#focused more on the sexism aspect rather than the fashion

[jetravenex]

I do wish they could've explored a transition between April and Bonnie. Or that Season 2 gave us a bit more of an intro to April as if I recall correctly she was kind of just there with little explanation or preamble. And was also cut out just as quickly with as little explanation.

I also liked that while Michael was always saving and getting with multiple women, he usually respected Bonnie and April's opinion and also they never just became eye candy. (something KR 08 I felt like really struggled with)

Sorry to drag KR 08 into the discussion, but tbh they definitely played up Sarah and even Zoe's 'oh look how sexy they are' far more often than they showed how capable they were.

In fact I remember Sarah was often undercut so Mike could be shown in a better light (the amount of time early KR 08 spent talking up Mike was exhausting, and don't get me started on that second episode sooo much focus on the male gaze).

Contrast that to the original Knight Rider and while both Bonnie and April could dress up, there was something nice that even when Bonnie first showed up she was in a jumpsuit ready to work. Her scenes in that first episode with her had her working hard. She wasn't a damsel she was a coworker, she was KITT's mechanic, and she would chew out Michael if he caused a circuit to go out of place.

Similarly with April, she was experimented and sure she dressed up (also the girl could rock so many different styles). I agree with Bonnie and April just having different styles and being very fashionable.

But Knight Rider at least the show where the ladies appeared didn't just make them eye candy like it's follower Knight Rider 08 wasn't above sinking too and far earlier. And hey as Sarah said 'she does look good in a bikini' it was undercut by the abundance of Male gaze focus from Mike's scenes in episode 2. (Episode 1 and 2 of KR 08 are two that really just did Sarah dirty in making her there to be ogled rather than seen as capable). Despite her actually being out in the field with Mike.

Kinda sad that the original had more respect for it's core ladies that KR 08 undercut in its first two episodes.

Just wanted to muse about how the supposed 'modern' iteration took a bit of a step back with it's 'Bonnie/April' counterpart at least at first. It felt like they got better with Sarah later on (but gosh those first two episodes were soo bad), so sadly it wasn't just a trend from the 80s it's something that persists today.

It's also hard in general with 'sexism' like I said Sarah rocking it in a bikini and being confident in her own body could be empowering. I've heard some women say as such it feels freeing and empowering to embrace that they are sexy and to feel attractive. Which I think original KR played to. When Bonnie and April dressed up in something different they rocked it, when they were at work they were functional, with varying ways to show their personal styles.

Admittedly Knight Rider did also have the damsels for Michael to rescue and to be pretty eye candy. Not to mention there being other instances of women traipsing around in bikinis (the women on rollerblades in KvK pops into mind as an example).

There were also times Bonnie and April were in need of rescue from Michael (or had guys creep on them, Garthe to April in Goliath returns along with Bonnie having that guy be creeping on her in that halloween episode).

But also the flip to them being treated with more respect, they also didn't often get in on the action. And if they did they often wound up being the damsels. Which at least Sarah had some moments in action, and I guess for a time there was Agent Rivai who rarely was a damsel and more the bad ass (at least until they included her in the cuts the only one I was genuinely sad to see go when they started cleaning out the cast bloat).

Granted I will also say I loved Rivai, Sarahs and Zoe's outfits, just wished the latter two (though Sarah especially, Zoe I think I'm just thinking of her time in that cheerleader costume). So I dunno, I'm also not a fashion expert I just appreciate the women in KR, and recognize how the presentation was definitely pushing it sometimes.

alphadelta227529

April was the fashion icon, not Bonnie, so that’s doubly unfair! Don’t get me wrong, I love her style - especially the shirt and tie combo in Give Me Liberty - but Bonnie’s style was practical, not fashionable. Plus she spent longer wearing a boiler suit that April did.

April and Bonnie both had lovely fashion senses. April’s being far more feminine- with more flares, puffed sleeves, and skin showing. 

You’re right. Bonnie was far more practical with her looks! Practicality, however, doesn’t negate fashion sense. While practically dressed individuals wouldn’t be setting high fashion runways on fire, they would be comfortable. Working in a garage, comfort matters more than gaining the attention of others. After all, it wouldn’t make too much sense to be changing a car’s oil and doing hard work in skirts and dainty outfits. (Although certainly April pulled it off. But she was very much a different entity than Bonnie.)

I tend to think Bonnie really made a statement in her broiler suits. (She made things typically masculine look cool enough that I wanted to own several and I bought a leather jacket modeled off the top of her jumpsuits). But that is definitely my bias. Although, my favorite looks have to be the sequenced pantsuit she wears to a party with Devon and the dresses she wore as Alicia Craven-hall. And you are right! The outfit in Give Me Liberty is just darling!

Honestly, I don’t think either woman really gets a fair shake. Most people focus on their looks and little else. I think too, in their own rights, they were both fashion icons but with very different tastes.  

[lgbtqia-representation]

Token Representation

In the same realm as fetishizing an individual for their sexuality is none other than the new pop culture phenomenon of token representation. This is the concept of including an individual of a minority group to create diversity and inclusion. Token representation has a few key factors that skews it from just representing the community:

The token character is never complex.

The token character follows stereotypes, tropes, or plot lines, such as them quickly being killed off or no longer being seen in the film.

There not intersectional but rather are just LGBTQIA+

They have nothing else in their life except this identity.

The “gay best friend” trend is one that has swept the nation. This ranges not only from the mass media representation in movies like its namesake, “G.B.F” to the trend of straight celebrities having their very own. But sadly, this is only detrimental to the community and does not work to expand on accurate representation. “Gay men are not accessories; they are not your entities. Lesbians and bi women are not just the objects of your sexual desires. We are real humans with more to offer than the romanticized stereotypes straight people perpetuate. I guarantee no gay man wants to follow you around, tell you “yas, queen,” and give you fashion advice. The fetishization and romanticization of same-gender attraction is extremely damaging to our community. It dehumanizes us.” (Price) We are turning people into items, no longer are they a gay person struggling through coming out, societal backlash, learning about themselves, or navigating an ever-changing terrain. Instead, they are as if the newest trendiest handbag on the market, and guess what, those get ditched fast for the next new one.

(Price)

This trend works to perpetuate the idea that gay men are there only for the benefit of these straight women when they adamantly avoid other members of the LGBTQIA community. “Urban Dictionary's top voted definition for the term is “the best friend of any hot girl you know.”” (Price) It draws attention to the fact that these people are not made famous for their individuality, their contributions, or being themselves but rather by taking one singular aspect, their sexuality, and making it the only aspect that anyone cares about. We are morphing these people from a complex human with thoughts, emotions, desires, and pains they carry with them every day throughout the day into just a gay guy.

"More LGBT people are simply integrated into the lives of all people as friends and family," says Cathy Renna, a media activist and LGBT community PR guru. "We will continue to battle homophobia and sexism and racism for a long time to come, but I would like to think we have made progress beyond the patronizing 'I have a gay friend so I must be OK with it' statement." (Scheffler) This concept perpetuates the swathe that holds together our current society's stance on the LGBTQIA+ community. “We’re okay with it.”, “I have a friend”, or “my sister is”. These all play off the concept that association or even simply mentioning a concept equates to acceptance and understanding of it.

“While 64% of adults think it’s positive for the LGBTQ+ community to be visible in advertisements, a considerable 72% of the LGBTQ+ community think the way they are presented in advertising is tokenistic, according to research commissioned by the Gay Times and Karmarama.” (Watson) The fact that 72% of the community being depicted feels as though it is only out of tokenism shows just how big this problem is. It is the culmination of people fetishizing the community into objects they want to see for their own pleasure, it is the monetization of a community, and it relies upon heteronormative stereotypes which erases people within the community. Representation on the other hand, would include dynamic characters, with complex emotional and background stories, and a wide variety of representations and plot lines to which a character advances through (all while not disappearing or being killed).

A token representation is one that follows stereotypes or even flows within the heteronormative narrative society so wishes to paint. “I find that these policies and documents promote a specific normative form of monogamous, marital, middle-class, normatively gendered, and in many implicit and explicit ways, white, heterosexuality—that is best described as heteronormative.” (Rosenblum 425)

This very specifically calls attention to the fact that diversity and intersectionality is a rare find within representation, meaning it is not real representation. It is a sad excuse that is happy to sweep the entire community under one blanket statement that follows the standards set up for the whole world, heteronormativity. Best put, we are looking for representation that understands, “LGBTQ+ people run the gamut. We are white and Black and brown. We are lesbians, and gay men, genderqueer, trans, nonbinary. We are rich and poor, fat and skinny, healthy and disabled, and our representation deserves to show us in all of the shades that we exist.” (Karner)

What our community demands is this: “That means when it comes to representation, it has to be more than a token. It must be inclusive and intersectional. People do not exist in a single aspect. They are complicated and multi-faceted, and heterosexual people get to see themselves in a hundred different ways onscreen. We deserve the same thing.” (Karner)

Thus, despite the exposure and seeming representation, there is still an oppressive and commodity culture-based reason to be including these characters. We are not showing that this community is everywhere as normal human beings but rather depicting them solely as this overly noticeable and focused upon person just for their sexual identity.

Resources:

Karner, Jen. “LGBTQ+ Representation in Movies Has a Long Way to Go.” Whattowatch.com, WhatToWatch, 2 June 2020, www.whattowatch.com/opinion/lgbtq-representation-movies-has-long-way-go.

Price, Cameron. “Stop Fetishizing Gay People.” YouthCake, 1 Jan. 1970, www.youthcake.com/2019/01/stop-fetishizing-gay-people.html.

Rosenblum, Karen Elaine, and Toni-Michelle Travis, editors. The Meaning of Difference. 5th ed., McGraw-Hill Education, 2008.

Scheffler, Daniel. “Why It's Time to Say Goodbye to the ‘Gay Best Friend.’” Mic, Mic, 26 Feb. 2015, www.mic.com/articles/111308/why-it-s-time-to-rename-the-gay-best-friend.

