#but screw gender conforming standards

[entropyatropa]

I hope this uploads my tumblr and Twitter don't seem to want to get along.

[homophyte]

mmhhgm 2 AM thinking about HRT…………..perhaps my urgency is influenced by the belief that my transness only becomes acceptable after certain parameters are met and that it is in some way inappropriate to present myself as a trans person while being pretransition . something radical about the exposure of the whole process instead of being one of those instagram transes who pop into existence 7 years on T and post top surgery

[genderqueerdykes]

if you are a person of color and are struggling to understand or express your own gender because you do not and/or cannot conform to white beauty & gender standards you're not alone and you do not have to warp yourself to suit someone else's narrative- every culture on this planet has their own relationship with biological sex & gender and you do not have to mold yourself to suit gender roles that literally just don't exist in your cultures, or don't make sense to you

you do not have to try to change your face, hair or body to match standards that don't apply to you. you are allowed to approach gender in your own way, in whatever ways make sense to you. it's your life, your gender, your culture, your expression. you don't have to screw yourself over like that. good luck in finding the real you, you'll find them

[automatismoateo]

Christians have some of the worst views via /r/atheism

Christians have some of the worst views I often stumble upon Christians saying some crazy things. I just heard a pastor complain about how immoral everyone is becoming. How people of god are being attacked and god is taken out of everything. He continued to bitch about how kids are coming to school dressed as animals, how churches are doing Toy Story/iron man themed events, how ‘men are dressing like women’ and how awful our world is - likening his bigoted views and people who hold them being in the minority to how Noah was a minority before god righteously destroyed the evildoers in the flood. Christians are such snowflakes that they think that furries are a sign of degeneracy and evil? People who dress up as anthrophromorphic animals are evildoers? It’s no different than enjoying wearing Halloween costumes or cosplaying as an anime or fictional character or wearing fictional costumes - like plenty of geeks do, what is wrong with that? It’s just people expressing themselves with unique costumes and dancing for tiktok. Almost no one thinks they are actually an animal. Is fun and fiction a sin? Then was his whole bit about men dressing feminine - but what is wrong with that? Are they hurting anyone? Who is anyone to say that just because you’re a man you need to be like most other men in terms of gender expression, clothing as well? Why does he choose to shit on lgbt people in a world where conservative straight pastors like him rape kids, and there are actual problems? And then this whole ‘people are being fired from their jobs and ostracized for being righteous god believers’ narrative - is being pushed by Christian’s who would not hesitate to fire a member of church staff who is openly gay - or has a disagreement on the earth is 6,000 years old narrative. No shit if you’re going to be bigoted and proselytise your brand of conservative Christianity people won’t take it well, would this dude take it well if an extremist Hindu tried to turn the USA into a Hindu state and and prosletyze to him about how backwards Christianity is? Doesn’t Christianity teach thst every one of your loved ones who died a nonbeliever will suffer for all of eternity, and you will too if you don’t submit? What about a religion that believes that should be respected by the average person? Christians think gender role non conformance is evil, and secularism, and cosplaying, yet they liken the good conservative Christians to Noah and his family - a group of people who stood by a god who genocided every adult child baby and fetus/zygote/embryo, every animal and cub except for 1 human family and a few pairs of each animal - sending them all to an eternity of suffering just because all of them didn’t obey him? That is the standard of morality they think is perfect as opposed to the evil diversity and tolerance we see in the modern world? I think Christianity radicalises people into being incredibly hateful - and convinces them their hate is actually righteous. When there is a book that discourages critical thinking - instead relying on blind faith, with a god that has incredibly bigoted authoritarian views - and everyone who doesn’t share them is a sinner who deserves an eternity of suffering - this religion creates incredibly screwed up people. I wish it wouldn’t be considered politically incorrect to criticize Christianity Submitted January 08, 2024 at 07:47AM by SeaworthinessRich646 (From Reddit https://ift.tt/WI5QYLo)

[iamnmbr3]

Well, the good thing this show is over soon... I'll be honest - i never was a fan of Loki. But he was a character of great tragic spectrum - it was there for everyone to see. He was an antagonist for first big-event Avengers movie, that's how compelling and charismatic he was back in 2011. But this degrading of Disney+ show,... what for? Dudebro comics fans hate it for horribly hamfisted 'girlpower', most optimistic Loki fans are tired of defending it... Disney screwed up!!

I know! And it could have been so great!!! It could've been a flagship show for Disney+. That's what's really sad. There was SO much potential here - they had a great character and great actors - and they squandered all of it.

And it's not even progressive at all! As I said in another post, the women are written like a sexist dudebro’s idea of what feminism is. It’s not about female supremacy! Feminism is about equality. That’s it.  Usually if you gender swapped a “strong” female character you’d realize that their only claim to fame is their gender and that they are completely weak shallow charcters…and usually not very nice or likable.

Nobody talks about “Strong male characters” they talk about well written male characters. And that’s what I want for female characters! They don’t need to conform to traditionally masculine standards of aggression and physical standards to be worthy! I want female characters that are strongly written and have depth and complexity and vulnerability.

Honestly Loki getting silenced and undervalued and ignored and being dismissed bc he doesn’t have the usual strengths that his society values is much more relatable to the female/feminine experience than any of these empty cardboard cutout women who just beat everyone up all the time.

Loki being “punished” for having traditionally feminine traits by being constantly mocked and beaten by women who conform to traditionally masculine values is not progressive. It’s gross. Also abuse is not ok when it happens to men. But societal attitudes that often treat women abusing men as funny are why men who are abused are less likely to report it or be believed. This show is so toxic and harmful and offensive.

[springsteenicious]

Donna + Hypocrisy

(2 of 2 metas about Donna written by me) 

((A/N: Again, very long but do stick with me please. I put a lot of effort into these.))

Hypocrisy (noun) - the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense

Donna’s a hypocrite. She is, I won’t deny that. And I think it’s awesome. Every single person I have ever known is a hypocrite. Everyone in the world is a hypocrite. And if you say you aren't, trust me, you are. It just varies in severity. You’re a hypocrite for simple things. You don't like animal cruelty but you still eat chicken nuggets? Great news, you’re a hypocrite. And that’s completely okay. 

I am such a hypocrite. I constantly tell people not to assume the gender of strangers, but I reflexively do it myself to almost everyone I see on the street. Of course, 90% of the time I catch myself and stop assuming, but it’s definitely still something I do. 

Donna is a feminist, but sometimes she doesn't stick to her feminist ideals. And she’s really just a general hypocrite about a lot of things. It’s a great flaw for a character to have because it’s a very real flaw. There are not enough hypocritical characters. 

A lot of people who hate Donna are hypocrites. I’ve had people send me asks where they tell me I need to acknowledge Donna’s flaws and see how bad a character she is. Some people will even say that they love Jackie like I love Donna and they’re able to acknowledge Jackie’s flaws. Those people tell me to see Donna holistically when they don’t even see Donna holistically. You can't tell me to focus on Donna’s bad traits when you won’t focus on her good ones. 

Some people will also tell me that I need to let people have their opinions and respect that. Like... you are actively attacking my own opinion, man. If you’re not gonna respect my love for Donna as a character, why do you expect me to respect your hatred of her? 

