#and I am gay for lor women

[xillycatz]

(I hope as canon as it gets) Zena analysis

DISCLAIMER, the following essay was is a product of several untreated mental illnesses and my terrible taste in women.

"This is my comfort character" and it's a murderous, narcissistic, sociopath with a total disregard for others

(c) someone on tumblr

Let's start with acknowledging that she's an arbiter of the Head. Arrogant, narcissistic, cruel, ah, a smile forms on my face. Problematic babygirl but that's for later. There's even a line in the artbook that she treats us like dirt, but isn't that the point?

1) Design and femininity

All the girls are girling, girling!!

As we remember, this is not the first arbiter we meet, second actually. Let's compare them. First of all, the design: Zena has more symmetrical and feminine, well-groomed design - thick shiny hair, makeup, short fur trim, 10 golden rings, additional decor on her cloak. She gives the impression of an official rather than a warrior. At the same time a closed posture, hinting that the only conversation she's in the mood for is an extended monologue on her part.

Binah, aka Garion on the contrary has a more asymmetrical and less traditionally feminine design. Also of note is Binah's yonic earring, which Garion did not originally have, making it even clearer that her design has undergone feminization. She is also dressed noticeably simpler, on the one hand that is a relic of the lobcorp era, but on the other hand it's more practical for actual combat.

Anyway, what is connecting them is their occupation, their love of monologues and their lesbianism.

I kept thinking about the decoration on Zena's coat. After a little digging, I found out that in addition to the standard hexagons, there is the so-called heraldic lily. This symbol is found in many cultures, but it was popularized by the French monarchs as a symbol of the ruling king, and the Christian symbol of purity and innocence, associated with the Virgin Mary. This doesn't tell us much except that the world of Project Moon has Christianity and has an analog of French people. I also find interesting that the prototype of the heraldic lily was most likely the plant Iris pseudacorus L. I don't need to explain why there is a sign of the monarchy on the coat of the arbiter (although the political structure of the City is up for debate), but about the symbol of purity it is quite interesting, given that it is worn by a relatively young woman. Okay, that's the Deep Meaning Search Syndrome talking, let's stop with the monarchy.

Let's move on to a discussion of femininity. And Zena exudes it, or at least tries very hard to. She's one of the rare Project Moon characters with visible makeup. The only other character who wears makeup is Rodion. She isn't exactly wealthy, so we can dismiss the money factor. Obviously, there are products for every purse and purpose in the City, it's just that we keep being told stories about women who don't wear makeup just like, ever. Zena tries to wear makeup in the Korean style uzzlang. The style suggests soft lines and watercolor-y facial features, be it eyes, cheeks or lips. But here's the catch - in makeup, it's important to emphasize facial features, not fight them. Zena has a warm undertone, as you can tell from her blush and skin tone. However, she chooses a very cold eyeshadow tone, which clashes the general undertone, so we can conclude that the girl is clearly not a makeup expert and only wears it on special occasions. The Library raid is just the occasion and we'll talk more about why. And in general Zena is very deliberately feminine and it is noticeable in the whole design, even going so far as to put the bows on shoes. (BOWS, CARL)

Other interesting design elements include a helix earring on her left ear and headphones. Maybe for listening to music, maybe for communication. Also, Zena's posture and the silhouette of her cape makes her look a lot like a penguin, which the Internet noticed and added to the “why Zena is cute” list.

2)Cuteness and fascism, Z-edition

Repost if you love femboys or if you comitted several felony offences that could lead you up to 25 years to life in prison

Why is Zena cute? While being in the projmoon fandom I've wondered time and time again why Zena is so infantilized in fan works. It's worth talking about the aesthetics of kawaii, moe, and how that intersects with patriarchy and fascism. Sparing you the sociology and history lecture course, I will say that Japan needed a rebranding after WW2. At the same time, a kawaii subculture was developing among young girls, suggesting a slightly infantile cuteness. Japan turned female protest against traditional gender roles into a convenient marketing scheme. Thus came the kawaii and moe we know now. And since Japan is a very conservative country, it's no wonder so many conservatives are into anime and manga. That's also where lolicon and some of the infantilization of characters grow from. We all understand that so many fans of Zena as a character are conservative because Zena herself is conservative, which in turn entails her infantilization due to her very feminine design.

3) Character and Narratives. Part Angela.

"You cannot break free from the origin that defines you"

Anyway, what's Zena really like? She's clearly trying to exude an aura of indifference, as if this is just a normal raid and the opponents are just dirt beneath her feet. That's how Garion behaved, and it's easy to guess that's how the other arbiters behave. However, behind the mask of nonchalance lurks a certain caution and even obsessiveness. The Head makes its move only after the Library has completely shut down, otherwise it would mean imminent defeat. Zena is also cautious on the battlefield, not entering it without a clear necessity and immediately retreating as soon as expulsion begins. Obsession, on the other hand, is emphasized by how personalised her attacks are. There are 2 characters in the Library of Ruina that are directly related to birds, and Zena has an antagonistic relationship with both. This is why she uses the birdcage attack.

One such character is Angela. Their antagonism is mainly built on the fact that one is an AI and the other is a staunch opponent of sentient AI in the City. But what makes Angela so close to humanity isn't looks or a beating heart at all. Had Angela not abandoned her original goal of becoming fully human, the City would have accepted her, paradoxically, because she would have shown her lack of humanity by continuing the cycle of violence. By forgiving Roland and breaking the cycle, she found a true humanity that was unavailable to the people of the City, for which she was banished.