Watson, Imogen. “72% Of LGBTQ+ Community Believe Their Representation in Advertising Tokenistic.” The Drum, The Drum, 17 June 2019, www.thedrum.com/news/2019/06/17/72-lgbtq-community-believe-their-representation-advertising-tokenistic.

Image:

“G.B.F. (Film).” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 3 May 2021, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.B.F._(film).

Piskorski, Mikolaj Jan, et al. “LGBT Diversity and Inclusion within Organization: IMD Article.” IMD Business School, IMD Business School, 20 June 2019, www.imd.org/research-knowledge/articles/Thrive-as-an-LGBT-executive-or-ally/.

[rapeculturerealities]

If the past few days in sports have taught us anything, it’s that reporters often flub up the opportunity to ask the nation’s top athletes pertinent, intelligent, non-redundant, non-offensive questions.

Last week, we watched as a reporter asked LeBron James the same question over and over again, trying, unsuccessfully, to coax him into either getting angry or ratting out his teammate.

Then, days later over the weekend, a journalist at the French Open asked Serena a question he said he’s been waiting fourteen years to ask.

And despite thinking about it for over a decade, nothing told him it might be sexist, inappropriate or asinine.

According to Rolling Out, Bill Simons first attempted to banter with Williams about her daughter, Olympia before taking a turn.

Bill Simons: I know you want to get back to Olympia, work with me here, please.

Serena Williams: Work with me (smiling.)

Simons: We’re in this together, baby.

Serena: No, we’re not; you’re not going home to a screaming baby.

Simons: I have been waiting about 14 years to ask you this question. After the 2004 Wimbledon match with Maria, I had the opportunity to interview Donald Trump on his LA golf course, and he said that Maria’s shoulder were incredibly alluring and then he came up with this incredible analysis: That you were intimidated by her super model good looks. My question is: Have you ever been intimidated by anyone on a tennis court, and what are your thoughts about that occurrence?

Serena: I honestly don’t have any thoughts about that. I can’t say I have been intimidated by anyone. That’s all. That’s it.

Chile…

Serena said she’s made a more conscious effort not to get offended by the sexist questions reporters ask her and this right here, shows that she was not lying. Because this is beyond insulting.

Before we get into the beauty aspect of the question, we have to acknowledge that it completely disregards the entire reason Williams and the reporter were in the room together: tennis.

And since we’re on the subject of tennis, we should mention that Serena has a 19-3 win record against Sharapova. She’s proven time and time again that she’s the superior athlete. (Sadly, a pectoral injury that prevented her from serving has forced Williams to withdraw from her match with Sharapova that was supposed to have taken place earlier today.) Serena has won 23 Grand Slam titles to Sharapova’s 5. Serena has taken home a gold medal each of the four times she’s appeared at the Olympics, whether she was playing singles or doubles. Sharapova lost the one time she was there. In the words of Joanne The Scammer, “You don’t compare when you don’t compete.”

Now, when it comes to beauty, we all have our standards, our preferences, the conditioning we’ve accepted or rejected. It’s perfectly fine if someone prefers Sharapova’s looks to Serena’s. And judging from Donald Trump’s dating and marriage history and his blatant racism, it should surprise no one that Sharapova would be the woman he extols over Serena Williams.

But is that really any of her business? Should she really be concerned that an old, racist White man, who just so happens to be president, said he thought Sharapova’s shoulders were alluring?

Hell nah.

I know it might come as a shock and surprise to White folks but Black women have our own beauty ideals, ones that celebrate features not typically associated with Europeans. And I’m telling you if 1,000 Black women were asked to list 1,000 women— of any race— they found the most attractive, Maria Sharapova’s name would not appear on any list. Let me spell it out. We are not thinking about her. I know our society would like for you to believe otherwise, but most Black women don’t spend their days idolizing the looks of White women. I promise you.

I don’t know Serena personally. But I would assume, outside of ensuring that she wax that a$$ on the tennis court, I doubt she’s thinking about Sharapova’s looks either. And if she is, I believe her when she says she’s not and never has been intimidated by an opponent’s physical features.

I’m not here to prove Serena’s attractiveness to you. You either see it or you don’t. But in the words of Cardi B. and YG, “She Bad.” And there are more than a few people, men, women and fashion publications, alike, who would cosign that opinion. Most importantly, Serena believes that about herself.

Not only is this physical comparison a waste of time emotionally and psychologically, it distracts from the real reason any of us even know Sharapova’s name: tennis.

The fact that this reporter would keep Serena from her baby with a question attempting to pit two women against one another, outside of their actual sport, because of one man’s opinion on beauty just shows the depths of sexism that still exists in our society. It shows that instead of focusing on the time, skill and effort it takes to perform at this elite level for the past 24 years, a man would rather ask a Black woman if she’s intimidated by Sharapova—because Donald Trump, one of the most lying a$$ figures in modern political history—said so.  The mere fact that it came from his mouth should have been enough to disqualify the question. The inquiry completely devalues her expertise on the subject of sport and human determination and excellence in favor of a petty and juvenile discussion on beauty. It’s a discussion that is not only unnecessary and trite but completely reductive— as if the only worthy contribution a woman can make to the world are her good looks.

[caveartfair]

The Forgotten Story of Audrey Munson, Famous Muse and Fierce Advocate for Women Artists

Audrey Munson with Arnold Genthe’s cat, Buzzer. Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Alexander Stirling Calder working on a sculpture for the Panama-Pacific International Exposition in San Francisco in 1913. Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Not many people know Audrey Munson by name—but if you’ve spent any time in New York City, you’ve seen her face. After all, Munson’s likeness tops some of the city’s grandest buildings. She’s the subject of a handful of its largest sculptures, and is featured in a whopping 30 statues at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Her influence extends further, too, all the way to the White House, which holds a piece that borrows Munson’s features and fierce gaze.

How did one woman come to captivate so many? In the early 1900s, Munson—an artist’s model, actress, and writer—was a household name in the United States, lauded by many as both the “American Venus” and the “Perfect Woman.” The country’s most celebrated artists, like Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney and Daniel Chester French, invited her into their studios. Hollywood enlisted her to star in trailblazing films, like Inspiration (1915), directed by George Foster Platt. And newspapers ran her first-person, tell-all articles to the delight of readers hungry for more insight into this great, gutsy beauty. (If the rumors are true, it would have been hard to find an American schoolboy circa 1915 who didn’t harbor a passionate crush on her.)

But, like so many women of her time, Munson’s star faded fast and hard—eclipsed by the male artists she worked with as model and muse. Even when she is remembered, it’s often for the more scandalous and tragic events in her life (controversy around her nude modeling; struggles with depression) rather than her essential role in the creative process, and her work as an advocate for the rights of creative women.

Audrey Munson in her role as an artist’s model in the film Inspiration, 1915.  Photo via Wikimedia Commons.

“There were tragic aspects to her life, and that’s a juicy story to tell,” artist Andrea Geyer explained to Artsy. Geyer, whose practice is research-based and often focuses on the untold stories of women, made a series of photographs and collages inspired by Munson’s life: an attempt to rewrite her distorted, mostly forgotten legacy. “It’s also important to tell Munson’s story with the agenda that she had in mind—one where she not only had agency, but also creative power,” Geyer continued.

Munson was born in 1891 in Rochester, New York. Before she was 10 years old, her parents divorced, setting off a life of financial struggle for Munson and her mother (who had sole custody of her daughter). But Munson had dreams of supporting herself as an actress, and between 1907 and 1909, both she and her mother relocated to New York to pursue her goal.

It was around this time that Munson, still in her teens, was scouted while walking through Manhattan; a photographer, captivated by her beauty, asked her to sit for him. The gig jumpstarted Munson’s role as artist’s muse, and led to her first major job: modeling for a then-famous sculptor named Isidore Konti.

Konti, though, had one non-negotiable request: He wanted Munson to pose nude for one of his sculptures. His intentions, he insisted, were pure. “To us, it makes no difference if our model is draped or clothed in furs,” he claimed. “We only see the work we are doing.” Munson’s mother was eventually convinced.

USS Maine Monument in New York City, NY, USA. Photo via Wikimedia Commons.

Soon after, Munson became one of New York’s most sought-after nude models, inspiring the greatest sculptors and painters of her time, from Vanderbilt Whitney and Chester French (of Lincoln Memorial fame) to Attilio Piccirilli and A. Stirling Calder. She posed with the dramatic flair and sensitivity of an actress, and artists’ interpretations of Munson began surfacing all over the city. You could find her likeness in the New York Public Library, leaning against a horse; on top of the Manhattan Municipal Building, gilded and presenting a crown with aplomb; and at Columbus Circle, a stern, stone figure serving as the centerpiece for the USS Maine monument. By 1915, when she was selected as the model for a large series of highly publicized works commissioned for the World’s Fair in San Francisco, Munson was undoubtedly one of America’s most recognizable figures.

Hollywood and Broadway took note and began producing blockbuster silent films and plays in which Munson acted as a version of herself: a bold model whose work was marked by both agency and artistry. With titles like Inspiration (1915), Purity (1916), and The Girl O’ Dreams (1918), they highlighted Munson’s essential role as an active—rather than passive—muse.

These films, with their smattering of nude scenes, were also controversial, and many theaters banned them. Through them, “the fine line of art was examined,” as writer Justin White (whose grandmother and aunt knew Munson) put it in his 2007 essay “Rediscovering Audrey.” Indeed, Munson’s films exposed both the “true skill and instrumental role a model plays in the creation of the human form in art” to a large, national audience. “To pose nude for an artist in privacy was one thing,” White continued, “but to bring it to the masses was a courageous, perhaps even bold, move on her part.”

Munson’s unwillingness to be a silent partner in the artistic process manifested in other media, too. In 1921, she penned a series of 20 articles about her life and work for the popular magazine The New York American, a Hearst publication. Across Queen of the Artists’ Studios, as her articles were collectively titled, she emphasized the collaborative nature of the artistic process and the important role of the model. She also exposed salary discrepancies (between women and men, as well as between female actresses and artist’s models), and alluded to the inherent sexism of the art world in the early 1900s.

