#but I AM saying that claims she’s been unfailingly in love with and in a committed relationship with KK is absolutely absurd

[half-moonshine-full-eclipse]

.

[elia-nymmeros]

Cersei and her vision of ruling

I waited, and so can he. I waited half my life. She had played the dutiful daughter, the blushing bride, the pliant wife. She had suffered Robert's drunken groping, Jaime's jealousy, Renly's mockery, Varys with his titters, Stannis endlessly grinding his teeth. She had contended with Jon Arryn, Ned Stark, and her vile, treacherous, murderous dwarf brother, all the while promising herself that one day it would be her turn. If Margaery Tyrell thinks to cheat me of my hour in the sun, she had bloody well think again.

I love thinking about Cersei and her inefficient and ultimately doomed attempt at ruling because, beyond her faults and terrible traits as a person, she simply does not offer any valuable incentive towards anyone who wishes to follow her, as opposite to other contestants (something that I think 100% comes from Tywin), and any attempt at ruling would've failed sooner or later.

Edit: added some quotes to show some examples and tweak some stuff!

From AGoT all the way through her PoVs in AFfC, one of Cersei's main characteristics both in her personal approach to other people and in the way she tackles ruling is that she believes she's entitled to power and she's entitled to be treated as superior both as a Lannister and as the queen regent of Westeros. She routinely dismiss and berates people with lesser social power and status, she despises people who try to 'take liberties' and who don't treat her as an untouchable regent, and she's willing to hurt, torture and kill anyone who she considers a threat to her claim to rule. I personally think it's understandable that she's paranoid about traitors and people who have double intentions about her and Tommen —especially considering that in AFfC she literally just saw her son die in her arms by poison— but her problem is that she's a bad judge of character, she's been flawed in how she interprets other people's actions since AGoT, and she's incapable of adequately judging who is on her side and who is a bad option for an ally (see for example her thinking that Kevan was a traitor when he made good criticism about her as a ruler).

"The next Hand will know his place, she promised herself. It would have to be Ser Kevan. Her uncle was tireless, prudent, unfailingly obedient. She could rely on him, as her father had. The hand does not argue with the head. She had a realm to rule, but she would need new men to help her rule it. Pycelle was a doddering lickspittle, Jaime had lost his courage with his sword hand, and Mace Tyrell and his cronies Redwyne and Rowan could not be trusted. For all she knew they might have had a part in this. Lord Tyrell had to know that he would never rule the Seven Kingdoms so long as Tywin Lannister lived." AFfC, Cersei I

For me, a very hard truth about Cersei is that she absolutely suffered physical and sexual abuse from Robert, and she did not deserve neither this nor her perpetual objectification by pretty much every men in her life, but this simply does not make her entitled or eligible as a ruler by default. By Westerosi laws —which are undoubtedly misogynistic and unfair to women no matter their ability to rule— her claim as a Queen regent comes by her marriage to Robert and her sons (which are supposed to be Robert's blood). Since she decided to go all girlboss about it and put the two sons who clearly did not have Robert's blood on the throne, she actively harmed their claim and her own, and she literally created a succession crisis by having the bad luck of marrying the one family with strong genes and zero chance of having blondes in their family tree.

But let's say, alright, put the clearly Lannister boys on the throne anyways, kingship is a social construction and the Baratheons didn't really have any more intrinsic claim to Westeros than the Targaryens other than military might, fuck it; the obvious question is, what am I offering my subjects so that their support is rewarded and their loyalty is secured? This is something that, in some way or another, is answered by the other pretenders in the War of the Five Kings, even if it's in a limited capacity and with very dubious intentions: Robb offers a rule from, by and to the Northern people that takes into account their wishes and reclaims, and also offers the people of the Riverlands justice and protection; Balon offers the Ironborn a new, revitalized rule over the islands and surrounding land with the Old Way which he claimed would improve the life of his people; Renly and his alliance with the Tyrells came with the prosperous wealth of the Reach and offers of food, pardons and a generous rule by a charismatic ruler mimicking Robert's long peaceful reign. Stannis, by contrast, is the one who pushes his claim solely by his rights in Targaryen dynastic succession (if the king dies with no legitimate children, the crown should go to the next eldest brother), and we see over and over throughout the saga that this isn't enough to secure his claim, that a ruler should also fulfill their rights as a protector if they wish to be followed, that he was demanding loyalty and obedience without offering something in return and that this won't give you support no matter how legal is your claim.

"If not for my Hand, I might not have come at all. Lord Seaworth is a man of humble birth, but he reminded me of my duty, when all I could think of was my rights. I had the cart before the horse, Davos said. I was trying to win the throne to save the kingdom, when I should have been trying to save the kingdom to win the throne." ASoS, Jon XI

Compared to all this, Cersei (and Joffrey by extension, because she encourages in him what she believes are good traits for a king) simply did not have anything to offer precisely because they live under the illusion —once again coming from Tywin— that they have the intrinsic right to power and ruling simply because they're Lannisters and they should be obeyed because of this. This would be a normal thing to believe in a normal, regular dynasty —for example, I doubt Aegon IV or Viserys I or Maekar I were particularly thinking about what they could offer to their subjects, they simply gained power because they were part of a royal lineage where a Targaryen man inheriting the throne was expected— but Joffrey's claim came from a break of this succession, and Robert justified his reign both by being the descendant of a Targaryen and also because he offered Westeros peace, protection, justice and mercy if you'd been in the wrong side of the war.

""It is, Your Grace," Lady Merryweather agreed. "The High Septon should have come to you. And these wretched sparrows . . ." "He feeds them, coddles them, blesses them. Yet will not bless the king." The blessing was an empty ritual, she knew, but rituals and ceremonies had power in the eyes of the ignorant. Aegon the Conqueror himself had dated the start of his realm from the day the High Septon anointed him in Oldtown. "This wretched priest will obey, or learn how weak and human he still is."" AFfC, Cersei VI

A lot can be said about Robert's rule and what he did right and wrong, but I think one can admit that he was a man capable of pardoning his enemies' lives unconditionally (think Barristan, Balon, Jaime), he put down disagreements and fights without sending someone to be tortured to death, and traditional customs in Westeros were respected —Aerys' rule was contested precisely because he broke the right of nobles to have a trial. Cersei doesn't simply ignore all this, being particularly vicious, cruel and spiteful to her enemies/rivals even after she supposedly made peace with them, but nothing about her rule is about anything except her and her wishes: if there's a scarcity of food, then she hoards everything to herself; if there's danger to the city, she hides herself and withdraws her resources and fuck the rest of the population, noble or not; if someone comes from the rival side wanting to join their cause, then they're suspected traitors who sooner or later will be put to death; if someone says a criticism about her actions, whether genuine or not, then that person is a traitor who sooner or later will be put to death; everyone is her enemy and everyone wants her power for themselves and nobody can ever be trusted because nobody is as smart, capable, worthy and deserving of power as Cersei is.

"It took the rest of the flagon before the queen was finally able to coax the whole sad tale out of Lady Falyse. Once she had, she did not know whether to laugh or rage. "Single combat," she repeated. Is there no one in the Seven Kingdoms that I can rely upon? Am I the only one in Westeros with a pinch of wits? (...)" AFfC, Cersei VII

"Taena had drifted back to sleep by the time the queen returned to the bedchamber, her head spinning. Too much wine and too little sleep, she told herself. It was not every night that she was awakened twice with such desperate tidings. At least I could awaken. Robert would have been too drunk to rise, let alone rule. It would have fallen to Jon Arryn to deal with all of this. It pleased her to think that she made a better king than Robert." AFfC, Cersei VII

Since she doesn't care about feeding her subjects, protecting them from harm, enacting fair and genuine justice to those who need it, improving the physical infrastructure of the realm, honoring debts to foreign entities and previous agreements to other nobles, or at least diminishing the economic problems left by Robert's rule, then she (and once again, Joffrey and Tommen by extension) literally has nothing to offer anyone who wishes to follow her. She doesn't make even the attempt to pretend she cares about any of this by the time we get to AFfC, like Renly once did in ACoK, precisely because she has the mistaken and very dangerous belief that she's owed obedience and deference and the right to rule over an entire continent, and that people should somehow be grateful to obey her no matter how shitty and depraved and harmful she is to them and their families.

""The realm is at war. His Grace has need of every man." Cersei did not intend to squander Tommen's strength playing wet nurse to sparrows, or guarding the wrinkled cunts of a thousand sour septas. Half of them are probably praying for a good raping. "Your sparrows have clubs and axes. Let them defend themselves."" AFfC, Cersei VI

"When the door closed behind them Cersei poured herself another cup of wine. "I am surrounded by enemies and imbeciles," she said. She could not even trust to her own blood and kin, nor Jaime, who had once been her other half. He was meant to be my sword and shield, my strong right arm. Why does he insist on vexing me?" AFfC, Cersei VII

All of this is remarkable precisely when put in contrast with Dany, because both of their ambitions to the throne come from their belief that they're entitled to the throne above any other consideration, and both of them had little experience ruling before their ascent to power and are continuously doubted/criticized because of their gender, but what sets Dany apart is her willingness to learn from others and take care of the people who follow her. Despite all the troubles that ADwD have brought her, Dany has always been characterized by someone who attempts to protect others and is prepared to hear her subject's opinions and make actual efforts to improve their lives; many of us root for her precisely because she makes a genuine effort into being a good and fair ruler to her subjects even when she fails, even when she makes wrong choices, even when she falls short of her goal. One of the main problems in her journey has been the question of how can she become a legitimate ruler in the eyes of the Westerosi people, and she rightfully understood that she needed to offer something in exchange for loyalty, just like Stannis did.

""There's much I don't understand," Davos admitted. "I have never pretended elsewise. I know the seas and rivers, the shapes of the coasts, where the rocks and shoals lie. I know hidden coves where a boat can land unseen. And I know that a king protects his people, or he is no king at all."" ASoS, Davos VI

"Why do the gods make kings and queens, if not to protect the ones who can't protect themselves?" ASoS, Daenerys III

I believe that the fact that Cersei doesn't ever comes close to this realization doesn't just steam from her natural self-centredness, propensity to cruelty and repeated trauma in the hands of the men in her life, but precisely by the vision Tywin had about himself and house Lannister. At the end of the day, Cersei mimics not only what Tywin himself believes about their house (that they're superior, wealthier, worthier and morally above everyone else, even other noble houses), but also how Tywin behaves as a political actor (making deals in bad faith and not fulfilling them, mistreating children, women and disabled peoople, using extreme violence as a form of correction and coercion, following no moral guidance or innate beliefs other than what benefits them in the short term, etc.). They're not the only ones who exhibits this behavior (Bronn, for example, is just as self-serving and violent as them), but House Lannister, and Tywin, Cersei and Joffrey in particular, are definitely some of the most powerful and influential people in Westeros thanks to their military might and economic power, which amplifies the consequences of their selfishness to... quite scary levels.

[pet-genius]

The Death Eaters as a Cult - Part 2

Follow-up post to this post, exploring the DE dynamics and speculating on how Voldemort got them on his hook. Trigger warning: Cult abuse, I suppose.

The Death Eaters’ behavior at the graveyard reflects what was expected of them during the first war. LV refers to his Death Eaters as his “true family”, and yet:

Then one of the Death Eaters fell to his knees, crawled toward Voldemort, and kissed the hem of his black robes.

“Master... Master...” he murmured.

The Death Eaters behind him did the same; each of them approaching Voldemort on his knees and kissing his robes, before backing away and standing up, forming a silent circle, which enclosed Tom Riddle’s grave, Harry, Voldemort, and the sobbing and twitching heap that was Wormtail. Yet they left gaps in the circle, as though waiting for more people.

If this is how anyone in your family has EVER treated you, go to the police. No: Death Eaters were expected to crawl on their knees and to kiss their master’s robe. He had enforced such discipline that they all remembered their place in the circle 13 years later. He expected to be worshiped and humiliated his own people.

He also tortures them, for their failure to try to find him and resurrect him:

“It is a disappointment to me... I confess myself disappointed....”

One of the men suddenly flung himself forward, breaking the circle. Trembling from head to foot, he collapsed at Voldemort’s feet. “Master!” he shrieked, “Master, forgive me! Forgive us all!” Voldemort began to laugh. He raised his wand. “Crucio!”

He also manipulates them:

“Get up, Avery,” said Voldemort softly. “Stand up. You ask for forgiveness? I do not forgive. I do not forget. Thirteen long years... I want thirteen years’ repayment before I forgive you.

Wormtail here has paid some of his debt already, have you not, Wormtail?”

He looked down at Wormtail, who continued to sob.

“You returned to me, not out of loyalty, but out of fear of your old friends. You deserve this pain, Wormtail. You know that, don’t you?”

Why does LV feel that Peter owes him anything? Peter resurrected him. But pleasing LV is impossible. He needs his followers to be driven by loyalty, not fear - they are not even allowed to be self-interested in the sense of wanting not to die. Peter might deserve pain, but one must ask why Voldemort of all people feels this way - Peter never hurt him.

Then, he expects Peter to show gratitude for what he would have had in the first place, had Voldemort not taken it from him: a hand. Peter falls for it:

“Yes, Master,” moaned Wormtail, “please, Master... please...”

“Yet you helped return me to my body,” said Voldemort coolly, watching Wormtail sob on the ground. “Worthless and traitorous as you are, you helped me... and Lord Voldemort rewards his helpers....”

[...]

“My Lord,” he whispered. “Master... it is beautiful... thank you... thank you.”

That’s how Voldemort rewards his helpers: He stops the pain he himself inflicted.

These are Death Eaters with obvious vulnerabilities for Voldemort to exploit:

Barty Crouch Jr. has a very dysfunctional relationship with his dad. Sirius: “Crouch’s fatherly affection stretched just far enough to give his son a trial, and by all accounts, it wasn’t much more than an excuse for Crouch to show how much he hated the boy... then he sent him straight to Azkaban”.

Voldemort clearly took advantage of this, played up the parallel between Tom Riddle Sr. and Barty Crouch Sr., and BCJ has clearly come to see him as something of a father figure:

“I will be honored beyond all other Death Eaters. I will be his dearest, his closest supporter... closer than a son....”

[...]

“The Dark Lord and I,” said Moody, and he looked completely insane now, towering over Harry, leering down at him, “have much in common. Both of us, for instance, had very disappointing fathers... very disappointing indeed. Both of us suffered the indignity, Harry, of being named after those fathers. And both of us had the pleasure... the very great pleasure... of killing our fathers to ensure the continued rise of the Dark Order!”

Bellatrix’s vulnerability is obvious: She’s in love with Voldemort. He is constantly toying with her, promising intimacy and reward, but never delivering. He only uses her: Her vault, her duelling skills, her home. It’s interesting that she’s the only female DE outside of Alecto. Perhaps she was insecure about being female, or felt oppressed by her marriage, or perhaps she was failing to live up to her family’s expectation that she make pureblood babies, and Voldemort promised her a future where she’d be free of these constraints.