I have plenty of characters I don’t like. I don’t like Red that much, but I’m not going in peoples’ inboxes and telling them all the things I don’t like about him. Because I know a lot of people like him and I don’t want to ruin the character for them. You go on and love Red Forman, I’m happy you like him! I have my reasons for not liking him. I know you have your reasons for liking him and I’m happy for you. This is one of the times I’m actually not hypocritical. 

And before you go, “Ezra, you’re a hypocrite about this because you’re writing this whole meta to get people to like Donna” I’d like you to know that I am not writing this meta to get you to like Donna. I’m writing this meta so you can maybe think about your own beliefs and biases and possibly see that the reasons you don’t like Donna have nothing to do with Donna herself. I get it if you don’t love her, not everyone will. But don’t see her as this demonized version of herself that has been perpetuated by fans of the show. 

Another hypocritical thing I’ve noticed in these Donna haters that have come to me in anonymous asks because they don’t actually want me to know who they are and attach their opinions to their identity is that some of them idealize Jackie. Some of them like to think that Jackie is a perfect angel who has done no wrong and was actually screwed over by everyone around her. Well, I have news for you. She has flaws. Crazy, right? 

I’m just asking those people in particular not to tell me to acknowledge Donna’s flaws when they don’t acknowledge Jackie’s. I admit that Donna often acts in her own self-interest, so why don’t you admit that Jackie is manipulative? And when those people say I need to stop blaming every bad thing about Donna on bad writing, why don't they admit that they do the same thing with Jackie? Food for thought.

To clarify for those of you that are probably a little offended at this moment: I am not saying all Jackie fans are like this at all. You can absolutely love Jackie and see all the good things about her. She’s a fantastic character who didn’t deserve a lot of the treatment she got in the show. 

Just please realize your own hypocrisy before you judge Donna’s. We are all human, we can admit our faults. And we can admit the characters’ faults as well. 

[enchanted-lightning-aes]

every time I read a review in goodreads where readers (esp. women, tbh) condemn the main character who’s a dude for being ‘wimpy, ‘not assertive’, or ‘unrealistic for not being a manho’, it fuels me to write Krispin as emotional and timid (and zero experience at physical stuff) as he is. I don’t read the books, I just read reviews for drama, lmao.

along with the other characters that are dudes I write about?? especially in fandoms, where the men aren’t allowed to express and process emotions properly in canon (there are some exceptions, tho. . . like Bucky, I guess. . . then that’s just one scene. . .)?? screw those ppl, because I am unabashedly writing these men with a personality with more layers than what’s expected from them society. yet I also try to not infantilize them if you know what I mean. 

sometimes, when I’m in tumbls and discord, I forget the gender conforming standards expectations set by the real world, lmao. and when i remember I just. . . 🔪🔪🔪

[a-little-slice-of-fandom]

I agree with all of your statement except for the part where you said it wouldn’t have happened if they were men. Men are manipulated, abused and sexually assaulted by women as well, I saw my dad go through it and it’s awful, it happens to both genders

I’m not saying that men can’t be abused or victims of sexual assault. I would absolutely never insinuate that, and I’m so sorry that I wasn’t clear in my wording. I promise I will take better care next time to be more careful of how I think about my posts. I also think that men can absolutely be screwed over by divorces and denied access to their children (like Aragon was) or adored by a partner for being so witty and sarcastic, only to have their partner hate that when their marriage (Boleyn, or expected to conform to some dangerous and frankly, unobtainable, beauty standards or rejected because they don’t look how women expect them to (like Cleves). Men do face these struggles. They absolutely do and it’s horrible regardless of your gender to go through that. Again, I take full responsibility and I’m sorry I didn’t think about my words more carefully.

What I am saying, however, is the wives stories specifically are inherently woven in to the confines of their gender and the inherent disbalance of power within that time period, and I think changing their genders in incredibly tone deaf to their stories. Henry held all the power in their relationships, because he was a man (and king). I meant it in that context, not that men don’t face these struggles within today’s society. While men do face similar struggles and they should absolutely be discussed within musical theatre, I don’t think it’s as simple as just changing the genders of the six queens to fit men. There is nuance to both sides that needs to be woven into the script.

[transgenderteensurvivalguide]

I want to grow out my leg and arm pit hair, but um worried that people will judge me for not shaving. I'm a closeted trans dude

Lee says:

If people judge you internally but leave you alone about it, then you can decide if you want to just wear pants and t-shirts and hide it, or stand up to them, or just ignore them all together- they aren’t preventing you from doing what you want to do because them thinking whatever they’re thinking doesn’t necessarily have to affect your life or your behavior in any way.

I’ve found that most strangers don’t make comments on me not shaving my legs or arms, but I did overhear someone comment on it once in the high school girl’s locker room and my mom had a few questions.

Honestly, I just wore pants all summer when I stopped shaving my legs and t-shirts instead of tank-tops until I was confident enough to not care what random people thought, which was helped by most of my friends being supportive of me. So it’s possible to stop shaving before you’re ready for people to see that you’ve stopped shaving, and that way you do have the validating leg and armpit hair but you don’t necessarily have to be public about it until you want to be. There’s nothing wrong with taking the path of least resistance- you don’t have to always Make A Big Stand and educate everyone if you don’t feel like you’re ready for that or up for it. But if you want to, this can be a good opportunity to explain why it’s okay to present yourself in the way that you’re the most comfortable presenting yourself.

If you make it into a feminist thing then that might throw them off from the trans thing if you’re not able to safely come out yet, so you could try telling anyone who comments to screw it because nobody should have to shave their natural body hair to fit societal gender norms. Women didn’t used to shave and it’s natural to not shave and let your body be as it is instead of conforming to gender norms that were created to sell you stuff. If you go for the the feminist angle, emphasize that you can do whatever you want with your body hair and it’s a double-standard that women shave shave their legs and men don’t have to. Those are both true true statements to say no matter what your own gender is, so that’s one way to explain it since you’re still closeted.

For issues with peers bullying at school:

Show your administrator an open letter to schools about addressing anti-lgbt bullying if they won’t respond when you tell them you’ve been bullied and show them another one too

Your state’s laws and policies on bullying

If you’re worried about being bullied/are being bullied

You have to kind of judge your audience- will they listen if you politely tell them that it’s your choice not to shave and let it go? Or will they keep bothering you until a more aggressive response is needed?

Assertive communication

Assert yourself!

List of interpersonal skills

Interpersonal effectiveness handouts

Interpersonal effectiveness skills

I statements

In general, I’d say it’s likely that most people won’t say anything, and if the rare person does say something you can tell them to fuck off and/or try explaining it from a feminist perspective.

So I’d say go for it- it doesn’t matter if other people are judgmental, that’s their problem and not yours. So if you don’t want to shave your legs or your armpits, then don’t do it! It’s your body and it’s your choice.

Kii says:

Assuming you won’t be put in physical danger from doing so, try to focus on what you want, not what other people might think. If not shaving is going to make you happy, then don’t shave. Some people might stare or think differently of you, but their opinions shouldn’t matter as much as your comfort levels matter.

