lesbians, however, aren’t mere masculine lesbians. it is not a sole aesthetic. it has its’ long history that is intertwined with gender abolition, feminism, and revolutionary activism. butch is a gender identity, a revolutionary reclamation of casual masculinity. many non-lesbian feminists, or even toxic lesbian separatists, claim how the butch-femme relations are a replication of the heterosexual regime, the recycling of the heterosexual gender roles, or an imitation of the heterosexual couple. this could not be more wrong. butch-femme relations challenge heterosexism, heteronormativity, and the heteropatriarchy: the love between two non-heterosexual individuals in a non-heterosexual relationship could never somehow possibly be “heteronormative”; especially when the two individuals in question choose to subscribe to two feminist lesbian subcultures that promote gender abolition, revolutionary action & anti-sexism.

and even though lesbians are still subject to conversion therapy, we continue to exist. we continue to exist, regardless of what is being done to us; we have always existed, and we always will exist. the system will never be able to get rid of us, and we will continue creating inconveniences for the system. we adore the mesopotamian & assyrian lesbian women from ancient times who were depicted to be homosexual in texts, as well as the ancient women of egypt, and lesbian women from ancient greece & rome. no matter how much the system may despise us, we will find ways to strike back. we are willful, and we do not give up. we do not surrender to the colonizer of our bodies, and that is why i love lesbians & lesbianism. we are real activists, and we try our best to strengthen universal sisterhood; even though we are more often than not excluded & segregated from it. i thank my mother for having given birth to another butch lesbian, another butch lesbian with the willpower of a tiger. i have the willpower for social change– and i stand right next to my sisters against this power-sick structure that wishes to nihilize us. we will take it down together.

[daddysfangirls-dc]

The Arrangement

Ch 2 Exposed

Damian Wayne x OC!Female

Prev | Next

Robin enters the cave to find everyone there, including Duke, who should have been sleeping. The only one missing was Jason. Not for long, however, he drove in, parking his motorcycle next to Robin's and walking past him, removing his helmet and settling it on the counter. It seemed like a him vs them situation as they took one side of the cave and left him alone on the other. He was nervous, a bit scared. In his head, he was going over every possible wrong he had committed recently, but he could find none that would warrant a full audience. They didn't let him stew for long.

Without a word, Bruce hit a button on the computer, and it came alive, revealing a dozen images. The main subject is Damian and a girl in various locations and situations. And while his appearance changed between images, Robin to Civilian, she wore the same outfit in every picture, bearing the scandalous insignia of the League of Assasins. If that doesn't make it bad enough, the center photo was of him kissing her knuckles while she looked up at him lovingly in a bed. Damian stood before his father, sharing the same expressionless face. 

"Explain"

"I see me in various situations with ...my fiance." 

The silence was still, and one would have thought time had stopped, of course, time started again. When Alfred started to stumble, everyone moved quickly. Jason, the closest to him, gathered him before he could fall and pulled up a chair with Duke's help. It was after Alfred was settled that chaos erupted. Damian couldn't say who said what. 

"what the fuck!?"

"You know how to talk to girls?"

"He doesn't even like people!"

"I'm sorry, did you say fiance?"

"She's part of the league?"

"When did this happen???"

"When did he start dating?"

"You're still in high school, right?"

"ENOUGH," Bruce said, silencing everyone. He looked to Damian." Explain. Everything"

Damian 'T T' the truth was bound to come out. " It's an arranged marriage," ignoring the smug look Tim and Jason shared. " It was made between Ra's and Her father. I was always told I was supposed to rule, to conquer. I was supposed to continue the legacy, have an heir, and teach as I was taught. I was five years old when I was introduced to her. She was three. She is the second daughter. I didn't like her at first. But she was skilled. The arrangement was made, and she was my mother's choice."

"Makes sense," Tim said. Dick smacked him upside the head.

"Ra's made the arrangement> He's gone. We can- " 

" I agreed to it," he said, striking his father's conclusion and ending any planning. "After Ra's died, her father approached me about the arrangement. I agreed to continue, and we stayed in communication."

Dick stepped for " Why didn't you say anything?"

"Your reactions were predictable."

"This is the young friend you've been talking to over the years." Now, all eyes were on Alfred. Damian confidence stance starts to flatter, and he nods shyly. " We'll. I'd like to meet her."

"I... she's sleeping now."

"Obviously, it's 3 am, " Tim scoffed. 

"She'll be leaving soon. I'll speak to her tomorrow and see if she can make time for dinner, perhaps."

"Is she a part of the League?" Bruce asked- No, demanded.

"She's not a threat."

" If the League is operating In Gotham- ."

" She's here to see me. Her purpose here is not as nefarious as you want to believe."

"I believe we should take a moment. Maybe pick up the conversation tomorrow." Alfred could see where everything was heading; honestly, it was far too late in the night for such things. It was all too much. Following the orders of their patriarchy, everyone files upstairs to their respective rooms.

