#it's the emphasis on marriage and gender conformity

[rawliverandgoronspice]

Kind of regret having used "imperialism" so much in my criticisms of Tears of the Kingdom. Not because I think it's not the correct term, but because I think "the game has conservative values" is easier to understand and harder to deflect as "??? but ganondorf is the one doing the imperialism" because.

Yes.

Of course he would.

[rinbylin]

re: jianghu as a queer space in mlc

here to answer @redemption-revenge !! in reply to this post

(also tagging @markiafc @ananeiah <3)

there are many definitions of jianghu, but this is specifically based on the framing of jianghu as the space people retreat to, away from the mainstream sphere governed by the imperial court. in that is a sense of rejection and defiance against the patriarchal, heteronormative values and norms, which had been enforced through a fixation on upkeeping order in the society. as such i guess it's not too much of a stretch to interpret jianghu as a queer space in a way that's characterised by a spirit of nonconformity to the norms. consequently, it makes sense for stories set in jianghu be used to illustrate and navigate queer identities/experiences/feelings - which I came to believe mlc had made really good use of.

there's always kind of a dichotomy between 江湖 jianghu and 庙堂 miaotang (ie. imperial court). like in mlc, there are two separate, distinct law enforcement bodies from the respective spheres - and jianghu strives to keep imperial court from interfering in their affairs. like how li xiangyi firmly stands against getting imperial court involved in jianghu matters. like how fang duobing is actively running away from the grip of the royal court on his life choices. the rejection of the mainstream (very conveniently and broadly put, confucian) norms in mlc also manifests in many of its key relationships being non-familial (in the sense of blood/marriage-based kinship) and there being little emphasis on the main characters' biological familial ties. (anyway this is for a whole different meta on its own... edit: it's here)

it's then actually a sort of irony that the imperial court's institution of law and order is what sigu sect/baichuan court had been formed to be a de facto counterpart to. so when li xiangyi becomes li lianhua, it triggered the process of deconstructing the meaning of installing such an institution and the need to maintain order to a fundamentally nonconforming space such as jianghu. mama fang's seemingly throwaway line of criticising li xiangyi and his mission is in fact the thesis statement in this particular reading of mlc's story: jianghu makes its own rules. nobody should dare to do it in its place.

now deprived of all means to fight like he used to, li xiangyi's new life as li lianhua is essentially a refresh of how he views jianghu. the death of li xiangyi the leader of sigu sect and top of wulin, meant taking apart the idea that jianghu is a lawless arena where the fittest fight to the top for power and control over wulin. and li lianhua then putting together lotus tower, living a life focusing on a domestic lifestyle this time for real far from the reach of the governance both from the imperial court and sigu sect/baichuan court, is him living the jianghu that's defined as a space away from any form of conformity.

with that, there's also a sense of queerness to this particular way of living as li lianhua, if you consider the chinese conceptualisation of gender being more social than biological. if femininity and masculinity were respectively characterised by inner/domestic sphere and external/any space outside of that, dare I say...it actually makes li lianhua's moving house mindblowingly smart as a metaphor for gender fluidity. lonely wanderers are common in wuxia but housed lonely wanderers? he carved for himself a domestic (ie. feminine) space in the wilderness - among a jianghu space that's still dominated by masculine values of aggression and competition. and being freely mobile makes this feminine space more fluid and less tied down than the more rigid, inert domestic, feminine spaces in traditional mainstream society. when you combine it with how his character has been fem-coded - even as li xiangyi (eg. yin-coded powers/energy) (also a whole other meta on its own... edit: it's here now), it speaks to a part of him that has always found appeal in qualities conventionally associated with femininity of stability, gentleness and non-aggression. and a rejection of expectations to fight and destroy. he is defining who he is in his own terms, in the true spirit of jianghu.

[spiderfreedom]

get thee some feminist blogs

Y'all there are a lot of good feminist and woman-centric substacks (blogs) out there and you don't need to pay to see the good articles! just put your email in and they will email the free articles to you. or don't and just bookmark the site itself. anyway on to the recommendations!

The Unpublishable by Jessica Defino: A critique of beauty culture from a woman who used to be an editor shilling beauty products. She is uncompromising in her analysis of the false mystique of beauty and the harms that beauty culture does. Recommended article: Barbie Has Cellulite (But You Don't Have To):

From the story alone — Barbie leaves Barbie Land after discovering she’s a “less-than-perfect doll” and journeys to the human world to “find true happiness” — it’s clear that writer-director Greta Gerwig aims to subvert much of what the Mattel toy symbolizes in American culture: conformity, compliance, the objectification of women and girls. The issue, as it was with Don��t Worry Darling and Blonde, is that you cannot subvert the politics of Barbie while preserving the beauty standards of Barbie. The beauty standards are the politics, or at least part of them. (emphasis mine)

(she has tons of great ones like "Having a human experience? Try being hot instead")

The Great Gender Divergence by Dr. Alice Evans: A historical/economical history of patriarchy and analysis of modern women's participation in the labor force. What forces prevent women from working across different countries? Recommended Article: The Patrilocal Trap.

Pre-Christian Europe, the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia, Central Asia and East Asia were all patrilineal and patrilocal. Sons were scions of the family line, inherited land/ herds, and remained with their clan. Households strengthened trusted networks through inter-marriage. Daughters were socialised to marry, please their in-laws and stay put. Marriages were arranged; divorce was stigmatised. Wives’ inability to credibly threaten exit gave their husband’s family the upper hand. Mothers-in-law could enforce their preferences - to exploit labour or restrict mobility. I call this “The Patrilocal Trap”. What explains the global-historical variation in patrilocality? Through my globally comparative historical analysis, I realise that arranged patrilocal marriages with stigmatised divorce were common in regions with inherited wealth, beasts of burden and long-distance trade. What might explain this correlation?

And then here are some good individual articles from sundry writers: Do Words Mean Anything Anymore, The Proletarian of the Proletariat, and What Was the Girlboss.

Please share your favorite off-Tumblr feminist or woman-centric blogs and articles! It's a big internet out here and I know I can't have read all the feminist blogs :D

[forkingandcountry-if]

Hi! I really enjoyed the prologue and I'm very impressed with your worldbuilding so far. I was wondering if you'd be willing to tell us more about the Church? What are its virtues (other than charity and compassion)? What does it consider to be sinful? Does it have any rules or guidelines with regards to clothing? What's its priesthood like? Is it gender restricted? I hope you have a lovely day! :D

I can tell you about the Church, I have far too many details about this:

I'll start with the clergy, it isn't gender restricted, while there once was a historical precedent for it being male-only that was quickly overturned by the Redeemists in the process of doctrinal evolution where they assert that the Words of our Faith call for all men (as in mankind) to prepare the world for His eventual return.

That doesn't mean that the Church is gender-balanced or even close, but there is no official reason why a woman couldn't become the Pontiff.

The Clergy in modern day—much to the chagrin of the Congregationalists—is formed of a highly educated, very wealthy, quite young cohort of priests and priestesses with the majority of them following quite a similar career progression.

They are born as not the heir child to a vassal house or into some well-off yeoman family, they spend the first few years of their lives as Scholar Postulants where they are educated at their local chancel or convent or priory. Then if they have enough money and don't particularly want to be stay as a Parish Priest for the rest of their lives, they go to a Theological University, once they graduate they usually are parish priests or priestesses for about two or three years before being parachuted into a Scholar Archivist or Scholar Priest in the capital. Those who are particularly talented at theology or networking with noble houses become bishops, some become archbishops and the very best becomes the Pontiff.

In regards to clothes there are uniforms for all members of the church, generally there's an expectation of modesty for men and women but the church doesn't place much emphasis on austerity, should you be wealthy enough to get your clothes tailored and made of fine fabrics you are entirely allowed to.

As you might be able to tell there are two distinct sort of religious factions in the Church namely the Redeemists and the Congregationalists.

Redeemists believe in the Churches' central authority and are mostly focused on textualism and theological rigour, if they can't find evidence for it in the texts they don't believe it should be enforced or banned by the Church and so they end up being the more 'liberal' or 'permissive' social force.

Congregationalists however believe that the central church is deeply corrupt, see how nearly all of its officials are very wealthy and very urban and very liberal, and that it is disconnected from the beliefs of ordinary people. They also claim to be textualists but the text they believe in, is simply a set of the doctrines laid out in the early, very conservative days of the Empire. They are the other big social force in the Empire.

A lot of the stuff you'll see in the story that you think, hey that wouldn't be fine usually in such a setting is thanks to the Redeemists: homosexuality, them. Transgender issues, them. Gender-non conformity, them.

That doesn't however mean they aren't deeply suspicious and reactionary for example as a homosexual, the Church will allow you to get married to the same sex but if you refuse to have children and cannot provide a good enough reason why as a noble? They will annul your marriage and say it's fruitless and hence stagnant and must be cleared away.

The virtues of the church are different by region and what faction they align with more but besides Compassion and Charity which are two very big ones a lot of it is quite esoteric, theological rigour, justice, morality, fruitfulness, restraint & mercy, scholarliness, consensus.

The Church has the power to hold its own trials outside of the powers of the King's Justices of the Peace and while they technically have coercive religious power very few kings have refused to sign an arrest warrant requested by the Pontiff.

Anything else in particular you'd like to hear about regarding it?

[torturedpoetsofpemberley]

These two memes capture the enemies-to-lovers and somewhat feminist trope in Pride and Prejudice, themes I specifically wanted to talk about after observing the version we saw in Special Collections. Pride and Prejudice can be argued to be the original enemies to lovers stories and feminist stories, with the opening line reading, "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife." But in fact, the line is meant to be satire and is trying to communicate the opposite of what it means. In fact, at this time, it is women and their families who are seeking rich husbands and have agency in this situation. Furthermore, a "well-off" single man is not seeking a wife, but in his neighbors' eyes, he “must” or has to be seeking one, because they need him to be.

