#like in the UK you need ''evidence of living in your gender for the last 2 years'' which seems like so much effort | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

pantoneblou · 4 years ago

Text

Why I think Fine Line has to be listened to in full: A masterpost

So, a couple of weeks ago, literally one lovely anon asked me to do some Fine Line and Walls lyric analyses, which I know is not probable cause for me to bombard all your dashes with a masterpost of incoherent rambling. However, as I began trying to analyse the songs on Fine Line individually, I realised that most of my opinions are built upon the links between the songs. So, I decided that I’m going to try and explain why I think that Fine Line is more like a journey through a long-term relationship, from Harry’s perspective, than twelve stand alone songs (i.e. You need to listen to all the songs on the album in order to understand some of the more cryptic meanings). I don’t necessarily think that there’s something major to say about all the songs (Harry can be quite literal at times) but I’m going to talk about each of the lyrical choices that stand out to me.

So, without further ado, here is my take on Fine Line:

Golden

I’m kicking this off with Golden, mainly because it’s the first on FL but also because I think my interpretation differs slightly from others I’ve seen.

Golden, for me, really starts off the album by introducing us to where Harry is at now upon his journey with the album’s subject. It’s essentially an ode to an amazing, ‘golden’ person, who has continued to persevere with Harry as he’s gone through some trying and testing stages, which will then be acknowledged and spoken about later in the album. Here’s why:

Golden, golden, golden, as I open my eyes,

Hold it, focus, hoping, take me back to the light.

So, Harry starts us off with some hefty repetition that confirms straight away just how great this person is. However, when he says ‘as I open my eyes’, I think he’s referring to the early days of their relationship. In the following line, therefore, I believe he’s longing for the ease of their early days. The subject and their greatness hasn’t changed (hence the present tense and frequent commands in the second line) but Harry has, and whilst he knows its for the best, he can’t help but long for the simplicity of when they first met.

I know you were way too bright for me.

I'm hopeless, broken. So, you wait for me in the sky.

Browns my skin just right

Here’s where I start to get the idea that it is Harry’s issues that have perhaps separated the two of them. Through it all, the person has remained perfect (in Harry’s eyes), someone to look up to who has a wonderful patience and enough love for Harry to ‘wait’ for him. The line ‘browns my skin just right’ is so lovely, because whilst Harry is acknowledging that there were times when their relationship may not have been working, this person’s perfection has never faltered, and they’ve continued to improve Harry’s life and make him happy.

You're so golden (x2)

I'm out of my head

And I know that you're scared

Because hearts get broken

So, I feel like the final lines of each chorus are where people start to get confused with this song. I think – and here’s where I think people might start to disagree with me – that Harry isn’t saying that this Golden figure is scared of their own heart getting broken, but Harry’s. Whilst they continue to be perfect, ‘golden’ in every way possible, they’re afraid for Harry, of what Harry might face as a result of his actions but this song is Harry’s way of saying that it’s okay, I’ll be fine.

I don't wanna be alone (x2)

When it ends, don't wanna let you know

I don't wanna be alone

This part confuses me a little, because when what ends Harry? Going down the lines of the rest of my interpretation, I’m gonna guess that Harry is talking about their relationship. This, to me, is one of the many times across Fine Line where Harry admits his faults a lot more than most other artists do in their songs. He doesn’t want to be apart from this person, so much so that he’d be willing to make it work even if it should truly be over.

But I, I can feel it take a hold (x2)

I can feel you take control (x2)

Of who I am and all I've ever known

Loving you's the antidote

But, it doesn’t really matter, because he’s happy allowing this person to steer the course of the rest of his life. Loving them is the ‘antidote’ to his fears, and he wishes they could see just how wonderful they are so that they’ll stop worrying about him.

Chorus repeated

Bridge

I do find his live lyric changes very interesting here, I’m pretty sure he’s now said all of these at some point ‘I’m hoping someday you’ll open’, ‘I’m hoping someday he’ll open’ and ‘I’m hoping someday I’ll open’. Either way, they all still fit in this interpretation for me. I find it especially interesting that the last lyric change (at the jingle ball) was so recent. I think perhaps this is yet another indication that the turmoil referenced in this song is not yet over.

I know that you're scared

Because I'm so open

These are another two lines that I see talked about a LOT and they are hugely important to my interpretation of this song. I do NOT believe that Harry is saying this person is scared because they can’t be as open as Harry. I believe, again, that he’s saying they’re scared for him. They’re scared of the possible backlash that Harry might face for his openness (if we’re getting personal, perhaps his gender expression, his sexuality, etc.). For me, Harry definitely isn’t saying, I know you’re scared to be as open as me, it’s him saying: I know you’re scared about me being the way that I am, about how it might get me hurt. But I. have. you. And that’s all I could ever need, it’s the antidote to all my fears, and I hope one day you’ll be able to see that you’re the reason I’m able to be this ‘open’.

Overall, I think Golden is Harry’s promise that, for as long as he has the ‘golden’ subject, he’s safe from his heart being ‘broken’.

Watermelon Sugar

I don’t think that Watermelon Sugar has been wrongly interpreted in the past (ie, I do think it can be read as a celebration of the joy found in a sexual relationship). However, I think some lyrics are actually super wholesome, and I read WS as more of a teenage version of Golden.

For example:

Tastes like strawberries

On a summer evenin'

And it sounds just like a song

I want more berries

And that summer feelin'

It's so wonderful and warm

Everything about this first verse just screams adolescence to me? The summer evenings are those in which you played out with your friends until the sun finally went in at 9pm, and the ‘song’ is a beautiful one that you’re listening to for the first time. That’s what the love felt like for him, at first. It was passionate, yes, but also endlessly warm and safe.

Baby you’re the end of June

What do we associate with June here in the UK? Long days of (well I wish it was endless, but at least persistent) sunshine. Here’s where I get my evidence that WS is about the same person as Golden. This person is a ‘summer evening’ personified, they’re his sunshine.

I want your belly

This lyric is just??? The cute little face emoji??? In a lyric??? Like, ‘belly’ isn’t a word I hear adults use very often??? This lyric tells us that Harry longs for that feeling of initial infatuation, the time when all they could think about was being together and getting lost in one another.

Ultimately, I see WS as the Golden prequel. It’s their relationship before either of them faced any hardship, when they were able to be freely and completely ‘washed’ up in one another. The WS days are the days he yearns for when he asks to be ‘[taken] back to the light’ in Golden.

Adore You

Not a huge amount to say about this song. I think it’s worth mentioning that there are many indications that it’s definitely about the same lover as Golden and WS. Harry uses similar weather analogies, this time referring to a ‘rainbow paradise’ instead of the more literal sunshine he refers to in Golden and WS. But it’s the same theme. AY makes it clear that Harry associates this person with everything bright, warm and comfortable, they’re ‘brown skin and lemon over ice’, they’re his summer. This song, however, is more about him begging for them to just let him indulge himself in his love for them.

Lights Up

I don’t have much to say about the whole song that hasn’t already been said but have we talked about this lyric?

All the lights couldn't put out the dark

Running through my heart

Because I think it’s important that he accepts darkness in a song and an album that is otherwise so focused on the light. I will be saying this a lot, but Harry has a habit of acknowledging his humanness in his lyrics in a way that I don’t think a lot of artists manage to (think: ‘arrogant son of a bitch’, ‘what am I now?’, ‘I’m selfish so I’m hating it’). This line really does it for me. ‘Lights up’, otherwise, is a non-apology for Harry accepting who he is. But in this line, he seems to acknowledge that it doesn’t matter how much he accepts himself, it doesn’t right the wrongs he’s committed, or dull his imperfections. But Lights Up is him saying ‘I don’t care’.

So earlier, when I said that he’s asking the subject of Golden not to be scared? This is what he’s talking about. He’s asking them not to be scared about the consequences of him stepping into the light because he’s not scared any more; he doesn’t care if his ‘heart gets broken’, because he’s done not being ‘open’, and he’s joining his ‘golden’ person in the light.

Cherry

Cherry is where the album begins to truly delve into the more difficult parts of this relationship, where they perhaps took some time apart.

I was going to do a full lyric analysis of it, but the more I look at it, the more I just think it’s Harry at his absolute pettiest (and if anything that kind of makes me love it more??)

Have we ever discussed how much he sounds like a stroppy child when he says ‘Did you know I still talk to [your friends]?’ or ‘Does he take you walking round his parent’s gallery?’ I can almost picture Harry asking these questions in a high-pitched, whiny voice when he drop some stuff round at an ex’s place. The reason this makes me love him even more is he’s not just admitting to that post-break up stage that we all go through but kind of pretend that we don’t, he actually wrote a whole fucking song about it. He’s admitting that even he isn’t free from getting a bit overly bitter about watching your lover be happy without you. It’s such a lovely way to capture what is otherwise quite an unpleasant feeling, and again, it’s Harry acknowledging his humanness.

Falling

And then, after that initial feeling of utter pettiness and jealousy, comes the dejection, the realisation that you’re not the same person that you were when you were in the relationship as you are now, without them. Cherry and Falling confirm, for me, that whether it’s a break up Harry’s talking about, or just some really serious troubles, this relationship really forced him to look inside himself.

Most of its quite self-explanatory, but there are some particularly heart-breaking lyrics in this song. In the last chorus, when Harry asks ‘What if you’re someone I just want around?’ he perfectly captures that feeling of knowing that right now, your relationship may not be healthy for either party, but, as it’s basically all you know, you just want that well-known comfort. He’s almost begging them here, asking them why his love for them isn’t enough to make it work, even though he knows they need time apart.

Linking it to my interpretation of the rest of the album, I think there’s a real importance in the image of Harry ‘falling’. He told us in ‘lights up’ that he was never coming back down, yet now? He’s ‘falling again’. He hasn’t reached the ground, but he’s in danger of doing so.

Also, I feel the need to talk about the short bridge

I get the feeling that you’ll never need me again

I think the really important thing here is the verb, to need. I don’t think Harry believes there is no chance of repairing the relationship. Instead, I think that he knows there’s a possibility they’ll want one another again, but they’re grown enough to recognise that they can exist apart, they don’t need each other anymore.

Therefore, as gut-wrenching as this song is, I see it as Harry’s acceptance that he might not need this other person in his life to display the confidence he did in Lights Up, but he wants them there, oh so desperately, ultimately bringing us back round to ‘loving you’s the antidote’.

To Be So Lonely

The last of the not-so-happy tracks (well, other than Fine Line but we’ll get on to that). Their relationship is on the up again, but there is a lot of repairing to do.

Again, this song isn’t overly cryptic. But there are some important things to note.

Don’t call me baby again

In ‘Cherry’, he was pleading with them not to use that pet name with another man. Now, he’s pleading with them not to use it on him. I get the sense that he’s finally accepted that they can’t immediately act like nothing's happened, and is willing to try at friendship, but he isn’t quite ready yet himself.

I just hope you see me in a little better light

Do you think it's easy being of the jealous kind?

Light imagery, again. He’s hoping that now, the subject is able to see him as a better person, perhaps less petty and angry as he was in Cherry and less self-pitying than he was in Falling. Once again, he beautifully displays his flaws in the following line, making it clear that even pop star Harry Styles is guilty of being a jealous little bastard.

And this is it, so I’m sorry

When he enters the chorus after this line, he creates the impression that the chorus is his apology, confirming what he said earlier on in the song (that he’s actually just really bloody bad at apologising). But even considering the moody undertones, this is still an apology. He’s saying that he knows this person had their reasons to spend some time away from him, he knows they both needed it, he just needs a little more time to wallow. It’s the most indulgent song on the album.

I think it’s really important to note that whilst the tone of the song can appear slightly angry, he never once calls the subject out on any of their faults. It’s just as self-deprecating as the rest of the album, and he doesn’t imply that the subject is ever anything but the same person he idolised in Golden, WS or AY. Essentially, TBSL is Harry making it clear that he needs time to be dramatic, even when he knows they’re going to make it.

She

I’ve seen some absolutely wonderful analyses of She, and I share in the sentiment that it is most likely about a journey with gender identity, so I will refrain from rewriting the thoughts of others here.