How to not care what people think

Self esteem

Followers say:

rogueinkglitch said: I literally never shaved my legs, even before knowing I was ftm, and I never had anyone notice or comment, even when playing on an all-girls sports team. In my experience, no one will care, and the people who do and are rude enough to say something aren’t worth your time.

desmordus said: Closeted ftm here! Although I usually wear pants and not shorts, my parents are the only people who have ever said anything negative about me not shaving my legs. Though whether or not other people notice and/or comment might come down to the local community’s culture

numbcult said: just like the blogger above my moms really the only one who gives/gave me trouble about not shaving, i’d just always say they were my legs not hers. everyone else kinda got shocked at first sight that i was wearing shorter pants and let it go. it can be nerve wracking at first especially if you’re not “out” but once you realize no one cares you’re a lot more comfortable

lilulak said: Keeping em hairy and wearing light loose pants and rolling up the bottoms is a good transition in my experience. People get used to seeing your hairiness and you get used to owning it/ it doesn’t risk being too overwhelming as much the way shorts do. My experience was that while young adolescents are very concerned about doing puberty/ adulthood “right”, people older than that really don’t care, or they think you’re a cool feminist smashing gender norms if they read you as a woman.

lycanthro-queer said: I honestly tell them to go fuck themselves. When i stopped shaving, i got a lot of shit at my work (a clothing retailer) from my boss and i had to explain that her control over my body ends as soon as i clock out and same with family. Im the only one who is with me always and I wear what I want with my unshaved legs. I stopped so i could transition, but as op says it can be a feminist thing, or even pass it off as too much effort when you could be doing x y z instead. If you’re self conscious, something i did was i spent a lot of time looking at hair and body positive tags on social media

zarathot said: if it’s any consolation to anon, i haven’t shaved since i was like 13-14 and i am extremely hairy even though i’m pre-T. hardly anyone will say anything to you. the most i’ve gotten in public are 2 second glances and i live in texas of all places. i’m not sure about the area you live in, but people surprisingly just do not care and they’ve generally got more to worry about than some hairy kid’s legs.

homofamiliaris said: another thing you can tell people who give you trouble about it is like…. it’s Cheaper to not shave. you/your parents don’t have to spend money on razors that way. also (depending on if it’s true or not, or if u feel like u can successfully lie to the person) you can say that shaving or other hair removal methods hurt your skin / u have sensitive skin or whatever.

[triptychexe]

TRIPTYCH. DARE. SECOND ALBUM. 7/31/19.

TRACK DESCRIPTIONS TYPED OUT BELOW.

INTRO: BRAVERY:

A purely instrumental/ambient track that was produced and composed by One, Teo, and Van.

"DARE is an album that feels close to getting punched in the gut… Some things that are discussed in this album are not topics that your average idol group sings about. This intro is your airbag.”- ONE

"DARE is no joke. The introduction track is supposed to give you just a taste of what’s to come. We took elements from stand-out tracks like DARE, RED RUM, and THE INVITATION and made it into one short and sweet sample.”- TEO

“Our group has always gotten criticisms. A lot of people dislike that we are very… open about who we are and what we believe in. Not many idols are as outspoken as we are, which is fine, of course. But we want to inspire people with our music to stand up against injustices and wrongs that we see. They need bravery, and we’re more than happy to give them that.”- VAN

DARE:

The title track is the second ever song in Triptych’s discography to feature all 18 members. The song calls out the injustices in society (including unfair police treatment, prejudice against the LGBT, sexual assault cases, to name a few). The track was written by members Nia, Asa, Cal, Teo, and Eli. It was produced and composed by One, Sun, Van, and Sol.

“We feel like people will gossip about something serious for a few days and then forget about it once it’s lost its shock value. This track, in my eyes, is supposed to help people realize that in order to see change, we need to take charge. And that’s what we want to do. This song is a risky move… We could tarnish our reputation with this song. But is it worth it if it gets people talking? I think so.”- NIA

“This is the most politically driven song we have ever made. We’ve talked about gender roles, we’ve talked about general societal standards… but I don’t think we’ve ever been this blunt before. It’s sure to give the older generations a bit of a shock. I can’t wait to see the reaction.”- CAL

“[DARE is] going to be a game changer, I think. I don’t know how to word this correctly without sounding too boastful, but I think our music usually makes an impact in the K-Pop community one way or another. However, I don’t think anyone will ever take an idol group seriously. We hope to change that with this song and other songs on this album.”- ELI

WE ARE:

Featuring all 18 members, this song was written by members Ame, Teo, Fin, Van, Jin, and Eli. With EDM and pop influences, this track explores what it means to truly put aside your pride and be who you want to be.

“There’s a lot of pressure these days to fit in, especially with things like social media being a huge part in people’s lives. I think that people just need to be reminded that at the end of the day, fitting in isn’t all that matters. Being popular isn’t going to make you happy down the line, wearing designer clothing will only make you happy as long as it fits you. Fitting a mold shouldn’t be what people strive for. Fitting into yourself is what truly matters.”- AME

“When I wrote this, I not only had our younger and teenage Artychs in mind, but I also thought a lot about our own maknaes.Our youngest member is currently nineteen, and even though that’s not a child, they still are constantly feeling pressure to conform to what an idol should be. They haven’t been in the game as long as us, so I think some of the lyrics are for our maknae line to learn from.”- JIN

“I’ve always struggled with trying to be someone else that other people liked. If there’s one thing that plagued my teenage years, it was the fear of judgment. I’ve slowly grown out of this fear, but I’d be lying if I said I still care about what others think to some degree. I think writing this song really helped me focus on goals that I want to reach for self-improvement. I hope that fans also can reach these goals with me.”- FIN

RED RUM:

RED RUM, inspired heavily by Triptych’s seniors and lablemates, Vice, has a creepy and horror-like sound. Written by Teo, Jin, Sol, and Hyo with special help on producing from Vice’s Cyth. Features all 18 members.

“RED RUM is an interesting track. It’s a direction none of our subunits has explored, so it was fun to mess around with a darker sound. We got a lot of help from Cyth. He was really interesting to work with and really added a new twist. As far as the lyrics go, this song is about perception. Perception of people, situations, industries… Nothing is ever as it seems.”- SOL

“We know way too many people who have been screwed over in this industry. Including us, of course. No one’s safe from being used when you’re an idol. I guess this was sort of a reflection on all the things we have gone through to be where we are today. A lot of people look at an idols life and think it’s a dream. I beg to differ. Never trust a smile in a suit.”- YEN

“Unfortunately, by expressing how badly you want your dreams, you’re making yourself vulnerable to companies and agencies that want to sign you. Once they have your desperation, they can manipulate you. Everyone knows ‘red rum’ backwards is ‘murder’. We get asked for advice from fans who want to be idols pretty frequently. Even though to their face I tell them to never give up, I wish I had told them to read between the lines.”- HYO

VISION:

Boasting all 18 members, this track gives a much more hopeful and upbeat message than previous songs. Written by members Teo, Fin, Yen, Asa, and Zim, this song almost counters the previous track “RED RUM” by reminding listeners that things always get better.

“Life isn’t just filled with bad stuff. I think VISION is very relevant for this album, even though it is different from the first four tracks. At the end of dark tunnels, there is always light. I hope that VISION can guide our Artychs through their own dark tunnels.”- FIN

“I think we contradict ourselves a little bit with this track, but that’s human nature. All of the songs leading up to this one have been very serious and filled with some dark stuff. We needed a song that would pull everyone out of that emo funk, and I think this song delivers.”- ZIM

“VISION is that feel-good song that should just be played on a loop all summer long. I think it’s that song that you listen to on the way back from a rough day at work or an unpleasant outing and you’re like… Wow, Triptych is right. Life gets better.”- ASA

SELFISH:

Written and composed by members Yen, Asa, Jin, Teo, Nia, Sun, and Sol, SELFISH is a song about wanting a significant other all to yourself without other people being involved in your relationship. Boasting 18 members, this track holds special meaning to the members of Triptych who have come forward about their personal relationships.

