#its just error suffering in horrific situations

[thiccsys]

doodles doodles

[incorrect-ikevamp-quotes]

Hi again! I come to you today with a question that may simply be a continuity error, but I'm still interested in your thoughts! In the main story, le Comte *knows* it was MC that came through the door behind him. Yet in Comte's "One Night, Beneath the Crescent Moon" POV story, he said he "...had no idea of what would happen next... That she would end up using the same door and end up stuck on the other side." What's your take on it? Thanks in advance! 💛

Hiya! First off I wanna apologize for how long it took to reply oTL I had originally drafted a response and then lost it when I accidentally closed the tab, and whenever that happens I always have to like sufficiently mourn the words I lost 😂😂😂

But to answer your question! If I’m entirely honest, I can’t remember what it was Comte said exactly in the Main Story in regards to her entering the door. There could be a lot of explanations for him saying he “knew”: continuity error, him wanting to put her at ease by seeming “in control” of the situation (while he’s screaming internally), or maybe even him wanting to cast some doubt as to whether or not he’s a person that can be trusted (aka the whole like “MC nooooooo don’t trust me I’m a vampire very bad very scary run away” kind of like Leonardo). 

All that being said, given the evidence we have and the stories I’ve read from his POV--esp that Crescent Moon one you referenced--I’m most inclined to believe that he had no idea she would follow him that day at the Louvre. If anything I really don’t think he ever anticipated any human person could follow him through the door? Because remember Sebastian (and the suitors for that matter) only manage because Comte is their escort. Sure their will to live on was strong enough that he could hear them, but they had no capacity to approach or find a door on their own as far as we currently know. The door was closed when MC found it; this suggests that Comte fully closed off that avenue to make sure nobody wayward stepped in by accident. He did the responsible thing and he left long before he could ascertain her safe journey through time, but she still managed to make it across somehow.

That’s why I think MC’s mere existence is earth-shattering to Comte. I mean we have all the good basics: a lovely lady, sweet and hard-working, means well and does her best. And these attributes all do matter, for sure. But the door is perhaps a greater catalyst in their romance than we might have first anticipated.

There will be some semi-hefty JPN rt spoilers below the cut for Dazai and Comte, so I’m just going to keep it under wraps just in case there are people who want to remained 100% unspoiled:

TW: Mentions of suicide in Dazai’s rt

The reason I say this is twofold, based on information provided by Dazai and Comte’s Main Story route. In Dazai’s route, remember that the focal point of the story is that Dazai wants to go back in time to kill himself as a baby so that he can never grow up to write his books or cause anyone pain in the near future--essentially, suicidal ideation to a frightening extreme. One of the main reasons that he fails (though MC plays a significant role in stopping him, too) is that Dazai’s will to kill himself is too weak. In simpler terms, this means that--no matter how much he insisted he wanted to die, the truth of his heart was revealed in his constant hesitating and difficulty going through with it. This is very often a reaction from people who need sizable psychological assistance to overcome trauma; they don’t usually want to die, it’s more that the pain of surviving their experiences is outweighing any possible joy they can find in living. 

But back to the most important part in bold. When Dazai asks about being able to use the door to travel through time, Charles confirms that it’s possible to travel without a pureblood escort. HOWEVER. This type of travel is very, very difficult unless you have an intense sense of willpower. I imagine the implication here is that you have to have an overwhelming desire and firmly believe it’s where you want to be in order for the travel attempt to succeed at all. (I don’t think the tethering point necessarily matters, but there is a suggestion that strong bonds between people--whether platonic or romantic--can serve as powerful guideposts when the door is distorted.) In other words, the reason Dazai relies on Charles’ moral bankruptcy is because Dazai knows he doesn’t feel strongly enough to go through with the suicide. He needs someone else who has the sheer determination and unbending will to see it through when the door opens. 

This is why Dazai is forced to ask Charles to accompany him, even though Charles doesn’t necessarily want to kill him. For Charles, this is less about a desperation to kill Dazai and more about his intense obsession-love for MC, and his willingness to do anything to receive her love/attention in return. In Charles’ view, since MC is ostensibly in love with Dazai, removing Dazai from the picture permanently is ideal. While Charles’ judgement is clouded and a little horrific, he is nonetheless rock steady in comparison to Dazai’s nonstop wavering. Dazai knows that he’s fickle on a personal level; one moment he wants to die, another he’s too afraid to let go of what he does care about or upset anyone. He’s at a point where he doesn’t know what’s right or true anymore and he’s floundering, which is honestly fairly common among those who share his lamentable condition. (Most people don’t have a death wish--it’s more a combination of circumstantial problems and healing that has remained in stasis that constitutes the extremity of that behavior.)

Moving right along, Comte’s route also features a similar testament to willpower, believe it or not. This happens in the last few chapters of the main story. Basically, Shakespeare dumps MC on Vlad’s doorstep and she’s more or less suffering the latter’s monologuing for a good while. Not long after that Comte appears and nearly shoots Vlad in the head, the bullet just grazing his cheek. Comte demands that he let MC go, and Vlad--in a classic sadistic act of compliance--wrenches open the door and just tosses MC into the freefall of distorted spacetime.

Now this is dangerous to MC’s life in and of itself, but there’s a key element there: distorted spacetime. In this main story the door never returns to its normal state after that first month period. Rather, the expanse of the door is too dangerous to be traveled even by a pureblood, let alone a human being. The chances MC will ever be able to escape in order to survive are closer to zero than any other number. Remember that Comte is immortal. If he gets stuck on his own, he can’t die and the damage to his body is always more than able to heal when he’s back to safety. (He even warns Leonardo in Leo’s MS that the danger of getting stuck in some kind of pocket in spacetime is still too significant to be ignored, though I can’t be sure if that’s due to Leonardo’s inexperience with time travel/requirement for an escort, or just an inevitable risk you juggle anytime you travel through the door.)

Of course Comte leaps in after her to try to save her, but presumably their entry point is long gone now (Vlad shut the door), so they’re just kind of floating in amorphous time. They do and don’t exist. Comte is understandably distraught because MC’s life hangs in the balance; if they don’t find a way out, she is almost certainly going to die. Comte admits that--while he hates the fact that his very existence is a danger to her, he still doesn’t regret finding her by any extension. MC protests, naturally, that there’s nothing to regret. Circumstances be what they may, she loves him. 

Now, here is the key. While Comte is trying to think of a way out, MC is thinking hard about wanting to return to the mansion. Her mind reflects an acute, intense desire to return home to the place where they both belong. And wouldn’t you know it? They both suddenly tumble out of the door in the mansion and onto the carpeted floor, whole and alive, sputtering in disbelief. Comte is baffled at first but it can only give way to immense relief that she’s safe, and he just immediately breaks down.

The only reason the two make it out unscathed is because of--I can only assume--MC’s overwhelming will to live on with Comte and return to the mansion. While it would have been natural for her to be overcome by fear to the point where she could make no productive decision, or even humor the concept of focusing on their home, she does it all the same with immediate success. That’s also part of why I think Comte just 100% caves into both of their feelings in the next chapter. He saw firsthand that, not only does MC keep a level head under duress, but she also has the overpowering will necessary to survive amongst vampires. And it was perhaps this unshakeable will in the first place that landed her in the late 19th century all those weeks ago.

It’s interesting because, honestly? Her entry through the door is more or less a hinge point for their romance. While it obviously isn’t the only reason he cares about her, it definitely is one of the bigger reasons he even feels safe enough to court her in earnest in the aftermath. It is literally only after this event that he confesses everything. Why he created the mansion and the men. How he’s really felt about her and himself all this time. What Vlad showed her and the implications of Vlad’s existence. And finally the truth about what he wants. He wants a relationship with her, but he keeps being held back by the fear that he’s too much. That the demand of being by his side will outweigh any happiness she might find choosing him. (Granted MC and I find that preposterous given how attentive and considerate he is, but you know). But after seeing her pull off surviving Vlad and traveling through the door by her own willpower again? I think it sufficiently lessens his doubts as to whether she could handle a future with him. It gives him the courage to just ask her: Do you want a future with me? Can you handle the demands of a vampire that cannot accept a mere human lifetime to be in love? 

And so this is why I have unceasing Comte brainworms ladies and gentlethem. I need to go lie down before I start crying again, I love him oTL

[volturialice]

since you’re the resident (and I hope to god the only) safe haven expert, would you say it’s worse than, equal to, or better than fifty shades -❤️🧡💛💚💙💜🖤

hello rainbow heart anon! i’ve been pondering this question all 1,600 miles and two days between colorado and virginia (thank you for entertaining me)

so ok. there are a lot of different metrics by which we can judge fics/stories. we can judge them based on plot, or writing mechanics, or how Problematic they are or aren’t, or overall literary merit. I’m gonna do a couple of these things, but let’s aim to decide based on “overall literary merit,” a phrase which it is physically painful to apply to either of these works but oh well

1) problematic-ness

first of all, a HUGE note about Problematic-ness: I do not often find this a useful way to judge stories, because all stories have to have some kind of conflict and also art can be as Problematic as it wants and still be good art. but in the case of e.l. james I will make the fattest fucking exception oh my god

and in terms of Problematic-ness, Safe Haven is WAY worse than 50 shades. many more articulate and knowledgeable people than me have written about how 50 shades a) does not depict actual BDSM, and b) misrepresents BDSM as some gross deviant thing that only a “twisted degenerate who has suffered horrific abuse” archetype could possibly be into. BUT however much 50 shades is grossly inaccurate in its depiction of BDSM, at least 50 shades admits that the relationship between christian and ana is “fucked up.” like at least there’s a token acknowledgement of “this is not a normal or appropriate way to treat your romantic partner” in there a few times.

whereas in SH, the same violent, abusive, controlling and manipulative tendencies are never acknowledged. they’re there (edward fantasizing about literally beating bella because he’s angry that she witnessed a murder, anyone?) but they’re never talked about—just handwaved away as “this is how regular guys in love think and behave.” which, um, no, erika. no the fuck it isn’t.

SH!bella is also a 19-year-old orphan with absolutely no support system, whereas at least ana (21) has friends, family, and a bachelor’s degree. all SH!bella has is obscene wealth, a cello, and a creepy plantation in (I’m still laughing about this) metairie. she has no one to look at her situation and go “dump him” the way ana’s friends could and did in 50 shades.

winner: 50 shades

2) writing

in order to be published, 50 shades had to pass through an editor. not a good editor, but it was still given a basic once-over for stuff like grammar and spelling, which makes it automatically better than SH. I’m not exaggerating when I say I have barely scratched the surface on this blog of just how bad the grammar et al is in SH. the paragraph-long run-on sentences, the bizarre random capitalizations, the constant abuse of ellipses, the utter lack of commas...it’s bad. when I think about how it was written by an adult TV professional with english as her first language, I kind of despair for the human race.

the original 50 Shades fic, Master of the Universe, is also riddled with errors but still not as bad as SH. I’m guessing this is because MotU came second? afaik Safe Haven was erika’s first foray into writing fic and boy does it show

and finally, the lack of every third word being “fuck” makes a huge fucking difference lmao. it’s also a POV thing—ana may be insufferable, but she’s far, FAR less insufferable than erika’s attempt at writing from a man’s perspective (the constant No-Homo-ing, anyone?) in fact, it would probably be more accurate to compare SH to Grey, but I haven’t read that. (does christian get a dicksona? important question I never want the answer to)

winner: 50 shades

3) you know what, let’s cut to the chase here

I could do a bunch more categories and talk about how 50 shades, while bad, is still better than SH, but I’m realizing it’s probably faster if I make the (much shorter) list of ways Safe Haven is better than 50 shades.

ways in which Safe Haven is better than 50 Shades: 

the pacing/length - the 50 shades trilogy is something like 500k words, and was originally published as two incredibly dragging, meandering fics in which it was incredibly clear erika had no idea where the story was going. SH, by comparison, is less than 60k words and, for all its faults, has clear rising/falling action and a climax, with most of the filler-y parts frontloaded to the beginning rather than disrupting the action (such as it is lol.)

the unintentional comedy - the unintentional comedy is way better in SH. the grammatically worse, “this is totally what men sound like” writing makes SH entertaining on a language level as well as a story level, and the plot beats—bella is abducted by a cross-dressing kidnapper we never hear about again! emmett digs through bella’s trash!—are more balls-to-the-wall ridiculous than anything in 50 shades.

and that’s it

in every other possible category, 50 shades edges out Safe Haven. including in (sigh) overall literary merit. at least 50 shades had something (however stupid) to say about its characters and their relationship, as opposed to Safe Haven’s “bella hot, edward mean, edward like bella, sexy sexy”

[mittensmorgul]

8.14, Trial and Error.

Or, a concise jaunt through Dabb's pet themes that will carry us into s15.

With Dean finally finding a home in the bunker, the family themes really begin to kick in. Not only the stuff tied to their personal legacies, but also Dean's... veneration (not exactly the right word, but close enough) of Mary's memory. In an episode where we begin by finding a family that made not one, but THREE demon deals-- (which I already detailed in regard to Dabb's pet themes in this post a couple years ago: https://mittensmorgul.tumblr.com/post/169622891355/im-watching-814-again-and-its-like-a-concise), with the final deal made by Ellie had been to heal her mother of Parkinson's disease, with the worst bit being that Ellie had NO IDEA about the 10 year clock that set on her life before the hellhounds would show up to drag her to Hell.

So we have mother themes already, in an episode where Dean set Mary's picture on his desk in his room when he arranged his room just so.

I mentioned in the last few episode writeups in this series that I wanted people to remember Sam and Dean's respective mindsets going forward, because this is where that all gets torn up. So we're officially back on the job, getting down to the business of closing up Hell forever. Which again, as I've said, seems like a really good idea on the surface. What could possibly go wrong, messing with the Natural Order in such a drastic fashion? I mean, we're just trying to lock up all the evil, right? Gotta keep people safe, and without demons harassing people on Earth, people will be safe... in theory...

Well, one problem with this is the COST of doing the thing... I mean how many things with OBJECTIVELY GOOD AND WHOLESOME conclusions also end with the person doing the thing, in Kevin's loose translation from the tablet:

KEVIN And it's just a few words of Enochian, but... [KEVIN gives a piece of paper to DEAN.] DEAN Oh, here we go. KEVIN ...the spell has to be spoken after you finish each of the three trials. SAM T-trials like, uh, like "Law & Order"? DEAN hands SAM the piece of paper, SAM grabs it out of his hand. KEVIN More like Hercules. The tablet says, "Whosoever chooses to undertake these tasks should fear not danger, nor death, nor..." A word I think means getting your spine ripped out through your mouth for all eternity. DEAN Good times. KEVIN Basically, God built a series of tests, and when you've done all three, you can slam the gates. SAM So, what – God wants us to take the SATs? KEVIN I-I guess. Uh, he works in mysterious ways. DEAN Yeah, mysterious, douche-y ways. All right. Where do we start?

And hoooboy... first off, does God actually want you do complete these trials? Or are they simply a CHOICE that is POSSIBLE to make, even if it might actually be a very, very bad choice? I mean, God also technically gave the angels a choice between "watching over humanity and creation and serving as the guardians of the world" and "starting the apocalypse and burning it all down." And a horrifyingly large number of the angels really believed the apocalypse was what God wanted them to do... (and the AU angels demonstrated that God... didn't actually care one way or the other what they chose, because it wasn't some sort of test  they could pass or fail, they'd just have to live with the consequences of their choices... even if those consequences were MISErABLE for EVERYONE). Just as we will see with Cas's choice to help do the EXACT SAME THING to Heaven under Metatron's guidance by the end of 8.23, and what the horrific consequences of that apparently well-intentioned choice. Did God want them to do that, as well? To shut the gates of Heaven? And look what happened with THAT one? Metatron performed that spell, and was therefore the only angel who did not fall as a result. He effectively left himself in charge of Heaven, the only one able to control the doors in and out. So what would've happened to Sam if he'd completed the spell to close the gates to Hell? And can we all shudder at the parallel here for a moment and once again be grateful Dean stopped him from finishing that?

Good.