I do, however, think it’s worth mentioning that back in the Golden analysis, when I referred to the thing that maybe scares the ‘Golden’ figure, and back in the Lights Up analysis, when I said that Harry has found who he is? I definitely believe there’s a link to the journey referenced in She. I think Harry’s journey to self acceptance was something that he had to go through alone, but that didn’t stop it from impacting upon his relationships.

Imo, Sunflower forms the final part of the perfect trio of celebratory songs, alongside Golden and Watermelon Sugar. Golden encompasses the journey, Watermelon Sugar is the beginning and Sunflower comes after the period of separation, as they’re rebuilding their relationship. It’s basically Watermelon Sugar 2.0, the adult version.

Sunflower, Vol. 6

And finally, we're out of the woods!

This time, however, Harry has realised his worth. My not-very-common interpretation of this song is that Harry is the sunflower, not the subject. Why do I think this? Well:

Sunflower (x2), my eyes, want you more than a melody

Like a sunflower turned towards the sun, Harry is stuck pining for this person and longing for their light, ‘more than a melody’. Again, we have multiple links to different songs. The first time they got together (referenced in WS) their love was ‘like a song’. This time, he wants them more than a melody. It’s going to be better, brighter and happier. Alike Golden, this person is as important as the sun, but now Harry, too, is something beautiful. (I know that he always was but he’s realised it now)

Let me inside

Wish I could get to know you

Sunflowers, sometimes, keep it sweet in your memory

Here’s the line that really makes me think Harry is the sunflower, not the subject. In order to be talking about the subject when he uses the word Sunflower, this line would be a switch from speaking directly to the subject, to speaking directly to an audience. I think it’s much simpler than that. If we read the whole song, instead, as simply him speaking only to his subject, then he’s almost asking them to ‘keep it sweet in [their] memory’. Perhaps, this is him showing them that he knows he’s always been this beautiful in their memory, but now he’s aware of it, and wants to ‘get [back] inside’.

I was just tongue-tied

I don't wanna make you feel bad, but I've been trying hard not to talk to you

This just has super innocent energy for me. It’s mega-sweet. He doesn’t want to make them feel bad, he knows he had to learn who he was, and now he’s figured it out he’s just desperate to share it with them.

I couldn't want you any more

Kiss in the kitchen like it's a dance floor

I couldn’t want you anymore tonight.

Wondering headshake, tired eyes are the death of me.

Mouthful of toothpaste, before I got to know you.

I have nothing to say other than these lines are adorably domestic. He’s longing for the warmth and comfort of the love he knows they can share together.

I've got your face, hung up high in the gallery

I love this shade

Again, Harry’s making it clear that he still sees this person as worthy of his ultimate devotion. But this time, the tone is just way simpler than Golden. ‘I love this shade’ suggests to me that he just loves what they are now - he loves to colours that they’ve grown to be, together.

The rest of the song is quite repetitive but there are some stand outs:

Your flowers just died

Plant new seeds in the melody

Yet another lyric that makes me think that Harry is suggesting that he’s the flower and not the subject. He’s changed, been reborn, and now they can plant new seeds together and he’ll grow into something even better. What’s important, really, is that he belongs to the subject, he’s their flower.

And lastly, just,

I’m still tongue tied

Basically, confirmation that this song is about re-infatuation. He was tongue tied in the past, back in the WS days, and he still is now. He’s absolute enamoured with this person, and even now, they have the ability to make him speechless.

Ultimately, Sunflower Vol. 6 is about the feeling of falling in love a second, third, fourth, etc. time over. It’s about rediscovering everything you love about a person, and it brings us out of the rocky part of the album.

Canyon Moon

Finally, they’re back together. Everything is so good this time that whenever he’s around any other couple, he’s thinking of the subject.

There’s not much to say here, other than Harry’s repetitive bridge of multiple ‘I’m going home’ is sooooooo sweet because it’s almost like he’s just sharing with the listeners how he is so elated that he gets to call this person his home again.

Treat People with Kindness

This is probably the only song that doesn’t appear to fit smoothly into my interpretation, but I do think it’s Harry finally acknowledging the outside world, beyond him and the subject. For instance, he doesn’t only use the pronoun ‘I’, but ‘we’ and ‘us’ (If we’re here long enough, they’ll sing a song for us).

Therefore, I don’t really know how else to interpret this other than it being Harry’s request for the world to stop judging everyone and their relationships so harshly. Meaning I can’t, for the life of me, understand a reading in which the relationship that he’s on about isn’t a queer one. But I don’t think I need to get into that...

Fine Line

I’ve already written several in-depth analyses of Fine Line and some of the lyrics that stand out for me (which you can read here), so I’m not going to do it again. However, I think it’s the most beautiful way Harry could have possibly ended the album. It may seem, according to this entire masterpost, that Fine Line wouldn’t make sense as the final song because the overriding tone of the last third of the album is so positive (whilst the song itself is so utterly heart-wrenching).

However, one thing that I think I need to mention here, is that no matter what him and his subject go through and no matter how much Harry endures, this person has remained, without fault, his ‘sunshine’, and Fine Line confirms that for us. Yet, he also acknowledges that the subject is also human, so human that they both have things even they’ll ‘never know’, and his subject has layers upon layers in their being --> spreading you open, is the only way of knowing you

Ultimately, Fine Line (the song) confirms, for me, that this entire album is focused on someone that Harry has found a true soulmate in, his ‘sunshine’, but someone who he is in reachable distance of, who he can join in the ‘light’. And together, they’ll get through whatever the world throws at them. In a way, Fine Line almost completes a perfect circle, bringing us back around to Golden, ready to start the album again. The journey explored in the album is both Harry’s romance with the subject and his own journey to self acceptance, which are closely intertwined (revealed immediately in Golden). When we reach the final song, he’s accepted himself, but he knows that he and his partner are going to face more difficulties. Their fight isn’t over. But, with his overwhelming love for the person...

together, ‘[they’ll] be alright.’

#So #this took me a while lol #But it's a summary of some thoughts that have been swimming round my head for a while #I don't think I've seen some of these interpretations before?#Especially not of Golden and Sunflower #Anyway if anyone wants to discuss anything further pls pop me a message because I could talk on Harry's lyrics for days.#Walls analysis will follow shortly #Also anon #I know you wanted me to look at the parrallels in the Walls and Lights Up music videos so I will aim to include that in the next one #Anyways love to y'all and enjoy reading #Fine Line masterpost #Fine Line lyrics #Golden lyrics #watermelon sugar lyrics #lights up lyrics #adore you lyrics #cherry lyrics #falling lyrics #to be so lonely lyrics #she lyrics #sunflower vol 6 lyrics #canyon moon lyrics #treat people with kindness lyrics #harry styles #harry styles lyrics #hs #larry stylinson #lourry #lyrics analysis #harry styles lyrics analysis

38 notes · View notes

thatsonemorbidcorvid · 4 years ago

Text

It was at the tail end of 2017 when Cora*, a frontline worker for a south London organisation supporting women who have survived sexual violence, realised that undercurrents of transmisogyny had become a new precedent for her workplace.

“I just remember there being far more comments like ‘Yeah we only support real women’,” Cora says.

Both visibility and hostility were on the rise for trans people in the UK thanks to proposed reform to the Gender Recognition Act. As a result, many junior workers were attempting to ensure inclusivity for trans survivors. But senior staff, made up of cis women, responded by shutting down the conversation altogether.

Cora’s organisation is not an island. On record, gal-dem has spoken to workers in the violence against women and girls [VAWG] sector, who have spent time at organisations including Imkaan, Rape Crisis, Refuge, Amnesty International and Liberty, academics working in the field of gender studies and members of the dedicated gender-based violence branch of union United Voices of the World. Of the workers who spoke to gal-dem, all were too terrified of reprisals to use their real names.

Alongside interviews, gal-dem examined records of public statements made by senior members of organisations like Nia, Southall Black Sisters, and the Centre for Women’s Justice. What emerges is a hostile landscape to navigate for trans survivors of sexual violence, both in accessing immediate frontline services and overcoming ideology that seeks to shut them out of the gender-based violence sector (GBV) in general. With one in six trans women experiencing domestic violence between 2017 to 2018 (and more recent figures suggesting violence against trans people remains high), this landscape’s hostility is undoubtedly already having damaging effects.

At Cora’s organisation, it quickly became apparent that senior staff were deliberately shelving pressing trans-related issues, in the hope that they would disappear altogether. Cora alleges that the CEO Rachel*, who had served as the head of the organisation for nearly three decades, encouraged a culture that was openly hostile to trans women.

Regular requests for the centre’s policy regarding trans women were lodged, but the policy didn’t exist. A lone attempt to create a gender inclusion policy ended with the firing of the employee tasked with producing it. As Cora remembers it, the day after the employee submitted their work, they were told their position was no longer viable. Although it wasn’t cited as a factor in the decision, Cora believes the incident speaks for itself. The policy was not adopted by the centre.

Staff soon began to organise and demand an outright commitment to supporting trans people, pushing the transphobic views of senior management into the open.

“We do get abusive callers on the helpline. But they present as men, not as trans women”

Cora remembers one member of the counselling department declaring that it was “unsafe” for cis survivors using the centre’s services to have people in the building who had not fully medically transitioned. She was challenged by Cora and her colleagues, who explained that this transmisogyny went against the fundamental principles of sexual violence workers: that you must believe survivors.

“I find it fascinating in a horrific way that this bedrock of [sexual violence services] is thrown out of the window immediately,” Cora observes. “They say, ‘Oh, men will just call up pretending to be women, and saying that they’re trans to get into the space to enact harm’.

“Do you not think we are trained in such a way that we are able to speak to someone and know? Because we do get abusive callers on the helpline. But they present as men, [not as trans women]… When you get a call like that, you know. As soon as you pick up the phone, it doesn’t feel right. The gut that you’ve honed so wonderfully and beautifully to do this work, it knows”.

When Cora and her colleague refuted transmisogynistic claims, the goalposts shifted. Senior staff instead claimed they weren’t equipped to work with trans women because they wouldn’t “understand” their experience with sexual violence. Tellingly, one staff member who used such a defence said they would feel comfortable supporting trans men who had “experienced violence as women” – revealing that they didn’t recognise trans men as men.

“There is a real focus on the penis,” Cora says.

Cora left the organisation a few years ago, in part due to the virulent transmisogyny that had become the norm. Rachel stepped down from the CEO position in 2020, after what Cora describes as “successful unionising efforts” from the organisation’s staff. While the new CEO is “far more inclusive”, Cora says, her former co-workers report that hostility to trans survivors persists.

“The problem is much deeper than top down,” she says. “It runs through most of the services.”

Women vs women

Cora’s organisation has become part of a larger war. Transphobia – or ‘gender criticism’ as its proponents like to position it – has become a battleground for a small but powerful pocket of UK feminists. With access to mainstream media platforms, large social media audiences and political influence, these ‘gender-critical’ feminists are attempting to turn trans people from a minority group into a full-scale moral panic.

But where does the antagonism towards trans people in the VAWG sector come from? Academic Alison Phipps, professor of gender studies at the University of Sussex, links it to “political whiteness”. Transmisogyny in the UK is focused on violence against white, cis women and “lasers in” on the male body as the source of that violence, Phipps explains. “There’s a lot of straight, [white], privileged [cis] women involved. Whiteness has a lot to do with it. Whiteness and class privilege.”

Weaponising woundedness against marginalised groups has always been a core component of white womanhood and political whiteness, adds Phipps. “It’s Carolyn Bryant [Emmett Till’s accuser] all over again,” she says. “[Trans-exclusionary feminism] is grounded in fear and, in some cases, a hatred of the Other and a deep need for protection.”

For the last few years, trans-exclusionary feminists central objective – achieved for the time being – was to prevent reforms to the Gender Recognition Act that promised to make the process of legally identifying as trans or non-binary (which isn’t a recognised legal identity at the time of writing) far quicker.

A spotlight fell on women-only services for survivors of sexual and domestic abuse as a result. In order to provide rationale for their aversion to trans individuals, the gender-critical cabal alighted upon whipping up fear around trans women who might need to access such spaces. For trans-exclusionary feminists, the argument goes that allowing self-determination through GRA reforms would open up ‘single-sex’ sites to ‘predatory men’, who would supposedly pretend to be women in order to perpetuate abuse.

