#but it's a legitimate question i have. and so is petiteness in females (who are not ripped). | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

kaylin881 · 2 years ago

Text

I just went on a multi-hour wikipedia spiral and my candidate for the rightful Byzantine emperor is Louis Alphonse de Bourbon, Duke of Anjou. Let me explain.

OK. So I'm starting from the last actual Byzantine emperor, Constantine XI Palaiologos. He was killed fighting the Ottoman Turks in 1453, after which the Ottoman sultan Mehmed II claimed the title by right of his conquest of Constantinople. But let's look at where else the title could have gone.

Constantine XI had no children, but was survived by 2 younger brothers. The elder, Demetrios, attempted to claim the throne for himself after Constantine's death, but never succeeded. He only had a daughter, who wasn't eligible for the succession according to Byzantine rules. The younger, Thomas, had a son: Andreas Palaiologos, who was next in line after Demetrios and Thomas. Like his uncle, Andreas tried unsuccessfully to reclaim Constantine's throne during his lifetime.

Here's where things get interesting. Andreas had no surviving children as far as we know, but we do know how he disposed of his titles.

In 1459, Andreas sold his rights to the Byzantine throne to Charles VIII of France. However, this was conditional on Charles successfully conquering the Morea, a province of the Byzantine Empire which had been previously ruled by Thomas, and giving it to Andreas. Charles died in 1498 without ever conquering the Morea, and Andreas resumed using his imperial titles until his own death in 1502.

In his will, Andreas gave his titles to Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile, the husband and wife who unified their respective kingdoms to become the precursor to modern Spain. Neither of them ever did anything with this...but let's look at where those titles would have gone from there.

Ferdinand and Isabella had a daughter, Joanna, who inherited both of their thrones and passed them on to her son, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. He now ruled Aragon, Castile, and the Holy Roman Empire—and, seemingly unbeknownst to anyone, had a claim to the Byzantine Empire too. His marriage to Isabella of Portugal added yet another kingdom to the list by the time their son Philip inherited, although Philip did not succeed his father as Holy Roman Emperor, because that was an elected position.

A string of Philips named after their fathers or grandfathers later, Portugal regained independence from Spain, and in 1700 King Charles II died without surviving children, sparking a civil war.

Because Spanish succession law allowed inheritance through the female line, and even allowed women to inherit, the inheritance could theoretically pass through Charles' sisters. Let's allow it for now and see where it takes us.

The elder sister, Maria Theresa, had given up her right to the Spanish succession on her marriage to the King of France. Importantly for our purposes, she did not give up any claim she had to the Byzantine succession, because no one knew she had one. So, leaving aside questions of who was entitled to the Spanish throne, her grandson, Philip V, (who did eventually end up as king of Spain) was the new Byzantine emperor—if we allow descent through the female line.

(What if we don't do that, and stick to Byzantine inheritance law that only allows male-line descent? How far back do we have to go in the male line? Well, technically, if we're only allowing male-line descent, we shouldn't have allowed the title to pass into the Habsburg family in the first place, because the initial inheritance was through Joanna of Spain. So we return to Ferdinand of Aragon, who had no surviving legitimate sons, ending that line of inquiry. But that's boring, so let's keep going with this line.)

We trace the Spanish throne down through several more Philips and Charleses and Ferdinands (petition for royalty to get some more names) to Ferdinand VII, who was overthrown by Napoleon, abdicated his claim to the Spanish throne, and later won it back. His death in 1833 without male children... (sigh) started another civil war, over whether his brother or his daughter should inherit.

The male-line claimant was Ferdinand's younger brother, Don Carlos, who never succeeded in becoming king of Spain. Following what became known as the Carlist line of succession brings us, with a couple of backtracks and side-steps, to his grandson, Alfonso Carlos, the second son of Don Carlos' second son. Alfonso was the last undisputed Carlist claimant. He died, without sons, in 1936, extinguishing the Carlist male line.

Backtracking to find another male-line heir takes us back to Ferdinand VII's father, Charles IV, who had 1 other surviving son: Francisco de Paula. His son, also called Francisco, married Queen Isabella II of Spain—there was a lot of cousin-marrying going around in those days—and the Spanish throne was inherited by their son Alfonso XII, merging this line with the line of succession from Ferdinand VII's daughter. His son, Alfonso XIII, was overthrown in favour of the Second Spanish Republic in 1931, but survived until 1941—and in 1936, with the death of Alfonso Carlos, arguably inherited the Byzantine Empire.

Alfonso XIII's oldest two sons renounced their claims to the Spanish throne—but not the Byzantine throne—in 1933. The oldest died without issue 5 years later, so the claim passes to the descendants of his younger brother Jaime. (Here we diverge from the kingship of Spain, which passed to the third son.)

The current heir, then, is Jaime's grandson, Louis Alphonse de Bourbon, born in 1974. Since his father's death in 1989, he has styled himself Duke of Anjou. He is also a claimant for the monarchy of France (as Louis XX) through his descent from Philip V (above), although Philip renounced his right to the French throne in the deal that ended the Spanish Civil War.

Oh, and he's also the great-great-great grandson of Queen Victoria. Along with most of the rest of the royalty of Europe.

trying to figure out the funniest crackpot stance on who is the current Roman emperor, and accepting suggestions (tenuous historical justification required)

#kaylin the history student #i love history #shitpost

53K notes · View notes

fymagnificentwomcn · 4 years ago

Note

Why do people think Kösem mistreated or was mean to Turhan and Mehmed? I've never read that anywhere in a book, but it's so famous around internet that it's ridiculous.

<DISCLAIMER> Here I need to put a small disclaimer because while answering the question, I truly decided to share some interesting bits about Kösem vs Turhan and in the end it turned into some mini-essay heh. It was definitely a really complex matter and the myth of evil old hag who snatched unlawfully power from her angelic daughter-in-law and then began persecuting her because she was not obedient enough culminating in Turhan having no choice but to kill her mom-in-law and then become best (but absolutely not interested in power) Valide ever is just... not true.<END OF DISCLAIMER>

*******

Same.

I mean, we can bet that when later the rivalry between the two ladies was in full force, they were sometimes rude to each other, but I doubt they would have done it in public for people to note and record, and even that could be filtered out. Harem was truly a closed-off space and this is why we get most of quotes by Sultanas from their letters or if they act in political capacity, like Kösem’s speech to the pashas from the Divan. And yes you can find all sort of rumours cited in books, but I haven’t seen anything like that with legitimate sources provided.

This is also why we have so many different accounts of Kösem’s assassination, often very conflicting, and sometimes even completely internally incoherent and illogical.

And for example we have an account by Derviş Abdullah, who so wanted to avod placing blame on any of the Valides, that he put all blame of Süleyman Agha going from one Valide to another, with each telling lies about the other to incite them to act against each other. But why would the agha want to create showdown between two sultanas? In this case he was an easy scapegoat because he was present as the participant in brutal treatment of Kösem in most accounts. And both Sultanas surely actively participated in the conflict.

As I said, Turhan was very good at propaganda. She really put a lot of focus to keep a good image, especially an image as a lady who was not so much involved in politics and doing it legally, so she placed far more attention to make it seem like Mehmed was ruling, not her, during her regency. She also relied more on statesmen’s advice than Kösem because she was less experienced, and, as Halil İnalcık puts it, less talented than her mother-in-law. And when she gave her power to Köprülü (who was however her man through and through) she created that image of a woman giving up her power willingly. Sakaoğlu states plainly that those historians who criticised Kösem so much were exactly the ones who praised Turhan a lot and stresses how such historians desribed Turhan as having “no political aspirations” as opposed to her mother-in-law. “No political aspirations immediately meant “charitable lady with golden heart, religious and loved by all”. Turhan continued to create her image even when Köprülü began taking radical actions to maintain order:

The year 1656 is, nevertheless, an appropriate date at which to conclude a study of the political role of dynastic women in this period, for henceforth the emphasis in Turhan Sultan’s role as valide sultan would be altered. As her overt political involvement lessened, her ceremonial and philanthropic roles increased considerably. Indeed, the appointment of Köprülü Mehmed Pasha seems to have initiated a period of intense ceremonial aggrandizement of the dynasty. It was shortly after his appointment that Turhan undertook the construction of the Çanakkale fortresses and her great mosque—both reportedly at the grand vezir’s urging. The elaborate royal progresses between Edirne and Istanbul and to Bursa and other areas near the capital also date from this period. Mehmed IV, who in the forty-five years of his reign displayed little interest in the government of his empire, nevertheless campaigned a number of times as a figurehead ghazi under Köprülü Mehmed Pasha’s successors. It may be that these royal rituals were planned by Köprülü Mehmed Pasha, or Turhan Sultan, or both, in order to divert attention from continuing crises and the severe and bloody solutions imposed by the grand vezir. With political power and military leadership delegated to the grand vezir, the most useful function that the sovereign might perform was to furnish visible symbols of majesty and piety to maintain the subjects’ loyalty and sense of community.

Source: Leslie Peirce, The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire

Peirce also said that Turhan was a sultana who was very concerned with “custom and propriety”.

Sakaoğlu also concludes his citation of Evliya Çelebi’’s account mentioning [short summary & parapharase of that account by me:] how Turhan and Meleki found a way to kill Kösem and then they killed many other people after that and then mentioning also alleged mismanagement by both that brought about Cinar incidents in with the following comment: “This historical account tells us that she [Turhan] had a character far removed from some of her descriptions on other sources and the only ting that saved her from a fate worse than Kösem Sultan’s was luck and her son”. Sakaoğlu also wrote a whole article on how male historians tried to villify the most powerful woman in Ottoman history entitled precisely that (Turkish title of the article: Erkek tarihçiler Osmanlı tarihinin en güçlü kadınını nasıl kurban etti? How did male historians villify the most powerful woman in Ottoman history?)

Peirce mentions about Meleki that:.

Kösem was murdered in a palace coup led by Turhan’s chief black eunuch. Meleki became the new valide sultan’s loyal and favored retainer. She was eventually manumitted and married to Şaban Khalife, a former page in the palace training school. The couple established residence in Istanbul, where, as a team, they were ideally suited to act as channels of information and intercessors on behalf of individuals with petitions for the palace. Şaban received male petitioners, Meleki female petitioners; Şaban exploited contacts he had formed while serving within the palace, while Meleki exploited her relationship with Turhan Sultan. The political influence of the couple grew to such a point that they lost their lives in 1656 when troops stationed in Istanbul rebelled against alleged abuses in government.

Source: Leslie Peirce, The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire

Curiously, some people truly believe in some myth it all immediately became good after Kösem was killed. Evliya’s account is not the only one actually that mentions Meleki and Turhan being good friends even during Kösem’s lifetime, so maybe the “betrayal” wasn’t actually betrayal even if Meleki was formally Kösem’s slave/servant. Maybe the story of Meleki warning Turhan was invented. We will never know.

Turhan was truly careful to cut herself from controversial decisions and whatever the Grand Vizier was doing, but as Leslie Peirce puts it, she undoubtedly had influence on Köprülü and if she hadn’t liked what he was doing, she would have definitely had a way to end it.

Turhan saw what problems her mother-in-law encountered, so was careful to hide her interest in politics (which again does not mean she had none). But when she gave up power it was a necessity - chaos persisted and persisted after Kösem’s death, there was no Grand Vizier who could stay for longer, and last rebellion was bloody and very dangerous to both Turhan and her son. Turhan realised she would not be able to handle it and in the end made a correct decision because that was a necessary step at that point.

According to Naima, nothing came of these efforts because no one was strong enough to enforce the necessary reforms; the would-be reformer Tarhuncu was brought down by the discontent of influential persons injured by his attempts to economize.The year-and-a-half-long grand vezirate of Derviş Mehmed Pasha in 1653 and 1654 was a respite of relative solvency and harmony, but after his death matters once again began to deteriorate. The integrity of the throne was increasingly threatened both internally by rebellious pashas and externally by Venetian advances in the war over the island of Crete, as well as by chronic fiscal shortages now exacerbated by the costs of mounting campaigns against these internal and external enemies. A serious uprising of the troops in March 1656 that resulted in the execution of many palace officials demonstrated the urgent need for a political solution. It was found six months later when Turhan Sultan appointed the elderly Köprülü Mehmed Pasha grand vezir.

Source: Leslie Peirce, The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire

Sakaoğlu descirbes this event in the following word “the financial and political management were responsibilities that Turhan Sultan and her son Mehmed IV could no longer attempt to rescue and operate, so they handed over the management to Köprülü Mehmed Pasha and new era began for the Ottoman Empire”.

Which does not mean Kösem ruling in her own right was a bad decision either - Kösem was more talented in state matters and she knew she could handle stuff, especially during her second regency when she also had a lot of experience. Turhan realising she could not handle it and withdrawing also spoke well of her sense of responsibility, even though she was not as gifted in politics as Kösem.

Thus said, while Turhan did not have such gift for state matters, she was truly skilled in the act of PR & ceremony, which truly helped her a lot during her career and after her death.

Since she later skillfully cut herself off from blame concerning what was happening in politics, there was still one huge stain on her reputation, namely the way she took power from her mother-in-law.

Contemporary Ottoman chroniclers did not welcome the news of Kösem Sultan’s death and recorded it as an injustice committed against a woman of great accomplishments and stature, and as a harbinger of greater social disorder. The manner in which the older valide was disposed of and the subsequent chaos in the palace was recalled during the reign of Mehmed IV as a time of upheaval. Bobovi, so taken by the event, was able to recall more than a decade later the part of the palace where the old valide had been removed from her quarters for the last time.

Source: Lucienne Thys-Senocak, Ottoman Women Builders: The Architectural Patronage of Hadice Turhan Sultan

Murder of Valide Sultan was unheard of in Ottoman history. And what was a better way to justify it then by assassination attempt on the padişah himself? But how to explain why Kösem, known for her prudence and careful calculation, would have attempted such a risky move for no reason? Wouldn’t it have meant that Turhan, the lady of pure characters with no political aspirations, actually did desire power and wanted to take her from her mother-in-law?

Peirce comments that:

The bloodiest contest between competing mothers—the murder in 1651 of the formidable queen mother Kösem by the party of her daughter-in-law Turhan, who was impatient to take power—was reminiscent of past rebellions of princes against aging sultan fathers.

We know little about their relations when Turhan was just a haseki - we only know about conflicts between Turhan and Ibrahim. We similarly know next to nothing about relations between Kösem and Ibrahim’s concubines - the person she was definitely in conflict with was Şekerpare aka one of the people who encouraged Ibrahim’s spending and supported corruption in his court (do not confuse her with his consort Şivekar, historically they were two separate people, show put them together because of limited screentime). There are however some mentions of her, similarly like in the show, backing up Turhan in her conflict with Zarife. Peirce mentions Kösem groomed Turhan in the Imperial Harem and one of her articles. This is a mention of Kösem backing up Turhan in the Zarife conflict from Sakaoglu’s Famous Ottoman Women, though of course this whole Padre Ottomano story with illegitimate prince has so many versions and legends surrounding it and again this account sounds sensationalised in some details like Turhan seeing them in bed or Zarife being pregnant with Ibrahim’s child only then, though we know such situation with throwing Mehmed after a quarrel did take place.

Turhan was definitely the person who benefitted most from Ibrahim’s deposition - from relative obscurity she entered big politics as Valide Sultan. While Kösem got the job of a regent, her position was actually not as stable as woman with her own son - it all depended on statesmen and their whims. She was offered a job due to her experience as opposed to really young Turhan (she was only around twenty two) and as person who had already stabilised Empire when it had been on the brink after Osman’s deposition and Mustafa’s disastrous reign. It was not legally normalised in the Ottoman Empire for a mother to be automatically regent - in the past it was often Grand Vizier and when Süleyman left for campaigns, he always appointed his viziers and later his sons as his regents, not his mother or Hürrem. Mehmed III was the first one to appoint Safiye as regent when he was on campaign to Hungary. Later Halime and Handan were appropriately co-regent and regent de facto, but they did not have the naib-i-sultanat title like Kösem and later Turhan.