Plus there's that other consequence of performing the trials... the whole "getting your spine ripped out through your mouth for all eternity." Which makes it seem pretty clear, despite Sam's insistence that he wants to survive completing the trials, like there is a zero percent chance of actually being able to survive completing the trials, you know? No matter how you slice it, that seems like... a nonsurvivable situation... And yet, it's one of Sam's arguments to Dean at the end of the episode when he decides to complete the trials instead of finding another hellhound for Dean to kill...

DEAN Sam, I didn't pass the test. SAM But I did... And I'm doing the rest of them. DEAN My ass you are! SAM I'm closing the gates. It's a suicide mission for you. DEAN Sam... SAM I want to slam hell shut, too, okay? But I want to survive it. I want to live, and so should you. You have friends up here, family. I mean, hell, you even got your own room now. You were right, okay? I see light at the end of this tunnel. And I'm sorry you don't – I am. But it's there. And if you come with me, I can take you to it. DEAN Sam, be smart. SAM I AM smart, and so are you. You're not a grunt, Dean. You're a genius – when it comes to lore, to – you're the best damn hunter I have ever seen – better than me, better than dad. I believe in you, Dean. So, please – please believe in me, too.

But Dean... He saw it clearly from the start:

DEAN Because of the three trials crap – God's little obstacle course. We've been down roads like this before, man – with Yellow-Eyes, Lucifer, Dick friggin' Roman. We both know where this ends – one of us dies... Or worse. SAM So, what – you just up and decided it's gonna be you? DEAN I'm a grunt, Sam. You're not. You've always been the brains of this operation. SAM Dean— DEAN And you told me yourself that you see a way out. You see a light at the end of this ugly-ass tunnel. I don't. But I tell you what I do know – it's that I'm gonna die with a gun in my hand. 'Cause that's what I have waiting for me – that's all I have waiting for me. I want you to get out. I want you to have a life – become a man of Letters, whatever. You, with a wife and kids and – and – and grandkids, living till you're fat and bald and chugging Viagra – that is my perfect ending, and it's the only one that I'm gonna get. So I'm gonna do these trials. I'm gonna do them alone – end of story. You're staying here. I'm going out there. If landshark comes knocking, you call me. If you try to follow me, I'm gonna put a bullet in your damn leg.

BUT THIS DOES NOT MEAN DEAN'S ON A SELF-DESTRUCTIVE PATH HERE. We have repeatedly been shown that in s8-- but especially since Cas got out of Purgatory-- that Dean is kind of the opposite of self-destructive and nihilistic. He's REALISTIC. versus Sam's fantasy of idealistic. Dean doesn't see it as a "suicide mission," and he's anything but suicidal. That's obvious from the last few episode. He ENJOYS his life, he's THRILLED about having found the bunker, having his own room, this incredible legacy (how many people does he tell "yeah, we're legacies" to over this period? It's hilarious how proud and happy he is about this), not to mention his relative "lightness" since processing through what he went through in Purgatory. He's not self-destructive, he's just accepted his life and is realistic about it. He takes pleasure where he can find it, he's spending a lot less time denying the things that make him happy (like LARPing with Charlie or making him and Sam some really good food or even decorating his own room at the bunker). He's just accepted the fact that he doesn't even WANT a different life. He LIKES his life hunting, and is realistic about how he'll meet his end as long as he continues hunting.

But this is in stark contrast to Sam. Sam hears Dean's lil speech about dying with a gun in his hand and he sees it as hopelessness or resignation, when to Dean, it is not that at all. BUT IT WOULD BE TO *SAM*. And Sam really has difficulty processing Dean's emotions and desires through his own personal sympathy filter, because they just do not compute to Sam. What to Dean equals "comfortable acceptance of reality and the life he chooses because it makes him happy," to Sam sounds like "I'm willing to die because my life is otherwise meaningless." And it really misses the whole entire point.

But what SAM has always wanted for HIMSELF was that perfect life Dean described to him EXACTLY there. Normal family, normal life, living to old age and never having to hunt again. To Dean, that sounds like TORTURE. But in Dean's mind, Sam COULD have that life without Dean, without Dean dragging him back into the life like he literally did in 8.01, which Sam had been RESENTFUL AS FUCK over. He WANTED to hold on to that normal life! He was able to do it for a year, and even after Dean came back from Purgatory, Sam did not want to go back to hunting. Even when he DID reluctantly get back into hunting, it was filled with "you wanted me in the game, so I'm in the game," and repeated reminders that as soon as they found Kevin, and then when they found him it shifted to as soon as they closed the gates of Hell, that he would be retiring from hunting for good. REPEATED. REMINDERS.

Dean doesn't want out of the life AT ALL. He THRIVES on it. He doesn't know how to be anyone else, and doesn't want to try to be... but he's also not running toward the nearest cliff, you know? And as we go through this season, we'll watch Sam's attitude in reaction to the suffering the trials put him through, and watch him come to grips with the reality that there is no surviving these trials, no matter how much power of positive thinking he applies. But hooooBOY he's gonna keep trying to win here...

Let's also take a moment to reflect on just how... mistaken... the Winchesters' instincts can be regarding their plans. Because I think this has bearing on their entire choice to undertake the trials, as well. They go to the ranch knowing at least one person there made a deal. They BELIEVED it was primarily a deal to make themselves rich, but then the first hellhound victim dies, and they learn that he'd sold his soul for 10 years of love with his wife, who reverts to a state of confusion and can't even remember why she'd fallen in love with her husband in the first place. And... ew. So Sam quickly realizes that at least one more person sold their soul at that ranch, and begins suspecting the three happily wealthy (if socially stunted) members of the family. They don't at ALL suspect it's the quiet, nice youngest sister who lives a "normal" life after her family became inordinately wealthy. She sold her soul hoping that wealth would solve all her family's interpersonal arguments, but instead it just made them worse. But the surprise was the final soul-deal-- Ellie, who literally worked in shit all day in the barns because she loved the animals and loved her work, even if she didn't care for her employers. She sold her soul to save her mother's life. Entirely altruistic, if misguided.

After all this s8 nonsense, which is in turn s13 and s14 nonsense regarding the choices they all make re: possession by Michael, going to the AU to save Mary and Jack, Cas going to Heaven and making his deal with the Empty, whatever Dean was doing with the Drama Coffin, and whatever Jack's personal trials will entail after he returns from the empty in s15... well... what are we willing to trade for the people we love? Even when that's put up against the framework of potentially saving the universe?

Because let's remember again what Ellie traded her soul for... to save her mother. And wasn't this the exact offer Chuck made Dean in 14.20. Do the terrible thing, end your own life, but it will save your mother. And in the face of that choice, Dean refused.

[stormbornbastard]

Daenerys Targaryen Rant

Look, I'm new to the GOT fandom and being on Tumblr overloads with you a lot of information at once. This fandom, is like the definition of toxic and for what? Ships? I have to laugh.

I'm only gonna address one thing but believe me, I've got a list so let's do this shit.

One thing I've noticed is the overwhelming hate against Daenerys Targaryen, for her cruelty and impulsiveness in some of her actions. In no way do I agree with all of them but I refuse to reduce her complex character and story buildup to that of a villain or a mad queen.

Daenerys has simultaneously figured out to be loved and feared all at once by her people which is fucking amazing. She was not born with the same training to rule as other highborns. She was not given some handbook on how to be the perfect fucking queen for the people and herself. She makes mistakes and acts impulsively but not at all times and the times she has, she's paid for them greatly and if she hasn't learned from them now, she will. Its trial and error with her, it's the only path of ruling and conqueror she has.

By no means do her mistakes outweigh her good deeds. Daenerys has done questionable things for her claim to the throne but honestly at this point, who hasn't? (Jon isn't aware of his claim so just don't)

She's not just some benevolent and perfect ruler who shows mercy to all and does nothing wrong. You wanna know why? Because that ruler doesn't exist. No real person is capable enough to do that because real people are flawed and since GOT tries to reflect real people in their characters, Daenerys is flawed too.

Those flaws do not make her incompetent enough to rule nor do they take away all that she fought to overcome and gain (screw anyone who thinks that shit was just handed to her, her name didn't mean shit. The Targaryens had been discarded before her and the name and entitlement can only get one so far, look at Viserys for example if you need to)

A lot of people want her to be more compassionate and empathetic with her enemies and people who pose a threat but why should she? Her enemies have never been compassionate and empathetic with her. Daenerys was raised with cruelty, she was only shown cruelty by all those who were supposed to love her which is why I believe she has no problem being cruel to those who pose a threat. It's all she's knew, the cruelty others for a very long time. As much as you wanna discard her backstory, its integral to shaping the person she is.

We have seen her ability to grow as a character and show more than the death and destruction that Targaryens have left behind. She cannot learn all the capabilities of a kind and good queen when she has rarely known kindness and goodness herself. But she is growing, her sacrificing a dragon who she considered a child of her own in an effort to help defend the north against the white walkers (without Jon bending the knee first) shows her ability to put people before her own political even fucking personal interest. (Another impulsive action that she paid/ will pay for and fucking learned/will learn from. Also can we acknowledge the fact that instead of holding animosity towards Jon for the death of her dragon like she could've, she empathizes with him and instead wants to help him destroy the night king BEFORE he bends the knee all while grieving her fucking child! Dany had no indication that he would bend the knee if she helped him, none. Yet she still wanted to help him destroy the night king and protect the north and it's people regardless!)

A lot of people have ridiculously high expectations of her even though when she started the show, she had no political experience, no good social experience, no military experience, no experiences one needs to rule. Yet she gained them (she wasn't given some wise person along her entire path to help her do it either) and she gained a council of people to advise her and that she trusts with her life to become a better fucking queen and to give her knowledge when she lacks it because she knows she doesn't know everything about ruling. She's aware of almost all of her flaws and she's worked to improve on them. She's not the second coming of Robb Stark (we all wish he was still here) but she is Daenerys motherfucking Targaryen and that means something and not because of her ancestry.

Do I want her to receive the iron throne? Fuck no. I hope its destroyed along with the wheel.

Do I think she doesn't deserve to be a queen? Fuck no, she's earned it.

So stop discrediting her and fixating on her bad qualities when there is so much more of her to see.

And for fucks sakes, stop pitting her and Sansa Stark against one another. They both are remarkable fucking women who have coped with terrible shit to become who they are and they're situations as rulers are rarely the same. Most of y'all are hating on one of them because she gets in the way of a ship and its pathetic.

Sansa helps protect and maintain the north as ruler and was born a Stark which means something there and gives her some kind of respect. Dany is a fucking ruler and conqueror and the Targaryen name held nothing but negative connotations of destruction, failure and death in GOT society before her, she is consistently judged by the sins of her family. She's not familiar with every land she plans to control but she wants to be, wants to be a voice for the people and those who are oppressed just as she was. Conquering and ruling a new kingdom and ruling a well established one that you grew up in (therefore she's familiar with customs, the people and ways of life in the north) is nowhere near the same thing.

I'm not discrediting Sansa, I love her and she's an amazing ruler but she had some aspects afforded to her that Daenerys doesn't.

I know she's got an ego but shit, if I had done the things she did and overcome the things she has, my head would either be too fucking big to fit through my front door or I would've offed myself before Dany gained her first dragons (I honestly don't know if I would've had the strength to get past that point).There is no question about her strength and resilience because she's got a fuck ton of it.

One more thing, after Jon bends the knee and she says "I hope I deserve it!" THAT SHIT! THAT NEEDS TO BE FUCKING TALKED ABOUT! Dany isn't as collected as she paints herself to be, she doubts her actions just as everyone does theirs but she does it in secret. She's just not in a position to be open about her insecurities and doubts which is why she doesn't show them to anyone. She's never really been. Dany has never had family who genuinely and unconditionally loved her like the Starks have their entire lives. She has never had the comfort of confiding in someone like they have or trusting someone the way they do. Even now, the people who love her mostly love her for what she can offer them and what she represents, not who she is. She's always relied on herself for that which is probably why she's not as open and vulnerable as people would like her to be. It could even be said without all she represents or her dragons or her power, no one would love her.

She's grown up without it. Abuse taking its place, she would have no one without her claim. The starks would have each others which is why I think she holds onto it and enforces so much. Her claim has given her people who love her, the things she can offer have given her the people that love her. That sucks but it what it is.

Her questioning her ability to rule, her insecurity shows that she will not let her pride and ego get in the way of being a good queen if she gains the seven kingdom. Just because she exerts confidence does not mean she is overconfident or stuck in the belief of her entitlement to the throne. She worries she will not be the queen the seven kingdoms need which is exactly why she could be. Because those thoughts will keep her vigilant and attentive to all the shit she's needs to get done once she's no longer prioritized with conquering.

And to address her motives, or what I believe are her motives, Dany likes power. Why is that a bad thing? For a long period in life, she was considered weak and powerless, a pawn for those with power. She knows what it means to suffer (the death of her family, her husband [Stockholm syndrome but let me not start because she did love him], her only child Rhaego, and her dragon who she loves like a child, being raped, etc.) She knows it and she will never allow herself to be powerless again, she will never allow herself to be weak (I'm pretty sure she associates vulnerability with weakness at this point) in the face of threats, potential allies and the suffering of her, her people or both.

Why is that a bad thing? For her to be powerful, because that's what she equates it with strength. Power keeps her from weakness and I think it's why she strives for as much as possible so that she will never know that feeling of powerlessness again and so that her people who depend on her will never know suffering at the hands of the powerful again. It's not because of her "selfish belief that she deserves it." She wants it and forced herself to belief she's entitled and deserves it because while on the throne, she can secure protection from those who would do the horrific things she's endured and seen with that power to those without it.

She may result to cruelty when needed but that does not make her an evil person/ruler (yes I know about the Tarlys who refused to bend the knee for her. She made a power move, seeing as there were witnesses and the men who witnessed could see her not delivering on her threat of death as a weakness and eventually try and move against her, and she killed them. Now they all know she means fucking business. Also the Tarlys betrayed House Targaryen and Tyrell and were responsible for the death of thousands of Tyrell men. This is all Daenerys know of them, why do ya'll just ignore that. You act like Dany killed an innocent or someone she had a strong emotional attachment to but that's not the case. Her action was a strategic, political move and they chose to defy her when she gave them a choice) It wasn't right but it instilled fear, she cannot rule with just love. You can love someone and still plot against them, if people fear the consequences of what could happen if they fail, it'll hold them back. She needs both fear and love to rule. Loved enough to fight for her, feared enough to not move against her.

It's one a.m. but I had to get this off my chest, so yeah, I'm done.