Audrey Munson, 1915. Photo via Wikimedia Commons.

Advertisement for the film Purity, in Moving Picture World, 1916. Photo via Wikimedia Commons.

“In a successful play the principal actors and actresses who contribute to its success are given due praise…and such honors mean increases in salary and a step at least one notch higher on the road to fame and prosperity. Not so with the artist’s model,” Munson wrote. “She remains ever anonymous. She is the tool with which the artist works…though she provides the inspiration for a masterpiece and is the direct cause of enriching the painter or sculptor.”

While Munson wrote the articles at the height of her career, she began to see something that her contemporaries hadn’t yet: that her legacy, like those of other women like her, was by no means set in stone.

For some, the chance to have an image survive into posterity seemed like it should have been enough. To Norman Rose, who interviewed Munson during her heyday, she was “a slender, graceful girl who will live in marble and bronze and canvas, in the art centers of the world, long, long after she and everyone else of this generation shall have become dust!” But Munson, in her own accounts, seemed to predict a different future: “Where is she now, this model who was so beautiful? What has been her reward? Is she happy and prosperous or is she sad and forlorn, her beauty gone, leaving only memories in the wake!”

In 1922, a year after Munson wrote these words, she attempted suicide. By that point, modeling requests and film roles had begun to slow, and she had been embroiled in two scandals that seemed to negatively affect her reputation. The first came in 1919, when Munson’s landlord murdered his wife because, according to him, he wanted to marry his famous tenant. Munson denied any romantic relationship and was cleared, but the media latched onto the story nonetheless.

Film still of Audrey Monson in Heedless Moths, 1921,  on the cover of Movie Weekly, 1922. Photo via Wikimedia Commons.

Daniel Chester French, The Four Continents at the Alexander Hamilton Custom House, Bowling Green, New York, 2015. Photo via Wikimedia Commons.

The other incident, which took place in 1922, bears a striking resemblance to recent stories that have emerged in the wake of the #MeToo movement—and Harvey Weinstein’s conduct in particular. In Munson’s telling, a powerful Broadway producer (whom she never named) entered her dressing room during the production of a play called The Fashion Show. He made sexual advances, to which, as she later recalled, she boldly rebuffed: “Don’t touch me. I hate you. Your touch is repulsive to me. I would rather have a snake crawl over me than to feel your hand upon me.” The lecher didn’t react well. A few days later, Munson was told—without explanation—that the play was closing imminently. From then on, she struggled to find work.  

Afterwards, Munson also battled mental illness; she was eventually committed to the St. Lawrence State Hospital for the Insane in Ogdensburg, New York, at the age of 40. It was there that she died in 1996; typical of Munson’s tenacity, she lived to the remarkable age of 104.

But, as she predicted, it would be years until she was recognized for her unique contributions by historians and artists, like Geyer. After Munson died, she was buried in an unmarked grave—an ironic end to the life of a woman rendered all over the United States in stone and gold.

Geyer, for her part, is intent on raising money for a gravestone to mark Munson’s resting place. “She not only stood up for her own rights, but also became an activist and organizer fighting for the recognition of other women,” the artist explained. “For that and many other achievements, she deserves to be remembered by name.”

from Artsy News

[the-roadkill-cafe]

I like your writing and answers so I'm going to do another. 50: How does Himiko react to the sexism in the Uchiha? And an anon once asked how Himiko would Touka as a stepmom, but what I want to know is how she would view her father after he goes into this relationship where the consent is grey.

adv;ands;vansdv;dlvna;jhaf;hdsv I LOVE these questions, thank you 1192ibelin!

50. Create your own/How does Himiko react to the sexism in the Uchiha?

Well, this is a doozy of a question (that is, it is an excellent question but my answer is very long, lolol). So first of all, it is my opinion that society at large during the Warring Clans Era (and probably still in contemporary Naruto) is sexist. It is not at all unique to the Uchiha. There are of course people, whether because of their personal beliefs or their personality who aren’t sexist, and people are sexist to different degrees, but it is very prevalent. 

Among the Uchiha, this most commonly takes the form of “I am your father/brother/husband and I may or may not make major life decisions for you.” Women in general in the WCE don’t tend to be active shinobi; my idea is that they’re trained, but their training usually starts later, may or may not be less intense, and is more centered on defending the clan compound. Basically, they’re a reserve force, not the active force (men). Some men take this further and say it’s not because of practically but because women can’t fight or shouldn’t (”their job is at home”). But!! All of that said, women do most of the logistical stuff and day to day running of *everything* at home. For instance, while Izuna helps Madara with planning and what not regarding missions/patrols/etc, when it comes to supplies and things not directly related to fighting, Madara’s primary aid comes from a woman in the clan (who would ordinarily be his wife but well....he doesn’t have one so there, lol). 

Each clan is slightly different, and civilians are even more different besides. Therefore, what sexism looks like *exactly* in each clan is going to differ. For Himiko specifically, her case is special because she’s the only daughter of the main family. Ordinarily, because she has no brothers, her husband would be the next head of the Uchiha clan. Depending on how long Madara and/or Izuna live, it would be the case that they choose Himiko’s husband for her, or, depending on the state of the clan and their mindset, just provide her with a list of candidates that she can choose from (which is more likely - it’s not enough to have a shinobi with strong martial abilities running a clan, they also have to be intelligent and able to handle other aspects, which Himiko, as the highest ranking woman, would be the judge of). As a final judge in a lot of matters, this gives her a *lot* of power....but the fact is that her life is very much laid out for her and it doesn’t matter if she likes it or not because she has a duty to her clan. 

In short, Himiko has a lot of the privilege of being born in the main family, but because she has no siblings, she also bears the burdens of it all alone. Compare to another girl in the clan who is born to a foot soldier, or who has several sisters - there is less social status, but also no one is putting very specific expectations on her.

Which comes to your actual question, how does Himiko react? The answer is: poorly. Himiko sees a lot of this as a child, but it doesn’t really sink in until she’s a teenager when suddenly she’s required to behave a certain way and think of the clan all the time etc etc. Himiko wants to make whatever choices she wants, not be beholden to what someone else thinks is the right choice. And there’s not really a good way she can show that she can still be responsible to her clan *and* have the freedom to do whatever she wants. Unfortunately, rejecting the hold that the clan has over her means rejecting the clan as a whole - which means she’s a traitor and needs to be killed. 

And adding on to this - certainly there’s other women who aren’t exactly thrilled with this system. It’s not like they’re all passively accepting it. Some work to change it, some don’t - just like any other social movement at any time. But Himiko’s version of feminism and what women should be allowed to do (which is everything) reads as very extreme to many of the women around her, even the ones who, if they knew the word, would call themselves feminists. It’s like...compare women’s rights movements in history. Depending on the time and the region, what women’s rights movements actually wanted all differed. Even today we see that with the difference between American feminists and, say, Japanese feminists. (and of course, this also isn’t to say that women never imagined until fifty years ago that they could be equal to men, just that, in general, what people consider extreme in social movements can be somewhat considered relative). 

Anyway, this last paragraph was probably a bit clumsily written (I’m on mobile and keep getting distracted) so if you want me to clarify or add anything on this point or anything in this first answer, let me know. 

And the next question...

How would Himiko view her father when he enters into a relationship with Touka where the consent is grey?

Quick recap/summary for people who aren’t familiar: I wrote an Izuna/Touka fic called “the devil and the deep blue sea” (which I will link once I am off mobile, but it is available on ao3 and tumblr in its smutty entirety, and the non smut is on ffnet).The premise was that as part of the Uchiha-Senju peace treaty, there was to be an arranged marriage. Eventually both Izuna and Touka volunteered to marry each other. What makes the consent gray is that they don’t like each other in any fashion (nor do they by the end of the installment) and they don’t really want to get married. Even though they weren’t tricked/forced/coerced into marrying each other (and having sex with each other), it isn’t something they would ordinarily do except that they both want peace enough that they’re willing to try. 

I later received an ask from an anon about what would happen if, in my SI fic, Himiko’s mother died and Izuna remarried Touka. I immediately thought of my fic, and answered the ask as if the premise of their marriage was the same as in “devil and the deep blue sea”; that is, Izuna and Touka married under very tense conditions for political purposes. In that ask, I focused on Himiko and Touka, but here I’ll talk about Himiko and Izuna. 

With all of that said, Himiko knows that for *both* Izuna and Touka, the consent is grey. Izuna is in fact more conservative than Madara; he’d rather not have peace with the Senju at all except that Madara wants it. So she knows it’s not a case of Izuna coercing Touka (though of course Himiko doesn’t know for certain until later that none of the Senju didn’t pressure Touka and that she actually volunteered, like Izuna). Himiko knows that Izuna volunteered to do it, and while he isn’t thrilled to be married to Touka, she’s also fairly certain he won’t mistreat Touka, if only to make sure the treaty succeeds (and also because later Touka is pregnant with his own child). Overall, her opinion of him, based solely on the fact that he entered into the relationship, wouldn’t really change. It’s not a mystery to her that Izuna would do everything he could if he thought it would benefit the Uchiha. 

On the other hand, Izuna isn’t exactly welcoming of Touka when she finally moves in, and he avoids her as much as possible. He also does his level best to keep Himiko from Touka, because he doesn’t trust Touka around her. The avoidance and distrust is something that, though Himiko understands *why*, she doesn’t approve of. To Himiko, this is not the way to show that the Uchiha are serious and that Izuna is taking it seriously. And also if Touka was planning on assassinating someone, leaving her to her own devices at all times isn’t really a smart idea. 

But Himiko tries not to be too hard on Izuna. She can understand why he’s behaving the way he is, and also that he’s stressed. Since she’s a child, her version of not being too hard on him is basically behaving and going with the flow, and not causing him any problems. Honestly what she wants is for them both to get along so that this peace thing works out, because living in a constant state of war is not really on her list of enjoyable things. 