As we continue to read, we are introduced to Elizabeth Bennett—arguably one of the most feminist heroines of her time. While women were expected to embody passivity and charm, Elizabeth stands as a sharp contrast. She's independent, bold, and unafraid to challenge the expectations of her gender. Her walk through the mud to see her sister demonstrates her disregard for superficial standards of propriety, and her refusal of not one, but two marriage proposals, is a radical statement of agency. The moment she overhears Darcy belittling her at the ball is a turning point, but instead of wilting like many heroines of the time would, Elizabeth steels herself. Her declaration that Darcy is the last man she'd ever marry isn’t just a personal affront—it’s a rejection of the very societal forces that dictate a woman's worth by her marriage prospects. This is what makes the enemies-to-lovers trope in Pride and Prejudice so compelling. Elizabeth’s refusal to conform to expectations and Darcy’s eventual growth and humility build a romance based on mutual respect, not domination or submission. Darcy’s growth, in turn, is essential to the evolution of their relationship. His initial pride and entitlement are slowly eroded as he begins to realize that his wealth and status do not entitle him to Elizabeth’s love—or anyone’s, for that matter. His journey from arrogance to humility mirrors Elizabeth’s own determination to maintain her integrity. It is only once Darcy humbles himself—by addressing his pride, making amends for the wrongs he’s done, and learning to respect Elizabeth’s independence—that their relationship can truly begin. So the romance, comedy, and heartbreak in this story is so touching to the soul, but more importantly, it is one of the few stories of the time in which the romance is built on respect and not personal gain. This subversion of traditional gender dynamics—where the woman’s value isn’t measured by her ability to secure a wealthy husband, but by her wit, integrity, and independence—makes Pride and Prejudice a romantic and a somewhat feminist narrative.

I indicate that Pride and Prejudice is not entirely feminist, as there is still some unintentional support for traditional gender norms and expectations through the emphasis of the female dependence on marriage, portraying characters like Mrs. Bennett as representations of insanity, revealing the results of female disobedience, and restricting women’s options and ambitions.

[historyhermann]

The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder Season 2 Review

The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder is a coming-of-age animated sitcom and adventure by Bruce W. Smith and Ralph Farquhar, two well-known producers. It is a revival and soft reboot of The Proud Family, a classic Disney series by Smith which aired in the early 2000s. This review will have spoilers.

Reprinted from Pop Culture Maniacs and Wayback Machine. This was the twenty-third article I wrote for Pop Culture Maniacs. This post was originally published on February 13, 2023.

This animated series centers on Penny Proud (voiced by Kyla Pratt), a 16-year-old Black girl in the town of Smithville. She attempts to navigates her home life, filled the antics off her father, Oscar (voiced by Tommy Davidson), who owns a failing snack business, her mother, Trudy (voiced by Paula Jai Parker), a well-off veterinarian, her grandmother, Suga Mama (voiced by Jo Marie Payton), and her two siblings, Bebe and Cece. At high school, she has four friends-of-sorts: Michael Collins, Dijonay Jones, Zoey Howser, and LaCienega Boulevardez. They are voiced by EJ Johnson, Karen Malina White, Soleil Moon Frye, and Alisa Reyes respectfully. All the while, two new kids, Maya and KG, raised by two dads (Barry and Randall), try to adapt to their new life in Smithville.

The show's first season broke ground for featuring openly gay characters, unlike in the original series, such as Michael, who is also gender non-conforming. His voice actor even considered gender transition. This character is joined by an interracial couple: Barry and Randall Leibowitz-Jenkins, who voiced by two gay actors (Zachary Quinto and Billy Porter). They are the adopted fathers of Maya and Francis "KG", voiced by Keke Palmer and "A Boogie" Dubose. Palmer previously voiced Izzy Hawthorne in Lightyear, a lesbian character who has a wife named Alisha. She has also stated that she does not want her sexuality to be defined by labels and that people should be fluid when giving themselves labels.

The series has been swept in the culture wars, with claims it is promoting the "gay agenda" or is "anti-White". In reality, there are various White characters, including Zoey and Barry, and often promotes themes of racial togetherness, rather than division. Additionally, Michael is the only protagonist in the series who is part of the LGBTQ community. Barry, Randall, and Makeup Boy (voiced by Bretman Rock), with the latter beginning to date Michael later in the second season, are only recurring characters. In fact, Penny and Dijonay both have boyfriends, Darrius St. Vil (voiced by Chance the Rapper) and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Brown (voiced by Asante Blackk), by the end of the season. Furthermore, Zoey is sweet on Myron (voiced by Marcus T. Paulk), and Maya romantically connects with one of the Chang Triplets, Billy.

Like the original The Proud Family, the series is not neutral when it comes to politics. It often focuses on racial injustice, whether noting past bans on interracial marriage, reparations, prejudice of Black people toward White people, anti-Black racism, sexism, or White skin privilege. This is interwoven with an emphasis on the importance of Black history, friendship, family, indigenous rights, harmonious neighbors, paying people fairly, respecting people for who they are, going beyond the color of their skin, and the folly of celebrity worship. Many books are name-dropped throughout the series, like Africans and Native Americans, as are the names of intellectuals such as Michelle Alexander, Robin DiAngelo, Elizabeth Acevedo, Leslie T. Chang, Saeed Jones, and Ta-Nehisi Coates. Many of these names are displayed during the English class taught by Kwame (voiced by Leslie Odom, Jr.).

Similar to season one, the second season of The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder provides more background about the characters, whether about Suga Mama's short-lived romance with an indigenous cowboy named Quanah (voiced by Wes Studi), and how Barry and Randall met, or the history of the Soul Vibrations band composed of Oscar and his brothers, and Giselle. As Penny says, in one episode, "you can't know yourself unless you know where you come from". This interconnected with the meaningful, and well-done, episode in which Bebe is diagnosed with autism, with the Proud family trying to figure out what to do with him, and coming to accept him, even if he requires more attention from them.

Other episodes focus on family conflict and fissures between friends, and neighbors, all of which are resolved before the end of each episode. This includes an episode when everyone is enamored with LaCienega's uncanny athletic ability (because of her big feet) and realize they have gone into a frenzy, another about Oscar, Felix, Puff, and Suga Mama fighting one another in an absurd parody of TV court shows, and one in which animals protest the awful Proud Snacks created by Oscar Proud. One of my favorite episodes in Season 2 featured a Princess Ball, with references to other Disney princesses: Penny dressed up as Princess Tiana, Dijonay as Cinderella, LaCienega as Princess Elena, Michael as Pocahontas, Maya as Beyonce, and Zoey as Princess Merida.

There are many notable characters in The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder like the Principal Hightower (voiced by Patricia Belcher), who insults and demans the students, reporter Vanessa Vue (voiced by Brenda Song) or incredibly wealthy Wizard Kelly (voiced by Aries Spears) who is shown as too tall to fit on the screen. However, in this season, Maya comes into her own, especially in the season two finale. In the episode, the ghost of Emily (voiced by Storm Reid), a Black girl enslaved by the town's founder, Christian A. Smith, guides her, revealing her diary which proves that Smith is a slaveowner, contradicting the common town myth.

In an interesting depiction of wealth-as-power, Wizard Kelly orders the police, clad in riot gear, to stop Maya, and her friends, who are protesting a ceremony dedicating Smith, with chants and placards. As a result, all of them, and their parents, are thrown in the city jail, despite the efforts of Barry to protect his children. His detective badge shown to mean nothing, as the police, who are serving as Kelly's goons, step over it with their boots.

Although Maya is just as determined as Wednesday Addams, in Wednesday, she does nothing equivalent to her. The latter, with the help of Thing, lights the statue of Joseph Crackstone, the Pilgrim founder of Jericho, on fire, causing it to melt. In fact, Kwame counsels his students to not pull down Smith's statue. This makes it ironic, then, that some reactionary media and personalities are all up-in-arms about the series, acting like it either "ruins" the original, or is "causing" division. Where were these people when Wednesday came out? They could have said some of the same things about that series, but they did not.

In many ways, the Season Two finale of The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder sets the series apart from methods of police control over the citizenry depicted in Velma or the incompetent police force shown in The Simpsons. That is because this series emphasizes how some can control and distort history to their benefit, covering up what they don't want others to see. There is no acceptance of the town myth which Lisa Simpson conceded to in The Simpsons. Instead, the town's name is changed to Emilyville and a new statue is erected. In a possible indication of the long-standing nature of the existing economic system, Kelly becomes the mayor of the town, and faces no consequences for cracking down on Maya, her friends, family, or other town residents.

This series features many guest stars like Jane Lynch, Gabrielle Union, Al Roker, Ceelo Green, and Andre Jamal Kinney, along with other lesser-known ones like Forrest Goodluck, and sports stars Laurie Hernandez, Gabby Douglas, and Dominque Dawes. Of the guest characters, I liked Dr. Lord (voiced by Holly Robinson Peete) best as she gives Penny a chance to talk about her experiences as the oldest child in the family, in which she is given additional responsibilities.

All of the episodes of the second season of The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder all aired on February 1st, unlike the previous season, which aired over a two month time period. There's strong animation and backgrounds which make the show stand out, as does the voice acting and music selection, which fit with stories and characters. It is unfortunate this 10-episode season isn't spread out across two months, because it would be easier to watch the series and take in all that happens. Even so, this season is much less glitzy than season 1 and that is to the show's benefit.

Furthermore, I appreciate that the series did an episode based on the little-remembered, or regarded, but wild, The Proud Family Movie, which seemed like an episode from Milo Murphy's Law, especially when they are fighting the Pistachions. In some ways, the episode reminded me of the annual Treehouse of Horror episodes of The Simpsons.