[primrose-path-of-dalliance]

Lotor’s end (?) in s6

toc 1: i shake out some salt and talk about the altean colony | 2: i question why people keep insisting lotor was "evil all along" | 3: i talk about my favorite parts of lotor’s breakdown

lotor, altea, and king alfor

when lotor chooses to lash out and start destroying everything, he says: "what about your father? he may have been a master engineer, but alfor was too weak to defend his homeworld. i'm the one who had to step up and save our entire race. who are you to question my tactics in bringing peace and prosperity to the universe?"

the knee-jerk reaction is to be furious at lotor for this statement, and what he says is unfair. it's not as if alfor simply gave up, lay down, and offered his people to the pyre. perhaps he made a mistake in sending voltron away (as his ai freely admits to allura), but although we don't get a lot of information on what happened after zarkon's resurrection, we know that he tried to defend his people. that he ultimately lost isn't a fact that's fair to reflect onto his moral character. additionally, lotor is singing his own praises even after we've discovered that he's far from hot shit, and naturally it's unappealing.

but as a character, lotor possesses an extremely unique perspective. he is the only major sympathetic character in the show to have lived through all of the 10,000 years of post-resurrection zarkon's reign. and he is among the small group of characters who have been aligned against the empire for a significant amount of time since before allura and coran reawoke; potentially, he has spent the longest actively on the galra empire's shit list.

i said that allura's viewpoint in the show is limited for a very good reason. even the person who is our primary protagonist, who is extraordinarily sympathetic and compassionate, whose heart breaks regularly for the people who suffer under the oppression of this empire and who has suffered tremendously herself while determined to devote the rest of her life to this cause, can be a bit clueless when she's a teenager and only woke up about a year ago into a universe entirely different from the one she once knew.

most of allura's life was spent in a stable and loving home on an idyllic planet as crown royalty, with all the resources and wealth that lifestyle offered to her. she was raised for both diplomacy and warfare but had little time to become familiar with them, particularly the latter, when compared to the work of centuries or millennia under the rule of an extremely powerful and oppressive empire. and the perspective from which she learned her trades was as the heir of a powerful kingdom and expansive legacy, not as a freedom fighter. most significantly, she had astounding resources even after waking up into an empire that wanted her dead—the castle of lions, an extremely mobile self-powered warship with apparently no concern to be had for things like food supplies or relative comfort; and voltron, quite literally the most powerful weapon in the universe with limits unknown and a sentient being in its own right. additionally, the return of the black lion distracted zarkon. he was obsessed with reclaiming it above all else, to the point where haggar criticized his illogical behavior right to his face. voltron's return weakened zarkon's ability to strategize intelligently. in terms of practical position against the galra empire, allura, coran, and the paladins possessed the strongest one from the very beginning. and they have only gotten stronger.

this doesn't place allura in an easy position to empathize with the other forces who have fought against the empire, and considering the usual level of empathy or thoughtfulness one can already expect from a teenager, it shouldn't be a shock that allura's perspective may not be the most understanding.

when she condemns lotor for his treatment of the altean colony, as rightfully as she may be doing so, she does so without any understanding of where lotor is coming from. she literally cannot comprehend the type of situation someone like lotor must have been in to drive him to do something so horrific, nor that someone who's not Evil could still commit such crimes. this is tied into one of the biggest reasons lotor loses his temper and says what he does.

what i'm saying isn't without precedence in this show. @howtofightwrite has talked about the usual experience of a resistance (link). (please feel encouraged to read the whole post, especially for context. they do a great job being a resource for writers about a wide variety of topics, and if you're not already acquainted, i totally recommend following them.)

since it's a very long post, i'll quote the most relevant parts:

"When you’re writing a story about a resistance, never forget that they are in a hostile environment where everything is a danger to them, and you should approach every engagement violent or not as a cost comparison. ....

When you’re working with a resistance fighter, the resistance part is more important than the fighter part. These are not people with a very large margin for error, and who need to be incredibly good at threat assessment in regard to their greater goals. The greater goal is what’s most important to them, their priority, their mission, they have limited resources and that means they have to make compromises. For the resistance fighter, violence itself draws attention. Attention is bad.

Think about this, if he does manage to fight these two and kill them then whatever kills he makes will be taken out on the civilian population. If he doesn’t kill them, and they remember his face then he’s done as a resistance fighter. Again, attention is bad. Attention brings notoriety. In a hostile state, the consequences are many and they hit the innocent population hardest.

My point is this: your character is not making decisions on what he can do or can’t do, not in what’s morally right or wrong, if he wants to survive in a resistance then he’s making decisions based on risk. ....

Resistance fighters are the ones who run when their friends get captured, the ones who stand by and do nothing if they’re not at risk of being outed. They wait. They strike later, though usually not to recover their friends. Well, the smart ones do. The stupid ones try. They either get gunned down or captured because hot blood and hot heads get murdered in the streets by the gestapo. There are always more of them than there are you in a resistance, and violence attracts attention. The wrong kind of attention in the wrong place means death or capture, prison, interrogation, torture, and then the firing squad. The consequences for failure are high, not just for the single resistance fighter but for everyone they know, everyone they love, and for the very movement they’re fighting for. ....

For every piece your character and his friends take, the enemy will take five of theirs. He is in a rigged game where his own lack of resources will crush him unless the resistance can convince the populace at large to rise up. That is how a resistance actually wins in the real world, you know. If they can’t get the citizens behind them or receive aid from an outside power or train up an army on foreign soil, they’re doomed."

when the blade of marmora are first introduced, they fill precisely this type of role in the show. they are the resistance, the small guy fighting against an empire that has conquered and controls most of the known universe, who has decided to focus on spywork as the primary goal they can accomplish. and allura dislikes them instantly—not only because they're galra, but because she considers them disappointments for having not already taken down the empire themselves. she criticizes what she sees as passivity, as fear to engage with the enemy. she fails to realize that the blade of marmora lacked the firepower of voltron or the resources to commit to a war with the empire.

as the blade of marmora emphasized in their introduction, they survived through their secrecy. if things went wrong, if they took too many risks in trying to liberate other people, their existence would be discovered. and then the empire, a force with effectively infinite resources and no small amount of cruelty, would have their guard up. all of their spies would suddenly be in great danger. any future operations would become exponentially more difficult. depending on the risk that fell through, it wouldn't be difficult at all for the empire to decimate their numbers, or worse, decimate whatever civilian populations they might have been trying to protect or train for war. the blade of marmora simply wouldn't have the ability to fight back.

allura deserves no guilt for condemning lotor, of course. he abused the very people he was supposed to be protecting. he may have found some comfort for himself by treating it as a conservation issue, but he nevertheless ruined the lives of thousands of already oppressed people. regardless of motive, that is never going to be something that sits well with the type of good our protagonists are, and rightfully so. it's the reason we love them so much.

but it's frustrating to see people reduce antagonists like lotor to "Pure Bad Evil all along" because it's completely dismissive of the work the show writers have put into him as a character with a story entirely different from either zarkon's cardboard cutout villainy or allura's honest but youthful idealism. and to what purpose? making sure we all know genocide is bad? surely we don't have to perform hatred or oversimplification of a fictional character just to make sure everyone knows our disdain for mass exploitation. and surely we're capable of understanding that exploring the reasons why someone would do such a thing doesn't mean we agree with them or are excusing their actions.

i stated that the ultimate incompatibility of allura's perspective with lotor's is tied into lotor's break. not the sole cause. that's because it, when expressed in such a raw attack on lotor's character, was only the trigger for the release of a massive amount of resentment that lotor has been harboring inside him. when lotor breaks, it isn't because he can't tolerate the idea of a woman rejecting him. it's because he's been bitter toward everything for a very, very long time, and his break is that moment when he decides to stop holding it in or rationalizing it away.

for 10,000 years, he has endured abuse from the people who ought to have loved him the most. he's been disconnected from each side of his heritage: the galra, because he's half-altean and a disgustingly moral half-breed exile; and the alteans, because he's half-galra and they, at the hands of the empire and to an extent lotor himself, have experienced genocide and abuse until they were scattered and isolated, a mere shadow of what they once were. his friends are few and far between, because trust is difficult when his father will murder everyone around him just because he hears from someone nearby that lotor's having a decent time being deviant, and when the woman at his father's right hand (who he now knows is his mother, one of the sole figures in his life he imagined to be good because he thought she was already dead) will send spies his way through any avenue possible, including benevolent ones (he's not even a little shocked to accept narti's supposed betrayal, or to find himself taken to haggar's feet at galra central command after kuron's mind-control switch is flipped). sendak, the man implied to have been more raised as a son by zarkon than zarkon's own actual son, threatens to make lotor his personal slave, and lotor barely bats an eye because this inherent violence toward his existence is something completely normal to him. his style of fighting and strategy is entirely angled as someone who's used to being the small guy—he's agile, and clever, and quick, and prefers to either manipulate his way out or outfox his enemy because he rarely has the strength to challenge or threaten people head-on; even sincline's strength is in outmaneuvering its opponent. as an infant, we see lotor in the darkness crying alone in his crib with no one to tend to him.

consistently, lotor has been characterized as a target of abuse, with all the baggage that it comes with.

the resentment here is in knowing how easily it could have been better. how happy he might have been. if he had known king alfor as a parental figure instead ("i envy you, growing up with king alfor"). if he had grown up in altea with honerva instead of in the galra empire with zarkon. if king alfor had not failed in his duty to his people, to the universe 10,000 years ago, and simply killed zarkon when he had the chance.

allura, as much as he respects her as an individual, is also a representation of what he wishes he could have had: a loving family, a happy life, proper training as an altean alchemist, security in a group of close friends she can trust and interact with comfortably. she trusts the universe in a way he can't even comprehend of doing. moreover, allura got to sleep relatively peacefully for those 10,000 years of zarkon's tyrannical rule, undisturbed and undiscovered on arus.

she never had to live those millennia under zarkon's oppressive rule. she never had the burden of a horrific legacy. she never had to figure out who she was all by herself, uninternalize every ounce of racism and abuse and discover what it meant to be a person of value by chasing after crumbling ruins. instead, he had to save the last alteans left after zarkon's genocide. he had to figure out a way to topple the empire. he had to find himself trapped in every corner with the choice to either die or sacrifice whatever morality he had to live another day, to take a single step closer to killing his own father.

and now allura has the gall to condemn him, when he didn’t have a superweapon like voltron. he didn’t have a massive castleship, a wormhole generator, or the gifts of a sacred altean. he was working with the best he had. does she think he wanted to use the alteans as a quintessence farm? does she think he wanted to be zarkon's son? all he wanted was peace. maybe if her father had just won, none of them would've had to be there. none of this would have happened. but instead she has the gall to hate him for trying to clean up her father's 10,000 year old mistake.

well, fine. he'll just do a better job restoring the alteans to power and bringing peace to the universe than any of them ever could.

in lotor's relationship with allura and king alfor, there is as much jealousy and resentment as there is love and admiration. and he understood how much of it was unfair, or else we would have seen it leak into his behavior before now no matter how good of an actor he was, if only so we the audience might characterize him properly as a dick. (hopefully i don't have to clarify that it didn't.)

but at this point, everything has been going wrong, allura is on the other side of the battlefield, and quintessence exposure is insidiously wreaking havoc on his ability to process what's happening in a healthy manner. all he can think about is how bitter and tired he is of this. and so he breaks.

of course it was wrong. he was literally attempting to kill the team by the end. none of this excuses the choices he made or the things he said, and he has to be held accountable for all of it. but more than anything, lotor is an example of how a person as human (for lack of a better word) as anyone else can be incredibly hurtful, how his end of self-destruction is brought about by the very authentic experience of wanting the happiness that has been continually taken away from him, and how this self-destruction is implicitly tied into his isolation.

the importance of a support system

this is probably one of the defining themes of vld. although it sometimes doesn't deliver on the paladins as a family unit, we get numerous arcs throughout the show about one character helping to emotionally support another through something difficult, and it's emphasized several times that every person in the team is deeply concerned with the individual wellbeing of their other team members/friends. as a show about a bunch of somewhat-strangers having to come together and form a giant robot mech in order to literally save the universe through the power of teamwork and cooperation, this isn't really surprising.

so let's look at lotor. he's incapable of having a positive connection with either side of his heritage as a whole—the galra have abused him and most of the known universe, the alteans either never recognize him as one of their own unless he tells them or end up victims of his own vampiric needs. the only person from his history he can draw strength and purpose from is honerva, his long-dead mother—and then he discovers that she survived quite well to become one of his greatest demons. his relationship with his generals is fairly good, but their dynamic is always more professional than casual—and then he kills narti and later claims he will kill any and all galra that stand against him. he and the paladins tentatively befriend each other, he and allura fall in love with each other—and then it's revealed that he hid very dirtied hands from them in the process. all of them abandon or turn against him. and by the end, he pilots sincline alone, in sharp contrast to the recently-reunited team of five in voltron.

repeatedly, we see lotor as a desperate seeker for connection who inevitably sabotages himself through his own actions, driving away every one of his friends and associates. this final collapse of his already-fragile support system is what leads directly to his self-destruction.

officially, lotor's been described as a secret azula the writers were trying to trick us into believing was a zuko. it's a fair description, but not in the sense that he was an evil villain, and that misconception ought to be cleared away. anyone who's watched avatar: the last airbender understands that azula, as dramatic and stunning a villain as she was, was far less someone to hate for her deeds than she was someone to pity—she was a tragedy who never got to grow away from the abuse of her father the way zuko did, and who brought about her own self-destruction through her toxicity and subsequent isolation.

the parallels are very obvious, and i suspect the reduction in similar reception when it comes to lotor is because 1. it's a lot easier to sympathize with a teenage girl who already had characters in-story to sympathize with her and fill in her background of abuse, and 2. fandom culture now is different and much less forgiving to its villains.

in many ways, lotor had the chances azula never got. like zuko, lotor was exiled in disgrace and spent a significant amount of time away from home; like zuko, lotor got the chance to uninternalize his abuse; like zuko, lotor demonstrated qualities from the beginning that made him more similar to the protagonists than the villains. the one thing lotor never got, however, was an uncle iroh: someone with the maturity, energy, and willingness to stay by his side through his unhealthy behavior, support him by promoting healthy behavior, and give him the unwavering love and forgiveness and faith that he was never able to receive from anyone else.

instead, lotor more or less had to figure it out on his own, which is challenging enough without adding isolation and high amounts of stress into the mix. by the end of s6, lotor was probably unconsciously seeking out a similar kind of relationship through allura, but the problem is in how demanding that type of support is. no one is really obligated to expend that amount of effort on anyone, no matter how positive of a result it might create. uncle iroh sacrificed a lot to give zuko the encouragement he needed to find a healthier state of mind, even suffering through his multiple missteps off the path that hurt iroh and everyone else around him, and zuko understood this by the time they reunited in the campgrounds of the order of the lotus.

team voltron, on the other hand, would never have been able to give lotor that kind of support for a myriad of reasons, youth and conflicting priorities and unfamiliarity with lotor among them, much less should have. many of the circumstances were also different—much more difficult with a 10,000-year-old character whose missteps include the abuse of a colony of already oppressed people, after all.

lm and jds have also drawn a similar comparison between lotor and keith (link). they share similar backgrounds—complicated family situation, absent mother, interpersonal issues borne from a history of isolation—but unlike lotor, keith found someone to guide him away from a downward spiral: shiro. ("i will never give up on you.") this difference between the two of them is explicitly acknowledged as what saved keith from self-destruction.

lotor was not an irredeemable character by far, and for some of us who were excited by the potential we saw, the end of s6 was disappointing. but within the context of the show and the progression of the plot, lotor's self-destruction was the logical path for him to go. it probably isn't the ultimate end of lotor; he didn't die, after all. but all things considered, i feel that lotor was ultimately treated with respect, and his arc added things to the story we never would've gotten otherwise.

(if we want a happy story, well, that's what we can write fanfiction for, right?)

[d6azylnwhr]

Consider the first statement delivered by Barack Obama after Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting.

- What are his goals here?

On December 14th, 2012 Barack Obama delivered a statement from the Briefing Room on the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut. The most prevalent goal of the speech was to unify the nation and call for love, support and humanity in a moment of great adversity. It was a call to overcome political disputes and other seemingly meaningless differences for the common good. Barack Obama’s speech was tailored to every US citizen, because it revolved around the universal theme of family and grief - topics that are sensitive, emotional and evoke a sense of pathos. Furthermore, the goal of the speech was to blur the line between his powerful presidency and his identity as an American citizen in order to create a bond between himself and the people by finding common ground. One of the most evident goals of the speech was to offer his support and condolences to the ‘brokenhearted’ families and to prompt the nation to come together as one. Although it centered around a tragedy that was likely to evoke feelings of terror, despair and hatred (and he acknowledged the brutality and unexplainable nature of the situation) another one of his goals was to instill a feeling of hope in the audience, spreading the implicit message that despite hate, there is a lot of love in the world that binds people together, and that there is a future prospect of peace and harmony for the people of the United States.

- How are his means suited to the occasion?