Yet trans women, with some exceptions, already have access to single-sex spaces under the 2010 Equality Act, which would remain unchanged by any amendments to the GRA. Furthermore, no countries that already allow self-determination have reported any sudden trend of cis men engaging in such behaviours. A 2018 Guardian investigation found that Ireland, which introduced self-determination in 2015, has seen “no evidence” of new legislation leading to men “falsely declaring themselves female”.

No matter; gender critical feminists in the UK still insist that the sex assigned at birth must decide who is admitted to women-only spaces. Never mind that multiple global studies show that trans women report sexual and domestic violence at double the rate of cis women (with trans women of colour facing the most peril) – but, as with cis women, the perpetrators were most likely to be men.

“Trans-exclusionary feminism is grounded in fear and, in some cases, a hatred of the Other”

Phipps believes many transphobic, white radical feminists also think that acknowledging their own privileges compared to the likes of trans women is tantamount to erasing their traumatic experiences. “It’s as if they think ‘if you tell us we’re privileged because we’re cis, that means we haven’t been raped or haven’t experienced these awful things’,” she observes. “Well of course you have and that’s awful and it’s because of your gender. But that doesn’t mean you don’t also have race and class and cis privileges.”

In the VAWG sector in particular, Phipps says there is the feeling of “living in the past”, with particular aping of the 1970s women’s liberation movement. It’s a notable reference point for trans-exclusionary feminists, many of whom experienced the movement as young women. But they’ve created a warped pastiche that erases contemporary critiques of white radical feminism that were made at the time, says Phipps.

Radical feminist texts of the 1970s were often trans-inclusive. While the likes of Andrea Dworkin held problematic notions around issues like sex work, they weren’t trans-exclusionary and didn’t see the body in “essentialist” terms. In stark contrast, trans-exclusionary feminists of the present, do.

The crusade against trans women is tragic, says Phipps, a focus of energies on completely the wrong target. “There is a war against women worldwide,” she says. “But trans women are also [victims] of this war, not the perpetrators.”

A worsening situation

Frontline VAWG workers say that hierarchical power structures mean transmisogyny is often sanctioned from the top. Close ties between powerful names in the sector mean it is hard to challenge for fear of being blacklisted from multiple organisations. Nevertheless, those who spoke to gal-dem said they did so out of a desire to lift a lid on the situation and encourage more scrutiny of the reality behind the press releases.

“I couldn’t [continue to] work for an LGBTQ charity that poses like it’s inclusive,” says Lily* a former employee of one high profile organisation serving sufferers of domestic violence. She says she witnessed virulent transmisogyny during her time there.

One incident occurred when Lily’s workplace was developing a helpline for clients. She and her colleagues were concerned that the helpline wasn’t inclusive enough because the organisation didn’t have a gender inclusion policy. They asked for clarity on who the helpline was for.

“The reply from [Martha* the director of operations at the organisation] and another senior staff member was that ‘if they sound like a woman on the phone, talk to them’,” remembers Lily. “‘If they don’t sound like a woman, it doesn’t matter if they say they are, hang up. We’re not supporting them’.”

Lily also heard references to “men-women”, assertions that only “biological women” should have access to refuges and accusations from a senior staff member that junior employees were behaving like “perpetrators” by supporting trans-inclusivity as it put them on the side of “men”.

“They told us: if they don’t sound like a woman, it doesn’t matter if they say they are, hang up”

According to those present at one group meeting, a staff member declared that there needed to be a “step back” on giving “privileges” to trans women because they were damaging support being provided to “women”. The staff member is also alleged to have said this view was the organisation’s “policy” as well, blaming trans-inclusive terms like “person with a cervix” for having “erased” cis women.

Allegations of increased transmisogyny are mirrored across the sector. Eva, a non-frontline VAWG worker who has spent time at multiple women’s organisations, says she became aware the issue wasn’t going away in 2016.

One early indicator came when Eva posted on a social media platform, from the official account of one prominent organisation about the death of a trans woman in a men’s prison. The next day, she says, she was handed a social media policy that “explicitly stated” she was not allowed to post about trans people anymore.

Even in supposedly inclusive environments within the women’s sector, transmisogyny simmers, says Eva. Her organisation, which focuses on ending gender violence for Black women and girls, still throws up obstacles when it comes to officially including trans women, including a failure to create and implement a trans-inclusive policy.

She also believes economic factors have caused trans women to become a lightning rod of the frustrations and fears of some cis women within the field.

As she explains it, many of the more senior positions in the modern VAWG sector are filled by women who have been there since its foundation. They’ve seen funding and resources chipped away by successive governments, resulting in resignation that “they’re never going to win a victory over the government”.

Collective fightback

Eva stresses that she doesn’t believe the sector itself to be transphobic and that younger, more junior members of staff tend to be fiercely trans-inclusive. There are some power players in the sector attempting to make change.

Cara English, head of public engagement at trans-led charity Gendered Intelligence (GI), says that she’s been approached by CEOs of VAWG organisations to provide training on trans inclusivity to staff. But plans have been stymied by the individualised structures of centres and refuges subject to the decisions of CEOs.

“[GI] met with the CEO of probably the largest VAWG service provider in the UK,” Cara recounts. “She was saying transphobia is very prevalent and she’s not content with it. But there’s not really a great deal they can do apart from bringing training from trans organisations in house.”

The situation is particularly dire in England and Wales. Scotland however, while no utopia for trans survivors, offers a look at how trans inclusivity can begin to be implemented.

Simple commitments have made huge differences to services says Mridul Wadhwa, manager of the Forth Valley Rape Crisis Centre in central Scotland. One such initiative is the LGBT Charter, a programme which includes education on trans inclusion. Completion of the course sees organisations given a digital “badge” to display on-site, letting survivors know they are an inclusive space.

As a trans woman managing a refuge, Wadhwa says she has received “unnecessary negative attention”, despite over 15 years of experience in the sector. After a recent bid to become an SNP candidate, she was even hit with accusations online that she had “lied” by not disclosing her trans identity when she was first employed in 2005 by Shakti Women’s Aid.

“This was before the Equality Act,” she remembers. “I said in an interview that if [Shakti Women’s Aid] had known I was trans, they would not have hired me. But everyone knew I was trans when I was [hired] for my current position.”

Wadhwa’s experience has taught her that many trans women survivors seeking support are too fearful of being faced with transmisogyny to approach services in the first place. This renders them invisible within the sector, despite being a group disproportionately affected by sexual and domestic violence.

“You have to be explicit that you’re inclusive, you cannot assume that people know,” Wadhwa says, adding that as a member of intersecting minority groups, she expects to be “oppressed in every place I go”.

“You have to wear the badge – these things make a huge difference, as well as word of mouth recommendations spread by survivors who have worked with you. There also needs to be a trans-inclusive workplace policy”.

“You have to be explicit that you’re inclusive, you cannot assume that people know”

For workers who want to push back against institutionalised transphobia, organising collectively offers a glimmer of hope.

Cora tells me that challenging transphobia was a key driver of unionising efforts by herself and colleagues who didn’t feel “safe” enough to do so as individual unprotected workers. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the workers union United Voices of World, which has a dedicated arm for workers in the gender-based violence sector, says that one of the union’s goals is fighting transphobia in the field.

Those pushing for change recognise that while the pocket of women they’re up against is small and unrepresentative, they’re powerful, with a reach that extends into the upper echelons of journalism, the legal system and the halls of Westminster. All workers who spoke about the transphobia they’d witnessed feared the impact their whistleblowing might have on the sector, which they stressed still does vital work. But as Eva puts it, if the services are not working for all women, they’re ultimately failing in their purpose.

“If frontline services aren’t working for all women, they’re not working for any of us really,” she says. “They’re not rooted in our liberation or justice.”

Pulling trans-inclusive training in-house, as suggested by Cara English is also a key goal. But it will take determination and demand on the part of the workers within those organisations.

And ultimately, it will need the battle-weathered radical feminists perpetuating transmisogyny in the the GBV sector to do something they are unused to: rethink the dogmatic approach that has for so long served as a survival technique but now works to oppress a deeply vulnerable group of women.

The entire situation is, says Cara English, a “degradation”.

“The fact we’re still in a position when we’re actively having to humanise trans women and trans people to services that would seek to exclude us, in order to get into places that we should have the right to access… this is just an obscene position to be in,” she adds.

“It’s a wholesale failure to take into account the needs of trans people. It’s embarrassing. The issue isn’t that trans women aren’t accessing VAWG services. It’s that people aren’t seeing this joint fight against the patriarchy and the oppression of all women.

“That’s where we need to be focusing our attention. It’s about solidarity between all people who need help and an escape”.

*Names have been changed to protect identities

#would someone else like to analyse and unpack this or shall I attempt it another day

8 notes · View notes

path-of-my-childhood · 6 years ago

Text

Taylor Swift: ‘I was literally about to break’

By: Laura Snapes for The Guardian Date: August 24th 2019

Taylor Swift’s Nashville apartment is an Etsy fever dream, a 365-days-a-year Christmas shop, pure teenage girl id. You enter through a vestibule clad in blue velvet and covered in gilt frames bursting with fake flowers. The ceiling is painted like the night sky. Above a koi pond in the living area, a narrow staircase spirals six feet up towards a giant, pillow-lagged birdcage that probably has the best view in the city. Later, Swift will tell me she needs metaphors “to understand anything that happens to me”, and the birdcage defies you not to interpret it as a pointed comment on the contradictions of stardom.

Swift, wearing pale jeans and dip-dyed shirt, her sandy hair tied in a blue scrunchie, leads the way up the staircase to show me the view. The decor hasn’t changed since she bought this place in 2009, when she was 19. “All of these high rises are new since then,” she says, gesturing at the squat glass structures and cranes. Meanwhile her oven is still covered in stickers, more teenage diary than adult appliance.

Now 29, she has spent much of the past three years living quietly in London with her boyfriend, actor Joe Alwyn, making the penthouse a kind of time capsule, a monument to youthful naivety given an unlimited budget – the years when she sang about Romeo and Juliet and wore ballgowns to awards shows; before she moved to New York and honed her slick, self-mythologising pop.

It is mid-August. This is Swift’s first UK interview in more than three years, and she seems nervous: neither presidential nor goofy (her usual defaults), but quick with a tongue-out “ugh” of regret or frustration as she picks at her glittery purple nails. We climb down from the birdcage to sit by the pond, and when the conversation turns to 2016, the year the wheels came off for her, Swift stiffens as if driving over a mile of speed bumps. After a series of bruising public spats (with Katy Perry, Nicki Minaj) in 2015, there was a high-profile standoff with Kanye West. The news that she was in a relationship with actor Tom Hiddleston, which leaked soon after, was widely dismissed as a diversionary tactic. Meanwhile, Swift went to court to prosecute a sexual assault claim, and faced a furious backlash when she failed to endorse a candidate in the 2016 presidential election, allowing the alt-right to adopt her as their “Aryan princess”.

Her critics assumed she cared only about the bottom line. The reality, Swift says, is that she was totally broken. “Every domino fell,” she says bitterly. “It became really terrifying for anyone to even know where I was. And I felt completely incapable of doing or saying anything publicly, at all. Even about my music. I always said I wouldn’t talk about what was happening personally, because that was a personal time.” She won’t get into specifics. “I just need some things that are mine,” she despairs. “Just some things.”

A year later, in 2017, Swift released her album Reputation, half high-camp heel turn, drawing on hip-hop and vaudeville (the brilliantly hammy Look What You Made Me Do), half stunned appreciation that her nascent relationship with Alwyn had weathered the storm (the soft, sensual pop of songs Delicate and Dress).

Her new album, Lover, her seventh, was released yesterday. It’s much lighter than Reputation: Swift likens writing it to feeling like “I could take a full deep breath again”. Much of it is about Alwyn: the Galway Girl-ish track London Boy lists their favourite city haunts and her newfound appreciation of watching rugby in the pub with his uni mates; on the ruminative Afterglow, she asks him to forgive her anxious tendency to assume the worst.