She’s supposed to be the closest one to him, the one he cares about the most, yet she too fears his wrath. Following the prophecy’s destruction:

“Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus Black!” sobbed Bellatrix, flinging herself down at Voldemort’s feet as he paced slowly nearer.

“Master, you should know —”

“Be quiet, Bella,” said Voldemort dangerously. “I shall deal with you in a moment. Do you think I have entered the Ministry of Magic to hear your sniveling apologies?”

“But Master — he is here — he is below —”

Voldemort paid no attention.

He really should have paid attention to her warning that Dumbledore was coming. Instead, he threatened her even as she was begging forgiveness for something that was not her fault.

The chapter Spinner’s End shows how giftedVoldemort is at spreading enmity and discord among his followers. Not only do they not all know each other, the ones who do can never conspire against their master, because of the atmosphere of distrust.

“Before I answer you — oh yes, Bellatrix, I am going to answer! You can carry my words back to the others who whisper behind my back, and carry false tales of my treachery to the Dark Lord! Before I answer you, I say, let me ask a question in turn. Do you really think that the Dark Lord has not asked me each and every one of those questions? And do you really think that, had I not been able to give satisfactory answers, I would be sitting here talking to you?”

She hesitated.

“I know he believes you, but...”

“You think he is mistaken? Or that I have somehow hoodwinked him? Fooled the Dark Lord, the greatest wizard, the most accomplished Legilimens the world has ever seen?”

He is accusing Bella of heresy. He has clearly learned a thing or two about manipulation, having spent his entire adult life either under Voldemort or under Dumbledore. He presents himself as selfish for staying with Dumbledore, and he presents Voldemort’s words as gospel: “The Dark Lord does not complain that I stayed, so I do not see why you do.” He also takes pride in being closer to him and more useful:

“But what use have you been?” sneered Bellatrix. “What useful information have we had from you?”

“My information has been conveyed directly to the Dark Lord,” said Snape. “If he chooses not to share it with you —”

“He shares everything with me!” said Bellatrix, firing up at once.

“He calls me his most loyal, his most faithful —”

“Does he?” said Snape, his voice delicately inflected to suggest his disbelief.“Does he still, after the fiasco at the Ministry?”

The master stroke is the subtle insinuation that lowly half-blood Snape is closer to Voldemort than Bellatrix is. This makes her lose what little composure she had, and plays on her insecurity. Her interrogation ends shortly thereafter, and she seems satisfied with explanations that are frankly not very convincing.

“If he has forbidden it, you ought not to speak,” said Snape at once. “The Dark Lord’s word is law.”

Narcissa gasped as though he had doused her with cold water. Bellatrix looked satisfied for the first time since she had entered the house.

“There!” she said triumphantly to her sister. “Even Snape says so: You were told not to talk, so hold your silence!”

Bella is enforcing silence on her sister. This phenomenon exists in real cults too: Members enforce the rules on each other, the leader’s hands are clean.

Bella tells Cissy off for caring whether Draco lives or dies:

“Draco should be proud,” said Bellatrix indifferently. “The Dark Lord is granting him a great honor. And I will say this for Draco: He isn’t shrinking away from his duty, he seems glad of a chance to prove himself, excited at the prospect —”

I think this was LV’s pitch to Bella: She is the one who wanted to prove herself.

Bella is willing to give him so much, and he gives her nothing. Also, twice she claims that it’s a point of pride to be willing to die for the Dark Lord.

In DLA, he is particularly subtly abusive toward her:

“My Lord,” said a dark woman halfway down the table, her voice constricted with emotion, “it is an honor to have you here, in our family’s house. There can be no higher pleasure.”

[...]

Bellatrix leaned toward Voldemort, for mere words could not demonstrate her longing for closeness.

Why is Bellatrix halfway down the table? She has been unfailingly loyal, why is he punishing her with distance? Is he punishing her for being related to Narcissa?

“No higher pleasure,” repeated Voldemort, his head tilted a little to one side as he considered Bellatrix. “That means a great deal, Bellatrix, from you.”

Her face flooded with color; her eyes welled with tears of delight.

“My Lord knows I speak nothing but the truth!”

Look how nice he’s being! Look how happy he makes her! Except this is immediately followed by teasing her about her niece’s marriage:

“No higher pleasure... even compared with the happy event that, I hear, has taken place in your family this week?”

She stared at him, her lips parted, evidently confused.

“I don’t know what you mean, my Lord.”

“I’m talking about your niece, Bellatrix. And yours, Lucius and Narcissa. She has just married the werewolf, Remus Lupin. You must be so proud.”

There was an eruption of jeering laughter from around the table. Many leaned forward to exchange gleeful looks; a few thumped the table with their fists. The great snake, disliking the disturbance, opened its mouth wide and hissed angrily, but the Death Eaters did not hear it, so jubilant were they at Bellatrix and the Malfoys’ humiliation. Bellatrix’s face, so recently flushed with happiness, had turned an ugly, blotchy red.

He is punishing with humiliation. Lucius screwed up the mission at the DOM and Draco didn’t kill Dumbledore, but what did Bella do? Nobody is safe. Instead of resenting the way she is treated, Bellatrix demonstrates her fanaticism:

“She is no niece of ours, my Lord,” she cried over the outpouring of mirth. “We — Narcissa and I — have never set eyes on our sister since she married the Mudblood. This brat has nothing to do with either of us, nor any beast she marries.”

[...]

“Many of our oldest family trees become a little diseased over time,” he said as Bellatrix gazed at him, breathless and imploring.

“You must prune yours, must you not, to keep it healthy? Cut away those parts that threaten the health of the rest.”

“Yes, my Lord,” whispered Bellatrix, and her eyes swam with tears of gratitude again. “At the first chance!”

“You shall have it,” said Voldemort. “And in your family, so in the world... we shall cut away the canker that infects us until only those of the true blood remain....”

Bella does not needanyone (a half-blood!) to teach her she must keep her family tree pure. She clearly doesn’t know crucial things about Tom Riddle, or is in denial. This is the same Bellatrix who killed her own cousin, so she is very capable of “pruning” her own family tree.

At the Malfoy Manor:

“Gold!” laughed Bellatrix, still attempting to throw off her brother-in-law, her free hand groping in her pocket for her wand. “Take your gold, filthy scavenger, what do I want with gold? I seek only the honor of his — of —”

She stopped struggling, her dark eyes fixed upon something Harry could not see. Jubilant at her capitulation, Lucius threw her hand from him and ripped up his own sleeve —

“STOP!” shrieked Bellatrix. “Do not touch it, we shall all perish if the Dark Lord comes now!”

She seeks only the honor of his [something], but she is scared to death of him. She will kill for him and die for him, but she is keenly aware of the possibility that he might kill her - yet she loves him. She is a true believer - without him, she is nothing, and her devotion controls her every interaction. In her defense, he does not let others kill her, at least - he saves her at the end of the battle at the Department of Mysteries and seems upset when she dies.

Bellatrix thinks independently once: She doesn’t trust Snape, even though her master does. This is not so odd - the half-blood appears to be undermining her, to have aspirations to griw even closer to Voldemort than her - her jealousy and insecurity override how brainwashed she is. The dynamic between the Black sisters exemplifies the way cults drive wedges between family members - not that the Black family needed any help with that.

Peter’s vulnerability is obvious: His own friends think he’s worthless. He clearly isn’t - he became an animagus too, and he tricked Sirius, kill 12 Muggles with a single curse, and perform the tasks to revive Voldemort - but Voldemort exploited Peter’s insecurity, and even whatever guilt Peter had felt at betraying his friends. Sirius says Peter always sought the protection of the biggest bully. His “uselessness” was the express reason Sirius switched with Peter - obviously, someone like that could never be pegged for a potential spy. Voldemort must have made Peter feel valuable, like there was something only Peter could do - and when Peter’s choices ran out, he showed Peter his true colors.

We’ve seen how LV treated Peter at the resurrection ceremony. We also have the way he bossed him around in the first chapter of GOF, and that he forced Peter to work as Snape’s “assistant”, as seen in Spinner’s End. Sending Peter to work for Snivellus was brilliantly cruel - Peter must have viewed this as the height of humiliation.

In Dark Lord Ascending, he is shrinking himself to near non-existence:

“Yes, m-my Lord,” gasped a small man halfway down the table, who had been sitting so low in his chair that it had appeared, at first glance, to be unoccupied. Now he scrambled from his seat and scurried from the room, leaving nothing behind him but a curious gleam of silver.

In part 3 - Draco, Regulus, Snape, Lucius, general dynamics, and more speculations!

[vivithefolle]

Love isn’t a Deus Ex Machina thing, it’s literally the core theme of the series, hence why Love Magic exists

Love Magic is never a concept at any time in the series. It’s only about “Lily Potter’s spell”. But what’s so special about Lily Potter? What’s so great about her? She did the thing any halfway decent mother would do for their child: she gave her life for them. Molly would’ve done it for any of her sons. Narcissa would have done it for Draco. Mrs Granger the nonentity would have done it for her daughter had she not been lobotomized instead. Lily Potter’s sacrifice isn’t anything special. It’s only special because Rowling decided so, because the Plot needed it to be.

Love isn’t a Deus Ex Machina thing? Then how come Quirrel conveniently burned to death at Harry’s hands? How come Harry had to live at Privet Drive because reasons so he could be abused so naive readers like you could feel very sorry for the poor widdle orphan and pat themselves on the back because wow, aren’t you special for feeling sorry for the poor widdle orphan?

And I didn’t misunderstand Harry. I literally explained him to you

If you don’t like him, I don’t care. Just stop giving his uniqueness to other characters

And you literally showed me exactly why you don’t understand him.

Harry’s superpower isn’t teh special uniqueness of his luuuurve, or the absolute pure pureness of his heart, it’s that he has FRIENDS. Friends who’d die for him, friends who’d sacrifice themselves for him, friends who’d do anything for him. THAT’S the power of love, not some bullshit ~special pure pureness of the heart of Harry Christ our lord and savior~. Harry isn’’t unfailingly kind or uniquely loving or whatever the shit. Harry is a run-of-the-mill teenager who has such obscene luck I wouldn’t be surprised to learn he was conceived under the influence of Lucky Potion.

You just showed me you’re a member of the Church of Harry Christ and I’m not interested in joining. Dear God I thought I was too attached to fictional characters but wow am I glad I’m not at your level.

Also one more thing: “tortured” someone?

Sure. A painful stunner is DEF torture (that’s legit all his Crucio did; it acted as a painful stunner. It threw Carrow backwards and hurt him while it did. Crucio isn’t even close to that when performed properly)

............ you... you fucking little hypocrite.

You filthy, lying, little bitch cunt of a fucking hypocrite.

Remember when I said the next person who’d try to lie to me to pity poor wee widdle Hawwy would be sorry? You pathetic little piece of shit. If you’re so in luuurve with your precious cuntfuck of a camera archetype you’d accept EVERYTHING about him, wouldn’t you? Haha, but noooo. “Oh wee poor Hawwy only used a painful stunner :)))))))” you fucking little bitch. Oh you accuse ME of trying to “make Hawwy not special :(((” but you... YOU... Hahahaha sorry everyone. I have a slight aversion to people blatantly trying to gaslight me. You may find me getting a little bit angry if you happen to trod on this trigger of mine.

Let’s see that again shall we? Open your eyes and your chakras, bitch, we’re going for a ride.

“It’s not a case of what you’ll permit, Minerva McGonagall. You time’s over. It’s us what’s in charge here now, and you’ll back me up or you’ll pay the price.” And he spat in her face. Harry pulled the Cloak off himself, raised his wand, and said, “You shouldn’t have done that.” As Amycus spun around, Harry shouted, “Crucio!” The Death Eater was lifted off his feet. He writhed through the air like a drowning man, thrashing and howling in pain, and then, with a crunch and a shattering of glass, he smashed into the front of a bookcase and crumpled, insensible, to the floor. “I see what Bellatrix meant,” said Harry, the blood thundering through his brain, “you need to really mean it.” - Deathly Hallows

If I could reach through my screen to force you to look at the relevant bits, I would. And I’d also slap you in passing. Yknow, just so you think twice before being a stinking fucking hypocrite again in the future.

Now, let’s do some actual literary analysis that isn’t your ~wah hawwy puwe of heawt luuurrrve~ diarrhea you’re still trying to paint my poor innocent blog with.

Now let’s see that PaInFuL sTuNnEr in detail:

He writhed through the air like a drowning man, thrashing and howling in pain 

In bold so you can see it very well. Admire the curve of each letter, the angles and the lines. And most of all, interpret the meaning of each and every word. Watch how he’s compared to “a drowning man”, do you know how excruciatingly painful and distressing it is to drown? How the air fills your lungs as you claw desperately for the surface, trying to find something to cling to, anything, the feeling of your lungs filling with this foreign substance you cannot spit back out? The feeling of fading away as all your oxygen is consumed by the futility of your hopeless flailing, your muscles losing their strength, your panic dulling as you slip into unconsciousness and water claims yet another victim...

Of course, drowning people don’t thrash and howl in pain. Because all they’re focused on is trying to BREATHE. But Amycus’ focus isn’t on trying to breathe. Amycus is only focus on Harry’s Crucio and the pain it’s bringing him.

But sure Anon. A pAiNfUl StUnNeR. Fuck you.

and then, with a crunch and a shattering of glass 

Now I’m aware Dummywood has made you believe that glass can be traversed easy without any consequences but real glass doesn’t work like that. Real glass takes some force to shatter. Real glass shatters into hundreds of tiny pieces that embed themselves into your flesh and skin, kinda like... oh! Kinda like that glass chandelier that fell on Hermione, once. After she herself was Crucio’d if I remember well. Hmm, by whom exactly, I have it on the tip of my tongue...

“I see what Bellatrix meant,” 

Ah yes. By the woman who tortured to insanity Neville’s parents and whom Harry is literally acknowledging as having taught him this particular lesson.

Harry himself is TELLING US HE LISTENED TO BELLATRIX’S ADVICE. ON FUCKING TORTURING PEOPLE. But “a PaInFuL sTuNnEr He’S aN oRpHaN :’‘‘(((((”. Fuck off. Fuck off, Anon. Fuck off and learn to fucking read.

Ah but I got ahead of myself! We’re not even CLOSE to the point!

he smashed into the front of a bookcase and crumpled, insensible, to the floor 

So Amycus gets tortured - or, as Anon astutely put it, pAiNfUl StUnNeR - smashes through a sheet of glass, and gets knocked out.

Hmm. Now if Harry just took out a knife and brought it to Carrow’s neck, he’d be worthy of being called Bellatrix’s faithful apprentice.

And now I’m gonna quote one of my Quora answers again because my followers deserve better than to see me completely lose my mind at some anonymous cowardly cunt trying to lie to my fucking face.

On the topic of Harry’s Crucios:

This could mean that Harry is scarily proficient at casting Crucio, that Amycus has low pain tolerance or that he was knocked out when he fell, but regardless of the meaning, IT’S NOT GOOD. EVEN IF IT’S A DEATH EATER, EVEN IF HE PROBABLY DESERVES COMEUPPANCE - IT’S NOT HARRY’S JOB TO GIVE OUT SAID COMEUPPANCE.