“Relationships of mine have always been up for speculation. Ever since I debuted to now. I guess I wrote this song thinking about all the things I’d like to say to my significant others when we’re not in the spotlight.”- NIA

“Being as polite as possible, I think the typical fan sometimes forgets that we, idols, are humans too. And I’m not saying they’re bad people for forgetting so-- it’s our job for our fans to feel very close to us! We do have a very tight bond to our fanbase, which is something I’m forever thankful for, but I think SELFISH is a nice way to draw the line in the sand."- SUN

“Idols date all the time, it's just rarely ever show to the public. Having to share every aspect of your life to people can be exhausting. Sometimes we wish that our personal relationships were kept personal. There's actually nothing 'selfish' about that."- DAY

THE INVITATION:

For the seventh track, the supergroup takes a more sensual and slow take with their song THE INVITATION. Written by members Van, Sol, Teo, Ame, and Jin.

“The song is supposed to be a little intimate and slow. The ‘invitation’ is a peek into our minds and our personal lives, something that we give to fans on a daily basis. THE INVITATION talks about how open we are. Being an idol has really taught me how to let certain people in and how to keep others out. As a group, we put out very raw and real stuff. We just wanted to express how intimate that truly feels through song.”- KIT

“If it feels like we’re… Uh… getting it on…While listening to the song, that’s the goal. Everything we put out, we trust our fans to react to it and support it. They literally carry our careers in their hands. They know they’re powerful, just watch them on Twitter, but they also have all our trust, which I think is more powerful than trending a hashtag world wide.”- DAY

"We hope that what fans take away from this song is that we share a deeply intimate relationship, even though we may not know each other. Like the song itself, the concept of this relationship should be slightly unsettling. However, our relationship goes both ways. You share intimate things with us and we share intimate things with you." - VAN

WONDER OF IT ALL:

Even though the group itself has been in motion since 2015, the support and love they receive around the world still baffles them to this day. On the eighth track and the final OT18 song on the album, Triptych dedicates this song to all the Artychs that have supported them. Each member has given a hand in either producing, writing, or composing this track.

“This song is probably the most personal and sentimental song I have ever helped write. I’m not the best with my words or emotions, so trying to tell Artychs how I feel about their continuous support was really hard, especially when they never fail to leave me speechless. They have helped us do what we love to do as a living and they allow us to be ourselves while doing so. That’s something I will forever be grateful for.”- HYO

“I think it’s really beautiful just how strong music can be. A good chunk of our fans don’t even speak Korean, yet they learn all the words to our songs and practice the dance routines. Music and the love for music brings us together on a colossal, global scale. We may come from different backgrounds and walks of life, but I hope that when Artychs listen to this song, they feel like they are connected to us somehow.”- AME

“Out of all the songs I’ve written, I love writing about our fans the most. It’s like documenting a great love story. I’m not saying that our fans have romantic relations with us by any means, but the way we love each other - platonically and supportively - is so strong and so powerful. It’s a kind of love that I will never find anywhere else in the world, yet I feel it all around the world when I tour. It truly is wonderful.”- TEO

S.O.S:

Y3LLOW brings back a classic hip hop vibe with S.O.S, a track that tells the story of someone falling deeply in love with someone, but is unsure if the feeling is reciprocated. Written, composed, and produced by Y3LLOW subunit members Zim, Eli, Van, Ame, One, Sol.

“I think our discography needed a break from being so down and in the dumps. As a group I feel like love songs aren’t really our forte, but they’re equally as relevant and as relatable as our more serious songs. We shouldn’t have to just sing about the bad stuff to be recognized as a ‘good artist’. We should be allowed to sing about whatever we’re going through and that should be enough.”- ELI

“I feel like we’ve all been in this situation before where we like someone so much it feels like we’re drowning. I think when writing S.O.S I reflected on feelings that I’ve had in the past. Crushing on people hurts. That’s why it’s called ‘crushing’."- AME

“This song kinda hits a little hard, I’m gonna be honest. It’s relatable in the saddest way possible. Why is it that the people you love hurt you so much? And most of the time without even knowing it? What the hell? How is this a thing that humans feel?”- ONE

MIDNIGHT:

Subunit R3D enters the album with a slow EDM and pop style jam that has hints of romance. Written and composed by R3D subunit members Nia, Teo, Ura, Jin, Kit, and Sol.

“MIDNIGHT is supposed to give you those butterflies you feel when you’re young and in love. The song itself literally speaks of sneaking out your window at midnight to meet someone you love. If you want to look at it on a deeper level, I personally like to think of it as a love song between oneself and escaping your old self to meet a new version of you. If you don’t want to take deeper looks, don’t feel pressured to, though. Love songs just aren’t my thing.”- URA

"This track is very vocal-heavy, much like our other subunit track. I think R3Ds role in the group is to bring attention to our vocalists. It's nice to have songs with little to no rap in them from time to time."- JIN

“I mean, who doesn’t dream of sneaking off with someone in the middle of the night? I’ve yet to meet someone that makes me feel this way, but I wrote how I want to feel when I meet the right person. If they don’t make you feel how MIDNIGHT makes you feel, they’re not the one for you!”- KIT

EYES ON ME:

Returning with a hyped up tropical beat, subunit BLU3 makes a splash with their song “EYES ON ME”. Written, composed, and produced by BLU3 subunit members Yen, Asa, Cal, Hyo, Sun, and Fin.

“EYES ON ME is that summer bop that will just be blasting from your car radio all summer long. It’s just a fun song about just basically just showing up to the club with all your friends and being like ‘we run this biss’. I think it’s the ultimate turn up song.” - HYO

"Look, we saw your tweets, Artychs. We know it’s hot girl summer. So trust me when I say that this is the ultimate hot girl summer anthem. I hope listeners get an instant confidence boost when they hear this song. I personally think it’s a total banger.”- SUN

“I think BLU3 has some of the funniest and most lively members out of Triptych. I think our role in Triptych is to bring songs that give people those good vibes and I think we delivered. Our personalities really shine through in this song. This couldn’t have been a better fit with our subunit.”- YEN

OUTRO: SOMETHING:

To finish the album, another instrumental and ambient track is played. The sound may be confusing to fans at the first listen, as it seems to be playing samples of old Triptych songs in the background.