While she has always written about relationships, they were either teenage fantasy or a postmortem on a high-profile breakup, with exes such as Jake Gyllenhaal and Harry Styles. But she and Alwyn have seldom been pictured together, and their relationship is the only other thing she won’t talk about. “I’ve learned that if I do, people think it’s up for discussion, and our relationship isn’t up for discussion,” she says, laughing after I attempt a stealthy angle. “If you and I were having a glass of wine right now, we’d be talking about it – but it’s just that it goes out into the world. That’s where the boundary is, and that’s where my life has become manageable. I really want to keep it feeling manageable.”

Instead, she has swapped personal disclosure for activism. Last August, Swift broke her political silence to endorse Democratic Tennessee candidate Phil Bredesen in the November 2018 senate race. Vote.org reported an unprecedented spike in voting registration after Swift’s Instagram post, while Donald Trump responded that he liked her music “about 25% less now”.

Meanwhile, her recent single You Need To Calm Down admonished homophobes and namechecked US LGBTQ rights organisation Glaad (which then saw increased donations). Swift filled her video with cameos from queer stars such as Ellen DeGeneres and Queen singer Adam Lambert, and capped it with a call to sign her petition in support of the Equality Act, which if passed would prohibit gender- and sexuality-based discrimination in the US. A video of Polish LGBTQ fans miming the track in defiance of their government’s homophobic agenda went viral. But Swift was accused of “queerbaiting” and bandwagon-jumping. You can see how she might find it hard to work out what, exactly, people want from her.

***

It was girlhood that made Swift a multimillionaire. When country music’s gatekeepers swore that housewives were the only women interested in the genre, she proved them wrong. Her self-titled debut marked the longest stay on the Billboard 200 by any album released in the decade. A potentially cloying image – corkscrew curls, lyrics thick on “daddy” and down-home values – were undercut by the fact she was evidently, endearingly, a bit of a freak, an unusual combination of intensity and artlessness. Also, she was really, really good at what she did, and not just for a teenager: her entirely self-written third album, 2010’s Speak Now, is unmatched in its devastatingly withering dismissals of awful men.

As a teenager, Swift was obsessed with VH1’s Behind The Music, the series devoted to the rise and fall of great musicians. She would forensically rewatch episodes, trying to pinpoint the moment a career went wrong. I ask her to imagine she’s watching the episode about herself and do the same thing: where was her misstep? “Oh my God,” she says, drawing a deep breath and letting her lips vibrate as she exhales. “I mean, that’s so depressing!” She thinks back and tries to deflect. “What I remember is that [the show] was always like, ‘Then we started fighting in the tour bus and then the drummer quit and the guitarist was like, “You’re not paying me enough.”’’’

But that’s not what she used to say. In interviews into her early 20s, Swift often observed that an artist fails when they lose their self-awareness, as if repeating the fact would work like an insurance against succumbing to the same fate. But did she make that mistake herself? She squeezes her nose and blows to clear a ringing in her ears before answering. “I definitely think that sometimes you don’t realise how you’re being perceived,” she says. “Pop music can feel like it’s The Hunger Games, and like we’re gladiators. And you can really lose focus of the fact that that’s how it feels because that’s how a lot of stan [fan] Twitter and tabloids and blogs make it seem – the overanalysing of everything makes it feel really intense.”

She describes the way she burned bridges in 2016 as a kind of obliviousness. “I didn’t realise it was like a classic overthrow of someone in power – where you didn’t realise the whispers behind your back, you didn’t realise the chain reaction of events that was going to make everything fall apart at the exact, perfect time for it to fall apart.”

Here’s that chain reaction in full. With her 2014 album 1989 (the year she was born), Swift transcended country stardom, becoming as ubiquitous as Beyoncé. For the first time she vocally embraced feminism, something she had rejected in her teens; but, after a while, it seemed to amount to not much more than a lot of pictures of her hanging out with her “squad”, a bevy of supermodels, musicians and Lena Dunham. The squad very much did not include her former friend Katy Perry, whom Swift targeted in her song Bad Blood, as part of what seemed like a painfully overblown dispute about some backing dancers. Then, when Nicki Minaj tweeted that MTV’s 2015 Video Music awards had rewarded white women at the expense of women of colour, multiple-nominee Swift took it personally, responding: “Maybe one of the men took your slot.” For someone prone to talking about the haters, she quickly became her own worst enemy.

Her old adversary Kanye West resurfaced in February 2016. In 2009, West had invaded Swift’s stage at the MTV VMAs to protest against her victory over Beyoncé in the female video of the year category. It remains the peak of interest in Swift on Google Trends, and the conflict between them has become such a cornerstone of celebrity journalism that it’s hard to remember it lay dormant for nearly seven years – until West released his song Famous. “I feel like me and Taylor might still have sex,” he rapped. “Why? I made that bitch famous.” The video depicted a Swift mannequin naked in bed with men including Trump.

Swift loudly condemned both; although she had discussed the track with West, she said she had never agreed to the “bitch” lyric or the video. West’s wife, Kim Kardashian, released a heavily edited clip that showed Swift at least agreeing to the “sex” line on the phone with West, if not the “bitch” part. Swift pleaded the technicality, but it made no difference: when Kardashian went on Twitter to describe her as a snake, the comparison stuck and the singer found herself very publicly “cancelled” – the incident taken as “proof” of Swift’s insincerity. So she went away.

Swift says she stopped trying to explain herself, even though she “definitely” could have. As she worked on Reputation, she was also writing “a think-piece a day that I knew I would never publish: the stuff I would say, and the different facets of the situation that nobody knew”. If she could exonerate herself, why didn’t she? She leans forward. “Here’s why,” she says conspiratorially. “Because when people are in a hate frenzy and they find something to mutually hate together, it bonds them. And anything you say is in an echo chamber of mockery.”

She compares that year to being hit by a tidal wave. “You can either stand there and let the wave crash into you, and you can try as hard as you can to fight something that’s more powerful and bigger than you,” she says. “Or you can dive under the water, hold your breath, wait for it to pass and while you’re down there, try to learn something. Why was I in that part of the ocean? There were clearly signs that said: Rip tide! Undertow! Don’t swim! There are no lifeguards!” She’s on a roll. “Why was I there? Why was I trusting people I trusted? Why was I letting people into my life the way I was letting them in? What was I doing that caused this?”

After the incident with Minaj, her critics started pointing out a narrative of “white victimhood” in Swift’s career. Speaking slowly and carefully, she says she came to understand “a lot about how my privilege allowed me to not have to learn about white privilege. I didn’t know about it as a kid, and that is privilege itself, you know? And that’s something that I’m still trying to educate myself on every day. How can I see where people are coming from, and understand the pain that comes with the history of our world?”

She also accepts some responsibility for her overexposure, and for some of the tabloid drama. If she didn’t wish a friend happy birthday on Instagram, there would be reports about severed friendships, even if they had celebrated together. “Because we didn’t post about it, it didn’t happen – and I realised I had done that,” she says. “I created an expectation that everything in my life that happened, people would see.”

But she also says she couldn’t win. “I’m kinda used to being gaslit by now,” she drawls wearily. “And I think it happens to women so often that, as we get older and see how the world works, we’re able to see through what is gaslighting. So I’m able to look at 1989 and go – KITTIES!” She breaks off as an assistant walks in with Swift’s three beloved cats, stars of her Instagram feed, back from the vet before they fly to England this week. Benjamin, Olivia and Meredith haughtily circle our feet (they are scared of the koi) as Swift resumes her train of thought, back to the release of 1989 and the subsequent fallout. “Oh my God, they were mad at me for smiling a lot and quote-unquote acting fake. And then they were mad at me that I was upset and bitter and kicking back.” The rules kept changing.

***

Swift’s new album comes with printed excerpts from her diaries. On 29 August 2016, she wrote in her girlish, bubble writing: “This summer is the apocalypse.” As the incident with West and Kardashian unfolded, she was preparing for her court case against radio DJ David Mueller, who was fired in 2013 after Swift reported him for putting his hand up her dress at a meet-and–greet event. He sued her for defamation; she countersued for sexual assault.

“Having dealt with a few of them, narcissists basically subscribe to a belief system that they should be able to do and say whatever the hell they want, whenever the hell they want to,” Swift says now, talking at full pelt. “And if we – as anyone else in the world, but specifically women – react to that, well, we’re not allowed to. We’re not allowed to have a reaction to their actions.”

In summer 2016 she was in legal depositions, practising her testimony. “You’re supposed to be really polite to everyone,” she says. But by the time she got to court in August 2017, “something snapped, I think”. She laughs. Her testimony was sharp and uncompromising. She refused to allow Mueller’s lawyers to blame her or her security guards; when asked if she could see the incident, Swift said no, because “my ass is in the back of my body”. It was a brilliant, rude defence.

“You’re supposed to behave yourself in court and say ‘rear end’,” she says with mock politesse. “The other lawyer was saying, ‘When did he touch your backside?’ And I was like, ‘ASS! Call it what it is!’” She claps between each word. But despite the acclaim for her testimony and eventual victory (she asked for one symbolic dollar), she still felt belittled. It was two months prior to the beginning of the #MeToo movement. “Even this case was literally twisted so hard that people were calling it the ‘butt-grab case’. They were saying I sued him because there’s this narrative that I want to sue everyone. That was one of the reasons why the summer was the apocalypse.”

She never wanted the assault to be made public. Have there been other instances she has dealt with privately? “Actually, no,” she says soberly. “I’m really lucky that it hadn’t happened to me before. But that was one of the reasons it was so traumatising. I just didn’t know that could happen. It was really brazen, in front of seven people.” She has since had security cameras installed at every meet-and-greet she does, deliberately pointed at her lower half. “If something happens again, we can prove it with video footage from every angle,” she says.

The allegations about Harvey Weinstein came out soon after she won her case. The film producer had asked her to write a song for the romantic comedy One Chance, which earned her second Golden Globe nomination. Weinstein also got her a supporting role in the 2014 sci-fi movie The Giver, and attended the launch party for 1989. But she says they were never alone together.

“He’d call my management and be like, ‘Does she have a song for this film?’ And I’d be like, ‘Here it is,’” she says dispassionately. “And then I’d be at the Golden Globes. I absolutely never hung out. And I would get a vibe – I would never vouch for him. I believe women who come forward, I believe victims who come forward, I believe men who come forward.” Swift inhales, flustered. She says Weinstein never propositioned her. “If you listen to the stories, he picked people who were vulnerable, in his opinion. It seemed like it was a power thing. So, to me, that doesn’t say anything – that I wasn’t in that situation.”

Meanwhile, Donald Trump was more than nine months into his presidency, and still Swift had not taken a position. But the idea that a pop star could ever have impeded his path to the White House seemed increasingly naive. In hindsight, the demand that Swift speak up looks less about politics and more about her identity (white, rich, powerful) and a moralistic need for her to redeem herself – as if nobody else had ever acted on a vindictive instinct, or blundered publicly.

But she resisted what might have been an easy return to public favour. Although Reputation contained softer love songs, it was better known for its brittle, vengeful side (see This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things). She describes that side of the album now as a “bit of a persona”, and its hip-hop-influenced production as “a complete defence mechanism”. Personally, I thought she had never been more relatable, trashing the contract of pious relatability that traps young women in the public eye.

***

It was the assault trial, and watching the rights of LGBTQ friends be eroded, that finally politicised her, Swift says. “The things that happen to you in your life are what develop your political opinions. I was living in this Obama eight-year paradise of, you go, you cast your vote, the person you vote for wins, everyone’s happy!” she says. “This whole thing, the last three, four years, it completely blindsided a lot of us, me included.”

She recently said she was “dismayed” when a friend pointed out that her position on gay rights wasn’t obvious (what if she had a gay son, he asked), hence this summer’s course correction with the single You Need To Calm Down (“You’re comin’ at my friends like a missile/Why are you mad?/When you could be GLAAD?”). Didn’t she feel equally dismayed that her politics weren’t clear? “I did,” she insists, “and I hate to admit this, but I felt that I wasn’t educated enough on it. Because I hadn’t actively tried to learn about politics in a way that I felt was necessary for me, making statements that go out to hundreds of millions of people.”