"Tim"

"I'm just clearing the screen and saving the files. I'll be up in a moment B" He gave a nod and quickly lef. Alfred would come later and see if he actually did as said. 

-

"Good morning"

"They know." She took a moment. This was definitely not the phone call she had expected this morning.

"How did you tell them?"

"I didn't. Apparently, Drake has been surveilling us for some time. I'm unsure as to how or when it started." Damian was losing his touch when she suspected something, and he dismissed her. She didn't think to question him; it was his city.

" I'm sorry," she apologized. " If I had been more stealthy, more hidden, this wouldn't have happened."

"Don't apologize. It was inevitable. I was a fool to think I could hide it for so long."  Damian was too busy in the bliss of having her to remember to hide her. That sounded wrong. " They want to meet you?" 

"Oh"

"I told them you'd be departing in a day or so. You don't have to." They fell into silence. He heard the chirps of morning birds on his end while she heard the muffled sounds of cars honking from early workers.

"I-"

"Damian?... do you want me to meet your family?" He had to take a moment. Did he want her to meet his family? No, he didn't. He didn't want to introduce her to his family. They hadn't even met her, and they had already formed an opinion, already judged her. And while he knew one meeting her, some would change their opinions of her, others would not and would continue villainizing her until she proved herself worthy. And he simply didn't want to go through that, at least not yet.

"I want you to meet Alfred."

"your grandfather? You want me to meet your grandfather?" '

He was safe. He was good. He'd see how much Damian cared for her and she for him, and he'd look past everything else... hopefully.

"Yes, he wants to meet you as well."

"Damian, I'd love to meet your Grandfather."

[doorhine]

I think the show does a really good job at validating and empathizing with Akemi’s concerns as a woman living under a patriarchy while also acknowledging her privileges, not just as a wealthy person, but as a literal princess. There’s a lot to be said about Akemi’s dynamic with Madame Kaji and the other sex workers but right now I’m focusing on her and Mizu as two main characters whose experiences as women contrast each other the most. I specifically want to talk about the end of episode 5 because it’s a culmination of so many things.

*SPOILERS BELOW

Mizu obviously isn’t there to personally see the misogyny Akemi experiences so from her perspective, she has no real reason to empathize with her running away. Mizu also just has her own priorities with her revenge quest. But even with the lack of context or understanding of Akemi’s situation, Mizu and the other sex workers' judgment of Akemi isn’t unfounded because she has real privilege over them. As a princess, she has an unfathomable amount of wealth that lets her live a life of comfort and luxury so far removed from other people’s experiences to the point where, Akemi herself states that being rich like that makes you forget that you’re rich. And while Akemi is clearly shown to utilize the skills sets she does have to her advantage when she runs away, it’s not an insult to her intelligence to acknowledge that getting as far as Madame Kaji’s establishment was also the result of luck because there’s so many ways that things could’ve gone wrong on the way there. 

So for Mizu to encounter Akemi

A princess who ran away from all that luxury for the sake of a failed marriage with a guy who bullied/hate crimed Mizu as a child and wants to duel and kill her for his honor/social status in the present (when social climbing was never truly possible for Mizu even when disguised as a man and because we know how her marriage ended)

A princess who tried to kill her and says she only regrets not doing it immediately 

A princess who calls her a monster just like everyone else 

A princess who has no idea Mizu’s even a woman or all the experiences that got her to this point, including the assassination of Kinuyo (who didn’t want to die) at Madam Kaji’s request because women have to be practical and think of the results (not how they get there) when it comes to revenge 

A princess who may have fought to help defend Madame Kaji and her girls but then expected a mentally, emotionally and physically exhausted Mizu (suffering from multiple puncture wounds after doing the majority of the killing/defending) to fight Akemi’s own guards like a personal attack dog when doing so would’ve more than likely killed her and Ringo while Akemi still lived and got taken back home…. *takes a deep breath*

It’s totally understandable why Mizu just lets them take Akemi. 

On Akemi’s part, she doesn’t know the context around why Mizu is the way that she is but at the end of the episode assumes that she’s not capable of love when they’ve only known each other for… not even a day and half technically speaking. Meanwhile Mizu’s assessment of Akemi’s privilege is still accurate in certain ways despite her lack of context that makes Akemi empathetic to us as the audience. Also, not that Mizu sees this happen, Akemi is able to maneuver her way around the shogun’s court and her new husband while also uplifting and hiring Madame Kaji and her girls to both their benefit. A path she chooses to continue taking at the end of the season. It’s still within the confines of the patriarchy and not without its challenges, but Akemi is taking advantage of the privileges she does have when she previously took them for granted. 