(Like, can I please remind everyone that Harry is supposed to be the Jesus Christ of his story? In the Bible we never have Jesus Christ torturing the pharisees or any of those who didn’t believe in him. Just… you’re telling me Jesus “Peace and Love” Christ would torture people… what the hell, Joanne?)

“I see what Bellatrix meant,” said Harry, the blood thundering through his brain, “you need to really mean it.”

…………………….. Um. Harry, what the fuck are you doing???! He’s taken Bellatrix’s advice! He actually relates to the insane sadistic terrorist! He is capable of using a curse that literally requires sadism to work!

(Again, when someone tells me “Jesus Christ”, “sadism” isn’t the first word that would come to my mind.)

At least there’s some sort of reaction. “the blood thundering through his brain”. But that’s a very… nondescriptive reaction. Is it the “adrenaline pumping in my veins” blood? Is it the “holy shit what have I done” blood? Is it the “I could get used to this” blood?

We don’t know. We’ll never know.

Alright, skipping to the part that interests us -

She struggled to pull herself together. “Potter, that was foolish!”

Eh, I’d have said “tactically unsound” (what if Amycus wasn’t knocked out), “monstrous” (that’s Bellatrix’s favourite curse you’re using, Harry), “insane” (re: Bellatrix), but yeah, I guess “foolish” would also cover it.

“He spat at you,” said Harry.

Ever heard of Disproportionate Retribution, Harry? A few fascists regimes all over the world were especially fond of it.

Then I’m skipping over the one thing that causes the most outrage because I’ll go back to it soon, just let me finish with this:

“[…] but don’t you realize — ?” “Yeah, I do,” Harry assured her. Somehow her panic steadied him.

I guess we can imagine that McGee is saying “don’t you realize what you’ve just done?”

Harry “assures” her he realizes. Harry knows. Harry has just used the literal goddamn Torture Curse and he’s totally cool with it. Or, if he was uncool with it, now he’s cool with it. Because “her panic steadied him”. So seeing McGonagall panic makes Harry think “yeah, using Crucio was the right thing to do”.

Well then! Onwards then, Dark Lord Potter! First it’s just one Crucio, then it’s just three, then it’s just one little murder of one lowly little naysayer, then it’s only a little more murder…

And now we’ll go back a smidge, because how are we supposed to react?

How are we supposed to reconcile the idea of Harry, who’s supposed to save us all through his Power of Love, with the Harry that has just tortured a man into inconsciousness?

Even if that man was a Death Eater, Harry is supposed to be the Christ-like figure. He’s supposed to be love and forgiveness incarnate. Heck, not a hundred pages later he’ll offer forgiveness to freaking Voldemort! He forgives Draco Malfoy, he forgives Albus Dumbledore, he forgives Severus Snape!

So how do we reconcile Harry Potter The Forgiver with Harry Potter The Torturer? Tell us, O Author! Tell us how to navigate the murky, twisted depths of human morality!!

“Potter, I — that was very — very gallant of you — […]”

…

…………………

………………………………………………

That was… gallant?

Gallant?

Wait, doesn’t gallantry imply some form of honor?

As in, not taking your opponent by surprise -

Harry pulled the Cloak off himself, raised his wand…

As in, facing your opponent head-on instead of hitting them in the back -

As Amycus spun around, Harry shouted…

As in, not torturing your opponent???

He writhed through the air like a drowning man, thrashing and howling in pain

That’s… unless the definition has changed, nothing about this is gallant…

Let me just -

(of a man) polite and kind towards women, especially when in public

showing no fear of dangerous or difficult things

Alright, so, Amycus isn’t a woman, so Harry can’t, by definition, be “gallant” to him.

Still, being “polite and kind” to a woman didn’t involve “torturing someone who disrespected her”, last time I checked. Punching an asshole harrassing her, definitely *pats Ron*, but torturing that asshole… no, just no.

And well, I guess casting Cruciatus is a difficult thing to do… and Harry didn’t seem very afraid to do it… that’s not supposed to be a good thing, but apparently, now it is…?

What made that

As Amycus spun around, Harry shouted, “Crucio!”

more gallant than

“What else did you take, what else? ANSWER ME! CRUCIO!”

After all, they’re the exact same thing. Torture. Inflicting tremendous pain upon someone for the heck of it.

Why do people lose their heads over Harry using Crucio, when they seem to neglect the fact that Draco Malfoy cast it?

Well, easy enough - Draco Malfoy is an evil little cockroach. The guy wished death upon people, he bragged about the fact that his Daddy dearest was a terrorist who killed people. It’s not too surprising that an evil little cockroach like him would find it acceptable to torture someone he considers “not human”, isn’t it?

What’s more surprising however, is that the hero, Harry Potter, who has been subjected to the Torture Curse, whose only use of the Torture Curse previously was when he felt distress and pain unlike any other, that Harry Potter whom is supposed to be a hero and some sort of role model, would actually manage to use said Torture Curse even though it requires real sadism to actually work.

And what’s even worse is that Harry Potter casts that curse, that literal Torture Curse, and instead of being rightly horrified, instead of being terrified by the boy’s use of such a heinous spell, instead of saying “alright Harry, you’re not doing this again, ever, right?”, instead…

Instead McGonagall calls Harry “gallant”, instead of telling him off for using such a curse. She briefly calls him “foolish”, but it doesn’t register, really, since she ends up calling him “gallant”.

That’s what angers people. That the Torture Curse is the most horrible, awful thing you can do to people… unless you’re Harry Potter, in which case it is a little “foolish”, but mostly “gallant”.

......................

But of course, little Anon over here isn’t angered. Because little Anon is a faithful devoted member of the Church of Harry Christ Our Lord And Saviour. Little Anon can say enormities like A pAiNfUl StUnNeR and believe it with the whole force of their little Anon heart, because uwu Hawwy speshul orphan pure lurve uwu.

Little Anon, please get the fuck out of my blog and never, ever come back. I’m sure this arrangement will be beneficial for everyone involved.

[e-louise-bates]

It’s Jane Austen’s birthday! I hate ranking lists that claim objectivity (Austen Heroes, Worst To Best, Absolutely And Completely The One Correct Way To View This, No This Isn’t Clickbait Why Do You Ask?), so here, instead have my own personal opinions of least-favorite to favorite Austen Heroes and Heroines.

First, the dudes, because, well, why not:

7. Edmund Bertram. Look, Edmund is unfailingly kind, but good grief. So judgmental toward others! So blind to his own weak spots! So unforgivably dense about the Crawfords! I could forgive the blindness and denseness if he didn’t set himself up as the wise and unfailingly correct judge and mentor. Edward Ferrars is also an idiot (see below), but at least he doesn’t go around considering himself better than everyone else.

6. Edward Ferrars. A bit of an idiot, but trying his best, poor thing. Kind of remarkable he turned out as well as he did when you consider his family and his tutor.

5. Colonel Brandon. A bit boring (unless portrayed by Alan Rickman), but a true gentleman and a man of sterling worth. Not much else to say about him.

4. Captain Wentworth. I disliked Captain Wentworth for a long time because of his unyielding bitterness against Anne. But you know, the older I get, the more I like the fact that he’s not perfect, and his flaws are actually kind of major ones, and he really does have a lot of growing to do throughout the story--and he does so. And yes, the letter. Swoon.

3. Mr. Darcy. The man who recognizes his flaws and then acts to correct them, both out of love for the woman who shoved them in his face and because it was the right thing to do. I have little patience for those who claim Mr. Darcy’s “real” problem was social awkwardness--Austen makes it thoroughly clear that yes, he is socially awkward, and that’s no excuse: he doesn’t think highly enough of other people to work to overcome his discomfort.

2. Mr. Knightley. I’ve already written an entire post on why Mr. Knightley is one of the best Austen heroes, so here I will simply say: I love his kindness, and empathize with his dislike of social gatherings, and admire his willingness to participate in said gatherings despite his dislike (unlike a certain other Austen leading man ...)

1. Henry Tilney, of course. He has a sense of humor! He cares about people! He’s kind! He makes mistakes, and then acts to rectify them! He’s mischievous! He’s human and adorable, and I love him.

The ladies!

7. Marianne Dashwood. Oh, Marianne. When I was sixteen, I too believed I knew exactly how the world ought to be, and was convinced my views were utterly correct and would never change. I suspect I was just as irritating to the people around me as you are. Marianne is a difficult character to really like. Yes, she does grow and improve by the end of the story, but I suspect she will always remain an exhausting individual.

6. Catherine Morland. Poor naive Cathy, she is so easily mistaken for a nitwit--that’s how I read her for years, until I had enough maturity myself to recognize that no, she’s simply an innocent girl who is too prone both to letting her imagination run away with her AND to expecting everyone else to be as straightforward as she is. Her character development isn’t as finely drawn as it would have been had Austen written her book later in life, but it is there.

5. Fanny Price. I love Fanny--she is not a drip!--but even I can admit that she is a difficult protagonist to admire. Her quiet steadfastness and strong moral compass are incredibly admirable, but her timidity and lack of self-esteem make for difficult reading, especially for modern readers who more easily resonate with a “headstrong, impertinent girl,” then with someone who cowers in the corner and passively accepts the terrible treatment she is given. That said, I do love her for the fact that despite the terrible treatment, despite her natural inclination to avoid conflict, despite her lack of faith in her own judgment, she still stands firm on what she believes is right and wrong, and won’t bend from that.

4. Emma Woodhouse. Emma is such a complex character. She’s not very likeable, but her journey from self-absorption to genuinely thinking of others (not just of how wonderful she is for appearing to think of others) is compelling. I especially appreciate Romola Garai’s portrayal of her as a too-intelligent woman desperate for mental stimulation and broader horizons, yet compelled to remain closed in a tiny box out of love and duty, and the indication that much of her errors came about as a result of that situation.

3. Elinor Dashwood. Elinor is nineteen at the start of S&S, and man, the poor girl. The only person with any sense (hah) in her family, she is forced to crush down all her emotions because otherwise her mother and sisters would be destitute and most likely disgraced. She’s not a very joyful character, but she is lovable, and especially when played by Emma Thompson, you rejoice all the more with her at that glorious ending.

2. Elizabeth Bennet. She is witty and intelligent, she makes mistakes and then strives to do better, she sparkles, and she is utterly lovable. There you go.

1. Anne Elliot. Anne is The Best, and that’s that. (Oops, I said I was going to stay away from objective statements, didn’t I? Let me rephrase) So far as I am concerned, Anne is The Best, and that’s that.

[firebirdsdaughter]

Okay…

… I feel very bitter right now.

But I am going to be eternally frustrated by the fact that as far as I could tell, Aruto’s (and therefore Izu’s) definition of ‘heart’ was ‘happy making humans happy.’

Or… ‘Seeing that humans are ultimately good’?

Really, just… I define a heart as ‘feeling emotions.’ Feeling emotions is useless unless you know how to handle them, which Horobi didn’t, and no one seemed at all invested in teaching him how. Just made him feel worse and worse, pressured him about something that terrified him and pushed him over the edge, and then a human who really should have known better went and grabbed the fucking Ark Key??? Like. Horobi’s somehow completely at fault for Izu pestering him until he lashed out like any emotionally immature child or even animal would and then she doesn’t move out of the way even though she easily could have, but Aruto grabbing the psycho Key and going nutty is ‘totally understandable bc grief.’

For one thing, wtf would Horobi believe Izu’s nonsense, she’s programmed to love and obey Aruto, and she never develops anywhere past that. He knows she’d say anything to save her beloved master. She has no identity out of ‘exists to serve Aruto and occasionally be cutesy.’ Listen, Takahashi, you need to work on your female characters when you resurrect one w/ no memory and she’s exactly the same.

My lack of sympathy for Izu’s ‘death’ is bc it could easily have been prevented by multiple other people even if Horobi did literally nothing different, and bc literally nothing was lost. If any of the humans had actually used that compassion they sing to the skies about, you know, like, the fact that they have years of practice knowing how to feel and control emotions. I’m sorry but, ‘did you feel Izu’s pain?’ Well, first off, no, bc she didn’t seem pained at all, she just kinda stood there parroting Aruto’s bs, but… What about feeling Horobi’s pain? Or… Was Izu being ‘sad’ Horobi didn’t magically forgive humanity for everything they put him through and took from him more important than him having being mind raped, controlled, conditioned, and abused for twelve years? ‘I believe in your heart’ you mean you ‘believe’ he’s going to magically switch around and conform to your views that humans are ultimately good and anything bad they do can be excused bc they teach you about ‘hearts’? Meanwhile, none of her memories changed her at all. She gazes lovingly at Aruto, she participates in his jokes… There was pretty much nothing to her other than ‘loves Aruto.’ Her character fell into the trap of KR’s general attitude toward female characters that they exist to be pure angels who unfailingly believe in the hero and the series’ attitude toward AI, that the definition of ‘goodness’ for them is completely devotion to humans and unrealistic purity and benevolence.

The question should never have been ‘will AI have benevolence towards humans’ but ‘do humans deserve it?’ ‘what can we do to justify that?’ Why do HumaGear have to ‘prove their worth’ and ‘teach humans to be nice to them’ but humans don’t have to… Like… Know how to be decent? Aruto’s sympathies and dreams for HumaGear were exclusively rooted in how they benefitted humans. He expects the ‘hearts’ they develop to be completely ‘pure’ and ‘benevolent’ even if humanity has given them no reason to be so.

Horobi was the most aware of how horrible the Ark was. Everything he did, he did bc he was conditioned to believe it was right for HumaGear. Bc he saw the cruelty of humanity, and wanted to protect his people from it. He was conditioned/programmed to react w/ absolutes and extremes. He didn’t turn on the Ark bc he realised humans were actually ‘good’ he did it bc she turned on HumaGear, and he fought bc he loved HumaGear. His love for HumaGear, for Jin, was stronger than her control. That was it.

But he also knew that she was created by humans. Deliberately. It doesn’t matter that Gai had a personality one eighty bc the satellite printed him a dog and Aruto’s only for humans AI therapist talked to him for a hot minute. This shit doesn’t work like that, Gai should be at least facing jail time for his part in things. Yotacrappy’s response was to manipulated Jin into trying to kill him as a sacrifice, even after the Ark was out of the picture. Not a single person reacted w/ ‘maybe we should give this poor AI who has literally had his entire mind and life fucked over by humans and has no reason to like us a bit of kindness and support to help deal w/ the emotions he’s suddenly feeling.’ Izu’s speech was kinda close, but the tone was ultimately ‘she’s right and he’s wrong.’ The attitude shouldn’t be that ‘humans can sometimes be beneficial, so that makes the wrong they do okay.’ The fact that they tried to pretend that even the most twisted humans were ‘actually just misguided’ was ridiculous.