Judge Abdülaziz Efendi commented on this unprecedented occurrence in the following words:

It being an ancient custom that upon the accession of a new sultan the mother of the previous sultan remove to the Old Palace and thus give up her honored office, the elder valide requested permission to retire to a life of seclusion. But because the loving mother of the [new] sultan was still young and truly ignorant of the state of the world, it was thought that if she were in control of the government, there would result the possibility of harm to the welfare of the state. Therefore the elder valide was reappointed for a while longer to the duty of training and guardianship, and it was considered appropriate to renew the assignment of crown lands to the valide sultan.

Of course I can bet neither Kösem wanted to go to Old Palace nor Turhan was happy about not becoming regent, but it obviously had to look like this officially :) Peirce comments here that truly the position of Valide Sultan had become institutionalised by then for Abdülaziz to put it in these words because he was a well-known as opponent of Kösem.

After quoting the above,Thys-Senocak goes on to say:

By the time that Turhan Sultan was to take up the position of valide, Kösem Sultan was in her sixties, and she had been a valide since 1623, close to three decades. Upon the death of her husband, Sultan Ahmed I, she had been removed to the Old Palace for six years until her son Murad IV succeeded to the throne in 1623 and she returned to the Topkapı. When Murad died, she continued to serve as a valide for her son İbrahim. During these years Kösem had established a solid network of alliances within the court and among the Janissaries, who would support her if her power was threatened. In the unstable times that faced the Ottoman administration Kösem’s seniority and guidance were seen as essential by many in the palace. Her authority was not, however, welcomed by Turhan, who saw her place in the harem administration usurped by her mother-in-law.

Turhan was deprived neither her Valide Sultan title NOR status. Kumrular mentions she was nowhere near as powerless as some try to portray her. There is even evidence from Spanish ambassadors she participated in foreign politics, e.g. that she complained about ambassador Allegretti sent by Spain .She also moved to Kösem’s old Valide chambers.

Kösem’s rank as “Big Valide” was a new one, created especially to allow her to be regent. It was the only time this title was used in the Ottoman Empire.

Also the new Grand Vizier, Sofu Mehmed Pasha, was against the appointment of Kösem as a new regent because he hoped to get the position himself and as Peirce says also saw himself as “temporary ruler”. He was supported by Abdülaziz Efendi, and these two were the two statesmen Kosem addressed particularly in her famous speech because she was well aware they plotted against her together. Swedish ambassador Ralamb said the following about two first years after Ibrahim’s death: “the state experienced two good years. The valide sultan, an intelligent and smart person, ruled well and peacefully thanks to her natural talents and much experience”.

It is generally assumed by historians who assessed the whole conflict, like Kumrular or Peirce, that Turhan was the one who initiated the rivalry. From the start, she tried to undermine Kösem’s rule, thus also making it difficult for her to stabilise Empire and Kösem was actually doing a good job with it. Her first decision was to remove corrupt harem aghas, who participated in mismanagement and mayhem of Ibrahim’s reign, but Turhan used this opportunity to lure them to her side and made them her supporters, which as Valide Sultan was not a difficult task. In her speech dimissing the aghas according to the account by Derviş Abdullah, Kösem apparently accused them of having schemed against her which resulted in her exile and then said that thanks to their corrupting influence “light of my eyes, Sultan Ibrahim, became a martyr, crying loudly. Do you intend to bring similar fate to Sultan Mehmed?”

Turhan also worked hard to lure as many statesmen as possible to her side by showing herself as morally superior to her mother-in-law, which again was quite easy considering she was up against a woman with so many years of experience on political scene. She especially used Ibrahim’s deposition for this purpose. According to Rycaut, she sent letters to statesmen describing herself as poor grieving widow with an orphan who hopes to see those responsible for his father’s death punished.. obviously she meant Kösem among them. She often incited anger following Ibrahim’s deposition and rebellions, which again made it difficult to restore peace after Ibrahim’s reign. And please - relations between her and Ibrahim were so bad & she was so sidelined by him during his reign compared to his other women, it is hard to believe she was truly in any grief. Sakaoğlu mentions three “strikes of luck” for her - Ibrahim’s death, Kösem’s death and surviving Cinar incidents of 1656). Rycaut ends his description of the “throwing Mehmed” incident with the following words: “All these matters served for farther fuel to nourish the implacable Spirit of the Queen [Turhan]”.

This tactic was also shown in the show – after pushing for Ibrahim’s death during the coup&making it bloody, she continued to incite riots to force the Şeyhülislam and others to demand Ibrahim’s execution, then made Mehmed sign his dad’s death order. For once, she seemed to acknowledge Kösem’s rank and didn’t do anything behind her back because she was well aware that Kösem, a seasoned politician, would realise that there was no way Ibrahim could survive this and decide to carry out the sentence herself being justifiably scared what might happen if he got into Turhan’s and her supporters’ hands or other angry people as she saw what had happened to Osman. Then Turhan could carefully remove herself from the scene and depict Kösem as Ibrahim’s murderer, while conveniently forgetting everything she had done from first episode she was in to have him dethroned and killed (when she told Haçı: “How any padisahs have you killed?” GIRL….) Plus, she knew the whole situation of Kösem carrying out the execution would fuck up Kösem mentally and make her an easier opponent for further fight...After all, following Ibrahim’s death she happily announced “Ibrahim is dead, now time for Kösem”.

Shortly before Kösem’s assassination there was still rebellion of sipahis incited by Turhan. Rycaut mentions she wrote to them about her husband’s death and how those who had caused it (implied Kösem and janissaries) disrespected her son’s authority and would soon bring similar end to sipahis and eradicate them forever. The rebels also mentioned Ibrahim’s name & demanded his killers punished during these riots in 1651 (!).

What happened next, we will never know for sure. Kösem was definitely a woman of action&it’s likely she had to take into account steps like dethroning Mehmed or getting rid of Turhan. Apparently, Turhan was afraid about Süleyman being put in Mehmed’s place for some time. What we know for sure she planned for eliminating four of Turhan’s allies.

Did she try to kill Mehmed? We will never know, but it spreading such rumours would definitely make it easier for Turhan to rally supporters.

Another example of Turhan’s strategic PR – she requested a fetva for Kösem’s execution, but after Kösem’s death dismissed the judge to cut off herself from his person and this decision&also to prevent punishment of people involved in the matter. Still, GV who carried out purges among Kösem’s allies was later dismissed for that and it’s hard to imagine Turhan had not been involved in the original decision for these purges. There is one account by Rycaut describing Turhan requesting fetva for Kösem’s execution in which the mufti was scared to make this sort of decision, while Turhan arranged a mob to come and demand justice “for their padisah”, and simultaneously Turhan hid behind a curtain to say to leave the woman (Kösem) in peace for the sake of the padişah her son and to stop slandering his grandmother’s name&involve the padisah in such matters The account goes to kinda sensationalised picture that there was a woman in crowd that Turhan pointed out as being Kösem and encouraged the mob to punish her, not the padisah’s mother, and then fell to her knees crying in front of her son, with Mehmed drying her tears with handkerchief, but this sounds definitely like sensationalised account to make the story more dramatic such as Rycaut’s mentions that Kösem was 80-year-old toothless old lady to stress her age (she was 60, chill)

Turhan was a very sly and PR-based sultana.

I’ve seen a theory (?) that Kösem was rude to Mehmed and Turhan because of her sassy speech to pashas (?). Firstly, one of the people to whom the speech was addressed earlier, Abdülaziz Efendi, had insulted MEHMED when during a Divan meeting Mehmed did attend (Kösem was there with him to instruct him, just as Turhan later) replied to Mehmed asking him about bribery among pashas: ’My dear, who taught you this?” Of course what they wanted was to express displeasure that in fact this woman was ruling them, not a padişah. And Kösem did mention the slight given to her grandson. After the “I’ve seen reigns” part the usually skipped later part is “Sometimes they attempt to kill me. When certain imperial commands have been issued, they have said [to the sultan], ‘my dear, who taught you to say these things?’ Such patronizing behavior towards sultans is impermissible! And what if the sultan is instructed?” [translation taken from Peirce]. Moreover, the same people were plotting against her and also tried to have her killed and she was very well aware of that, which is why she kept mentioning her death. The speech is not only sass, as Kumrular points out, Kösem also mentions that she is aware death might be near and is not scared of it and she’s also aware everything will go on following her death, no matter how important she was.

Kösem following Ibrahim’s death was shaken and just as shown in the show in fragile mental state that she did not resemble her old self in certain aspects – she was definitely more reliant on her trusted group of people mostly consisting of janissaries instead of co-operating closely with everyone unlike during her first regency (which was pointed out as serious mistake by Naima) and was more quarrelsome than ealier, but damn those people truly used her weaker mental condition for their purpose – like when she was crying in her room following Ibrahim’s execution, Abdülaziz Efendi (yes this bitch again) came to her and told her it was what she had been praying for in response to her “Whose curses and bad wishes reached him [Ibrahim]?”, which shook her mentally very much (Abdülaziz Efendi himself described this incident, so it’s hard to doubt its occurrence).

And in the end, while assessing the Kösem/Turhan conflict we must also take into account that this elderly woman who had been through a lot was automatically at disadvantage against young, seemingly innocent rising star, who in the end emerged as victor. And as Derviş Abdullah put it when talking about the matter “it’s easy to put all sort of blame on the deceased” (he used it when discussing all sorts of rumours & blame being assigned to Kösem following her death).

- Joanna

#turhan hatice sultan #turhan sultan #kosem sultan #kösem sultan #ottoman history #ottoman empire #answered #Anonymous #history #muhteşem yüzyıl kösem #historicalquotes

42 notes · View notes

storygirl000 · 5 years ago

Text

The Many Dates of Marinette Dupain-Cheng: Prologue

Summary: After Adrien proves himself a bad choice as a crush and she decides not to pursue Luka, Alya decides to get Marinette to sign up for a dating service. Though reluctant at first, Marinette eventually gives in, signs up...and gets far more than she bargained for.

(or, in which the author is about to indulge in far more crossover ships than what could be considered healthy)

Ao3 link

------------------------------------------------

Signing Up

“A dating service?”

Marinette looked at the website apprehensively. “Alya, are you sure this is a good idea?”

“Look, girl,” Alya sighed. “Adrien sided with Lila-”

“He didn’t! He just doesn’t want to get in trouble with the rest of the class!”

“-no matter how much denial you’re in over it, you’ve already turned down Luka, and most of the other good boys we know are either fully wrapped around Lila’s finger or taken. This could be a good thing for you.”

Marinette twirled one of her pigtails nervously. “But what if I end up with a date and he’s a complete jerk, or a stalker, or-?”

Alya shook her head. “That only happens in bad sitcoms. Trust me, it’ll be fine! All you gotta do is sign up for an account. Simple as that!”

Marinette thought it over for a few more seconds, then sighed. “All right, I’ll do it. How does this work?”

Alya beamed. “Knew you’d say yes! And it’s all on the information page.”

Marinette nodded, then clicked on the link to said page.

The “Red String Teen Dating Service”, as it was called, was rather simple. For fifteen dollars, you could set up a month-long account – you would get a blind date every day for a month, then choose who you wanted to go on a second date with after the last one. If you were at all dissatisfied, they’d pay you back in full.

And who knows, she thought to herself. Maybe if I do end up getting a boyfriend this way, it would finally get Chat Noir to back off.

Her partner had started getting more pushy in his romantic pursuits over the last few months, insisting that she “owed” him a date for all the help he’d given her. She’d rejected him several times now, but he hadn’t backed down. Even worse, it was affecting his performance in their battles. She’s been meaning to talk to Master Fu about it, but hadn’t gotten the chance.

“Sounds promising,” Marinette said. “Oh! I should probably ask my parents first.”

Alya gave her a thumbs-up. “You do that, and if they say yes, we can start on making your account!”

Marinette nodded, then headed downstairs so she could ask them.

00000

Tom and Sabine had immediately agreed to let Marinette sign up for the service, once they checked to make sure it was legitimate. And so, after paying the 15 dollars needed, Marinette started writing up her profile.

“Let’s see...” she muttered, typing. “Name: Marinette Dupain-Cheng...age: 15...gender: female...height: 5’3’’...weight: 115 lbs...star sign: Libra...hometown: Paris.”

She leaned back in her chair and stretched. “Right, that takes care of the easy stuff.” She then moved to fill out the rest of the required boxes.

Physical appearance: Petite, slim Chinese-Italian girl with black hair in pigtails, blue eyes, and freckles.

Personality: Kind, artistic, somewhat awkward and clumsy, hates liars and bullies

Likes and interests: Design work (especially fashion design), baking, video games, Jagged Stone, Clara Nightingale, helping friends out

The kind of person I’m interested in: I just want someone who’s nice and sweet, who will listen to and respect me.

Alya looked over the profile and nodded in approval. “Nice. But I think you’re forgetting something.”

“What?” Marinette asked, raising an eyebrow.

Alya pointed at a pair of empty boxes near the top of the screen. “Your username and email.”

Marinette groaned. “Thanks for pointing that out.”

She quickly filled out her email account, then thought for a few seconds, going over various usernames in her head. Eventually, she typed in MariDC, her usual chat handle when talking with friends online.

“Looks like you’re ready to go!” Alya said, smiling.

Marinette nodded and clicked on the “submit” button. After a few minutes, the sign-up screen was replaced with a video, which automatically started playing.

A young woman with short brown hair, brown eyes, and black-framed glasses came into view on the screen, smiling.

“Thank you for using the Red String Teens Dating Service!” she said cheerfully. “Within the next few hours, you should receive an email containing the profile of your first prospective date and the time and place your date will be!”

She then held up a red paper heart. “Remember to print one of these out and pin it to your shirt so your date will know who you are! You can find a link to the PDF for it on our main page!”

With that, the video ended, taking Marinette back to the main page.

“What now?” Alya asked.

Marinette shrugged. “I guess I’ll print out the PDF and wait for the first email to come in. Until then, what do you want to do?”

Alya immediately grinned and pulled out her phone. “I found some great videos earlier that I wanted to show you!”

As Alya pulled up said videos on her phone, Marinette thought about what she’d just done.

She had thirty-one dates to look forward to, but she didn’t know any of the people she was going to date. They could be perfectly nice and kind...or they could all be womanizing creeps. Either one seemed like a possibility.

But who knew? Maybe this would be a good thing for her in the long run.

Maybe.

------------------------------------------------

A/N: Partly inspired by a Danny Phantom fic I found with a similar premise, partly inspired by the several different crossover pairings I’ve seen Marinette end up in, I’ve decided to write this.

I am open to requests for guys Marinette could date, as I only have six lined up at the time of this writing. The only two rules I have are 1) they have to be within a set age limit (14-17), and 2) I have to be able to realistically fit them into the setting (I might take liberties with this one, but no characters from post-apocalyptic works or the distant past, for example). I also might not use a character if I’m not familiar with the series they’re from. If you have any questions about the setting, feel free to ask.

With that in mind, the next chapter should (hopefully) be up tomorrow, so stay tuned!

#miraculous ladybug #tmdomdp #anti-adrien #solely for plot reasons

27 notes · View notes

the-desolated-quill · 6 years ago

Text

We Need To Talk About James Gunn - Quill’s Scribbles

This could prove to be the most controversial Scribble I’ve ever written on this blog, and the sad thing is it really shouldn’t be, in my opinion.

First off, a couple of disclaimers because I know some people are going to accuse me of ‘bias’. I’ve never been very fond of James Gunn as a filmmaker, it’s true. I thought the first Guardians Of The Galaxy movie was okay at best and I absolutely hated the sequel, but I confess that’s less to do with any inherent flaws in the films themselves and more to do with the fact that I just don’t like Gunn’s style of humour. Oh don’t get me wrong. There are still legitimate problems, which I’ll go into later when they become relevant, but I’m big enough to admit that my dislike for his brand of comedy and storytelling is merely due to my own subjective tastes (the same is true of Taika Waititi and Thor: Ragnarok).

Okay. So. Let’s talk about James Gunn.