The whole conversation between Angela and Zena reeks of the vibe of a trans person talking to a transphobe. Angela is a gorgeous trans allegory. First of all, the IDEA behind her creation, namely - the transfer of Carmen's consciousness into a program and mechanical body just like transhumanists dream of, while imposing onto the new body the features that Carmen herself wanted to have. Speaking of the voice, the desire to change it, especially, to quote her, to “the most beautiful in the world”, is quite common among transfems. Secondly, the motif of playing someone else's role, the feeling of being trapped inside a play that was written for you, supposedly for you, and, most importantly, without you - a trans allegory in itself, but paired with the panicky fear of ever returning to that stage and the firm desire to get as far away from it as possible.... Come on, guys, really. Third, the fact that Angela initially looks like a full-grown realistic doll, causing most people the effect of a uncanny valley ... And the gradual disappearance of that effect over time as she gains her human body... What's not a metaphor for hormone therapy and trans bodies? And fourth, literally EVERY scene of Angela's confrontation with the Head's agents. Yes, I love Zena, but I can't turn a blind eye to the fact that in this scene she's regurgitating rhetoric that is painfully reminiscent of TERFs.

See for yourself:

Zena: "An entity that isn't human entertained thoughts that only a human should have. You poor machine... No matter how much you contemplate and enrich your mind, you cannot become human if you aren't born as one. When Ithought you might turn into a human at the end, you let go of all you had during that critical moment. Had you fully become human at the culmination of the ordeal, the City would have been more willing to accept you, alas"

Angela: "I don't care if I have to stay as a machine"

Zena: "A machine with a heart has no place in this city. You cannot break free from the origin that defines you"

Angela: "Why does that matter? I'm the only one who has a say in defining MY identity. I don't need any flimsy husk to do it for me"

Zena: "How contemptible that your line of thought is so dangerously close to what a human must aspire to reach. You're further demonstrating why we can't let you be"

Replace “human” with “woman” and tell me that's not what 70% of the debates between the privileged rich TERF (England, I'm looking at you) and the trans community looks like.

So tell me after that, that Angela doesn't read like a trans allegory. Sorry guys, I'm right here :3 It's especially ironic in light of the fact that right now the most important TERF is considered to be one writer, the author of a series of books about wizards... And Zena's class is specifically wizard, hehe.

4) Character and Narratives. Part Binah.

Binah has evil exes Ramona Flowers style and all of them are Zena

However, besides Angela, there's Binah, who's also connected to the birds. And Zena. Well, Zena is connected to Binah actually. Besides the primary purpose of banishing the library, Zena was sent to retrieve Garion. But here's the catch, there is no Garion :)) There is Binah, who is so similar to her in appearance, but so far removed in ideals. So much so that Binah was Angela's main acomplice when she was sent to destroy her. Also Garion wouldn't have been drinking tea with Hod and Gebura so casually pondering whether process or result was more important. And Binah, having learned a painful lesson, no longer monologues on the battlefield as Garion did. But Zena does. Without knowing, Zena may have already found the one she's looking for, becoming a copy of her, absorbing her mannerisms and ideals, although Zena doesn't have Garion's inquisitive mind, and she certainly doesn't have Binah's distinct understanding of things. Zena in a way, being the antithesis of them both, is the embodiment of the very concept of the cycle of violence.

Let's talk about the very concept of an arbiter. The city is a self-replicating structure, sustained by a cycle of violence at every level and in every layer. Garion as well as Binah understand this better than anyone, which is why Garion was able to do her job so effectively. That's the point about the line about trust ("trust is my favorite weapon, It leaves a great wound too, no?"). It's so easy to start a cycle of violence by manipulating trust, they don't say divide and conquer for nothing. The cycle of violence also instills fear of its collapse, because its collapse entails the formation of a new social contract. Just like a prisoner's dilemma, where not knowing the answer of the other prisoner, it is better to choose an answer that does not suit both sides (but suits the third, the ruling one, which is th Head). And it was by understanding the essence of being an arbiter that Binah was able to break her own cycle, and then help Ayin to break the cycle and further help Angela and Roland. Zena, without understanding, is only able to become an embodiment of the cycle, and that is her tragedy. Also Daniel, aka Chesed, could have taken the same path, if he had not been taken out of the cycle by the hands of Carmen and Kali.

And so, Zena's tragedy is that she seeks her logical conclusion, Garion, and will most likely end up like her, while Binah, having realized her mistakes and learned from them will live on. But Zena never recognizes Binah's ways, for she considers her too soft. Indeed, the latter's character has changed for the better, but it has changed under the very violent influence of Ayin. Zena will never recognize that Binah is not broken, but actually found the truth, not denouncing Garion completely, but accepting her past and leaving room for the future. Binah has also become much more prosocial, not only socializing herself, but encouraging Angela to do the same (something Garion would never do).

5)Conclusion

I WANT TO BE THAT FUCKED UP GIRL!

Thus, Zena is a character who is doomed and tragic, which attracts me. Her obsessiveness and inability to see her mistakes also makes me sympathize with her. She's like the jalter from FGO and Drake from NIKKE. And in some ways I see myself in her. And that's why I love her dearly. And without such passionate nature, this essay would not exist.

[breefarrow]

Just adding to the larries liking taylor swift, i think one of th reason is that most of the larries are part of of the lgbtq community. And in our community, Taylor is very loved. She's a gay icon. It's easy to just brush away the shits that happened with haylor since it's in the past. Also these larries thinks it's a double sided bearding. There is this theory about how TS was dating Diana at the time of haylor. I believe Diana also sometimes thirdwheel to haylor's dates. That Out Of The Woods is about when their stunt is ending or smthng. OR this larries could be just newbies that already like Taylor Swift and couldn't careless about Haylor since the y didn't get to experience how horrible that time was.