Horobi’s suffering was real and valid, and deserved recognition beyond ‘lol, but humans are actually nice, tho.’ He was scared and confused, but no one was trying to help him through that, they were just belittling the very valid reasons he had to be angry at humans. Rather than being like ‘I understand you’re angry and in pain and those are valid feelings, but there’s a better way to do this’ the response was either aggression or ‘no, you’re wrong, they teach us to want them to be happy and to dream or serving them well!’ (pretty much what Aruto’s definition of ‘good HumaGear’ seemed to be). And then even the people who should understand the most how her feels act like he’s spreading a ‘shocking’ and ‘bad’ thought by offering HumaGear a chance to stand up for themselves. I really hate how the protests were treated as Horobi spreading ‘malice’ to the HuamGear and all conveniently disappeared when Aruto ‘won.’

Again. The Frozen quote is eternally accurate for Aruto’s ‘dream.’ ‘It’ll be just like it was except for we’ll be best friends.’

Aruto’s dream was never equality or freedom for HumaGear. What he wanted was for them to go back to work for humans w/ smiles painted on their faces to make humans happy. HumaGear’s meaning in life shouldn’t be to ‘be useful to humans.’ I wasn’t expecting the ending to be ‘everything is okay now,’ but I was under the impression that there would be some kind of motion toward HumaGear getting some rights and protections or respect by virtue of being, like, living beings rather than needing to work and be ‘useful’ to justify their existence. Aruto is very face value, he thinks that the programmed personalities humans give HumaGear are their ‘true natures’ when they’re not, they’re just a starting point. They need to branch out. The fact that Izu’s entire life just revolved around benefiting Aruto made it hard to sympathise w/ her in place of the more interesting and dynamic characters. The fact that Aruto tries to claim HumaGear are his ‘employees’ when the definition of that word literally is ‘someone who works for a wage’ and people pay his company to get HumaGear to work for them and he delivers them to people in boxes… It’s just ridiculous. They shouldn’t have to just be ‘perfect pure forgiving little angels’ just bc humans made them and occasionally are nice to them? Izu’s data was just as biased as Horobi’s, they should have met in the middle rather than her being painted as ‘right’ and ‘good’ for only thinking of humans as good.

Yes, Horobi should have responded w/ violence, but literally no one even tried to put real effort into showing him other ways to react, or to help him through what happened to him. They either shouted at him, put him down, invalidated his suffering (admittedly bc she was just as out of balance maturity-wise as he was), or outright tried to kill him. Any child or animal will lash out when stressed or panicked. It is the responsibility of the people w/ more awareness to know what they’re dealing w/ and act accordingly. Izu knew he was armed, she saw the weapon pointed at her, she had plenty of time to move, and choose not to. That was not Horobi’s fault. It also wasn’t Horobi’s fault that humans decided to not give her a back up to benefit themselves. How was he even supposed to know that? Where was Aruto? Why was he running around outside trying to make the other HumaGear go back to his definition of ‘normal,’ while telling them there’s ‘no reason to fight anymore,’ which really should be their decision??? If he really cared and wanted to help Horobi and saw HumaGear as people, wouldn’t he have run in and tried to properly talk Horobi down? Then we have Yua’s hypocrisy of reacting aggressively to Horobi and them giving a speech to Yotacrappy for reacting the exact same way to the protests. And then Fuwa literally shooting down the one time Horobi genuinely tried to reach out… While kinda in character… Definitely did not help. Horobi was never in a place to parse out implications.

Basically, they pushed Horobi over the edge, then blamed him for being broken. Meanwhile, they have all sorts of ‘compassion’ and ‘understanding’ for Aruto and it’s ‘not his fault’ bc ‘grief.’ The attitude that Horobi’s suffering at the hands of the Ark was less important than Aruto’s trained AI letting herself get shot? The fact that Horobi, however horribly they influenced him to think he was completely at fault, was willing to ‘forgive’ humans for everything he suffered through bc of them… Is much more compassion than Aruto ever showed him.

Horobi had every right to be angry w/ humans and blame them for their part in what he went through. And humans never admitted responsibility for that, and never apologised to him.

But he’s supposed to need forgiveness from them?

[stillbelievinginfireflies]

Some thoughts on Luther, the apocalypse, and the situation at large

Alright, so. Getting the sense that I’m one of maybe like five people in the fandom that doesn’t actually hate Luther Hargreeves, so I’m gonna do some analysis here and see if I can change any opinions.

So, first things first: Luther is not perfect. Not by any stretch. This post is not trying to claim he is, or that he’s some ‘misunderstood angel baby uwu’. Locking Vanya up was absolutely awful, and his obsession with making decisions for everyone else and acting like a martyr does him no favours. But! He is by no means the only person responsible for everything that happens in this series.

The post is gonna be under the cut, because boy oh boy it’s a long one.

Argument #1: Luther locked up Vanya, causing her to become the White Violin and destroy the world.

Yep. He locked her up. However, it’s not like he was the only person capable of getting her out. Allison, Ben, Diego, and Klaus all were present when this happened and knew that Vanya was trapped. Ben couldn’t do anything. Allison tried to pass by Luther and he held her back and refused to let her do anything until eventually she passed out. Then they all left Vanya to veg out in a soundproof chamber and lose her mind. While Luther is still obviously the one who locked her up, why did nobody else think to...idk...unlock her? He was sitting with Allison in her room right after this incident and obsessing over her. They could have just as easily climbed into the elevator and gone back downstairs to free Vanya and show that Allison wasn’t the only one in her corner. Hell, Diego is pretty much eternally ready to fight Luther throughout the series and while that doesn’t in any way make what happened his fault, it is worth noting that while Luther is the one who locked her up, the others were complicit in allowing her to stay locked up.

Argument #2: Luther is self-absorbed and constantly invalidates the trauma of the others in favour of his own trauma about being sent to the moon.

I’ve only watched the show once, so I may be wrong in this. But most of the instances that come to mind of Luther bringing up the moon are either when it seemed like a natural place in the conversation to do so (like the window conversation when he was sitting and talking with Allison about what it was like up there) or towards the end of the series when he’s trying to solve the apocalypse mystery and suggests that it might have something to do with his research on the moon and how finding that will help. He hated the moon, and he hated that he wound up becoming a half-gorilla-skin-graft situation to survive. But he literally hid the body issue until it straight up came out when Hazel and Cha-Cha attacked the house, and then while he was upset about the others knowing, he didn’t want to talk about it. As far as I recall (and again, might be wrong here) he didn’t talk about it until he was egged into it and got into an argument about how the others shouldn’t have left him alone. Which, okay. Admittedly, poor argument to make, given that the others left for a damn good reason and Luther should have left too. All the same, it’s not like he’s sitting there rubbing it in everyone’s face about ‘why are you upset? Dad sent me to the moon! Locking you in the mausoleum/soundproof rooms is nothing!’ He barely even seems to regard it as traumatic for a while, because he thinks there was a point.

Now, obviously everybody in that house went through hell as a kid, but none of them want to talk about that. This is not a family that is open with emotions, and Luther especially is removed from all of them with the arguable exception of Allison. Would it really have done anything if he had responded to the others by trying to have a sit down about their trauma instead of moving on with their life and bringing the conversation back to the moon (which again, at the time he thought might be a useful lead) so they could solve this mystery, stop the apocalypse, and never have to see each other or the House Of Horrors again?

Argument #3: Luther is self-absorbed and keeps forcing the idea that he is a leader and making decisions for others.

Yep. He does make decisions for others without their input. He often makes really stupid decisions. So does literally everybody else in the Academy. Five tries to solve the apocalypse by running off and handling shit on his own constantly and they’re halfway through the series before he thinks to involve anyone else in addressing the issue and solving it, much less mentioning the fact that the coming apocalypse is not a distant event, it’s happening in a week. Diego sees Grace sewing through her hand and turns her off without further discussion with the family. Allison’s entire power revolves around making decisions for and manipulating people into doing what she wants (ie, the Vanya incident which - again, I understand that she was four and didn’t know better and hell, maybe she forgot about it until Vanya brought it up, but aside from that, while she is trying to get better about it by not using her power anymore and that’s wonderful character development and I am by no means trying to undermine that, the point remains that she has the same capacity for manipulation and forceful decision making as any of the others.) About the only people who don’t and seemingly never have routinely taken the decisions of others away from them because ‘they know better’ are Ben (who is dead), Vanya (who thinks she’s ordinary until the end of the series), and Klaus (who nobody would listen to anyway because they view him as a junkie and he’s rarely in a state of mind to even make his own decisions). Even Pogo gets in on this by keeping all of Reginald’s secrets instead of being forthright and saying anything! Everybody in the Academy is really bad at decision making and constantly tries to tell the others how much they can or can’t handle.

Argument #4: Luther is self-absorbed and idolises their father too much to be a functional human being/is too busy pouting about their dad at the end of the series to be useful.

Luther Hargreeves is every bit as traumatised as each and every one of his siblings. He shows it very differently, though. Let’s look at it this way: Luther believed in their father until the day the old man died. He was with their father well past the others having left, leading to the incident where he almost died because he was trying to solo a mission that was impossible to solo. The others had years upon years upon years (in at least Five’s case, literal decades) to distance themselves from the trauma of their life and figure out a way to work through it and accept how awful their father was. Vanya wrote a book to get through it. Allison left it behind and didn’t look back. Klaus got into drugs. Diego became a vigilante. They all saw this mess and they left it, but we don’t know what that looked like in the moment, what even finally prompted them to officially give up. I’ve seen some hints that it was Ben’s death, which makes sense for some of it, but on the other hand whether it was Ben’s death that inspired the exodus or not, the fact remains that we don’t know what the other Academy members were like when they first left. Maybe Allison stopped talking to anyone for a while. Maybe Klaus just didn’t come home some time and three months later someone tried to bring him home and Klaus told them to fuck off. We don’t know.

When we see the Academy at the start of the series, it’s the first time any of them have seen each other in ages, and they are all still very screwed up and struggling to recover from their life and are incredibly dysfunctional as humans in general, never mind the undoubtedly complicated feelings they must have been going through about the entire situation of their Dad being dead now. For Luther, he actively still cared about their Dad and hadn’t left. He didn’t have that curtain of time to take the edge off of the loss, and then a week later he found out that it was all for nothing and Reginald Hargreeves was every bit the bastard his siblings had always claimed he was.

This puts Luther at a very, very different point in his progression of grief than the others are at. They’ve had time to adjust to the idea of their father being awful, but for Luther it is a fresh revelation that he absolutely cannot ignore anymore, and unlike the others, he doesn’t even have the option to bring it up to their father and get any kind of answers, because Reginald Hargreeves is dead. His claims that he wasn’t going to lead anymore, his running off to the rave to get high and get distracted, those are all probably similar things that the others went through when they hit that eureka moment about how much of a prick Reginald Hargreeves was. He’s grieving a lot of things, and he has an excuse to not be okay with everything.

Argument #5: Well, that’s Luther’s fault! He was a grown-up when he got sent to the moon. If the others left, so could he!

Here’s the thing: the kind of abuse the Hargreeves children went through has some serious impacts on a kid’s psychology. Speaking from research and experience here, when you have a parent that tells you you’re special, that you’re Number One, that you’re Important, you want to believe them. When it’s a parent like Reggie who shows no emotions and is unfailingly awful to his kids ‘for the greater good’, that only increases. Put yourself in Luther’s shoes for a moment here. His siblings, one by one, had left. He’s the only one his father still has. He’s Number One. He’s been told they’re saving the world. If he doesn’t stay and bear the load, what happens then? Who saves the world if all the heroes have left? He’s supposed to be the leader, and if the ones he’s supposed to be leading have left, well. That just means more effort is needed out of him.

When you want to believe that somebody has your best interest in mind, that they love you, you will make excuses for them. Everybody constantly will tell you that your parents love you and want what’s best for you, and if you truly believe that, you will make excuses for their behaviour, especially in situations like this. That’s why this kind of abuse is so awful: it puts the blame on the victim. Luther truly believed that there was a purpose to everything Reginald did, that making him Number One and pushing them to their limits had a reason, because your parents are supposed to be the ones you can trust and when they tell you something is for your own good as a kid, you adjust your worldview to reflect that perspective. It is hard as hell to break free from that.

The others managed to get out. They managed to see Reginald for what he was, and they left because they knew it wasn’t getting better. Luther couldn’t see that until the very end of the series, and he went down believing that everything their father did was done with the best of intentions because That’s What Leaders Do. They aren’t nice, they make the hard decisions nobody else wants to make. And that’s what Luther took away from everything: that he had to make the hard decisions to keep his family safe.

Argument #6: That doesn’t excuse him locking up Vanya!

No, it doesn’t. Locking up Vanya was a horrible choice. It was cruel, and terrible,  and exactly the sort of thing Reginald would have done. It was also not done to be vindictive or vengeful. It was done because he thought that was what he needed to do to keep the rest of his family safe. Keep in mind, when Luther sees Vanya for the first time, he has just found out she almost killed Allison losing control of her powers. When he chokes her out and locks her up, he is apologising the whole time because he genuinely is sorry. This is not him being vengeful, this is him making hard decisions because he thinks that’s what Number Ones are supposed to do. It is not a good decision, but it’s the only one that comes to mind for him in order to keep people safe when he already has a LOT on his mind (such as: Vanya having powers, Allison almost dying, the rave, the revelation that Reginald was in fact every bit the douchecanoe his siblings always said he was... Not exactly conducive for clear thinking, no?)

Argument #7: But he didn’t let her out when the others gave him other ideas either!

No, he didn’t. No, that wasn’t okay. Yes, that was awful. But again, he didn’t do it because he thought Vanya needed to sit where she was and think about what she’d done. He did it because he thought that this was safer. The others were suggesting they let Vanya out, but nobody made any suggestions on how to keep them all safe afterwards. At the time, Allison could barely move and had almost died. They were all emotionally screwed up. From his perspective, they were all either missing or at low power, and Vanya was freaking out in the cage - you know, kinda like how she was freaking out when she almost killed Allison? That said, I am ABSOLUTELY not blaming Vanya. I would freak the fuck out if I was locked in a cage too, especially if it was done by my brother who I thought I could trust and wanted to believe in. But while this was a fucking stupid and awful and horrible decision to make, I would like to return to my former point: if nobody else agreed with it, why was Allison the only one who even tried to do anything about Vanya being locked up?

Argument #8: But Luther caused the apocalpyse! He made Vanya the White Violin!

No. Like Five said, Vanya is the bomb. Leonard was the fuse. But there were a whole lot of other things that lit the match. If Luther had been the only person Vanya was mad at and the only one responsible for her situation, she would have only killed him. Instead, she wrecked the entire Academy and went for everyone outside of Allison. Let’s look at this in review:

- Allison Rumoured Vanya into thinking she was powerless as a kid. Granted, she has apologised for this and has been trying to be a better sister to Vanya. Hence, Vanya doesn’t intentionally attack her.

- Luther locked up Vanya and told her she was too dangerous to be let out. The only person Vanya actively saw trying to free her was Allison. Nobody else came back.

- Pogo lied to every one of the kids for Reginald Hargreeves. He kept his secrets, he perpetuated his lies. He knew about Vanya’s powers, and Allison’s role in hiding them, and he kept it to himself even when he knew better and didn’t reveal anything until it seemed like ‘a good time’, despite KNOWING how deeply the siblings trusted him over their father.