Both Mizu and Akemi are just so nuanced and well written and this scene is a perfect example of how and why they clash due to such drastically different lives shaped by their social status. I’m curious to see how their journeys will go from here and what circumstances reunite them (for better or worse) given where they left off with each other during the season finale.

[goodgirlsdoithisway]

The danger of friends and family.

Coming into my place as a woman has been difficult. I've been a feminist most of my life, believing I need to be free and do as I please. I surrounded myself with like-minded people, and kept pushing on even though I was suffering. These people had me convinced that I was unhappy because women have been "oppressed" by the patriarchy, and I just needed to rise above.

Here's the problem with this train of thought. Not everyone is capable or has the correct tools to survive alone in this world. Some people need structure and guidance to live. Most women fall into this category. Sure, we can do it, but it's incredibly hard, incredibly stressful, and it's a lifelong investment to work hard instead of smart.

Then, I looked into tradwife material. I started looking at how happy these women were. Sure, you occasionally see the sad ones living this life, but they are just full of resistance, like I was. These women made life look fun. What girl doesn't want to have a life where they don't have to worry about money, or politics, or drama? No internal struggles, just the calm acceptance of giving yourself to something bigger. A man.

My friends and family all called me out on this, saying I'm being red pilled. I told them I'm still committed to diversity and I love everybody, and I know I have the option to chase whatever dream I want, and that this was my dream. Not a single one believed in me. A few stopped talking to me altogether. I mean, I'm fucking trans for fucks sake. It's not like accepting my place under men means I'm all of a sudden A Trump supporter. No thank you, although I do hope to see some things revolving around women to pass, either way. We shouldn't be allowed to vote, hold jobs, or go anywhere without a man. Hell, Afghanistan just passed a law where no woman is allowed to speak in public, or to another woman at all. This would be great. No more toxicity spreading like wildfire, hurting our true place.

It's crazy how, when you go against the grain, you get demonized. It took its toll. I started thinking it was just a stupid fantasy I was grabbing onto because I wasn't working hard enough to make my life mine.

Then, with those few friends gone now, I started to realize I was feeling great in those moments I was embodying serving men. And without those extra comments, I was starting to be able to ignore the others saying those things. And as I cut more people off, I felt so much better. I felt deep inside that this was the right path. I knew that serving men was what I was created to do. It was like a certainty.

So I started reading more about it, embodying it, envisioning it. I set those feminist views aside and really devoted myself...I'm never going back.

Friends are toxic to a trad relationship. Family are toxic to a trad relationship. Even other trad wives can be turned, and in turn, turn you. Feminism is powerful because it promises unattainable visions of freedom. Friends and family can exacerbate that and poison your mind. When you devote yourself to this lifestyle, which I believe all women should, the adjustment is rough because there's so much propaganda out there, manipulating you into giving up the biggest, best, most fulfilling life a woman can have, a life of dedicated servitude.

It would be perfect to have a man who lives off grid with no electricity, no phone, no outside communication. To be taken by him, to his home, never allowed to leave or have visitors so that I may focus solely on Him would be the perfect life. Imagine forgetting people exist outside of Him. The only person you'll ever see again is the one you serve. No jealous friends to try to take you away or poison your mind. No family to pretend they know what's best for you. No. Only Him.

[hotdaemondtargaryen]

OLIVIA COOKE PHOTOGRAPHED BY EVELYN FREJA FOR LA TIMES.

RYAN CONDAL TALKING ABOUT ALICENT HIGHTOWER'S CHARACTER ARC IN S2.

Condal describes Alicent’s journey this season as “an ongoing expansion of the character,” although he admits the episodes “really put Alicent through her paces.”

That was something Cooke felt deeply.

OLIVIA COOKE TALKING ABOUT ALICENT HIGHTOWER IN S2.

“In this season, she’s so adrift,” Cooke says, joking that there are only so many miserable faces she can make.

“She’s losing her power. With Rhaenyra and Alicent, it’s like a butterfly effect, so as Rhaenyra is gaining power, the hourglass is turned over and the power is waning from Alicent, and her influence is waning as well. There’s an imaginary rope between [the two characters] that carries them throughout seasons.”

Cooke says Alicent “gets a massive dose of the reality” when her “psycho sons” take control of the realm.

On a more positive note, Alicent has the opportunity to explore her sexuality this season, coupling up with a character who will, for now, remain unnamed (let’s just say he matches her freak).

It’s a rare expression of freedom for a woman who has lacked agency, which Condal says has “greatly affected who her character is.”

“That was really important because you’ve not seen Alicent experience that in her adult life, and all of a sudden, she has all these teenage, passionate feelings toward someone,” Cooke says.

“I think that makes her feel insane.”

ABOUT FILMING 'HOUSE OF THE DRAGON' S2.

After seven months of production, which wrapped in September, Cooke was “absolutely knackered” — a polite British way of saying the experience had completely depleted her.