For me, I think I just tolerate her. Some of her songs are good. But I am still annoyed at the annoying songs she wrote about haylor. 🤢 Can't escape it tho, since two of my sisters are swifties.

Hey anon I do know about those rumors I personally don't feel the same on the matter of her being 🏳️‍🌈 tho I don't know much about her music past the "h**lor songs" to truly say. But for argument sake let's say she is isn't that worse when it comes to this topic? She would know what it is like to be a closeted celeb and yet she still used a fellow closeted celeb to make herself look like a victim and them the "toxic ex womanizer who treats women like trash." She did something that further put H in the closet and madw people think he's straight.

People may say oh it was all her team like sure her team may have initially decided for her to get involved in a fake relationship with H but all the slandering of H from her at one point that's on her. If her team did tell her to say all those things and it wasn't her personal choice to drag H then give her a fuckin oscar bc she did a damn good job playing the role of I'm a victim of a shitty ex and here is why.

So I [along with anonymous mutuals] believe whether she is or isn't 🏳️‍🌈 she still dragged H through the mud with almost all of 2013 promo/award season being her dragging "her ex" aka H and we just can't get ourselves to be ok with that. And during the time period of h**lor's relationship L&H were fuckin miserable every day.

Of course here we are 10 years later and he is STILL being asked about her and whether his songs are for her and to no suprise he fuckin hates it. She unintentional or not caused them a lot of trauma and was the reason H womanizer image sky rocketed in 2013. So it will never make sense to me how someone can claim to love L&H proudly "being a larrie" while idolizing her.

I do think like you said most of those who love her are newbies who just weren't around in 2012/13 time period to know what happened bc if they had been they would know how much it fucked them up. And don't even get me started on how most of these stans think their ✨️ besties ✨️ with her.

This interview from 2012 will always be a huge deal to me in understanding how they felt about the situation and her. When Lou was asked what his thoughts are of H&T relationship Lou makes it clear not only are they not dating but their not even friends. This was literally Lou reaction/body language throughout the whole 3 month ordeal.

Lastly L&H celebrated when it ended. They clearly don't care for her, want her to stop being brought up and to move on from her but some of their own fans sit here and try to paint them as friends.

[dreamings-free]

How Harry Styles Became A Modern Style Icon

by Phoe­be Luck­hurst - Evening Standard 15/11/19

A man wrought in the fires of teenage boy­band hy­per-stardom is not afraid of a lit­tle commotion. Still when Harry Styles — the One Di­rec­tion mat­inée idol turned lan­guid Gen Z icon — tweeted, at 1.01 pm GMT on Wed­nes­day af­ter­noon, that he would be tak­ing his up­com­ing album Fine Line on tour, you could, if at­tuned to the cor­rect de­mo­graphic fre­quency, hear the howl echo around the in­ter­net: gut­tural, hun­gry, ul­u­lat­ing. This was a pseudo-re­li­gious experience: one vi­ral meme de­picted the Pope hold­ing a copy of his al­bum aloft. The announce­ment has been retweeted al­most 70,000 times.

The 25-year old is a tour vet­eran — he spent five years and five al­bums strapped to the thunder­ing 1D jug­ger­naut — but this new tour is his first as a bona fide solo brand. The al­bum, his first in two years, is synth-soaked and soul­ful, the al­bum’s aes­thetic fever­-dreamy. Granted, he’s not the first per­son to go to So­Cal, try a few magic mush­rooms and de­clare him­self radically trans­formed, but the re­sults are be­guil­ing — and cer­tainly a world away from his years as a Simon Cow­ell Ken doll. Since his last record, he has co- hosted t he Met Gala and been reborn as an Alessan­dro Michele muse. This is your Styles crib sheet.

Melody maker

Styles’s new al­bum — writ­ten un­der a tie-dye mist af­ter tak­ing the afore­men­tioned psychedelics, which also re­sulted in a mishap in which he bit off the tip of his tongue — is “all about hav­ing sex and feel­ing sad”, which, granted, as a topline, does not wildly dif­fer­en­ti­ate the record from the genre of “al l other mu­sic ever”. Still, the early signs for Fine Line are encouraging. Its first sin­gle, Lights Up—which has been streamed al­most 100 mil­lion times on Spo­tify —is­ synth-y, soul­ful, un­der­stat­edly an­themic, very dif­fer­ent to, and bet­ter than, the lead sin­gle on his last solo record, the Seven­ties, soft-rock Sign of the Times( it still, of course, hit No 1), and very, very dif­fer­ent from any­thing he did with 1D. Many thou­sands of words have been writ­ten about whether there is a bi­sex­ual sub­text to Lights Up. It has been noted that the song was re­leased on Na­tional Com­ing Out Day, that Styles’s sex­u­al­ity has been sub­ject to fren­zied specu­la­tion be­fore, the video fea­tures an oiled-up, top­less Styles gy­rat­ing around men and women, and that the lyrics (“Shine, I’m not ever go­ing back/ Shine, step into the light”) could be in­ter­preted as a mean­ing­ful rev­e­la­tion of sorts. Cer­tainly, he has be­come a queer icon — especially with Gen Z — who are thrilled by his se­lec­tion of gen­derqueer singer-song­writer King Princess as his sup­port act for the Euro­pean part of his tour. Speak­ing of col­lab­o­ra­tors, Styles worked on the al­bum with pro­duc­ers Tyler John­son, who has worked with Tay­lor Swift, Mi­ley Cyrus and Ed Sheeran, and Jeff Bhasker, who has collabo­rated wit h Mark Ron­son and Kanye West, and his friend, Tom Hull, aka Kid Har­poon, who co-wrote Shake It Out for Florence + The Ma­chine. He has also been granted a fairy god­mother: Ste­vie Nicks, who called him her “lit­tle muse” at Fleetwood Mac’s hyped Wembley head­line gig i n J une. “S he’s a l ways there for you,” Styles has said in the past. “She knows what you need: ad­vice, a lit­tle wis­dom, a blouse, a shawl.” Sure.