- Klaus threw away the contents of the box to go pawn it all, meaning that Leonard got hold of the book he used to train Vanya and screw her over.

- Leonard found Vanya, manipulated her, lied to her, and used her to enact his revenge fantasy against the Umbrella Academy and Reginald Hargreeves and all those other ‘Extraordinary People’ who made him feel like he was nothing, leading to Vanya feeling used and betrayed by the first person she has ever thought actually loved her for being herself, ordinary and all.

- Diego missed no opportunity to tell Vanya how little he valued her opinion or her presence, particularly in the first half of the season. At every given chance, he made sure to make jabs about her making a sequel, about how she didn’t get a vote until he decided her vote was useful. He loves her, yes, but he did not ever make her feel any more welcomed than the others did, and he certainly didn’t include her in the rest of their reindeer games as kids, either.

- Five, as stated, knew the apocalypse was coming. Rather than warning his siblings and trying to get them to come together to stop things, he spent the first several days trying to handle everything on his own, leaving a trail of corpses and problems in his wake while he tried to discover the owner of the eye and killed the assassins after him and then got shitfaced drunk when he hit a dead end and didn’t tell anyone what he saw until three days before the fact because he kept trying to handle it on his own and nobody else would understand.

Most importantly, above all others, there is Reginald.

Reginald Hargreeves was an absolute bastard. He abused his kids physically and emotionally. He neglected every one of them. He set them to fight each other, he set them up to go into situations which they were unprepared for, he set them up for ruin because ‘it was for the greater good’ and was never emotionally available to coax them through anything. He screwed over every single one of the kids, he was the mastermind behind Vanya being lied to and put on her medications and having her powers suppressed, he intentionally isolated her and made her feel worthless, he let nobody tell his secrets, and he was never straightforward or understanding or even marginally remorseful about any one thing he ever did in his life. He took seven kids and threw them in a house together and raised them to be extraordinary by his standards at the cost of their sanity and their emotional stability. He told them to be a team, and he made them each other’s enemies. That’s why the series starts with almost none of them being able to talk to each other, no connections between them, and all the other nuances of them being dead, addicted, disgraced, imprisoned, or otherwise isolated. These traumatised kids all grew up to be traumatised adults, and he is the reason.

The only person who is completely innocent of blame in terms of the apocalypse is Ben, because he was too dead to do anything about it. Even then, he did all he could - saving Diego, trying to get Klaus sobered up, fighting the guys at the theatre - but in the end, all of the siblings were too fucked up to work together and be an effective team. They all had a hand in what happened.

Now Luther is not a perfect person. He makes some stupid decisions. He makes some absolutely idiotic, cruel, inexcusable choices. But he is not an irredeemable person. He is in a different stage of his life and grieving journey than the others, and he is still reeling from trying to figure out who he is outside of the identity he was assigned as Number One. That doesn’t excuse his actions, but I’d say it makes them make a lot more sense. The apocalypse happened because Reginald Hargreeves screwed up seven superpowered kids and called it child-rearing, and now those kids are trying to fix the problem by going back to the start and rewriting the story. It didn’t happen just because Luther locked up Vanya and was grieving their dad.

[constablewrites]

Reclaiming Cinderella

The other day, my husband told me about a conversation he had with a woman who claimed not to like Disney’s Cinderella because she’s a feminist. It’s not the first time I’ve heard such an argument, and I never cease to find it to be bullshit. I wish I could have asked the woman when she had last watched the movie, because I’m guessing it hasn’t been since puberty. So many of these knee-jerk dismissals of things like the classic Disney canon are based on vague recollections of movies the person half-watched decades ago, rather than the actual text. (And the actual texts definitely merit a second look as an adult, if only for the frequent what-the-fuckery, like how Jiminy Cricket in Pinocchio is a hobo who hits on every remotely feminine entity in the movie, up to and including wooden carvings and the fish.) There’s this perception that Cinderella is a wholly passive character who just sits around and waits for a prince to rescue her, but that’s just not supported by the film itself.

For starters, Cinderella’s not going to the ball for the prince. When the invitation arrives, her stepsisters are the ones who burble at the idea of seeing the prince, but Cinderella presses for her chance to go because, dammit, she was invited too. She never equates her unspecified wishes and dreams with this invitation or implies that her whole world is riding on it; she simply wants to be treated like an equal, to have a night off and enjoy herself. When it’s all over, she’s thrilled to have been left with the one glass slipper and the memory of a dance with a hottie. The idea that he’s the prince, or that she could have a shot at marrying him, doesn’t even occur to her until the news gets out the next morning. Hell, she didn’t even seek him out at the ball; he’s the one who came over to her, and never managed to introduce himself while they were dancing.

Then there’s the tricky question of agency. This is the image that detractors seem to point to as the essence of the issues with the story: Cinderella weeping while the Fairy Godmother comes out of nowhere to solve all her problems.  

But that’s not quite what’s going on here.  When she appears, FG implies that Cinderella actually summoned her. (“Nonsense, child.  If you’d lost all your faith, I couldn’t be here.”) True, that would indicate a power that Cinderella doesn’t otherwise demonstrate–except when she’s singing. She harmonizes with herself in multiple parts on “Sing, Sweet Nightingale”, and immediately before FG materializes, Cinderella is having a conversation with the background music. Seriously, there’s no other way to explain her dialogue there.  A little later, she duets with the prince on “So This is Love” without either of them opening their mouths. It’s not a direct correlation, but it’s enough unnatural shenanigans to underscore the repeated refrain that believing hard enough (not just possessing a belief, but the action of believing) will make a wish come true.

But that’s still passive, right? She’s not actually doing anything, just bursts into tears and gives up. Well, she did do something about going to the ball: she finished up an inhuman workload and found an outfit, which her menagerie did an extreme makeover on.  She earned her chance and then was fucking assaulted, forced to watch in horror while her dress, a memento of her dead mother and a gift from her only friends, was destroyed. Of course she breaks down. Holy shit, guys, give the girl a minute. All FG is doing is restoring the balance, popping in like Sam Beckett to set right what just went wrong.

Of course, the dress was only presentable in the first place because of the mice and the birds. So let’s talk about them for a second, shall we? After all, the Tom and Jerry bullshit takes up over half the runtime (41 minutes out of 75, I shit you not; it is 23 sodding minutes before Lady Tremaine gets a line), and we meet two of the birds before we even meet Cinderella. The animals, then, drive the bulk of the plot. But this isn’t like Sleeping Beauty, where the supposed protagonists take a back seat to fairy face-offs.  See, while the mice are the main ones we see in action, they never act on their own behalf. Ever. The one time we see them doing something for their own benefit is when they go out seeking food, and who’s the one that provides it? In addition to feeding them, Cinderella clothes them and teaches them to speak (which is something they value, apparently) and protects them from traps and the cat. This has created a cult of personality, where the animals all happily sing to her tune as they perform incredible feats of engineering in her service. Everything they do on-screen serves Cinderella’s interests, from acting as her lady’s maids in the morning to altering her dress to helping her escape her tower. In short, she has a small army of devoted minions at her command, who prove by the end that they’re willing to risk their lives against a sadistic predator if she needs them to. Do we say that the supervillain has no agency because he hangs out on his dark throne until the final battle, letting the underlings get their hands dirty until then?  (Am I calling Cinderella an evil mastermind? Well, she has taken over a kingdom by the end credits. Just saying.)

tl;dr: Cinderella is fighting for equal rights and a fair leave policy, is maybe a little bit psychic, and can bend animals to her will. I’m not claiming that she’s a perfect template for a protagonist, or that there’s not some problematic bullshit at work here. (The love-at-first-sight thing is only part of a ludicrously compressed timeline; the entire story, barring the prologue, takes place in just over 24 hours, including the complete organization of a royal ball.) But this incarnation of the fairy tale gives us a heroine who’s snarky, determined, and industrious at the very least, a woman who unfailingly approaches her situation on her own terms even if she’s not exactly fighting to change it. She might not be a feminist icon, but she’s absolutely nothing to be ashamed of.

[of-suns-and-guns]

What's wrong with oneshit? Did I miss something?

I’m answering this fully conscious of the fact that this ask may very well have come from either her, or someone she’s asked to do this for her. Which, if any of you have ever sent me an ask I never answered, 75% of the time it’s because I’m all too aware this is something she does, and I’m sorry for any genuine askers I’ve ignored because of it.

That being said, no, you haven’t missed anything. I’ve never spoken publicly about it (nor has anyone else she might’ve tried to do this to, of whom I know of at least one person in this fandom, and two others before me from other fandoms).

Even in private I’ve only alluded the actual extent of it to one person, and even further still, there were details I couldn’t make myself say, and won’t say now because re-counting them makes it feel like it’s still happening and I’ve spent too much time getting violently sick in my recovery of it.

But maybe part of that recovery comes with no longer being afraid to warn people of what to look out for when it comes to her and others like her.

Content warning for sexual abuse below the cut:

This might sound like a stupid place to start, but nothing about what happened was stupid or so benign as this intro might lend you to believe, so I’m asking you to just go with it, for a second, please.

I write angst, drama, and romance. Clearly. Unabashedly. It’s what I’m here for, and it’s what I love to do. I’ve also always been upfront about my disinterest in writing smut. There’s nothing wrong with it, it just doesn’t hold my interest, so even smutty prompts will turn dramatic and romantic in my hands.

And literally can’t count the number of times I said that to her.

She read something into one of my first ficlets that I didn’t put there, and because it came up in the very beginning of our relationship before we’d established a stronger report, I didn’t argue further than to just tell her, when read in context, this[1] was meant to describe the way Alex feeds her own self-deprecation, NOT because it’s actually a sincere reading of what happened between them.

I told her so many times that smut was difficult and uninteresting to me to write, that I wanted to write drama and romance, and I was remiss for ever thinking she cared about that, because she wanted me to write smut for her, and getting what she wants is literally all she cares about.

And after a time, I did write smut for/with her because, while it’s not something I have ever sought to do on my own, I am physically capable of it and I’m a good enough writer that I do write it well, so I didn’t see the harm in making the concession for someone who, at that point, I considered a really good friend, with every chance of becoming a best friend, especially at a time in my life I didn’t have many of those, and had NO fandom friends to speak of.

So I did it on the basis that it wasn’t something I would do often, and it still didn’t hold my interest the way it held hers, making it clear throughout that I would always prefer to write within my own genres.

I had no clue at the time that, in my concession, I was giving her the tools she needed to create an environment in which she’d tell me to perform to her liking, and very quickly established the punishments I’d face for saying no.

Those punishments included:

pushing the issue, asking again and again, until the easiest option was just to give in so the issue would just finally go away

pretending to make concessions herself by asking instead for only part of the original whole, regardless of why I didn’t want to do ANY part of it

treating me with cold antagonism if I stuck to my original no, making interactions one-sided and uncomfortable

guilt-trip or punish me (in all the listed ways) if I didn’t react to her or her writing (also all smut, do not let the genre of her public works make you doubt that) in the way SHE qualified as the correct way to respond (which was almost always an expectation to enthusiastically jump into continuing the [smutty] prompt with her)

making it very clear that she only kept people around if they served her purpose, likening friendship to a quantifiable transaction, that if she wrote something for me (which was almost always smut, by the way, in case you were wondering if she wrote my preferred genres for me), I was expected to write something for her that she deemed appropriately proportional

going so far as to actually stop talking to me for two or three months at a time when I really pissed her off, left stuck with the knowledge that if I’d just done what she wanted, or if I hadn’t opened my mouth and called her out for her shitty behavior, then I wouldn’t have lost my friend

if I showed her any of my writing that DIDN’T include smut, she eventually stopped feigning interest in it, and would instead: not actually react, outwardly belittled it, belittled me, make me feel stupid and dramatic for writing what I love to write, like my writing wasn’t actually good or enjoyable without smut being included, or she’d take some core part of my plot and MAKE it vulgar in an attempt to spin the whole thing into a way to force me to write smut with her

Again, I know this sounds like a relatively benign place to describe what happened and doesn’t do much to claim she was anything other than a shitty friend, but I need to make clear how she works and the choices I faced, the choices SHE gave me between saying no to her, and just giving in.

Because it wasn’t just writing smut for her, and everything fatally wrong about even that part of our relationship got exponentially more so when the relationship became sexual between us.

No wasn’t a suitable answer for her. Hard-line, “No, I don’t want to,” means, “Convince me in whatever way you can,” in her opinion. If I didn’t have a reason SHE deemed good enough to not be able to do what she wanted, then she expected me to get over it and just comply, and she’d push and push and push because, to her, no means I just haven’t said yes yet, and she had no qualms about using those same punishments against me when that yes never came.

And those choices change the way you think until it’s, “I don’t want to do this, but I don’t want to even tell her that because things have been good and I don’t want to make her mad,” and “If I just do it, she’ll let it go and leave me alone,” and “Is sticking to my first no really worth the fight? Is a little discomfort worth losing her?”

She cornered me into a lot of vulnerable positions, and I am utterly terrified of her using those things to retaliate against me for talking about this now, because last time I even vaguely alluded to her, she sent me a message making it very clear she not only read it, but was defensive and angry at me for doing so.

I adore this fandom, I love being here, and I’m terrified of people hating me for the things she’d say.

But I’m saying it now, because I’m tired of being scared. And I’m tired getting sick to my stomach every time I see her writing being held up to any kind of esteem, and I hate that it took someone else noticing my reactions to sex and intimacy were that of someone who’d been sexually abused for me to actually face the extent of what she did to me.

And most of all, I hate that she might be following this blog. That she might be reading this, or having people send me messages, or being anywhere in my fandom space at all, and I will not let that vile, disgusting, predatory, miserable excuse for a human being scare me out of my fandom.

It took time, distance, and a few unimaginably awesome friends to stop excusing every vile thing she did, and certainly played a major role in keeping me from folding to her the last time she tried to twist me back into it.

I’m still not quite at okay though. I still can’t stomach sexual attention, not even from my partner[2], and there are still a lot of days I can’t even stand skin-to-skin contact. But I’m strong enough to do this. To talk about it now. Still terrified, but my friends know most of this already, and I know I’m not going to lose them.

And not gonna lie, a huge part of my ability to do this comes down to the fact that you guys have always been so unfailingly supportive. I wouldn’t feel safe enough to do this if you weren’t so great, and while the fear’s still there, I do take comfort in what you’ve shown me thus far.

[1] “You’re her little sister, and you turn her on, make her wet, make her want. You’re her little sister, and she loves seeing your blue eyes staring up at her from between her legs. You’re her little sister, and she loves watching you come for her, knows what every inch of your body tastes like, and she can list every vulgar thing that drives you completely wild.”

[2] Yes, my partner knows the full extent of this. They were actually the one who broached the subject of my reactions being that of a sexual abuse survivor. We’re also in a poly relationship, just by the by.

[multipleservicelisting]

Trump Impeached for Inciting Insurrection

WASHINGTON — Donald J. Trump on Wednesday became the first American president to be impeached twice, as 10 members of his party joined with Democrats in the House to charge him with “incitement of insurrection” for his role in egging on a violent mob that stormed the Capitol last week.