“Last season, Emma and I were only in four episodes each, so we’d walk in and be full of beans when everyone else was at death’s door. Then I think we both really felt the enormity of the schedule. And it’s so emotional.”

“Both of us are just either sobbing or screaming all the time. I don’t know if I smile in Season 2.”

Despite the exhaustion, Cooke loves playing Alicent.

She’s a character of “so many subterranean levels of repression and anger and despair and passion,” which is a huge gift.

Has compassion and empathy for her, and she understands why Alicent does manipulative, devious things.

“She’s smarter than all the men as well and she could rule and she’d be really f— good at it.”

“It’s so frustrating that she can’t believe she would be this amazing ruler because she’s so indoctrinated by the patriarchy and by her father.”

“She’s been molded to talk sweetly into the ears of these powerful men, and it’s such a disservice to who she is and what she’s capable of.”

ABOUT HER PERSONAL LIFE.

Before Season 1 premiered, Cooke was worried that her personal life might become too public for comfort.

“I just didn’t want my life to change. It’s such a big TV show, and I hadn’t ever done anything to this scale before. Or if I had, it was a film that comes out and then goes away and doesn’t live in the culture for years and years and years.”

So far, Cooke’s fears have gone mostly unfounded. She’s recognized, sure, but not in a way that disrupts her daily life.

And when it does, fans are generally nice about it, like recently when she was on the London Underground going home and a group of drunken girls started shouting “Alicent” in her direction.

“It’s actually been all right. I think you notice an uptick as the show is about to come out because they’re promoting it more.”

ABOUT ACTING.

She calls herself a “catastrophizer” and admits she can be hard on herself when reflecting on a performance.

ABOUT THEIR UPCOMING PROJECTS.

She wants to “embark on more of the unknown,” something the actor is aiming to do with her production company Chippy Tea, which she formed two years ago.

Her first production, a romance film called “Takes One to Know One,” will shoot in Rome early next year and stars Jamie Bell alongside Cooke.

She also wants to try her hand at directing.

“When I’m on set, I’m always figuring out how things work and almost shadowing the director.”

“I find acting a lot of the time to be so insular. You can get in your own way. I like the collaborative process of making something from the ground up, and I want to do more of that.”

“It’s also taking control of my own destiny a little bit more.”

ABOUT ALICENT HIGHTOWER FOR 'HOUSE OF THE DRAGON' SEASON 3.

As for Alicent, well, she may not be so lucky. But, she wants to play her for as long as possible.

“I really want her to just go off and be in the forest with some chickens,” she says, jokingly.

“But really, there’s some good stuff for her for Season 3, if we get it. Really exciting stuff.”

[justforbooks]

Christina Hendricks

The star of Good Girls discusses Mad Men, sexual harassment and squaring her glamorous reputation with her ‘weird, goofy’ personality

Christina Hendricks appears on our video call with the most dramatic backdrop. Art deco gold peacocks bedeck a black wall, making her look, as she has so often in her career, a bit too good to be human. Perfectly poised, perfectly framed, perfectly lit, she is more like a dreamy vision of what humans look like. “I, erm, like your wall,” I say, pointlessly. She flashes a smile, as if to say: “Obviously.”

We are here primarily to discuss the comedy-drama series Good Girls, the fourth season of which will resume in the US this month after a midseason break. The elevator pitch would be Breaking Bad for girls: three suburban women, each hovering on the edge of bankruptcy, unite to embark on a life of cack-handed crime, only to discover they are good at it. The ensemble – Hendricks, Mae Whitman, who plays her sister, and Retta, their friend – works strikingly well, their pacey comic rapport instilling a sense of perpetual motion. You just can’t imagine Good Girls ending. Every time a plot line seems to be reaching its climax, something worse – and funnier – happens.

“It’s funny you say that, because originally, when I read the pilot script, I thought: ‘I love this, but I can’t imagine this being more than one episode,’” says Hendricks. “It felt like it finished itself.” She is unsentimental about it. Hendricks wasn’t looking for a new show – “I was happy doing films, taking my time” – but went into it with her eyes open. It is a network drama, for NBC – it is shown on Netflix in the UK – so producers are always aware that “it’s going into every house in the US on a Thursday or a Sunday and a family is watching it. They’re much more careful about numbers and advertisers and people being offended or not getting it. A cable show is much more: ‘We trust this creator – they’re a visionary.’”

It has a conventional tone – however dark the material, it is handled very lightly. Yet you can’t help but notice some hard-boiled social commentary from the off – if it weren’t for the bracingly callous US health system, the generation of wage-stagnation casualties and the patriarchy, none of the characters would have gone anywhere near a supermarket heist. More than Breaking Bad, it reminds me of Roseanne and the golden age of US mainstream comedy, when you could be poor on TV without that being a breach of good taste.