“OUTRO: SOMETHING isn’t supposed to be an easy listen. It’s supposed to kinda throw you off and make you think ‘What is this’? The point of the track is to have you anticipating what’s to come.”- SOL

“A third generation of Triptych has been rumored for a long time and I know Artychs are curious about the outro and if it has any relation to Gen 3. I can confirm that this outro is not about new members joining us. However, we have plans already to try out some new things musically. We hope that fans will receive these new changes well. Anticipate.”- NIA

“Artychs know to expect the unexpected with our group. We are always try out new things, testing new waters, stuff like that. I think OUTRO: SOMETHING reminds both Triptych and Artychs that there's always room for exploration." - ELI

[anti-marxistcult]

SJW’s “Diversity” dogma and Tokenism comments

same with me

YES!!! THANK YOU!!!

good point

same, entertainment is for escapism, not propaganda but this is what happens when ideologues control any business

Pretty much.

muthafucken TRUTH ^

they do because 1) it is their “selling-pitch” and to guilt/shame you into watching/liking it and 2) it is so if you dare criticize it they use the women/POC/GLBT card on you and call you names to smear you and deflect attention away from the criticism that it is a shitty poorly constructed film, game, series, comic, etc they use “diversity” to protect their mediocre propaganda from negative reaction, backlash, criticism

yup, that is why feminism is a sham, by looking at the people in the movement, their mentality and hatred of femininity and healthy women, it is no wonder feminists indulge in fandoms to bash classical feminine characters and project themselves into male characters by stripping them of their masculinity and making them go against their original identity by screwing other male straight characters. Feminism is for self loathing fugly women who are anti femininity and anti masculinity in their natural forms.

exactly, they know they have to get them while they are young, the younger he better because they are at their most vulnerable and impressionable. it is very much like a cult, they’d groom their children too.

True, it is feminism that makes women turn against themselves and each other. it conditions them to hate their femininity, hate being healthy and attractive. It is these land whale types that attack classic and traditional femininity and want to make women more butch and masculine because they think that since masculinity is men’s strength then women should emulate it, when in truth femininity is women’s strength, but feminism views femininity as a weakness, thus they emasculate men to weaken them in society’s eye and promote women to be masculine under the dumb belief it is supposed to give women some magical strength that men possess, lol or in other words: ‘cock envy’. This leads to both men and women being unhealthy, depressed, miserable, they develop self-image issues, and instead of taking responsibility for their lifestyle and their gullibility for buying into feminism and anti-gender norms dogma, they blame attractive people or the air brushed celebrities and models (friendly reminder sex sells for a reason, human beings generally prefer attractive healthy partners, people that a obese is a turn off - unless you have a fetish for it). another fact is women are prone to jealousy, envy, (I’m a woman, I know, and every other women with an honest bone in her body knows it is true too) again it leads back to human nature and our hard wired competitive streak. Majority of society’s problems, men and women, where personal issues and self-image and all that are concerned stem from the backwards ideology of feminism attacking our natural behavior because feminism and its flawed theories attack gender norms for its own interest, not for the majority of people’s interests. it causes more problems than it fixes, the only people that benefit are the ones that are devout followers of that dogma...except they aren’t really because they’re still jealous and resentful to those that are not conforming to their ideology. this is why they are now pushing it onto younger people more than before.

yup, sad but true, this is what happens when they are exposed to conditioning through media for decades and pass it down to the next gen and peer pressure them to hate the natural norms of women, her femininity and nature. feminism is communism in a skirt and marxism in drag. feminists are their own oppressors.

well that is one way of putting it. a channel I watched explained that too with a remarkable collection of articles, studies and polls and surveys and all that stuff and not to mention just observing that behavior by living and experiencing the real world, which these snowflakes dont do, they live on the internet in their safe bubble echo chambers believing the opposite about human nature and then get triggered and shocked and outraged when it doesnt mirror their fantasy expectations

personally I like watching attractive and healthy women, I can identify better with a person of any race, gender, sexuality, creed, etc that takes care of their health and appearance, not an unhealthy smelly thing that makes me feel sick :\ the agenda to promote ugliness and force acceptance of it is truly sad and gross

that is a great point actually, it is why the activists first hijacked online fandoms when the internet began because it was the perfect platform to shove their politics down teens and apolitical people’s throats and peer pressure them by calling dissenters all the usual buzzwords if they didnt re-”interpret” characters to virtue signal and appease the oppression stack.

yeah that is true, that is the women’s jealousy showing itself (and in some cases their control-freak tendencies), tumblr showcases their hypocrisy too with the double standards of sexual objectification

omg ... I have found my soul mate !!! ;D

Yeah and that is racist and sexist, once again SJWs are the thing they claim to hate. Personality and who you are matters, not what you are. for the people that think their entire being revolves around their race, gender and sexuality - that is pretty pathetic, that means they havent discovered themselves outside a group. One is supposed to let go of the ‘group’ after highschool. I think because millennials were given social media while they were still in highschool is why they havent grown up, they use it as an emotional crutch. Naturally a dependent person is going to feel helpless and confused because they arent thinking and evolving outside their surface traits that they cling to and use as victim cards. identity politics is cancer.

yeah... -__- yeah they eat themselves, this is a move of virtue signaling to gain more minority followers, they really are bigoted to think minorities want to be used as their fucking pawns in their self serving agenda

truth. the best a girl can hope for is a best friend and a sister. rumors, gossip and backstabbing is huge problem among girls/women, it is the result of being emotionally driven, lol 

because feminist/sjws double standards and jealousy, and their dogma of “not please the male gaze” lol it is not up to them to tell people what to do and dress and be attracted to, but they do because they and their ideology is totalitarian

yup and they get their activists running rampant on damage control to ridicule people who point this out, who do they think they are fooling?? their strategy and co-ordinated efforts to brainwash the youth is fucking blatant at that point, we get students reporting the ideological bias bs they endure in the classrooms 

thats why i find the romantic comedies of the past 20 years unbearable lol

there is nothing wrong with liking characters that all fall into one demographic due to great writing. I like characters for their journey+personalities+quality, gender and race is just the wrapping paper they come in. Badly written characters are the types that only focus on their race, gender, sexuality and nothing else, which are boring tokens and unrelatable on personal level. that why im resentful to fanfic writers that change characters recognizable identity traits (race, gender, sexuality), they prove they cant create a character and have no respect for established characters, even though those traits are what i called the “wrapping paper” it is still their image and a part of them. people that change canon characters are the bigots for changing them in the first place and would be the first to screech if a minority character was changed to be a different demographic. hypocrisy is the SJW game.

exactly, they build it up first, gain the following and support and devotion and then flip the switch. Jim Jones did the same thing. He gained his following by enticing a church, and then after filling them up with joy and hope and hoax miracles to convince them he was legit he then threw the bible onto the floor and said “did lightening strike me down?” and then began pushing his own marxist twisted beliefs and because the followers had been duped to sell their homes to donate to the Jim Jones church and live with the rest of the followers, (note it is easier to create a cult when they are isolated and exposed to the dogma all the time, like modern days ppl are hooked up to social media 24/7) it made it harder for them to just walk away. This is what these zealots do, they lure you in and once they have you they make you feel obligated and dependent on it and then switch the dogma an further poison your mind to reality. it is sick but they use this trick so often it is not hard to spot it, and it is always by the same brand of ideologues using the same methods.

[papirouge]

I have a strange question to ask you. I have a sibling who's born a boy but is non-binary now with a feminine leaning preference. I respect their pronouns since that's what they wish to be called, they dress like a woman, and they've gotten kinder toward me since coming out, their little sister. As they were acting as their assigned gender they were cruel and controlling so the kinder personality is great. The thing that's bothering me is that Christians have the stance on man is a man and woman is a woman. I believe that, sure. The part that's getting stuck is that biology with the sense that x and y aren't all there is, science showing that male and female brains are wired differently but can be in the 'wrong body' per se, and anecdotal evidence from people like my sibling suggests that gender isn't that straight cut, especially for people who don't live up to the standards/stereotypes of their gender such as Barbie for girls and G.I. Joe for boys. So here's the question, as a Christian should we reevaluate gender in the sense of what is appropriate for each, or should we try to live up to standards that weren't even that hardlined in the Bible (By that I mean like the Barbie GI Joe thing) or is there any compromise? I want to be respectful toward my sibling and also be a good witness to God. Any advice would be helpful.