Barack Obama uses a lot of emotional language and figurative imagery in his speech, such as metaphors, seen in the following examples: ‘our hearts are broken today’ and ‘their innocence has been torn away’, this really lays the foundation that there is nothing that can be done to reverse time or amend the past and to bring back the deceased, highlighting that the aftermath of this tragedy belongs to an emotional landscape. This kind of language hints that grief and empathy should generate support and compassion for the affected families and for one another, in general. It fits the mood of national shock and grief. The use of pathos is also very prevalent in the situation: ‘they had their entire lives ahead of them -- birthdays, graduations, weddings, kids of their own’. He uses enumeratio to describe the course of human life as one progresses from childhood to adulthood, highlighting that the children killed in the school shooting won’t have the opportunity to experience that, hence they have been stripped from their right to live and enjoy the complexities of a fulfilling life that would be otherwise ahead of them. The death of children always creates a sense of sorrow, despair and existential confusion, so his commentary and the use of asyndeton very much match the tragic, unexplainable nature of the event. The continuous use of the pronoun ‘we’ suits the occasion because it binds the nation together. Obama often touches on the topic of overcoming differences and disputes be that political, social or international for the common good, and this is one of the cases. He mentions that ‘we’ve endured too many of these tragedies’, that ‘our hearts are broken’, and ‘these children are our children’ - showing that US citizens are all connected through their humanity and emotions, and it is these things that should steer them in difficult moments. It’s a call for coalition and almost teamwork to overcome adversity. He highlights that suffering is universal and that it is the people’s responsibility to come together and support one another.

- Do you find it effective? Why/why not?

I find Obama’s statement very effective in that it gears away from his political stance and evoke a feeling of national unity and compassion in light of the tragedy. The consecutive use of the pronoun ‘we’ binds the nation together, elucidating the impression that this horrific event is not an individual trauma that must be dealt with privately, but a national tragedy that should affect the lives of every American citizen. I also find it effective, because it instills strong emotions and is characterized by a raw and honest tone. It focuses on the semantic field of family and love, topics that resonate with everybody to some extent, which set this event apart from everyone’s daily routines - makes them realize the drasticity of the situation and puts an end to their desensitization. It raises awareness, calls for empathy and support, whilst simultaneously steering away from hatred and finger pointing. The speech’s short length works in its favour, making it more hard-hitting and powerful. Obama doesn’t sugarcoat the situation in the slightest, or use so-called ‘toxic positivity’ to outshine the devastating nature of the school shooting. He recognizes, as head of state, that this event isn’t something that should be taken lightly and that at this moment no words of condolence or solace will do it justice, because people will be left wounded and ‘brokenhearted’. However, the speech’s effectiveness lies in the fact that it leaves the audience with hope that this state of grief won’t last forever.

- How would you comment on his delivery of the speech?

His delivery of the speech is characterized by prolonged pauses and by a lack of energetic gestures. For some reason, he looks exhausted, burnt out which makes the speech so much more real and also somehow humane, showcasing his emotional, vulnerable side. His other speeches seem full of vigour and life - he embodies the perfect orator in every sense. Here everything seems subdued, as if he’s too shaken for words. It’s hard not to notice the way he frequently bows his head, checking his notes, which results in him talking without making eye-contact or looking at the camera - something that would otherwise not be accepted and would be marked as a major error. Yet here it just makes him look more ‘human’, in the sense that it illustrates his inner turmoil. It’s evident that this event has taken a toll on his mindset and the sorrow presented in his speech makes him seem deeply affected by the school shooting, which creates a bond between him and the audience. It also adds an aspect of humility and nobleness, seeing as his speech isn’t centered around his own persona, but around those affected by the tragedy. It's as if he’s standing in the shadow of the event. The frequent pauses, the longest of which happens after he says ‘the majority of those who died today were children -- beautiful little kids between the ages of 5 and 10 years old’, create the impression that he’s stepping down from his position in the spotlight to honour the lives that have been lost.

Consider the speech made by Barack Obama during the Sandy Hook Prayer Vigil, 17 December 2011 (three days after the shooting).

- Culture, identity and community. How does this text explore ‘aspects of family, class, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, and sexuality’, and the way these impact on individuals and the society?

• Family

The text explores the aspect of family in great detail, focusing on its universality and relevance to everyone’s lives. This theme of family and love is an effective use of pathos - since family is something that creates emotional appeal due to its sensitive nature. There are a lot of references to parenthood and childhood - and the relationship between parents and children, as seen by the phrases ‘someone once described the joy and anxiety of parenthood as the equivalent of having your heart outside your body all the time, walking around’, ‘this is our first task - caring for children’, ‘there’s only one thing we can be sure of, and that is the love that we have -- for our children, for our families, for each other’. Parents or guardians see their children grow up, go to school, find a job and when that flow of normality gets abruptly put to an end, something feels wrong, uncomfortable, as in the case of the school shooting, where innocent children were killed. Family is shown as something that should be treasured at all costs. It should be an object of love, support, compassion, because in a world full of uncertainties and unanswered questions, family almost acts as a shelter from the many dangers of the outside world. Whatever we define family as, be it blood relations, guardians, very close friends, or fellow citizens, family is a bond often too strong to break and that is something that Barack Obama highlights throughout his speech. The idea of family being perceived as something often undervalued and taken for granted is also prevalent during the Prayer Vigil. The president implies that it takes devastating moments like these to truly raise awareness of how important people are to us and how important it is to love and care for one another in a world full of hatred and spite. Parenthood is described as being vulnerable, of losing parts of yourself to ensure the safety and happiness of your child and as acceptance of knowing that they won’t always be yours to keep. Obama uses family as a method of uniting people and shedding a positive light on the situation - he appeals to the audience’s emotions, encouraging them to strengthen their relationships with those around them. Family is presented, once again as common ground between everybody - and despite its almost fleeting nature, its etherality due to the fact that people come and go, it is something that should be cherished. The effect it has on people is that it evokes strong emotions - the topic of family is sensitive for everyone, possibly because it touches the lives of every individual in a myriad of ways, be that positive or negative. Obama constantly stresses that family is something people can be sure of - it is our rock at the end of the day, that can support us and share our problems, and people have the basic need to belong. It is presented as something of critical importance and something that we should always prioritize.

• Nationality

Nationality is explored in the text, as something that binds people together and as a kind of common factor shared between every American. Their American identity connects them together by an invisible thread - thus making a relatively local tragedy, a national one. Nationality is expressed as something along the lines of a family or a universal support system, as seen in the phrase ‘I can only hope that you’re not alone in your grief’. Furthermore, the use of the pronoun ‘we’ in phrases such as ‘we have wept with you’ and ‘whatever portion of sadness we can share with you to ease this heavy load, we will gladly bear it’ creates a bond between both the President and the audience. It is something that is presented, as a responsibility of compassion and kindness towards one’s neighbours. It’s almost described as something that rids one of loneliness and replaces that feeling with a sense of community, of being heard and seen, and most importantly understood, as seen by the quotation ‘Newtown - you are not alone’. Obama highlights that the school shooting was not a localized tragedy, but a national one, one that should affect the lives of every single American citizen and act as a ‘wake up call’ to take action and to love and appreciate those around us. The phrases ‘we’re all parents’, ‘they’re all our children’, ‘this job of keeping our children safe, and teaching them well, is something we can only do as a nation’ once again illustrate the responsibility that US citizens have of taking care of one another. The President tries to blur the disparity between different groups of people, claiming that factors, such as race, political ideology, or social class should not in any way obstruct the most important similarity they share which is their nationality. Nationality is something that makes every American citizen equal - it is a kind of dependency on one another, a form of mutual respect, a friendship despite all odds. It unites people in moments of importance and when all else fails. That is something that Obama focuses on a lot in his speech through his descriptions of nationality as an unbreakable, unseen bond between people and as a tool to erase prejudice and differences in moments when the only thing left to do is come together and support each other until the pain eases.

• Religion

Religion is an important theme in most of Barack Obama’s speeches and it is especially prevalent in the Sandy Hook Prayer Vigil, since it contains many elements characteristic of a eulogy. Religion in this case is used for national healing and restoring a kind of peace and ease of mind. It offers people an answer to what would otherwise be an unexplainable tragedy that can not be comprehended in any way, causing a great deal of distress. Obama starts with a quote from Scripture, in which the phrases ‘for light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all’, ‘’what is seen is temporary, but it unseen is eternal’ and ‘eternal house’ seem to stand out the most and share a common theme of continuity. Obama’s biblical references fill people with the hope that their struggles will be rewarded with peace and that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. He uses religion also a unifying tool, see in the phrase ‘prayers of a nation’, which highlights that religion is possibly the only thing that can bind people together in this moment of unrest. Obama refers to God as looking over humanity, keeping an eye on everything by using religious language such as ‘God’s grace’, ‘even when we’re trying to do the right thing, we know that much of our time will be spent groping through darkness, so often unable to discern God’s heavenly plans’ or ‘let the little children come to me’ Jesus said ‘and do not hinder them -- for such belongs the kingdom of heaven.’ Religion has a huge impact on the audience - it offers them comfort in a time of pain and confusion. And after a tragic event involving the deaths of innocent children, it provides them a kind of peace of mind, knowing that they are in good hands and that there is some kind of consolation in all of this. Often, people are left so stricken that they are left without the ability to think rationally or logically - they need something else to pin their hopes on, knowing they are being looked after, and religion is almost like their anchor, supporting them when nothing else can. The biblical language used highlights this and draws attention to God’s power and love.

[nemesis-nexus]

Darkest Greetings and Salutations My Family, how is everyone on this bright and breezy day? The events of this time are actually a triple shot for me as not only is it the Full Worm Supermoon and Equinox but also the 6th anniversary of my Walking the Ishtar Gate! So much has happened in the last six years, it’s been a literally life altering time that was not easy but was worth it as I have grown and evolved quite a bit thanks to the Ancient Family guiding me!

Tonight’s sermon is fairly short and to the point, so without any further ado:

Full Worm Supermoon and Vernal Equinox 2019

HAIL THE ANCIENT FAMILY! On this day the Wheel turns yet again and the Season of Rebirth triumphs over the Season of Death! With this a multitude of changes come sweeping across the landscape and what was hidden under the snow is now exposed and Ninhursag, our Blessed and Beautiful Mother Earth shows off her splendor in shades of green and blue! Flora and Fauna are once again buzzing with the activities of the bees as they begin their search for flowers to gather nectar from and to pollinate all the plant life! Fair warning for all those who suffer from pollen allergies, it’s supposed to be pretty bad this year so you may want to start preparing now!

Watching Nature just do what it’s done forever has always fascinated me; the lesson of the trees that lose their leaves in the Autumn yet stand strong in their barrenness during the Winter no matter how cold it gets or how much snow falls is a lesson for all of us to learn; life is not always easy and there are going to be times when it takes a lot out of us, when we feel that our “leaves” (our sanity) have been stripped, but if we stay the course and keep moving forward, we find that we not only have the inner power to overcome any obstacle, but like the trees, we emerge stronger and more vibrant for having not given up no matter how biting the chill may have been from having been buried under the drama and stress that comes from everyday life and especially from those times when it gets to be almost too much! Life is not easy, it is not meant to be, but without trials and such, there is no growth or evolution! This is the lesson of the trees, they lose their leaves year after year yet they never give up because they know that Spring will always come, they just have to be patient and so do we!

It’s not just the trees that change, deep under the once frozen Earth another change is occurring! The worms who lay dormant once again begin to wriggle around underground aerating the soil so that the roots of the trees can again receive the sustenance they need to regain their majestic statures and also so the grass can begin to emerge from its slumber to blanket the newly awakened Earth in a striking shock of green accented with a myriad of colors from the multitude of flowers that decorate the Natural World! The lesson of the worms is also something that we need to learn: life is not always about being in the spotlight, in fact like the worms whom we rarely see when they are at work, a lot of times we can accomplish more from behind the scenes! In other words, we don’t see the worms when they are going about their business, what we DO see is the end result of all their tireless toiling underground! We see the grass sprouting, the tree regenerating, the flowers blooming and deer grazing, just to name a few things! We see all this and yet rarely do we stop to acknowledge who it is that plays one of the BIGGEST roles in making it happen! The lesson is that if we all work together on any project, we can make amazing things happen and we don’t always have to be front and center! The lesson of the worms is humbleness and humility as well as supporting those whose time it is to take center stage, if only for a little while!

Today we celebrate the immortal beauty of Nature and the vast array of different forms of Life created! We stand in awe of its splendour as we contemplate all that we don't know and are humbled by all that we are privileged to observe and partake in! We respect that we are a part of in this never-ending dance between the Lord and Lady of the House!

The Dark Night of the Soul is a necessary time as well, it is the time for all of us to sit in quiet reflection of everything that has occurred not only in the last year but all throughout the course of our individual lives as well as the timeline of all things!

There are some things happening that can't be explained in the immediate situation however if we go backwards in time sometimes we can pinpoint when things were at their turning-point, these turning points can be good or bad depending on the situation! It is said that sometimes you need to go backwards in order to go forward and in these present times, I believe this is very much the case!

At this point in time it is not enough to ONLY focus on what is PRESENTLY happening, it is absolutely vital to look down the road and see where everything is headed! While no one can predict the future EVERYONE has the ability to use logic and reason to at the very least consider the possibilities! Some things are easier to determine than others, but we must always be prepared for anything!

It is during these times that we must remember who we are; we are the DEFENDERS, we are the PROTECTORS, we are the GUARDIANS who were created to oversee the environment and all it entails, we were created so that Life itself could continue to live and to maintain the Balance that exists between all aspects of Nature!

We are NOT here to elevate or exalt ourselves above the Natural Order, when we do this WE in fact create the Imbalance that causes MASSIVE amounts of Destruction to ALL things - including the Earth - and when this happens we need to step up and push back against those who would destroy everything in pursuit of personal agendas, instant gratification and temporary pleasure!

We have seen many horrific things take place even in the last year, we have seen our Mother Earth raped and ravaged repeatedly, we have seen her children of ALL species brutalized and thrown aside as though they didn't matter! We have seen the arrogance of the human ego put itself on a pedestal and glare condescendingly on all those down below!

When it comes to Protecting and Defending Nature and Life generally speaking it is imperative to know that everyone has it in them to be a Warrior for the Deity! A true Warrior does NOT fight because they hate what is in front of them, they fight because they love what is behind and beside them! Molded through years of trials, errors, setbacks, pressure and perseverance, they carry on NEVER surrendering no matter how stalwart the opposition! They do not fear death for they know there are fates which are MUCH WORSE! Every battle waged, every fort guarded, every life defended, every scar received are but testaments to the tenacious nature and unyielding Spirit of all those who walk this Path! When they lay their head down for the final sleep they have no need to fear the unknown for they know that they are already connected to the Deity and it is from him that they draw their Strength and it is to the Stars where they shall return, severed from their flesh vessels which go on through their own metamorphoses to maintain the flora and fauna by biodegrading and becoming food for them to thrive on!

The Caduceus was created by Enki and embodies the Balance of EVERYTHING in the Multiverse; Life and Death, Darkness and Light, Creation and Destruction. It was bequeathed unto NINGIZHEDA because he is the Guardian of the Gateways and as such NONE may pass beyond him in any direction without his permission and in many cases without his guidance! In the Descent of INANNA it was NINGIZHEDA who met her at every Gate and granted her passage. It was also NINGIZHEDA who revived her after the confrontation with ERESHKIGAL and helped her escape back to the Heavens! This cycle of Life, Death and Rebirth is also very much like the changing of the Seasons. When INANNA (ININNI/ISHTAR) descended it is comparable to Autumn as the further she went, the more she needed to leave behind, just like the further we go into Autumn the more Nature leaves behind (ie the leaves fall from the trees, the grass becomes suspended in the Earth, the herds hibernate or move on.) When she confronts ERESHKIGAL this is comparable to Winter because INANNA (ININNI/ISHTAR) did not actually die, like the Earth she also went into a form of suspended animation and when NINGIZHEDA revived her using the gifts given to him by ENKI is the heralding of the Spring or Season of Rebirth which is where we are now – the Vernal Equinox! The Season of Life is right around the corner which completes the Wheel and the Caduceus once again symbolizes the Balance and the reason why NINGIZHEDA who is the very essence of ALL Forces in the Multiverse both posing and opposing was charged with its maintenance and protection!