As I’m sure most of you know, in July 2018, an alt-right conspiracy theorist called Mike Cernovich unearthed tweets made by Gunn between 2008 and 2012 where he made offensive jokes and remarks about sensitive topics such as rape, child abuse and paedophilia. While James Gunn did apologise and vowed to ‘do better,’ Disney, fearing the public backlash, fired Gunn as director of Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3 and dismissed him from any role in producing and expanding Marvel’s planned ‘Cosmic Universe.’ The result was the public backlash Disney were trying to avoid in the first place. They received a lot of criticism from various entertainers and filmmakers, as well as many media outlets such as Collider and The Independent, the cast of Guardians wrote a letter urging Disney to reconsider their decision with Dave Bautista in particular being very vocal in his criticism, and there was a massive outcry from fans who petitioned for Gunn to be rehired. Guy Lodge, writing for The Guardian, asked the question ‘Was James Gunn the first undeserving victim of Hollywood’s new zero tolerance policy?’ Now I’d argue the answer to that question is a definitive no, but apparently, and surprisingly, that’s not a very popular opinion among liberals. So I’d very much like to challenge them as we explore James Gunn’s moral character and ask ourselves why he’s being defended so passionately.

Before we go any further, I think it would be a good idea for me to show you some of the tweets that we’re talking about, just to remind everyone what we’re dealing with here.

Now I hope we can all agree that this is objectively disgusting. Only an amoral, depraved and utterly moronic individual would find offensive tweets like these even remotely funny. But I should make it clear that, by James Gunn’s own admission, these tweets represent who he was rather than who he is. In his apology, he described himself as a ‘provocateur’ during the early days of his career, making shocking statements for the purposes of ‘satire.’ But it’s okay because he’s a better person who has grown and matured fully and will never do this again. Fair enough, you’d think. He admitted what he did was wrong and apologised profusely. That was a very honourable and decent thing to do.

Except we’ve seen this song and dance before.

In 2012, roundabout when Marvel announced they were making a Guardians Of The Galaxy movie with James Gunn directing, an old blog post of Gunn’s resurfaced entitled ‘The 50 Superheroes You Most Want To Have Sex With.’ The original post has since been deleted, but cached versions still exist here and there around the internet if you know where to look. Here are a few quotes from said blog:

[on natasha romanoff, the highest ~debut] “considering she’s fucked half the guys in the marvel universe, that’s quite a feat”

[on batwoman] “i’m hoping for a dc-marvel crossover so that tony stark can turn her; she could also have sex with nightwing and still be a lesbian”

”Many of the people who voted for the Flash were gay men. I have no idea why this is. But I do know if I was going to get fucked in the butt I too would want it to be by someone who would get it over with quick.”

Needless to say, this was quite offensive and causing bad PR, so James Gunn issued an apology:

“A couple of years ago I wrote a blog that was meant to be satirical and funny. In rereading it over the past day I don’t think it’s funny. The attempted humor in the blog does not represent my actual feelings. However, I can see where statements were poorly worded and offensive to many. I’m sorry and regret making them at all.

People who are familiar with me as evidenced by my Facebook page and other mediums know that I’m an outspoken proponent for the rights of the gay and lesbian community, women and anyone who feels disenfranchised, and it kills me that some other outsider like myself, despite his or her gender or sexuality, might feel hurt or attacked by something I said. We’re all in the same camp, and I want to do my best to make this world a better place for all of us. I’m learning all the time. I promise to be more careful with my words in the future. And I will do my best to be funnier as well. Much love to all – James”

Sound familiar?

Now of course it’s unfair to judge the man based on past actions that he himself apologised for. What matters is the present. Whether or not he has demonstrated to a reasonable standard that his work has grown and matured and that his offensive idiocy is a thing of the past. So let’s look at the Guardians Of The Galaxy movies.

While the first movie received critical acclaim, a few people (particularly fans of the source material) complained about how Gamora was treated. The so called ‘most powerful woman in the galaxy’ was reduced to a love interest, an occasional damsel in distress and there were a few odd occasions where she was objectified and degraded based on her sexual history. The most prominent example of which is when Drax describes her as ‘a green whore.’ The context being that he was ignorant of how offensive he was being despite trying to compliment her and call her a friend, and this was played for laughs in the movie. The second movie has more examples. Gamora’s role still paled in comparison to the role she played in the comics, and a new female character called Mantis was introduced whose power level from the comics was also significantly reduced for the movie and whose character was effectively reduced to be a punchline/punching bag. There’s also a scene involving Drax where he frequently describes her as ugly, saying that "when you're ugly and someone loves you, you know they love you for who you are. Beautiful people never know who to trust." Again this is played for laughs. Except I’d argue that an adult man constantly fixating on a woman’s appearance isn’t even remotely funny.

Another disturbing aspect of the Guardians 2 was the way it seemed to romanticise and excuse abusive relationships. Obviously there’s Drax and Mantis, but the biggest example is Star Lord and Yondu. The first movie did a reasonably good job establishing what drew Star Lord and Gamora together. They were both trying to escape from abusive father figures. The second film does a complete U-turn, calling Yondu Star Lord’s ‘David Hasselhoff’ and giving him a gratuitous and overly sentimental funeral as though he were a noble hero. While I’m sure the death of Yondu would emotionally impact Star Lord to a certain extent (he did raise the kid after all), to say that he’s like ‘David Hasselhoff’ because he’s a better dad than Ego the Living Planet was seems like a very low bar to clear. By that logic, Hitler was a good person because he didn’t kill as many people as Stalin did. It’s tone deaf, lacking in nuance and just a little bit insulting.

Bearing all this in mind, has James Gunn grown and matured since the period between 2008 and 2012? That’s for you to judge. I’d personally argue he hasn’t. Sure he’s no longer as extreme or provocative as he once was, but that’s not necessarily proof that he’s matured. Rather he’s just gotten better at hiding his immaturity. And in my own subjective opinion, based on his work, I think Disney made the right decision in sacking him. Now let me be clear, I don’t think Disney sacked him in order to take a moral stand as a lot of the problematic elements in the Guardians films have carried over into other MCU films. Gamora is still treated like shit in Avengers: Infinity War, and Thanos, who, like Yondu, was clearly established in the first Guardians movie as an abusive father figure, has been woobified and turned into a kind of sympathetic anti villain who actually cared about his daughter and only killed her because he had no other choice (as opposed to, you know, because he is a maniacal despot who’s a few Oompa Loompas short of a chocolate factory). The reason Gunn was fired was because of bad PR. Disney had dealt with this shit before in 2012 and they weren’t prepared to deal with it again, so they dropped the baggage, as it were. It’s a very common occurrence in Hollywood. Which is what makes the public backlash against this decision so puzzling to me.

I can understand being upset that the director of your favourite franchise has been fired, but can we try to get some perspective here? What happened to Gunn is nothing unique. This kind of thing happens all the time. A filmmaker does something controversial or has been revealed to have done something controversial in the past, the studio sacks them in an attempt to save face and everyone gets on with their lives. The situation with James Gunn is no different. The only reason I can see why people are so passionately against this is because of how these tweets were unearthed in the first place. Because the discoverer of the tweets, Mike Cernovich, is a member of the alt-right, the liberal community seem predisposed to dismiss this out of hand, which I think is incredibly dangerous. Okay, yes, Cernovich is a Nazi and almost certainly didn’t do this out of the goodness of his heart, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. It doesn’t change the fact that the tweets still exist and that they’re still incredibly offensive. And all the things I’ve heard people say in defence of James Gunn sound very similar to things the right would say about the likes of Brett Cavanaugh and Donald Trump. ‘It was x number of years ago.’ ‘It’s not relevant to who he is now.’ ‘He’s changed.’ ‘You can’t judge someone based on their past mistakes.’ I mean... come on guys! Either everyone should be held to the same standard or nobody should be held to standards at all. You can’t just change tact just because the person in question has the same political ideals as you. What are we saying? It’s okay for liberals to hold conservatives accountable for past actions and behaviour, but the right can’t do it to the left because apparently it’s not as funny when they do it? It’s classic ‘them and us’ mentality and it’s got to stop.

So, why am I bringing all this up, you may be asking? This happened over six months ago Quill. Aren’t you a little late to the party? Well a couple of days ago, it was announced that Warner Bros and DC Films had hired James Gunn to write and direct a sequel to Suicide Squad.

Well... sequel isn’t quite the right word. Apparently it’s more along the lines of a reimagining. Titled ‘The Suicide Squad’, the film is going to follow a whole new cast of characters and effectively start from scratch. No doubt this is part of WB and DC’s attempts to salvage the DC Extended Universe after the critical and financial disaster that was Justice League, as well as a response to people’s criticisms of the previous Suicide Squad film.

Writer/director David Ayer’s version of Suicide Squad was... let’s be charitable and call it problematic. Many people criticised the film for being misogynistic, borderline racist due to the one dimensional characterisation, and particular outrage was directed toward Ayer’s attempts to romanticise the relationship between the Joker and Harley Quinn. So it’s quite ironic that WB and DC are relying on James Gunn - James Gunn?!?! - to fix Suicide Squad when similar criticisms have been made toward the Guardians Of The Galaxy movies. That’s like hiring Harvey Weinstein to investigate sexual harassment claims.

And do you know what the funny thing is? We’ve been in this exact same situation before. In February 2017, news media started to report that WB and DC were eyeing Mel Gibson, the Oscar nominated director of Hawksaw Ridge and professional arsehole, to direct Suicide Squad 2. I even wrote a Scribble on it then. I heavily criticised WB and DC for caring more about snagging an Oscar nominated director to bolster their failing franchise than about holding certain ethical standards of decency within the industry. Oh, sure, Gibson has said many sexist, homophobic and antisemitic comments for years and has never at any point showed any hint of remorse for the amount of offence he’s caused, but he just made a good movie about Spider-Man fighting in World War II, so it all balances out, doesn’t it? We’re good, right? We’re cool. Gibson’s cool now. Yeah?

And now here we are seeing this play out again. James Gunn, a man who has said some incredibly offensive things over the years, is being hired by WB and DC to helm a new Suicide Squad movie and conveniently ignoring all the problematic shit surrounding him because he’s the guy that made those sci-fi films about the talking raccoon. People love those films. Let’s get him on board.

I’m getting so sick to death of actors and filmmakers getting away with shit and avoiding the consequences of their actions. James Gunn and his offensive tweets, Mel Gibson and his shitty behaviour, Kevin Hart and his temper tantrum when he was expected to apologise for being a homophobic prick. And the few times there are consequences for said actions, people of influence within the industry end up undermining it. WB and DC hiring James Gunn so soon after he was sacked by Disney, and Ellen fucking Degeneres ringing the Academy and persuading them to let Kevin Hart host the Oscars. Thankfully, and to his genuine credit, Hart turned it down, but seriously, what the actual fuck Ellen?! You’re LGBT, aren’t you? Why are you giving him a free pass? Do you have short term memory loss like the fish you voice in Finding fucking Nemo? Jesus Christ!

Finally, to people saying that Disney treated James Gunn too harshly for the tweets, may I remind you that when ‘The 50 Superheroes You Most Want To Have Sex With’ resurfaced in 2012, Disney still kept him on! He still got to write and direct two Marvel movies before finally getting the sack. And he was in talks to lead production in all future ‘Cosmic’ Marvel movies going forward before the resurfaced tweets made that impossible. Too harshly? I think he got off extremely lightly, frankly. I think he’s grotesquely lucky he’s still got a job at all. Let alone a job where he continues to direct tentpole blockbusters. For someone who was treated ‘too harshly’, he’s sure done alright for himself, hasn’t he? He’s not Oliver Twist begging movie studios to give him a film, cap in hand, ‘please sir, may I have some more?’ His position hasn’t changed one iota. That’s what we should be pissed off at. Not that he’s being unfairly punished. That he’s not being punished enough roughly seven years after the fact.

So what should we take away from all this? That we need to hold everyone accountable for their past actions and behaviour, regardless of whether they share our political beliefs or whether they were involved in films we actually like, and that the industry needs to do a better job of upholding the consequences of said actions. And regardless of whether you thought Disney were right to sack James Gunn, it cannot be denied that WB and DC handing the keys of another profitable franchise over to him so soon after this controversy is an incredibly irresponsible thing to do.

#anti james gunn #suicide squad #the suicide squad #guardians of the galaxy #dc extended universe #marvel cinematic universe #disney #quill's scribbles

225 notes · View notes

lostfaesworld · 15 days ago

Note

So many things that make me scratch my head. What kind of animes is anon talking about here that has female characters being called every name under the sun?

Are we talking about ecchi animes that are 15+ or 18+, or plain hentai here? Because outside of, maybe, villains and male characters from edgy Shonen works, I don't see it happening that much.

For the pedophilia thing... Anime won't influence teens to become pedophiles just because they watched a show. Just like gamers won't become school shooters or killers after playing games like COD or GTA. If they act on urges, chances are they already had a propensity for it before watching a show.

And since you brought up pedophilia, most of the people who make this accusation are talking about lolisho. Character has a big tits or is tall and built? Probably an adult until their age is revealed. Character is short and cute? That's a child and the author has to be a pedophile for even creating them that size. That's always the reaction that I see online.

Let's make a test, look at the boys from Hatsukoi Monster, a shojo anime, and tell me how old you think they are. No cheating, look at the pics and give me an age.

The whole lolisho debate is so annoying. It should have ended yesteryear. Yes, some of these characters are underage. Unsurprisingly, adults characters who DO fall in this category, such as Tatsumaki(OPM) and Rebecca(Cyberpunk: Edgerunners) keep on being called petite by fans despite their creators' admission. While male characters like Venti and Aether(Genshin) were called minors despite being a god and an immortal respectively. Lolisho is about body type, where the character is short and has a YOUTHFUL appearance. There are literal HUMAN adults who still get ID checked because they LOOK like they are still in high school.

So no, people who like lolisho AND non-lolisho characters are not closeted pedos. Adult characters are sexualised too FYI. Just look at the Bleach cast. Most people who watch these shows are in it for the story, the fights or whatever else is in the plot, not for fapping materials that they could easily get on the hub or any hentai sites.

Stop calling people gooners and pedos ffs. These are inks on paper, pixels that won't age even 10 years after the show ends. Thanks to this line of thinking, we now have teens who either jump through hoops to justify their FICTIONAL crush or develop OCD because they might get labelled pedos by their friends since they are now older than their favourite characters.

For the misogyny and women being treated only as hot bodies, you're gonna have to be precise here. Which anime are you talking about? Most of the girls who aren't the MC or part of the main team do have things going for them outside of their looks. Just because the girl (*cough* Orihime *cough*) has a crush on the MC, doesn't mean that she only exist to be with him.

If teenage boys are such dumbasses to think that anime reflects real life, then the girls are too. Remember the Twilight era? What do you think of Vampire Kinght, its animated counterpart? What about 50 shades, After and whatever else that went mainstream in the past? The books with questionable romance where some of the leads display bad behaviour which never get called out for. Do you have a problem with those books too or is it only Shonens?

There are legitimate criticisms to be made about Shonen AND Shojo works. But you shot yourself in the foot by acting like a Karen and acting like teenagers are infants who can't think for themselves.

https://www.tumblr.com/damnfandomproblems/765615706897268737/fandom-problem-6195-when-people-forget-that?source=share

"When people forget that shounen anime’s literal target demographic is teen boys, and get all mad when the anime girls are hot or sexy, THEYRE LITERALLY NOT MADE FOR YOU, the teen anime girl is made for the irl teen boy!"

Just because you're not the target demographic for something doesn't mean you can't criticize it for being sexist, pedophilic, and other things

There's a huge difference between making a romance plot for teen boys where both parties are treated with respect and like equals, and having adults drawing high school/middle school childrens' panties and giving them large gravity defying breasts, and having other characters refer to them with misogyny degrading terms—be it by constantly describing/referring their bodies sexually, or calling them bitches, whores, sluts, etc, just so male minors can jerk off to those portrayals

Teen boys are just that, TEENS! A.K.A, CHILDREN! While they may not be as impressional as younger children, they are still learning and taking information and forming their worldview around the things they are exposed too. These boys don't need to have misogynist bullshit shoved down their throat and shown all these girls (children, mind you) being sexualized and degraded and being told that this is a good thing to be attracted to, you should be attracted to it.

Healthy sexuality is aimed at adults, and these boys are starting to slowly transition into adulthood, their sexuality is going to be influenced heavily by the media and ideals fed to them, why do you think most men female hate body hair and non-make uped faces on women despite it being completely natural? They're constantly told it gross, and they are never shown natural women being portrayed as attractive and simply normal, which they are. If anyone should be sexualize in shounen, it shouldn't be the girls but rather WOMEN and MEN, not minors. They shouldn't be shown sexualized little girls and told this is okay, told that these children are sexy, aren't they sexy? Don't these little girls turn you on? we made them to be sexy just for you!! Please be turned on by these little girls so you stay more interested in my series!!