She explains her inner conflict. “I come from country music. The number one thing they absolutely drill into you as a country artist, and you can ask any other country artist this, is ‘Don’t be like the Dixie Chicks!’” In 2003, the Texan country trio denounced the Iraq war, saying they were “ashamed” to share a home state with George W Bush. There was a boycott, and an event where a bulldozer crushed their CDs. “I watched country music snuff that candle out. The most amazing group we had, just because they talked about politics. And they were getting death threats. They were made such an example that basically every country artist that came after that, every label tells you, ‘Just do not get involved, no matter what.’

“And then, you know, if there was a time for me to get involved…” Swift pauses. “The worst part of the timing of what happened in 2016 was I felt completely voiceless. I just felt like, oh God, who would want me? Honestly.” She would otherwise have endorsed Hillary Clinton? “Of course,” she says sincerely. “I just felt completely, ugh, just useless. And maybe even like a hindrance.”

I suggest that, thinking selfishly, her coming out for Clinton might have made people like her. “I wasn’t thinking like that,” she stresses. “I was just trying to protect my mental health – not read the news very much, go cast my vote, tell people to vote. I just knew what I could handle and I knew what I couldn’t. I was literally about to break. For a while.” Did she seek therapy? “That stuff I just really wanna keep personal, if that’s OK,” she says.

She resists blaming anyone else for her political silence. Her emergence as a Democrat came after she left Big Machine, the label she signed to at 15. (They are now at loggerheads after label head Scott Borchetta sold the company, and the rights to Swift’s first six albums, to Kanye West’s manager, Scooter Braun.) Had Borchetta ever advised her against speaking out? She exhales. “It was just me and my life, and also doing a lot of self-reflection about how I did feel really remorseful for not saying anything. I wanted to try and help in any way that I could, the next time I got a chance. I didn’t help, I didn’t feel capable of it – and as soon as I can, I’m going to.”

Swift was once known for throwing extravagant 4 July parties at her Rhode Island mansion. The Instagram posts from these star-studded events – at which guests wore matching stars-and-stripes bikinis and onesies – probably supported a significant chunk of the celebrity news industry GDP. But in 2017, they stopped. “The horror!” wrote Cosmopolitan, citing “reasons that remain a mystery” for their disappearance. It wasn’t “squad” strife or the unavailability of matching cozzies that brought the parties to an end, but Swift’s disillusionment with her country, she says.

There is a smart song about this on the new album – the track that should have been the first single, instead of the cartoonish ME!. Miss Americana And The Heartbreak Prince is a forlorn, gothic ballad in the vein of Lana Del Rey that uses high-school imagery to dismantle American nationalism: “The whole school is rolling fake dice/You play stupid games/You win stupid prizes,” she sings with disdain. “Boys will be boys then/Where are the wise men?”

As an ambitious 11-year-old, she worked out that singing the national anthem at sports games was the quickest way to get in front of a large audience. When did she start feeling conflicted about what America stands for? She gives another emphatic ugh. “It was the fact that all the dirtiest tricks in the book were used and it worked,” she says. “The thing I can’t get over right now is gaslighting the American public into being like” – she adopts a sanctimonious tone – “‘If you hate the president, you hate America.’ We’re a democracy – at least, we’re supposed to be – where you’re allowed to disagree, dissent, debate.” She doesn’t use Trump’s name. “I really think that he thinks this is an autocracy.”

As we speak, Tennessee lawmakers are trying to impose a near-total ban on abortion. Swift has staunchly defended her “Tennessee values” in recent months. What’s her position? “I mean, obviously, I’m pro-choice, and I just can’t believe this is happening,” she says. She looks close to tears. “I can’t believe we’re here. It’s really shocking and awful. And I just wanna do everything I can for 2020. I wanna figure out exactly how I can help, what are the most effective ways to help. ’Cause this is just…” She sighs again. “This is not it.”

***

It is easy to forget that the point of all this is that a teenage Taylor Swiftwanted to write love songs. Nemeses and negativity are now so entrenched in her public persona that it’s hard to know how she can get back to that, though she seems to want to. At the end of Daylight, the new album’s dreamy final song, there’s a spoken-word section: “I want to be defined by the things that I love,” she says as the music fades. “Not the things that I hate, not the things I’m afraid of, the things that haunt me in the middle of the night.” As well as the songs written for Alwyn, there is one for her mother, who recently experienced a cancer relapse: “You make the best of a bad deal/I just pretend it isn’t real,” Swift sings, backed by the Dixie Chicks.

How does writing about her personal life work if she’s setting clearer boundaries? “It actually made me feel more free,” she says. “I’ve always had this habit of never really going into detail about exactly what situation inspired what thing, but even more so now.” This is only half true: in the past, Swift wasn’t shy of a level of detail that invited fans to figure out specific truths about her relationships. And when I tell her that Lover feels a more emotionally guarded album, she bristles. “I know the difference between making art and living your life like a reality star,” she says. “And then even if it’s hard for other people to grasp, my definition is really clear.”

Even so, Swift begins Lover by addressing an adversary, opening with a song called I Forgot That You Existed (“it isn’t love, it isn’t hate, it’s just indifference”), presumably aimed at Kanye West, a track that slightly defeats its premise by existing. But it sweeps aside old dramas to confront Swift’s real nemesis, herself. “I never grew up/It’s getting so old,” she laments on The Archer.

She has had to learn not to pre-empt disaster, nor to run from it. Her life has been defined by relationships, friendships and business relationships that started and ended very publicly (though she and Perry are friends again). At the same time, the rules around celebrity engagement have evolved beyond recognition in her 15 years of fame. Rather than trying to adapt to them, she’s now asking herself: “How do you learn to maintain? How do you learn not to have these phantom disasters in your head that you play out, and how do you stop yourself from sabotage – because the panic mechanism in your brain is telling you that something must go wrong.” For her, this is what growing up is. “You can’t just make cut-and-dry decisions in life. A lot of things are a negotiation and a grey area and a dance of how to figure it out.”

And so this time, Swift is sticking around. In December she will turn 30, marking the point after which more than half her life will have been lived in public. She’ll start her new decade with a stronger self-preservationist streak, and a looser grip (as well as a cameo in Cats). “You can’t micromanage life, it turns out,” she says, drily.

When Swift finally answered my question about the moment she would choose in the VH1 Behind The Music episode about herself, the one where her career turned, she said she hoped it wouldn’t focus on her “apocalypse” summer of 2016. “Maybe this is wishful thinking,” she said, “but I’d like to think it would be in a couple of years.” It’s funny to hear her hope that the worst is still to come while sitting in her fairytale living room, the cats pacing: a pragmatist at odds with her romantic monument to teenage dreams. But it sounds something like perspective.

#taylor swift #interview #by taylor #the guardian #lover era #lover album #not sure how I feel about the interviewer's approach...there's a lot of irony in it #but a fun read for us nonetheless

762 notes · View notes

thriftthatisviolet · 5 years ago

Text

Words on *that* incident (Long read)

Ok, I think yall know what I want to speak about rn, but if you don't, its the Leclerc-Verstappen incident in the race.

Just incase you live in the UK or another place where the race is really late, here's a tldr; I think what Charles did was dangerous, BUT (oh boy, here it comes) I don't think that some of the hate he's getting is, mature, to put it best.

I've been on every form of social media where opinions are discussed, and I think that I have gathered enough evidence to fully confirm that some people don't know how to remain sensible on the internet.

It's strange, you know? The way the people act on the internet, knowing that these are real people "expressing their opinions", and also knowing that some (most, actually) of these people are GROWN ADULTS.

It seems like these people don't know what r e s p e c t, is! All sportsmen and women have respect for eachother, incuding F1 drivers. Each and every pair of Rivals and teammates have high respect for eachother.

You know, we wouldn't have had Senna V Prost if they hadn't had a bit of respect for eachother. If they didn't, then they'd probably hate going up against eachother. There wouldn't even be a rivalry! If they hadn't had respect for eachother, then I bet my 10 bags of Supreme cheese Doritos and 900+ litres of Mountain Dew that whenever Prost realised that Senna was on his rear wing, he wouldn't even bother fighting with him since he would think that there'd be another crash between them.

No, that's obviously not how it went down. We get all these fantastic, historical races to look back on for when we grow grey and old. And now, lots of fans have been hyping up the Max and Charles rivalry, a rivalry that a new generation can witness and tell to our 6 year old grand children.

But that can't happen if they don't have respect for one another. The whole point of a rivalry is to prove that you are better than then your rival. You obviously wouldn't want to prove yourself to a s*** driver, would you. So, obviously, if you want to prove that your a future F1 champion, you gotta label a talented and strong driver as your rival.

And how can you do that is you don't think that there good? Obviously, you would think that your better, and that's normal. But you'd obviously still think that your rival is a strong driver...no?

Now, like I said earlier, I've been on many sites where opinions are regularly shared like Youtube, Tumblr (of course!), Twitter, Insta, Reddit and countless blog and news sites. And on nearly every single one of them I find MULTIPLE comments berating and disrespecting many drivers. And they're more simmilar than you think.

Some include-

Calling Seb "Spintell"

Calling Lewis a "Crybaby" (yes I've seen that photoshop of him)

Labeling Max as- " Crashstappen"

Most recently, Hating on Charles for being the "Golden boy of Ferrari" (Lecry, Grosjean of the year, Glorified midfielder) (That last one's actually true..)

Gasly. Need I say more?

Teasing Stroll, a decent midfield driver, and calling him a "Un-talented pay driver", even when he is pretty good and that a lot of succesful and strong drivers are pay drivers.

And the list goes onnnn and onnnn-

Do you e v e r hear any of the drivers call eachother any of these? No, I dont think so. Remember Baku 2017? The Lewis and Seb incident? They might've been a bit mad at eachother then , but do you ever see them sending eachother death stares or flipping the bird at one and other when they (think) that the camera isn't looking at them? NO!

Another instance with Seb and our main chatting point, Charles, is Singapore and Russia. The press, F1 "fans" and journalist are chewing up a team issue, and bellowing out nonsense headlines that aren't even true. Why the hell would Helmut Marko and Christian Horner be warning Ferrari? They'd probably be rubbing their hands in sheer delight with what was happening.

Anyways, while the press spreads rumours about how Seb and Charles secretly loath each other, and how they silently wish that the other would just burn in hell (over exaggeration , both of them seem have common sense outside the car, and instead of having all those hateful thoughts, those two are gleefully answering fan questions, playing rugby, dorkily making some origami 'Kokoni' cranes and happily chatting to one another after a tough race for both of them. Doesn't sound like hate does it? If I put it correctly, it should sound like a word that I've been saying for a little bit now.

Going back to the topic at hand, I think it's utter bull crap to be calling some of the only 20 most talented, popular and fantastic drivers offensive nicknames, hating on them and DISRESPECTING them is not, at all, mature.

Max and Charles are definetley stars of the future, and they're handing out samples of a brand new chocolate bar called "Suprise mother heckers it's the new generation" to us for many races now. But I don't think that many people might be enjoying this brand new flavour of chocolate.

Anyways, I still think that Charles might need a penalty (not like it'll do anything, think he finished like 10 secs off Ricciardo, I think?) I don't really think many people picked up on it but Charles was shown the black and orange flag, I believe. But that's deffinetley not enough. He litteraly kept going after his front wing had been shattered to pieces, creating a safety hazard. It was a great drive from him after, but still, a very dangerous and avoidable start (still love him tho).

Max, did not deserve any what happened to him this race. Today was very unfortunate for him.

So, take this as a lesson boys and girls, men and woman, or any other genders. pLeaSe, for the love of the God you beleive in, be responsible on the net, share opinions lightly, respect those who respect eachother and remember-

You're not alone on here

Warm regards,

Thrift

#f1 #charles leclerc #max verstappen #sebastian vettel #lewis hamilton #f1 rant #long reads #essay #kinda?