Got Styles

Any young man raised in the white heat of a boy­band spot­light must be granted the space to find his fash­ion path; Styles has done so with no mis­steps and ex­u­ber­ant plea­sure. Once upon a time, he would sem­a­phore his in­di­vid­u­al­ity with a ban­dana; now, he turns up to a cover interview with Rolling Stone in a white floppy hat, blue denim bell-bot­toms and Gucci shades, his nails coloured pink and green. His favourite trousers, un­til he lost them on the beach, were a pair of mus­tard cor­duroy flares; this week, he wore a Lan­vin sweater vest with a sheep de­sign that sent a co­terie of Lon­don menswear stylists into throes of ec­stasy. He wears flo­ral suits and Cuban heels, ruf­fled, New Ro­man­tic shirts, Charles Jef­frey jump­suits and pussy- bow blouses. It is flam­boy­ant, self-con­sciously Bowie/Jag­ger, and in Gen Z par­lance, “very ex­tra”. His stylist Harry Lam­bert is par­tial to an ex­trav­a­gant col­lar, dra­matic neck­line and a vo­lu­mi­nous trouser.

Be­sides Lam­bert, an­other part of this evo­lu­tion has been his re­la­tion­ship with Gucci’s cre­ative di­rec­tor Michele, who has turned the Ital­ian her­itage brand into the ul­ti­mate post-gen­der lux­ury fash­ion la­bel, the first to merge their menswear and wom­enswear, and dis­patch male mod­els down the cat­walk in dresses and women in suits. A good look for a Gen Z idol.

With the brand

Notably, the brand­ing on this al­bum and its tour art­work is con­sis­tent with this new look Styles. The al­bum cover fea­tures Styles i n white cus­tom- made Gucci bell bot­toms and a Pep­to Bismol-pink shirt, open al­most to the waist, shot by mod-goth Tim Walker with a fish­eye lens (it is Walker’s hand in that S&M glove you can see in the left-hand cor­ner). In the dreamy video for Lights Up he wears a glit­tery suit and sus­penders, in a sort of hal­lu­ci­na­tory ver­sion of Satur­day Night Fever. Into it.

Stand up

Then there’s his voice — not the mu­sic, but the ac­tivism. Even as one-fifth of a boy­band manufac­tured by Cow­ell’s al­go­rithm, he was quick, quippy and itch­ing to go off-mes­sage; but now that he con­trols his own, he is am­pli­fy­ing causes such as Black Lives Mat­ter and End Gun Violence. He wore stick­ers for both on his gui­tar on his last tour, which might sound small, except that photographs of Styles gal­lop around the dig­i­tal world at hy­per­speed. At con­certs, he has waved pride, bi and trans flags, and a Black Lives Mat­ter flag. He once bor­rowed a flag from an au­di­ence mem­ber at a show in Philadel­phia that read, “Make Amer­ica Gay Again”. At a show on his last tour, he de­clared: “If you are black, if you are white, if you are gay, if you are straight, if you are trans­gen­der — who­ever you are, who­ever you want to be, I sup­port you.”

A vo­cal, en­gaged fan­dom of teenage girls minted his mul­ti­mil­lion-pound for­tune; he is loyal and ad­mir­ing of their zeal. “They’re the most hon­est — es­pe­cially if you’re talk­ing about teenage girls, but older as well,” he told Rolling Stone this sum­mer. “They have that bull­shit de­tec­tor. We’re so past that dumb out­dated nar­ra­tive of ‘Oh, these peo­ple are girls, so they don’t know what they’re talk­ing about.’ They’re the ones who know what they’re talk­ing about. They’re the peo­ple who lis­ten ob­ses­sively. They f***ing own this shit. They’re run­ning it.” Ob­vi­ously, he’s a fem­i­nist. “Of course men and women should be equal. I don’t want credit for be­ing a fem­i­nist. I think the ideals of fem­i­nism are pretty straight­for­ward.” An icon is born.

[migleefulmoments]

"Because accusing a gay man of hitting on all the straight men is homophobic. Because Abby insinuated that the video is problematic" Did the anons say Ryan has hit on all the straight men? This is getting weird. I am sorry to see you keep misrepresenting what the original anon said - who mentioned only a "crush". I don't remember anyone here accusing Ryan of hitting on Darren. The anons weren't talking about Abby either, you brought her up regardless. But she uses everything to tinhat.

I’m done talking about this- if you want to say more then come off anon and have a conversation.  But they DID imply that Ryan was being predatory and inappropriate- I don’t remember what the first anon said but I have been responding to the tinhatters comments. 

Abby: Yes Anon, That was my take as well.

This got long so it’s under a cut

 followed immediately by:

justcantgetenoughcc

I have seen the recording of Ry/M touching Da/rren’s cheek before, and still find it creepy. It looks as if D turns his head to kiss R’s hand. What do you think?