Hi!

For thing first, brain sex theory has been debunked.

If anything, if men could have "women's brain" and vice versa, wouldn't it be the proof that sex in non gendered considering both men and women could have the brains of either sex? 🤔

It doesn't make any sense.

This whole brain sex theory is so ridiculously reductive because you said it yourself; it all boils down to people not conforming to their gender standards. Which is ridiculous. A boy being into dolls or make up doesn't make him a woman, just a boy into make up and dolls. But genderist will try to shove it as a proof of people being non binary when it's just.... humans being multifaceted. Gender isn't a straight cut, never been. It's genderist that are setting everyone back by arguing that if you like interests dominantly championed by the other sex, THEN you are of the opposite sex...

Humans aren't stereotypes. A butch will always be more of a woman than a bimbo transwoman in dress.

"Feminine" or "masculine" are just gender stereotypes/norms. They depend of cultures, place and History. Masai men do wear "dress/robe", so are they non binary? Wodaabe men (and men only) have to wear flashy make up & do seduction parade to find a spouse, is this female behavior?

Yes, the Bible states that women shouldn't wear men's clothing and vice versa, but as I said, men's vs women's clothing do depend on culture. But I think we can all agree that Western men wearing dress is culturally referencing to female clothing and thus shouldn't be reinforced to western Christian men.

If the identity you're hellbent to define yourself with depends on a very small sociocultural frame (i.e America/Western Europe are pretty much the only places acknowledging this whole non binary thing), you're setting yourself to be screwed.

It's great that after coming out he felt more at peace with himself and became less erratic. Living their truth apease people. But he's still a boy liking feminine stuff.

Now, when it comes to the Christian perspective of masculinity and feminity, I've already made a few post about it. Basically, biblical feminity ≠ what we deem today as "feminine". I got trouble for saying that make up was a no go for Christian women, and being critical of the tradfem movement for getting fetishy about feminitity. Wearing make up, etiquette, lusting after a husband/marriage/children, obsessing over our look, etc. aren't qualities explicited by the Bible for women. "Biblical men" today on the other hand are typical pickme-incel that bring nothing to the table beside posting bimbo, whining about 'modern women', invading tradfem space with their irrelevant takes, and making everyone uncomfortable...

I've had a bunch of anon telling how uncomfortable they were with the whole biblical feminitity fad for enjoying 'manly interests' or having short hair.... when the Bible never said women shouldn't have hobbies dominated by men lol ..... So yes, I'm all to reevaluate what biblical feminity & masculinity is because so many Christian get it so wrong anyway.

But to go back to your sibling, and I'm going to be bluntly honest : you're not helping him entertaining this non binary thing. He's a multifaceted boy who's entitled to like whatever he likes without having to put a "feminine" or "masculine" label onto it.

If you're Christian, you'll probably understand that God isn't a God of confusion but rather of freedom and peace. Your nephew should be a at peace with enjoying whatever he likes without putting some reductive label onto it.

[destroyyourbinder]

Questions They Implicitly Ask To Check Your Progress in Treatment for Gender Dysphoria, Because There Aren’t Even Clear (But Wrong) Functional Standards for Any of This

I wrote this as part of a reply to a chain of conversation you can find as the previous post on my blog, but since tumblr is all about the short and snappy shit, I thought I’d repost it as this in case people didn’t want to clog their blog. 1. Did they let us change their self-narrative? Do they see themselves as having an internal, individual problem with gender and sexuality? Do they understand themselves as a transgender person rather than a type of gay person who is naturally expressing themselves but running into problems in society? Do they see their depression or functional issues as coming from their having gender dysphoria, having the “wrong body”, or having their “true gender expression” be stymied? Do they believe they can and do have the mind, soul, or brain of a different gender? Are they less confused about their personal understanding of their gender and sexuality history, even if it is a distorted or incorrect understanding of factual details of their life? Do they see their current relationship to gender and sexuality as inevitable and the final outcome of a long string of internally-generated events that started in childhood or even at birth or before? Were they happy to find out these things about themselves? Did they seem relieved when we told them or that this was their “real” problem? Did it make them seem less worried and less apt to hate themselves when we told them that it’s gender dysphoria and not something else? Did they seem like they were having real insights about themselves when they began to use our narrative for self-understanding rather than their own?

2. Did they comply with the medicalization of their distress?

Did they begin to see that their issues with gender and sexuality are a medical problem, or at least an appropriate issue to bring to a doctor or psychological professional? Do they trust doctors (me) to handle their issues with gender and sexuality? Do they prefer to get this issue resolved through medical treatment rather than trying to resolve it through other means? Do they understand that medical treatment is the only real way to get rid of their distress about gender and sexuality, and that if they try other strategies, they’ll be futile? Have they transformed their personal narrative so that they see that they’ve tried to handle their “gender dysphoria” on their own but failed, and need expert help now? Do they now collapse their ineffective, self-harming strategies for coping with gender and sexuality-related distress with any other, non-medical strategy for helping themselves?

Do they now use strategies to help their gender and sexuality-related distress that make them dependent on the medical system, a particular doctor or therapist, or a medicalized understanding of themselves? If all doctors disappeared tomorrow, or the medical system failed, would they be screwed? Do they have to keep coming back to the office or clinic to make sure they’re ok?

Do they now understand that transition would be best for them? Do they see transitioning as the natural outcome of their life course? Do they think that using medical tools to transform their body is the best way to make their feelings about their body and their social position go away? Do they think we doctors and psychological professionals will be helpful, and will they turn to us to make those changes to their body?

3. Did they prove that their distress is a very serious issue to us by letting us enact our medical authority on them?

Were they treatment-compliant? Did they agree to their diagnosis of gender dysphoria and the course of treatment recommended? Did they jump through all of the hoops to make sure this was absolutely right for them, and listen to our rules and regulations? Did they spend the appropriate amount of time in waiting, or articulate their narrative in the correct way? Is their gender presentation in line with what we expect from someone who has such a serious problem, or do they seem not to care about our narrative enough for us to think they’re for real?

Did they take in the narrative well enough that now they are begging us for medical intervention? Do they seem eager to start hormones or to have surgeries? Do they seem to be ambivalent about anything or are they able to stuff down doubts enough to make their problems easy for us to deal with? Do they make us feel like we are coercing them into anything? Are they making us make hard choices about whether this is right to convince someone to do this to solve their problems? Are we talking to a parent of a preteen, a caretaker for someone disabled, an individual who formerly very strongly saw herself as gay, or a freaked-out mess of a person? Are they really a good candidate if they are one of these people and should we just give up on treating them like a person? Or are we here to affirm people’s identities and feel great about helping them in their gender journey, no matter who they are, except when they are too difficult and we can set a boundary around caring about them? Are they giving us a lot of shit about being confused about what to do, or going on and off hormones, or ending up in the psych hospital again, or putting off surgery, or asking for it early, or not following aftercare instructions? Or are they listening and following our recommendations calmly and nicely, as if we know what we are doing, and we’re helping them?