I hope I answered this well! I really loved your questions; feel free to send me more! And as always, this goes for anyone else too; you can check out any memes I’ve reblogged or just send me in questions you’ve made up. Thank you!

[clubpassim]

Women in Folk - The Ladles

Hey there!

Katie here, excited to bring you a very thought-provoking conversation with The Ladles!

The Ladles, Katie Martucci, Caroline Kuhn, and Lucia Pontoniere, formed in the Fall of 2014, in the New England Conservatory dorm rooms. Interestingly enough, they formed for a reason similar to what we're discussing: They were the only three women undergraduates that year in the Contemporary Improvisation program at NEC. “Being in such a boy’s club[...]”, they said, “[...]we naturally gravitated towards each other and started hanging out, singing Joni Mitchell, knitting, and playing music together. We decided to perform at a friend's house concert, and the rest is history!” The group has been performing together for about four years now, though individually they’ve all been playing for the better part of their lives, starting to sing and play as young children. When asked who their biggest musical influences were, they responded with Mountain Man, Meredith Monk, and The Boswell Sisters; all artists with rich harmonies that have played a part in helping The Ladles form their own rich and beautiful harmonies. That, paired with their varying musical backgrounds, has shaped their sound into the unique blend they’re known for having. The band is currently working towards the debut of their first full-length album, ‘The Line’, coming out on July 12th! “We are super excited about this, as we've only got an EP recorded and we really want to share these songs”.

They will be doing an album release tour around the northeast beginning on July 11, 2019. To stay up to date on the progress of their album, tour dates, etc., make sure to follow them on Instagram, check them out on Facebook, or visit their website! And be sure to come hear them play at Club Passim on Friday, July 19th, 2019 at 8 pm. You can buy tickets online here.

The next portion of the interview was focused on their experiences as women in the folk community.

[full interview under the cut]

Club Passim: Talk a little about your experiences as a female artist/all-female group in a heavily male-dominated music genre.

The Ladles: Well, to begin with, we felt it right away when we all arrived at New England Conservatory and realized how few women were in our program. It can definitely create a divide, and it's easy to feel judged for how you play and what you play. There's a sense of needing to prove yourself. Styles of music that include more improvisation tend to be more male-dominated. This is because we believe men are allowed to make more 'mistakes' than women in our society. We don't have to look very far to see examples of this. Improvisation is all about making mistakes and being vulnerable; you figure things out as you go and you will make a fool of yourself. But because women don't have that same sort of leeway, they often shy away from that level of exposure.

We're sure many women can relate to the experience of feeling pressure to present as "perfect." As we have continued to grow as musicians and The Ladles has grown as a band, it's been easier to let go of perfection in favor of taking risks and learning new things. In those moments, we certainly make "mistakes" but also feel more creative, authentic and fulfilled.

CP: Do you notice a difference in how you’re treated by other artists, venues, audiences, and industry professionals before vs. after you play?

TL: We definitely have. Condescending comments like, "Wow I'm surprised at how good you are!" We literally have had people say that. But the vast majority of audiences and venues are very supportive and treat us with respect.

CP: Do you feel you are viewed differently on stage by men v. women?

TL: I think this varies more person-to-person, rather than men vs. women. Of course, there is a measure of objectification that is inherent with performance, whether you are female or male. That being said, the presence of the "male gaze" is undeniable (obviously among straight males) when you are a woman being viewed on stage by a man.

CP: Often, all-male bands have a heavy female fanbase that buy merch, go to many shows, support, etc. Do you feel you have the male gender's support of your music in this same way? Why or why not do you think that is?

TL: Our fanbase is pretty equally male and female. The men who enjoy our music respect us as musicians and genuinely enjoy what we have to offer. In our generation, there is generally more awareness among men of respecting women (at least in the lovely bubble that we live in, in the northeast). But honestly we see it throughout the country - even in the deep south where Lucia is living these days - things have changed a lot between our generation and our parents’.

At the same time, one cannot ignore the violence and oppression that women face en masse. The abortion laws being passed in various state legislature around the country are a good indicator of the ways in which women continue to be policed. Women in every profession have to deal with these questions of respect, creative/intellectual worth, body image, and entitlement. Femme musicians just have the added experience of navigating that in public, on stage.

CP: Incredible classical artists such as classical pianist Yuja Wang use their performance attire as a way to express themselves. This provocative style of dress has been viewed as “distracting” from the music. What are your personal thoughts on women using fashion and sex-appeal as a means of bringing in more audience members and assisting in selling their music?

TL: Performers should be able to dress and act however they want! They are creating a performance, and that includes a visual aspect. If a woman is using her sex appeal, go right ahead girl! The bigger issue here is that sex appeal and skill are not mutually exclusive. A woman can be an incredible musician and not fit society's typical (and ridiculous) standards of beauty and be overlooked and ignored. On the other hand, a woman can be an incredible musician, fit some of those ridiculous standards of beauty, and therefore not be taken seriously. There's no "right" way to do this, so just be yourself and wait for everyone else to catch up.

CP: In your opinion, how can men be more aware or informed about women in the music industry?

TL: Men can include women in their projects, they can support their femme friends' shows and projects, and they can examine their own experiences! Really just talk to your female friends and listen to what they say about their experiences.

CP: What do you do in a situation when you feel disrespected by the artists/co-workers you’re surrounded by?

TL: Try to address it, as quickly as possible. It can be super hard, but it's important for both parties. Sometimes people aren't even aware that they're acting in a way that feels disrespectful to you. Learning to trust your gut and to vocalize those feelings is hard work, but really the only way to bring about change in a work environment and step into your power.

CP: What message do you want to display as a woman in folk music?

TL: We think it's important to stop making subsections of musicians - "Women in music" "All female band"  etc. We don't want to be defined as "female musicians", we just want to be musicians! We should be able to transcend that label. It can be creatively limiting to put yourself into a box that labels you a certain way. We are happy to talk about our experiences as women living in a society that still takes issue with women living public lives, in fact, it's absolutely essential dialogue that can be informative for women and men. But why not ask men to examine their experiences as well? How have they benefited from sexism? What has been easier for them because of their gender? What do they not understand about life as a femme creator? What is their experience of working with women? Establishing that expectation, that men should be examining their experience and including women in their work, is necessary for us all to move forward.

CP: What words of wisdom/encouragement do you have for aspiring women in folk?

TL: Build community and be true to yourself and your music! If there's emotion and intention behind music, it's always good music. Who cares if anyone likes it or not? If it feels like a true expression to you, then it has merit. There's a wonderful letter from Martha Graham to Agnes de Mille that captures this idea beautifully:

“There is a vitality, a life force, a quickening that is translated through you into action,
 and because there is only one of you in all time, this expression is unique. 
And if you block it, it will never exist through any other medium and be lost. 
The world will not have it. 
It is not your business to determine how good it is, nor how valuable it is, nor how it compares with other expressions. 
It is your business to keep it yours clearly and directly, to keep the channel open. 
You do not even have to believe in yourself or your work. 
You have to keep open and aware directly to the urges that motivate YOU. 
Keep the channel open.”

Thank You, Katie, Caroline, and Lucia for your thought-provoking answers. My favorite points you made were how improvisation-based genres are usually male-dominated and the reasoning behind it, and that it is everyone’s job to help establish the expectation that both men and women should reflect on their differentiating experiences with sexism in the workplace, and then talk about it more.

Thank you for reading, and stay tuned for the next installment of the ‘Women in Folk’ blog!

- Katie

Want to hear more from The Ladles? They will be performing at Club Passim on Friday, July 19th, 2019 at 8 pm. You can buy tickets online here. 

PC: Elizabeth Maney

[feynites]

I had a thought earlier and thought I'd shoot you an ask about it: Do you have any tips on getting better at world-building (I think you're great at it btw)? Also, have you always liked world-building, in itself? I find myself often using worlds other people create, because I'm not very good at creating/thinking of my own, and was wondering if that was lazy of me? Just was wondering what your opinion was, on all that! Just food for thought. c:

Thank you! I’m glad you think I’m good at it!

World-building is a very interesting subject, but it took me a while to even really appreciate what it was. I’ve also spent a lot of time in other people’s worlds and environments, that’s pretty common among fanfiction writers, but I wouldn’t consider it lazy. Not unless you think any fiction set in our world is also lazy. There will always be parts of a story that some people are better at or prefer to focus on, or still need to build up their skills at. It’s normal.

I think a few things are very key to good world-building, though. Or at least in my experience, it’s the stuff I’ve figured out that’s helped me the most.

1. Nothing is original. You might not be entirely sure of where an idea has come to you from, but at the end of the day, there are only so many facets to human existence out there. Our imaginations only carry us so far, and our ideas come from the people around us, and also from their ideas. Artists draw from the things they see and experience, and use references to make stuff more realistic. So do writers. Do not worry that your stuff is unoriginal. Doing your best to abandon that fear is one of the biggest favours you can do for yourself as a writer; there’s a difference between similar concepts and ideas, and plagiarism, and only plagiarism is really a problem.

2. Nothing is without real-world context. This is related to the above. The things you make are coming from somewhere, and that means that they will have implications and real-world parallels. It pays to stop and consider where you’re getting your ideas, and what those ideas are implying about the world around you, too. In order to write stories, you have to be willing to take the stuff of your daydreams, and hammer it out into a narrative. It’s like turning a hunk of rock into a gemstone. You have to cut pieces out, decide what to reshape, what to keep, and what to throw away. If you can’t attack your own presumptions about the real world, you’ll have a harder time shaping a consistent fictional one. But also, at the end of the day, a rough diamond and a faceted one are both still diamonds. People will often be able to tell where you’re pulling your ideas from, so what you say about certain subjects can still have an impact on real-world concepts, and on your readers.