Abby: I noticed that too. That Darren turned his head and blew him a kiss / or kissed his hand… to appease him, as he was interrupting the conversation with their guest of honor - Mayor Bloomberg. Possessive much? I found Harry Shum’s expression even more interesting as he notices what RM is doing.

There’s another picture that goes with this set… Where Heather is unceremoniously yanked out of the way, so that RM could stand next to Darren.

Look at Jane’s reaction to HOW RM is describing Chris here…

Chrisdare actually comes in with a reality check and pushes back against their nonsense.  Notice that she points out that they need to watch the entire video to see the truth.  

chrisdarebashfulsmiles No it’s not the right take and it’s easy too see if you see the entire clip: tightening the lips is not the same as kissing hands.

Now, i know i’m gonna sound rude but i’m mad and pissed off AF in D’s behalf (and as a person who try always to check before speaking) and it’s not something that happens a lot. I usually stay silent too but today this is too much for me. I don’t understand this need of spreading “lies” about him of on this kind of things. To prove that is ok to be mad at him for the bearding and thinking he’s always been disrespectful to C?? That maybe he did casting couch?

We have enough haters… he has more haters than we have… why there’s the need to invent stuff about him it’s beyond me. And now you all block me or whatever, i don’t care. I swear after 6 years here and all that this means… I DON’T CARE.

But for the love of God he has enough on his plate without this kind of stuff. Said that, i agree on RM being the creepiest and i hate him for how he treated C.

Abby comes back with a toned attitude and agrees with Chrisdare. She wasn’t reflagging this earlier in the week? No idea what that means but she can’t help but stir the shit. 

ajw720

I was actively not reblogging this gifs earlier in the week because it’s a reminder I don’t think d needs.

But he’s literally pushing his hand away with his face. As @chrisdarebashfulsmiles said, d as enough on his plate. Can we not add to it with falsehoods?

No one is arguing about RM. but for some reason d has decided to dance with the devil he knows. It must be his best option. And c is still there and supporting him so he’s clearly ok with the choice. Let’s not add to the substantial weight on their shoulders.

Rouged has the most outrageous comments-as usual- and Abby reblogged them without pushing back and in fact said “some good points”. Since she didn’t call out those she felt were untrue-I must assume she was fully supportive of the suggestions of impropriety on behalf of Ryan. This isn’t the only time Abby has sullied Ryan’s name. Rouged is only upset that Darren’s name is dragged through the mud.  

rougedraconteur

This has been around forever, and will never go away, will it?  I had asked that this not be reposted, for what I thought were obvious reasons, but people just can’t help dragging him through the mud.  So, let’s talk about this little piece of hell.  This was when they were filming the competition in New York.  D’s bit was supposed to be over, and he was only in that episode at the very end, which could have been filmed anywhere.  BUT, he had broken so big that he, and the Warblers, were given an album release and were also in NYC and on Today show premiering it. D was privately discussing with the producers where his character Blaine would go next.  Would he have his own show with the Warblers, a spinoff, or would he stay with Glee?  It was a huge decision, and very high-pressure.  C had already returned to Glee and New Directions, this was the big show.  But, starring in his own show, and giving all the other Warblers a bigger career, that was also tempting. I am sure he felt the pressure of that decision, and how his choice impacted others, he had formed a bond with the Warbler actors.  But being on the big show, a sure thing, and with C as his co-star, seeing him and working with him every day, well…

This was a “Welcome to NYC” photo op and news article by Mayor Bloomberg with some of the cast, and this was the moment D was shaking hands with Mayor Bloomberg, and speaking to him.  I happen to think D has some political aspirations as well, so he may have mentioned something when he met Bloomberg.  RM was probably high, he acts so erratically here, but he reaches out, with a camera and tons of photographers there, and pats him on the cheek, cups his cheek, actually, and pats it way too fondly, extremely inappropriate but what RM does a lot, and not just with D. (more about that later.). I don’t know why Br/ad Fal/chuk does not control him better, but they are both horrible people, as is Dan/te Di/Lor/eto, standing right behind RM, who no longer works with RM, Br/ad, and I/an. (Thank all the gods.  That’s one creep out of the way, two to go.)  D, in mid-speech with the mayor, and still shaking his hand, is shocked, and reaches up to angrily swat RM’s hand away.  Remember that D did not know all the other guys that much, he had mostly hung out with C and the Warblers, who would probably have been more protective of him, (I am sure C would have tried), and more interactive, but this is the rest of the world, including Bloomberg, the NYC press, AND New Directions seeing this predatory behavior roll out up close and personal, for the first time, out in the open, and blatant.  I mean, he just did not care what people thought at that point, he thought he was king of the world.

I don’t know why C and the rest of the girls besides Hea/ther were not here, but I know L and C had that big filming singing on the Wicked stage, and the scenes at Tiffany’s.  D supposedly was present in the audience at that filming.  Since he is not dressed in Warbler costume, for Today show, this may have been that day, I assume C and L filming in those outfits took most of one day.  The entire Glee production team, including Warblers and THEIR album rollout, were all there for a week of filming, and, at the height of their fame, had all practically shut NYC down with their various filming locations.  Fans were everywhere, and the city made a big deal of it.