The 48-year-old has been a household name for almost 15 years, thanks to Mad Men. She was born in Tennessee, where her mother was a psychologist and her father worked for the Forest Service, and educated in Oregon and then Idaho. She didn’t have time for formal acting training; by the time she was 18, her modelling career had taken off. Later, when she had a manager, she took acting lessons: “I did that for almost a year and a half and put auditions on ice. Then I was watching a film – I don’t even remember what film it was or who was in it – and I thought: ‘I’m ready. I can do this.’” She has the most insistent work ethic; as she describes her life’s trajectory, she notes diligently the jobs she had while she was at high school, at a hair salon and a menswear shop.

In 2007, she appeared as Joan Holloway in Mad Men. She played the role for the next eight years, her character growing around the depth she brought to it, until by season seven she was almost the central part. In the early 2010s, Hendricks was talked about constantly, although she says the original focal points of obsession were the male characters: “Men started dressing like Don Draper and Roger Sterling. Suits came back in, skinny ties came back in. It took three to four seasons and then all of a sudden people wanted us [the female stars] on magazines. We were like: ‘This is strange – we’ve been doing this for a while.’”

Hendricks, along with January Jones, who played Betty Draper, came to represent so much. There was a great deal of rumination on their physicality, Jones as elegant as an afghan hound, Hendricks like the pin-up painted on the side of a bomber. What did it mean, people asked, that in the middle of the 20th century there were multiple ideals of the female form, whereas in the 21st century there was only one? How did that complicate the perception of gender equality as a steady march towards the light? Thousands of column inches went on that question – but, from the actor’s perspective, it was an annoying distraction. “There certainly was a time when we were very critically acclaimed, and getting a lot of attention for our very good work and our very hard work, and everyone just wanted to ask me about my bra again. There are only two sentences to say about a bra,” she says.

The signal impression the show left was of an ensemble at the peak of its creativity: actors, writers and the creator, Matthew Weiner, working in almost telepathic unison. It won the Emmy for outstanding drama series four times in a row, but the more notable year was 2012, when it was nominated for 17 Emmys (and didn’t win any of them). The take-home was: everyone involved with this is absolutely brilliant.

That harmonious picture was blurred two years after the show ended, when one of the former writers, Kater Gordon, accused Weiner of sexual harassment. Marti Noxon, a consulting producer on Mad Men, concurred that Weiner had created a toxic environment and said that he was an “‘emotional terrorist’ who will badger, seduce and even tantrum in an attempt to get his needs met”.

Hendricks takes this head on, in a considered, straightforward manner. “My relationship with Matt was in no way toxic,” she says. “I don’t discount anyone’s experience if I wasn’t there to see it, but that wasn’t my experience. Was he a perfectionist, was he tough, did he expect a lot? Yes. And he would say that in a second. We were hard on each other.”

It is impossible, from this distance, to adjudicate on Weiner’s character, but Hendricks’s response reveals something of hers. The easiest response in this situation, and the one 90% of actors give, is: “No comment.” Hendricks is always collected, never evasive, doesn’t gabble. She reminds me powerfully of Joan Holloway – and I am sorry to say it, because she insists throughout: “I’m an actress. I am completely not Joan. Not in any way. I wish I was more like Joan.”

I wonder if, while we were all fixating on Joan’s bras and whether or not, in the asinine words of Lynne Featherstone, the UK’s equalities minister in 2010, she represented a “curvy role model”, the audience was responding to Joan’s deeper life lesson – that self-possession is 9/10ths of the law.

What Hendricks emphatically doesn’t do is minimise the existence of sexism and sexual harassment in the industry: “Boy, do you think anyone in the entertainment industry comes out unscathed and not objectified? I don’t know one musician or one model or one actor who has escaped that. I have had moments – not on Mad Men; on other things – where people have tried to take advantage of me, use my body in a way I wasn’t comfortable with, persuade me or coerce me or professionally shame me: ‘If you took your work seriously, you would do this …’

“Maybe it was my modelling background, but I knew to immediately get on the phone and go: ‘Uh oh, trouble,’” she says. “That’s where it’s very much a job. We need to talk to the producers and handle this professionally.”

Yet, at the same time, she is defensive of her industry. “It gets a lot of attention because people know who we are. I’m sure there’s a casting couch at the bank down the street, I’m sure the same thing happens in management consultancy, but people don’t know who the management consultants are.”

Modelling always sounds like a harsh environment – predatory photographers vying with stringent agents to give everyone a complex about their thighs and stop them eating carbs. But that is not how Hendricks describes it at all. Her career sounds like one out of an 80s Judy annual: innocent and hearty, good for pin money and travel opportunities. “I think I was lucky – I didn’t start when I was 14. When I was about 18 or 19, I went to Japan for the first time, I went to Italy. We’d be lots of girls, sharing a house, and I sort of became the den mother. I’d make everyone egg salad sandwiches and Greek salads, going into this mother hen role.”