Reconvening in a building now heavily militarized against threats from pro-Trump activists and adorned with bunting for the inauguration of President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr., lawmakers voted 232 to 197 to approve a single impeachment article. It accused Mr. Trump of “inciting violence against the government of the United States” in his quest to overturn the election results, and called for him to be removed and disqualified from ever holding public office again.

The vote left another indelible stain on Mr. Trump’s presidency just a week before he is slated to leave office and laid bare the cracks running through the Republican Party. More members of his party voted to charge the president than in any other impeachment.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, declaring the past week one of the darkest chapters in American history, implored colleagues to embrace “a constitutional remedy that will ensure that the republic will be safe from this man who is so resolutely determined to tear down the things that we hold dear and that hold us together.”

A little more than a year after she led a painstaking, three-month process to impeach Mr. Trump the first time for a pressure campaign on Ukraine to incriminate Mr. Biden — a case rejected by the president’s unfailingly loyal Republican supporters — Ms. Pelosi had moved this time with little fanfare to do the same job in only seven days.

“He must go. He is a clear and present danger to the nation that we all love,” the speaker said, adding later, “It gives me no pleasure to say this — it breaks my heart.”

The top House Republican, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, conceded in a pained speech on the floor that Mr. Trump had been to blame for the assault at the Capitol. It had forced the vice president and lawmakers who had gathered to formalize Mr. Biden’s victory to flee for their lives in a deadly rampage.

“The president bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack on Congress by mob rioters,” said Mr. McCarthy, one of the 138 Republicans who returned to the House floor after the mayhem and voted to reject certified electoral votes for Mr. Biden. “He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding.”

Outside the House chamber, a surreal tableau offered reminders of the rampage that gave rise to the impeachment, as thousands of armed members of the National Guard in camouflage fatigues surrounded the complex and snaked through its halls, stacking their helmets, backpacks and weapons wherever they went. Their presence gave the proceedings a wartime feel, and evoked images of the 1860s, when the Union Army had quartered in the building.

The House’s action set the stage for the second Senate trial of the president in a year. The precise timing of that proceeding remained in doubt, though, as senators appeared unlikely to convene to sit in judgment before Jan. 20, when Mr. Biden will take the oath of office and Mr. Trump will become a former president.

The last proceeding was a partisan affair. But this time, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, was said to support the effort as a means of purging his party of Mr. Trump, setting up a political and constitutional showdown that could shape the course of American politics.

If a Senate trial resulted in Mr. Trump’s conviction, it held out the prospect, tantalizing for Democrats and many Republicans alike, of barring Mr. Trump from holding office again in the future.

In a measured statement after the vote, Mr. Biden called for the nation to come together after an “unprecedented assault on our democracy.” He was staring down the likelihood that the trial would complicate his first days in office, and said he hoped Senate leadership would “find a way to deal with their constitutional responsibilities on impeachment while also working on the other urgent business of this nation.” That work included cabinet nominations and confronting the coronavirus crisis.

In the House, Democrats and Republicans who supported his ouster made no attempt to hide their fury at Mr. Trump, who was said to have enjoyed watching the attack play out on television as lawmakers pleaded for help. Republicans harangued members of their own party for supporting his mendacious campaign to cling to claim election victory.

Returning to the same chamber where many of them donned gas masks and hid under chairs amid gunfire one week ago, as rioters carrying zip ties and chanting “hang Pence” and “where’s Nancy” overtook the police, lawmakers issued stinging indictments of the president and his party.

“They may have been hunting for Pence and Pelosi to stage their coup,” said Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the lead impeachment prosecutor, “but every one of us in this room right now could have died.”

At least five people did die during the attack, including an officer and a member of the mob who was shot just outside the chamber door.

Lawmakers, on edge about the state of the country, said the threat from Mr. Trump had not subsided.

“He is capable of starting a civil war,” Representative Maxine Waters of California, a veteran liberal, said.

Updated 

Jan. 13, 2021, 6:50 p.m. ET

After four years of nearly unquestioning alliance with him, few Republicans defended Mr. Trump’s actions outright. Those who did resorted to a familiar set of false equivalencies, pointing to racial justice protests last summer that turned violent, and accusations that Democrats had mistreated the president and were trying to stifle the 74 million Americans who voted for him.

“It’s always been about getting the president, no matter what,” Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, shot across the room at Democrats. “It’s an obsession, an obsession that has now broadened. It’s not just about impeachment anymore, it’s about canceling, as I’ve said. Canceling the president and anyone that disagrees with them.”

Overhanging the proceedings was the deadly coronavirus pandemic, which is killing 3,000 Americans a day. A handful of lawmakers were infected, as well, after the chaotic evacuation of the Capitol, as many Republican lawmakers refused to wear masks in the secure rooms where they huddled for safety. Fearful of exposing colleagues or of putting themselves at risk to the dual health and security threats, dozens of lawmakers cast their votes remotely by proxy.

Far from contrite, Mr. Trump insisted in the run-up to the vote that his words to loyalists swarming Washington last week had been appropriate. In the days since, he has repeated bogus lies that the election was stolen from him. He denounced impeachment as part of the yearslong “witch hunt” against him, but had taken no apparent steps to put together a legal team to defend him when he stands trial.

Not long after the vote, Mr. Trump released a video condemning the violence and urging his followers to avoid a repeat in “the coming days both here in Washington and across the country” as federal authorities warned of a nationwide wave of violence surrounding Mr. Biden’s inauguration. But he did not mention his own role in instigating the violence or apologize, nor did he concede or mention Mr. Biden’s name.

The president recorded the video under pressure from aides, who have warned him that he faces potential legal exposure for the riot, which took place after a speech in which he urged supporters to “fight” the results of the election.

It also came after Mr. McConnell had released a note to Republican senators in which he did not deny that he backed the impeachment push. The leader said that he had “not made a final decision on how I will vote, and I intend to listen to the legal arguments when they are presented to the Senate.”

He also issued a separate statement in which he rejected a plea by Democrats to agree to begin the proceeding immediately. After the House vote, Mr. McConnell said there was “simply no chance that a fair or serious trial could conclude” before the inauguration.

“I believe it will best serve our nation if Congress and the executive branch spend the next seven days completely focused on facilitating a safe inauguration and an orderly transfer of power to the incoming Biden administration,” said the Senate Republican leader.

The statement did not mention the merits of the case, but privately, Mr. McConnell was seething at Mr. Trump, whom he has sworn he will not speak to again, and is said to believe he committed impeachable offenses. It would most likely take 17 Republicans joining Democrats to convict Mr. Trump, an exceedingly high bar.

Mr. McConnell’s anger was shared by some Republicans in the House, most prominently Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the chairwoman of the House Republican Conference and scion of a storied political family.

The other Republicans who voted to impeach Mr. Trump were Representatives Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington, John Katko of New York, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Fred Upton of Michigan, Dan Newhouse of Washington, Peter Meijer of Michigan, Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio, David Valadao of California and Tom Rice of South Carolina. Together, they issued some of the sharpest condemnations of Mr. Trump, defying the prevailing view of their party.

“I’m not afraid of losing my job, but I am afraid that my country will fail,” Ms. Herrera Beutler said. “I’m afraid patriots to this country have died in vain. I’m afraid my children won’t grow up in a free country. I’m afraid injustice will prevail.”

Mr. Rice, who represents a safely Republican seat, said that he had “backed this president through thick and thin for four years.”

He added: “I campaigned for him and voted for him twice. But, this utter failure is inexcusable.”

A dozen or so other Republicans indicated they might have supported impeachment if Mr. Trump were not on the brink of leaving office or Democrats’ had slowed the process down.

Mr. McCarthy, who had privately mused about calling on Mr. Trump to resign after years of eagerly defending him, spoke out against a “snap impeachment,” warning that it would “further fan the flames of partisan division.” But he also batted down false suggestions from some of his colleagues that Antifa had actually been responsible for the siege, not supporters of Mr. Trump. He proposed censuring the president instead of impeaching him.

But there were strong signs of support for Mr. Trump as well, despite the fact that he has now lost his party the House, the Senate and the White House in the course of two years. Far-right Republicans immediately started a campaign to oust Ms. Cheney from her leadership post, which she said she would not relinquish.

While Ms. Cheney had released a statement on Tuesday announcing her intention to impeach Mr. Trump and denouncing him in scathing terms, she chose not to speak during the impeachment debate. Democrat after Democrat quoted her anyway — despite the party’s longstanding antipathy for Ms. Cheney and her father, Dick Cheney, the former vice president — effectively arguing that her backing signified a broad consensus that Mr. Trump must go.

“As Liz Cheney was saying, there has never been a greater betrayal by a president of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution. Don’t dismiss that,” said Representative Steny H. Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland and the majority leader. “As she has taken a stand, I hope others will as well.”

The vote came a little more than a year after the House impeached Mr. Trump for attempting to use the levers of power to pressure the leader of Ukraine into smearing Mr. Biden, then his leading rival for the looming 2020 election. Republicans unanimously opposed the charges then, but the themes at the center of the impeachment and subsequent trial were ultimately the same on debate Wednesday: Mr. Trump’s willingness to put himself above the nation he swore an oath to lead and abuse his power in pursuit of retaining it.

The House’s case was narrow, laid out in a four-page impeachment article that charged the president “threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of government.”

Specifically, it said he sowed false claims about election fraud, pressured Georgia election officials to “find” him enough votes to overturn the results and then encouraged a crowd of his most loyal supporters to gather in Washington and confront Congress.

The article referred to the 14th Amendment, passed after the Civil War, which prohibits any officeholder involved in “insurrection or rebellion” from holding official office. It also quoted Mr. Trump’s own words at the rally a week ago, when he told supporters, “if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

This time, there were no witness interviews, no hearings, no committee debates, and no real additional fact finding beyond the public record and the plain facts of the brutal attack and Mr. Trump’ words.

Emily Cochrane and Luke Broadwater contributed reporting from Washington, and Maggie Haberman from New York.

from Multiple Service Listing https://ift.tt/2XAWr7N

[nookishposts]

Making Miracles

Our family got an early Christmas gift this year upon the successful completion and subsequent straightforward healing of a cancer surgery for my Mum. Leftovers from a radical mastectomy 11 years ago grew big enough to wrap themselves around a nerve and cause pain, otherwise they could have gone on growing in both size and threat for years. It was a lucky find, even though it was, y’know, still cancer. I am happy to report that after an initial delay, things went along, the surgeon found more disease than expected, but got it all. A week into healing Mum has no pain and 13 syringes of fluid later, no swelling. We are all very grateful.

Now, here’s the thing; a person’s health is a private matter unless they decide otherwise. but over the years I have seen first-hand how much the sharing of fears and challenging circumstances can in fact affect outcome. You can pooh-pooh the idea all you like, but you can’t tell me that getting repeated messages of support sometimes from people you don’t even know won’t have an effect.

I tell stories on Facebook all the time. It amuses me and I hope, others. I’m not bothered by being blocked or un-friended, there are things I don’t want to read either. We are grown-ups and we have choices and few of them are that personal. Choosing to share someone’s trials can often bring about an interesting sense of community creation; anything from volunteering to provide transport, to making soup, or sending a silly card. People like to be needed, they like to do good stuff, and they like to help out when they can. They also like to be asked. Look at the success of some of the GoFundMe and Kickstarter campaigns. Check the statistics in regard to volunteering; the number one reason people do it is because somebody asked them for help.

My Mum is a private woman, but in her later years has come to appreciate the fact that not everything has a price and not everybody has an agenda. Some folks are just plain kind, even anonymously. She has gotten much more relaxed about telling her own story; “Yes, I have had cancer, and yes I am doing well, thank you.” When it came back to her after 11 years, cancer brought back some pretty big emotions of radical surgery, and remembrance of the chemo that nearly killed her enroute to saving her life. I knew when she asked to speak to me privately what I was about to hear. As the eldest daughter, I am the big mouth who asks the hard questions, the advocate who is unfailingly polite but also relentless, the translator and researcher of medical terminology, the note-taker when emotion overrides the ability to take in details. The decisions are always hers, I just do the footwork on her behalf and at her direction.

So, believing as I do in the power of people united in common cause, I let a lot of folks know what was about to happen prior to Mum’s surgery and asked that they keep her in mind. She was stunned at the sheer number of good wishes on Facebook, the offers of prayers and good vibes, pink bubbles and white light and beams of healing. I reminded her that most of us have had vulnerable parents, that cancer frightens and pisses off everybody, that there are all kinds of “me toos” around when it comes to the subject. Any surgery is scary, especially when parts of our generally wonderful healthcare systems are getting stripped to the bone and our professionals are stretched thin. I don’t care if you do a dance under the full moon or call with a joke, it all matters. We get each other through stuff, taking turns, doing what we can and learning that it’s okay to not always keep a stiff upper lip when the monsters crawl out from under the bed. Everybody needs a cuddle, even if that makes things worse before they can get better.

This experience brought out a really neat story. My friend Sandy sent me a message two days after Mum came home, and I have her permission to reproduce it here. Bear in mind she has never met my Mother.

“Just have to tell you that I had an epic dream last night. It was very detailed and involved attending your Mother’s wedding. She was apparently well enough to get married a few days after her surgery to someone she adored (but whom I didn’t meet in the dream). It was attended by me and about 200 other women. We started off having a delicious chicken pot pie before we all started to freshen up and get dressed for the ceremony which was in a large room in a very nice hotel. There were so many light-hearted moments that I resisted awakening this morning. You and Trish were extremely busy finalizing all the details since it was so soon after your Mom’s miraculous recovery. Really not sure of all the symbolism here, but have seldom had a better time in my life. I guess she really is intent on getting on with living. It was such an incredibly delightful and joyful experience that I just had to share it. Overall it was about celebrating life and about the camaraderie of women having a wonderful time, sharing hilarious humor and absolute joy about your Mom’s renewed health and zest for life and love. OH, I just remembered a tidbit...As I was waking, the pre-wedding activity was taking place on the lawn outside the hotel. You and Trish were beginning to decorate an antique car for your Mom to ride in after the ceremony. It was a balmy spring/early summer day...what a blissful dream it was!”

I know, eh?

What’s funny is that prior to announcing the return of her cancer my Mum had said to both my sister and I (separately) “I have something to tell you. What would you think if I got married again?” as a silly joke.( She has never dated since our father’s death 20 years ago and has no interest in doing so.)