22 notes · View notes

alternislatronemhq · 5 years ago

Photo

Congrats, Beth, you have been accepted to AL for the role of Kingsley Shacklebolt (FC: Aldis Hodge). Beth!! Way to go in breaking the ice on picking up your second character! I know that you’ve been thinking and dreaming about Kingsley since the beginning, and the way that you’ve brought a familiar but mysterious character to life while keeping that mystery alive is incredible! There’s so much tension within Kingsley that even he isn’t really aware of in his need to please in following in his father’s footsteps, and I can’t wait to see how that comes into play as the war begins to heat up again. Fantastic job! Please send in your blog (no sideblogs for first characters, please) in the next 24 hours and be sure to take a look at our new player checklist. Welcome home (once again), we’re so excited to have you join the family!

OOC

name — Beth age — 24 pronouns — She/Her timezone — CST

IC Overview

name — Kingsley Shacklebolt

age — 34 (Birthday: March 2, 1952)

gender — Cis Male

sexuality — Asexual, Biromantic: Kingsley hasn’t put much focus in relationships, and it’s left him feeling a bit lonely. Straight out of school, he began training to be an auror and was shortly after inducted into the Order. Even after the war ended, Kingsley has focused his attention on work things, like making sure Voldemort isn’t coming back. Still, he can’t help feeling like it would be nice to have someone to come home to—someone he could kiss good morning, make dinner for, and fall asleep with at night. Kingsley isn’t sex-repulsed and will have it with a partner he feels highly committed to, but he doesn’t seek it out or find inherent pleasure in the act itself so much as the intimacy with someone he loves and trusts. He hasn’t technically shared a bed with anyone since Hogwarts when he was still figuring himself out, and Kingsely has only had one romantic relationship as a full-fledged adult. He misses having someone he can be romantically close to. He feels alone and wonders at this point if that will be his lot in life.

hogwarts house — Hufflepuff, and it would be difficult to find one more likely to work hard than Kingsley. He probably trusts too easily, but his years as an auror have taught him to rely less on that instinct. Despite his experience, he has a hard time believing that anyone is ever truly without good. People can be redeemed, and Kingsley is pretty sure the moment he stops thinking that is the moment he stops being a good auror.

blood status — Pureblood (Though his non-English mother doesn’t exactly have his family in high standing with the “truly” pure English elite.)

patronus — Lynx, both because it’s canon and because that aloof individualism + steadfast loyalty thing feels fitting for Kingsley.

boggart — In school, his boggart was his father scoffing and yelling at him for failing out of school and being a disappointment. It was counteracted by imagining his mother coming in and laughing that his father was reading too many puff news publications and that no such thing was true of her well-achieving little boy. As an adult, it became a Death Eater slowly moving toward him. If he gives it long enough, it eventually takes off the mask to reveal his own face. The only time he’s been faced one in front of other people, Kingsley quickly cast the spell, imagining the figure tripping over his own robes and dropping his wand before the mask could come off. The explanation was a conversation Kingsley didn’t want to have.

IC In Depth

personality traits —

Kingsley is an incredibly driven individual, although he may have been accused of being obsessive a time or too. That drive has always worked out for him since he’s so goal-oriented, and both his job and his, well, other job have benefited from his methodical approach. Occasionally Kingsley has been called naïve because he desperately wants to see the best in people; however, he sees no problem with being trusting and giving people the benefit of the doubt. He has a big heart and doesn’t try to hide that from the people he’s closest to, perhaps even making him a romantic. His whole life was grooming him for a position as an auror, so Kingsley does well under pressure. He comes off cool and collected. A person would be hard pressed to consider him callous for this lack of emotion, but The Prophet has made the claim in respond to Kingsley’s ability to keep his emotions hidden during stressful interviews. Still, that power to remain calm and not let his feelings get the best of him are part of what makes him good at his job.

character biography —

The Shacklebolts are a longstanding pureblood family, and while Kingsley has some halfblood cousins, his immediate family could still claim their Sacred 28 title if they wanted. His mother was born Esi Caron and attended Beauxbatons Academy before beginning her career as a seer. Her parents had immigrated from Libya to French when she was a small child, but Esi never fully felt comfortable there. It wasn’t difficult for her to give up those new roots when Cypress Shacklebolt entered her life while abroad on a Ministry mission. Although it was another three years before they married, Esi moved to the UK almost immediately.

The two were lovely together, even if they weren’t always the most cohesive. They loved each other and never had a harmful household, but when they didn’t agree, it was certainly a tense one for Kingsley and his siblings. Two headstrong parents meant that an argument could stew unsettled for the better part of a week. Still, his parents worked at their communication and always tried to create a loving environment for their kids.

As the oldest, Kingsley had a certain responsibility to look out for his younger siblings. Irma, Hendrick, and Rosetta had plenty of responsibilities too, but it was Kingsley who grew up constantly trying to meet Cypress’ expectations and always felt like he never truly got there. Cypress’ approval was hard won, and occasionally Kingsley wondered how his father would react if Kingsley hadn’t wanted to become an auror. It was family legacy at this point, but because of Kingsley, his siblings didn’t have the same expectations. The option was there if they wanted it, but it was Kingsley who had Cypress’ attention.

The weight of his father’s expectations wasn’t easy to live with, especially when Cypress was killed by a cursed object when Kingsley was sixteen. Kingsley was a fifth year studying for his O.W.L.S. Momentarily his indecision paralyzed him, but the thought that he’d never have his father’s full approval made Kingsley throw himself even harder into his studies. Maybe he couldn’t ever have his father’s praise, but he could follow the steps that would have made his father proud.

Kingsley came of age and joined in aurors right as long brewing tensions and whispers finally broke out into war. At first, he was convinced that the Ministry could handle it and that the aurors would be the front lines working toward stopping Lord Voldemort and his Death Eater followers. Instead he saw firsthand the Ministry’s corruption as higherups looked the other way or stalled searching on ‘important families.’ Kingsley grew more frustrated by the day as they barely reacted to something that had already spiraled beyond the Ministry’s control.

Alastor Moody saw this frustration. After some small testing of Kingsley’s loyalty and conviction, he invited Kingsley into the Order of the Phoenix. Despite its technically illegal nature, Kingsley never hesitated when faced with the opportunity to make lasting impact. Almost ten years of his life was devoted to that cause, but when the war ended, Kingsley couldn’t wrap it up quite like everyone else. Between the Ministry and the Order, he’s kept himself fairly busy in the time since then.

Kingsley has watched two of his siblings find happy partnerships and one have children. In his father’s absence, he hasn’t ever tried to be that figure, but he has certainly tried to help out his mother as much as possible, especially with Rosie. The gap between them is large enough that she literally has no memories of him before Hogwarts, so they’ve always been a little different than the other sibling relationships in their family. Every once in a while, Esi gently inquires about Kingsley’s love life, but she accepts his no with just a small nudging reminder that she wants to see him happy. Kingsley is happy. At least, that’s what he’s told himself.

With rumors of Voldemort returning and Death Eaters beginning to shift, Kingsley isn’t so sure he found the happiness and stability he was looking for. This has been his life for about fifteen years now. He’d hoped they were on the tail end of cleaning up that mess, but apparently that might not be the case. When he can see the rebuilding around him, Kingsley has a hard time accepting that everything could shift again in an instance, but he knows how easily it could happen. He’s hoping to be part of the force that can keep that shift from ever coming.

plot ideas —

The Order: Obviously certain members of the Order have never really stopped looking to cement that Voldemort doesn’t return. People like Alastor and Sirius are among Kingsley’s closest confidants. Surely they don’t always agree about how to move forward, though, especially right now when there are so many whispers about Voldemort’s potential return.

The old Order: Some members of the Order have “retired” so to speak in light of Voldemort’s disappearance. I’d love to see the tense interactions of people like Kingsley trying to convince them there’s still a threat—or on the flip side, Kingsley trying to mislead them against it for their own good.

Known Death Eaters: Plenty of Death Eaters escaped justice, some with fairly sizable evidence or gut instincts betraying them. Even if he wants to see the best in people, Kingsley won’t trust them.

Siblings: This is more character than plot, but it could be interesting to eventually see some of Kingsley’s siblings or in-laws in play. How do they react to their workaholic big brother? How do they feel on the matter of blood status? Family dynamics are always interesting, and the range for the Shacklebolts could be fun.

Potential romance: As I said above, Kingsley is asexual, but he’s still a romantic soul. In fact, he’s quite lonely and wouldn’t mind a relationship if he had more time to meet someone. It could be fun to play out a potential relationship forming, whether it works out or fails dramatically. I could also see fun potential for an ex where things didn’t go well (I mentioned above one particular one in his adult life, and that could be interesting to play with). Another connection off this idea is a well-meaning friend trying to set Kingsley up on dates that don’t really work out because his friend doesn’t really know much about his type (although to be fair, Kingsley isn’t always sure either).

Whistleblower: Eventually something is going to happen which cannot be denied any longer. While Kingsley wouldn’t probably be the person to go, “He’s back,” or, “The situation is worse than you’ve all feared,” I could see him potentially supporting the person who is, depending on how they go about it. Regardless of his beliefs, it would be interesting to see how everyone reacted and who the surprise denialists are.

extra —

Family tree: https://narcissaamaryllis.tumblr.com/private/621468809324380160/tumblr_3GKGHoSROIWvKhxY7

Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/myrpboards/kingsley-shacklebolt/

#harry potter rp #hp rp #marauders rp #kingsley shacklebolt #al:accepted

1 note · View note

tgai-spock · 5 years ago

Text

okay so before you read this a note - I wrote this before the BLM protests began

a second note, I had another almost identical slightly crazier version of this written before coronavirus. a minture of both and, bad judgement is leading my to post this.

consider this - the government is shit - why not just build a completely new one without even fighting to dismantle the other.

-----

Planned Land Name : Newski -

change available on suggestion of better name

When the Doctor was acted by David Tennent he had a line that stuck with me, all the ways we as humans could have decided to live, and this is what we choose. It wasn’t really a choice just a platform of life built over all the last ones, run with greed and fear, and a large portion of cruelty.

We took old models and added to them, and in a way if we continue this way we will deserve the destruction we get. On a singular basis most of us are mostly innocent, and yet, we won’t be for long.

I think now is the right time. Now its more blatant and obvious than ever before. Thirty years ago the government would have experimented on you, and left you for dead, without your consent, penniless. Before that they would have asked you to steadily walk into machine fun fire. The only difference now, is you know of that past. You don’t know of the decade that came next, or the one after that because it’s yet to be revealed. More information on this:

usa see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States

uk see

……..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porton_Down

is all i can find, the uk had a wiki list just like the usa, half as long (USA IS LONG) just as bad. all on purpose. this was here.. someones.. removed the wiki article?? Someone please give me the link. It must be on the internet somewhere still. Is it just me or has this … been deliberately hidden. Hidden in favour of articles on corona virus ‘vaccines’ ah.

anyway, this isn’t news, or even the whole point.

The economy, our very life and being is currently ruled by one question, which is always answered, with ease and purpose. What’s more important money, or a human life? Money or hundreds of thousands of people? The money is now what it always was, money. The prime minister of the UK has sent pople with non-vital jobs back to work. Some of these people will catch corona-virus and die, as a direct FORCED action from the government, as it is no longer an ability for people with those jobs to choose to risk themselves, and their familys. They must work, earn money for the economy (endanger their family and possibly die) or they can stay home loose their job, home (and then die.)

But was there ever a different option? Yeah. Just like the current looming global warming crisis, they were told about possible plague outbreaks. Instead of preparing for a possibility, they closed their. We will face this again when global warming makes its first attempts to claim lives.… well honestly, we’re already well past the first few, but when it starts hitting younger people, when not only the old suffer. When the temperature outside reaches 50c do you think you will be allowed to stay in your air conditioned home? Now we know at least. Not only will you be forced into an environment made uninhabitable by rich greedy bastards, but you’ll also be forced to work on non-necesery jobs (umm actually this show store is necessary because it’s technically a garden blah blah blah. Rich people are bored at home. So now, you must die.

But who wants to go war? - Note I wrote this before the BLM protests, and honestly guys, I’m so proud of you but so many innocent people are dying. Gauge their eyes out. Eradicate the police. BLM! BLM!