As Children of the Ancient Family it is our sworn duty to not only uphold the honor of our Family who gave us so much, but to do what needs to be done at the time it needs doing! To be a voice for the voiceless, to provide a place where people can go where they are free to express themselves without fear of reprisal and to think outside the box when it comes to matters of community and the Animal Kingdom! We are here to have a humanE experience by enjoying life to the fullest but also to stand up and fight for those who can’t fight for themselves - ie encouraging people to adopt from an animal shelter rather than a breeder, believe it or not this helps save COUNTLESS lives! We are here to remind everyone that human life is NOT the only life that matters and as such we need to respect ALL of Father’s creation, not just certain aspects of it! When we take our place in the Hoop of Life, what we are really doing is remembering who we are and why we are here!

“Vernal Equinox Prayer

Earth is the Mother who gives all manner of Life a Home!

Fire is the Passion that burns brightly from within and without!

Water is the Blood of Creation that exists in many interchanging states!

Air is the Breath of Life carried by all organisms great and small!

Heart is the strength that keeps us going when times get rough!

Spirit is the driving force behind all actions both Positive and Negative!

This night we say a verse for those we hold dear,

So that they will know happiness tonight and all year!

We acknowledge those who came before and held fast,

And forged on ahead to the future with bonds that will last!

The Darkness of ignorance can do insurmountable damage,

We are grateful for our Deity and Family who help us manage!

We give thanks to NINGIZHEDA who inspires us all,

For whom we stand up and will respond to his call!

The Wheel continues to turn bringing on more and more changes,

It is for us to adapt or die when the script rearranges!

Nothing in this Life is ever guaranteed,

But through hard work and effort our Spirits are freed!

The most important thing to remember is loyalty to Family,

No matter what happens, we are one even though we are many!”

ZI ANA KANPA! ZI KIA KANPA!

MAY THE DEAD RISE AND SMELL THE INSENCE!

Etiamsi MULTA Et Nos UNUM Sumus Nos Sto Validus Ut Nos Sto Una!

Semper Veritas, Semper Fideles, In NINHURSAG'S Nomen Nos Fides! AVE NINHURSAG!

(We Are ONE Even Though We Are MANY And We Stand STRONGEST When We Stand TOGETHER!

Always TRUTHFUL, Always FAITHFUL, In NINHURSAG'S Name We Trust! HAIL NINHURSAG!)

AVÉ THE ANCIENT FAMILY!

AVÉ IGGIGI! AVÉ ANUNNA!

AVÉ DRACONIS! HAIL THE GREAT SERPENT!

HPS Meg “Nemesis Nexus” Prentiss

[graceivers]

Review #31 - Kissing Madeline

Kissing Madeline Author: Lex Martin Genre: Contemporary Romance, Sports Rating: ★★★★ Recommendation: give it a shot; once was enough Summary: After catching her ex-boyfriend cheating on her, Maddie McDermott decides to focus on her career in journalism and newscasting instead of jumping into another relationship. But when her latest assignment involves interviewing Daren Sloan, a popular and upcoming quarterback sensation who also happens to be her next-door neighbor, can she really resist the temptation?

Female Lead: I really liked Maddie for the most part. In the beginning, I was completely in her corner. She’s young, lost the only parent she really had, is working so hard to build a legitimate and serious career and reputation as a journalist/news reporter. And, oh yeah, she caught her ex-boyfriend cheating on her. Despite what seems to be a lot of obstacles in her way, she makes things work. She understands that sacrifices have to be made, that she unfortunately has to cover storylines that are little more than meaningless fluff pieces like the whole football 101 thing she does with Daren. Maddie isn’t adverse to hard work and has patience. Those are excellent qualities.

When it came to her relationship with Daren, though, I was a little less enthusiastic about Maddie’s character. It is absolutely okay for a girl to get wrapped up in a budding relationship with a guy, that’s not my problem. What I had a slight issue with is the fact that Maddie’s relationship with Daren put her career in danger, and yet she took that risk. Do I believe Daren was super hot and sweet and irresistible? Yeah, sure. But Martin established Maddie as someone who took the news and her job super seriously. Her closet is full of business suits, for goodness sake. Everything about this girl screams professional, but then when it came to Daren, all that went away. It was a little disappointing. (That’s also why I classified this as a forbidden romance given that both of them acknowledged that they shouldn’t be in a relationship when he was basically her news story.) Moreover, her reaction to her speculation that Daren might be cheating on her? Part of me feels for her because she’s been burned once. But honestly, the way she acted without even asking Daren for the truth was a little unbelievable to me, especially for a girl who didn’t want anything serious (though she was obviously falling in love with him) and would seemingly have no problem confronting people otherwise. I did love her relationship with Daren, honestly. And thank you, Martin, for having Maddie realize the error in her ways, but those slips of character inconsistency were unfortunate. Male Lead: Daren is pretty sweet for the most part. You can tell that he tries his hardest to be honest and a good person even if he does make mistakes along the way. He does fall into the typical ‘athlete only cares about the game until he meets the one and suddenly life is all about her’ category, but that’s okay. I still enjoyed it and his character for the most part. Daren has walls too and like Maddie, he never intended for their relationship to get so serious, but lo and behold, they fall in love with each other. And yeah, Daren also acts like a ‘typical guy’ when Martin writes things in like him not noticing another girl all over him until it’s too late and not realizing it was Maddie’s birthday. Um… I guess I’ll give him a pass. Those moments didn’t change my overall reaction to his character.

One thing I do have to mention. Let’s be clear here. Daren was dating Clementine their senior year of high school. During that time, he had sex with Veronica. This is cheating. Plain and simple. There was a couple of lines in the book where Daren said that he “never considered it” or that it “never crossed [his] mind” when he told Maddie about how Veronica always accused him of cheating on her. So, first, my confusion is whether Daren is referring to the fact that he would never cheat on someone and/or Veronica or if he’s saying that he never considered himself a cheater. If it’s the first case, fine, that’s great, thank you for being a loyal dude. But if it’s the second case, then he’s just plain delusional and wrong because sorry, but he’s already technically a cheater even if he was a senior in high school. I do believe Daren is not that guy anymore, and it’s evident given that he constantly turns female attention away and only has eyes for Maddie. But… maybe Martin should’ve been clearer during this part because the wording does not sit right with me, which subsequently may affect how I view this character. Plot & Writing: Here’s the thing. I started Kissing Madeline quite a while back. Like I think back in March. I was a little more than a hundred pages in and SUPER into the book for all the sports and Massachusetts references, and thought, hey, I should save this for my lame two-person book club because I think the other girl I read with would enjoy this too. Long story short, this was not added to the lame two-person book club to-read list, so I left it on my shelf for a long time until I finally wanted to get it off my shelf and be done with it. The thing is, when I came back to it, I was far less enthusiastic about it. Why? Maybe because I stepped away from the book and lost the momentum of feelings I originally had for it. Maybe because I had read so many other things between then and now and my perspective on things had changed. Who knows. The point is, had I finished Kissing Madeline then when I first started reading it, the book probably would’ve gotten a higher rating. Alas, I just couldn’t seem to find that original high I had reading those first hundred pages.

I’m from Massachusetts. Born and raised. I LOVE Massachusetts, so obviously I loved that the book was set in my home state and all the references Martin put in there. That being said, if you’re going to write a book set here and reference real life places in Boston, towns in the state, colleges, and the public education system, and everything else that Martin did, lady, you have to be 100% accurate on your information and facts because otherwise, I’m going to be upset. For example, BU and BC are on the B-line of the MBTA/subway system. THE B-LINE, MARTIN. NOT THE D-LINE. We’re not going to Riverside. I don’t know anyone who takes the D-line to the Chestnut Hill station and then walks all the way over to BC when they can just take the B-line, WHICH PASSES ALL OF BU, to its last stop, BOSTON COLLEGE STATION. And then another thing. Clementine and Daren were next-door neighbors growing up. Daren went to Lexington High School, which is consistently one of if not the best public school system in the entire state. Therefore, Clementine also went to Lexington High. Clementine, who is referenced to being student council president in high school and likely very smart on top of the stellar academic education she’s getting in Lexington, committed to BU early action? NOPE. SORRY. People from Lexington High do not commit early action to Boston University. THEY JUST DON’T. BU is basically a safety school for half the students who go through Lexington High. And though a good percentage of students there do actually go to BU, people from Lexington just don’t commit early action there when their high school education is just as difficult if not more so than a lot of colleges, including BU. I know no one is reading this, and I know no one cares, but I care. I CARE A LOT. Okay. End rant.

I liked the overall relationship between Daren and Maddie. I liked that Daren was actually super sweet to her. I liked that Daren cared about her career and wanted the best for her. I liked that Daren made it okay for Maddie to cover sports again after she avoided it after losing her father. I did not, however, like that Maddie’s reaction after she got jealous, but I already talked about that above in her section. But also, I was not a particular fan of how Martin wrapped the story mostly because Maddie’s career suffered while Daren got off with barely a slap on the wrist. I was pleasantly surprised that the major conflict of the book escalated to that proportion and had such repercussions, but the way Martin handled the fallout was not my favorite. It was like Maddie’s career didn’t even matter anymore when it was constantly emphasized in the beginning and an integral part of Maddie’s character. Instead, she’ll just be a happy, pregnant wife for Daren who gets all the glory for being an overpaid athlete. As a woman, as a feminist, yeah, that doesn’t make me feel too great, even if I have a super hot and successful and loving husband like Daren. I mean, Maddie ends up with a YouTube channel and gets to do some segments for ESPN every once in a while? Isn’t that what she was avoiding before? And now suddenly she’s okay with it? I don’t know, man… Doesn’t seem right.

On a similar note, I praise Martin for highlighting the absolutely gross and sexist workplace Maddie worked at and simultaneously curse society for allowing those places to exist in the real world. It was cringeworthy and disgusting what Maddie’s boss, Spencer, made her do—forcing her to interview Daren and wearing what she had to wear and all that. Maddie was seriously brave and completely professional in taking those forced directions when it was obviously an uncomfortable situation. And again, this is absolutely not Martin’s fault for writing it like that because this is unfortunately real stuff that women have to deal with. So props for including such scenes and issues into the book. And given what Brad did to Maddie, which was ABSOLUTELY HORRIFIC, I only wish more could’ve been done about the whole situation and that Maddie would’ve gotten more justice. Secondary Characters & Plots: All of Maddie’s girlfriends were pretty cool. This is the first book I read in the series, so this is my first encounter with Clementine’s character. Her book was already on my to-read list, and I’m still interested in her story, though I personally don’t know how to feel about her history with Daren and the fact that she wrote a best-selling novel about how he cheated on her…

Daren’s football teammates were… not particularly outstanding in any way. They were fine during their scenes, but no one was memorable. And just about everyone that worked with Maddie at that new station was abhorrent. Maybe Roger wasn’t that bad. Nicole was okay for like a moment or two. Everyone else, gross. Favorite Part(s): Daren going to find Maddie after everything blew up in the faces and arriving at her uncle’s house where she was so she could wake up in his arms. Obviously, they still had to talk and work things out, but clearly that was what Maddie needed in that moment and Daren knew that. That was awesome. Final Thoughts: Overall, Kissing Madeline is good. Pretty good leads, pretty good story, sports, set in Massachusetts, good climax. But again, I only gave this four stars because after stepping away from it for about three months, I couldn’t find the original high I got when I first started the book. That and the fact that I wasn’t a huge fan of the way Martin resolved the major conflict of the book, especially in regards to Maddie and her career. But it’s okay. I would still recommend Kissing Madeline. Daren and Maddie’s relationship is too sweet to pass up.

[mastcomm]

Lip-Syncing Her Abduction, Matter-of-Factly – The New York Times

The day before rehearsals resumed for Lucas Hnath’s new play “Dana H.,” the star, Deirdre O’Connell, was quietly expecting her bad dreams to return.

Having performed the piece last year in Los Angeles and Chicago, she knew what would happen when she slipped back into the role of the playwright’s mother, a Florida chaplain, sitting alone onstage to recount the story of her violent abduction in 1997 and the five brutal months that followed, as her captor dragged her across the South from motel room to motel room, frightened and isolated.

“There’s a nightmare that gets stimulated inside a person, just thinking about this stuff all the time,” O’Connell said the other afternoon, in a brightly lit room at the Vineyard Theater’s downtown Manhattan offices. “I loved doing it. But it’s sad, and it’s scary.”

It is also, for Hnath (pronounced nayth), personal — a story he had long thought of telling in a play. “And at various points,” he said, “my mother had expressed interest in me telling this.” Given how far its details veer from mainstream experience, though, the trouble was finding a way that wouldn’t leave audiences wondering which parts were true and which he had made up.

Enter Steve Cosson, artistic director of the Civilians. He asked Hnath over coffee in 2015 — before “A Doll’s House, Part 2” and “Hillary and Clinton” took the writer to Broadway — if he had any interest in making a piece of documentary theater.

“I have the memory, and it probably is a false memory,” Hnath said, “of it clicking in that moment and thinking, ‘O.K., this is the right story and that’s the right approach: for someone who is not me to interview my mother.’”

Why not him?

“Because of course we know each other,” Hnath said, his evident discomfort — with giving an interview in the first place, with discussing a play about his mother’s trauma — evaporating for an instant as he laughed. “I was interested in her telling the story to someone who knew nothing. So that there’s no shorthand.”

That someone was Cosson, who spent several days interviewing Hnath’s mother, Dana Higginbotham, who these days works with hospice patients. The show’s dialogue is audio culled from those recordings. Audiences hear Higginbotham describe her experience in her own voice, in her own emotional register.

And O’Connell, the Obie Award winner embodying her, lip-syncs every word as Higginbotham recalls being yanked out of her ordinary life into a terrifying subculture where she discovered that help was out of reach.

Now in previews Off Broadway at the Vineyard, where it is directed by Les Waters, “Dana H.” arrives at an interesting moment for stories of violence against women, with society re-evaluating its own metric for what constitutes a persuasive witness.

Reviewing the show in the Los Angeles Times, Charles McNulty deemed it “a sly referendum on how we process a survivor’s story,” while the critic Chris Jones, in the Chicago Tribune, noted that it prompts “the question of whether or not you are listening to a reliable narrator.”

Hnath, well aware of what he called the “circular and wobbly shape of memory,” said it was vital that the play “match the reality of somebody recounting something really, really horrific that happened to them.”

Unspooling recollections of her captor — a man raised in the Aryan Brotherhood, whom she had counseled in the hospital where he was a psychiatric patient — Higginbotham offers no florid displays of feeling as evidence of having suffered.

The striking calm of her tone on the recordings came as no surprise to Hnath, 40, who was an undergraduate at New York University at the time of her abduction, and who stipulated, before the interview for this story, that he would not fill in any biographical details or discuss the events of the play.

The matter-of-fact way that his mother speaks of that episode in her life is the same way he is forever asking actors in rehearsal to deliver lines that might otherwise seem to call for screaming or crying. (He suspects maternal influence as a possible factor in his preference for toning things down.)

To Hnath, the recording — meticulously edited though it is — serves as proof that he is not inventing details, and that a real person remembering severe, sustained emotional and physical stress might be subdued rather than agitated, might laugh in unexpected places, might weep only sparingly.

“I wanted that one layer of verification, of ‘This is what it really sounds like,’” he said. “We sort of judge the legitimacy of what people are saying by how they perform it, which I think is extremely dangerous.”

Of necessity, O’Connell’s own performance hews to Higginbotham’s expressively muted account, piped into O’Connell’s skull through earbuds.

Yet her portrayal is as fully realized as any other she might give, except that she has to squelch her voice while appearing to speak precisely in time with Higginbotham’s. There is no room for error, because the recording plunges ahead, regardless; even her breathing must match it.

It’s a skill that took a few grueling months for O’Connell, 66, to learn, with the help of a lip-syncing coach, Steve Cuiffo.

Hnath with his mother, Dana Higginbotham, whose abduction is recounted in the play.  Credit…Ryan Miller/Shutterstock

“As an actor,” she said, “I can imagine being really interested in my interpretation of her telling this story. But this is much more my really having to surrender to her interpretation of the story, and I felt like there was a sort of purifying fire inherent in that problem, in having to lip-sync her.��

Hnath, whose oeuvre hopscotches from one form to another, was in graduate school at N.Y.U. when he developed a fascination with lip-syncing and dived into the works of the experimental theater maker Reza Abdoh.