Not only that, they don't need to have misogyny shoved down their throat and told that it's okay and good and normal, if not natural. Girls and women aren't flat static weak character types. If they are giving boy and men characters dimension, they should be doing the same with women. Once again, teenage boys are boy and still impressional, there's a lot of subconscious things they will be internationalizng without realizing it because their brains are still developing and trying to figure out the world around them, still figuring out what is right and wrong and nuanced, and misogyny and pedophilia shouldn't be some of those things at risk of being internalized. They should be shown that girls and women are just like them; strong, capable, important, independent, awkward and longing, nervous, and everything else. They shouldn't be shown that girls and women just exist to be hot and sexy for them, and that they only exist to further their story/lives and are rather dull, only made interesting by desire to belong to a male

And all of this isn't touching upon the fact they grown ass men and women will watch these shows and too and get off to the sexualized minors

Posting as a response to a previous problem.

#stop blaming media for parental and societal problems

14 notes · View notes

kainosite · 6 years ago

Text

Les Misérables 2018, Episode 2

Welp, Anthony Perkins is not going to be knocked from his pedestal of “Most Brick-Accurate Interpretation of Javert Despite Being Far Too Attractive for the Role” any time soon.

The Good:

• Finally we get an adaptation that will force both us and Valjean to confront the question “Does Petit Gervais deserve the protection of the French criminal justice system, and if not why not?” The miniseries kind of had to do this because it made Valjean’s theft of the coin so much more deliberate than in the book, but it has done it, and not before time. Les Mis fandom has been willfully avoiding this question for years.

• The Thénardiers were superb. I know Olivia Colman is contractually obliged to appear in every BBC production ever, but her ubiquity is entirely justified here because she may be the best Mme. Thénardier of all time. Thénardier was good too, and that brief flash of violence against Mme. T when she challenged him was a valuable addition, both because it explains a lot about her character and because it foreshadows what he’ll become in Paris. So far we’ve only seen him as a corpse looter, a dodgy innkeeper and an extortionist, but he’s more dangerous than that, and we caught a glimpse of that here. There were some nice subtle touches: the Sergeant of Waterloo sign and the story of Thénardier’s heroism, the fact that the girls only have two good dresses between them (Azelma immediately gets Cosette’s; when they’re showing off Cosette to Victurnien she’s wearing Éponine’s), the inclusion of unloved, adorable baby Gavroche.

• One consequence of Colman’s excellent performance is that Fantine’s choice to leave Cosette at the inn appears quite reasonable, as it should. Fantine did exactly what a young woman traveling alone is supposed to do: she gravitated towards the mother playing with her children because that’s the person who is supposed to be safe. Mme. T was welcoming and sympathetic, though still with a bit of a Thénardiery edge, the little girls played together like sisters, and Fantine’s decision to leave Cosette in this stable, apparently happy environment seems entirely natural. She had no way to know that wholesome surface was wallpaper over an abyss. The people who can afford the diligence get a recommendation for the other inn, but she had to walk. (The Vimes theory of Yelp reviews.)

• Having Fantine walk in on Madeleine’s mayoral inauguration was a clever way to handle that exposition in theory, although slightly clunky in practice.

• Madeleine is so awkward. His speeches are so bad. His hat and coat are so ugly. <333

• I love every OC in Montreuil. I love the bourgeois who is super excited about Madeleine becoming the mayor (I hereby dub him “Robert”). I love Fantine’s factory friends who gossip about their sexy boss and his bedroom grotto and then run to get him to rescue their fallen coworker from evil cops. I even love the public letter writer with his creepy but pragmatic advice. I imagine he’s been witness to a lot of human misery and has developed that cynicism and dark humor you often see in people in frontline emergency services.

• I don’t love Mme. Victurnien, but that’s her, all right.

• This adaptation is doing an excellent job with Fantine’s illiteracy, and has been since the first episode. The skin-crawling awfulness of having to conduct your most private, personal business through the public letter writer and have him know and comment on all of it really comes through.

• The police are all in plainclothes and basically look like a gang of thugs. This adaptation has really grasped the 1820s French police aesthetic. I also appreciated how hostile and judgey everyone at the Prefecture was towards Javert.

• I don’t know what it says about Davies that the characters he can most consistently write well are the asshole fuckboys, but Bamatabois was great.

Also I don’t think I’ve seen a Fantine beat up a Bamatabois this bad since 1934 when she put his head through a glass window. As in the 1934 adaptaion, this creates a minor problem with the narrative because it means she really is guilty of a serious assault and Javert is right to arrest her, but you’d have to have a heart of stone not to enjoy seeing Bamatabois punched repeatedly in the face. I do not have a heart of stone.

• I’m choosing to believe that Javert’s handshake following his resignation is a little nod to readers of the novel, who know as well as he does that a legitimate magistrate has not taken the hand of a spy.

• Nice fake jet manufacturing process in Valjean’s factory: they even included the gum-lac. The flag at the Prefecture of Police is the white fleur-de-lys, not the tricolor. They really are putting tremendous effort into getting some of the little details right.

• This adaptation’s sense of place continues to be excellent. Montreuil-sur-Mer has its steep hill; during Madeleine’s inauguration you can even see the Canche. The soldiers from the garrison are a ubiquitous background presence. The Prefecture of Police in Paris looks like the old headquarters at the Rue de Jérusalem, which if it wasn’t a happy accident shows a truly remarkable degree of historical research and commitment to accuracy. (They then proceeded to cover it up with that hideous red font, truly the ‘YELLOW’ of this adaptation.)

The Meh

• If you must go with a “Javert immediately makes a positive identification of Valjean” plot their first meeting wasn’t a disaster, I guess. There was some decent dramatic tension. I appreciated Madeleine’s initial cunning plan to stare out the window for the entire rest of his life so that Javert couldn’t look him in the face, before realizing that this probably wasn’t going to work. The little slip where he called Javert ambitious and betrayed his prior knowledge of him was good.

• Why does every person in this adaptation have a ridiculous and implausible horse? Why does Javert have a horse to ride to Paris, which is far enough away that you’d need to change horses and you should probably just take the diligence, but not to Arras, which is within riding distance?

The horses are elevated from “bad” to “meh” by the fact that Valjean’s palomino is gorgeous, though very unlikely to exist in northern France in 1823, and if he must ride an implausible horse it might as well be an anachronistically pretty one. Also by Valjean and Javert’s fraught moonlit horseback encounter, which is obviously what an adaptation should do with its ridiculous horses if it insists on having them.

• The Chief Inspector in Paris was neither Chabouillet nor attractive, nor did he have any fun hierarchical tension with Javert. Boo.

• This adaptation is sure going hard on the Valjean/Fantine vibes, huh. I don’t hate it, which probably counts as an enormous accomplishment for the miniseries. I think it manages not to come off as gross mainly because Madeleine is so incredibly awkward that it’s impossible to imagine it ever progressing to the point of a sexual relationship. Fantine smiles at Madeleine because she’s so relieved to have found a safe harbor. After an internal struggle Madeleine manages to smile back because that’s what you’re supposed to do when people smile at you, right??? and she’s so powerless that she’s the only adult in Montreuil he doesn’t find threatening. In a decade or two they might progress all the way to reciprocal “Good mornings” when she comes in to work. That’s as far as this is going to go.

• Sadly this vision of social harmony and human connection will never be realized, because Fantine got fired. Specifically she got fired by Valjean for added drama. I know people are up in arms about this, but honestly I think it’s fine? At the end of the day it is Valjean’s sexist policy that costs Fantine her job and his chosen supervisor who implements it. The franc stops with him. Having him fire her himself just makes his responsibility a little more apparent. I don’t think it’s necessary to depict it this way, but it’s fine. Adaptations do this sometimes. In 2012 something very similar happens, where Valjean is too distracted by Javert to deal with the Fantine Baby Drama and lets a malicious subordinate call the shots. The Original French Concept Album has Valjean fire her directly without any excuse for his behavior at all, and nobody thinks the musical is a irredeemable character-ruining travesty of an adaptation– well, one guy.

• Shouty Valjean is not doing anything for me but he’s not catastrophic either. It is unfortunate that most of the people he interacts with in this episode, and therefore most of the people he shouts at, are female, but we know from Episode 1 that he’s equally happy to shout at bishops who have just saved him from a lifetime sentence of forced labor. Westjean is an equal opportunity shouter.

The decision to portray Valjean’s saintliness as a constant effort that slips whenever he’s stressed is an unusual one, and certainly not Brick-accurate (Brick Valjean’s saintliness is a constant effort that almost never slips), but I don’t think we should dismiss it out of hand. Television needs to externalize internal conflicts in some way, and I can’t say this is a less artistically valid method than eg. I Miserabili’s tendency to have everyone monologue all the time. We’ll have to see where they go with it.

• Valjean didn’t refuse Javert’s resignation. The resignation scene is so weird that I’ve decided I’m actually okay with this, because it’s really very unclear what Javert’s is resigning over. Is it the “false” denunciation? Is it the argument over Fantine, which he also apologizes for? Has all this turmoil just made him reconsider his life choices, and he’s decided to emigrate to America and become a paddleboat pilot on the Mississippi? Who knows! Valjean has a moral responsibility to stop Javert falling on his sword over the denunciation, but not to keep him on the police force. If Javert is going to be this vague, it’s his problem.

• The Burning Coin of Shame was so melodramatic Hugo’s ghost is presumably kicking himself for not making Valjean pick it up in the novel. I don’t hate it, but when you’ve out-melodrama’d Hugo it may be time to take a step back.

The Bad

• That red font looks worse every time I see it.

• Valjean’s godforsaken ponytail. WHY. It’s not even attractive! Who the fuck decided to lift every aesthetic decision from the 2012 movie except for the period appropriate hair!?

• Speaking of period appropriate hair, your prospective employers might be less likely to assume you’re a slut if you put it up like a respectable woman instead letting it flop all over the place like a prostitute, Fantine.

• I don’t love Fantine’s intake interview. There are ways they could have depicted the factory’s morality policy without making Madeleine come off like such a nosy sexist asshole, and Davies should have found one. Being the nosy sexist asshole is Victurnien’s job. Madeleine is meant to be the paternalistic, well-meaning sexist asshole.

• The Brick glides over Marius’s childhood in a few sentences, so I appreciate there is a difficulty in finding incidents to fill the Pontmercy sections in these early episodes. TOO BAD. You decided to merge the timelines, Davies; it was self-evident that this was going to be the major problem with that approach when you did it. THIS IS THE LIFE YOU HAVE CHOSEN. Go over the novel with a fine-toothed comb or make some shit up, but it was your responsibility to fill this gap somehow.

Killing off Georges Pontmercy ten years early is not a solution.

a) You gave us Hot Sad Dad Pontmercy and then tore him away from us two episodes before you needed to. HOW DARE.

b) The Marius timeline in the Brick makes sense. His father dies, he finds out Georges loved him from Mabeuf, he starts researching his dad and Napoleon and grows estranged from his grandfather, Gillenormand kicks him out of the house, he meets Bossuet and Courfeyrac. Marius’s internal growth, the timeline and the plot all work together as a cohesive whole. Fuck knows how any of that is going to work out now.

c) Marius is still going to be a child next week, so killing off Georges didn’t even solve the problem, it just postponed it for the space of a single episode.

d) The gap wouldn’t even have been that hard to fill! Georges could have fought with the prosecutor about his decoration and spied on Marius at church or something. It would have given us a chance to meet Mabeuf properly. Fuck this bullshit so much.

• This is a minor thing, but there should be women at Gillenormand’s table. Ancien Régime salon culture was run by women; the exclusion of women from male political and social life in France was a nineteenth century invention. The Brick is very clear about this – Gillenormand generally hangs around with Baroness T. History has enough sexism in it already. There’s no need to invent more.

• I have no objections to Valjean firing Fantine in person, but the toy bird introduces a pretty serious flaw in Victurnien’s “She’s a callous whore who doesn’t care about her child” case, one you’d think Valjean might notice. There’s no reason for it even to appear in that scene! Have the Tories cut the BBC’s budget so much they can’t afford script editors?

• Gosh those are some bright, white street lamps they have in Montreuil. I wonder what sort of oil burns with such a constant flame?

• If Davies wanted to dissociate his adaptation from the musical, a good first step might have been to spend much less time with the campy tooth and wig guy. Fantine’s plot arc was actually fairly good up until that point, but after that it really did devolve into misery porn.

• Oyelowovert has a very pretty face. What he does not have is any coherent motivation for his behavior in this episode.

Javert’s plotline was such a fucking disaster in this that I gave it its own post.

• If Davies insists on doing this stupid Arras entrapment plot, the least he could do is give us a Robert and a Genflou to make up for it. Well, we got a Robert but not a Genflou, and I’m mad.

This episode was a mix of the sublime and the grotesque, and therefore, in a certain sense, truly worthy of Victor Hugo. But Gavroche is going to have a lot of work to do at the barricade to make up for this mess.

#Les Misérables 2018 #Les Mis Adaptations #Les Misérables

19 notes · View notes

thiswaycomessomethingwicked · 6 years ago

Note

Do you know anything about interracial marriage in Napoleonic France? Most of what I found are behind paywalls.

Interesting question! I will preface this by saying that my knowledge of race and colonial spaces is focused on 17th century colonial New Spain (what is now Mexico) and the relationship between religion, translation, and colonial identity. I am not a specialist in colonialism, slavery and race-relations in the French Empire.

Ok, disclaimer done.

So, from what I know race in the French Republic and Napoleonic Empire hasn’t really been touched in a big, serious manner by historians until recently. This is part to do with the perception of a “race blind” French citizenship model and perceived “republican universalism” in the 18th and 19th century. That said, this is changing and more historians are becoming interested in how racial relations played out in the Revolution and Napoleonic France as models of citizenship and civic identity shifted.

Some background: interracial marriage in pre-Revolution French Empire was most usually a concern of colonial spaces in an attempt to codify racial lines (this became more intense as the 18th and 19th century advanced). Some legal precedents include: 1711 decree saw the banning of interracial marriages in Guadalupe and 1724 decree saw it banned in French Louisiana. On mainland France the 1778 royal decree banned interracial marriage in France-proper.

During the French Revolution, in 1791 all men in France were declared free, regardless of colour. This was followed, of course, by the 1794 abolition of slavery. Also, post-1791 couples could marry either in a civil union or a religious one but only civil was deemed “legitimate” by the government.

In 1802 slavery was reinstated and in 1803 a Ministerial Decree reinstated the 1778 royal decree effectively banning mixed-race marriage in the metropol (i.e. conitental France/Napoleonic Empire, not the colonies). The 1803 Ministerial Decree remained in effect until late-1818/early 1819 (though there is one petition for a dispensation as late as 1820 in Montpellier). However, if you were living in the colonies it seemed you could participate in mixed-race marriage which is an interesting inverse of previous approaches to racial control.

That said, if you were a mixed-race couple in the Metropol you could apply for a dispensation and be allowed to marry. Considering that the black and mixed-raced population of Continental France was relatively low (around 5,000 people-ish) these records are sparse and hard to find. I know Jennifer Heuer found something like 40? 50? cases of dispensation requests to allow for a mixed-race marriage. And that is from extant documents in the French National Archives. So the actual number, of course, could be higher.

NB: The 1803 edict only applies to those who are black – mixed-race people were allowed to marry whomever they pleased. Basically, an inverse of the later 19th-century US “One Drop” rule. Jim-Crow south had the rule that was if you had any black ancestry you couldn’t marry someone who is white. In Napoleonic France if you had any European ancestry you were allowed to marry a white spouse. Though this distinction was not enshrined in law, it was an administrative proclamation by Claude Ambrose Regnier, Minister of Justice (1802-1813).

Negotiating these restrictions resulted in couples making all sorts of arguments to convince authorities to grant their unions from the need to legitimize children to citing a devotion to French citizenship and having served the French state in some way. This served to highlight the tensions between the values and principles Napoleonic France claimed to represent and align itself with and the reality of racial classifications.