Make with Sandy’s Dream whatever you will, but here are some facts: As I age, the community around me becomes sometimes the scaffold for whatever I am building; a career move, a new understanding, hearing other’s stories, knowing who is adept at what when it comes to experiential advice, etc. We have grown strong in our very living, in what we have seen, and even in the mistakes we have made. I’ve let go of a couple of friendships that changed in ways not conducive to the path/changes I needed to make, and that was painful learning. I think I’ve gotten better at telling friends how much they matter, sometimes with deeds rather than words, I have hard-won a better appreciation for not needing to “fix” things as much as simply showing up, bearing witness, walking beside someone else figuring out their own stuff in their own way. How comforting is it to share a silent look across a room and understand the unspoken? How heart-swelling it is to have your own battle-scarred, skin-thickened, don’t-care-what-the-world-thinks cheerleaders. My Mum could hear the distant roar of her own little crowd, urging her over the finish line and ready to scoop her back on to her feet should she falter in the race. They would have carried her had she needed them to. There were friends and there were strangers. Some of the people involved performed very deliberate and elaborate rituals, others just took the length of a breath to wish her well in their heads. There were texts and emails and phone calls and everybody claimed my Mum as their own until they got the word she was safe. It all mattered. (As did the excellent surgeon who did the precision work with skill and care, whose hands may also have been especially supported that day).

We can do big things my friends. We get each other through the swampy slippery muck and back on solid ground. We tell one another stories in the dark and sing away the shadows. We build ladders and plant gardens when no one is looking. We are more important to one another and more effective than we can ever explain. Instinct and determination are a very powerful mix.. Christmas may be the season of giving, but it happens all year long, every minute of every day in ways you cannot imagine. So, start to imagine! You have proven what we can do with a little focus, knowing we have no tangible control, but having a little faith in trying anyway. I know you get this, because you’ve told me.

Light the candle, make the phone call, hold a hand, shed a tear, say a prayer, rage at the machine, dare to be human, know that you are never truly alone, and we may yet meet, even in our dreams. There is absolutely nothing to lose and everything to give. No cost, no refunds, no fancy wrapping, just the already beautifully-packaged, perpetual gift of who you are. Mum says Thank you.

[aboutelan-blog]

6/5/17 8:54 p.m.

I just finished my 2-mile walk during which time I listened to church. No new messages have been uploaded yet for Oasis, so I backtracked and found an older message. The message I listened to was titled “Stronger in Marriage and Relationships” by Dr. Jim Burns.

I figured in the midst of learning how to be in a loving relationship with myself, what else could I learn that will help me with my future spouse?

A lot of the message was scary, simply because I haven’t connected with that part of me. In truth, it was everything I needed however. In my past posts I mentioned how I wanted to work on being more intimate or connected. This message covers that. It also addresses pornography, sometime I always wondered about. And then it used my favorite word, “honor.”

I always remind myself to honor my job, but this was about honoring the person you’re in a relationship with. Since I’m currently in a relationship with myself, that means I have to learn to honor me. I also have a relationship with Jehovah, so I have to learn to honor Him.

*****Bring honor by working on my stuff, not focusing on my partner’s stuff. What am I bringing to the table?

Be ruthlessly honest about my own brokenness...repair the past.*******

For this lesson, I imagined Zach, since he’s still fresh in my mind, and he’s the closest thing at the moment that my imagination can grasp on to.

*****This whole thing with Zach, it’s like you took my heart. It’s OK, I’m growing another heart.*****

If I love him, I must honor him and his new relationship. If we are in a relationship, I would honor him and would honor me. That looks like dealing with emotional baggage, like past traumas or addictions before bring them into the relationship.

It also means sometimes I will be serving the other person in the relationship.

We’re all human and sometimes we need someone to lean on while we actively/proactively work on healing. This also means the other person will sometimes serve me while I’m growing or facing challenges. It won’t always be one person constantly serving the other.

We each give 50 in a 50:50 split, though sometimes, one person will give 80. The point is we both are the person that gives 80 when the person needs it.

Sexual integrity is also key. This means several things:

1)    No emotional affairs – or fantasies about someone else. Meaning no “I’m going to wear this for this person.” This is important, because I do this with men I shouldn’t. Including a man at work who’s married. Sometimes I have to stop myself from choosing an outfit just to wear for him. I’ve been really good at this this past month. I’ve never known the name for this until the sermon: it’s called having an emotional affair.

2)    No porn – Porn isn’t reality and can easily become addictive while setting false intimacy expectations. Intimacy of course is connectivity. Falling into a trap is easy by attributing value to something that’s worthless. This is the case with porn. We’re placing value on something that isn’t real and bringing it into our reality where it tampers with how we decipher real intimacy and connection. It creates a false sense of intimacy.

When you view pornography, your mind takes a picture. Mine is an image of a woman being abused in a pool room by several men and she has a paper bag on her head that someone writes whore on.

After viewing a certain image, you may start to act it on in your mind, then you want to act it out in your relationships. But then you realize, it wasn’t as good as the fantasy, creating a false sense of intimacy.

••••Am I a servant lover, or a selfish lover? We should mutually submit to one another.*****

****Give forgiveness and receive forgiveness.********

How do I become the right person for me? How do I become the right person for Jehovah?

3) Set healthy boundaries and respect the other person’s boundaries. Don't’ let people walk all over me. This point ties back to emotional affairs and watching pornography.

-----

I am unhealthily attached to Zach. I think about him every day. I write about him every day. For my birthday, I only wanted to stay at the Cosmopolitan in Vegas because Zach suggested that’s where we stay last November. It was my way of holding on to him.

This attachment is relentless and hard to shake. He’s moved on and here I am stuck. Why do I feel so attached? I’m not sure.

At first I thought it was because I “lost him,” which triggered the same volatile reaction of me losing my father. Then I thought it could be something with me wanting to be in control. Once again, I grew up in a traumatic, abusive environment, one where I did not feel like I was in control. Now I try to control everything, including my environment.

I’m not ready to let Zach go yet, but in this universe, surrendering is key.

If I’m lucky, we’ll cross paths again. If that doesn’t happen, I’ve unlocked a whole world of pain that I’m now wading through to heal, which is also pretty lucky.

I’m also working on forgiveness; maybe I’m obsessed (I hate that word; it makes me feel dangerous) because I haven’t fully forgiven my father yet.

I’m not quite sure what the connection is, but if I had to guess, it would be holding on to past hurts, expecting them to change.

I’m holding onto Zach, expecting him to change and ultimately choose me. I’m holding on to the idea of having a perfect, loving father, knowing that my dad is in a critical state of self-loathing, self-hatred, and self-harm.

He’s dying a little every day, and I can’t save him.

Both of these men I hold onto unfailingly expecting something to change, but it won’t. In fact, I direct so much energy into trying to the universe to give me Zach, by saying I’ll “surrender” him, when really I won’t.

The universe knows my intentions. Jehovah also just whispered I’ll know when to let go.

My faith keeps me going through all of the pain.

Zach has found someone else. He may never return, despite all the healing I do. 

I have to redirect my energy somewhere else, mainly toward me becoming healthy and not relying on one single guy to take the place of my dad.

That’s a lot of weight for one dude, and I have to deal with my own issues of abandonment instead of roping someone else into this like Zach.

I want to be healthy and understand that my dad is not coming back. He’s gone. There’s nothing left for me to fight for or hold on to.

He loved me with his whole heart, as best he could, probably more than he loved himself.

I love my dad and that love is unwavering.

At the same time, Zach is not part of this narrative.

Right now, my mind is playing the message back: “Surrender Zach, so the universe will bring him back to you.” That’s A) Not true surrender; B) Zach was never mine to claim; C) I wouldn’t be surrendering Zach to get healthy. But only to continue my obsession with him. This last point is the most important.

My mind is stuck on a loop and I’m trying to recover after every rotation. It’s frustrating and infuriating, and I wish there were some way to make this easier. I’m not going to give up on myself yet, though.

Today, I realized I always fantasized about being the hero, because there’s value in that. People recognize your value and your worth when you're the hero. Maybe that's why I over give or I'm over generous, because I want to be the hero, the person that other people value, because I have that hole in my heart.

How do I keep going Jehovah? How do I stay on this path, your path? What are the steps I need to take to let go of Zach? Am I becoming a perfectionist? What am I trying to hide from you, or better yet me? How can I save my soul? If I let go of Zach, who will I turn to? You? Only you can fill the void in my heart left by my father. That's not a job for a man, but a job for God.

I have to stop looking for love and flesh. I'll never be satisfied. As always Jehovah, I pray for your forgiveness, your patience, and your grace. I also need continued mental Clarity. We watching that video on relationships  and marriage was all about Zach (Satan stepping in) and not about myself.

He kept playing in the back of my head. It's like an addiction, or simply something I want more of. I want more of that feeling that he provided, that validation. I could be loved. Your love, Jehovah is unwavering and never ceasing. My mind doesn't give much value to this because I don't have to fight for it or earn it.

-----

Side note: #QOTD: Am I going through this healing process for me or am I doing this for Zach? What's my true intention? Only then can I uncover the true me.

-----

With Zach however, it feels like a fight to my mind, and I'm so used to fighting for everything I have, but I don't want to let this go.

But the real fight is in loving myself and healing the relationship I have with you Jehovah. It's taking a discipline I didn't have before and an inner strength to keep going. I have to keep fighting for what's real and what's here now. That's me, that's you, that's mom. Dad isn't here. Zach isn’t it here. This is for me…. and those who stick around and love me.

Final Thoughts Before Bed  –

My heart wants validation from a male that is emotionally unavailable. My dad is the ultimate prize. This Conquest however comes at a price and in the end there is no true reward in it for me. It's the ultimate price of look at me, love me, I am worthy. This is the recognition I didn't get from my father, and me so desperately trying to prove my father wrong. A game of “I told you so….see I knew someone could love me. You were wrong.

The truth is someone does love me, and that person is me. This is a love that not even my dad has, and this is the love that will get me through.

This is the love that’s telling me right now, “I am better than Zach. I am better than the emotionally unavailable guys I’m choosing. Now go out into the world and conquer.”

[booksbroadwaybbc]

A Letter to Young Adults and People-Pleasers via /r/selfimprovement

A Letter to Young Adults and People-Pleasers

“People will do anything, no matter how absurd, in order to avoid facing their own soul. One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious.” - Carl Gustav Jung

❀

It was a quiet, unsuspecting Friday night. I was scrolling through blog poetry blog posts munching on a chicken sandwich from a fast food place. 

As whenever I am immersed in good writing, I was in a pensive mood. But when I encountered a piece of prose written by E.E. Cummings, my sandwich was soon dotted with tears.

As a highly sensitive person, my emotions never reside too far from the surface of my demeanor. It only took a few sentences of candid prose to open the gateway to tears and reminiscence, but these words also happened to address one of the biggest inner challenges that colored my life as a young person:

​

“A poet is somebody who feels, and who expresses his feelings through words.

This may sound easy. It isn’t.

A lot of people think or believe or know they feel — but that’s thinking or believing or knowing; not feeling. And poetry is feeling — not knowing or believing or thinking.

Almost anybody can learn to think or believe or know, but not a single human being can be taught to feel. Why? Because whenever you think or you believe or you know, you’re a lot of other people: but the moment you feel, you’re nobody-but-yourself.

To be nobody-but-yourself — in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else — means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting.”

​

I was transported back to a college classroom with new-smelling black plastic swivel chairs, and a tall portly man with kind eyes sitting in front of me. Every lecture with Professor M was a revelation on consciousness, jazz, and the socioeconomic implications of artificial intelligence, but that wasn’t the only reason why I loved him as a professor.

He puts down my first assignment and looks at me. “Why, you’re an artist.”

To my surprise, I choked up. I didn’t know why I was fighting back tears. Perhaps it was because I remembered sitting in the backseat of the car as my mother told me that she decided to end my art lessons so that I could focus harder on my studies. Perhaps it was because my Asian immigrant family taught me to believe that adopting a profession other than that of a lawyer, doctor, or engineer was a disgrace to the family and all their sacrifices. Maybe it was because I had been trying so hard. 

However, I think it was because a near-stranger could see so clearly what I had always been.

I am someone who feels, but I had tried everything to be anything else.

It has been five years since that encounter, and it is with great happiness that I announce not changes in my life, but rather growth. Change is an immutable current, the pulse of time. Growth, however, only occurs when one takes life by its horns. Growth is intention fleshed out by action.

Change happens with or without your say. Growth is having the courage to accept this with grace and move forward.

​

Here is a letter I wrote for those who feel and for those who forgot how to. I hope you are able to accept yourself with grace:

​

I want to address young adults ages fourteen to twenty-nine, as well as all young adults older, because you are at a time when the world is opening up for your exploration. You can choose to learn about anything, to become, to try, to fail, and to develop resilience rooted in self-worth--something neither your parents nor your money could ever buy.

However, unlike your parents, you have the infinite utility of the internet to guide you. Time, on the contrary, is limited, but you have more now than you will ever have. And don’t worry about rushing art, both your life and your creations. The best things in this world are done with mindful effort--not in rushed breathlessness but rather daily action.

You are also at a time when everyone is trying to claim a stake in who you are, if they haven’t already stuck their flags in a few plots. I want to warn you of the danger that is letting too many people stake a claim.

Sometimes a temporary hold is beneficial: you’re obtaining wisdom from a beloved mentor, are inspired by a particular art piece or artist, or you’re modeling your business or path after another’s success. You embrace these holds of your own volition, and they slip away as you grow so that you can move onto things that better suit the newer you. They never try to change you; they only stay until they are no longer of use.

Perhaps a handful remain for your entire life because they are that wonderful.

Remember--the best things never detract from who you are, but merely guide you to realizing your wholeness.

You know they’re the best ones when they grow more beautiful with age. For most people wisdom, compassion, and their calling are such claims.

However, not all claims are beneficial or benign. Others, disguised as Love, will attempt to stake their claims in you when prompted by their ego, a faithful servant of Fear and Lack.

Instead of trusting you, which is an unexpectedly difficult thing to do (especially for adults), they control you in an attempt to feel whole. It is not a fault, inability, or incompleteness on your part.

When someone does not recognize their own wholeness, they will try to fill the perceived emptiness with pieces from other people or other things. And that only leads to destruction.

The world is filled with people who have forgotten their wholeness, who have allowed too many people to stick poles in them. Then, one sullen day, they realize that they are only left with a small piece of themselves, while the flags of others are waving in the wind as far as their eye can see.

If you find that you are one of those people, it is not too late. You have time and strength, but what’s most important is the desire to reclaim who you are. 

Fortunately, the moment you refuse to let others take claim on your soul, the flags stop being planted. After that, it is merely a process of unearthing them, and refilling the holes with fresh soil. After some time, the land heals, and you can begin planting whatever species of flower or tree your heart desires. 

Poets, artists, philosophers, feelers and creators--they are the ones who notice the flags. They know how to build high fences to prevent stake-claimers from trampling on their saplings, but also know the importance of opening their garden to others. When people come to admire the rows of sunset-hydrangeas dotted with dew, the protective oaks, the carefully-trimmed rose bushes, they are reminded of how colorful and precious their own wholeness is.

Seeing your garden may prompt others to weed, the daily ritual of plucking out the life-sappers of modern living. Much like illusory happiness, weeds, through methods mysterious but nonetheless potent, unfailingly snake their way into your plot and pop up beside your plants. Some donn well-made disguises like flowers to try and fool you, and in their infancy you often cannot discern weed babies from your spinach sproutlings. However, turn your back on them for a day, and they will outgrow everything.