3. Let your setting be bigger than you. When writing, it’s extremely easy to get caught up in your own ideals and frames of reference, and that can mean that you design a world that acts more like how you think it should, rather than how it would. Worlds are big, and to some extent you can mitigate this by being aware that there is more going on than what you’re describing - that your story’s perspective is limited to the characters and events in it, and that contradictory things or mysterious unknowns still linger in the wider scheme of the setting. Your characters shouldn’t know everything that you, the author, knows, and you, the author, shouldn’t know everything about the world, either. An exhaustive list of details can even work against you, because it makes it trickier to keep track of what all your characters do and don’t know as well.

4. Big events are great, but cause and effect is better. When you look at history, you can see the way certain figures and events impacted one another, and connected together to get people to their ends or beginnings. A common mistake in world building is to take the big events - wars, coronations, the fall of empires, the rise of them, etc, etc - and just throw them into the setting without much thought for how they all interact with one another. But it’s like… if you have a nation that’s got a standing army, that’s expensive. Most nations have very small armies of professional soldiers, and instead tend to temporarily conscript people to bulk up their armies in times of crisis, because someone who is busy training and fighting isn’t doing other vital work, like raising livestock or farming crops or building homes, making babies, running households, etc, etc. But they still need to be fed and clothed and offered some kind of shelter from the elements, provided with equipment and a certain degree of entertainment, and things like that. Professional soldiers can spend their time focusing on being the best fighters they can be, so there’s an advantage to it, but you also need to justify having them around, especially if the rest of your country is having to work overtime to keep them fed. So a nation with a big standing army is going to be a nation that finds a lot of reasons to go to war - war lets you bring home spoils, lets you raid someone else’s farms to feed your soldiers, and expand your territory, and tax or enslave conquered peoples, and so on and so forth. You can start your world-building at the point of ‘I want this nation to have a big army’, or you can start it at the point of ‘I want this nation to be war-like’, or somewhere else on the chain of events - but certain things will also imply certain other things. It’s best to be aware of what those elements are when you’re laying out your setting. If you make a nation with a big army that is ‘peaceful’, you either need to explain how that works, or else people will probably think that the reputation is inaccurate (and that’s fine, too, as along as you’re willing to create a nation with one hell of a propaganda machine instead). But if you have a warlike nation, then there will also be other nations that have taken the brunt of its actions and conquests. So you will do better to let a few key traits expand into their implications, than to try and railroad everything into a framework that doesn’t flow naturally from those things. Because if you have your big nation with its standing army and militant inclinations, every other part of the world is probably going to be impacted by its quest for expansion, and if they aren’t, you need to be thinking about why, or else the pieces of your setting won’t fit together very well.

5. Avoid the Golden Mean Fallacy. The Golden Mean Fallacy, also known as the ‘argument to moderation’, is the idea that the perfect solution to any problem lies in compromise. But thereare some situations where saying ‘both sides are in the wrong’ requires a lotof false equivalents or narrative contrivances, even though people often tend to think that this is the most reasonable or neutral stance to take as the sort of arbitrator of the setting. Approaching societal conflicts in your world-building withthe idea that compromise is an ideal solution can actually be really offensive, though, and less ‘neutral’ than beneficial to aggressive qualities in the setting.For example, if one group is trying to commit genocide against another, looking at it and going ‘okay you guys want to live, but these other guys want to killyou, so I think the solution here is to just let them eradicate your culture –that’s really what they’re objecting to, anyway, and then you get to live andthey still get to destroy you, everybody wins!’ is not something you want to present as a fair solution. Sometimes people are just plainly in the wrong. That said…

6. Nevermake any culture/race/ethnicity/etc ‘evil’ in your stories. Doesn’t matter ifit’s orcs, robots, aliens, faeries, or what-have-you. The ‘savage tribe ofmonster people’ or Always Chaotic Evil Race™ is a bad trope and it needs to godie in a fire. If you want an ‘evil group’, you will do far better to alignpeople based on something like ideology or political corruption than race, geography, or traits theyare born with. There are other tropes along these lines that should be avoided, too, in fact there are more of them than I could successfully list in a timely fashion. As a general rule, though, if taking your world-building principles and applying them to real-life groups would result in an appalling statement, you should either change it, or else work it in as a form of propaganda and prejudice which you’re well aware of. That’s the difference between something like ‘mages are the most dangerous people in Thedas’ versus ‘the Templars believe that mages are the most dangerous people in Thedas’. One is you, the writer, making a blanket statement that some groups of people are just born dangerous, whereas the other is you, the writer, creating a scenario where prejudice exists in the setting.

7. Taking something out is often harder than adding something in. For example, building a setting without something like sexism or racism is usually much more complex than building a setting with something like magic or dragons or something. Fantastical elements are flexible, and you can shift the rules of them around to suit your needs without too many people crying foul. Whereas something like sexism is built into a lot of aspects of our society, and sinks into things that many people don’t even think twice about. Trying to create a fictional world where there is no sexism or history of it is, therefore, very hard, because you have to learn as much as you can about the ways in which this prejudice impacts our society and our presumptions, and then try and extrapolate how that would change everyone’s behaviour in a different world. And what you don’t change will immediately tilt your setting towards being the kind of place where biased presumptions are true facts of nature, rather than being a place where bad attitudes merely exist among the people and cultures there. This applies to basically everything, by the way, although it’s usually the most glaring when someone decides that they don’t want to deal with X kind of bigotry, and think that just going ‘it doesn’t exist in this world’ is the simple way out. (It’s not, the simple way out is to go ‘it exists in this world just the same way it does in ours, but I’m not focusing on it’.)

8. Keeping track of things is more important than knowing them off the bat. Everybody knows you’re making stuff up. That’s what they came to this party for. Inconsistencies can happen, but it’s also entirely possible to get so caught up in the planning stage that you never actually do any writing. So a good compromise between spontaneous invention and consistency is to just note the things you add in when you add them in, and then figure out how they might impact the other elements in your story, and set aside potential consequences in case they’re interesting or useful later on. Editing is your friend, and ‘I don’t know, let’s think about it until I do’ is also a vital element to incorporate into your thinking.

9. Be aware that you can mess up, and probably will. In order for any story to be inclusive of a wide enough range of people and cultures to make a whole world, it’s going to require you stepping outside of your own experience, or incorporating stuff that you have only a limited amount of knowledge on. You may very well fuck this up. This doesn’t mean the attempt was doomed, and it doesn’t mean you’re bad at world-building, and it also doesn’t mean that you have to defend your mistake in order to keep your setting from being deemed a worthless heap of junk. Your honour doesn’t ride upon whether or not you can make a convincing argument as to why your intentions outweigh the unintended implications of your actions. If someone points out a mistake, you should think about the ways you can go about handling it and/or fixing it. Maybe you just suddenly made your virtuous heroic group a lot more shady than you thought. Maybe you have to abandon a plot twist you were originally angling for. Maybe you have to make your narrator a lot more unreliable than you initially planned. There are solutions, and most importantly, you gotta listen to the people in the real world whose cultures or traits you borrowed from for your story. Just like when you borrow anything. If it’s not yours, you need to respect that and be mindful of how you use it.

10. Have fun. When you make a new world, there should be things in it that you love. That speak to your delight and sense of wonder. These are the things that often help the most when you’re deciding what to actually make in your world. You want unicorns? Put in unicorns. You want talking dragons? Put in talking dragons. Just think about how they would work, and how people would react to them, and how having them around might change the way the world operates. A lot of stuff will build naturally out of that.

I hope some of this helps!

[mediaeval-muse]

Book Review... Gail Carriger, “Changeless”

Rating: 2/5 stars

Summary:  Alexia Maccon, the Lady Woolsey, awakens in the wee hours of the mid-afternoon to find her husband, who should be decently asleep like any normal werewolf, yelling at the top of his lungs. Then he disappears; leaving her to deal with a regiment of supernatural soldiers encamped on her doorstep, a plethora of exorcised ghosts, and an angry Queen Victoria. But Alexia is armed with her trusty parasol, the latest fashions, and an arsenal of biting civility. So even when her investigations take her to Scotland, the backwater of ugly waistcoats, she is prepared: upending werewolf pack dynamics as only the soulless can. She might even find time to track down her wayward husband, if she feels like it. CHANGELESS is the second book of the Parasol Protectorate series: a comedy of manners set in Victorian London, full of werewolves, vampires, dirigibles, and tea-drinking.

Reviewer Comments: I needed a break from my heavier reading list, and I was a bit fed up with the sexism in my popcorn fiction list, so I returned to this series for a bit of Victorian-era supernatural fun. I wish it had been as fun as the previous novel, but unfortunately, it fell a little more flat with me.

Things I Liked

Madame Lefoux: French woman who is not only a brilliant inventor but also dresses in men’s attire? Said character has a tattoo that connects her with the bad guys from the previous book? Sexual tension between her and other female characters? Sign me up!

Things I Didn’t Like

Alexia/Conall’s Dynamic: Conall Maccon spends a lot of time running around doing things without telling his wife, which was unsettling to say the least. Their relationship also seemed to be lacking, with more fights and images of not getting along for the majority of their relationship except when they were having sex. I’m all for a bit of lighthearted fun and irritation, but there came a point when I wondered why they were married at all.

Lack of Agency: While Alexia seemed to be rather involved in the previous novel, it seemed like in this novel, things just happened to her and she had to react to them. She wasn’t very proactive until the last third or so, and that was disappointing.

Colonialism: I know this series is set in Victorian England, but the focus on England’s colonial holdings and the empire is a little much. It’s not necessarily an aspect of history I’d like to see praised or even incorporated into fiction without some serious thought as to why it ought to be there. Colonialism in itself if awful - why include it without criticizing it or at the very least, present it as something that influences a character by making their beliefs more complex?

Plot: Characters seem to be not at all concerned about the driving plot at hand. Attempted murder? Let’s not focus on it. Something is turning all the supernatural beings mortal? Let’s spend more time focused on inconsequential scruples on an airship. I would have loved more focus on the supernatural mystery rather than the petty fights between the female characters.