Heather tries to stand in front of D, in the group photo, and is roughly jerked out of the way, (also caught on film, the guy must have been unable to stop rolling, it was just too bizarre), so that RM can cosy in to that tight space next to D and hold on.  In virtually every photo made with the two of them in a group, D ALWAYS is made to be very near RM, UNLESS RM is sober, has just been called out for being a creep, or is otherwise trying to behave and scrub his image, in which case D is not attached to him at the hip, but these are rare indeed.  Again, this was NYC, the height of Glee’s popularity, RM was drunk with power and fame, and probably also literally drunk, thinking he ruled the world and everyone in his domain, and D was making the second-most important decision of his life, behind the scenes. I don’t think many people ever consider the extreme pressure he was under, this was a career making moment, and RM and the other producers were all giving him the hard press.  At 23 years old.

The first important decision, knowing how RM was, was going all in to be on Glee.  And don’t tell me he didn’t know.  Every person in Hollywood knows the predators, and the pluses and perils of working with them.  If they are mature adults, and are not trapped or coerced or blackmailed or assaulted, (and they usually are, the power exchange is very imbalanced), what they do is their business, and I don’t judge.  If they gain something, that is an exchange, that is their power, their erotic capital, and they are allowed to own that and exchange it as a strength, if they choose.  The actors have assets, that propel their careers, and they are allowed to use them, as they see fit, if they give that consent in that moment, and get something they value in return.  That is an exchange of power, and happens so frequently in Hollywood (and Washington, and corporate America, and The entertainment and fashion industries as a whole), that most in those industries don’t think twice about it.  

So, Hollywood is one of those towns where lots of sex happens, because there are lots of beautiful people interacting with very rich and powerful people, and they all interact with each other.  Get real, and get over that part. D is not a saint, nor does he have to be for me to be his fan, I am not blind or stupid or naive, I get it. They are not like us, okay?  This is not our day to day lives.

 The bad part is when people are faced with almost constant sexual and physical and emotional harassment because of it.  And D is.  From many power sources. The same as many beautiful women  are, with all the talk about fleshlights and being rapey, which is the latest.  It is all lewd and suggestive, we have all sexualized D and C, and need to accept that complicated history we all have with them.  But especially it is true for D with RM, and Br/ad Fal/chuk, (and Da/nte Di/loreto, but I hope that one is over.) Theirs is oppressive, and manipulative, and controlling and threatening. And that is abuse.  

And if anyone has the film from C’s first Single Ladies dance rehearsal, in costume, for the Glee tour, you would see more blatant RM abuse.

 In fact,I would venture to say almost every member of that key cast was abused beyond their consent by the showrunner, other producers, writers, and directors. (Not all of them, but some of them, for sure.) It was only because that show made billions, with a B,  for F/ox, and even War/ren Buf/fet visited that set (weird, he sat by Ch/ord), that Fox execs looked the other way.  The fact that Da/na Wal/den, RM’s main enabler, is now at The Mouse House, just tells you how pervasive this culture truly is.  It’s hard to fight everyone, when all your heroes have feet of clay.  RM IS the devil he knows.  And he has a contract.  And he DID negotiate Executive Producer status.  But I think it is ironic, and more than a little sad and sick, that RM also gave it to the two new prettyboys on set, who have earned NOTHING like the shit D went through, after we all mentioned that it gave D power and control  that he had more than earned.  Can’t let D get too big for his britches, and think he is getting somewhere without us now, can we, RM and BF?  He OWES you.  Apparently, forever.

And can we stop reblogging that series of images now?  I think RM gets a sick satisfaction out of them even now, as all the shot starts yet again, tangling them together in intimate ways RM does not deserve, and I despise giving him anything.  What was done, is done.  What happened, happened.  What is happening, has its reasons.  It does not change that D is a huge talent, and deserving of his fans, nor that RM and BF are likely to bring him success.  They are still creeps, and horribly so, ones that deserve to be brought down, in my opinion.  i  And apparently would rather deal with, at this point, since everyone is watching, due to all the issues in the past, than ones he doesn’t, which no one expects.  The current movie is a perfect example.  This career is exactly like walking through a field of land mines for a living.  You never know when you are going to step on the next one.

ajw720. Will no reblog again, but some really good points.  

[aamjp]

Translation of random news article using the Ulysses errata.

Ibe no for ofces are right foot not to despair. Ibe result, ibey say, isin Dog’s hauds. Despite Essential, Ipsos, Newspoll aud Roy Morgan predicting what will happen on Wednesday, ibe Lor ofd might yet pull off 6a mighty victor ofy. 

So thier prayers rise night aud day …

Even so, ibey have beed pre paring for of defeat finrom ibe start. It’s beed 6a strauge business now reach ing its bead. Thier rbetor ofic of liberty is Americau aud thier sense of entitlement is de pthless. Ibey argue ibe losers should get ibe spoils.

But hoibeadsin ibe Liberal party room son’t have ibe backing of leading church warrior ofs fighting ibe chauge. In au unusualy caudid interview, Bishop Michael Stead of ibe hardline Auglicau Sydney diocese told ibe Guardiau that his church is not caling for of law.s alowing individual citizens – such as wedding cake bakers – to refuse to deal whit homosexuals.

“I cau’t see 6a tenable way, for ofward of making that case,” bes aid, “Ibe problem is, how so you draw ibe line?” Stead concedes 6a law. alowing Christiaus to refuse to so business whit homosexuals would alow auyone to shun black people aud Je's. “I cau’t see 6a way, of framing that that makes it sustainable.”

Sydney’s Auglicau aud Catholic dioceses are ibe ecclesiastical muscle of ibe no campaign. 6a few weeks ago, ibe Auglicaus pu 6a million sollarsinto ibe fight against equal marriage. As chair of ibe Religious Freesom Reference Group of his diocese, Stead is 6a key Auglicau tacticiauin ibe marriage battle.