It is hard to know where The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder goes from here. If it follows the recent pattern of Disney series, such as Amphibia and The Owl House, it will have at least one more season. If that was the case, it would have one more season than the original series. However, it would need another 32 episodes to match the original, which aired from 2001 to 2005. This revival is different because the episodes range from 27 to 30 minutes, similar to the first season.

This series comes at the time that Disney is producing and airing series with diverse casts, like The Ghost and Molly McGee. In fact, this year, Iwájú, Kiff, Marvel’s Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur, Primos, and Hailey's On It! are set to air. Disney has also contracted to produce series such as Cookies & Milk, Moana, and Tiana. On the other hand, Disney series with similar casts such as Mira, Royal Detective and Amphibia ended last year, while The Owl House is set to end this spring.

The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder is more unique, incorporating perspectives of Black creators, unlike Hamster & Gretel, Phineas and Ferb, Kim Possible, and Star Wars: The Bad Batch, which likely have mostly White writers rooms and have casts largely composed of White characters. As production coordinator, Breana Navickas, recently wrote, the show's writer's room is Black, and much of the staff is Black and "a mix of asian folks, latine folks, white folks". This shows in this season even more strongly than in the first season, with the series establishing itself more, and putting the original into the dustbin.

This series is not alone. Craig of the Creek, Victor and Valentino, Carmen Sandiego, Arcane, and Glitch Techs are all recent series with diverse stories and characters. As such, The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder, comes at an opportune time, when some executives are cutting back resources dedicated toward animated series, or squeezing workers in tough working conditions.

All in all, I thoroughly enjoyed the second season even more than the first, and hope that Disney orders another season sometime this year, considering the amount of people watching it. There are so many more stories to tell with these characters. This could include Penny getting new, and non-toxic friends. Even so, I doubt this will happen because the plot of the series depends too much on their existence to bring in new friends, just as Futurama would fall apart without the antics of the Planet Express crew keeping its current members. In addition, considering the issues with colorism in the original The Proud Family, and somewhat replicated in the first season, it was good to see that the Gross Sisters (Nubia, Olei, and Gina), all by Raquel Lee, only had a small part in this season. The fact that Maya had a bigger part in the season, instead of the Gross Sisters, is a welcome development.

One of the series' downfalls is repeating elements of narrative set-up in the original series. Although I still believe the series could be stronger if it focused on older versions of the cast, the second season made the characters, at their current age, workable. It didn't fall into simple tropes used in Kim Possible and Totally Spies!, both animated series centered in school environments.

Seasons 1 and 2 of The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder is currently airing on Disney+. While you are at it, you can watch The Proud Family and The Proud Family Movie on Disney+ too!

© 2023 Burkely Hermann. All rights reserved.

[datinglifetips]

Why Women Aren’t Dating Anymore

In recent years, a noticeable shift has occurred in the dating landscape. More women are choosing to remain single, and the reasons behind this trend are multifaceted and deeply rooted in societal changes. Understanding why women aren’t dating anymore requires examining a range of factors from personal preferences to broader cultural shifts.

1. Emphasis on Personal Development

Today, many women prioritize personal growth and career development over traditional relationship pursuits. With greater access to education and career opportunities, women are focusing on building their own futures before settling down. This shift reflects a desire for independence and self-sufficiency, which can sometimes take precedence over dating.

2. Empowerment and Independence

The modern woman values her independence and often seeks to maintain it. The empowerment movement has encouraged women to recognize their worth and pursue their goals without relying on a partner. As a result, many women are less willing to compromise their independence for the sake of a relationship that may not meet their standards.

3. Changing Relationship Dynamics

Traditional relationship dynamics are evolving. Women today are looking for partnerships based on equality and mutual respect, rather than outdated gender roles. If these standards aren’t met, many women prefer to remain single rather than settle for less. This shift highlights a growing awareness and rejection of unhealthy or unbalanced relationships.

4. The Impact of Past Experiences

Past relationship experiences can significantly influence a woman’s decision to date or not. Negative experiences, such as toxic relationships or heartbreak, can lead to a cautious approach towards dating. Many women choose to focus on healing and self-care rather than rushing into another relationship.

5. Societal and Cultural Pressures

Societal expectations around marriage and relationships have evolved. There is less pressure to conform to traditional timelines, such as marrying by a certain age. This cultural shift allows women the freedom to live life on their own terms without feeling compelled to date or marry for the sake of meeting societal expectations.

6. The Rise of Technology

While dating apps have revolutionized the way people meet, they have also introduced challenges. The abundance of choices and the superficial nature of online interactions can be overwhelming and discouraging. Many women are opting out of the online dating scene due to frustrations with ghosting, superficiality, and the lack of genuine connections.

7. Prioritizing Mental Health

Mental health awareness has increased significantly, leading many women to prioritize their well-being. The emotional toll of dating and the potential for unhealthy relationships can deter women from pursuing romantic connections. Instead, they focus on their mental health, seeking fulfillment through friendships, hobbies, and self-care.

8. Financial Independence

With greater financial independence, women are less reliant on relationships for economic stability. This independence allows women to make relationship choices based on love and compatibility rather than financial necessity. Consequently, many women prefer to remain single until they find a partner who truly complements their life.

9. Redefining Happiness

Happiness is increasingly being defined on individual terms rather than through the lens of traditional relationships. Women are finding joy and fulfillment in diverse aspects of life, such as careers, travel, hobbies, and friendships. This broader definition of happiness reduces the pressure to date and marry.

10. High Standards and Self-Respect

Women today have higher standards for their relationships. They seek partners who respect, support, and uplift them. Rather than settling for mediocrity, many women choose to stay single until they find someone who truly aligns with their values and aspirations.

Conclusion

The decision to forgo dating is influenced by a myriad of factors, all reflecting a broader cultural shift towards independence, self-respect, and personal fulfillment. Understanding these reasons sheds light on the evolving nature of relationships and the empowered choices women are making in their pursuit of happiness.

[rentbabe]

Navigating Companionship: The Phenomenon of Renting a Girlfriend in China

In recent years, the cultural landscape of urban China has seen the emergence of a unique service that straddles the line between social convention and modern necessity: the rental of temporary romantic partners, colloquially known as rent a girlfriend in china. This service, which allows individuals to hire a companion for various social events, holidays, or even just for companionship, has sparked both curiosity and debate within and outside of China. This article delves into the phenomenon, exploring its origins, implications, and the societal factors that have led to its rise.

The concept of renting a girlfriend in China is a direct response to the intense societal pressure faced by young adults to present a stable and successful image to their family and peers. In Chinese culture, significant emphasis is placed on marriage and family. During traditional Chinese festivals, family gatherings, and especially during the Spring Festival, young adults often face relentless inquiries about their relationship status. For some, the pressure to conform to these societal expectations can be overwhelming.

Enter the girlfriend rental services, which offer a temporary solution to this social dilemma. These services allow individuals to hire someone to pose as their romantic partner for a specific period. The service is not just limited to renting a girlfriend; there are also options to rent boyfriends, and the terms of the engagement can vary widely, from attending a single family dinner to spending an entire holiday together.

Critics of the service argue that it commodifies relationships and reinforces unhealthy societal pressures. However, proponents see it as a practical solution to a real social problem. They argue that these services offer a way to alleviate family pressure, reduce loneliness, and even boost confidence in social settings.

The mechanics of renting a girlfriend in China are relatively straightforward. Numerous agencies and platforms offer these services, with varying rates and terms. The process typically involves selecting a companion from a catalog or database, agreeing on the terms of the engagement, and paying a fee. It's important to note that these services strictly prohibit physical intimacy, emphasizing that the arrangement is purely for companionship and to fulfill social expectations.

The rise of girlfriend rental services in China can be attributed to several societal factors. One of the most significant is the demographic imbalance. According to the National Bureau of Statistics of China, the country has a skewed gender ratio, with significantly more males than females. This imbalance has intensified competition for relationships and marriage, leaving some men struggling to find a partner.

Additionally, the rapid urbanization and the pressure of modern work life have left many young adults with little time for socializing, making it difficult to form and maintain relationships. The transient nature of modern work, where young professionals frequently move between cities, exacerbates this issue, leading to increased loneliness and social isolation.

Despite the controversy, the phenomenon of renting a girlfriend in China sheds light on the evolving nature of relationships and societal expectations in modern times. It highlights the lengths to which individuals will go to conform to social norms and the innovative solutions they devise to navigate these pressures.

For More Info:-

rent a girlfriend in UK

Paid Dates in Singapore

[hellisanhonourstudent]

#bi and deeply closeted misa i can live with#everything else is just very hard to see#answers#doing headcanons as something more au and just not canon compliant is valid for the record#ITS JUST NOT FOR ME

Most of the Death Note gay ships and headcanons(especially involving my favorites and/or main characters) are like coconut to me:people can savor and enjoy it,I don't have anything against it existing,but the whole thing can leave such a bad taste to me. There are some exceptions,but almost everyone in there reads really cishet to me.

Misa:explained above.

Takada:Babygirl is always shown as such a go-getter who knows exactly what she wants. If she was a lesbian,I could see her being in the closet for the sake of her family/career/reputation, but get herself a gay man to have a fake marriage with and seek women in the down low. Of course,there's probably a good argument for her facing comphet,but those headcanons are not my cup of tea. Besides,there are degrees of conformity to societal standards,and characters who only partially internalize said ideals are usually more interesting,especially when there's a game of appearances. For Takada(whether a gay or a straight one), she might be the "it's okay to be gay,but please do it at home" kind of homophobe.

Light Yagami,the one and only:I've seen a gazillion of meta texts about Light and gayness,plus the appeal of the "perfect child with a facade" is a feast for people who like it. I'm glad for them(despite my occasional whining),but I don't like it for two reasons(four,if we count my dislike for the most popular Light ship and the homophobic jokes with his surname):I don't see him having any tension about being secretly out of the norm(before being Kira,that is),and I feel like it's "characterization clutter".