“I went to the performing arts library every weekend and watched almost everything that they had on tape of his,” he said. “Even on video, you got the sense of the sort of strangeness, and that it almost feels like the performers are possessed.”

Lip-syncing has an uncanny effect in “Dana H.,” a show that requires from O’Connell an unusual degree of isolation. Already alone onstage, she is also cut off from most of the sound of the audience. Out of town with the play, she was solitary much of the time offstage, too. So she is glad to be performing it at home in New York, where that won’t be the case.

On the day before the first rehearsal, she was high-spirited and funny, joking that she was in denial about how intense it was going to be.

“I think, ‘Why was I so tired in Chicago? Why was it all I could do to get myself from the theater to my apartment every night? What was wrong with me?’” She laughed. “But I have this memory of being kind of a broken spirit and stumbling into my apartment, and I would make a nice bath of Epsom salts and watch a cooking program.”

It’s not a physically demanding part. Emotionally is a different matter. Knowing that this is a true story “makes the world a darker place,” she said.

And, in O’Connell’s view, the play taps into a lot about the moment we’re living through, and the way that women in general — and second-wave feminists like her in particular — are lately looking at the world with fresh eyes.

Higginbotham, whom she met at opening night of “Dana H.” in Los Angeles, is “a tough cookie, and she’s very smart,” O’Connell said.

They have that in common. O’Connell remembered with perfect matter-of-factness her desire, years ago, “to be a tough enough broad to work late in the bar and walk home with my tips and not get killed.”

“I felt like my toughness and my freedom were very connected to each other,” she said, “and I feel like this play is a lot about that. About being tough enough to find yourself in a situation that would kill a lot of people, and not die. And then you have that as a sort of badge in your life.”

You also have the wounds, of course. Part of the hope of “Dana H.” — and, it seems, of Higginbotham — is that it can do something to mend them.

“What she cares about a great deal,” Hnath said, “is how can she help those people who have undergone extraordinary trauma, how can she help them heal? So I think of myself less as telling her story than as being complicit in that mission.”

He laughed to dismiss any loftiness.

But O’Connell looks at “Dana H.” as the work of a “very feminist son” trying to aid his powerful mother in taking care of her own trauma. And she finds that heartening.

“He’s helping shepherd that,” she said, “and I feel like that’s a good thing to be happening right now, as we try to make a very different world.”

from WordPress https://mastcomm.com/lip-syncing-her-abduction-matter-of-factly-the-new-york-times/

[meanwhileinoz]

Let It Be: Using Mindfulness to Overcome Anxiety and Depression

“Perhaps many things inside you have been transformed; perhaps somewhere, someplace deep inside your being, you have undergone important changes while you were sad.” ~Rainer Maria Rilke

When I was twelve years old, I figured out how to get out of things.

It was a rainy Saturday morning and I was supposed to be getting ready for choir practice—an eight-hour rehearsal before a big concert. Eight hours! I began to obsess about how much time this was in my then tiny life.

As though by my own will, a heavy sensation of dread and nausea arose. I wasn’t aware of it at the time but my brain had said to my body, “Hey, if you feel sick, we can get out of this!”

Unfortunately for me, this would happen many more times, well into my adult life.

Commitment equaling nausea coupled with a terrible fear of vomiting. Concerts, sport events, sleep overs at friends’ houses—any situation that might be awkward to get out of.

It wasn’t until I was sixteen that it started affecting school. Too paralyzed to turn up to the first day of year eleven, I was taken to the doctor. She said I was anxious. She prescribed Effexor, an anti depressant. I wasn’t depressed. I would end up taking one tablet everyday for the next eight years.

At twenty-four, a friend made a comment: “I don’t think those tablets are actually treating what you think they’re treating. Maybe you would be fine without them.”

I realized then that I had been swallowing them purely out of habit. Maybe they had been my crutch—a morning ritual to keep the wolves at bay. By that time I wasn’t really experiencing too many of the attacks. I felt okay. I started to slowly wean myself off the medication while on a trip overseas.

The withdrawal symptoms were horrendous, but I came through—a bit dazed and spaced-out but “clean” nonetheless.

I returned home. At first I was happy, comforted by the familiarity of my pets and family. But something was slightly off. I started having strange thoughts—negative and disarming.

Usually one might shrug such moods off, but they came with such conviction that I began to worry. I Googled: “Why don’t I want to do anything anymore?” and “Why do I feel detached?”

A month later I experienced what one might call a nervous breakdown. Lying in bed watching a film, something in me clicked: “Life is meaningless.”

A horrific wave of panic and racing thoughts ensued. My mind was trapped in cycles of anxious rumination and would go on like this for months, with little to no respite except in sleep.

Everything seemed bizarre and pointless and menacing. Worst of all it felt as though, despite their best efforts, nobody could reach me.

Anxiety is not the nerves you feel before a performance. It is not the quickening heart upon realizing you left the stove on at home. Anyone who says, “Just relax!” to a person who is experiencing anxiety or depression should know this; they just cannot. Not yet anyway.

Both are fuelled by worry. Not only about these new and disorienting sensations, but also of the thought “Will I be this way forever?”

I tried CBT and it was a waste of time. Maybe I sought the wrong psychologist, but she seemed more concerned with the small clock on her table than my exasperated tears.

I was prescribed anti-depressants again—but even through the hardest days, a tiny voice inside said, “No drugs. Just wait. Please.”

I found another psychologist, a Romanian man who was kind and spoke my language. I bought $300 worth of useless supplements. Trial and error.

Anxiety plays tricks. It tells you that everything you feel is serious. Depression paints everything in black and white. Together, they skew perceptions. 

One day I became truly convinced I was developing schizophrenia. I Googled “disturbing thoughts.” This time I stumbled upon a website called Anxiety No More, created by a man named Paul David, an ex-sufferer himself.

It summed up every symptom I had—racing and disturbing thoughts, dizziness, panic, depressed feelings, detached feelings, plus a myriad of others. Paul had suffered anxiety and came through completely unscathed. The answer? No drugs and no expensive smoke cleansing rituals.

The answer was so beautiful and near unbelievable in its simplicity: Stop fighting it. Let it come.

This was the first breakthrough for me, and from then on I became determined to learn as much as I could about the human brain and why we experience anxiety and depression.

I learned that those born post 1940 are ten times more likely to experience depression. This indicated that in many cases, life events are to blame; the stress we endure, assuming we are unbreakable. You only need to watch someone trying to balance two iPhones, a laptop, and an iPad on one knee to see how we even overload ourselves.

I learned that anxiety is a slow-to-evolve trait leftover from our prehistoric ancestors (apparently our brains haven’t received the memo that the lions are no longer lurking behind bushes). 

And depression? In many cases it is the brain saying, “I can only handle so much! Bye!” and feelings are seemingly switched off—a defense mechanism.

That is not to discredit cases of severe depression caused by other factors where medication is necessary, but knowing how easily and frequently anti-depressants are prescribed, one has to ask, at what cost exactly?

Are we perhaps interfering with a natural defense process that might be best left to run its course, approached with patience instead of a ‘fighting’ attitude?

I had read all the books. I was meditating daily with soothing music and practicing breathing exercises.

I let the panicked feelings come and go and surely enough, over time they lessened until I no longer anticipated them. Feelings came back. I could laugh. I felt battered and worn, but hopeful.

But still the dark thoughts would seep in, slowly swelling in my mind. Heavy as wet wool. Despite my best efforts, I was left in depression and wanted so terribly not to be.

Sure, thoughts came with less urgency, but they were still there and I remained in a daze, as though I was swimming an inch away from reality.

I Googled. I was lead to mindfulness.

Mindfulness—the final stepping-stone of my path to healing.

It was intuition that led me to the practice of mindfulness. All along, medication and CBT felt wrong for me. Even chanting affirmations, burning lavender candles, and distracting techniques seemed unproductive—as though I was telling my mind, “This is a thing that must be gotten rid of!”

It really is the equivalent to “Don’t think about pink elephants!” Of course we will. It is in our nature.

The great revelation came when I was listening to a podcast about mindfulness and secular Buddhism by a man named Peter Strong, a mindfulness expert and Skype counselor. His own experience with anxiety and depression as a young adult mirrored my own.

I organized a Skype session with Peter, excited to learn more about mindfulness and encouraged by what I had read.

I confessed to him that I saw breathing exercises as an attempt to distract. He said, “Yes. It’s a tool. Mindfulness is all in the subtleties.” Then he paused and told me, “Instead, when thoughts and feelings come, you simply say to them ‘Hello. I see you. Welcome.’”

After almost two years of struggling with my mind, the battle was coming to an end. I let the thoughts in. I let them stay. I treated them as one might a small wounded bird. Compassionately.

As promised, the negative taboo enshrouding them dissolved. The rumination stopped. I finally felt free.

It is my genuine wish that no one suffer needlessly as I did and as so many others do. My story was one of trial and error, one that has taken almost two years.

I think if I had discovered mindfulness earlier, the road could have been a little shorter. Trust me when I say that I thought I would be trapped like that for the rest of my life. But I took the advice to sit it out, be patient, and not take everything my mind threw at me so seriously. It takes time. Relapses happen, but you do heal.

Accept the uncertainty, open up to those close to you, and try to allow commotion to coexist with who you are. And believe me when I say that despite how hopeless it may feel, you are still there—temporarily clouded, but there, waiting.

Photo by Moyan Brenn

About Lucy Roleff

Lucy Roleff is a Musician, Poet and Illustrator living in Melbourne, Australia. She is an advocate for daily mindfulness and mindfulness-based meditation and hopes to one day teach others about its benefits. Lucy has released her first book “Somewhere; poems and illustrations from a place” inspired by her own healing from anxiety and depression. You can find her at lucyroleff.com.

A quick note from our founder-

Over the past year, my friend Dave at PaleoHacks has been working on a secret cookbook with world-renowned Le Cordon Bleu chef Peter Servold.

Well, today this new this new incredible Paleo Cookbook is finally available to be shipped right to your door for FREE

That’s right as a special launch promotion, we’re offering our brand new Paleo fat loss cookbook to you for free (Chef Pete lost 60 lbs using these recipes!) All you have to do is just cover a small shipping cost (international shipping is a bit more).

Get your FREE copy of Paleo Eats Here. (Grab this today, because we only ordered a small batch of these cookbooks for this freebie promotion, and they will sell out FAST!)

Get The Free Cookbook

http://ift.tt/2jqWP4g

[latoyarubalcava3546]

Robert Rodriguez Says He Cast Rose McGowan In Grindhouse To SPITE Harvey Weinstein — And The Movie Got 'Buried' Because Of Her!

We've heard lots of stories over the past couple weeks from women Harvey Weinstein scared into silence.

But what would have happened if they fought back?

Video: Rose McGowan's Powerful Speech At The Detroit Women's Convention

According to Robert Rodriguez, he did try to help Rose McGowan beat Harvey's "blacklisting" of her -- by casting her in his Weinstein Company-funded film Grindhouse.

In fact, in an official essay for Variety, he reveals the plot of his half of the throwback double feature with Quentin Tarantino was inspired by her story, something he could never talk about before:

"I have not previously discussed what I knew about the 1997 incident that Rose suffered in a hotel room during the Sundance Film Festival. I never wanted to do anything that jeopardized a legal settlement she entered into with Harvey Weinstein. Now that she's able to tell her story, I want to provide an account of what I knew, when I knew it, and what I did about it."

Rodriguez says he first learned of her "blacklisting" at Cannes in 2005, when she explained to him why she hadn't auditioned for Sin City. She told him the whole story of the assault -- and the subsequent legal action:

"Rose told me that all she could do at the time was to get Harvey Weinstein to donate money to an abused women's shelter and in return she had to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) that forbade her from talking about the horrific violation without being sued, and that she shouldn't even be telling me. To add insult to injury, she told me that she was blacklisted from even auditioning for any Weinstein movies."

That's when the director got PISSED -- and decided to go renegade:

"I then revealed to Rose right then and there that I was about to start writing a movie with Quentin Tarantino, a double feature throwback to 70's exploitation movies, and that if she was interested, I would write her a BAD ASS character and make her one of the leads. I wanted her to have a starring role in a big movie to take her OFF the blacklist, and the best part is that we would have Harvey's new Weinstein Company pay for the whole damn thing."

But they got to throw it in Harvey's face sooner than they were expecting:

"Just as I finished telling Rose this, I saw Harvey walking around the party! I called Harvey over to our table, and as soon as he got close enough to see that I was sitting with Rose, his face dropped and went ghostly white. I said, "Hey Harvey, this is Rose McGowan. I think she's amazing and really talented and I'm going to cast her in my next movie." Harvey then dribbled all over himself in the most over the top performance I'd ever seen as he gushed, "Oh she's wonderful, oh she's amazing, oh she's fantastic, oh she's so talented… You two should definitely work together." And then he skittered off. I knew right then that every word Rose told me was true, you could see it all over his face."

They made the film, a star-studded, strangely meta movie that played like two '70s B movies, complete with fake trailers for other movies made by friends like Eli Roth and Edgar Wright.

It was crazy and long and ahead of its time -- and Rose is spectacular in it.

Unfortunately it completely tanked at the box office.

Rodriguez still believes Harvey's vendetta against Rose is what kept the movie from even being given a fighting chance with a proper ad campaign, etc. He explains:

"But because of the NDA Rose told me she had signed, at Rose's request I had to keep it quiet from everyone until now as to why we were even making that film together, especially Harvey. We knew that strategically we couldn't rub it in his face why we were REALLY doing this movie, because then he'd just bury the movie, not sell it well, and everyone would lose. To our horror, Harvey buried our movie anyway, and because we did not want to risk getting sued, we never spoke publicly about the matter...

I am still haunted and disillusioned that after all the good intentions, immense pain and struggle Rose and I and so many talented people went through to make the film, that Harvey Weinstein won in the end by burying the movie just because Rose was the lead actress."

Robert wishes they could have spoken about the inspiration of the film, the fight behind the scenes before now. And he hopes this new conversation will change things in Hollywood and other businesses:

"It's been really difficult to admit and come to terms that the NDA handcuffs forced us to needlessly jump through hoops that today would have been unnecessary because of Rose's fearlessness to speak out, despite the consequences. I hope that new legislation will result in NDAs to be legally null and void in situations where rape and assault have been committed and where power is so unequally distributed."

Hear, hear!

"Looking back over the years, I have wondered if I would have made the same choices, knowing the bleak outcome. We all suffered greatly on the film, and the journey ended up costing us all more than we ever bargained for. For me personally, it cost me my marriage of 16 years, my family, a large dose of sanity, and for years I have grappled with the sobering idea that maybe I made a grave error in standing up at all, when no one was even asking me to."

OK, we have to stop right there -- was it really the movie failing at the box office that cost you your marriage, Robert? Or did dating your star do it?

In case you didn't know, Robert and Rose went public with their relationship when the movie came out -- immediately after news of his split with his wife, Elizabeth Avellan, hit.

Photos: 10 Movies That Ruined Celebrity Relationships

Not the point, we know, but gotta be honest here. Anyway, go on:

"I know that's not the message I'd ever want to send out, but it's been hard to justify something that now is clear was a lose/lose situation from the get-go, and that in the end failed and simply caused more damage. The reason I'm saying this is because it's very clear to me now that when someone does what Harvey Weinstein did, the devastation goes far beyond predator and victim.

These past few weeks have given me new clarity and hope by seeing the tide finally turn, seeing Harvey finally on the run, and seeing all the brave women who have come forth with their own shocking and distressing stories of abuse. Since I've seen a distinct lack of stories coming from men who may have tried to do the right thing, I wanted to come forth to say that no matter the consequences, no matter how far you have to stick your neck out, no matter what you have to lose, that we must fight the good fight. Everyone has to make a stand and take action."

Damn right they do!

Because two against the world isn't enough. This fight needs to be ALL of us against them.

[Image via Z. Tomaszewski/Joseph Marzullo/WENN.]

[lorettalivingston6911]

Robert Rodriguez Says He Cast Rose McGowan In Grindhouse To SPITE Harvey Weinstein — And The Movie Got 'Buried' Because Of Her!

people always ask me if I've been getting Botox

We've heard lots of stories over the past couple weeks from women Harvey Weinstein scared into silence.