That is what they say about being taken hostage: if you want to survive, choose someone to look after. “Oh,” she says, coolly. “I wouldn’t consider being a model as being a hostage.”

She was only ever medium-successful, she insists – an “unusual and quirky” hire, rather than the slam-dunk face of everything. About as far as it went was that she never had to get another job to supplement her income. Probably the most famous image of that era in which she was involved was the poster for American Beauty. Two models were in the frame, so they took a photo of the stomach and the hands of each. In the end, they used Hendricks’s hand on the other model’s stomach. It sounds like a clunky metaphor, but it is true.

During this period, she moved to London with a friend, for the hell of it, living in a flat on Gloucester Road, “surviving on cider and hummus”. It is a glimpse of the oddball she says she was growing up, the outsider as whom she is rarely cast. This has been the story of her CV. “Early on in my career, I would get auditions and I would call my manager and say: ‘I would never cast me in this – she’s a cheerleader, she’s a bimbo. Can I audition for the other one, the weird doctor?’ And they’d be like: ‘No, they saw your picture.’ And I started realising that people didn’t see the weird, goofy me that I saw.”

She made the jump from modelling to acting via adverts, with what looks like fairytale ease. In fact, it was “a lot of pounding the pavement and showing up for auditions and getting rejected – and learning, as a young woman, to not take that personally”. By the late 90s, she was the face of ultimate female confidence, the woman who drinks Johnnie Walker and doesn’t need a chauffeur (these are two ads, not one for drink-driving). “I always thought of modelling as freeze-frame acting. It felt like a scene, and I still consider it that way. There are so many technical things that I think people don’t notice. They see you playing dress-up.”

From the commercials, she learned “how to hit a mark, how to memorise a line”, but acting wasn’t novel. She had been doing community theatre since the age of 10, and grew up expecting an alternative life, supplementing an art-house existence any which way. She never amplifies her creative urges. She is much happier talking about professionalism and graft, but that is strategic more than anything else. “I am incredibly emotional and I take things very personally. But I’ve learned to be a little bit of a politician and a little bit of a producer along the way. As a female actor, the easy go-to is: ‘She was emotional, she was hysterical.’ It can be a million other people’s fault, but it’s easy to point your finger at an emotional artist. So, I realised: if I’m going to be taken seriously, I need to have professional perspective and I can cry about it to my friends later.”

Yet she cares deeply about creativity, as is clear when she talks about Mad Men. “It may eclipse anything I ever did. And, if it does, it was a good one and I’m proud of it,” she says. “I got to bring who I was as a woman. I think I learned some of how to be a woman from Joan. No one would give a shit about me if it wasn’t for that show. I’d still be doing good work, but no one would have found me. If that’s the best thing I ever do, it was pretty good.”

Daily inspiration. Discover more photos at Just for Books…?

[wordslikesilver]

Seeing the discourse lately on transmisogyny and coming across new terms like tme and tma being used more than I think I’ve ever seen before because of everything going on had me uneasy, not gonna lie, I always do when I find new terminology from the alphabet mafia because I’m thinking to myself oh boy, more stuff to explain to cis people. Looked into it, it all seems pretty reasonable to me tho for including nonbinary femmes and femme intersex people I’ve sorta just always by default assumed “Trans Femme” was really good given the whole “it’s a spectrum and transmisogyny by definition is talking about the people on the femme side of it who didn’t start there” so admittedly I’ll probably be a grump about changing my vocab soon.

But then I see some new shit in the wake of all this TERF nonsense and bigotry being used against trans women? Detransitioned cis women calling themselves trans women and saying WE don’t understand the concept of gender well? The audacity? Look, changing the labels of a community to be less offensive is something I support so loudly and love and adore. This isn’t that. This is people encroaching on our pride and our identities and pretending the flag we nobly fly, the icon of bravery and unifying love in the face of oppression that it is, isn’t clearly “ours” enough. That it’s something they’re allowed to say belongs to them too so we need to come up with something new to call ourselves when we discuss the pain we face in our lives. Erasing and rewording the definitions of who we are til our identity is gone altogether. Moving the goal posts and telling us to teach everyone a whole new set of labels when the average layman still doesn’t even know that “Cis” isn’t a fucking slur, let alone what it means. Never forget that at your core when you fight against this new bigotry and they try to dance circles around you with their words and misdirect the conversation to stupid shit. Alienation from an already unified identity is a classic means of making it so much fucking harder for the oppressed to have their pleas for basic rights be acknowledged. Never let your people’s pain be silenced by someone pretending to they’re too stupid to know who you’re talking about.