Before being Kira,Light is shown as someone extraordinary in many ways and comfortable in his role. Too comfortable, in fact - he feels lonely and unchallenged due to being put on a pedestal. Yes,Light is being set apart here,but it's due to his being explicitly outside of the norm and on a way that's considered positive by his society. This leads to why I think the idea of Light being gay is "too much." He already has plenty of identity conflicts - the prodigy,the golden child,someone who deep down yearns for a companion that truly challenges him(I'm pretty sure they don't need to be a genius,tho. Light gets along with Sayu pretty well,and she's an airheaded girl 3 years younger than him. Of course, she seems to be more mature and responsible as a 20-year-old,but that's pretty normal. Mind you,he's from a society that emphasizes age and gender differences. Therefore,I feel like Light has to get over some complexes to get companionship outside of his family). On top of all that,Light being into guys not only is too much but kind of goes against his characterization,IMO(with the emphasis in IMO).

To be more specific, why do you hate wlw misa?

This has largely to do with me being anal-retentive about canon to a ridiculous degree. Canonically, Misa has homophobic tendencies as far as gay men go, so I find it incredibly weird to think of her as someone who is open and confident in loving women? 

Misa is already a character who gets altered by her fans to the point of unrecognizability, so I am just extra :/ about her in this regard, I think.

Misa is also like... the most horny character Death Note has ever seen, so it’s weird for me to think of her attraction to Light as compulsory (in the case of the lesbian Misa HC). Like, that’d just be utterly tragic (so much sex with someone you don’t even truly find hot...), and also it just suspends my disbelief a lot. Too much. She’s just so horny, guys. I’m additionally not fond of lesbian Misa given she’s a stalker type of character and lesbians get that rep enough, but that one is debatable and more of a knee-jerk reaction given her stalking isn’t actually directed at a woman. 

I don’t know, everything about canon Misa reads as super cishet to me, SORRY.

(Also for the record, I’m a lesbian. I am saying this as a lesbian.)

[aro-thoughts]

The Traditional Life

There are many things that capitalism teaches us about love from a young age, directly or indirectly, that are just plain wrong. Many people have begun to realise just how wrong they all are, but not a lot have realised it to the full extent. The traditional life differs between cultures but many of the constants are that we are all taught to marry one person of the opposite gender, have children with them, and live with them happily for the rest of our life, while also fulfilling specific roles in the family depending on gender.

Gay and bi people as well as feminists have differed from this norm through their subversion of gender roles, but asexual and especially aromantic and polyamorous people completely break and recreate the system that gay, bi, straight, feminist and sexist people all conform to.

Terminology

Aspec: Being somewhere on the aromantic and/or asexual spectrums

Arospec: Being somewhere on the aromantic spectrum

Acespec: Being somewhere on the asexual spectrum

Aromantic: Experiencing no romantic attraction

Asexual: Experiencing no sexual attraction

Aroace: Being both aromantic and asexual

Alloromantic: Experiencing the normal amount of romantic attraction

Allosexual: Experiencing the normal amount of sexual attraction

Romance/sex favourable: Being open to and enjoying romance/sex

Romance/sex neutral/indifferent: Being indifferent to or having mixed feelings about romance/sex

Romance/sex averse/repulsed: Being repulsed by romance/sex

Polyamoury: The healthy and consensual practise of having more than 1 relationship

Alloaces Vs Alloaros

The first part of the traditional life aspecs have begun to dismantle is the need for sex. We are generally taught to have sex with our 1 romantic partner of the opposite gender to express our love for them and to reproduce, however, it is now more accepted than it used to be to have a romantic relationship with someone without sex, as you can show your love in other ways, and you can adopt or foster children instead of creating them yourself. It is still quite unacceptable to have no children at all though, and these people are often greeted with pity and sympathy or even disgust and confusion.

Unfortunately, the 'love' for asexuals seems to stem from the fact that they still feel romantic attraction, and because of this, alloaros get ignored or demonised, even within the aspec community. Society tells us that alloaros and people similar to them are evil, inhuman, heartless players who don't have emotions, because they don't feel love.

This may be due to capitalism's emphasis on marriage only in order to handle both work and household chores when we must give a lot to get a little. A person who isn't interested in a romantic relationship, whether or not they are also interested in sexual, familial or platonic ones, will likely struggle to balance home and work lives because of the benefits necessities marriage brings that aren't available without it.

Attraction ≠ Action

When we ask allos exactly what romantic and sexual attraction feels like, they tend to describe it as butterflies in your stomach, feeling like everything is right in the world but also feeling stressed about the person's impression of you, wanting to do anything for the person, but not everyone's experience of these attractions is the same, as some people describe it as a sunny day or the smell of cookies baking in the oven...

What I personally believe is the best thing we've ever done is break attraction down to its core essentials, differentiating between attraction and action. This is where favour, indifference and repulsion come into play. Just because someone is aromantic or asexual, doesn't mean they can't still enjoy romance or sex. This is because attraction means a desire to do romantic/sexual/etc things with a specific person and doesn't equate to a desire to do romantic/sexual things in general.

It's like food. Sometimes we crave a particular food, but sometimes we eat just because we want to.

Types of Attraction

Another important idea aspecs have brought to light is the existence of attractions other than romantic and sexual. Allos don't usually differentiate between them because they often feel romantic, sexual and aesthetic all at the same time all towards the same person.

Platonic attraction has been known about for some time now but is still seen as lesser than romantic and sexual, obvious in phrases like 'more than friends' and 'stuck in the friend zone'. Romantic attraction is not more than platonic, it is simply other and should be treated as such. The friend zone isn't an inherently bad place to be in and is mostly a phrase used by men who believe their crushes owe them sex only for being nice to them.

Relationship Anarchy

Aromanticism and polyamoury, although seemingly opposite, have very similar ways of subverting relationships and a person can even be both aromantic and polyamorous at the same time. As I have mentioned previously, capitalism emphasises the importance of marriage as it is a good way of sustaining people while still keeping them trapped, but it may not have always been this way.

It is believed to be that, the reason why we experience menopause at a certain age is so that grandparents can raise the children while the parents go hunting for food. Also, the reason for why our menstrual cycles sync up with the people we spend the most time around is so that we might reproduce at the same time and help raise each other's children. This may suggest that we used to live in closely knit communities where we support each other rather than having 2 parents baring the responsibilities of parenthood, food and defence.

Ableism

The talk around society's need for marriage and children also sparks a conversation about ableism. People who are physically unable to not just reproduce but to work a certain way are left in the dust. The support network that community living gives you is absolutely necessary for disabled people but capitalism doesn't agree that all life is worth living as some lives don't contribute to the economy.

Conclusion

It is extremely difficult to dismantle the amatonormative story capitalism has told us, and for some it may be impossible to live authentically in this capitalist world, but we still have hope for the future, as the aspec community is constantly growing bigger and better than ever with every new person who discovers it. I hope I got my points across well, as I think it's very important to have more posts talking more in depth about amatonormativity.

[nerdygaymormon]

you said you're learning about what life was like for LGBT people before the stonewall riots. what are some of the things you learned?

Post World War II American society was very homophobic and transphobic. There was an emphasis on uniformity and extreme suspicion of people who were different.

Being gay or trans was labeled as “deviant” and was basically outlawed. 

Gay sex was illegal, as was same-gender dancing, or even holding hands. In many cities it was illegal to wear clothes of the opposite gender. 

The US Post Office refused to allow delivery of gay newspapers, gay magazines, or even letters from gay penpal clubs. The Post Office would bring obscenity charges against these groups in court. The Post Office law enforcement unit would go search peoples houses for obscene materials they might have received through the mail. They would sometimes make “educational visits” to employers, letting them know that their employee was receiving this material.

Fearing that gays were easy targets for blackmail by Communists, the US government banned them from being employed by the federal government. Companies who work with the US government also followed this ban as gay people were unable to qualify for security clearance. 

The FBI collected names of "deviant” people printed in newspapers or turned in by their fellow employees.

Gay & trans people were so looked down upon that many places would not knowingly rent to them, universities would expel them, whole professions banned them from having a career. 

Bars & restaurants wouldn’t serve them for fear of losing their liquor license or because it’d make their regular patrons uncomfortable. 

Queer people weren’t allowed to be Boy Scouts, to be teachers, to join the PTA or country clubs or the Rotary Club, or all the other “civilizing” organizations and men’s or women’s social clubs around which much of neighborhood life revolved.

Newspapers regularly reported the names of people who were arrested for deviant activity, and having their name published often meant a person could lose their job, their apartment, their family would find out and cut ties with them.  

Also, the societal pressure to conform by getting married was tremendous, so most found themselves in mixed-orientation marriages, being outed by the newspaper also meant losing their family. I’ve read studies that show these married gay people often espoused very conservative politics as part of keeping any suspicion away.

Hollywood had rules that didn't allow openly LGBT characters to appear in films, unless they were shown as morally corrupt (aka, the bad guy) and usually die a gruesome death, no happy endings for them. Hollywood contributed to the idea that queer people were suspect, dangerous, and ne’er-do-wells.

In the 1950′s when the first organizations for LGBT rights were formed, newspapers refused to run their ads announcing meetings, so it was difficult to get the word out. I found it sad that the attendees of the Mattachine Society used pseudonyms so even the other gays wouldn’t know who they are, it was that dangerous.

Queer people learned to maintain a low profile, keep their head down, be vague about their personal lives and avoid calling attention to themselves in order to avoid problems.

[bidean-byedean]

Drop the essay 🥺 it sounds so interesting

omg I’m so flattered! ❤️  I’ll put it under the cut here (it’s 3600 words lol), just a few things:

Anon is referring to this post 

I wrote this for my Gothic Lit + Film module during my BA - 3ish years ago. This clearly isn’t the final version (uncited works, missing bib, etc.) and there’s a lot I would change now. God, I might rewrite it for Victorian Gothic or just for kicks... I got so close to making some really great points lol so forgive Undergraduate me for being almost smart. 