An interesting point Heuer makes is to highlight that both the 1803 decree and the 1778 decree banning interracial marriages come close on the heels of laws restricting access to French territory by black and mixed-race peoples. I would add in regards to marriage in particular, an underlying tension is the perception of white-European women’s bodies as extensions of the Metropol (we see this quite strongly in late 19th century French Indo-china and the Dutch East Indies) and therefore extensions of the Ideal of the State. So part of restricting access to the State, to the Metropol, meant restricting access to the white-European female body in particular.

In summary? If you were mixed-race in the Continental Napoleonic Empire you could marry a white spouse. If you were black you couldn’t. However, you could ask for a dispensation from the government to allow you to marry. In French colonial spaces it seems to be more open.

I hope this helps!

Thank you for the ask! :D

Some sources if you have $$ or university access: Colours of Liberty, edited by Sue Peabody and Tyler Stovall “The One-Drop Rule in Reverse? Interracial Marriages in Napoleonic and Restoration France,” Jennifer Heur, Law and History Review “From Mariage à la Mode to Weddings at Town Hall: Marriage, Colonialism, and Mixed-Race Society in Nineteenth-Century Senegal,”Hilary Jones, The International Journal of African Historical Studies“Mulattoes and Métis: Attitudes Toward Miscegenation in the United States and France since the Seventeenth Century,” George M. Fredrickson, International Social Science“The Blood of France’: Race and Purity of Blood in the French Atlantic World,” Guillaume Aubert, William and Mary Quarterly“Négresse, Mulâtrese, Citoyenne: Gender and Emancipation in the French Caribbean, 1650-1848,” Sue Peabody, in Gender and Emancipation in the Atlantic World

#history #race #18th century #19th century #napoleonic #colonialism #french empire #napoleonic empire #napoleon #napoleon bonaparte #racism

45 notes · View notes

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

Are The Republicans Winning The Election

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/are-the-republicans-winning-the-election/

Are The Republicans Winning The Election

California Recall Lesson: Republicans Believe In Elections Only When They Win

Winning Elections: Why and How the Republicans Win

Republicans,;like totalitarians, believe in elections. But only if they always win.

New case in point? California, where voters on Tuesday appeared inclined to keep Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom in a recall election.

Cue Larry Elder, the leading Republican to replace him, who started dropping unsubstantiated claims that the election was;rigged against him.

Start the day smarter. Get all the news you need in your inbox each morning.

The only proof Elder offered was the fact that California voters were poised to pick Newsom over him or anyone else on the long list of possible replacements.

How could that be? Republicans can only lose if theyre cheated, right?

I Do Not Buy That A Social Media Ban Hurts Trumps 2024 Aspirations: Nate Silver

sarah: Yeah, Democrats might not have their worst Senate map in 2022, but it will by no means be easy, and how they fare will have a lot to do with the national environment. And as we touched on earlier, Bidens overall approval rating will also make a big difference in Democrats midterm chances.

nrakich: Yeah, if the national environment is even a bit Republican-leaning, that could be enough to allow solid Republican recruits to flip even Nevada and New Hampshire. And then it wouldnt even matter if Democrats win Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

One thing is for sure, though whichever party wins the Senate will have only a narrow majority, so I think were stuck in this era of moderates like Sens. Joe Manchin and Lisa Murkowski controlling every bills fate for at least a while longer.;

sarah: Lets talk about big picture strategy, then, and where that leaves us moving forward. Its still early and far too easy to prescribe election narratives that arent grounded in anything, but one gambit the Republican Party seems to be making at this point is that attacking the Democratic Party for being too progressive or woke will help them win.

What do we make of that playbook headed into 2022? Likewise, as the party in charge, what are Democrats planning for?

With that being said, the GOPs strategies could still gin up turnout among its base, in particular, but its hard to separate that from general dissatisfaction with Biden.

Georgia’s Brad Raffensperger: National Gop Figures Didn’t Understand Our Laws

But Gabriel Sterling, Georgia’s voting system implementation manager, said on Wednesday that the system is working exactly the way it is intended.

“The irony of saying ‘fraudulent votes have been found’ â he has gained in the finding of these votes,” he said.

Raffensperger has said he’s been pressured by top Republicans to find ways of disqualifying ballots that hurt the Trump campaign.

“They say that as pressure builds, it reveals your character, it doesn’t change your character. Some people aren’t behaving too well with seeing where the results are,” Raffensperger told NPR’s Ari Shapiro on Tuesday.

“At the end of the day, I want voters to understand that when they cast their ballot in Georgia, it will be accurately counted. You may not like the results and I get that. I understand how contentious it is. But you can then respect the results.”

Poll workers check voters’ identifications on Election Day at the Orpheum Theater in Madison, Wis. The Trump campaign has announced it is filing for a recount in two Wisconsin counties.hide caption

toggle caption

Poll workers check voters’ identifications on Election Day at the Orpheum Theater in Madison, Wis. The Trump campaign has announced it is filing for a recount in two Wisconsin counties.

President Trump’s campaign announced Wednesday morning it is filing a petition to formally ask election authorities to conduct a recount in two Wisconsin counties. President-elect Joe Biden won the state by a little more than 20,000 votes.

Recommended Reading: Did Donald Trump Really Say Republicans Are Dumb

Gop Scores An Early Win In 2024 Race

New Census figures show the gap between the popular vote and the Electoral College is widening.

As a result of Census Bureau population figures released Monday, if every state voted the same way in 2024 that they did in 2020, President Joe Biden would win three fewer Electoral College votes than he did in November. |

Link Copied

President Joe Bidens path to reelection just got a little harder.

As a result of Census Bureau population figures released Monday, if every state voted the same way in 2024 that they did in 2020, Biden would win three fewer Electoral College votes than he did in November, while the Republican nominee would win three more.

The shift is only a marginal one it would only affect the closest of elections.

But that doesnt mean the new state numbers which are used to apportion the number of congressional districts each state gets, and thus the number of electoral votes wont alter the landscape in 2024 and 2028.

Here are five reasons why:

The gap between the popular vote and the Electoral College is widening.

Biden beat then-President Donald Trump by 74 Electoral College votes. A net gain of six votes for Trump wouldnt have mattered.

But in a close race like the one in 2000, where just five electoral votes separated George W. Bush and Al Gore the re-balancing of the Electoral College could tip the scales.

Thats significant for a party whose presidential candidates have won the national popular vote only once since 1988.

But thats right now.

The Numbers Are Grim Republicans Are Winning At Normalizing Voter Suppression

Voter ID laws which are sculpted to make it harder to vote are wildly popular with voters, according to surveys

Voter suppression has been around for as long as the republic. Stories of subterfuge and ballot box-stuffing schemes are such a part of American political folklore, theres an entire book about them. So in one sense, there is nothing particularly novel about Republican politicians efforts to rig the vote, or the important revelations that rightwing groups and corporate officials are coordinating state-level campaigns to make it harder to vote.

However, a new nugget of polling data illustrates that something more fundamental has happened: voter suppression is no longer a plot engineered in the shadows and denied in public, for fear of criticism by a population that considers such measures grotesque. Instead, voter suppression is having its coming-out party because more and more Americans now consider it to be a perfectly legitimate and even laudable campaign tactic.

The data point comes in a new CBS/YouGov survey, buried under the topline finding that almost two-thirds of Republican voters do not consider Joe Biden the legitimate winner of the 2020 election, despite Bidens electoral college and popular vote victories.

Nearly half of Republicans surveyed supported the latter move, with the strongest demographics in support being female Republicans, non-white Republicans and white Republicans with no college degree.

Read Also: Democrats Have Tried To Impeach Every Republican President Since Eisenhower

Biden Avoids The Microscope

Another benefit Biden can enjoy from having his party control both chambers of Congress is that Republican investigatory powers will be greatly diminished. With Democrats in charge of Senate committees, embarrassing and potentially explosive investigations are unlikely to materialise.

Wisconsin Republican Ron Johnson will no longer run the Government Oversight Committee, so his planned forays into Hunter Biden’s China dealings and any connections to the incoming president will go away. The same applies to Lindsey Graham and the Judiciary Committee, which was expected to hold more hearings into the 2016 Russia election-meddling investigation and the origins of Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe.

Any new Democratic scandals that crop up should also avoid a full and potential politically damaging airing – a luxury Trump also enjoyed during his first two years in office and sorely missed during his final two.

The Trump-Russia saga in 350 words

Biden Flips Coveted Georgia The Last State To Be Called By The Ap

The full hand recount of the state’s 5 million presidential votes resulted in a narrowing of Biden’s lead over President Trump in Georgia, but not nearly enough to change the result. He started out with a 14,000 vote lead, and now leads by just over 12,000 votes.

The recount, formally known as a risk-limiting audit, is intended to verify the contest’s winner. As Georgia Public Broadcasting’s Stephen Fowler reported, four counties uncovered a few thousand previously uncounted votes, which subsequently cut into Biden’s margin of victory.

Douglas, Walton, Fayette and Floyd counties all experienced issues with missing or unscanned votes related to human error â but the numbers weren’t significant enough to change the outcome of the election.

Loading…

There is no mandatory recount law in Georgia, but state law does allow for a recount if the margin is less than .5%. It currently stands at .2%.

Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger announced the hand audit last week, citing the close margin of the race.

The four counties with new vote totals must recertify their results. Statewide election results must be certified by Friday. The Trump campaign then has until Tuesday to request an additional recount, which would be by machine rather than by hand.

Trump has repeatedly questioned the integrity of Georgia’s vote counting, it both a “joke” and a process that led to “fraudulent votes” being found.

Read Also: Are Any Republicans In Favor Of Impeachment

Redistricting Is The Next Step On A Path To One

The redistricting process kicked off this week in Washington. The Census Bureau released initial data from the 2020 census Monday afternoon, , which means that congressional district boundaries will soon be redrawn to account for changes in population.

These changes will probably tend to benefit the Republican Party, as conservative states will get more seats for instance, Texas will gain two seats, while New York, California, and Illinois will all lose one. Republicans are also certain to use the process to try to gerrymander themselves as many additional congressional seats as possible by leveraging their control of a majority of state legislatures. And that is just the opening tactic in a long-term strategy to abolish American democracy and set up one-party rule.

Today in Michigan, gerrymandering means Republicans enjoy a 3.4-point handicap in the state House and a 10.7-point handicap in the state Senate; in Pennsylvania, it’s a 3.1-point handicap in the House and a 5.9-point handicap in the Senate; and in Wisconsin, a 7.1-point handicap in the House and a 10.1-point handicap in the Senate.

It’s impossible to gerrymander the Senate, of course, but luckily for Republicans that chamber is inherently gerrymandered due to the large number of disproportionately white, low-population rural states that lean conservative. The swing seat in the Senate is biased something like 7 points to the right.

A Late Surge In Latino Voters Helped Newsom Keep His Job

Who is Winning US Election 2020 | Full 360 Analysis | Analysts, Democrats, Republicans on NewsX

For weeks, Democrats openly worried that Latino voters were not going to show up in force for Gov. Gavin Newsom. That might have spelled doom for the party, which has relied on support from Latino voters to rise to its current grip on power in the state.

But early numbers suggest that it might have been history repeating itself: a late investment in Latino voter outreach, and a late uptick in interest and voting among Latinos. Though it was far from unanimous, the majority of Latino voters backed Mr. Newsom, with some Latino-heavy precincts defeating the recall by as much as 88 percent, according to an analysis by the Latino Policy and Politics Initiative at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Early numbers, though, suggest that Latino voters may still not be showing up to the polls at the same rates as white, Black and Asian American voters. As of Tuesday morning, 30 percent of Latino voters who received their ballots by mail had sent them back, compared with 50 percent of white voters and 40 percent of Black voters, according to Political Data Inc., a Sacramento-based research group.

Historically, Latinos are more likely to vote late, and many observers thought it was possible to see a last-minute surge among those voters. Exit polling suggests that Latinos made up roughly 24 percent of all voters in the recall, and that about 60 percent of those Latino voters favored keeping the governor in office.

You May Like: Are There More Republicans Or Democrats In The House

Some Republicans Including Trump Make Baseless Pre

As Election Day dawned in California, some leading Republicans were preparing to declare the results marred by fraud.

Elder had already set up a link on his campaign website to a petition asking the state legislature to investigate voting fraud. In recent interviews he encouraged citizens to report voting issues to his campaign and said a team of lawyers was ready to act if needed.

The pre-election efforts to undermine confidence in the results were led by former president Donald Trump, who sent out a statement Tuesday morning warning of rampant voter fraud. In a Tuesday evening interview on Newsmax, Trump repeated his baseless claims, urging viewers to take a look at whats going on right now in California with the mail-in ballots and all the crap that theyre doing.

Shortly after 1 p.m. Tuesday outside a voting location at the Stanislaus County Fairgrounds in Turlock, Charlotte Dutra, 68, a retired human resources analyst for Turlock Irrigation District, said she is a proud Republican and voted yes to take out.

Dutra said she filled out her recall ballot and dropped it off in person. She said she believes there was fraud in the 2020 election, and shes still skeptical of election integrity in California because the current secretary of state was appointed by the White-privileged Gavin Newsom.

There is no evidence that there was widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.

Can Pence Affect The Outcome

While Pence has said he welcomes objections to the electoral college count, his role in the processopening envelopes and affirming the victoriesis largely ceremonial.

Last month, Rep. Louie Gohmert, a Republican from Texas, filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to give Pence the authority to overturn Bidens win, but Pence successfully requested the case be dismissed, with an attorney for the Department of Justice arguing he was not the right defendant.

Read Also: Why Do Republicans Want To Take Away Health Care

Newsoms Efforts To Combat Coronavirus Sway Some Voters

In a rapidly gentrifying part of Inglewood, Calif., Gov. Gavin Newsoms imposition of restrictions in response to the coronavirus pandemic swayed some voters as did Republican Larry Elders statements that children do not need to be vaccinated or wear masks.

Keeping a candidate in office thats going to protect health-care workers, protect children, enforce the mask mandate at this point Im on the front lines. I work at UCLA Health in a hospital setting as a manager and am in the thick of it, seeing children get sick, Jolie Emenike, 41, said about the issue that drove her to vote against the recall Tuesday morning.

I dont want to see the vaccine or mask mandates change, she said.

For Dan Sabin, too, the vaccine rules were top of mind, though his conclusion was different.

I was subject to a vaccine mandate when I was younger in Romania. We overthrew our government, but I still have the lasting effects of that mandate, said Sabin, 33. I definitely recalled Gavin Newsom.

Although he called mail-in ballots a massive risk, the software engineer said he trusts the election process.

Im not really sure. You have to trust the people that do the ballots, he said. Ultimately, the people that work in there are people in the community.

If Rep Liz Cheney Doesnt Have A Home In The Gop Who Does

To be sure, though, Fragas own research has found that white voters, regardless of how easy or hard it is for them to vote, consistently turn out at higher rates than voters of color, so we do want to be careful of not reading too much into this. Jennifer McCoy, a political scientist at Georgia State University who studies the effects of polarization on democracy, told me that she thought the current emphasis on voter restrictions boiled down to Republicans thinking they could appeal to Trumps base by codifying his baseless claims of voter fraud. know they have to attract Donald Trump supporters who now believe there is fraud, said McCoy. So a large part of the current efforts to change voter laws was a direct response to this last election. Large majorities of Republicans continue to believe Bidens win is not legitimate, and a that only 28 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning people agreed that everything possible should be done to make voting easy, a steep drop from 48 percent in October 2018.

The GOPs restrictionist bent sends the message that Republicans dont want Black and brown Americans to vote. In September 2020, 54 percent of Black respondents and 35 percent of Hispanic respondents told FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos they believed Republicans didnt want people like me to vote.

Don’t Miss: What Percent Of Republicans Approve Of Trump

Why Are Republicans Fighting So Hard For Georgia

While the presidential election results were full of disappointments for Donald Trump, losing Georgia may have been the unkindest cut.

Like Arizona, the state hadn’t been carried by a Democrat since 1992. But unlike that desert state, Georgia wasn’t considered an electoral battleground until the campaign’s final weeks.

That, along with the narrowness of the Biden lead in the state, may be why the Trump team has fought so furiously to flip the state to his column – even if it means going to war with local Republicans overseeing the state’s election.