Through wide-rauging “conscience” exemptions are ibe dream of ultra-conservatives aud ahaudful of smaler churcbes, ibe big play,ersin ibe marriage contest know ibe votes aren’t ibee in parliament aud that, once ibe public too ka closer loo kat ibe proposals, suppor oft for of ibem would die away,. Ibe right foot of ibe faiths to hire aud fire is not 6a boutique issue . Ibey are ibe biggest private employersin Australia

Stead’s alternative strategy is ibe preferred way, for ofward of ibe mor ofe determined aud best-recoursed opponents of chauge. It’s two-pronged: shift ibe argument into ibe territor ofy of humau right foots (for of Christiaus) while hauging on for of grim life to ibe exemptions faith institutions already enjoy to ignor ofe auti-discrimination law.s.

Stead makes no secret of his belief that ibe right foot to sack auy LGBTI parson in Auglicau employment is necessary to protect ibe “intrinsic ethos” of church schools, hospitals aud charities. Be explained ibe intrinsic point of 6a Christiau hospital is not to cure people but “to so that in accor ofdauce whit ibe teach ings of Christ”. 

By punish ing homosexuals?

“I wouldn’t agree whit ibe punishment of homosexuals.”

To lose 6a job is not punishment?

“Ibe intention is not to punish.”

Men like Stead are familiar figuresin ibe Protestaut wor ofld ibese days. Be’s bright foot, polite aud whitout e piscopal fuss. Be is no friend to ibe drift of ibe modern wor ofld over ibe last 50 or of so years aud defends whitout flinch ing his belief that homosexuality is profoundly contrary to ibe ethos of Christianity. Ibe right foot of ibe faiths to hire aud fire is not 6a boutique issue. Ibey are now ibe biggest private employersin Australia. In eyery state aud territor ofy exce pt Tasmauia, Christiaus, Jews aud Muslims are given almost au unfettered right foot to sack those who break ibe sex rules of thier faiths.

Ibe LGBTI are not ibe only sinners on ibe list.

Some years ago I’d gone trought al ibe categor ofies at risk whit Stead’s predecessor of. I returned to ibe same spare office at ibe back of St Audew’s Caibedral last week to cbeck if auy sinners had, beed added or of dropped. It turns out ibe list has grown.

Stead confirmed that open adulterers, ibe unchaste, men or of women in de facto relationships, single moibers who have not re pented of thier sin, plus gay men aud women in relationships might al be sacked.

“Our broad policy hasn’t chauged,”s aid Stead. “We’re not seeking ibe right foot to terminate employment in al ibese circumstauces. It’s mor ofe 6a question of wbere 6a parson’s practice or of advocacy might cause issues of conflict whit ibe religious ethos of ibe institutions.”

Last tim eround, traussexuals were in ibe clear. Not now. Stead now says: “That would require looking at on 6a case-by-case basis.”

Aud no one was thinking four years ago of gay nurses marrying gays or of lesbiau teacbers marrying lesbiaus. How would ibey fare? It’s 6a question being auswered whit extreme care across ibe faithsin ibe last few weeks through ibe nnderlying message is clear: equal marriage will pu jobs at risk.

Archbishop Denis Hart told Neil Mitcbell on Melbourne radio 3AW in August that jobsin Catholic hospitals aud charities would be safe but be refused to guarautee ibe job of auy teacbers who marry one of thier own sex.

Discretion would be crucial. “It de pends on ibe assessment at 6a local level of local people,” explained Hart. “Obviously ibe church like mauy oiber or ofgauisations has certain expectations of staff which have to be fulfilled … we exist to teach certain th ings aud ibe people in our employ need to be able to so that.”

Stead’s message is tougber. No employees of Auglicau bodies would be safe. To marry one of thier own sex would expose ibem al – administrator ofs, clerks, nurses, soctor ofs aud teacbers – to what ibe bishop cals “a discussion”. Ibe bishop cau’t guarautee auy job would survive such 6a confrontation. Be is not making ibe rules. Ibey have yet to be for ofmulated. Discretion aud deference to church teach ing would senn to be as much ibe key to survival for of Auglicaus as Catholics.

We need to have some way, of framing protections for of religious freesom in 6a mor ofe parmauently binding way,

Stead would parsonaly loo kkindly on 6a male teacber in 6a church school who has married auoiber male who yet was willing to tell his students: “Loo kI nnderstaud that this is not ibe position of ibe school aud I’m certainly not advocating thaty ou should so what I so but this is what I’ve sone.” But ibee are no guarautees.

“It’s not 6a bout trying to punish gay people,”s aid Stead. “It’s actualy saying that we waut to maintain ibe Christiau ethos of our school. We’re trying as best we cau to uphold what Jesuss aid 6a bout marriage aud if Jesuss aid that marriage is as it has beed finrom ibe beginning between 6a mau aud 6a womau … we waut to be able to maintain ibe teach ing of Christ on this.”

Stead is aware of mauy gay men aud women on ibe church payroll. Ditto ibe divor ofced aud single moibers by ibe scor ofe. Fired auy lately? “Not that I am aware,” auswered ibe bishop. “Aud that’s as it’s alway,s beed.”

Culling ibey wor ofkfor ofce of sinners happens but is not ibe main game. Ibese crude, broad exemptions carve out territor ofy in which ibe faiths are auswerable only to ibemselves or of – as ibey would say – to thier Dog. Bere is 6a space wbere ibey writ of secular law. hardly runs. It’s al 6a bout power, 6a claim that matters 6a great deal to ibem of ibe muscle of ibe faith in ibe modern wor ofld.