And yes, I looked at Interview with The Vampire so #tw: Anne Rice lol

‘Love Never Dies’ (tagline from Bram Stoker’s Dracula)

Explore the Treatment of Homoerotic Desire in Gothic Fiction and/or Film

The Gothic genre is one of transgressions and transformations. It crosses the boundaries of everyday societal norms to explore and express cultural anxieties by reforming psychological worries as physical monsters. Influxes of immigrants from around the Empire and the publication of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution created a huge social shift, undermining religious beliefs of creation and human’s superiority over the natural world. However, it also gave rise to more ‘scientific’ moral categorisations, being twisted to suit the needs of the white colonialists and justify the prejudices of the time by “grounding them in “truth.”” This new Scientia Sexualis, the bringing of sexuality into the psychoanalytic, political and scientific discourse, created new categorisations for sexuality and encouraged identification with these new categorisations.[1] This, for the first time, linked sexuality and identity and now meant one’s sexual practices and preferences came with a “truth” about the person. Homosexuality, as it was now known, was pathologised and seen as a new “species”[2] entirely, one that was a defective, lesser evolution than that of the traditional heterosexuality. Using the Gothic monster meant that authors could explore the ‘queer’ space in society, which means to blur boundaries of sexuality and gender[3] to explore repressed desires and curiosities raised by cultural anxieties over sexuality and gender. In Victorian Gothic, Le Fanu’s Carmilla and Stevenson’s Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde are two of examples of using the genre’s transgressive nature and monstrous metaphors to express veiled desires and vicariously act upon them. Although the Gothic gives a home to all that is abhorrent and unacceptable in everyday society, Rice’s Interview with The Vampire explores how the Gothic can treat something on the edge of acceptability. Writing in a time sexual liberation and progressive thinking, Rice’s treatment of homosexuality and non-conventional relationships could be seen to threaten the traditional allegorical use of the genre.

The vampire has long been a sexual being often representing foreign or ‘monstrous’ sex desires and appetites, and Carmilla’s portrayal of aggressive, homoerotic female desire is one the earliest and most complex of these examples. Although one cannot be certain about how progressive Le Fanu wished his novel to be, it can definitely be used to argue against the misogynistic and repressive Victorian gender roles. By using the Gothic genre, Le Fanu explores the ideas of transgressing boundaries, most prominently between life and death, but also using the boundaries of the domestic space being transgressed by Carmilla as a metaphor for the structure of society. The Victorians saw the woman as the ‘angel in the house’, ethereal and asexual, therefore Carmilla’s demonic invasion of the house and her inherently seductive nature is directly antithetical to the socially acceptable version of femininity. However, Carmilla’s “perfidious and beautiful” appearance is confusing for both the other characters, in particular Laura, and the reader themselves. Le Fanu’s expression of female sexuality and gender identity through vampirism conforms to the fact that the “monstrous is transgressive and unnatural because it blends those categories that should be classified as distinct.”[4] Carmilla represents a blurring of the gender boundaries set for women by Victorian society, with vampires being traditionally fluid characters as they “straddle the borders of the living and the dead,” it is natural for Carmilla’s vampirism to give her a freedom akin to that of masculinity. Carmilla excites and threatens the heterosexual male audience with her aggressive sexuality and choice of female victims. On the one hand, she is full of the voracious libidinal energy that is viewed as desirable in sexual objects, but on the other, because of her sexual power and freedom she can be read as a “potential castrator” by becoming a superior sexual predator. Crossing the boundaries of homosocial to homoerotic, Carmilla provides Laura with a relationship separate from her father, one that allows to grow outside of the parameters of the submissive, obedient and asexual daughter. The relationship between Laura and Carmilla means that they have, as Irigaray describes it, “refused to go to market.”[5] The queerness of Carmilla and Laura means that they no longer have to be commodities in the patriarchal market, passed from man to man, but created their own exchange between each other. By engaging in relationship with another woman Carmilla and Laura have “become masculine,”[6] they no longer need to seek masculine assurance outside of themselves or each other.

The group murder of Carmilla by the dominant men in Laura’s life is seen almost identically in Stoker’s Dracula. Lucy is staked by the three men from which she has had blood transfusions in a heavily sexually violent scene where the rebellious female is ‘penetrated’ and subdued by the heterosexual patriarchy. Once Carmilla has been destroyed, Laura is placed safely back under the dominance of the men around her and relies on them to relay Carmilla’s true identity. The confusion between whether they have killed the vampire or the queer woman becomes blurred by Le Fanu here. Laura is told that vampires stalk their victims with the “passion of love” and the use of “artful courtship,”[7]implying that she is not only being warned against vampires, but monstrous queer women. The men in her life invert her homosexual desire into warning signs of a vampire; that she must listen more carefully to the “abhorrence” she feels and ignore the “pleasure” that is akin to the “ardour of a lover.”[8] The novel seemingly ends with the message that many works in the genre embody:

“The Gothic may kill off the monster in such a way as to effect catharsis for the viewer or reader, who sees his or her unacceptable desires enacted vicariously and then safely ‘repressed’ again.”

Carmilla is no exception when it comes to reinstating the status quo after destroying the monstrous queer body it used to be able to safely blur and cross boundaries of societal norms.[9] However, this can also be argued. The novella ends with Laura reminiscing on the time since Carmilla’s destruction, and while she says: “it was long before the terror … subsided”, she also admits there is an “ambiguous” nature to her memories. The male authorities in Laura’s life could see Carmilla’s vampiric nature long before Laura could and despite insisting to Laura that Carmilla was nothing but a “demon”, making it clear that Carmilla’s desire was solely to kill Laura, she still feels affection for her lost friend. The very last sentence of the novella clearly shows her conflicting, but continued desire for Carmilla:

“sometimes the playful, languid, beautiful girl; sometimes the writhing fiend I saw in the ruined church; and often from a reverie I have started, fancying I heard the light step of Carmilla.”

Though the novella is, on the surface, wrapped up neatly with the white, patriarchy dominating over the queer female body, Fanu’s parting sentence emphasises the idea that it might not be a happy ending. Although Carmilla was literallya monster and would have killed Laura had she not been caught, she has clearly had a profound and positive emotional effect on Laura, who was briefly allowed to experience both same-sex support and desire.

Much of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were “shadowed by the growing focus on the dangers of … close male friendships and signifiers of homosexuality,”[10] causing a repressed and paranoid time of ‘homosexual panic’. Men of the upper classes moved in almost exclusively male circles; all of their significant relationships outside of marriage would have been homosocial and therefore, plagued with worries about being seen as taking these relationships too far.[11] This paranoia manifested itself in the Gothic literature of the time as frantic and often contradictory.[12] Socially acceptable misogyny allowed male writers to praise homosocial relationships above those with women, who were seen as weak and hysterical, as seen in Stoker’s Dracula when Mina Harker is described as remarkable because she has “the brain of a man.”[13] However, the more insistent and heated misogyny only serves to emphasis what the writers are trying to avoid: being read as homosexual. Stevenson’s novella The Strange Case of Jekyll and Hyde exemplifies the idea ‘homosexual panic’ manifesting closer to homosexual repression. The invisibility of women, apart from being placed near or as victims of Hyde’s violence, not only speaks to Stevenson’s feelings about women, but also his feelings about men. Hyde’s aggression is often triggered by being faced with female sexuality: he is angered by the prostitute that offers her “venereal box”[14] and the saleswomen that exude “lurid charms” and “coquetry.”[15] While this could be a product of his evilness or lack of moral development, Jekyll retells the former story as the woman offerings a “box of lights,” even though it is clear to both the characters and the readers what really happened. This reluctance to admit to Hyde’s anger towards female sexuality implies an awareness and an anxiety around profound misogyny, particularly if it is female sexuality that repulses Hyde, which leads the reader immediately to ideas of homosexual desire. Through the Gothic genre, Stevenson is able to explore man as “truly two” by creating a physical outlet for this anxiety and repression felt around homosocial relationships that dominated men’s lives. Gothic literature is often full of mystery and secrecy, and like the vampire, which has been linked to the plight of homosexuality because they are forced to live in the shadows, hiding their abhorrent desires and constantly plagued with the fear of being caught and destroyed - Jekyll goes through the same fears with Hyde. Although homosexuality was no long a capital crime (the last men executed for it in the UK being in 1835, the law was changed in 1861, before the publication of both Carmilla (1872) and Jekyll and Hyde (1886)), it was still punishable by law. Jekyll creates Hyde as a criminal outlet for his “concealed pleasures” that he saw as incompatible with his high social status and unworthy of a man respected so greatly by his peers.

Like with the vampire, the Gothic allows for Hyde to be an example of the “monstrous queer” with his “evil” actions reflected in his “deformed” “ape-like” body. In the eighteenth century, ‘monstrous’ was synonymous with queer, linking same-sex desire with the demonic.[16] Similarly, Stevenson’s use of language to describe Hyde is full of natural and evolutionary imagery. He constantly emphasises the fact that Hyde is animalistic, beast-like or, specifically, ape-like to distance Hyde from the respectable and civilised Dr. Jekyll. Hyde is presented as a step down on the evolutionary chain, he is a lesser creature and incapable of higher reasoning and moral thinking. Due to this lack of moral and reasoning capabilities, homosexuals were also seen as inherently selfish and indulgent. The purpose of their sexuality was solely to satisfy personal pleasure rather than transcendental values and contribute to the wider society.[17] This is linked to thinking that Edelman coined as “reproductive futurism,”[18] which is the idea that capitalism’s hold on cultural thinking pervades even to police sexual practices that it deems “unproductive” and therefore, “unnatural.” However, through the Gothic monstrous body, Stevenson can apply natural imagery to Hyde’s impulses and desires while still concealing them under the guise of a “deformity” or a lesser developed being. Through the paradox of his closeness to nature making him ‘abnormal’, Stevenson can tap into the language of the culture and exploit the reader’s psychological justifications for how they view these ‘social disgraces’ (homosexuals), but he can also challenge them.[19] By presenting Hyde as a grotesque Gothic monster the contradictions in viewing homosexuality as both closer to nature and a “deformity” are subtly, but clearly, there for the reader to understand, should they look into the coded meanings of the text.