The president’s efforts to cast doubt on the results in Georgia are complicated by the fact that the state’s two runoff contests in January will decide control of the US Senate. The more he feuds with his own party in the state, the greater the risk division will lead to Republican defeat.

Trump is making Georgia his first presidential visit since the election. The stated purpose is to campaign for the two Republican incumbent senators, but he is sure to continue to call into question the presidential verdict in the state.

Reversing the election results has proven to be a futile battle, but it seems the only thing worse for this president than actual defeat is appearing to accept it.

0 notes

ryland-rambles · 4 years ago

Text

I think I have it figured out

Right now, Im just throwing ideas at the wall to see what sticks. But I think I’ve decided on three couples - Lyddie and Amir.. Christofer and Lief.... Naim and Ella. I really like these six and we will see where it goes. I’m actually having fun.. its a brand new adventure for me to write paranormal romance.

**Side note, I changed it from eight years to three years for the company. made more sense.. and 7 years married, not ten. **

Lyddie turned her attention to Naim, the massive giant of a man, with his crimson fire red beard, and shoulder length wavy hair, an odd mix of blonde, different shades of red, and even a bit of orange. Somehow it looked good on him, with his tanned skin, the copper-red of his scales barely visible just under his skin, the most visible where the skin was delicate, throat and wrists , ankles she was sure even though she'd never seen them.

He had to be easily seven feet tall, and was barrel-chested, with thighs like tree trunks, and hands that were calloused from years of hard work. In the faded flannel over white tee he wore and the faded to white blue jeans, he looked like a mix of thundergod and farmer.

To be fair, Lyddie had no idea what job he did. Considering the way the muscles clearly rippled under his shirt, probably something physically demanding. One didn't get that body in a gym. Maybe he worked for the Queen or something, the Draconian queen that was.

Naim caught her staring at him, and arched one dark crimson brow at her. Too drunk to care, she sighed and surprising herself and him, flopped dramatically across both the men, as they were seated on the couch all together. Lief squawked as he was squished, until Naim leaned over and just effortlessly pulled the other free, setting the fairy on one massive knee instead.

Lyddie was certain he would shove her off, but he just sighed, collected her and tucked her against his side. And wow, he made her feel petite and feminine, and a part of her wished desperately that he was her mate for a brief moment. But she knew better, this time she would never settle for anything but her actual mate, even if the man somehow made her feel safe.

Pity he was a massive asshole on normal days. One solid hand landed on Lief's head, ruffling the curls, and Lyddie was distracted by the sheer size difference between the two, Naim's hand completely covered Lief's head, the fingers covering baby blues for a brief moment before Naim let go.

Lief gave a little squawk and promptly tried to fix the curls so they weren't so messy, glaring at the other man who simply smirked back. Huffing, Lief turned his attention to Lyddie. "Did butthead over here tell you about his latest adventure?"

Lyddie blinked while Naim barked out laughter. "Butthead? What the hell. Hey Lief, the nineties called, they want their insults back." Promptly Lief stuck out his tongue, giggling when Naim pretended to bite it. Still though, Naim turned his attention down to Lyddie.

Luckily he made no move to dislodge her from position, a spot that Lyddie had to admit was very comfortable. As a Carlyn, she ran hot like a furnace, but as a dragon, Nim was cool and comfortable and somehow even though he was a solid brick wall and Dracona did not have secondary genders like the animal shifters did, he still felt enough like Alpha to her that it was enough to settle and soothe her wolf for the moment.

"Last week," His deep voice rumbled and Lyddie closed her eyes to listen and better feel the vibrations. "I was in Kansas, working on a project. And well, I saw an opportunity for a little extra. Unfortunately, I did not count on nature activists -Humans at that, deciding to protest an oil pipeline being developed. Something about destroying old history, I wasn't really paying attention to the details. However, I ended up being lumped with the protesters and arrested with them."

Lyddie frowned, about to sit up, but really, she was too comfortable, and Lief looked amused rather than worried so she settled down and asked only, "Did you have fun in jail?"

Naim snorted. "I was only there for a couple hours, and that's just because my boss thought I needed a time out - his exact words."

Lief snickered at that. "Serves you right for doing extracurricular activities." Naim made a rude motion with fingers, at least she assumed it was, considering Lief's mock offended look. She wasn't completely up to date with the Supernatural community anymore, having lived as a Human for the last several years.

Gods, but she missed her pack, missed her brother.. missed being a wolf and running in the full moons with other wolves beside her. She couldn't even remember the last time she actually shifted - Jonah had slowly worn her down, convincing her to abandon her wolf side and live as a Human over the years until she was pretty certain she had completely lost herself along the way. It was a sobering thought. Still, she tuned in, listening to Naim speak.

"So he made a friend." Lief offered helpfully.

At that, Naim frowned lightly and shrugged one massive shoulder. "She was kind." He allowed. "She had a pretty smile." Lyddie didn't know Naim that well, but the way Lief was watching the other man, she had a feeling that was really high praise for him.

"Pity she didn't have much to smile about, being stuck in the cell with me." Lyddie snorted at that, nestling into his side. "I'm guessing she was trans, considering they don't usually lock up opposite sex in the same jail cell."

When two pairs of eyes landed on her in confusion, Lyddie yawned and explained, "Reapers accidentally put the wrong soul in the wrong sex body."

At that, Lief nodded. "Oh right, that happens sometimes. Not usually often for the Supernatural, but we usually have a Soul-Walker to help us when we are dying. I don't think Humans have that. And they don't have the magic to change their appearance."

At that, Naim furrowed his brows. "What do they do?"

Lyddie shrugged. "Suffer? No seriously," She continued at his look of annoyance. "It's pretty taboo to be trans. Most Humans don't believe in Reapers, so they think that the body you are born in is supposed to be the right one. They think that those who are trans are sick in the head or defective in some way. It's really kind of sad."

Lief had a thoughtful look on his face, and leaned forward slightly, asking, "Do they see trans like the Supernatural community sees duals?"

At that, Lyddie looked confused. "What? No, no one cares you can shift between male and female bodies." At that, Lief blew out a breath of air and ruffled one still out of place curl.

"Yeah, I know. It's because we bond with 'Siders instead of the "right" Lokarians." He made the air quotes with his fingers, which somehow didn't look completely silly. "But, I mean, are they treated the same way? Minus the whole "drowned at birth" thing of course."

At the question, Lyddie grimaced. It had been a legitimate law, repealed in the late eighties, but still some old fashioned, deeply religious people still followed it, along with other outdated practices.

"I- Yeah." Lyddie said slowly. "Humans have a variety of religions instead of just one like us, but yeah. Most of the religions treat those who aren't completely their version of normal pretty badly."

Lief frowned, clearly chewing on the idea. Naim sighed, a movement that moved Lyddie with it, and then shook his head. "Well, I will probably never see her again, so the point is moot anyway." Lyddie nodded slowly at that.

Little did he know, he would run into the same woman just tomorrow morning, hungover and snarly and biting the heads off of anyone who dared to speak to him.

#Lief #Naim #Lyddie #april camp nano 2021 #paranormal romance

0 notes

ericvick · 4 years ago

Photo

Wu, Campbell direct parade of hopefuls for mayor's chair

Mayor Walsh’s likely departure for Washington, D.C., could pull as numerous as 5 new candidates into a race to be successful him this summer season or fall, depending on the timing of his envisioned resignation, which would comply with his affirmation by the US Senate. Two metropolis councillors, Michelle Wu and Andrea Campbell, who have been by now waging spirited and well-funded strategies to compete versus Walsh will very likely be joined by at minimum two council colleagues and other hopefuls from in just metropolis and point out governing administration.

When he measures down, Walsh’s vacant seat will be crammed right away by Town Council President Kim Janey on an interim foundation. She would be the 1st Black human being — and the initially woman— to serve as the city’s main government. Janey has not nevertheless reported whether or not she will find a entire, four-calendar year time period, but preparations have by now begun for her changeover into the mayor’s place of work.

At-substantial Councillor Annissa Essaibi-George, a Dorchester resident who has steadily developed her citywide profile and electoral overall performance above her a few phrases in business office, is also critically weighing a mayoral campaign, in accordance to resources close to her. A former Boston General public College teacher and the proprietor of the Sew House on Dorchester Avenue, Essaibi-George has been a longtime ally of Walsh, whom she has regarded since childhood. She is one particular of numerous people with ties to his political corporation and donors who could mount a viable candidacy.

John Barros, the city’s main of economic development, is also witnessed as a probable candidate. A Dorchester resident who ran for mayor in 2013 and completed fourth in that year’s preliminary election, is now a seasoned City Hall veteran with sturdy connections to the city’s small business and civic leaders. Of Cape Verdean descent, Barros was the longtime chief of the Dudley Street Community Initiative just before becoming a member of the Walsh cabinet.

William Gross, the city’s law enforcement commissioner, explained to reporters this week that he is “90 percent” in as a candidate himself. Gross was promoted to the BPD’s leading spot by Walsh in 2018 and is a well-known figure amid officers and their families. A indigenous of Dorchester, Gross lived in Milton in more latest many years ahead of going back again into the city— to Roslindale— after his appointment to Walsh’s cabinet.

“I just can’t give you an reply 100 p.c,” Gross stated on Monday when questioned about his candidacy. “But out of respect, I’m heading to give this deep thing to consider. If there’s a single detail that rings correct, I would hardly ever be as presumptuous as just to toss my hat in the ring when the mayor was just announced.

“I will have to talk to my family, the mayor, and my mates about this. … I adore my city… there’s no way I would make that conclusion in 3 days,” he included.

Also considering a candidacy is Marty Martinez, who prospects the city’s Overall health and Human Services section, its greatest company and a critical one in the context of the however-unfolding pandemic crisis. A indigenous of Nebraska, Martinez moved to Boston far more than 20 several years in the past and settled in Dorchester past yr.

At least 3 point out lawmakers— House Approaches and Implies Chairman Aaron Michlewitz of the North Close, Sen. Nick Collins, who signifies South Boston, most of Dorchester, and components of Mattapan, and Rep. Jon Santiago of the South Conclusion – are all thinking of candidacies as nicely.

Walsh’s nomination by Biden activated a brief endorsement for Michelle Wu from a sizeable ally two times later, on Saturday. US Senator Elizabeth Warren, who observed that she has recognized the councillor due to the fact Wu attended her course as a Harvard Legislation student.

“Michelle is not just a lady comprehensive of excellent concepts and a passionate coronary heart, she is a female who receives out and does the operate that demands to be accomplished to make a distinction in people’s lives,” Warren stated in a assertion.

“Sen. Warren has been a buddy, mentor, and an extremely efficient adjust-maker for Boston and for the whole nation, so I’m thrilled to keep on partnering with her and to have her support in this race,” Wu told the Reporter in a cellphone get in touch with on Saturday.

Campbell, who life in Mattapan, has represented District 4 on the council given that unseating longtime incumbent Charles Yancey in 2014. She jumped into the race for mayor last September, citing her plan get the job done on the council and her roots in the town. In the past two months, her campaign claims she has lifted $160,000, bringing her complete money to far more than $467,000 given that asserting, additional than any Black candidate has at any time elevated overall for a mayoral marketing campaign in Boston. According to the Office environment of Marketing campaign and Political Finance (OCPF), Campbell has $513,731 funds on hand, driving Wu, who has $535,589, in accordance to the most new available report.

On Monday, Campbell’s crew declared notable marketing campaign endorsements from the subsequent: 11th Suffolk District Rep. Liz Malia Bill Walczak, co-founder of the Codman Sq. Wellness Heart Diana Hwang, founder of the Asian American Women’s Political Initiative Dr. Atyia Martin, founder and CEO of All Aces, Inc. and previous chief resilience officer of the Town of Boston and Makeeba McCreary, previous chief of workers at Boston Public Colleges.

Campbell reported previous weekend that Walsh’s departure and the concern about a particular election in the summer months or a common campaign in the fall “hasn’t transformed anything” for her staff.

“We launched this marketing campaign in September with the target of running a grassroots motion and connecting with voters all across the city,” she advised the Reporter. “I’ve been telling citizens that if we want this city to function for every person, we’re heading to have to do the difficult and at times uncomfortable get the job done of addressing our possess heritage in regard to racism. And if we do that together, we can in fact eradicate inequities in housing, schooling, the setting, you name it.”

The timing of selecting an electorally long-lasting replacement for Walsh remains unsure this 7 days. By metropolis statute, if Walsh have been to resign prior to March 5, his departure would mechanically result in a specific election— a preliminary followed by a runoff in between the two greatest vote getters— that would likely be scheduled for early summer months.

But District 5 Councillor Ricardo Arroyo has filed a Home Rule Petition requesting the Legislature to let Boston officers to override the specific election need in the function of a emptiness in the office environment of the mayor just before March 5. He argues that the metropolis ought to just wait for the by now scheduled September and November municipal elections to opt for Walsh’s successor.

Arroyo took to Twitter final 7 days to say that he filed the petition since he thinks a particular election would more drain the town spending plan create unsafe circumstances with citizens going to the ballot box in the course of the pandemic make limitations to accessibility and maintain an “unnecessary and redundant” election.

His petition is scheduled to go ahead of the City Council for evaluation at their conference on Wednesday of this week.

When she was asked about how the petition could influence the race, Wu reported “there are several various variables that we still do not have information and facts on. One is the timing of the affirmation procedure in D.C., and when we listen to much more on the proposal at this week’s council meeting, my colleagues will be weighing all of the various things to consider,” she claimed, including:

“This has been an extraordinary year and there have been a tremendous amount of prices to seeking to tackle all of the requirements all through the pandemic, and so this is a second exactly where we have to be wondering about how to continue to keep persons safe and sound first and foremost and the finest use of metropolis methods when making sure that we’re shielding obtain to the ballot and democratic accountability.”

Explained Campbell, “We have however to receive our official council agenda, so waiting around to review it and specifically the language in advance of taking any future steps.”

Reporter editor Invoice Forry contributed to this report.

window.fbAsyncInit = functionality() FB.init( appId: "270847243020841", status: accurate, cookie: true, xfbml: legitimate, oauth : accurate, channelUrl: "https://www.dotnews.com/fb_social/channel" )

FB.Celebration.subscribe("edge.make", function(href, widget) _gaq.force(["_trackEvent", "Facebook like", "Drupal", href]) )

(functionality() var e = doc.createElement('script') e.async = real e.src = document.place.protocol + '//hook up.fb.internet/en_US/all.js' document.getElementById('fb-root').appendChild(e) ())

#Campbell #chair #Direct #hopefuls #mayors #Parade

0 notes

davidjuice93-blog · 6 years ago

Text

The John Gerdes House - 59 Charles Street

The handsome Italianate home was originally numbered No. 5 Van Nest Place.

Abraham Van Nest, president of the Greenwich Savings Bank, purchased "Greenwich," the former country mansion of British vice-admiral Peter Warren in 1821. By then the once-sprawling grounds had been reduced to a city block, bounded by Charles, Hammond (later Bleecker), West 4th and Amos Street. As Greenwich Village grew up around it, the mansion and its grounds survived until shortly after Van Nest's death in 1864.

Charles Christopher Amos had inherited the portion of the Peter Warren estate directly to the south of the mansion, which he portioned into building plots. He named three of the streets on his property after himself: Charles, Christopher and Amos (later West 10th) Streets. But he gave a nod to Abraham Van Nest by christening the north side of one block of Charles Street, between Bleecker and West 4th Street, Van Nest Place. It was not uncommon at the time to give short sections of streets separate names, implying their upscale status. It resulted in three blocks of East 8th Street becoming St. Mark's Place, for instance.

Because only the north side of the block was Van Nest Place, the addresses were sequential, Wealthy brewer Walter W. Price purchased the lots at Nos. 4, 5 and 6 Van Nest Place. He commissioned architect Gage Inslee to design the middle house, and almost assuredly the nearly identical flanking houses as well.

Completed in 1866, the houses were three bays wide and three stories tall above brownstone-fronted English basements. No. 5, like its neighbors, was faced in red brick and trimmed in stone. The elevated financial position of its intended occupants was reflected in the heavy Italianate ironwork of the stoop and areaway, the double-doored entrance and its especially attractive stone enframement.