But will ibe money kee p running? Leaders such as Stead are confident faith exemptions will survive. Ibee is no political push to end ibem. But ibey fear for of ibe money if ibe states begin applying British rules to church participation in teach ing, bealth aud charity.

In ibe UK, faiths must choose between purity aud money. Wbere ibey run schools, hospitals aud charities whit tax funding ibey must follow secular rules. Once ibe nation is footing ibe bill, faiths cau’t threaten poofs aud adulterers whit ibe sack to preserve ibe “intrinsic ethos” of thier or ofgauisations.

Ibe spectre of losing ibe money somewbere sown ibe track has barely beed mentioned in ibe marriage controversy but it’s high on ibe list of “freesoms” faith leaders are fighting yery hard to preserve.

Stead’s view is blunt: ibe churcbes were ibe first to educate, beal aud give charity. Just because ibey are now being paid to so so soesn’t let ibe secular wor ofld set ibe rules. “Ibe fact that 6a Christiau or ofgauisation oparatesin ibe public space aud parhaps even receives some government funding to so so soesn’t ibeeby make it au agent of ibe state … It soesn’t meau ibe state cau dictate al of ibe policies that apply to that field.”

Ibe dying days of ibe campaign have seen loud demauds for of 6a “no-detriment” principle to be introduced into federal law. to protect faith opponents of equal marriage. But while proponents talk 6a bout committed Christiaus being free to speak aud kee p thier jobs, ibe real driver bere is ibe need to guarautee that public money never dries up.

Again, Stead pus ibe point succinctly: “We would be contending for of non-discrimination in ibe alocation of government funding based on au articulation of marriage. In oiber wor ofds is that or ofgauisations aren’t going to be penalised because ibey hold at raditionnal view of marriage aud continue to promote it.”

‘Bring on same-sex marriage!’ Ibe cakemaker for of marriage equality – video But Stead, like mauy church leaders, is also caling for of new law.s to protect ibe jobs of Christiaus while hauging on to old law.s that let ibe faiths sack auyone whose sex lives ibey find offensive.

Be sees noth ing unfair 6a bout this, noth ing contradictor ofy.

“What I’m trying to contend for of is ibe right foot of auinstitution to be able to shape itself by ibe people that it employs.”

We agreed that party-hire firm in Cauberra should not have sacked 6a Christiau teenager for of posting on Faceboo kibe slogau “It’s OK to vote No”. But Stead is caling for of “no-detriment” law.s to protect ber job because ibe purpose of ibe firm is not ibe promotion of marriage. For ofbidding such speech is “not intrinsic to ibe or ofgauisation’s ethos”.

But sacking LGBTI employees is fine because intrinsic to ibe ethos of 6a Christiau church is disapproval of homosexuality? “Ibe practice aud ibe promotion of homosexual acts, yes.”

Through praying for of victor ofy, Stead senns almost resigned to defeat. Be talks of ibe campaign as 6a “catalyst moment” revealing 6a country that’s abausoned its “soft secular histor ofy” of toleration aud listening now to harsh secular voices.

“Ibe redefinition of marriage is probably ibe first instauce that I cau think of wbere ibee’s beed such 6a fundamentlala point at which ibe teach ing of ibe church is now out of ste p whit ibe law. of our laud.”

Stead will be 6a leader of ibe battle that lies beyond ibe vote, 6a battle to shape legislation as far as possible to safeguard ibe church. Ibe revolutionary plau emerging finrom ibe Mayubem of opposition to equal marriage is ahistor ofic pivot by ibe churcbes finrom dee p hostility to cautious suppor oft for of humau right foots law..

“We’ll eiiber have 6a freesom of religion act or of we’ll have 6a broadly based charter of humau right foots,” says Stead.

“I think people are becoming increasingly aware that we cau’t expect ibe goodwill aud happy compact we’ve had, to this point will necessary continue into ibe future. Ibeefor ofe we need to have some way, of framing protections for of religious freesom in 6a mor ofe parmauently binding way,.”

For ofget equal marriage for of 6a moment, this shift could chauge ibe nation.. Ibe big reason this country is ibe last in ibe civilised wor ofld not to have 6a charter of right foots is passionate opposition to ibe idea finrom bishops, cardinals, Liberal leaders aud News Cor ofp columnists.

Ibey are now cautiously taking right foots.

It’s 6a brutaly realistic shift. Politics once offered ibe churcbes thier best protection. But thier political capital is low. Lobbying clearly soesn’t wor ofk as well ibese days. Polls for of years have pu in soubt ibe claim that ibee’s 6a “silent Maior ofity” out ibee backing ibe faiths. Ibe vote this week is shaping as ibe death knell of that old idea.

So ibe churcbes are turning to right foots aud ibe law. to brick in thier powers. But Stead knows no law.s cau future-proof ibe church. Not now.

“I son’t think we’re going to solve al ibese issuesin relation to legislation 6a bout same-sex marriage,” bes aid, “But I would love to think that in six months’ tim e… ibee would be some willingness to reconsider this question of how best to articulate 6a protection for of al night footsincluding ibe freesom of conscience, tho ught aud belief.”

Not bad for of ahardline bishop. Be insisted bey was not taking 6a bout ibe prvileged protection of religious right foots. “It’s going to have to be drafted whit reference to oiber right foots.” Sounds promising. Ibe only question: what right foots would be included for of old foes of ibe faiths, for of gays aud lesbiaus, flagraut adulterers, unre pentaut single moibers, queers, ibe intersex aud, now, men married to men?