Anne Rice’s Interview with The Vampire (1976) signalled a new kind a Gothic queer, one living in the age where to identify with homosexuality, personally and socially, was becoming more and more acceptable. One review by Jerry Douglas states that Rice’s series “constitutes as one of the most extended metaphors in modern literature”[20]because it made clear to the mainstream audience the deeply embedded parallel between queerness and the vampire. However, Douglas seems to have missed that almost a century has passed from the first uses of Gothic as an ‘extended metaphor’ for being queer, and it is not the homosexuality that is now hidden in subtext. The homoerotic content of Rice’s novels was so explicitly clear that despite buying the film rights in 1976, impressively the same year as publication, Paramount Pictures did not manage to successfully market the film for production for another twenty years and it was finally released in 1994. Although this proves that society’s view on homosexuality was still decidedly cold and the mainstream audience lacked a palate for viewing homoerotic desire in the cinemas, it also emphasises the leap that Rice was making through her Gothic novels. While homosexuality no longer needed to be coded and staked in a scene reminiscent of gang-rape by white men, the presentation of homoerotic desire and non-conventional relationships still needed the Gothic monstrous body to encourage the audience into a world of blurred boundaries concerning sexuality and gender. One of the revisions for the potential film was to make Louis female, apparently Rice herself offered up this change because she saw it as “consistent with his passivity.”[21] This compromise flags as one of the first indications that Rice’s works may not be the epitome of queer representation in modern Gothic literature, but in fact, she consistently seems afraid to truly obscure and distort societal boundaries of sexuality and gender because of internalised misogyny and homophobia. The film adaptation of Interview with The Vampire, although also written by Rice, downplays the homoerotic content to playful subtext and tension, refusing to risk alienating the mainstream, heterosexual audience by being too transgressive of norms. Coupled with the casting of blockbuster favourites Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, and Antonio Banderas, whose appeal was deeply entwined with their heterosexuality and masculinity,[22] the novel that was too explicitly queer for the 70s became a cautiously heterosexual-aligned film in the 90s. Perhaps one of the most significant dampeners on the Gothic novel’s queerness and transgression of boundaries was the AIDs crisis, which took hold of western media and created general panic in the 80s. This made the triad of homosexuality, blood, and multiplicity of victims, which appears in the novel, a direct and unavoidable link to the negative misconceptions about and unsympathetic feelings towards AIDs and its victims.

One of the ways in which Rice succeeds with transgressing boundaries is in her portrayal of the vampire and the way in which the reader is encouraged to relate to and sympathise with the monster. Carmilla and Hyde, though metaphorically complex, are essentially blood-thirsty killers, lacking in capabilities of higher moral thinking and reasoning compared to Louis’ very human existential suffering. The vampiric predecessors subscribe to an explicit separation between vampires and humans, but this opposition between fiend and man has ceased to exist within Rice’s Gothic world. Louis and Lestat, though monstrous and, at times, deeply unlikeable, are never presented as inherently evil. By making the previously monstrous relatable and understandable, Rice inadvertently played a progressive role in attitudes towards those with AIDs, by blurring the lines between the monstrous “them” and the moral “us.” The vampires, particularly Lestat and Claudia, do not try to be ‘good’ victims, they are ruthless and constantly hungry for their next hunt, which they deeply enjoy. Lestat describes his ability to transform others into vampires as a “gift,” encouraging Louis to ingest his contaminated blood and make the transformation from human to out-casted other. The AIDs allegory fits neatly into the traditionally sexualised moments of feeding and initiation, which are also the moments in which the physical boundaries between the vampiric-other and the human-us is most blurred. Much like Jekyll towards the end of Jekyll and Hyde when he loses control over which physicality manifests, the sharing of blood fuses the Gothic monstrous body and the normal, human body, rendering explicit physical boundaries ineffective. Along with Louis deep suffering with guilt and self-loathing, the ‘us’ reader is drawn into a sympathetic corner in this metaphor, even if they do not hold one for the real-life counterpart. The monstrous ‘other’ manifests only in the literal sense of being a vampire, he is no longer a physical embodiment of immoral desire, less evolutionarily developed and repulsive, but deeply emotional and craving acceptance and familial support. The unorthodox family unit of Louis, Lestat and Claudia is in many ways a comical parody of the bourgeois family, with estranged, asexual parents and a spoilt child, created in hopes of strengthening the marriage bond.[23] Unfortunately, Rice perpetuates the harmful ideas that homosexual units mirror heterosexual ones, therefore prioritising heteronormativity by remaining within its boundaries. Rather than choosing to portray a positive queer family unit or completely distort the norms of the family unit, the trio are a demonic, abhorrent “deformed” version of the conventional heterosexual family. This links to Rice’s suggestion of Louis’ gender transformation: she, whether consciously or unconsciously, projects the idea that even in a homosexual couple there must be a submissive ‘female’ and an aggressive ‘male’. The creation of this dysfunctional family also serves to later emphasis beliefs that were explored in Jekyll and Hyde, that homosexuality is inherently selfish and purely to satisfy personal pleasure. When Louis meets Armand, he is infatuated with a “longing … so strong it took all of [his] strength to control it,”[24] and Claudia is immediately jealous, she knows he is attracted to him and is threatened by Louis’ homoerotic desire. Claudia cannot fulfil her role as a child or a lover to Louis, and her death by the hands of his new lover is indicative of the conservative fears that sexually immoral people, like homosexuals, cannot be trusted to have a family for they are not bound to the reproductive process or inclined to sexual monogamy.

While homosexuality and homoerotic desire remain politically and socially contested, there has always been a space for the manifestations of non-conventional sexual practices and relationships in Gothic. The monstrous body is deeply metaphorical and without that sense of transgression, it lacks the conviction of otherness, which is used to frighten or morally awaken the reader. Although in all three novels explored homosexual desire is treated as a social taboo and something to be morally condemned, by using the Gothic genre the authors can sub-textually create an argument against the status quo. In both Carmilla and Jekyll and Hyde, the destruction of the monster does not mean that the text has a ‘happy ending’. Laura is left feeling melancholia and lonely without Carmilla, often dreaming that she has come back to her as the “beautiful” friend that challenged her male dominated life. Similarly, while Dr. Jekyll may be overpowered by his monster, Hyde ultimately chooses to take his own life, implying that he feels a sense of shame and comprehends the moral consequences for the indulgences in his desires. On the surface Stevenson is saying that allowing the darker side of oneself to surface can only end in losing one’s civilised self, but underneath that he does not seem to condone repression either. The last sentence of Dr. Jekyll’s final note is: “I bring the life of that unhappy Henry Jekyll to an end.”[25] Stevenson employing the same literary tactic as Le Fanu, by ending the novel on an ambiguous note that queer readers could understand differently to heterosexual. Even in Rice’s novel, the source of much of Louis’ pain is his lack of self-acceptance and desperation to find a family in which he can belong to. The monster that haunts all of the characters in these novels is conformity and the expectation of repression of self to suit societal conventions. Through the monstrous body authors are given a channel through which to transgress boundaries and vicariously act out repressed desires, providing two moral lessons: confirmation for those wishes to conform, and reassurance of kinship for those who have found they cannot.

[1] Michael Foucault, History of Sexuality, trans. Robert Hurley, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1978), p. 54

[2] ibid, p. 43

[3] Max Fincher, Queering Gothic in the Romantic Age: The Penetrating Eye, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), p. 69

[4] Fincher, Queering Gothic, p. 68

[5] Lucy Irigaray, ‘Commodities Among Themselves’ in This Sex Which is Not One, trans. By Catherine Porter, (New York: Cornell University Press, 1985), p. 196

[6] ibid, p. 194

[7] Sheridan Le Fanu, Carmilla, (iBook Ed.: Public domain, 1872), p. 102

[8] ibid, p. 34-35

[9] Eric Savoy, ‘The Rise of American Gothic’ in The Cambridge Companion to Gothic Fiction, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 198

[10] Jarlath Killeen, History of the Gothic: Gothic Literature 1825-1914, (Online: University of Wales Press, 2009), [accessed: 11 Jan 17]

[11] Savoy, Rise of American Gothic, p. 199

[12] Killeen, History of Gothic

[13] Bram Stoker, Dracula

[14] William Veeder, Children of The Night, p. 141

[15] Robert Louis Stevenson, Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, (1886), ed. by Martin Danahay, (Claremont: Broadview Press, 2015), p. 34

[16] Fincher, Queering Gothic, p. 69

[17] Carolyn Laubender, "The Baser Urge: Homosexual Desire In The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde", 17, (2009), Paper 12, <h p://preserve.lehigh.edu/cas-lehighreview-vol-17/12> [accessed: 11 Jan 17], p. 25

[18] Lee Edelman, No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive, (Durham: Duke University Press, 2004), p. 2

[19] Laubender,”The Base Urge”, p. 23

[20] James R. Keller, Anne Rice and Sexual Politics: The Early Novels, (Jefferson: McFarland & Company, 2000), p. 13

[21] Ramsland Prism pp. 268-69  

[22] Tony Magistrale, Abject Terrors: Surveying the Modern and Postmodern Horror Film, (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc. 2005), p. 44