But what would have happened if they fought back?

Video: Rose McGowan's Powerful Speech At The Detroit Women's Convention

According to Robert Rodriguez, he did try to help Rose McGowan beat Harvey's "blacklisting" of her -- by casting her in his Weinstein Company-funded film Grindhouse.

In fact, in an official essay for Variety, he reveals the plot of his half of the throwback double feature with Quentin Tarantino was inspired by her story, something he could never talk about before:

"I have not previously discussed what I knew about the 1997 incident that Rose suffered in a hotel room during the Sundance Film Festival. I never wanted to do anything that jeopardized a legal settlement she entered into with Harvey Weinstein. Now that she's able to tell her story, I want to provide an account of what I knew, when I knew it, and what I did about it."

Rodriguez says he first learned of her "blacklisting" at Cannes in 2005, when she explained to him why she hadn't auditioned for Sin City. She told him the whole story of the assault -- and the subsequent legal action:

"Rose told me that all she could do at the time was to get Harvey Weinstein to donate money to an abused women's shelter and in return she had to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) that forbade her from talking about the horrific violation without being sued, and that she shouldn't even be telling me. To add insult to injury, she told me that she was blacklisted from even auditioning for any Weinstein movies."

That's when the director got PISSED -- and decided to go renegade:

"I then revealed to Rose right then and there that I was about to start writing a movie with Quentin Tarantino, a double feature throwback to 70's exploitation movies, and that if she was interested, I would write her a BAD ASS character and make her one of the leads. I wanted her to have a starring role in a big movie to take her OFF the blacklist, and the best part is that we would have Harvey's new Weinstein Company pay for the whole damn thing."

But they got to throw it in Harvey's face sooner than they were expecting:

"Just as I finished telling Rose this, I saw Harvey walking around the party! I called Harvey over to our table, and as soon as he got close enough to see that I was sitting with Rose, his face dropped and went ghostly white. I said, "Hey Harvey, this is Rose McGowan. I think she's amazing and really talented and I'm going to cast her in my next movie." Harvey then dribbled all over himself in the most over the top performance I'd ever seen as he gushed, "Oh she's wonderful, oh she's amazing, oh she's fantastic, oh she's so talented… You two should definitely work together." And then he skittered off. I knew right then that every word Rose told me was true, you could see it all over his face."

They made the film, a star-studded, strangely meta movie that played like two '70s B movies, complete with fake trailers for other movies made by friends like Eli Roth and Edgar Wright.

It was crazy and long and ahead of its time -- and Rose is spectacular in it.

Unfortunately it completely tanked at the box office.

Rodriguez still believes Harvey's vendetta against Rose is what kept the movie from even being given a fighting chance with a proper ad campaign, etc. He explains:

"But because of the NDA Rose told me she had signed, at Rose's request I had to keep it quiet from everyone until now as to why we were even making that film together, especially Harvey. We knew that strategically we couldn't rub it in his face why we were REALLY doing this movie, because then he'd just bury the movie, not sell it well, and everyone would lose. To our horror, Harvey buried our movie anyway, and because we did not want to risk getting sued, we never spoke publicly about the matter...

I am still haunted and disillusioned that after all the good intentions, immense pain and struggle Rose and I and so many talented people went through to make the film, that Harvey Weinstein won in the end by burying the movie just because Rose was the lead actress."

Robert wishes they could have spoken about the inspiration of the film, the fight behind the scenes before now. And he hopes this new conversation will change things in Hollywood and other businesses:

"It's been really difficult to admit and come to terms that the NDA handcuffs forced us to needlessly jump through hoops that today would have been unnecessary because of Rose's fearlessness to speak out, despite the consequences. I hope that new legislation will result in NDAs to be legally null and void in situations where rape and assault have been committed and where power is so unequally distributed."

Hear, hear!

"Looking back over the years, I have wondered if I would have made the same choices, knowing the bleak outcome. We all suffered greatly on the film, and the journey ended up costing us all more than we ever bargained for. For me personally, it cost me my marriage of 16 years, my family, a large dose of sanity, and for years I have grappled with the sobering idea that maybe I made a grave error in standing up at all, when no one was even asking me to."

OK, we have to stop right there -- was it really the movie failing at the box office that cost you your marriage, Robert? Or did dating your star do it?

In case you didn't know, Robert and Rose went public with their relationship when the movie came out -- immediately after news of his split with his wife, Elizabeth Avellan, hit.

Photos: 10 Movies That Ruined Celebrity Relationships

Not the point, we know, but gotta be honest here. Anyway, go on:

"I know that's not the message I'd ever want to send out, but it's been hard to justify something that now is clear was a lose/lose situation from the get-go, and that in the end failed and simply caused more damage. The reason I'm saying this is because it's very clear to me now that when someone does what Harvey Weinstein did, the devastation goes far beyond predator and victim.

These past few weeks have given me new clarity and hope by seeing the tide finally turn, seeing Harvey finally on the run, and seeing all the brave women who have come forth with their own shocking and distressing stories of abuse. Since I've seen a distinct lack of stories coming from men who may have tried to do the right thing, I wanted to come forth to say that no matter the consequences, no matter how far you have to stick your neck out, no matter what you have to lose, that we must fight the good fight. Everyone has to make a stand and take action."

Damn right they do!

Because two against the world isn't enough. This fight needs to be ALL of us against them.

[Image via Z. Tomaszewski/Joseph Marzullo/WENN.]

you'll never know what you'll find in all of these celebrity items

from LL Celeb Fueads http://ift.tt/2iaL412 via IFTTT

[riederstravis]

National Patient Safety Awareness Week

Cliff Rieders is a founding member of Pennsylvania’s Patient Safety Authority. In 1999, the Institute of Medicine suggested a Patient Safety Authority. No one reacted to the catastrophe of preventable medical deaths in this country. Yet Cliff Rieders fought, as President of the Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association, now the Pennsylvania Association for Justice, to incorporate a Patient Safety Authority within Pennsylvania’s Mcare Act. Pennsylvania thus became the first state in the union to have a Patient Safety Authority. Cliff was one of the first appointees to the Patient Safety Authority, and he has continued as an active and aggressive member.

According to the National Patient Safety Foundation (NPSF), research shows that as many as 440,000 patients die each year as a result of medical harm that is preventable, and many others suffer significant harm (www.NPSF.org). The NPSF advocates for addressing patient and health care workforce safety as a serious public health concern. To bring this problem to the public attention, the week of March 12 to 18 has been designated as National Patient Safety Awareness Week, with activities planned to increase patient safety.

Hospitals and health care facilities should always be safe places and care for patients according to the highest medical standards, but this does not always happen. According to the American Association for Justice, one out of every three hospital patients will fall victim to a medical error during their hospital stay, and these mistakes cost nearly 120,000 patients’ lives each year.

Pennsylvania’s Patient Safety Authority collects a third of 1 million reports of incidents and serious events a year. Yet, only about 400 lawsuits are filed. This is less than one-half of 1%. It is absolutely astounding that so few people sue, given the problems with preventable medical errors in hospitals. That does not even include what goes on in doctors’ offices.

If the hospital or doctor is at fault and the patient suffers complications due to the care at their facility, that institution can be held financially responsible. If you or a loved one has suffered because of medical complications, you need legal representation. The experienced medical/hospital malpractice attorney Clifford A. Rieders of Rieders, Travis, Humphrey, Waters & Dohrmann has spent decades honing his skills and successfully representing Pennsylvania families who have suffered an injury or loss due to someone else’s negligence. Our deep sense of loyalty to each client drives us to pursue each claim vigorously.

Many cases involve medical devices and pharmaceuticals. Cliff Rieders is extremely knowledgeable in that field as well. He has written the book that virtually every medical/hospital malpractice attorney in the state uses. Cliff teaches the subject to the most seasoned attorneys in the state at seminars and has authored many briefs for the courts dealing with medical, hospital and pharmaceutical issues.

We offer a free consultation to examine the facts of your situation and show you how we can help.

Medical Facilities Are Held to Standards

Medical facilities must act reasonably and uphold proper standards of care and safety for their patients. Typically these standards are national standards, as in the case of board certified doctors. Standards include:

Maintaining safe and adequate facilities and equipment.

Selecting and retaining only competent physicians.

Overseeing all persons who practice medicine within its walls as to patient care.

Having and enforcing adequate rules and policies to ensure quality care for patients.

How National Safety Awareness Week Can Help

According to the American Hospital Association (AHA), National Safety Awareness Week should be a time hospitals focus on and put together information on projects that will improve the safety of patient care. Suggestions include:

The use of clinical pharmacists on rounds, computerized physician order entry, or unit dosing to reduce the chance of a patient getting the wrong drug or the wrong dose of a drug.

Using the “sign your site surgery” program to prevent wrong-site surgery.

Improving patient education process and materials to ensure patients know how to continue their treatment to promote complete recovery once they have been discharged.

Promoting any of the projects patient safety committees have undertaken to address issues of concern relative to patient safety, such as medication errors and infections.

The AHA believes that patient safety takes the involvement of everyone – consumers, physicians, hospitals and other providers of care, and manufacturers – to prevent errors and improve the quality of care for all.

Pennsylvania’s Patient Safety Authority

The Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority’s latest report to the legislature can be found on its website. Cliff was on the committee that helped to prepare the report and has many insights as to how Pennsylvania can be made a safer place for patients. It is very important that we “report card” hospitals. Cliff believes that information about hospitals and infection rates should generally be made aware to the public so that patients can choose the safest hospitals. Much of this information is available through the Health Care Quality Containment Council and the Social Security Administration. However, the information is hard to find and requires hours of work on the computer. Patients should be able to know more about the hospitals and doctors, infection rates, and other problems that are encountered in hospitals.

The Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority has initiated a number of collaboratives, but unfortunately they are sometimes like the “fox guarding the hen house.” Whistleblower protection must be enhanced for honest employees of doctors and hospitals. Patients must be able to report problems and get prompt answers. Benchmarks must not only be established but also must be monitored in connection with Act 52, designed in Pennsylvania to cut down on the horrific rate of unnecessary hospital infections.

What Activities are Going On?

The NPSF is having its 20th anniversary in 2017, and this is the 15th year that the organization has led Patient Safety Awareness Week. During the week there will be activities including a free webcast with major speakers addressing the following themes:

What Patients Want (and Need) to Know – This will be broadcast on Tuesday, March 14, from 1:00 to 2:00 pm Eastern Time, NPSF (@theNPSF). The NPSF will host a Twitter Chat on the topic. They will be joined by governmental, advocacy, and professional organizations and individuals to share tips, resources, and tools on patient safety. You may participate by using the hashtag #psaw17chat.

The Voice of the Patient and the Public – Broadcast on Wednesday, March 15, from 2:00 to 3:00 PM Eastern Time. The NPSF will host a complimentary webcast, with Dr. Gandhi as moderator and a panel of speakers including Marshall Allen, reporter for ProPublica; Rosemary Gibson, senior advisor at the Hastings Center; and Martin J. Hatlie, JD, president and CEO of Project Patient Care. You can register online for this free program at http://bit.ly/psawweb17.

Throughout the week, NPSF is encouraging a demonstration that “We are all patients.” You can participate by posting photos of yourself in hospital gowns or in patient care settings and using the hashtag#WeAreAllPatients.

The NPSF is also urging health professionals and members of the public to take a pledge in support of patient safety. If you wish to participate in Patient Safety Awareness Week, visit the website, www.unitedforpatientsafety.org, to take the pledge, share plans for the week, get ideas for activities, download campaign materials, or honor a loved one touched by medical harm.

To help plan for the week, the NPSF has suggestions for medical facilities including:

Allowing civic groups and residents to meet the staff, visit emergency rooms, and see your facility.

Offering a suggestion box for patients and families and encouraging them to share suggestions for improvement.

Submitting editorials, first-person stories, and op-ed pieces for local papers and newsletters.

Playing the educational video or Ask Me 3® video in patient waiting rooms, exams rooms and other locations for staff and patients.

For more information and activities visit npsf.org/psaw

Trust Our Firm for Honest Answers and Contact Us For Assistance

If you or your loved ones have had any problem with unsafe patient practices and suffered injury as a result, the experienced Pennsylvania medical malpractice attorney Clifford A. Rieders of Rieders, Travis, Humphrey, Waters & Dohrmann can help determine if you may be entitled to compensation. Medical malpractice law is complicated and highly regulated by a complex body of rules. Whether in settlement negotiations or pursuing a favorable trial verdict, our attorneys know the law and are thoroughly prepared and committed to achieving a just outcome. We are leaders in the field and are known for settling cases efficiently and litigating cases with maximum compensation. With our professional staff, we offer strength in numbers while providing top-notch personal service.

Based in Williamsport, we serve clients throughout the state of Pennsylvania, offering a free consultation on all medical malpractice matters. We are dedicated to providing the legal support you need to have a successful case, and we offer you experience, knowledge, compassion, and a long history of results.

If you or your loved one has suffered from medical malpractice, do not delay. Consult Rieders, Travis, Humphrey, Waters & Dohrmann by calling 800-326-9259 for a free consultation, or use our online contact form.

Cliff Rieders is a Past President of the Pennsylvania Association for Justice, formerly Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association. Rieders has won numerous awards and recognition from the Pennsylvania Association for Justice. Rieders is on committees and organizations that write the law in many fields of practice. Cliff Rieders was involved in the writing of the Mcare Act, which governs medical liability actions in Pennsylvania. Cliff Rieders wrote the book on medical malpractice that lawyers use in the state. Cliff teaches the subject of medical malpractice at seminars attended by the leading lawyers in the state. Cliff Rieders is recognized as an outstanding authority in the medical malpractice field. Cliff has even testified before the legislature on medical malpractice laws. Cliff Rieders is the lawyer that other lawyers call for counsel and advice in the medical malpractice and pharmaceutical/vitamin supplement fields. Cliff Rieders is admitted in state and federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States.

The post National Patient Safety Awareness Week appeared first on Rieders, Travis, Humphrey, Waters & Dohrmann.

[d2kvirus]

The longest suicide note in history

Yesterday morning a quite remarkably rant was posted on the Facebook page of Theresa May - remarkably not because of its brutal honesty but because of the quite staggering amount of outright lies, blistering arrogance and staggering amount of delusion.

And here is what is wrong with every single section of it...

If I lose just six seats I will lose this election, and Jeremy Corbyn will be sitting down to negotiate with the presidents, prime ministers and chancellors of Europe 

It took just six words before the arrogance was dripping off every character, because the opening gambit is patently false: Theresa May cannot lose six seats, she can lose only one - her Parliamentary seat in Maidenhead.  It’s hardly the first time during this election where Theresa May’s rhetoric can best be described as “I, I, I...” as her statement when calling the election was more about her than anything else.  if she had said the Conservatives losing six seats would have been enough for them to lose the election, that would be a more accurate description of the situation.

Except it isn’t, as it was soon pointed out that losing nine seats, not six, would be enough for the Conservatives to lose the election.  So just like her Chancellor of the Exchequer who got his sums wrong about the cost of HS2 by a mere £20bn, her Home Secretary who claimed the average wage for police officers in the UK is higher than the maximum an officer can earn, or one of her MPs being caught out making up what the Immigration Skills Charge was during a radio interview, Theresa May failed to get her numbers correct in her opening gambit.

Does this really sound like somebody who can be trusted to negotiate with the presidents, prime ministers and chancellors of Europe?  It’s no wonder her negotiating strategy thus far has consisted of empty threats and more empty threats.

For anyone with any doubts about the importance of this election, the events of the past week should have put them to rest. With the publication of the Labour Party’s manifesto on Tuesday, and the launch of my own plan on Thursday, it is clearer than ever just how much is at stake.

The Labour manifesto is fully costed, telling people not only what their policies are but how they will be paid for - which of course led to talk of “magic money trees” asking where he will get the funding from, even though where that funding will come from is spelled out in the manifesto.

The Conservative manifesto does explain where the funding will come for over fifty pledges contained within - so where was the talk of “magic money trees” then?