Recommendations: I would recommend this novel if you’re interested in:

werewolves, supernatural creatures

Victorian England, Victorian fashion

mystery, supernatural mystery

Similar Reads (same as previous book in series)

[gamexplained-blog]

Borderlands 2 and Its Reflection of Masculine Histories

Hey everybody! Before I get into the actual analysis, I wanted to point out an error I made in last week’s blog post. Last week, I focused on LGBT representation in the Borderlands series. However, this was ahead of schedule on the class’s syllabus (I did the subject for the class on 3/26 rather than 2/26). As such, I will be swapping the post for that date for the one I was supposed to do: narratives. Now on to the discussion.

In this weeks lesson, our class had to read the article “Watch Your Ass: The Structure of Masculinity in Video Games” (Burrill, 2004). There were a few important notes within this article that I want to focus on, with the most central being that video games are built around masculine traits. This includes plot elements like large war and violence, incredibly beefy male heroes, damsels in distress, ect. An interesting point made in the article to explain the origins of this trend in video games is that it was absorbed from other mediums such as film and tv, making masculinity in video games moreover a showing of transferred qualities including those of sexism. However, what is incredibly important is the note of that video games can be uniquely harmful in their own right due to its own level of interactivity; because of the immersion through physical input, one would be much easier led to believe that what the player is supposed to be doing is the right decisions. While much of the previous statements are right and address serious sexism in previous titles between the 70′s and 2000′s, there is a critical point that I want to address that I don’t feel was addressed enough in the article merely as it seems somewhat semantic, but is crucial to understanding the historical poetics of “masculinity” in video games in the modern era, using Borderlands 2 as a point of contention with this concept.

In the article, there is a heavy emphasis that video games are constantly projecting masculine traits, the most notable being violence (this is the point I will be addressing the most). This point is incredibly misleading in a modern sense. A revision in the statement towards newer titles that would categorically be correct would be that video games are constantly reflecting historical poetics of what has socially been perceived to be masculine. While this might be seen as a matter of tedium, I believe this distinction is important to understand a different mindset of analysis. Given the former premise, it charges the reader to identify anything perceived as masculine in a video game and, through its implications, immediately rule said game as inherently negative in some matter as it is somehow exclusionary. This isn’t to say that there are video games that have been outright been sexist towards women, as there have been undeniably plenty and have been harmful in plenty of ways. However, the newer premise is important as it takes a more open-minded approach: it acknowledges that many games are taking aspects that are historically perceived as masculine and putting them in their games without the immediate thought that they are made to exclude a feminine audience. The most obvious example to bring in this is the concept of using violence in video games (especially since I’ve mentioned it in many of my previous posts).

Undeniably, there is an absolute plethora of games that feature violence in some fashion as a mechanic for the player not only to act on, but be required to use in order to advance and beat said game. Historically, violence has been viewed as an inherently masculine quality. Being able to play as the super muscular hero to beat up a large number of foes to appear incredibly manly seems to be an inexhaustible device in video games mechanics. However, in the moving towards a more progressive era, there has been a large move and shift to have more women in “badass” action-packed roles in media, including video games. This is totally fine. However, many have objected to this by bringing up a point that, personally, feels like mental gymnastics: forcing women into masculine positions in video games is an erasure of their femininity. In laymen's terms, the logic in this argument is that in order for men to value women in video games is to make those women more like men to appeal to their mode of play. This is why the premise I made earlier was so important, the statement is false because violence is not inherently masculine, it is only culturally or at least historically perceived as masculine. But it does beg the question: why not make games with historically feminine qualities? One argument, that some would make, is that historically feminine qualities are either untransferable towards an interactive medium or simply just not interesting enough to even be considered to be put into a video game or simply can’t be developed into mechanics that qualify gameplay. That point is incredibly sensitive and leads to a huge slippery slope that I won’t dare touch with a 50ft pole. But I want to make one interesting consideration in design philosophy: violence in video games is quite generally categorically entertaining.

In this premise, indiscriminate of gender, violence is taken as a simple tool of entertainment for the player to keep them engaged and tell a narrative. With this in mind, this returns to a point that I have said again, and again in my previous points about why I love the Borderlands serious so much, especially Borderlands 2. The biggest theme and motif of Borderlands 2 is violence. The biggest objective in this game is to fight monsters to get better guns to kill even tougher monsters to get even bigger and better guns to fight bosses that will give you some of the best guns in the game in order to kill even more monsters in a more brutal fashion and fight even tougher bosses and enemies. This isn’t unique; this is the typical cyle of video games that projects a historically masculine trait of violence as a mode of progress and desire. However, what makes this game unique and a step in the right direction for representation is the inclusion well developed female characters who follow this same philosophy. Tiny Tina is a fourteen-year-old girl who has tea-parties and gossips while at the same time is one of the best demolition experts in all of Pandora. Lilith’s whole demeanor screams the essence of punk rock girl with her red hair and her feminine figure, but she is possibly the strongest Siren in existence. And Gaige, the character I’m currently playing as, is a teenage girl that falls into the tomboy archetype but is playable to become an incredible hero who becomes a “badass” and slays countless enemies. Having these female characters join the fray isn’t a reduction of their femininity, it creates a refreshing taste of showing powerful women who can keep involvement in an interesting development in a categorical entertaining design philosophy, giving them nuance and making them more valuable in that context. This is far preferable to having them in the background as dainty helpless damsels. And in fact, in my honest opinion, they are even more interesting than a lot of the men in the stories because of such a contrast. The women have somewhat of a dichotomy in their presentation in bouncing between perceived feminine and masculine traits whereas many of the men strictly adhere to masculine traits that can make them seem somewhat predictable. Regardless, Borderlands 2′s inclusion of these characters is a good contextually to the world of violence the create for their medium of entertainment and shows that women in these games are not only competent but amazing heroes

[russellthornton]

Internalized Misogyny: How to Recognize It, Fight It and Win Over It

Internalized misogyny is much deeper and more complicated than blatant sexism. Learning about what it is, how it formed, and how to fight it is crucial today.

We all know what misogyny and sexism look like. At least I hope we all do. It is clear behavior rooted in the belief that women are less than men. But, internalized misogyny can be seen from anyone, even feminists.

I am sure I have even shown signs of internalized misogyny at points in my life. But what is it? Internalized misogyny is involuntarily believing the stereotypes held against women.

This means that the intense amount of sexism in society has made its way into our psyches and even though we are feminists, some of those negatives beliefs still seep in. [Read: How to instantly recognize someone who hates women]

Why is internalized misogyny a thing?

From a young age, we have all *or almost all* been raised to believe boys and girls are different. Girls wear pink and boys wear blue. Boys work and women take care of the family. A man is bold, but a woman is bossy. These things may not have been engrained in us intentionally, but everything from our parents to television, and pop culture continue to remind us.

It is no surprise that even with the feminist movement on the rise, we still fall down this path of internalized misogyny, sometimes even daily. I catch myself continuously apologizing to men when it is far from necessary.

Society continues to sympathize with men accused of sexual assault because the allegations have ruined their career, over a woman’s life. Judges are lenient on young men who assault women because they have their whole future ahead of them with zero regards to the victim’s future.

And even in the world of dating, we tend to apologize for turning down a man’s offer for a date, turning our cheek to a kiss, or refusing to have sex. Although we as women have nothing to be sorry for, we feel this guilt. We have this responsibility to make men feel like men, but women do not owe men anything. [Read: 9 ways guys manipulate and control their girlfriend]

The effects of internalized misogyny

Internalized misogyny may seem harmless from afar. It, of course, cannot be as bad as outright and blatant sexism, right? Well, maybe, but the effects of internalized misogyny can be long-lasting and consequential for both men and women.

Men who are liberal and seem to understand feminism completely may still show signs of internalized misogyny through their male privilege. When a woman is asked what she does to prevent sexual assault, the list could go on forever, but because a man is a man the thought most likely does not even cross his mind. [Read: 19 inspiring male feminist ideas from around the world]

And yes, men are also assaulted. And yes, it is not directly a man’s fault that he doesn’t carry that burden with him. But internalized misogyny is what leads to it being okay or normal for men not to worry.

The message that men receive at a young age tells them that women owe them something, and the same message is given to women. We are taught gender roles. We are taught to be agreeable, to not fight back, and to be “lady-like.”

Although changes are being made and women are attacking internalized misogyny at every angle, it is still a deep set problem to deal with. And the best way to deal with something more subtle is to identify it and stop it in its tracks.

Signs of internalized misogyny

Attacking internalized misogyny head on not only aids the growth of feminism but also improves everyone’s lives. Women gain self-esteem and live out their fullest potential as men appreciate all women who do and act accordingly.

#1 Appreciating more feminine qualities. Hearing a man complimenting you’re beautiful is always nice. And there is nothing wrong with loving to hear those words. But putting more basis on a compliment about your more traditionally feminine qualities than masculine ones can be problematic.

You don’t have to necessarily prefer to hear that you are a good leader or smart or funny over being called pretty, but knowing your worth on both ends of the spectrum removes internalized misogyny from your mind. [Read: These are compliments that will backfire with women]

#2 Trying to be perfect. That balance that so many women strive for is impossible. You want to be smart but not too smart. Funny, but not funnier than him. You want to be a good cook and look cute, but not put too much effort in.

It is a balancing act so many women try to achieve but so unnecessary. Have you ever seen a man work so hard to be a perfect mix of naughty and nice?

#3 Looking down on traditional gender roles. Traditional gender roles are not evil. Yet, internalized misogyny can lead to that belief. If feminism is all about equality, then a woman who decides to stay at home with her family rather than work can’t be a feminist, right? WRONG!

Feminism is about appreciating and respecting a woman’s right to choose what she does with her life whether that be work, have a family, both, or neither. If you look at women who haven’t made the same choices as you as a lesser person, you may be dealing with internalized misogyny. [Read: Why you should celebrate being female]

#4 Judging other women. Whether you judge a coworker on her shoes, think a woman rocking her natural hair to work is unprofessional, or anything along those lines, you have a touch of internalized misogyny.