Price had come to America in 1840, and in 1860 partnered with Ebenezer Beadelston in the brewing firm of Beadleston & Price on West 10th Street. Two important events occurred in Price's life just weeks apart in 1865. On July 1 he married Constance Bridge Tallon, and on July 26, with the retirement of Beadelston, the brewery was reorganized. Ernest G. W. Woerz became vice-president and Price's new partner. The firm was renamed Beadelston, Price & Woerz.

It is unclear whether Price and his new bride moved into No. 5 Van Nest Place. The couple would soon have two children, but there would be significant problems in their domestic tranquility. On April 23, 1839, the year before Price arrived in New York, he had married Susanna Butler in England. He neglected to inform Constance of the marriage nor did he move to divorce Susanna.

But, although Constance left him in 1871, things worked out well enough. The courts annulled the first marriage in 1874, deciding that Price had assumed his first wife dead, and declared the couple's two children legitimate.

By then No. 5 Van Nest Place had been home for several years to Price's partner. Price sold it to Ernest G. W. Woerz in 1869. Born in Stuttgart, Germany in 1835, he had come to the United States while still a young man and, like Price, had immediately gone into the brewing business. His significant wealth by now was evidenced by his memberships in the Larchmont Yacht Club in Westchester County and the Seabright Yacht Club in New Jersey.

On the night of October 22, 1879, the Weorz house and the John Loughlin house nearby had intruders. Two days later The New York Times reported "On Wednesday night burglars, with a patent 'jack,' broke the bars from he rear basement windows of No. 62 Perry-street and Nos. 3 and 5 Van Nest-place." The rear yards of the Perry Street and Van Nest Place houses were back-to-back.

Having broken into Nos 3 and 5 Van Nest Place, the burglars were inside the Perry Street house when the next door neighbor heard them. He rushed to the street and found a policeman. One of the armed thieves was captured. "Mr. E. G. W. Woertz, of No. 5 Van Nest-place, lost a few articles of clothing," reported The Times. The family seems to have gotten off lightly, considering the silverware and other valuable items missing from the other houses.

On December 27, 1880 Woertz sold No. 5 to William F. Schneider for $13,000, about $322,000 today. Schneider leased it to Dr. C. E. Locke, who operated his office from the house. He announced his office hours as from 8 to 10 a.m., 2 to 4 p.m., and 7 to 9 p.m.

John H. Seaman and his wife, Matilda, next owned the house. He was the principal in the John H. Seaman Co., dealers in "masons' building materials." The couple sold it on February 10, 1887 to John Henry Gerdes and his wife, the former Anna Catherine Tienken. Property values had increased on the affluent block. The $16,000 price tag would translate to about $425,000 today. As was common, the title was put in Anna's name.

A German immigrant, Gerdes was a liquor concessionaire--providing refreshments in several taverns throughout the city. He also dealt in real estate. At the time of the purchase the couple had three children, 13-year old Emma, 10-year old Henry Theodore, and 8-year old Theodore Richard Nicholas.

As the century drew to a close, the boys attended the Stevens Institute of Technology. Both were graduated in 1902 and embarked on rather remarkable careers. In 1905 Henry was an inspector in the mechanical engineer's office of the New York Central Railroad, and Theodore was an inspector of electric subways for the Interborough Rapid Transit Co.

The Gerdes brothers, Henry (top) and Theodore R. N. as they appeared in 1905. A History of the Stevens Institute of Technology (copyright expired)

The ambitious young men went on to other endeavors. In 1906 Henry and his father incorporated the Ross Steam Specialty Company with other two other investors. John took on the position of president. And by 1911 Henry was a director in the Manhattan High Powered Motor Co., as well.

While the men of the family were tied up with business projects, Anna and Emma enjoyed a more relaxed lifestyle. On September 6, 1906 The New York Times noted "Mrs. John H. Gerdes and Miss Gerdes of New York City have arrived at the Montanesco [in Mount Pocono], where they will occupy suites during the Autumn weeks."

Spring was the season of love for neighborhood cats in 1912, a situation that disturbed Theodore's peace. He wrote to the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, to the State Board of Charities and, according to him, "several other unsympathetic organizations," asking them to do something about the nighttime yowling. When he got no satisfaction, he wrote to the mayor, William Jay Gaynor.

The mayor, too, was unsympathetic. His letter of March 8, 1912 dripped with sarcasm:

Dear Mr. Gerdes: I regret to say that I have so many official duties pressing upon me that I cannot just now devote any time to the tomcats. There are a few in my neighborhood, but I go to sleep and let them howl. It amuses them and doesn't hurt me. But some say that it is the pussycats that howl, and not the tomcats. How is that? We must not kill tommy for the sins of pussy. And, also, let us remember that the '"female of the species is more deadly than the male."

W. J. GAYNOR, Mayor

The noisy cat episode notwithstanding, Theodore and his brother were well respected in the engineering and business communities. In 1914 they formed Gerdes & Company with their father. The firm was described as "engineering, realty, metal products." And Theodore headed his own company, Theodore R. N. Gerdes, M. E., designing and manufacturing ventilation equipment. He held patents for inventions like the Gerdes Air Moistener, the Gerdes Electric Window Ventilator and the Gerdes Roof Ventilator.

One of Theodore's inventions, the Gerdes Roof Ventilator. Sweet's Architectural Catalog, 1918 (copyright expired)

On August 17, 1918 Theodore was married to Olive White Richardson. Although his brother had moved to Brooklyn following his own wedding, Theodore brought his bride back to the Van Nest Place house.

Commerce & Finance, March 10, 1920 (copyright expired)

On Saturday, January 23, 1926 John H. Gerdes died suddenly in the house he had called home for 39 years. He was 80 years old. His funeral was held in the house three days later. The following year on April 29, 1927, Anna died at the age of 78. Her funeral, too, was held in the house.

The title to No. 5 was passed to the unmarried Emma. At the time property owners on the block were beginning to question the advisability of keeping the Victorian name. On May 6, 1928 The New York Times reported "Residents of that little-known thoroughfare in the heart of Greenwich Village, designated on the city map as Van Nest Place, feel that the time has come to abandon that name as has been done in the past with many other names of small and once select localities." A petition had been drawn up to rename the block; but it would be years before change came. Finally, in 1936 the Gerdes house was renumbered 59 Charles Street.

The block as it appeared at the time of the name change. The New York Times, June 7, 1936

The 20th century did not infiltrate the world inside the mid-19th century residence. Although her brothers were successful engineers, the only concession to modernity within the house was the conversion from gas to electric lighting. In 1923 Anna had replaced the wallpaper on the stairwell. It was the last updating that would take place during a Gerdes residency.

Emma lived on alone in the house--Henry died in 1948 and Theodore in 1953. Along with the house she had inherited her father's real estate holdings. The New York Times reported, for instance, on June 1, 1961, that "After an ownership of forty-three years, Emma C. Gerdes has sold the four-story store and apartment building at 542 Third Avenue."

Having lived in her Victorian time capsule for 92 years, Emma died on October 6, 1966. Her funeral was held in St. John's Lutheran Church on Christopher Street.

The Charles Street house was sold the following spring. Gordon F. McClure and his wife bought a page torn from 1866. On April 23, 1967 The New York Times reported "The house is virtually the same as it was when Miss Gerdes was a little girl." The article described the zinc-lined bathtub in the only bathroom and noted "The bedrooms are still equipped with cabinet-enclosed washstands that had running water."

Photos of the parlor mantel and the cast iron kitchen stove appeared in April 23, 1967 the The New York Times article. photos by Allyn Baum

"All the rooms have marble-mantled fireplaces and these are especially elaborate in the parlor and adjoining library in the rear. Large, gilt-framed mirrors are placed over the parlor and library fireplaces, and a floor-to-ceiling pier glass between the parlor's two front windows supports a heavily carved gilt cornice." From the frescoed parlor ceiling hung the original gilded chandelier with frosted glass globes.

The McClures anticipated making obvious updates, including new plumbing and electricity and installing central heating and air conditioning. An additional bathroom was installed (and the zinc tub replaced) and the kitchen modernized. Nevertheless, the cast iron stove was kept, "if only to look at." The couple assured they would make "as few changes as possible."

No substantial renovation plans have been filed since the McClures gently updated the house, suggesting the Emma Gerdes's well-preserved 19th century interiors still survive.

photographs by the author

Source: http://daytoninmanhattan.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-john-gerdes-house-59-charles-street.html

0 notes

loudlytransparenttrash · 8 years ago

Text

The phobia of Islamophobia

Lol so I just had someone tell me that it is Islamophobic to tell Muslims that they aren’t being banned from entering the US and to not use the word “Islam” in tags.

It reminds me of those groups like the Interfaith Center, who demands films and television to edit and remove the words “Islamist,” “Islamic,” and “jihad”, even from documentaries such The Rise of Al Qaeda - referencing the 9/11 hijackers and their motives. They don’t want the public to think that Islamism or jihad had anything to do with Al Qaeda or the 9/11 attacks, because that would be “Islamophobia.”

Everybody seems so afraid of this word. From the police who are scared to investigate Muslim human trafficking and child abuse rings in the UK, being afraid to make public the mass sexual and violent attacks committed by Muslim refugees across Europe, being afraid to report their fellow officers who expressed radical Muslim beliefs or the teachers being afraid to alert authorities when their Muslim students show warning signs of becoming radicalized. What we are dealing with is not Islamophobia, but Islamophobia-phobia.

As author Ali Rizvi says: “As a brown-skinned person with a Muslim name, I can get away with a lot more than you’d think. I can publicly parade my wife or daughters around in head-to-toe burqas and be excused out of “respect” for my culture and/or religion, thanks to the racism of lowered expectations. I can re-define “racism” as something non-whites can never harbor against whites, and cite colonialism and imperialism as justification for my prejudice. And in an increasingly effective move that’s fast become something of an epidemic, I can shame you into silence for criticizing my ideas simply by calling you bigoted or Islamophobic.”

For decades, Muslims around the world have rightly complained about the Israeli government labeling even legitimate criticism of its policies “anti-Semitic,” effectively shielding itself from accountability. Today, Muslim organizations like CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) have borrowed a page from their playbook with the “Islamophobia” label - and taken it even further.

In addition to calling out prejudice against Muslims (a people), the term “Islamophobia” seeks to shield Islam itself (an ideology) from criticism. It’s as if every time you said smoking was a filthy habit, you were perceived to be calling all smokers filthy, horrible people. Human beings have rights and are entitled to respect. But when did we start extending those rights to ideas, books, and beliefs? You’d think the difference would be clear, but it isn’t. The ploy has worked over and over again, and now everyone seems petrified of being tagged with this label.

The phobia of being called “Islamophobic” has been on the rise for some time and it has become much more rampant, powerful, and dangerous than Islamophobia itself. Not long ago, a white American man successfully convinced the Massachusetts liberal arts school Brandeis University that he was being victimized and oppressed by a black African woman from Somalia - a woman who underwent genital mutilation at age five and travels with armed security at risk of being assassinated. That is the power of this term.

The man, Ibrahim Hooper, is a Muslim convert and a founding member and spokesman for CAIR. The woman, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, is an unapologetic activist for the rights of girls and women and a harsh, no-holds-barred critic of the religious ideologies (particularly the Islamic ideology in Muslim-majority countries that she experienced first-hand) that perpetuate and maintain their abuse. Having abandoned the Islamic faith of her parents and taken a stance against it, she is guilty of apostasy, a crime that is punishable by death according to most Islamic scholars, not to mention the holy text itself.

Hirsi Ali was also involved with the award-winning documentary, Honor Diaries, which explores violence against women in honor-based societies, including female genital mutilation (FGM), honor killings, domestic violence, and forced marriage. Despite featuring the voices of several practicing Muslim women, the film was deemed “Islamophobic” by - you guessed it - the poor folks at CAIR. Again, they felt they were the real victims, wanting their own voices heard while silencing those of the victims of FGM and honor killing in the film. Astonishingly, this ludicrous argument was enough to convince both the University of Illinois and the University of Michigan to cancel their screenings of the film which leads to even more deafness and blindness of a very serious human rights issue.

Progressive Muslim Maajid Nawaz tweeted a cartoon with the caption: “This Jesus & Mo cartoon is not offensive & I’m sure God is greater than to feel threatened by it.”

The result? Vicious death threats. A petition signed by tens of thousands to have him removed from his candidacy. Targeting by Western liberal apologists. Admonishments from his own moderate Muslim counterparts. Tweets such as, “Have spoken to someone in Pakistan. They will have a surprise for him on his next visit. He is used to surprises in Pak.” The most tragic aspect of all this is what Alishba Zarmeen has coined the “Greenwald Syndrome” - the phenomenon of Western liberals, in a supposed show of tolerance, embracing an apologist stance in favor of the intolerant.

After being publicly accused by Glenn Greenwald of “spouting and promoting Islamophobia,” Sam Harris responded with these words, which should be read by everyone:

“Needless to say, there are people who hate Arabs, Somalis, and other immigrants from predominantly Muslim societies for racist reasons. But if you can’t distinguish that sort of blind bigotry from a hatred and concern for dangerous, divisive, and irrational ideas - like a belief in martyrdom, or a notion of male ‘honor’ that entails the virtual enslavement of women and girls - you are doing real harm to our public conversation. Everything I have ever said about Islam refers to the content and consequences of its doctrine. And, again, I have always emphasized that its primary victims are innocent Muslims - especially women and girls. There is no such thing as ‘Islamophobia.’ This is a term of propaganda designed to protect Islam from the forces of secularism by conflating all criticism of it with racism and xenophobia. And it is doing its job, because people like you have been taken in by it.”

The fear of being called Islamophobic once led many prominent Westerners to abandon their own values when they abandoned Salman Rushdie. It led Yale to publish a book about the Danish Muhammad cartoon controversy, but without the cartoons. It led Comedy Central to censor their shows for fear of offending Muslims, even though the show irreverently lambastes virtually every other religion on a regular basis, unhindered and it has led to countless people being attacked, doxxed, threatened, silenced and their careers ruined, all for having a different opinion.

This epidemic continues today except now people aren’t taking “Islamophobia” as serious anymore and with good reason so Muslims have begun to create hoax hate-crimes against themselves to try and bring some credibility back to keep non-Mulsims in check.

Remember the 18-year-old Muslim girl who was assaulted and called a terrorist on the subway by Trump supporters and they tried to rip her hijab off and all of the social justice warriors had a complete meltdown? It was a lie that she made up to cover her parents finding out she was out fucking a Christian dude and getting drunk. It gets funnier, her Muslim father has forced her to shave her head completely for bringing shame on the family and she was arrested for making false accusations.

Remember the Muslim student who was robbed, beaten and had her hijab ripped off and stolen by Trump supporters? It was a lie. She is now being charged for filing a false report.

Remember when those white supremacist, anti-Muslim Trump supporters burned down the mosque in Houston? It was a lie. While the mosque did get burned down, it was done by a black Muslim who had attended the mosque for years.

Remember the Ohio student who was racially abused and assaulted by Trump supporters? It was a lie. She made it up the day after the election and after she made a post that she wants all Trump supporters to die of AIDS.

Remember the Michigan Muslim student who was harassed and threatened to be burned alive by the Trump supporter if she didn’t remove her hijab? It was a lie. Surveillance cameras show that she wasn’t even in the location where she claimed the attack took place.

Remember the Muslim woman who had her hijab ripped and forced off by police when they took her in for questioning? It was another lie.

Remember the Muslim kid who was beaten up on the school bus by five white kids and it forced the family to leave the country? Yes, another fucking lie.

Remember the student who had her face slashed and was called a terrorist in Lower Manhattan? Yet another lie.

These anti-Islamic hate-crimes even reached the UK with an 18-year-old Muslim student from Birmingham being punched in the face for wearing a hijab. It was a lie. She’s been charged for lying to the police.

These are just some of the false claims made within the past year alone and they received nation-wide coverage and left-wing outrage and hysteria, all pushing the agenda that America is a racist, Islamophobic hellhole and nobody except white people are safe.

This is an effective deterrent. This is exactly how terrorism works. This is how perfectly intelligent, well-read writers, commentators, and broadcasters become silenced by the Islamophobia smear fear - and rationalize themselves into becoming unaware victims of it.

When you’re unable to introduce Islamic-style blasphemy Sharia laws in a secular, Western society, you have to find alternative ways to silence those who offend you, right?