Also contained within the Conservative manifesto was what is being referred to as Dementia Tax, where the cost of caring for those suffering from dementia will be paid for with the personal assets of the person who suffered from dementia.  Note the use of the past tense: this money will be taken after they die.  The fact that this policy was proposed during Dementia Awareness Week makes it that much more barbaric.

Stepping away from the policies for a moment, it;s also worth pointing out this paragraph contains the second example of May’s “I, I, I...” language when describing this election, even though people do not elect a leader in this country, they elect their Member of Parliament to represent them in the House of Commons.

Labour’s plan – with its fantastical promises and utopian vision – would drag this country back to the past. It would undo all the progress we have made, return us to the days when the trade unions held sway, and put our economic security at risk.

When did having a utopian vision become a bad thing?  Considering the opposite would be a vision for the future described by the likes of George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and the Bioshock franchise, I can’t understand why any party would write a manifesto saying their vision of society was one that Winston Smith knew so well.

More importantly, as especially since one of the well-worn soundbite about Labour is that “Jeremy Corbyn will drag the country back to the 1970s”, it’s worth pointing out some of the policies relevant to 21st century life that the Conservatives are proposing include bringing back fox hunting (a popular activity in the 18th century) and reintroducing grammar schools (a form of education popular in the 19th century)

As we’re talking about dragging Britain back to past decades, let us not forget that under the current Conservative government house building is at its lowest levels since the 1920s while the economy is suffering from its slowest post-crisis recovery since the 1720s.  So if this was a game of Top Trumps, the Conservatives are winning that particular game hands down because they;re not just dragging this country back decades, but even centuries.

As for putting the country’s economic security at risk...

It is a despairing document from a divisive party, written and shaped by a leader who doesn’t understand – or like – our country.

Can somebody remind me which political party has been so divisive that an internal party squabble somehow mutated into a national crisis as Britain was dragged out of the EU on a tsunami of outright lies? Was it Labour who were responsible for this, or was it the Conservatives?

By pledging an EU referendum in his 2015 manifesto to try and calm the right-wing fringe of the Conservative party, David Cameron is the man responsible for the most divisive issue in recent British political history, and not only did he horrifically bungle the Remain campaign - even though, after damn near breaking up the United Kingdom by bungling the Scottish referendum campaign, he should have learned to change his election tactics - but he failed to put a contingency plan into action in case the British electorate voted Leave.  And then he resigned in disgrace within hours of the result, as he was too much of a coward to sit in the mess he created, which is how Theresa May snuck into power.

Does that sound like a party that likes this country?  One where a leader places short-term political advantage above the actual country they're in charge of?  And let;s not forget about Cameron’s successor, who claimed to be pro-Remain during the campaign only to commit the first of her many, many u-turns once she lucked her way into power?  Doesn’t that sound like someone who places their political career above the wellbeing of the country?  That doesn’t sound like someone who likes this country.

Jeremy Corbyn has spent decades apologising for Britain. He accuses me of wanting to wrap myself in the Union Flag, as if that were a term of abuse. It’s little wonder that even traditional Labour voters look at what he believes in and are appalled.

Why does this sound so familiar?  I am sure I heard a similar sentiment somewhere.  I guess we can count ourselves lucky that nobody can think of any reason why apologising for this country might be necessary.

This is the point where this statement really begins to go off the rails, because by claiming that using the term “wrap myself in the Union Flag” is being used as a term of abuse is completely ignorant of the fact that the term is used as a term of abuse.  It took me five seconds to Google that definition (and several others) and yet apparently there isn’t a single researcher at Conservative Central Office who could have looked that one up.

He has disowned and rejected the core values of Labour’s most loyal supporters to put his own extreme ideological obsessions first.

This is an outright lie, a lie that insults the intelligence of anyone who remembers the pre-Blair Labour party as they are fully aware that Corbyn has not rejected the core values of Labour or their supporters, he has rejected the core values of New Labour - and let us not forget that Margaret Thatcher herself, the antithesis of Labour’s core values, stated that her greatest achievement was the creation of New Labour.

The prospect of him walking through the door of Number 10, flanked by John McDonnell and Diane Abbott and propped up by the Liberal Democrat and nationalist parties, should scare us all.

If the last section wasn’t insulting, this one certainly is.

First of all, in the 2010 general election the Conservatives failed to achieve an outright majority, and the only way they were able to get into power was by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats, which is something Theresa May should have remembered considering this is how she was able to become Home Secretary.  Equally she should have remembered a large part of the reason why she became Prime Minister was because of the nationalist parties, as the defection of Jim Reckless and Douglas Carswell from the Conservatives to UKIP played a large part in the reason why Cameron pledged the EU Referendum in the first place, and which nationalist party was prominent in the Leave campaign that put the country on course to have Theresa May become Prime Minister?  UKIP.

As for her talking about undesirables walking through the doors of 10 Downing Street, here is a short list of Conservative MPs who have flanked the Prime Minister as they walked through the doors of Number Ten since 2010 that I find far more abhorrent: George Osborne Jeremy Hunt Michael Gove Iain Duncan Smith Boris Johnson Theresa May Michael Fallon Amber Rudd Phillip Hammond Nikki Morgan Justine Greening Chris Grayling

And make no mistake, it could happen. The cold hard fact is that if I lose just six seats I will lose this election, and Jeremy Corbyn will be sitting down to negotiate with the presidents, prime ministers and chancellors of Europe.

The cold, hard facts are that not only is she repeating herself word-for-word at this point, not only is she once again saying “I, I, I...” about the seats of whichever Conservative MPs she believes may lose their seats, but she has still not corrected the six seat/nine seat error.

Yet with his manifesto this week, he has demonstrated that he is simply not up to the job of leading Britain through the critical years ahead.

Has anyone noticed that, while she repeatedly says the Labour manifesto is “weak”, at no point does she explain why she believes it to be “weak”?

Once again, the Labour manifesto is fully-costed, as is the Liberal Democrat manifesto for that matter, yet the Conservative manifesto is not.  Based on that criteria alone, which manifesto is the one which sounds “weak” - the one that tells you how it will pay for itself, or the one that expects you to believe they can conjure money out of thin air?

Manifestos are a test of leadership. They force leaders to choose their priorities, reckon with great challenges and face up to difficult decisions.

Jeremy Corbyn has failed that test. His shambolic prospectus ducks all the difficult decisions we face as a country, threatening to bring chaos to Britain and selling future generations short.

Some of the priorities chosen by Theresa May * Asset-stripping those with dementia * Means testing the winter fuel allowance for the elderly * Having animals torn apart by a pack of dogs while they are still alive * Taking away free school meals for children

In comparison, the key points of the Labour manifesto include * Pledging to reverse the funding cuts to the NHS * Setting up a National Education Service, providing free education to all * Improving worker’s rights, with a rise in the minimum wage and scrapping tribunal fees so people can contest unfair dismissal without paying £1200 first * Repatriation of UK infrastructure

I freely admit to cherry picking the best of one and the worst of the other for this, but here’s the point: none of the four Labour items feature in the Conservative manifesto, and yet those are actual priorities for the people of this country.

I believe in being upfront and straight with people.

Theresa May has been so upfront and straight with people during this election campaign that she has refused to appear in any televised leader’s debate, mainly appeared at clearly stage-managed events (including at least one event that was falsely advertised as a child’s birthday party to stop the press finding out about it) where only pre-approved journalists can ask questions (and the public who were there were barred from talking to journalists afterwards), and has had journalists shut out from these same events - and this is hardly new behavior for her, given she was adamant on micromanaging everything into oblivion when she was Home Secretary.

More than this, Theresa May believes in being upfront and straight with people that she repeatedly claimed she would not call a general election before 2020...and then went and called one.

We face some great challenges as a nation.

Not least nurses and members of the police force having to use food banks - something which Theresa May has great difficulty trying to explain how this has happened.

How to make sure our economy stays strong; how we ensure Britain emerges from Brexit stronger, more united and more confident than ever before;

The wording here is downright perplexing, considering we’ve heard several times already about “tough decisions” and “critical times” and yet now we’re told the economy is “strong” - so which is it?  If the economy is as strong as she suggests, wouldn’t that mean the decisions aren’t so tough as we’re all living in a forest of magic money trees?

Or is it that the economy isn't strong as a result of the Leave vote and she’s merely thrown yet another blatant lie into this library of lies, damn lies and...I was about to complete the sentence, but then realised there isn’t a single statistic in here.

how we overcome social divisions, spread opportunity and make Britain the world’s Great Meritocracy

Britain isn’t a meritocracy, far from it, as social mobility has stagnated due to one barrier after another being erected.  From ever-increasing student loan repayments to house prices that have ballooned since the 1970s, from wages being their lowest for seventy years to above ever-increasing price hikes on food, fuel and rail fares, meritocracy is a myth in this country.

how to restore the contract between generations, providing security for older people while being fair to the young;

Is that by stealing food from the mouths of the latter, while asset-stripping the former?  because that’s what’s in the Conservative manifesto.

and how we seize the opportunities on offer in a digital world.

Talking about opportunities in the digital world a week after the NHS was brought to its knees by a ransomware attack made possible by the Conservatives being so keen to “seize the opportunities on offer in a digital world” that not only has the NHS has been running on Windows XP, an operating system launched in 2001, replaced by Windows Vista in 2007, and hasn’t had any security updates since 2014, but it soon came to light that Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt ignored repeated warning to upgrade the system’s security in order to save £5.5m.

Far, far worse than that is Theresa May’s proposal to have an internet that is controlled and regulated by the government, which includes huge restrictions on what people can post, share and publish online, while we have also had Home Secretary Amber Rudd demanding a ban on internet encryption.  In other words, not only would the UK have an internet more akin to that of China than any western nation, but that internet would be open to hacking from any half-decent hacker, meaning that the NHS ransomware attack could well look like a birthday party (and that’s an actual birthday party, not an excuse for Theresa May to avoid interactive with undesirables who might ask her questions) in comparison to the likely scenario for what the Conservatives thing their version of the internet should be.

We cannot wish these challenges away. But with a government that steps up, shows leadership and takes the big, sometimes difficult decisions that are right for Britain in the long-term, we can see them as opportunities instead.

...and we;’re back to doom-mongering with decisions that are big and difficult, even though the previous (much dissected) paragraph was talking about strength and opportunity.

The Government I lead will be that active government. A mainstream government that delivers for mainstream Britain. We will leave the European Union and the single market, and take control of our borders, our money and our laws – because we respect the will of the British people and recognise that, however they voted, people just want us to get on with the job of delivering Brexit.

So far Theresa May has got on with the job of leaving the EU by spending nine months doing nothing but uttering meaningless soundbites that may as well have been her saying "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious means Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" for as much worth as they had, issue one threat after another to the EU that is hardly going to be conducive to getting Britain anything approaching a fair deal when leaving the EU, and having triggered Article 50 she immediately called a snap election which means that rather than “getting on with” the task in hand she’s spending an additional two months organising a campaign for an election she said would not happen until 2020.

The fact she’s quoting the “will of the people” drivel spouted by the most vociferous of Leave campaigners as a means to shout down anyone who dares disagree with the idea that leaving the EU will not lead to a new Golden Age (but it is leading to a second Scottish independence referendum) is the rancid cherry on top of the stale and bitter cake.

We will bring net migration down to sustainable levels to tens of thousands rather than hundreds of thousands – because when immigration is too fast and too high, it is difficult to build a cohesive society.

Theresa May has made this exact promise when she was Home Secretary, and not only did she miss her target by a wide margin, but she also oversaw the highest level of net immigration in British history.

She failed to deliver on this pledge.  Miserably.

We will ensure taxes are low and money is targeted on the right priorities – because Conservatives know it is taxpayers’ money and we have a duty to spend it well.

Since becoming Prime Minister, Theresa May has broken pledges on not raising income tax and National Insurance by...raising income tax and planning to raise national insurance - only to u-turn on the latter.  How can anyone claim that they want to keep taxes low when they have increased them or planned to increase them in the past few months?  It’s absurd.

And we will invest in the future to ensure each generation is able to do better than the last.

...as long as that future involves attending a grammar school. For those that don't, you'll be going to an overcrowded and underfunded public school on an empty stomach, and when you graduate you'll find less technical colleges and adult education centres than there were a decade ago so you will have less chances of learning new skills, when you join the workforce you will be getting paid less than people who graduated ten years ago, and if you're lucky you may be able to buy a house by the time you're fifty - which will be sold from under you when you need care in your old age.

And we will continue to pay down our nation’s debts, because it is wrong to pass to future generations a bill you cannot or will not pay yourself.

George Osborne said the deficit would be paid off by 2015. That schedule was later extended until 2020. It was initially claimed by Theresa May the deficit would be paid off by 2022. More recently, she has claimed the deficit will be paid off by 2025.

In the space of seven years the Conservatives have got halfway to passing off the nation’s debts to future generations by taking at least a decade longer to pay off the deficit than they claimed in their campaign ahead of the 2010 General Election.

The next five years will be critical for Britain. Our future prosperity, our place in the world, our economic security and the opportunities we want for our children – and our children’s children – all depend on getting the best Brexit deal for Britain.

If those years are so critical, why are you bellowing "No deal is better than a bad deal" at every opportunity? That directly affects our economic security, which directly affects future prosperity, which directly affects opportunities we want for our children, and our children's children...and are any of them going to get a free breakfast?

That will require leadership from a prime minister who is strong enough to stand up for Britain, and a government that is stable enough to steer the country safely through the negotiations ahead.

It took long enough, but she couldn’t resist sneaking in the “strong and stable” soundbite that’s been playing from Conservative Central Office like a hellish symphony ever since the election was called back in April - although, after this tirade, the word “stable” really needs to be removed from their election materials because it got beyond the pale several paragraphs ago.

So far I have listed a Prime Minister who places their political career above everything else, a Health Secretary who is so callous about the NHS that they would rather keep £5.5m that spend it on protecting an antiquated IT system that is used by a service that was set up to keep people alive, a Chancellor of the Exchequer who doesn’t know how much major projects cost, a Home Secretary who doesn’t know what police officers earn yet does believe the country will be safer if we could be hacked at any given moment due to the lack of encryption on our machines - and all this is before other “stable” members of her party, such as the aforementioned MP who was pulling figures out of his backside on live radio, or the MP who told a child to “fuck off back to Scotland”, and then there’s the Councillor who posted a racist tweet while watching the Eurovision Song Contest, and then there’s the little detail about how they were apparently guilty enough of fiddling their election expenses in 2015 to be fined £70,000 - but somehow the Crown Prosecution Service bought the cock and bull story about how all thirty of their MPs (allegedly including the Home Secretary) being investigated were unaware of election spending rules.  Because of course they weren’t.

With a track record like that, how the hell does this sound like a “stable” government?

With his manifesto this week, Jeremy Corbyn has shown he is simply not up to that task.

Since this is another example of Theresa May repeating herself, I guess I should join in on the act and mention how we’re still waiting to hear about how the policies in the Conservative manifesto will be paid for.

For that reason, and because of the chaos his plans would unleash on this country, I will redouble my efforts in the weeks to come to earn every vote. That will strengthen my hand when I negotiate in Europe and help me build a stronger, fairer, more prosperous Britain.

As opposed to a party who not only unleashed chaos upon this country with the aforementioned inter-party squabble that mutated into Britain being dragged out of the EU, chaos which was exacerbated by a complete lack of contingency plan in case the referendum ended with a Leave result rather than Remain result.

Theresa May does not have a hand to strengthen, she’s someone acting as if they have a Royal Flush but the presidents, prime ministers and chancellors of Europe can all see she’s sat at the table without a single card in her hand and she still thinks she’s in a position to bluff.  She isn’t, she’s the political equivalent of that person two rows behind you at the cinema who will not shut up for the entire duration of a film, which is neither “strong” nor “stable” but an irritant who people are stuck with for the duration of the film.

A country our children and grandchildren are proud to call home.

"Mummy, why is granddad crying?" "It's because granddad has had his assets seized to pay for his social care." Is that a scenario that our children and grandchildren would be proud to face up to?