Working together as women, no matter how different, is what helps us break this poisonous pattern.

#5 Trying to be cool. Raise your hand if you have tried to be the “cool girl.” *Raises hand*. Being easygoing is something women try so hard to do when sometimes it is in our nature to nitpick. We can not say anything when our guy leaves the toilet seat up or forgets to pick up his dirty laundry. But we can become resentful after so long.

This is even more common in the dating world. You meet a guy, you like him, but he isn’t ready for a commitment. Although you might be ready to walk down the aisle tomorrow, you hold your tongue and follow his lead. Staying silent in these situations only enhances the culture of misogyny.

#6 Interrupting. It is a well-known fact that men interrupt women. In friend groups, in work meetings, even at home. This is brought on by the idea that what a woman has to say can’t possibly be as important as a man’s opinion.

This goes hand in hand with mansplaining. The annoying phenomenon of a man explaining something to a woman in a patronizing way. But women also tend to interrupt fellow women, because sexism pits us against each other rather than celebrating our mutual successes. [Read: Mansplaining and the dicks who do it]

#7 Feeling guilty. Ahhhh, feeling guilty. This is probably the one I have dealt with the most in my life. Feeling guilty for turning down a guy that bought you a drink when a drink does not imply or promise anything to a man.

Feeling guilty for leading on a man then changing your mind. These are all rights women have. Men make these choices all the time, but are they made to feel guilty about it? A man sleeps with a woman but decides not to call her, he moves on. A woman does the same thing and she is judged by society and may even begin to judge herself.

#8 Giving in. This is a difficult one because it requires a lot of strength to fight back at sexism. Sometimes, yes, it is easier to just give in with something small than to fight back and once again allow misogyny to take over and categorize you as whiny or bitchy.

But if a man at work asks you to get him coffee over a male coworker, that is not right. Maybe if it happens once it is because you stood closer, but when this becomes a pattern saying something changes the narrative.

#9 Shaming others. Feminism once again is about respecting women for their choices, no matter what they are. Yet, so many women and men are stuck with this level of internalized misogyny that blames women.

Slut-shaming is a huge example of this. Saying a woman deserves to be treated badly or disrespected because she is open to casual sex is not right. This also leads into to victim blaming. Blaming a victim of sexual assault for dressing too revealing, drinking, walking alone, or anything else rather than actually blaming the attacker is often just straight out sexism.

But, for those that don’t realize it, it is internalized. [Read: Harmful words we need to stop using to describe a woman]

#10 Thinking makeup or dresses aren’t feminist. I have heard multiple times that wearing makeup, loving makeup, being into fashion, etc. is hypocritical when you call yourself a feminist. But anyone, whether male or female that believes that does not truly understand what feminism is.

It is not a movement to make women more powerful than men. It is not about growing out your body hair and not wearing dresses. It is about being who you are in every sense and still be treated equally for that. So looking down on a woman for caring about her appearance is definitely a sign of internalized misogyny.

#11 Double standards. Men are often praised for being stay-at-home dads and giving up that traditional breadwinner role, yet women are often criticized for focusing on their career over family.

If a man is a bachelor into his forties he is a catch, but a woman who has focused on other aspects of her life is an old maid or spinster. These double standards are sometimes quite obvious, but even simply asking a woman who is married if she is going to have a child, but not asking her husband, is internalized misogyny.

#12 Wanting to be different than other women. “I’m not like other girls.” This is a statement I embarrassingly said multiple times in my teenage years without realizing how awful and negative the connotation was.

What is wrong with other girls?

#13 Being okay with oppression. Sitting back and not doing anything about the oppression of women is brought on by internalized misogyny. You think that sexism hasn’t affected your life so you do not bother fighting it. You may think your life is easier without the responsibility. Perhaps you think your opinions don’t matter.

Only looking at feminism from the perspective of your own life is a form of internalized misogyny. Think about it like this. Maybe you’re white so you don’t care about racism because it doesn’t directly affect you. Doesn’t that seem pretty awful? Well, it is the same thing with sexism.

#14 Not reporting sexual assault. I myself have been in this situation, so I never ever blame a woman who fears coming forward for fear of retaliation or disbelief. But these fears are brought on by the patriarchy. They are brought on by our sexist culture.

And although I myself am ashamed of that fear and giving into it at times, we are all victims of internalized misogyny in these moments. [Read: What to do if you’re raped on a date]

#15 Making excuses for men. A man assaults a woman, and people say he was drunk, he couldn’t help himself. Yet, she was drunk, so she asked for it? A man is disrespectful to a woman, and he had a rough day at work. A woman is rude to a man, and she’s a bitch?

Men get excuses made for them because they are used to getting their way. And this is not the ranting of a feminist, it is the cold hard truth.  Many of us continue to make excuses for men whether it be our fathers, brothers, boyfriends, or even male celebrities. But those excuses allow us to fall into the world of internalized misogyny once again.

[Read: The keys for how to respect women]

With each moment you appreciate your own self-worth and the equality between women and men, internalized misogyny is one step closer to being vanquished.

The post Internalized Misogyny: How to Recognize It, Fight It and Win Over It is the original content of LovePanky - Your Guide to Better Love and Relationships.

[sociopplwatcher]

Body Empowerment- Anti Victoria Secret Fashion show

Sociology teaches us how gender is a societal concept that we create and its way more than male and female.  While I could discuss numerous aspects of the genderbread person I’ll be focusing on another way our predefined gender roles become influenced by society.

Genderbread Person 3.3

Men have always held a dominant status in our society leaving females seen as unequal’s and unfortunately many of us still experience this in some form of indifference in inequality almost daily. We experience this in many ways when it comes to jobs, education and even the roles we have inside our homes. One of the most unsettling things still is men who use their power over females and treat us as objects. We are often devalued, degraded and labeled. It’s bad enough the media tells us how we should look and act but we even deal with it from strangers who think these behaviors are ok.

Sexism hasn’t seemed to slow down. It seems to be continuing and even easier with the technology we have available. The ads available and television shows have a huge impact on what young girls and boys are seeing. We are teaching our daughters they are invaluable at times and only wanted based on appearance. We start them young with body confidence issues and keep the insecurities going by playing on normal human appearance that we socially constructed into “bad” or gross rather than normal and okay. We’re teaching boys it’s ok to treat females with harshness or harm them if you like them under a “boys, will be boys” mentality which doesn’t fix the issue at all and only allows for them to further treat females like we have no voice and simply don’t matter unless it’s for their needs. We are conditioned to these beliefs not only in based on our gender roles and stereotyping but by the misogynistic views felt as we enter the job force and are placed under a glass ceiling as we struggle to look for equal treatment to that of our male counterparts. The right to be taken seriously, have equal pay (although the gap is closing it still exist!) and the right to not have our bodies being what simply defines us as being “inferior”.

So, what are some women doing to help to change this message and build up other women? 

Women are working on spreading the message of body positivity and equality amongst all women. We are saying the world shouldn’t be defining us we are all beautiful and unique. 

I’m sure many of you tune in for the Victoria Secret fashion show. But, did you ever notice almost all the girls are built similarly? To combat some of the divides even amongst our own gender a group of females created an Anti-Victoria Secret Fashion show. When I say anti it’s important to understand that doesn’t mean they are against Victoria Secret or the show but are stating it doesn’t show average women and portray what most women look like. It leads to false expectations on how women should look according to society they’ve given us this “ideal” of what beauty looks like rather than promoting more acceptance and diversity. It stopped being about beauty is in the eyes of the beholder but more about equality amongst each other and promoting self love and body positivity in a world that places stipulations and views on what we “should be”. 

As most of us know these images can have a major effect on self-esteem and create body dysmorphia and lead to eating disorders especially amongst young girls trying to obtain the same appearance. The goal is to say we are all beautiful no matter your shape, color, or flaws. We are equal until society that keeps telling us we aren’t good enough.

Take a minute and watch the show. 

I planned on leaving this here as the video speaks for itself. But, then I read the comments underneath and I felt it was more important to speak out because this simply highlights the point of my post. One of how women are being treated differently and how we are presented verse men and attacked if we open our mouths to speak up and refuse to conform to these ideals. There’s a denial at times about how women are treated still.  When you read the comments online you can see we still clearly have an issue with women being treated harsher than men. At the time I’m posting this around 98% of the comments made were negative, crude and attacking these women's appearances and making assumptions about them. As a female this is disheartening and I’m using this platform to speak out. 

The comments made highlight we still have a huge problem in society when it comes to how females are treated. If comments are posted so blatantly online I struggle seeing how people can deny that this doesn’t spill over in the workforce, in the general public and while some people have come to casual accept it as part of society for many of us feminist it’s not ok and we don’t accept this. It’s an underlying prejudice that is real and often still overlooked due to the progression woman have made from past feminist movements.It doesn’t mean however that the problems have simply gone away or have been resolved.

Comments from males about this video created for body positivity:

“I like watching the freak show, bring back the circus”

“The models are tranny men”

“I thought they outlawed freakshows”

“All I see is a bunch of heavily painted (up to the level of disgust) lazy feminist crybabies who act like victims. No one owes you anything, so GFTO w/that bullshit!” 

“Is this a promotional for Type 2 diabetes?”

and several I can’t even post due to crudeness.

+ many more! 

Keywords saw numerous times: 

“Gross”, “Disgusting”, “Pigs” “Insecure”, “Jealous”, “short and stupid”, “Losers” and “Too lazy”.

Those are just a few of numerous comments made. If words were painted on your skin, how would you feel? Now imagine your mother, sisters, daughters, girlfriends, wives and then put yourself in that position too. This is what many of us woman go through daily. Still, think feminism only affects women? Wake up! This isn’t ok. These women, all of them deserve to be treated equal and looked great doing it. That was their night to shine! 