Some people think that by locking up their garden they are protecting themselves from nasty stake-claimers, but what they are really doing is refusing their garden the nectar that butterflies and bees faithfully deliver. Many people think that putting a lock on the gate is a sign of strength, but that is often times the greatest sign of a garden in neglect.

It is true that we are the only ones who live in our gardens. Friends, family, and lovers visit to brunch and chat, but return to their respective homes by golden hour.

However, my friend, this does not mean you are left alone--every blossom and perennial were planted by you for you. Breeze and blithe birdsong greets you unfailingly at dawn, and even storms are merely turbulent replenishment for your soil and your roots. Hydrangeas and roses are no different than thunder and rain--although distinctly colored, they are yours.

Submitted September 20, 2018 at 10:41AM by neotenousmenace via reddit https://ift.tt/2ppJ0q6

[beyondforks]

Shooting Star by Jeffe Kennedy has a New Cover!

Here's the original cover, which is pretty snazzy already....

First, here's a little about the book. Have you read it yet?

Shooting Star by Jeffe Kennedy Genre: Adult Fiction(Contemporary Romance) Date Published: March 6, 2018 Publisher: Brightlynx

Not all desires are shiny and sweet—and the dark ones might change you forever… 

It’s not the kind of obsession a tough Army guy can admit to—a jones for Ava, the pretty-princess pop star. Not just her body, the perfect product that sells all those magazines. Her music. 

The critics call her human lip gloss, all style and no substance. To Joe Ivanchan, Ava is the exact blend of reality and fantasy that he can tolerate, the closest he’s willing to get to giving his heart after the injury and breakdown that got him out of the service. 

But Ava is real. She’s a flesh and blood woman with a publicity machine and an album deadline, along with a whole team of handlers paid to shellac a pristine sheen over a damaged, desperate soul. A woman with fears, with secrets, with desires. 

When Joe finds himself in an interview to join her security team as her driver, his instinct is to get away. But the woman behind Ava’s carefully focus-grouped image is even harder to walk away from. The angry needs tormenting her speak to something within Joe. Something empathetic, protective—and primal… 

Besides, even a falling star can light up the darkest night.

Check out the EW cover!! 

I don’t have to tell you she’s beautiful. All the world knows that. I knew that much long before I met her, from those skyscraper-high videos flashing her face in Times Square to the cover of that men’s magazine published obscenely soon after her eighteenth birthday. The magazine hit the stands so fast that the shoot had to have happened when she was still a minor. I and all the other twisted perverts of the world had been counting down for that moment, for the little-girl princess to grow up just enough to be legal fodder for our prurient fantasies. As opposed to the ones I’d had before that. The clock clicked past midnight and she went from forbidden to fair game. I’d be a liar if I said I wasn’t one of those guys. I was. I am. And I’ll cop to feeling like a dirty old man for being one of the ones waiting for her to be legal, even though I’m not a hell of a lot older than she is. War will do that to you, make you old before your time. I got my buddy to bring me a copy in the hospital. I even kept it in a plastic sleeve, to protect those precious images of her. Not that I was obsessed, exactly. Back then I didn’t even know much about her music. I’d heard my little sister talk about her, but that was it. Not something the guys listened to. The guys—we liked her for different reasons. I don’t claim to be some special snowflake, but I always thought something else drew me to her, besides the star-struck, lust-filled awe I shared with so many. I was stupid with the pain management back then, so that contributed. Still, on the glossy pages of that magazine she gazed out with her trademark tawny-gold eyes, as if she saw right through me. I won’t say I didn’t scrutinize the fine freckles on those high cheekbones that looked like they belonged on a sculpture of an Egyptian goddess, or where they scattered across the snowy skin of her breasts, a hint of her nipples behind the cloth she held in place. Or that I didn’t, like every other het guy out there, study that one pic—the one that showed her back—and the dark mole high on her adorable ass, which was barely covered by the gold-sequined drape of her gown. Yeah, I fantasized about kissing that little mole. And more. A hell of a lot more. But it was never only that. Her eyes grabbed me in that photo, too. Something riveting in that gaze. Calling to me. The way she looked over her shoulder, with her hair in gleaming waves like one of those forties Hollywood movie stars, lips painted with gold glitter, pouting in what was probably supposed to be sexy. I guess it was, for all that, though it didn’t work for me. With the expression in her eyes, she looked sad. I had plenty of my own problems, but it still bothered me. I went over and over that photo spread—and then every one I could find after that—studying her eyes, how they never matched the rest of her expression, the renowned color unfailingly brighter than all the glitter and jewelry they decorated her with. As if, if I looked long enough, I could decipher the thoughts behind them. Not what she was saying to me, some random guy among millions, but what she might say, given the opportunity. What can I say? I had a lot of time on my hands. I started downloading her music. People wanted to know what they could do for me, how to help? An iTunes gift card, man. All through the physical therapy, the hellish weaning from the morphine and all that other shit, I listened to her songs, her sweet voice a constant murmur in my ears. I even went back all the way to the kiddie albums and the inane and infectious bopping of those princess years, the goofy saccharine family movies and that kids’ show she started on. A bubblegum counterpoint to my grim reality. I wasn’t going to show anyone my playlist, but I wouldn’t give it up, either. Not long after that magazine spread, she came out with a new album—I told my home health aide to back off and stayed up to midnight to get it when it released. It had some of her own songs on it. With each album over the next few years, she had more of her own stuff. I made a game of it, when each dropped, listening and deciding which were hers before I checked the credits. Every once in a while I’d be wrong—and then those would be written by a particular few, the songwriters she must love. Her actual friends, maybe. Once I was able to work again, I made mixes of her own songs and the special ones, listening while I drove, as long as I had no clients. People seemed to find it funny that a guy like me listened to a pop star known for the rabid fandom of teen—and tween—girls and I didn’t have much bandwidth for smart remarks. Okay—zero bandwidth for static of any kind.

Check out my reviews of other books by this author!

Jeffe Kennedy is an award-winning author with a writing career that spans decades. Her fantasy BDSM romance, Petals and Thorns, originally published under the pen name Jennifer Paris, has won several reader awards. Sapphire, the first book in Facets of Passion has placed first in multiple romance contests and the follow-up, Platinum, is climbing the charts. Her most recent works include three fiction series: the fantasy romance novels of A Covenant of Thorns, the contemporary BDSM novellas of the Facets of Passion, and the post-apocalyptic vampire erotica of the Blood Currency.  

Jeffe lives in Santa Fe, with two Maine coon cats, a border collie, plentiful free-range lizards and a Doctor of Oriental Medicine. Jeffe can be found online at her website: JeffeKennedy.com or every Sunday at the popular SFF Seven.

To learn more about Jeffe Kennedy and her books, visit her website.You can also find her on Goodreads & Facebook, and Twitter.

[marjaystuff]

The Saint of Wolves and Butchers by Alex Grecian Review by Elise Cooper

The Saint of Wolves and Butchers

Alex Grecian

G.P. Putnam’s Sons

April 17, 2018

With his latest novel author Alex Grecian is moving in a new direction with a new series, a new era, and a new setting, Kansas. Another book that took place in that state, Wizard of Oz has a famous line “Lions, Tigers, and Bears. Oh My.” Replace that with The Saint of Wolves and Butchers and readers have the title of this new book.

This intriguing story involves Travis, a man who chases down evil-doers with help from his trusting companion, a dog named Bear, and a Kansas State Trooper, Skottie who join forces to track down a Nazi in hiding.

Grecian wanted to write more of a modern-day contemporary story than his past series, set in Victorian England.  “While driving through Western Kansas to visit my wife’s family I saw a lot of ranch/farm country.  Regardless of where I am I look for angles I can use to write a story. I found out that German POWs captured in Africa were sent to Kansas. After the war, most of these people were allowed to become farmers and stayed here as authorities turned a blind eye.  It occurred to me this would be a great place to hide if I ever committed a crime.  Since Travis and company will hunt for evil-doers, for the next book I would love to have Skottie, Bear, and Travis searching for the bad guy behind the funding of the Nazi in this book who runs a human trafficking ring.  I think I will set it in Alaska.”

The plot begins in 1951 when wanted war criminal Rudolph Bormann succeeds in making his way from South America to rural Kansas, where he begins a new life as Rudy Goodman. In the present, Travis Roan, the head of a family foundation devoted to bringing war criminals to justice, comes to Kansas after a report that the German was recognized by Ruth Elder, a concentration camp guard. Aided by his canine companion, Bear, a massive dog, and another ally, Kansas Highway Patrol trooper Skottie Foster, the search continues for this horrific figure who had performed medical research on unwilling victims. To make matters worse, Goodman decides to become a Church Pastor for a Nazi-type cult where he continues his cruel experimentation.

All the characters are either very likeable or very unlikable. The character that stole all the scenes was Bear, a Tibetan mastiff who understands Esperanto and became mute after poachers cut off his vocal cords. He is brave, smart, and loyal, where everyone except the antagonists have complete trust.  Surprisingly, Elder, was written as sympathetic considering she was forced into becoming a guard by the Nazi regime, after refusing to have sex with German military officers.  The main character, Travis is calm, intellectual, unfailingly polite, and very moralistic.  

Because Grecian wants this to be a series he plans on developing each character’s backstory as the books progress.  “Travis keeps to himself so we do not know where he has been in the world and where he has come from.  He is mysterious and I purposely did not say if he is Jewish.  I do hint at the terrible tragedy he has gone through.  As time goes on readers will find out more about him.”

An interesting aspect is that the Nazi was hit by lightning, not once, but twice, while in Kansas, and lived to talk about it.  After being struck people have their bodies affected in unexpected ways, such as a person’s hair and toenails will not grow back, and they can have hearing loss.  Goodman used it to claim he could heal people, because it gave him energy and insight. This for some could be the fantasy part of the book.    

Hopefully readers also understand that guns are tools. Grecian explained, “This is why I put in the book quote, ‘These chunks of metal that were largely useless without a hand to point them.’ The evil comes from the person who uses it to their advantage.  It is the person that needs to be blamed.”

Readers will yearn for the next book to see how Grecian flushes out the characters’ backstory, especially Travis Roan, whose mysteriousness is intriguing. Hopefully, this does become a series, because of the unique characters and storyline.

[suerusselldj]

PWR BTTM Deny Sexual Assault Claims

Spoil me - I'm a DJ and I'm cute!

PWR BTTM have issued a series of statements responding to the events of the past week. After member Ben Hopkins was accused of sexual assault, the band was subsequently dropped by their label and management, all of their music was taken off the market, and their upcoming tour was canceled. In their statements, Hopkins denies the claims made by an anonymous woman in an interview with Jezebel, saying that they "did not line up with any sexual experience I have ever had." They added, "I had no indication before last week that she had any concerns about our interaction."

Read the statements from Hopkins, bandmate Liv Bruce, and the band overall, below:

From Ben:

What has transpired over the past several days has been emotionally overwhelming and difficult to comprehend. Last Thursday, I learned that an anonymous individual had made an allegation of sexual assault against me. This allegation was devastating to me as it is contrary to the intentional way I seek to interact with those around me. As I digested the allegations, I tried to figure out who the individual might be so that I could try to reconcile what I had read with my memory of any particular sexual interaction. I've waited to respond to the Jezebel article because the statements made about me by the anonymous source did not line up with any sexual experience I have ever had. Over the past several days, I was able to figure out who the individual was based on what I was reading and my subsequent conversations with Liv. I am not going to breach the anonymity of the person interviewed in the Jezebel article, but given the serious nature of what was published and its impact, I have to unpack the claims and provide perspective on the details within. We met the night before a show in March of 2016 and spent most of the following day together. After the show, she invited me back to her house and we eventually engaged in sex. Based on the nature of our communications and our interactions with one another, I understood our interactions to be fully consensual. We stayed in touch over the course of several weeks by exchanging texts and pictures. Later, she asked if she could stay with me at my home, where we had sex several more times over the course of those days. Again, I understood these interactions to be fully consensual, especially since our ongoing communications continued to be mutual, positive and reciprocal in nature. We did not see each other much after that but when we did it was entirely pleasant and we continued to exchange texts, including as recently as March of this year. I had no indication before last week that she had any concerns about our interaction. Last week I learned that, in February of this year, this person had expressed concerns to others about what had transpired between us. I fully embrace and respect this individual's right to speak out in any manner or forum they choose, including in a Facebook post or anonymously to a Jezebel reporter. It does not diminish that person's experience or perception. After the initial shock of learning about her concerns, I have tried to understand her experience of our interactions. It would be antithetical to my values to attack, blame, or shame someone who is using the power of call-out culture to name their experience and hold others accountable, even when - or especially if - the individual they seek to hold accountable is me. I fully appreciate that someone's views about the dynamics of intimate interactions can change and are not always apparent in the moment. While I am open to understanding this person's perspective, I strongly contest the account put forth in Jezebel. I am firmly committed to consent, to communication, and to mutual expression of sexual interest. The accusations in Jezebel directly conflict with my experience, as it is not my practice to engage in sexual contact without protection, without discussing the issue with my partner, or to engage in the other conduct alleged in the Jezebel article. That being said, in keeping with my commitment to my principles, I believe it is my responsibility to be accountable to this individual's perspective and to honor it accordingly. One more thing. I have seen posts about people raising concerns about having their boundaries crossed when I have greeted our fans after our shows, something Liv and I do after every performance, taking selfies and thanking folks for coming. This is, again, incredibly shocking news to me, as the safety and well-being of PWR BTTM fans is the most paramount concern I have as a member of this band on and off stage. If my physical contact has made anyone feel uncomfortable, I sincerely apologize and will work hard to have an increased awareness of boundaries moving forward consistent with our commitment to our fans. From Liv:

In February, I made contact with the anonymous individual interviewed by Jezebel, someone I knew casually, after hearing that she had made inflammatory accusations about Ben in a private online forum. My intent in reaching out was to learn more and to make myself available in the event that I could be of any help. Our conversation was friendly, but it ended without a plan for any specific next steps. Based upon our discussion, my understanding was that she did not want me to share her identity with Ben unless I had her explicit permission to do so, and I assured her that I would not do so. After our conversation, I wanted to discuss with Ben the issues she had raised but I quickly realized that doing so would inevitably reveal her identity. I did not know how to proceed nor did I know where to seek advice about how to move forward. After Ben ascertained the individual's identity on Friday I decided that my withholding information was no longer protecting her privacy and I told Ben about the conversation she and I had. From PWR BTTM: As some of you know, we set up a separate email address back in mid-May so that anyone with information relevant to the situation that was then unfolding could privately share what they knew. At the time we thought it was the right thing to do. We now see that we were putting the onus on others to do something that only works if it is what they want. We have concluded that there is no viable way to do what we were trying to accomplish, with the result that we are going to shut that email address down (we have not and will not look at any emails that may have been sent there to date). Finally, to our fans, our friends, our family and those who have supported us unfailingly and who continue to support us unfailingly: thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Having enjoyed the enthusiastic support of so many incredible people throughout our music careers has been a blessing. We love playing music, we love sharing music with others and we want nothing more than to be back performing together soon.

[Read More ...]

IN MY Dreams