Who wants to go to prison, risk losing their job, their free time (oh which every second of is ever so precious because of what they’ve done) who wants to endanger their family? (BLM, heroes but you don’t deserve that. Keep up the good work though. They say all the police in the USA are the ones who are burning cars. Burn the police. burn the police.

Anyway: Instead of forcing a shitty government who takes way too long to make changes what I instead suggest is - make a new city.

Like start in the uk and then spread out, keep architecture unique to the area

Goals:

The sustainable continued existence of humans

Land that is self sufficient for all basic needs food/water/energy/medical care.

Sustaining and cleaning the environment

Creating 3 years worth of food back up for every Newski citizen in the event of catastrophe (plague/war/large volcanic eruption, dalek attack, ect.)

Sustaining and helping endangered animals caused by human interference

Developing cures to diseases that attack animals/environment in nature

Developing cures to diseases and ailments humans experience

Researching and developing cure/coping mechanisms for mental illnesses.

To interfere in other cultures that do not allow their own basic rights, for all citizens due to race/gender/religion/sexuality. (I support all different countries having their own way of life, but I draw the line at where a ‘way of life’ injures other humans. Lets not pretend to make this question harder than it is. It isn’t a hard question to answer. Volcano going to blow up and wipe out an entire civilisation of people who can’t help themself? Then help them.

To interfere in other cultures that force child marriages of those under 18. (Yes that includes the law allowing 16 years olds to get married in the uk! You know who mostly uses that now? Pedophiles, and people forcing their children into marriages. Ideally I’d raise it to 21, theres no reason anyone under that should be marrying.

Researching and creating a defence system for earth (dangerous comets, possibly aliens, mostly comets)

To create a bunker in the event of a large catastrophe where one will be needed for shelter

Creating off world self sustainable, peaceful settlements, and making sure the billionaire don’t spread hell to outterspace- can you honestly say with full certainty the won’t bring back slavery? they might even act like its not slavery if they splice humans with some other species…

To continue developing

Living in Newski

Government:

Newski is managed by 1 King or Queen, and a small Government. (nnnooo don’t be put off by the word king it’s more like a prime minister)

The King/Queen title is passed on to people when they wish to retire.

The King/Queen may train as many people (apprentices) as they wish but they must choose one person to takeover.

In the event the King/Queen is lost before an apprentice is chosen it will be down to the citizens to vote in one of the apprentices.

A King or Queen that has chosen an apprentice may give them the title Prince/Kinglet/Queenlet.

A King or Queen may unchoose their Prince/Kinglet/Queenlet, if they feel they have made a mistake, unless it is proved they are intoxicated or suffering from a severe illness, such as dementia. Other illness such as depression although severe are not just cause for ignoring the King/Queen.

A King/Queen is not required to have biological heirs however, there is nothing wrong with them naming their own children Prince/Kinglet/Queenlet, as long as they have been through sufficient training, and have been educated.

The King/Queen may be removed of their crown, given the government first votes to it with a 100% agree rate, and the citizens then vote with a 90% agree rate.

Only King (me) may not be removed of their crown, no matter the government votes.

On the death of King (me) expect their return with another body- wow I had a whole paragraph here about resurrection. weird.

The King/Queen may be respectfully retired given the government first votes to it with a 100% agree rate, with scientific evidence to suggest that they have a strong illness relating to memory/reality such as dementia. They may keep their crown and should still be respected as such but they are no longer allowed to walk in on government meetings or throw people in the stocks.

A new King/Queen may then be voted in by the citizens from any of the previous nominated apprentices, or a retired King/Queen in good mind has the right to single rename themselves King/Queen, or narrow down the selected apprentices to five individuals.

The Government is set up of twelve people each individually voted. The King/Queen can choose one person who will enter the government regardless of vote. Citizens will be free to vote in the other 11 from anyone who has nominated themselves.

All government nominees will be asked to fill out a list of what they stand for, and do not stand for, to be published in one easy to read leaflet, next to every other nominee, so voters may understand 100% who they vote for. Nominees who have written that they 100% agree with certain ideas but then vote against them may be placed in the stocks for shameful behaviour. They may also be removed from the government if a fair trial proved they have deliberately and with no good reason changed what they claimed to believe.

The government is to be revoted every 3 years, and the process will take up only 1 month.

There is no limit on the amount of time someone is allowed to be in the government, however if they are in the government for 9 years, they must take a 9 year brake before being nominated again.

The King/Queen may nominate themselves for government, but they cannot vote themselves in.

For new laws to pass there must be a 75% agree vote between themselves.

All meetings between the government are open for the public to view, including ones discussing pandemics and catastrophe. Only meetings discussing an ongoing war may be closed of to the public if they deem it appropeit.

The King/Queen may sit on whatever meeting they wish, unless they are not in a sober state.

The King/Queen may force new laws or regulations they want to create to be discussed first on a daily basis. The government may then choose to vote in the law (75% agreeing to it) or suspend it for 1 week, but it must then be voted on. Only 1 person need ask for a law review to be suspended for a week to put forth the motion.

Justice:

Citizens have a right to fair trial.

King/Queen or Prince/Kinglet/Queenlet are only ones allowed to sentence people for up to 2 weeks in the stocks without trial or other humiliating duties for misdemeanours, given they or her guards are witness to it. Most people will be put through to fair trial, this law is only for if King Opusername is about when it is witnessed.

Laws of the land

Human rights exist, many of that already associated with UK right laws will still exist but with the following permanent addition, food, water, medical care, and electricity needed ensure environmental conditions and basic food.

Rice is out

Potatoes are in

You may purchase avocados and other not Newski food as a treat.

Exceptions allowed only for people with many allergies/intolerance where this is not personally sustainable.

3. Basic human rights for prisoners exist, more advanced rights such as the right to vote are not available to prisoners sentenced to life in prison. Humans in the stocks have a right to water and shade/jumpers, and a 30 minute brake every 2 hours.

4. Criminal justice can vary from stocks and other humiliating duties, to re - introduction to society- to life in jail, and banishment. There is no death penalty…. ….. …. … … .. .. maybe a request for some prisoners to do the honroable thing and kill themselves. (pedos and nazis)

5. Fighting is allowed, but only within the arena, fighting outside is a serious crime, and assault. - yeah i think we should bring arenas back. I mean boxing still exists but I want to see my neighbours across the road fucking hash it out in the arena, I’m betting on billy.

6. False news, or deliberately misleading news is forbidden, reporters caught writing articles with no previous source to suggest they thought they were honestly writing the truth will be banned from journalistic jobs, spend time in the stocks or humiliating duties, jail time, and face possible banishment for being dishonourable.

7. Everyone of the age 14 or over must attend town or government meetings for at least 1 hour, 6 times a year. The 6 hours may not be ‘spent’ with in one week. This rule does not apply to those in extreme mental or physical illness that makes this impossible.

Home Owning/Renting:

All land is rented through the King/Queen.

Some homes can be rented for a monthly amount, with normal renting rules applied.

Other homes can be (“brought”) “rented” for their entire value, for an unlimited amount of years.

“Renters” who had paid the full value of their home will have full decorating privileges of the inside of their house open to them, and the owning of pets would be down to them. The decoration, or painting of outside of the house must first be granted permission, unless it redo decoration that has aged. Only the removal/addition of walls must first be granted.

“Renters” who have gardens have almost full decorating privileges to plant, whatever they like, however they wish. The only exceptions come with:

Large tree to close to houses that could cause damage

Ponds (planning permission need but most likely granted)

Pools (probably not granted.)

Covering the land with cement if forbidden

Covering the land with plastic grass if forbidden

The use of gravel in small quantities may be granted (permission needed.)

Objects that can be moved, tables, are free reign.

“Renters” who have paid in full and wish to sell their home may only do so to the King/Queen, but it being brought back is guaranteed. “Renters” will receive in full what they paid for it, possibly with the addition of inflation, or more if it well decorated. If the house is in need of repair, major cleaning, or some objects need replacing they may receive less for it.

It is down to “renters” who had paid the full price of the house to look after the house, if however the roof or something similar that will cause major damage is in need of urgent repair and they refuse to have it repaired, repairing will be arranged for them and they will be billed.

Cleaning of the outside walls of the house will be free, and mandatory, as these are for aesthetic purposes.

Home “owners” can be removed from their home in the case that they pose a threat, or are wildly mistreating their home. They will receive their money back for it. This will only happen in the case where they seem dangerous, or leave piles of rubbish in their garden, or animal poop (in the case of their own dog, this does not apply to chickens or other smaller animals) for an extended time and, have ignored 3 warnings to clean up.

Royal Businesses :

All business can be rented or “rented” from the King/Queen.

If a business is shite, the King or Queen can shut it down.

If the owners are miserable bastards their business can be shut down. Listen, I try to use small shops occasionally, and I walk in to see some ugly sad miserable bastards, then I ain’t gonna come again bitch, am gonna go to fucking tesco see wanker.

Unless the owners have a mental/physical illness that makes them appear to be miserable bastards. - a fair and just king/queen. No one else is excused, with the exception of book shop owners, and librarians, I mean I’d prefer if you weren’t but you do you. No one else do you.

All people working around food must wear hair and beard nets. Why are fast food places the only places getting this right. stop being groesss!!

OTHER

Guilds

Fish

fish

….fish? fish guilds.

Fighters guilds.

The guards are like police- but they aren’t. ACAB!!! they’ll brake up a fight. help people with shopping, keep an eye out.

detective guild for crimes commited- like the guards are busy doing day to day stuff. It may sound extreme but imagine this. You are in the uk, your stuff is stolen. You phone the police. They come to your house, they give a nod and say, ‘yep thats stolen’ thats literally all that fucking happens. No police. just guards and detectives.

guards are mostly just going to be dragging drunk people to their homes, or holding incase they throw up and accidentally kill themselves.

mental health emergency guilds - listen, you can’t have a man in fucking armour to try and talk a jumper off a roof, or to help calm down a large man have a tantrum.

what if someone takes a jewellery store hostage? Thats… that going to need different different professional people, probably the outside/talking mental health worker would be better for that than any guard.

stop criminal scum - OR PAY WITH YOUR LIFE.- newski guard catchphrase.

other notes on why creating a self sustainable news is possible - it only takes 1 acres of potatoes to feed 1 person 3000 calories every day for a year. I mean.. i guess you could have some bread or something if u wanted...

also i know I'm totally gonna get roasted for this, but consider this, i spent a damn long time writing this

1 note · View note

sharistonecom · 5 years ago

Text

Gender Reassignment Surgery – Transgender Procedures, the Facts.

One of the most controversial areas of cosmetic surgery that has arisen in the last decade is ‘Gender Reassignment Surgery’. This is both of medical and political interest. The emerging transgender movement and its position at the very forefront of ‘identity politics' means that it is a very special and sensitive topic in cosmetic and reconstructive surgery. It also requires a very specialised background to fully explain how the surgery works and what can be attained.

Sex reassignment surgery (SRS) is known by a variety of labels, including gender reassignment surgery (GRS), sex change surgery, sex affirmation procedures, and genital reconstruction surgery. These operations, which are known clinically as genitoplasty procedures, are done to surgically change the genitalia from one gender to another.

For the majority of patients undertaking SRS, the surgery is performed in order to match their physical gender with what they feel emotionally and intuitively is their correct gender. This syndrome, known as gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder, is infrequent but getting more widely diagnosed. You may also hear these individuals being referred to as “transgender.”.

Gender identity struggles usually begin in early childhood but descriptions of feeling like a man trapped inside a woman’s body, or vice versa, have been identified in and reported by people of all ages. A person living with this an internal conflict may develop anxiety and depression, and go on to be diagnosed with gender dysphoria, formally known as gender identity disorder

(GID). Gender dysphoria is a mental health condition that can arise when a person lives with ongoing feelings of being physically incongruous with his or her birth sex — and medical intervention may be beneficial. Identifying as transgender, itself, is considered by scientists to be, at least in part, biological and not a mental illness

Male to Female Transition. The procedures that change male genitalia to female genitalia include a penectomy (removal of penis) and orchiectomy (removal of the testes), which are typically followed by a vaginoplasty (creation of the vagina) or a feminizing genitoplasty (creation of female genitalia).