4. Did we get them to stop being such a pain in the ass after they proved how serious they were?

Do they bother us with their problems now that they got a name change and are on hormones and had surgery? Are they still in therapy or can we give their slot to someone else? Are they still confused about gender or having issues with gender and sexuality or have they learned to shut up? Do they voice complaints about transition or do they recommend it to others as a way to solve their problems with gender and sexuality?

Are they still depressed? Ok, but are they depressed because they’re the wrong gender or because their life is still crappy (because we never said it would fix their life, you know)?

Really, in the hospital again?

Did they stop talking to everyone who gave them crap about gender and sexuality? Are they either completely stealth and pretend this never happened, or do they live in an artificial progressive bubble and never come out? Is it visible that they’re transgender and think gender standards are bullshit, and are they still making a scene about the whole thing? Have they considered maybe transition wasn’t right for them if they are still having so many problems?

Have you heard from Jake since his top surgery? I heard he never came back to the clinic for followup, do you think he just moved on with things and didn’t need our help anymore? Isn’t that so typical?

5. Is their current narrative one which is a completion of or natural end to the one we installed in their head?

Do they tell us that they think their life is better? Do they tell us that they think they solved their problems? Did they tell us everything is better now?

Do they talk about their body in the same way, as if it’s the thing that’s bothering them, or do they talk about how awesome it is that we changed it for them? Are they unsatisfied with what we did for normal reasons or really stupid ones that make us feel like we did something bad? Do they know surgery has limitations, because like, come on, we can’t give them a real dick, you know, and if they’re still sad about that then we can’t do anything?

Do they tell themselves all the time that they made it, they did it, they achieved what they needed to in order to be happy? Well, we just gave you the tools to be happy, didn’t you know that people can choose their life direction and it’s in your hands now if you decide not to actually be happy?

Did they settle? Did they settle enough? Do they know this is the end and we can’t do anything else for them, and do they accept that?

Do they feel like a man now? Do they think there is no such thing as a “real man”? Can they tell themselves something, anything, that says that there’s no reason for themselves to be upset anymore about this gender and sexuality stuff and actually believe it? Is it written on their bodies and in their history now that they have no reason to object? ---- I want to note here as part of this piece that I think most trans people are intensely aware of a lot of this already. Except: since they are so motivated by their own horrible distress and have been captured by a narrative that says transition is the only solution to said distress, they still are coerced into buying into the narrative at least somewhat. Otherwise they cannot transition. This is why you often see trans people criticize elements of this (transition gatekeeping by professionals, the idea that being trans is a medical pathology, that you have to be “born trans”, that transition has to be “complete” or end up making you gender conforming, etc.) but rarely does anyone name the full set of conditions defining “gender dysphoria” and the way the medical system deals with it. The most threatening condition to name is the idea that level or legitimacy of distress has something to do with transition, because otherwise transitioning makes no sense. So-called “transmedicalists” will name it, but in the wrong direction (that being distressed means that you must transition) rather than the way that medical professionals level it, which is that agreeing to transition proves that your distress was legitimate and worthy of care and not just a lady-problem or a faggot thing. The most radical of queer types will sometimes deny that transition ever needs a reason, but this is essentially a coping mechanism for those who wish to access transition but know they are poor traditional candidates or who cannot get their distress ever taken seriously (because of demographic characteristics or because their distress is too unseemly to witness). Denying that anyone needs a reason to transition, and demanding access to it without justifying this access, leads to new forms of abuses of medical control. The process of transition becomes “informed consent” model treatment, without any limits, as a very serious and life-altering body modification option subject to all sorts of unbounded pressures. Transition without justification has also dissolved bonding and shared experience within transgender communities, as it used to be understood within these communities why and how and with what mentality people transition. Now it is not even clear to me what “transgender” means, or what someone who uses alternative pronoun sets (for example) is even attempting to communicate to me or wants from me as a standard of respect. What is lost in all of this is the origins and historical use of medical transition, which was heterosexual men in power feeling gracious enough to do something about gay people’s distress by deigning to feel bad about shocking the shit out of their brains or throwing them in jail. They came up with transition as an alternative to the horrific abuse and punishment of gay people; transition was modeled on historical ways gay people chose to deal with homophobia, i.e. by passing as or taking on characteristics of the opposite sex. Gay people in a heterosexual world, especially isolated or young people, have little way to understand their experience except through a lens that makes them feel like an abnormal example of their sex and therefore “more like” the other one. It is absolutely normal for gay people to feel this way and to communicate their feelings through this lens, but heterosexual men in the medical world interpreted it completely literally. It was the only way they could understand why gay people were the way they were (”inverts”) and not stigmatize them at the same time. When gay people saw they could get their distress finally heard by important people who claimed they could do something about it, but they could not actually be heard or seen except when they took on a literal and medicalized narrative of “being the wrong sex”, many simply went along with it. Transition has taken on a life of its own since then, being applied to children and non-gay deviant populations, and being taken up as the culmination of a personal identity by various modern subgroups who have little knowledge of its original history.

[theimpossiblescheme]

I hate reading classic movie reviews, I really do.  Because good lord, can the critics be really mean-spirited toward LGBT+ actors.  And I’m not talking about contemporary crtics who saw those movies at their first screening--I’m talking about critics now, and it happens a lot.  To be perfectly honest, a lot of the time, their tone and choice of words suggest they’re coming down on those actors simply because they’re not around to defend themselves and they don’t conform to modern expectations of what gay, bi, or even asexual men are supposed to behave like.  If only because, you know, back in those days being anything but straight could get you shunned, blacklisted, or even kiled (the hate crime death of Sal Mineo comes to mind).  There’s this gross sense of condescension--a critic who would never dream of mocking Neil Patrick Harris, Rupert Everett or Zachary Quinto calls someone like Jeremy Brett, Vincent Price, or Roddy McDowall “sissy”, “effete”, “swishy”, “camp”, or other veiled insults (and sometimes borderline slurs) apropos of absoutely nothing, regardless of the character they’re playing or their openness on their orientation at the time.  It’s like they’re saying, “What, you’re too good to be open and honest about screwing the same gender as yourself?  Oh, what, you were too worried about your reputation?  Aww, how precious!  Well, I’m going to remind everyone of what you were in the most belittling way possible, whether you would have wanted it that way or not!  Shame on you for conforming to the standards of your time!  You should have been more like us now!”  Holy double standards trying to pass as being a good ally, Batman!

Yeeaahh, when you’re talking about people who were so terrified that the stigma of being gay would ruin their careers that their agents threw any potential same-sex love interests under the bus and arranged legal marriages for them against their wills (Rock Hudson) or got called a “evil suburban closet queen” for daring to stay in the closet and had smear campaigns launched against them to keep them from getting work (Roddy McDowall), you might want to watch how you talk about them.  Maybe using loaded and patronizing language isn’t the way to go about discussing their contribution to film.  Consider it this way: the first black actress to win an Oscar, Hattie McDaniel, won it for playing a slave in Gone With the Wind.  If somebody were to shit on her accomplishment or discuss her performance solely in the most racially charged terms simply because she didn’t behave the way black women do now would be equaly distasteful.