To the TERFs and bigots who find this, and I fucking hope you find this, Trans Woman is not yours to fucking claim just because “gender is a construct and complicated” you will NEVER know the pain people like me have been through. I refuse to acknowledge a claim on my people’s identity because someone managed to misunderstand a concept hard enough and it’s now snowballed into a new form of complicating discussions of deserving basic and equal rights. I have felt the pains a cis woman has felt, I have felt sexist and awful treatment from men, I have been catcalled, I have been stalked, I have been made unsafe, I have been expected to be a mother for no other reason than “all women want them one day” and I have been assumed to be less than a man for some imagined frailty of the fairer sex. I am a woman. We can share that label, I WANT to share that label. We can bond over sapphic love and feminine experiences and hardships we both suffer under a cruel patriarchy. In just the same way, I have never known the pain of period cramps. I don’t have a vagina. I will never have a pregnancy scare and I will never feel the side effects of birth control. I wasn’t catcalled by gross men walking home when I was in high school. I was never sexualized by the media when I was in middle school the way cis girls would see happen to them. I am NOT a cis woman and I will never be one. I grew up as a boy, I lived and I loved as a young man, I saw the world through masculine eyes and was raised being treated as one, I will never pretend I know what it’s like to be a young girl being preyed upon and used by an older man. I will never touch that label because it’s simply not correct at the most fundamental level. I am a trans woman and that made me who I am. After all the people I’ve met and all the experiences I’ve shared, it took time to be so proud of calling myself a trans woman. Holding up the sky would’ve taken less strength of the heart, but now I feel the deepest pride knowing I’ve done something inconceivably harder.

But you, you people cannot take that from me and my sisters. I draw the fucking line at saying you think you have the slightest notion of what it’s like to be transfeminine. To be born in a body that makes people see you as a man from the very first glance, to hear you wrong from the first whisper of your voice. To spend the rest of your life working tirelessly in a fight against your own biology and/or the perception of the entire world whenever it casts its ugly eye upon you. Some of us don’t even have the privilege of fighting those perceptions or the things or own bodies have been programmed to force on us. Some of us don’t even want to have to do anything about how we look because it’s bullshit to have to fight for that basic respect from our peers in the first place and their standards just don’t align with who we are deep down in the first place! Gender is complicated but this isn’t. Have you EVER held your breath in the women’s public washroom and tucked your feet in because you were scared you’d make other women uncomfortable, because you’re not sure if you’re in an accepting space? FEARED what might happen if you step into the women’s change room to put on a bathing suit or your work clothes? Have you EVER been threatened with physical violence and called slurs in front of your own mother on public transit? Have you ever had to tell your doctor you’re ready to drop out of school to show how “sure” (re: fucking desperate) you are to be prescribed HRT? Sure, lots of cis women are on HRT, I treat them as patients all the time. Have you ever had a hot flash at the age of 21 because you were late on your injection? Did you pierce your skin with thin metal once a week for years and years to get the breasts you have? Did your body do irreparable things to your bones and your voice that make it so no one will ever see you as a woman at first glance without thousands of hours of effort, of tears, of sheer fucking focus and fixation on achieving the ideal self you see in your mind and dream of being one day? DID YOU HAVE TO BEG YOUR GOVERNMENT TO LET YOU HAVE THE BODY YOU LITERALLY ALREADY HAD AT BIRTH OR DID THEY NEVER EVEN SO MUCH AS TRY TO GET IN THE WAY OF JUST BEING CALLED MISS ON YOUR GOD DAMN LICENSE? Cis women can’t even begin to imagine the feelings I have felt, building my wings of feather and bones and wax, day after day, dreaming of flying beside my sisters who were born with wings they’ll never fear will melt, all the while remembering the last time someone born in a body like mine flew too close to the sun. Maybe they’ll perhaps know what it’s like to bind them to their back and hide them beneath their shirt, maybe they’ll even have sheered and ripped the bones from their sockets and one day wish they could have them back and sing with the rest of the angels like they used to, but they will NEVER fly on wings like mine, fear the heat from the light that makes life worth living the way I do, fear the same slings and arrows screaming up through the air from down below and even at times from above my head to let me know loud and clear they wanna knock me outta this sky, this sky that’s so beautiful and holy I cry when I touch it, the very first chance they get.

Transphobia won’t ever take the sky from me. My Icarian Wings are made on the foundation of generation after generation of my people who dreamed and yearned to touch the sunlight blue skies and the infinite glittering nights, each of us telling each other, telling ourselves we’ll never fear the light again one day, lifting each other when we fall, soaring higher each time than the ones whose wax melted before we could save them could, warmly teaching each other how to fix our broken wings and freely gifting each other the love it takes to make them stronger for the next flight. Holding each others hands as we dance and show each other how to fly, hand in hand and heart in heart with the angels who call us sister angels. A cis woman having the audacity to flap her never melting wings and saying hers are just like mine, that the name of my people is just a construct so she can say she she’s just like Icarus too, makes me wanna vomit. Pretending she knows what it’s like to watch in terror as all the feathers fall out suddenly in a moment of weakness making her break her bones upon the rocks, listening to everyone around her say “I knew it, I knew his wings were fake, look at him crawl along the ground in the dirt and the mud where he belongs.” Pretending that if two people both have skin, even of a different colour, that since the labels are made up, the sun and society itself will surely treat them the same if the white one calls themselves black.