And that’s where the “Islamophobia” smear comes in - the ultimate, lazy substitute for a non-existent counter-argument. Don’t fall for it.

#islam #islamophobia #muslim #muslim ban #SJW #anti sjw #anti social justice warriors #social justice #social justice warrior #Trump #Donald Trump #feminism #feminist #anti feminism

102 notes · View notes

silver-and-ivory · 8 years ago

Text

flowingblades replied to your post:

In general, Zucker, Dreger, and BBL advance this…

seems like dreger’s theory is wrong, but that doesn’t mean harassing her is good, and it’s okay for her to complain about getting rape threats on her kid even if she’s wrong

Hmm, I’ve only read about Galileo’s Middle Finger secondhand- a favorable review from SSC and another favorable review from the Wall Street Journal, and then Serano’s discussion of Dreger. I hadn’t heard this information before.

Assuming that it’s true:

I agree that it’s completely legitimate for Dreger to complain about rape threats towards her child, and it’s absolutely understandable that she would want nothing more to do with the trans community and trans activists. It’s important that she be able to discuss this without censure.

Hmmm.

I’m updating in the direction of “Dreger is wrong, but I don’t blame her for portraying her experience”.

This is oddly hard for me to articulate, but I have a strong feeling that Dreger needs to separate her (awful! bad!) experience from her arguments.

I guess that my problem is that Dreger uses the narrative not only to discuss her experience, but also to advance her theory. For example, in this article, she not only discusses the AGP theory, but also mentions that she has been harassed for discussing it:

5. “I feel as though your take on the Bailey situation had more to do with your interest in academic freedom than your conviction in his research, and I feel that what got lost in the public interpretation is that your opinion on this is probably more complex than the public image surrounding Bailey. So: what do you think?”

When I was publishing my work on Bailey in its first instantiation, I was agnostic on the question of Blanchard’s ideas. As an historian, I was interested in the historical truth, not the science per se. That’s where I put my focus.

But the more the years went on, the more Blanchard’s interpretation of male-to-female transgender made sense to me. I could see, for example, how it explained why sociocultural demographics differed among androphilic and autogynephilic transgender women, and why we are now seeing more androphilic white transgender women and more autogynephilic transgender women of color. I could also understand better why autogynephilia was so stressful for many marriages that began as apparently simple heterosexual marriages.

I also heard from so many transgender women (including old friends) who said Blanchard was spot-on and who said that if you tried to say so as a transgender woman, you’d be subject to the kind of relentless harassment Bailey had been subject to. And then there was the fact that, as I show in my book, at least two of Bailey’s critics had recorded what seemed pretty clearly to be admissions of autogynephilic orientations—that what was at issue was a killing of a messenger, not a wrong or even dangerous message. I do think Bailey has sometimes been unnecessarily obnoxious, as with the cover of his book, and I’ve said so.

Emphasis mine.

This is in response to a question about what Dreger thinks about the theory, in an article explicitly directed at people who don’t know much about the issue.

It very much gives the impression that the only reason you would be opposed to BBL was because you were trying to kill Bailey for Telling the Truth. I’m not sure that Dreger was malicious here; but I find her untrustworthy and her arguments without epistemic hygiene.

I think I’m allowed to have this standard, that Dreger portray her opponents properly. I’ve been badly hurt by antifas, and this hasn’t prevented me from trying to be charitable to them. I haven’t included “antifas harassed me and told me to commit suicide” in any of my articles on antifa, nor have I portrayed myself as a bastion of truth surrounded by terrible people wedded to ideology.

As for one of the other things I touched on above: it’s in my opinion acceptable to ask that Dreger (etc.) be prevented a platform in e.g. prestigious academic journals or newspapers. Academic journals and newspapers are all limited by nature; as such, they confer a sense of prestige and legitimacy. They do not and should not publish everything that is submitted to them. Dreger’s theories should be moved from the “okay to publish” column to the “not okay to publish” column.

I think there’s a fear of censure here, but this is confirmation bias. There are already hundreds of articles that aren’t published, from various people with various views. Something being published in a newspaper is not just putting it up to market; it’s placing a seal of approval on it. The seal of approval should not be conferred to anti-vaxxers. The seal of approval should not be conferred to head phrenology advocates. And the seal of approval should not be conferred to Dreger.

This should not be enacted through a campaign of harassment, nor should there be any kind of Bad Tactic that would otherwise be a Bad Tactic for any other goal. Letter-writing campaigns are good, blog-writing is good, and petitions are good.

Edit: To be clear, Dreger herself shouldn’t be subject to a blanket ban. I’m using her as a metonym for “articles which have horribly flawed and outdated arguments”, of which “articles which advocate for BBL without raising new arguments” (and probably others) are a subset. This is a continuation of current newspaper/scientific article policy, which is that they don’t publish articles which have flaws to x extent, where x is arbitrary and varies depending on publication; but now articles advocating for BBL without new argument (and probably some others) are included as having flaws to x extent.

I realize that this was very unclear before and so now you get to have this edit.

#flowingblades #alice dreger <.<#freedom of speech #one of the rare times i'm onboard with antifa type things #antifa cw #no platforming #transphobia cw #rape threats cw #transsexualism #effortpost

4 notes · View notes

shirlleycoyle · 4 years ago

Text

A New Wave of Reckoning Is Sweeping the Porn Industry

A new wave of sexual misconduct accusations is sweeping across the porn industry this week, as women started coming forward about abuse they've experienced on multiple porn sets.

One of these dozens of accusations comes from performer Lulu Chu, who said porn producer Kelly Madison drove her to Madison's home, where her husband, Ryan Madison, was waiting to shoot a scene. Kelly dropped Chu off and left, and the two were alone in the house when filming began, according to Chu.

"He asked me if I was okay with choking, which I said yes to," Chu told me in a Twitter message. "I honestly do enjoy it, and I figured he would just do a casual choke, not anything too serious. But he pressed DOWN pretty hard, on to my windpipe. Not grabbing the sides like most people do, which is safer. I started to lose focus, the room swam around me."

Then he slapped her, she said—hard enough that the sting shocked her back into consciousness. She recalled tears streaming down her face.

"I thought that since I didn’t tell him slapping is one of my hard limits, it was my fault that he slapped me and we had to stop," she said. She finished the scene, and hasn't spoken publicly about that day since—until now.

One of the first women to come forward with allegations against Madison is performer Annabel Redd. On June 5—which she says was the day after her scene with Madison came out—she tweeted about her experience, asking people not to watch it. This encouraged dozens more women to come forward with similar stories about Porn Fidelity and Teen Fidelity, for whom Madison directs and shoots with his wife, Kelly Madison.

Redd told Motherboard that prior to shooting she made it clear to Madison that her "don'ts" included creampie, anal, and deepthroat. During the scene, she said, he violated several of these limits, in addition to being extremely rough.

"He forced me to deepthroat several times until I puked all over him," Redd told me. "When I told him that I wanted that cut, he told me that his fans loved that stuff and then proceeded to rub my spitup and vomit on my breasts and vagina."

Like each of the women I talked to for this story, she says was also alone in the house with him and feared for her safety. They each also mentioned choking to a point where they were unable to communicate.

"I was alone with this man so far from where I was staying, I thought that my best chances for surviving my experience with as little harm to myself as possible," Redd said.

Kelly Madison Media, which owns Porn Fidelity and Teen Fidelity, did not respond multiple requests for comment on the allegations brought forward in this story, but a Kelly Madison Media company representative told XBIZ that “Our company takes any allegation of physical, emotional, mental or sexual abuse against any female talent seriously.” But in the same statement, Kelly Madison Media called the allegations from performer Annabel Reed false.

"2020 is fucking kicking people's ass and it's time to get some things straight and fixed."

Ryan Madison, whose Pornhub channel videos alone have more than 46 million views and has acted and directed in hundreds of videos and won multiple Adult Video Network awards, is one of several male performers and directors who have been publicly accused of misconduct on social media in recent weeks. In the past week alone, people within the industry have come out with allegations against several directors and male performers, including but not limited to:

Performer Aria Lee said that award-winning director Craven Moorehead assaulted her twice last year, once while shooting a scene for Pure Taboo, owned by a Gamma Films Group and again on another occasion off-set. On June 6, Gamma responded with a statement saying that an investigation showed "it has been impossible to validate the veracity of the allegations in question," and suggested anyone with allegations of abuse to call the police. But on Tuesday, Karl Bernard, president of Gamma Films Group, said in a statement to Motherboard that he decided on Monday to "sever ties with Black Wings Media and its director Craven Moorehead.”

Performer Maya Kendrick alleged on Twitter that talent agency Motley Models president and CEO Dave Rock used his position to coerce a model into having sex with him multiple times. Rock released a statement on industry news sites XBIZ and AVN (which Motley Models also provided to Motherboard directly) claiming he "engaged in consensual sex based on what I believed at the time to be mutual attraction… I take full responsibility for using bad judgment and assuming that there was a mutual connection. I was foolish…but to allege that these encounters were forced or that she was pressured in any way is categorically false and only serves to undermine the legitimate claims of abuse and assault, which still happen all too frequently in our industry."

The combination of the Black Lives Matter protest movement, which has led to more people to stand up for justice across many industries and the moving of porn creators to independent and creator-owned platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic has empowered some women to speak up about abuse in the industry, sources I spoke to said.

Several performers and directors I talked to this week say that the industry is experiencing a moment of reckoning—and according to them, it's only getting started.

***

Adult performer Kinsley Karter was flattered when Porn Fidelity, one of the top 30 channels on Pornhub, invited her to do a shoot with Ryan Madison in 2018.

She said her excitement turned to dread when, she says, Madison kissed her suddenly and hard during the pre-scene photo shoot. She also realized the makeup artist and the person who arranged the shoot—both women—had left the house without saying goodbye. She was alone with Madison, who would act, direct, and operate the camera.

Karter said the shoot increasingly pushed and crossed her boundaries. Madison kissed her roughly, she said, then went down on her and used his teeth. She said they moved on to shoot a blowjob, which was so rough she vomited.

"While rinsing off in the shower I started to cry quietly. I didn’t want him to hear me sobbing," she said. "I couldn’t believe how rough he was with me. I thought this was a vanilla [boy/girl] scene, not a kink scene. This kind of rough act I have to mentally prepare for."

She knew something wasn't right, but was afraid to end the scene.

Mid-scene, she says he asked her if he could cum inside of her. This is something that's typically negotiated and agreed upon before a shoot begins—as are limits for things like choking, slapping, and other BDSM acts—and not in the middle of a shoot. In the moment, Karter told Madison yes. "I could not wait for him to stop fucking me. I wanted this to be over already."

"Porn is supposed to be a fun time," she said. "I haven’t encountered the dark side of the porn industry until this day."

Chu and Karter's claims about Madison are being echoed across social media this week by other women who worked with him who described similar excessive and unexpected roughness and improper and dangerous choking.

So many women came forward about Madison's misconduct that performer Ginger Banks started a Change.org petition demanding several Mindgeek-owned sites—specifically, Pornhub, Redtube, and YouPorn—remove the Porn Fidelity videos from their platforms.

"It is completely unethical to allow the videos of his abuse to remain up on Pornhub, and to allow this man to continue profiting off of his victims," the petition states. "We immediately demand that Pornhub, and all of the Mindgeek sister sites, remove every video featuring Ryan Madison, and every video made under the Porn Fidelity website."

The Teen Fidelity and Porn Fidelity channels, which were ranked as the 55th and 30th most popular on Pornhub in May and have hundreds of millions of views, have been removed from Pornhub. Banks told me that Pornhub didn't communicate with her about their removal. Pornhub acknowledged Motherboard's request for comment but did not say if it removed the pages, when, and why.

Teen Fidelity and Porn Fidelity videos are still easy to find on Mindgeek sites and other porn sites. As Motherboard previously reported, the process for reporting abusive videos and preventing them from being reuploaded is severely flawed.

There remain several videos featuring him shooting scenes with his accusers, including Chu, on xHamster, another top porn site. I asked Alex Hawkins, a spokesperson for xHamster, if the company planned to remove any of those videos. He said that he hadn't seen the petition, and had not received any direct requests for the videos to be removed.

"However, I've now looked on Twitter and read some of the allegations… They are very disturbing," Hawkins said. "In the past, we've used either criminal complaints, for example, with Girls Do Porn, or complaints from people who are recorded without their consent, as the basis for removing videos. This has been the industry standard, but as an industry and a company, it seems like we may need a new standard. I've asked our legal team and others at the company to try and determine how we move forward … with these scenes and also with other complaints that surface."

Do you have experiences to share about how the porn industry handles abuse allegations? We'd love to hear from you. Contact Samantha Cole securely on the messaging app Signal at +6469261726, direct message on Twitter, or by email: [email protected]

Regardless of the reason Pornhub removed the Porn Fidelity and Teen Fidelity channels, people in the industry are using this moment to push for greater control over the content that ends up on tube sites. Another petition from the same group is demanding that Mindgeek sites only allow uploads from verified accounts, to prevent abusive content and theft. That petition has more than 1,500 signatures as of publication.

"I think people outside the industry use our abuse stories as clickbait," adult performer Allie Eve Knox told me in a Twitter message. "They sensationalize the abuse, victim blame, etc but this time, I think they will see that we are holding the industry accountable—from the producers to the companies to the performers to the agents to the mother fucking industry media. Everyone is having a reckoning. 2020 is fucking kicking people's ass and it's time to get some things straight and fixed."

***

Knox said that while this isn't the first time the industry has seen allegations of abuse, it's a unique moment that's been a long time coming.

"Performers have put up with this shit for years. Decades," she said. "And I think the MeToo movement really inspired women (specifically women) to come forward WHEN OTHER women come forward. It's a solidarity. A sisterhood. Something safer about when women do it in numbers."

In addition to #MeToo, Knox attributes the recent outpouring of stories to a combination of factors: First is the industry's pandemic response, which called for a production hold to avoid spreading coronavirus. The whole studio ecosystem was forced to adapt, either by supporting performers with special at-home content, or by getting on platforms like OnlyFans that sell content directly to consumers, cutting out the production middle men and studio contracts altogether. Being blacklisted or denied bookings because you set your own boundaries and stuck to them is no longer the career-ending decision it used to be for performers, when they can create, own, and promote their own content on fan platforms.

Second, the Black Lives Matter movement and protests in the last several weeks has fueled a general sense of power coming back to the people, Knox said. Going forward, she and others are planning to hold producers, agents, directors, and industry media accountable, she said—with plans to start formulating guidelines for performers to advocate for their own rights, education around how contracts work, and shared lists of companies and performers that have a history of mistreatment.

"They must know by now what he does. They are complicit."

Poorly-written and enacted legislation has made it harder for performers to speak out about abuse they experience on set. The Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2018 not only put sex workers in danger by taking away their ability to screen full-service clients, but made it more difficult for studio performers and anyone in the industry to speak up about issues in their trade.

"100% FOSTA made it harder to speak out," Banks told me. "People tell you that if you speak up about any abuses you see like this that it will be used against the industry. And they are not wrong." She told me she's concerned that anti-porn organizations will use abuses against the industry to argue for abolition, or for the full shut down of sites like Pornhub—which most performers don't actually want. They just want platforms to host their content responsibly.

Redd said that agents who repeatedly book performers with known abusers or questionable reputations need to be held accountable. "[Madison] has a reputation for taking advantage of young women who are new in the industry and agencies are still somehow booking with them," she said. "They must know by now what he does. They are complicit."

She also said that she'd like to see more sets employ talent advocates, "someone to make sure that women are being treated fairly and respected on set so that these things don’t happen… I hope that moving forward, the industry learns from this. That we are better vigilant of the ways that women can be taken advantage of."

In a moment when it can seem like every powerful person in an industry is suspect, it's important to acknowledge that abuses like Chu and Karter and the dozens more women coming out about their experiences still aren't the norm.

"Consent is important everywhere, especially in porn," Chu said. "I hope that this situation with everyone coming out not only opens a dialogue of proper boundaries on and off set, but changes the power dynamic completely." Performers are realizing they have the power, Chu said—not producers or studios executives.

A New Wave of Reckoning Is Sweeping the Porn Industry syndicated from https://triviaqaweb.wordpress.com/feed/

0 notes