[23] Keller, Anne Rice and Sexual Politics, p. 15-16

[24] Anne Rice, Interview with The Vampire, (London: Random House Publishing, 2010), p. 256

[25] Stevenson, Jekyll and Hyde, p. 83

[vanderpumprulesreview]

Episode 1

By Sierra Grossman

         In the first episode of season one in the reality TV show Vanderpump Rules, restaurant owner Lisa Vanderpump kicks off the series by describing the key differences of her two restaurants as “Villa Blanca is where you take your wife, SUR is where you take your mistress”. In the initial episode of the series, we are introduced to Vanderpump’s employees and their current ties and associations with SUR. We learn that Stassi is dating and living with bartender Jax, Katie is dating Tom Schwartz, who is also best friends with bartender Tom Sandovall, who is dating Kristen, who is best friends with Stassi and Katie. All these people work together at SUR, and many have had previous romantic or sexual histories with one another. In the episode, we are introduced to Scheana, who is a transfer from Villa Blanca to SUR. Scheana is desperate to fit in and be friends with the tight knit crew at SUR, but finds it is difficult when Stassi, the queen bee at SUR, finds out that Scheana “homewrecked” a marriage by sleeping with and having an affair with a married man for two years, ultimately causing his wife to file for divorce. This particularly does not sit well with Stassi, as she has dealt with infidelity from her partners in the past. From here on out, we begin to watch Stassi take the role of the jealous, insecure, yet beautiful blonde. In the episode, Sanderval mentions in a confessional, that “as confident and good looking as Stassi is, she is still insecure”,

          In the show, the main cast appears to be white, heterosexual, and cisgender. In this storyline, we mostly hear from the castmates that are women, as their drama seems to be the most enticing. The main episode’s storyline focuses on Stassi, who has the stereotypical attitude of the hot-blonde-mean-girl-head-cheerleader who always gets her way and is the center of attention. To counter it, we have Scheana, who is the sweet, lovable, but naïve brunette who just wants to be liked by Stassi and her crew. The duo gives off the same heated drama that is reminiscent of Sharpay versus Gabriella in the hit Disney movie series High School Musical. We also have Jax, who is your stereotypical meathead-player-bro. Together as a couple, him and Stassi move like Barbie and Ken. Fully accepting her role as a natural alpha, Stassi mentions “the girls are naturally drawn to me and the boys are naturally drawn to Jax, so we just kind of lead the pack”.

           From the first episode alone, you can already tell you are in for a raunchy ride. There is an unsaid emphasis on the fact that sex sells in the restaurant. The women’s uniforms are “barely there” backless mini dresses that do not allow you to wear a bra. It is also not unusual for male bartenders to have most of their buttons on their shirt undone while working. When discussing new tactics to sell the specials on the menu, waitress Katie encourages her coworkers to describe the dishes like they are sex. Every person on the main cast conforms to the social norms and expectations that come with their sex and gender, specifically the LA norms of their gender. The boys are strong, muscular, and tan, while the girls are thin, and do their hair and make up everyday before work.

           In a meeting with her employees, Vanderpump addresses an issue within the restaurant. Vanderpump debates with her employees whether to continue to pull tips, or have her employees begin to walk with what they make that night to avoid the weaker servers from piggybacking off the stronger servers. Vanderpump goes on with the meeting by announcing how much money each of the servers made that night. Whether or not this was done for the shock value for TV’s sake, this ended up having political ramifications, as it began a hostile competition between servers, specifically the two main women, Stassi and Scheana, who continue to throw jabs at each other for the rest of the episode. Vanderpump Rules depicts the hierarchal and competitive relationships women hold with each other, especially in a working environment. 

[onlineportfoliojuliag]

Gender in Othello

What it means to be a woman?

In the play, women are to some extent obliged to stay at home. Their femininity is shown by staying close to the rims of the house and family, while men are the ones leading exciting lives, exploring the unknown. In Othello, Desdemona is on the edge of breaking the societal norms as she “wishes the heavens had made her a man like Othello”, which indicates that she wishes she could experience a life as glorious and adventurous as his. Despite their opinions, women are still much controlled by their husbands and male-figures in general, desperately seeking for understanding.

What it means to be a man?

Men are expected to be strong, bold, and muscular. In the play, Cassio is the symbol

of masculinity; however, his intolerance for alcohol makes him seem weaker, as binge drinking is considered normal, even natural, for men.  Such stereotypes continue to appear even nowadays. Men present misogyny towards women, which is clearly emphasized by multiple phrases and behaviours illustrated throughout the play. As for Iago, what deserves a special emphasis is his attitude of relentless degradation towards his innocent wife, Emilia, that leads him to killing her. Furthermore, his perception of women is concluded be the sexist remarks he does not resist to make, and so does Cassio.

What is said about men and women in general?

    The role of a male or female in society is difficult to define. In Othello we may see contrasting differences between each of the female and male characters. The one feature that fits to characterize the three females in the play is love for their husbands/lovers. They would do anything to satisfy them, no matter how disregarding they were towards them. As for the male characters, the one that stands out most is Iago, who wishes to destroy everything that is beautiful. Unaware/unsure of his own identity, he behaves differently around different people and manipulates each person a certain way. Othello on the other hand is very genuine and loyal. He respects everyone and is the person who everyone turn to when they are in trouble. 

Desdemona 

adventurous

curious

young and beautiful

strong desire for love and marriage

refuses to conform to societal standards

innocent in her actions and beliefs

Emilia

conforming to her husband and societal norms

innocent in her actions

kind and warm

Bianca

an independent sexual worker 

despite her job, she cares for Cassio

her jealousy of Cassio mirrors the jealousy of Othello for Desdemona

Masculinity:

Othello

very highly thought of 

calm

respectful

dignified

inferior; often expresses feminine behaviour

Iago

envious of everything

deceitful

personification of evil and spite

chaotic; cannot control his passions

Cassio

brave; driven by courage 

disrespectful towards women - “’Tis such another fitchew! marry, a perfumed one.” (ll. 146-147, p. 146)

military man; loyal to his general (Othello)

because Cassio has low alcohol tolerance and gets drunk easily, Iago recognizes that as his weakness and uses it against him - “I have very poor and unhappy brains for drinking. I could well wish courtesy would invent some other custom of entertainment” (ll. 30-33, p. 82)

[psykonee]

A decade on a tropical island

My skin burns easily.  I dislike feeling sweaty.  I like the freshness of cold weather. I generally dislike crowded places.

I never thought I would spend a decade in one of the planet’s smallest, hottest and densest tropical islands.

Singapore.

Mistaken preconceptions

English as a main language does not mean a culture that is very similar to that of other mainly English speaking nations.

Having chewing gum is OK, even though nowhere sells it.

One of the richest countries in the world has some extremely poor people – for example elderly people working as cleaners and collecting cardboard.

Behind the ultra modern façade there tends be a more traditional and conservative mindset.

Surprises

Male Singaporeans having to do national service for 2 years, which at least some resent having to do.

The first group (late 1960s) to do national service had Israeli instructors.

The reason the police on the metro system look like teenagers is that they are.

The legality of prostitution.

Sometimes it is older Singaporeans that are most likely to be openly breaking the rules – for example during the Covid lock-down last year, it was common to see groups of older Singaporeans together in a way that was in breach of the restrictions.

At least at the level of individual seats elections can be genuinely competitive.

The normalcy of families having live in maids.

Very little built after independence (1965) has been considered worthy of protection from redevelopment.

Around 80% of Singaporeans live in homes that have 99 year lease holds from what is effectively the state.

How many Singaporeans live with their parents until well into their 30s.

The degree of language fluidity – for example, being with an Indian Singaporean who ordered drinks in Mandarin.

Singlish – an officially frowned upon blend of Chinese dialects with Malay, Tamil and English which is an organic part of the Singaporean identity, as opposed to many other things which have been driven from the top down.

Pre-covid the largest event in favour of making progressive changes each year has been Pink Dot.

The amount of green space, particularly in the core part of the island. It is not uncommon to see monkeys, otters, monitor lizards and other wildlife.

Understanding

The location on the map at the junction of the main sea routes between East Asia and India, the Middle East and Europe makes a port here logical.

The colonial legacy is complex.  The influence of the early, segregated city plan is still clearly visible in terms of street names and the nature of the oldest buildings.

WW2, defeat and occupation are critical to making sense of the structures created and the decisions made by the post-independence leaders.

Without Lee Kuan Yew (the first Prime Minister) things would have been very different.  He effectively got to play Sim City for real.

The country became independent from Malaysia and not directly from the UK.

Singapore was not a backwater at independence (the grand colonial buildings in the core of the city attest to that), but it did have serious issues (amongst other things few natural resources, housing problems) at independence.

To become what it is now has required a huge effort by many over the decades, but it has come at a high cost.

Not all laws are enforced equally.  There are some that are very strongly enforced (e.g. the ban on recreational drugs) and others which exist more on paper than in practice (e.g. the colonial legacy anti gay laws).

Singapore may have a populace that is majority Chinese by background, but it is very different from China and cannot be assumed to side with China (or any other country) on anything.

The degree of direct and indirect state involvement in the economy is far more than a crude look at economic freedom indices would suggest.  In some cases the largest companies in local sectors have significant (in some cases, controlling) shareholdings by the country’s sovereign wealth funds.

This is not a police state, but it is one of the safest countries.  In general there is quite a lot of latitude in what can be said or done by people.  People are largely free to be supportive or critical of the government or anything else here.  At the same time there some things which would be possible elsewhere which are barely tolerated here (e.g. protests are legal in just one place, a legal strike is almost unheard of).

Relative to many countries in the same region Singapore is in many respects liberal, open and tolerant.

People

Anyone can be Singaporean.

Kiasu – a fear of missing out, which makes behaviour around limited events pretty predictable.

Kiasi – a fear of death, which in practice means an avoidance of taking risks.