[christianna-knight-art]

Representations of the Ideal Woman - Dissertation Image Sources

My dissertation for my critical contexts unit centres around how the representation of women in the media affected a woman’s role in society and trends in the behaviour of British women. During the second world war, images of women in war work were mass-produced in a glamorised manner in order to encourage women to engage in the war effort. Although women entering previously male-dominated spaces threatened the status quo and brought into question a woman's role in society, it ultimately benefitted the government to push this ideal so that they could exploit the cheap labour of women during the war.

The first two images at the top of the post were produced in 1943, during the war. “Woman and Home” features a glamourous woman in uniform, clearly catching the eye of a handsome young man, also in military dress. The cover of “Woman” features a well made-up young woman with polished nails, plucked eyebrows and lipstick absorbed in manual labour, this figure was often referred to as the “riveter” due to the popularised American iconic figure “Rosie the Riveter” from the globally recognised “We Can Do It!” posters. These posters provide an unrealistic depiction of war work as well as perpetuating traditional female beauty standards and gender roles by presenting both women like glamorous film stars and the inclusion of “woman craft” suggestions at the bottom of the cover of “Woman and Home”.

The idealised nature of these illustrations from women’s magazines is even more apparent when contrasted the second two images of the post which are painting by Laura Knight commissioned by the Ministry of Munitions and the British military. The first painting depicts Ruby Loftus screwing a breech ring for a special type of military firearm. Although there are some similarities between the illustration on the cover of “Woman” and the painting of Ruby painted nails and perfectly set curled hair were not practical for the manual labour riveters and other factory workers engaged in. There are stark differences between the second painting of the post featuring a portrait of Corporal Robins and the cover of “Woman and Home”, government issue uniforms were certainly not as stylishly form-fitting as the illustration suggests and the gas mask in the lap of Corporal Robins sends the message of the serious danger of war far more accurately than the hat placed at a jaunty angle on the head of the idealised war worker.

I also researched the sudden trend to celebrate the figure of the domesticated woman in the post-war years, often referred to as the “Happy Housewife” After the conflict was over and men returned to their jobs after serving in the army, it no longer benefitted the government to have women working in positions they adopted during the war. The empowerment of women in ar work was only ever considered to be temporary, women were simply expected to return to their traditional roles as wives and mothers. The sudden change in what was considered the “Ideal British woman” was so successful because the government chose to celebrate the figure of the “Happy Housewife” while simultaneously shaming working mothers and antagonising career women.

Power was held over women be celebrating a single ideal while shaming and antagonising those that did not conform. This is a concept that I think I really need to consider in my own practice as my own work often features images of women, am I only representing one type of woman in my work and does this have a similarly negative effect?  

[thelegendofclarke]

People have been saying Sansa tried to force her sister to conform to traditional femininity. Do you know any specific examples of this? I don't remember her ever telling Arya she should wear dresses or embroider or anything like that. Other people like Septa Mordane, Catelyn, even Ned imposed that on Arya but I don't remember Sansa aggressively doing it. She did wish Arya was more like her, but Arya wished Sansa was more like /her/ and Arya isn't vilified for that, so it's unfair that Sansa is.

Ooohhh Anon haha, you are getting into one of my literal least favorite topics here on the lovely tumblr.com: Sansa vs. Arya and the “Sansa Bullied Arya” Discourse™.

I have seen sooo many posts calling Cat, Septa Mordane, and Sansa sexist/misogynists/bullies, ect. I haven’t really seen any of regarding Ned tbh, but I am sure its out there. I try to stay away from it because god I just really hate it, its so terrible and most of the time it makes me so uncomfortable.  I have never seen anything productive ever come from it. 

I didn’t get into the fandom here on tumblr until after I had read the books… I was honestly shocked at how much fandom fixated on this particular issue, and also how polarized the discussion was. We could talk for hours and days and years (because trust me, people have) about the instances where Arya clashes with other characters over the particular issue of femininity. But a vast majority of the time, it either starts as, or turns into, pitting the Stark sisters against each other and/or vilifying one of them and victimizing the other.

Honestly though, I think the issue more comes down to this: how much are you willing to hold these specific characters responsible for the society that they were born into? And how willing are you to blame or vilify them for perpetuating that society?

Westeros is a rigid patriarchy, that is absolutely no secret. Conformity to traditional, prescribed gender roles are all these people know. The discussion around Sansa is the one that usually makes me the most uncomfortable because at the time of most of events most of the discussion is centered around, Sansa is 11 years old. Idk about any one else, but when I was 11 years old I was in the 5th grade and we were doing that paper mache volcano science experiment where you made it ~erupt~ with baking soda and vinegar. I was not exactly interested in questioning prescribed gender roles or dismantling the patriarchy yet. As far as Ned, Cat and Septa Mordane go, I am more willing to hold them more culpable for their criticisms of Arya. But holding Sansa as an 11 year old to the same, and sometimes even greater, levels of culpability than full grown adults in the same situation is something I struggle with.

Sansa and Arya clearly do not have a perfect relationship, and often times its downright acrimonious; but imo, it’s also clear how their relationship became that way. Arya’s feelings of resentment of Sansa are understandable, because Arya has been criticized and degraded and made to feel inferior because she cannot, and does not want to, fit into Westerosi social norms and mores; everything from her looks, to her inclinations, to her hobbies, to the way she prefers to dress has been labeled “abnormal” and “unladylike.” Sansa’s inability to understand Arya is also reasonable because Sansa sees her role and what she’s been taught to do and to be as natural; she doesn’t think to question the way things are done or the people teaching and praising her. Sansa can’t relate to or sympathize with Arya’s frustrations any more that Arya can relate to or appreciate Sansa’s interests. They might as well be speaking completely different languages

Both Sansa and Arya were screwed over and let down, time and time again, by their society and the adults in their lives who created and encouraged miscommunications and hostility between them. Sansa and Arya could possibly have had a much more amicable relationship without, just for some examples, the influence of Septa Mordane, who fostered much of the resentment between the sisters. Or Ned, who held them to such different and inconsistent standards and expectations. Or Cat, who tried to hold Arya to Sansa’s example which Arya views as an impossible standard to reach. Or all three adults using comparisons to Sansa as a mechanism to shame and criticize Arya, making her feel insecure. However, all three adults are still operating in a patriarchy and they are (however unfairly) trying to teach Arya to do the same. For Septa Mordane that was her entire job description: to teach young girls to be Good Ladies as defined by patriarchal standards. They simply don’t know any other way to be. And they also know that not only failure and refusal to comply with, but downright rebellion against, said standards won’t make Arya’s life any easier going forward. Yes, there are notable exceptions in canon like Brienne of Tarth and the Mormonts; but they are just that: exceptions. Conformity and compliance is the rule.

So if you need something/one to vilify, vilify The Fucking Patriarchy tbh. It is Westerosi society, and its so deeply and violently indoctrinated patriarchal standards and values, that causes so much tension in these particular instances and between these characters. Sansa and Arya are children who are products of (and also at the mercy of) their environment. But if you get rid of the pervasive, toxic sexism and misogyny that dominated Westeros, their childish sibling arguments would not have progressed and would have been resolved or forgotten probably as quickly as they started. And in many cases, the cause for disagreement or hostility wouldn’t have even been present at all.