Assumptions are crazy especially knowing one of the models is 60 years old. Another is a mom of 2, nurse and fitness model, the ones who created show are fitness models/promoted athletes. All these women are so diverse and unique and to read these comments from men criticizing them. This is why feminism exists. My point being we choose to label each other and can’t allow society to define us, the act of being yourself is a form of rebellion. Be you anyways! 

Sources: 

[Bite Sized Fitness]. (2017, October 16). The Anti-Victoria’s Secret runway show proves all women can be angels. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/cyNvC9ckZuY

Conley, D. (2017). You may ask yourself: an introduction to thinking like a sociologist. New York: W.W. Norton.

[Future is Female]. (n.d.). Retrieved December 6, 2017, from https://weheartit.com/entry/279905898/via/lisaxmcl?context_type=inspirations&inspiration_id=138&page=2

Killerman, S. (2015, March 16). Genderbread Person 3.0 [Digital image]. Retrieved December 6, 2017, from http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2015/03/the-genderbread-person-v3/#sthash.ltYB9RVK.ygSFTbOq.dpbs

[nadelparis-blog1]

NADEL PARIS PERFORMANCE

Better Live Music Performance Tips

Hip-hop is not only about audio. Hiphop is all about party, craft, appearance, ache, love, bias, sexism, cracked people, hard-times, beating hardship and the search for God. It is a vocabulary, a way of living, a lifestyle, a style, a set of ideals, and a unique viewpoint. Hip-hop is about currently trying to live the American dream out in the bottom-up.

Hip hop culture is a trend that is unique since it affect and does combine a wide variety of civilizations, ages. In the 1970is the unnamed tradition identified nowadays as hip hop was forming in the ghettos in Nyc. Each element in this tradition had its history and language adding to the progress of the cultural activity. The tradition was determined within the 1980is when Afrika Bambaataa called the vibrant downtown motion, hip hop. Since that time hiphop contains advanced into a tradition having its own terminology, style of attire and mindset and has supported as being a strong voice and form of phrase for small black people. The hip hop culture envelops not merely trend but also music and dancing.

Ms. Nadel Rome can be an artist, musician, audio maker, songwriter, dancer creator, screenwriter, and her music is just a mix between different styles: Party, EDM, Place, Urban etc.

Nadel Paris has a voice which everybody remembers when they notice it! She has an audio that is really distinct that is hot.

What makes the evolution of hip hop may be flavor's selection the lifestyle has to offer and what hip-hop heads succeed on is personality and creativity, which is never more obvious than in hiphop fashion. In reality, hip hop trend is among the leading clothing companies in the world today. It is claimed to possess begun while in the African American group but has spread quickly into being a really widespread model for folks of sexes and all ethnicities plus a lynchpin of rap lifestyle.

Culture will be the item of the recent reality. the function and thought of people creates the personality of a culture. It is the expression of component or the school of a particular school and it is reflective of a selected time. The draw of Hiphop tradition as an organizing system has developed mostly since there is no existing governmental apparatus that sufficiently addresses the needs of inadequate and working class communities or young adults and/; in a political machine. Tradition, for the key of how folks state their beliefs, ideals and traditions, reductions like a standard issue. Hiphop lifestyle is the noisy and many noticeable representative business of its identification.

Hiphop dancing is developing in many various recommendations nowadays, heavily inspired by the advancement of its own recognition and hip-hop audio in press, surrounded by hot arguments on authenticity and background. Birth was given by modern hip hop music to new styles of hiphop dancing partly encouraged from the old-school variations. Nearly all of these models focused instead of breakdance which can be better known because of its flooring-oriented motions on dance that was vertical. To express the imaginative talent of one, hip-hop dance is perhaps the best way where words and thoughts result from the spirit.

Audio has usually performed with a vital role in shaping attitudes and minds. Rap music sheds light on contemporary politics, heritage and battle. The societal influence hiphop music is wearing the rap societal motion contains activities of other aspects, linked jargon, manner and dance. Hip-hop music involves dancing, visual art, the written phrase and rhythmic model with complex beats. Music has no limitations and no restrictions; something worthwhile should be accessible through audio, particularly spirituality and faith. There is about the hip hop individuality a huge affect its music that is redeeming.

Distributed by Tony Bucher and Universal Audio, Two of her beats Oh Lalala and Funk It-Up characteristic rapper extraordinaire Jagged I has created an enormous with around 1.2 million landscapes blended.

The word easy listening has been used being a draw for popular music's style that's simple on the hearing; comfortable, lovely, light music for decades. It advanced into move music and big-band and first appeared at the center of the 20th-century. Easy listening music's ease is that it draws laid's romance rhythmic tunes, popular with couples throughout the earth. Anything can be included by the type from groups and place singers, exotica painters, right through to critical varieties often played on violins, organs etc. The genre is to what is named lounge music extremely similar. Nevertheless, lounge music is more determined by musical improvisation and jazz orientated. Easy listening orchestrated and is usually fixed in place of improvised, which will be possibly why it's easy listening.

Another subject fond of easy listening is elevator or raise music. This is usually called muzak, and typically known in a way that was derogatory. I am sure we've all been stuck in a raise, being forced therefore there's no question muzak is considered in a way that is derogatory to endure the continual drone of noise falling from the speakers. However, as Muzak is really a company which production, provides and programs this easy-listening audio, it isnot actually a style by itself in any way.

The term easy listening is really a comparatively broad one for the reason that it is also usedto explain genres for example easy jazz new age audio and soft-rock, though it isnot proper to incorporate these while in the brand at all and many more. not a lot of US would place them in this genre of music, although afterall, actually Metallica have songs on the softer aspect that may be called easy-listening.

Modern music will be the perfect complement to yoga meditation, stress reading and management. The melodies are similar and comforting and frequently incorporate a drum-beat to provide a hypnotic effect. And even though there are rarely lines in new-age music, they could include harmonies and chants.

Easy jazz is just a sub-style of jazz that is affected by R&T, funk, steel and place. Contemporary derivatives of the type are broadcast radio's new adult contemporary structure. Nonetheless, 2007 has Nadel Paris Performance been ceased since by clean jazz's reputation and in the usa it was abandoned by several visible radio stations, although history income and smooth jazz shows still proceed to show fan service.

Comfortable rock, additionally labeled cool, simple or gentle rock, employs the tactics of rock n move to construct a gentler, more toned sound that is down that is easier around the ears and heartrate. Soft-rock tracks tend to be depending on interactions and existence and love and tend to include pianos, acoustic instruments and synths. Electric guitars are toned-down to offer a noise that was softer.

The American newspaper Billboard featured an easy listening singles data while in the 1960is an easy listening audio top40. This morphed into an adult contemporary information in 1979 and proceeds even today. Music that is wonderful or nostalgia; a subset of easy-listening music, had very rigid requirements for instrumentation only a limited number of words might be enjoyed in a hour and when enjoyed about no saxophones or the stereo few may be enjoyed. Generally, well known address designs of the 60's and 70is were re arranged and customized during its top in popularity into crucial melodies for that radio format.

It really is fairly significant that each one music's varying forms should retain their very own personality rather than be set under this quite simple to-use easy listening brand. You will find lots of varieties of music it'd be convenient to material to the, let us experience it, typically boring, easy-listening package which have their very own very unique nuances and deserve to have their own label.

Nadel Paris is a recording artist, musician, music producer, Screenwriter, dancer songwriter, and her music is just a mixture between various styles: Party, EDM, Place, Downtown etc.

She's likewise an actor, an mentor, a movie/ TV producer as well as the proprietor of the best behaving establishment in particular development for kids. For year Nadel and her team have now been the component towards particular progress for kids.

For many proven D.J.'s, meaning those individuals who have been D.J.'ing for a time whether it is in the membership or while in their room, audio production may be the move. Because D.J.'s play with a wide variety of kinds of music they locate large amount of defeats and looks. This inspires some D.J.is to sample those sounds and beats and make their own melodies up.

Music production involves making the music from damage and audio design entails therefore it sounds great, blending the various devices together.

Here is the music production stage's beginning. There are 3 phases Nadel London considers, to audio production: preproduction, audio production and postproduction.

Level 1 pre production

The music production period may be the crafting of the new track. It is the pre- stage because you are just trying out music. Where music in the history or mp3 is felt utilizing a sampler or drummachine such as an Akai MPC this really is. But one which just sample and produce audio you have to be sure your equipment is properly related:

To be able to taste you've to make sure you choose the phono option on my music device. After testing the sounds change to the CD choice on music model so you can notice the play in the drum machine. Once you've rescued your entire function and concluded your musical arrangement and you're content with it you could transfer to the element two of the preproduction section.

During this phase if you generate designers to perform on, is you observe. Where you commence to arrange audio or the course you created with the artists, that is. This venture interval allows you as well as the performers to generate alterations that are small towards the words along with the audio. You may even increase or take-away areas of the course including introducing strings or additional drums. The performers may practice their song using your monitor. Once this is quite tight you move to the studio to lay the words along with the audio on separate recording songs. Exactly why you wish to exercise before you get to the studio is really because facility time is quite expensive and you also don't need to waste time exercising in. That's where you have to focus your entire period making sure the music and vocals are saved precisely without leaps and clicks.

Level 2 Music Production

The mixing the main music creation phase is done within the studio where all of vocal songs and the music tracks are combined together to offer that which you hear on your own CD.

Oral track and each drum is blended and adjusted using what's called a mixing board like software-based mixing console-like Protools or my Akai DPS24 solely larger.

Where the audio engineer comes into play if you arrive at the studio this really is. This individual is responsible for making certain you all audio looks excellent. These people have years of experience. Some D.J./ since they know how they need their audio to sound, Producers also likes to manufacture their particular music. The audio engineer basically facilitates the D.J, if here is the situation then. With mixing the audio and utilizing the studio equipment.

Level 3 Postproduction

The process starts, following the mixing is performed. To what is named a Mastering Facility where particular gear is employed to bring out the perfect sound, the ultimate combination is taken. While this process is accomplished the final link between the melody distributed to the customer and are then pressed on CD or vinyl.