Conformity tends to be valued over individuality.

Stability is highly valued.

I have found that it is generally guess correctly from a conversation with a Singaporean if they have spent a significant part of their lives outside the country or not.

It is a village on a larger scale, which can be both a source of community and suffocation.

There is an emphasis on self and family reliance, which at its best makes people strive to be as successful as they can be, but at its worst can lead to an indifference in the well being of others.

Given the mix of people and cultures there tends to be a live and let live mentally for the most part in public spaces.

There can be a tenancy by some to resort to official means (e.g. reporting something to the police) instead of trying to resolve disputes without the involvement of the authorities.

Related to this there can be a tendency towards passive aggressiveness over directly confronting problems.

There can be a very hierarchical view of organisations, which can lead to a rigidity and inflexibility.

People will help you if you ask, but it is much less common to get unsolicited assistance.

Ideals and the reality

To be a clean city, but it is maintained more by an army of low paid workers, than a deeply ingrained culture of care of civic spaces. The amount of waste in piles at the beaches can be depressing.

Racism is officially not tolerated in any circumstances.  In practice it is easy to find examples of racism e.g. coming across rental listings that make it clear Indian applicants are not welcome.

To have gender equality, but in practice a patriarchal and defined gender roles remain strongly ingrained.

Education is highly valued, but with a strong emphasis on scoring high marks on structured exams it can lead (along with other factors) to a square box mindset and a lack of creativity.

Officially there are four languages (English, Mandarin, Malay, Tamil).  In practice many things are only in English, often in English and Mandarin and rarely only in the other two outside of some limited contexts.

Speculation on further evolution

Same sex marriage is more likely to be legalised in the medium term than recreational drug use.

Singapore is continuing to slowly liberalise at its own pace – for example many films that were banned in the previous century are now available on streaming services.

Can you forge a national identity with what appears to be a largely top down approach?  It will be interesting how this evolves over the coming decades.

The same party has been in power since before independence.  It is likely that other parties will win more seats (currently they hold 11% of them) in future elections.  If and when it happens a successful and peaceful transfer of power would be a momentous event.

Fragmentation of experience by linguistic and other factors in a small, young country which is open to the influences from louder places.

How Singapore has changed me

I can eat with chopsticks.

I effectively ceased to cook after realising eating out was cheaper, arguably tastier and easier.

I have eaten far more varied food here than anywhere else, tried so many new things.

Eating out alone feels normal.

I see more value in a collectivist approach than an individualistic one than I used to.

Paying $20 for a single drink no longer feels as outrageous as it used to.

My body has adjusted to the heat and humidity.  30C now feels normal and 20C can feel cold.

I walk slower to remain cooler.

Travelling 10km within the country feels like a long way.

I can understand and use some Singlish.

I tryto talk slower and clearer because it makes it easier for others to understand what I am saying.

Those who I am friends with and work with is far more diverse than before.

I have toned down some of how I tend to be naturally (swearing a lot, directness) in order to be more accommodating of others.

I have become quite used to standing out in many places due to my appearance.

Singapore has felt like home for some time.

Miscellany

The number of Singaporeans who have thought I am Australian.

The airport is the world’s best in terms of ease of use and facilities.

The one time my beer glass was freely refilled was while eating dinner I found myself amongst supporters of one of the opposition parties who were ecstatic the night they won a seat in a by-election from the ruling party.

The government information adverts (e.g. visit your relatives more than once a year) shown in some cinemas would not be taken with a straight face in many other countries.

The unexpected can lead to things grinding to a halt as orders are awaited.

The ubiquity of high speed internet access has made controlling what people can see, read or experience effectively impossible.  A great firewall is not a viable option here.

[ogwrites]

Counter-majoritarian Protections and the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Jamaica)

In a Constitutional democracy, such as Jamaica, majoritarian impulses ought to be limited, so that the rights of individuals and minorities are respected and upheld. This is done with the acknowledgement that it is the collective (that is, the minority and the majority), which has ordained and established the Constitution to be their fundamental law, and so what is best for the collective must be placed above what is best for the majority.[1]As the most powerful legislative instrument, there must be evidence of this prioritization laid out in the Constitution, in the form of counter-majoritarian measures. This body of work details the extent to which the Constitution’s Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms executes this ideal by an exploration of: firstly, which members of society may be considered members of either the majority or the minority; secondly, the extent to which the Charter upholds or resists majoritarian impulses in relation to issues which primarily affect the minority; and lastly, the ways in which the Constitution attempts to redeem itself from the lack of protections it may give to the minority in relation to certain issues.

Majoritarianism, Counter-Majoritarian Protections and Society’s Minorities

Majoritarianism is the numerical majority of the population having the final say in determining the outcome of a decision.[2]Counter-majoritarian measures come against the power of majoritarianism, in order to protect the interests and rights of the minority from infringement – this is done through the creation of special structures aimed at prioritizing the minority’s needs, special procedures for effecting change regarding the lives and welfare of minorities, or by protecting diffuse minority interests or the interests of a targeted group within the population.[3]

Minorities can be found in various aspects of life. Persons who practice a religion that is apart from the dominant belief system, persons of minority ethnicities, persons who are of a lower social class, who live in poverty, who live in garrison areas, who do not speak the official language of a country, who are disabled, who are illiterate, who are not heterosexual, or are non-gender conforming are a few examples. The distinction of majority and minority can also be defined through numbers relating to political alignment within the society.

Majoritarianism can easily become oppressive to the “disfavoured” minorities listed above.[4]This oppression can take many forms, including the barring of access to resources for underprivileged individuals, the barring of religious freedom, and discrimination against individuals that do not conform to heteronormative behaviour. Thus, counter-majoritarian provisions in the Charter that protect the individual from the increasing potential and rampancy of these adverse developments are necessary.

Where the Charter Stands: Jamaica’s Cherished Values

Western Constitutional democracies ought, when needed, to combine majoritarian and non-majoritarian features, to prevent the harming or undermining of cherished values within the society, to the benefit of the collective. A problem arises here, for in Jamaica, some might posit that the “cherished values” important to its citizens, if these values are indeed protected by the Constitution, may be harmful to the minority, but are majoritarian in nature. But how can we know this for certain?

The Charter ought to enshrine the rights of each and every individual. It ought to safeguard individual rights. It ought to do these things with the acknowledgement that all individuals are free and equal. Yet, we find provisions in the Charter which tell us, “Nothing contained in or done under the authority of any law in force immediately before the commencement of the Charter… relating to the offences regarding the life of the unborn, shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of the provisions of this chapter” [emphasis added].[5]In another section, it states, “No form of marriage or other relationship… other than the voluntary union of one man and one woman may be contracted or legally recognized in Jamaica” [emphasis added].[6]These provisions in the Charter offer no protections to women who have had abortions, regardless of any circumstances that could have led up to such a procedure, and no protections to homosexual partners who are seeking to live in union. These two provisions align perfectly with conservative Christian majority impulses within the country.[7]In relation to these issues, it seems that counter-majoritarian protections within the Constitution are non-existent. In this respect, it may be easy to deduce that there are certain views of the majority, though harmful to minorities, that the Constitution does not restrain, even if it may be beneficial to these disfavoured groups.

How the Charter Redeems Itself

Despite its failings, it would be unfair to say that the Charter does nothing at all to restrain oppressive majoritarian impulses. Indeed, when the Supreme Court declares as unconstitutional a legislative act, or the action of a member of the executive that has been elected by the majority, this is a clear example of a counter-majoritarian measure. Here, the courts have exercised control, not on the behalf of the prevailing majority, but against it.[8]“If any person alleges,” the Charter states, “that any of the provisions of this Chapter has been, is being or is likely to be contravened in relation to him, then…that person may apply to the Supreme Court for redress.”[9]Where there might be failings regarding certain provisions of the Charter in relation to the protection of minority interests, it redeems itself in allowing the judiciary to step in and bridge the gap. Through this particular mechanism – judicial review – and others, and the various declarations of laws as unconstitutional that have come from it, the Constitution tries to align itself with what is best for the collective society, as opposed to aligning with what the majority would agree on. It is in this that the Charter redeems itself.

Conclusion

In Constitutional democracies, majoritarian impulses ought to be limited, in order to protect the interests and rights of the minority from infringement. However, some may deduce that there are certain views of the majority, though harmful to minorities, that the Constitution does not restrain. Despite its failings, however, the Constitution tries, through judicial review and the Charter’s redress clause, to align itself with what is best for the collective society.

[1] Simeon McIntosh, Fundamental Rights and Democratic Governance: Essays in Caribbean Jurisprudence (Ian Randle Publishers 2005) 3 [2] Nicholas Capaldi, ‘Majoritarianism’ Encyclopædia Britannica (28 April 28) <https://www.britannica.com/topic/majoritarianism> accessed 25 November 2020 [3] Susan Alberts and others, ‘Countermajoritarian Institutions and Constitutional Stability’ (2012) <https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Countermajoritarian-Institutions-and-Constitutional-Alberts-Warshaw/396f68feedc541548449936a7bf4d685ef040afa#paper-header> accessed 25 November 2020 [4] Simeon McIntosh, Fundamental Rights and Democratic Governance: Essays in Caribbean Jurisprudence (Ian Randle Publishers 2005) 11 [5] The Constitution of Jamaica, Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) 2011, s 13(12)(c) [6] ibid s 18(2) [7] Dr Raulston Nembhard, ‘The Real Crisis in Jamaican Christianity’ Jamaica Observer (Kingston, 3 November 2012) <www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/The-real-crisis-in-Jamaican-Christianity_12899201> accessed 25 November 2020 [8] Simeon McIntosh, Fundamental Rights and Democratic Governance: Essays in Caribbean Jurisprudence (Ian Randle Publishers 2005) 35 [9] The Constitution of Jamaica, Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) 2011, s 19(1)