Transphobia won’t ever take the sky from me. Come and fucking try to take these wings from me and see what happens.

[cl0ckworkqueerness]

honestly a lot of posts on tumblr fucking rot my brain especially in regards to transmisogyny and transandrophobia, not because either are stupid or not serious, but rather because many conversations are focused on pointing fingers at one or the other and saying "no no no, they're actually the ones who benefit from the patriarchy!".

i must also emphasize that not all conversations are like this.

but i'd like to remind both myself and the rest of you that most people who are vocal about one of them are usually okay with, if not in support of, discussion about the other. even if they primarily talk about one instead of the other, that's usually because that's the type of oppression they specifically face, and do not discredit any other types of oppression.

at the end of the day, the trans community is divided by nothing but itself. transphobes don't care about what "type" of trans person they're talking to, they want all trans people gone.

immediately, a person's first thought may be to go on the defensive when they see a post about a type of oppression they don't face. well, this post doesn't center me, so it must be dismissive of my oppression! is a thought that may cross your mind, but is not inherently true. specific types of discrimination are not exclusive to just one group-- any group can face a unique hostility depending on who they are, or what people think they are.

at the end of the day, i don't think transradfems genuinely hate trans men. i don't think they despise us with a passion and want us to leave the trans community. most of them, anyway. they, like us, just want to get their specific avenue of oppression to have more eyes on it, to have a solution to remove it from society, or at least to have some relief in talking about it. unfortunately, it seems like they are in a position where they feel like any discussion of trans-specific oppression is speaking over them, or silencing them, or treating their oppression like it is not as bad and horrific as it truly is. our intentions don't matter, it doesn't matter if we also talk about transmisogyny, because merely the act of implying there is any form of specific transphobia besides transmisogyny makes us transmisogynists.

the solution to this problem is not to stop talking.

the solution to this problem is not to minimize our own struggles.

the solution to this problem is not to harass transradfems, and tell them that they Must hate trans men, even if they do say horribly transandrophobic things.

the solution is to continue talking, to have respectful conversations with the trans people around us, to open up about the horrible things we face that have been silenced and erased for so long. i know "infighting is bad!" is a take that a lot of people roll their eyes at, but it needs to be said: if your biggest enemy is another trans person, or a group of other trans people, you are fighting the wrong person.

yes, call out transmisogyny in the queer community. yes, call out transandrophobia in the queer community. yes, call out exorsexism and intersexism in the queer community. but do not make these people your #1 enemy. because at the end of the day, it is not the tumblr user who is legislating us out of existence, it is a bunch of cis people who are uncomfortable with us living our lives in any way except miserable.

[no-where-new-hero]

✨ love your fandom asks ✨ #16, please! 👀

hehe thank you @gogandmagog for sending this ask! excuse me while i blather about emily of new moon again :))

16. a tiny detail in canon that you want more people to appreciate

I can't say this is necessarily a tiny detail and also I've yelled it to the skies before, but the fact that Dean's voice is very nearly the last thing we hear at the end of Emily's Quest is something I love to harp on. Because if LMM were content with Dean just being a symbol of the patriarchy or judgmental masculinity or whatever, it would be so nice and easy to write him off in the middle of the novel. The last thing he could write to Emily is the long-overdue praise for The Moral of the Rose, and that would be that. But no, he intrudes, almost more overtly than Teddy in the middle of Emily and Teddy's happy ending.

I don't think LMM intended this to be sinister--I think she saw this as closure, that Dean gives Emily the Disappointed House, that he finally seems to revert to the safe and comforting friendship of her childhood. But it persists this strange triangulation of Emily, Dean, and Teddy that the entire third book is strung across, either intentionally or not. I was actually flipping through Emily's Quest earlier today (as one does) and got caught at the part where Emily learns of Ilse and Teddy's engagement:

"Well," she said aloud to Emily-in-the-glass. "I've spilled my cup of life's wine on the ground--somehow. And she will give me no more. So I must go thirsty. Would--would it have been different if I had gone to him that night he called. If I only knew!" She thought she could see Dean's ironical, compassionate eyes.

Why does she think of Dean here? You'd think her whole psyche would be focused on missing Teddy. But she thinks of Dean--either from a sudden new sympathy with him, who also lost his love and is left with his own "what ifs," or because she's so used to seeing herself through his eyes that she thinks of herself as he might, with a kind of dry secondhand kindness that's more acceptable than facing her own feelings on the matter. I don't know. But again, where Teddy is, Dean comes also. And that's a very odd flavor to temper Emily's eventual happily ever after with and something that I refuse to overlook.