For those born male and transitioning to female, there may also be procedures that include breast implants, gluteoplasty to increase buttock volume, a procedure to minimize the appearance of the Adam’s apple, and possibly, feminizing hormones.

Facial feminisation surgery (FFS) is often done to soften the more masculine lines of the face.2 Each patient is unique and the procedures that are done are based on the individual need and budget, but facial feminization often includes softening the brow line, rhinoplasty (nose job), smoothing the jaw and forehead, and altering the cheekbones. For some, a chondrolaryngoplasty, commonly known as a “tracheal shave,” can help reduce the prominence of the Adam’s apple.

Female to Male Transition. The procedure that changes female genitalia to male genitalia is a masculinising genitoplasty (creation of male genitalia). This procedure uses the tissue of the labia to create a penis.

The procedures that change the genitalia are rarely performed without other procedures, which may be extensive. For those born female, the change to a masculine appearance may also include hormone therapy with testosterone, a mastectomy, a hysterectomy procedure, and perhaps additional cosmetic procedures intended to masculinise the appearance.

Transitioning is often two-fold: a social transition, such as new clothing, a new name and new pronouns; and a medical transition, with treatments such as hormone therapy and surgical procedures. Depending on the needs and wants of each individual, transitioning may include both social and medical transitions; just one of the two; or for those who eschew gender completely, neither.

But does GRS really work for everyone?

Medical evidence suggests that sex reassignment does not adequately address the psychosocial difficulties faced by people who identify as transgender. As Ryan Anderson points out in his book ‘When Harry Became Sally' ‘even when the procedures are successful technically and cosmetically, and even in cultures that are relatively “trans-friendly,” transitioners still face poor outcomes’.

There are strong arguments on both side of the line and this is not really the place to debate them since the argument as to whether sex can be truly reassigned is an enormous political and cultural battlefield. Experts like Dr Lawrence Meyer from Princeton is quite clear on the subject:

Cosmetic surgery and cross-sex hormones can’t change us into the opposite sex. They can affect appearances. But they can’t transform it. They can’t turn us from one sex into the other. “Scientifically speaking, transgender men are not biological men and transgender women are not biological women. The claims to the contrary are not supported by a scintilla of scientific evidence,” explains Mayer.

The Global GRS Market

But what is certain is that there is a substantial demand from men and women who feel that their lives can be radically improved by trans-gender surgery and the job of our site is to guide them to reliable surgeons around the world who have extensive experience in this kind of work. We are also including a list of helpful organisations that will advise and guide you in your quest for the right answers.

The market is large and is trending ever upwards. Global Market Insights, Inc. has recently added a new report on sex reassignment surgery market which estimates the global market valuation for sex reassignment surgery will exceed US$ 1.5 billion by 2026. Rise in number of sex reassignment surgeries across the globe will be a major factor driving factor. The growth of market can be attributed to the increasing patient pool with an inclination towards changing sex from male to female as well as female to male. The number of such patients has increased nearly four times in the past years.

Destinations to Transition.

Germany dominated the European market and was valued at USD 15.9 million in 2019. The growth can be attributed to the development of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights in Germany. Also, improving healthcare facilities and presence of doctors, surgeons and clinics specialised in sex reassignment surgery will further boost the market growth over the forecast period. For instance, HELIOS Hospital Berlin-Zehlendorf provides female to male sex reassignment surgeries.

There are major facilities in the UK also driven by the LGBT movement. The UK also has some excellent support groups such as. FORGE and FTMMentors. Some of the other major players in the market include Some of the leading players in the sex reassignment surgery market share include Bupa Cromwell Hospital, Yeson Voice center, Chettawut Plastic Surgery Centre, Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery, Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC), Rumercosmetics, Transgender Surgery Institute of Southern California and Mount Sinai Centre for Transgender Medicine and Surgery (CTMS). You can also browse through our general listings and you will find many clinics offering these types of surgery at varying price ranges.

Clinic ImageRatingClinic Name & Feature

Chettawut Plastic Surgery Center, Bangkok Thailand

This is a ‘goto’ clinic for Gender Reassignment Surgery (GRS). Dr. Chettawut Tulayaphanich is regarded…

Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery Belgrade Serbia

This clinic is dedicated to genitourinary surgical procedures and ia a European frontrunner in gender…

Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC) Thailand

This is a medical tourist’s dream location on the fabulous island of Phuket and a…

Rumer Cosmetic Surgery. Ardmore USA

Dr. Kathy Rumer is a leading aesthetic and reconstructive plastic surgeon with a private practice…

1. Chettawut Plastic Surgery Center, Bangkok Thailand

0 reviews

This is a 'goto’ clinic for Gender Reassignment Surgery (GRS). Dr. Chettawut Tulayaphanich is regarded as one of the great surgeons in this controversial area of cosmetic surgery. With almost 3,000 cases in Sex reassignment surgery and Facial feminisation surgery with satisfactory outcomes. They even offer voice surgery to change a low pitch (Male voice) into a higher pitch pattern with natural voice quality. If you are looking for gender transition surgery this clinic will be high on your list

Address

1529/4 Onnut 31 Sukhumvit 77 Bangkok, Thailand 10250

Phone

+(669) 5650-3892

Checklist

Procedures Offered

Gender Reassignment Surgery

Does Your Clinic Offer Special Packages?

See website for any special packages

Email Sent

Clinic Booked

Position

Know More Details

{ "@context": "https://schema.org/", "@type": "Product", "name": "Chettawut Plastic Surgery Center, Bangkok Thailand", "image": [ "https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/chettawut_plastic_surgery_center,_bangkok_thailand_1588245902.png" ], "description": "This is a 'goto' clinic for Gender Reassignment Surgery (GRS). Dr. Chettawut Tulayaphanich is regarded as one of the great surgeons in this controversial area of cosmetic surgery. With almost...", "brand": { "@type": "Thing", "name": "Chettawut Plastic Surgery Center, Bangkok Thailand" }, "offers":{ "@type":"Offer", "url":"https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/listing/chettawut-plastic-surgery-center-bangkok-thailand/", "price":"0.00", "priceValidUntil":"2030-11-05", "priceCurrency":"USD", "availability":"https://schema.org/InStock", "seller":{ "@type":"Person", "name":"Chettawut Plastic Surgery Center, Bangkok Thailand", "url":"https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/listing/chettawut-plastic-surgery-center-bangkok-thailand/" } }, "review":{ "@type":"Review", "reviewRating":{ "@type":"Rating", "bestRating":"5", "worstRating":"0", "ratingValue":"3" }, "name":"Chettawut Plastic Surgery Center, Bangkok Thailand", "reviewBody":"This is a 'goto' clinic for Gender Reassignment Surgery (GRS). Dr. Chettawut Tulayaphanich is regarded as one of the great surgeons in this controversial area of cosmetic surgery. With almost...", "author":{ "@type":"Person", "name":"Pankaj Agarwal" }, "datePublished":"April 30, 2020" }, "aggregateRating": { "@type": "AggregateRating", "ratingValue": "3", "reviewCount": "1" } }

How’s your experience with Chettawut Plastic Surgery Center, Bangkok Thailand?

How well this software helped you achieve your business goal?

Review Title *

Overall Standard of Service *

What did you like about this clinic? *

What did you dislike about this clinic? *

Reviews - Fields

Chettawut Plastic Surgery Center, Bangkok Thailand (approved)

First Name

Last Name

2. Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery Belgrade Serbia

0 reviews

This clinic is dedicated to genitourinary surgical procedures and ia a European frontrunner in gender reassignment surgery. They are are also highly geared to the medical tourism market with a deep understanding of the needs of the travelling patient. A visit to their website will show you the wide menu of reconstructive and transformative surgeries on offer. If you are searching for this type of surgery you will be reassured by their services.

Address

Sava Perovic Foundation Belgrade, Serbia

Phone

+1 (216) 220-4220

Checklist

Airport Pickup

Hotel Booking

Private rooms for patients

Medical records coordination

Interpeter & translation services

Procedures Offered

Gender Reassignment Surgery

Does Your Clinic Offer Special Packages?

See website for packages

Email Sent

Clinic Booked

Position

Know More Details

{ "@context": "https://schema.org/", "@type": "Product", "name": "Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery Belgrade Serbia", "image": [ "https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/sava_perovic_foundation_surgery_belgrade_serbia_1588246917.png" ], "description": "This clinic is dedicated to genitourinary surgical procedures and ia a European frontrunner in gender reassignment surgery. They are are also highly geared to the medical tourism market with a...", "brand": { "@type": "Thing", "name": "Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery Belgrade Serbia" }, "offers":{ "@type":"Offer", "url":"https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/listing/sava-perovic-foundation-surgery-belgrade-serbia/", "price":"0.00", "priceValidUntil":"2030-11-05", "priceCurrency":"USD", "availability":"https://schema.org/InStock", "seller":{ "@type":"Person", "name":"Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery Belgrade Serbia", "url":"https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/listing/sava-perovic-foundation-surgery-belgrade-serbia/" } }, "review":{ "@type":"Review", "reviewRating":{ "@type":"Rating", "bestRating":"5", "worstRating":"0", "ratingValue":"3" }, "name":"Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery Belgrade Serbia", "reviewBody":"This clinic is dedicated to genitourinary surgical procedures and ia a European frontrunner in gender reassignment surgery. They are are also highly geared to the medical tourism market with a...", "author":{ "@type":"Person", "name":"Pankaj Agarwal" }, "datePublished":"April 30, 2020" }, "aggregateRating": { "@type": "AggregateRating", "ratingValue": "3", "reviewCount": "1" } }

How’s your experience with Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery Belgrade Serbia?

How well this software helped you achieve your business goal?

Review Title *

Overall Standard of Service *

What did you like about this clinic? *

What did you dislike about this clinic? *

Reviews - Fields

Sava Perovic Foundation Surgery Belgrade Serbia (approved)

First Name

Last Name

3. Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC) Thailand

0 reviews

This is a medical tourist’s dream location on the fabulous island of Phuket and a renowned clinic to make a gender reassignment surgery. In addition to GRS they offer a comprehensive range of plastic surgery and cosmetic procedures all aimed at reshaping appearance and improving lifestyles, performed by internationally recognised plastic surgeons.

Address

Phuket Plastic Surgery Institute Bangkok Hospital Siriroj 44 Chalermprakiat Ror 9 Rd, Phuket 83000 Thailand

Phone

+ 0 76 361 888

Checklist

Procedures Offered

Breast Augmentation

Breast Reduction

Breast Lift

Blepharoplasty (eyelids)

Abdominoplasty. (tummy tuck)

Rhinoplasty (nose job)

Otoplasty (ear correction treatment)

Thigh and Buttock Lift

Rhytidectomy (Facelift)

Gynecomastia (male breast reduction)

Labiaplasty

Hymen Repair

Gender Reassignment Surgery

Does Your Clinic Offer Special Packages?

See website for any offers.

Email Sent

Clinic Booked

Position

Know More Details

{ "@context": "https://schema.org/", "@type": "Product", "name": "Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC) Thailand", "image": [ "https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/phuket_international_aesthetic_centre_(piac)_thailand_1588247660.png" ], "description": "This is a medical tourist's dream location on the fabulous island of Phuket and a renowned clinic to make a gender reassignment surgery. In addition to GRS they offer a...", "brand": { "@type": "Thing", "name": "Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC) Thailand" }, "offers":{ "@type":"Offer", "url":"https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/listing/phuket-international-aesthetic-centre-piac-thailand/", "price":"0.00", "priceValidUntil":"2030-11-05", "priceCurrency":"USD", "availability":"https://schema.org/InStock", "seller":{ "@type":"Person", "name":"Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC) Thailand", "url":"https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/listing/phuket-international-aesthetic-centre-piac-thailand/" } }, "review":{ "@type":"Review", "reviewRating":{ "@type":"Rating", "bestRating":"5", "worstRating":"0", "ratingValue":"3" }, "name":"Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC) Thailand", "reviewBody":"This is a medical tourist's dream location on the fabulous island of Phuket and a renowned clinic to make a gender reassignment surgery. In addition to GRS they offer a...", "author":{ "@type":"Person", "name":"Pankaj Agarwal" }, "datePublished":"April 30, 2020" }, "aggregateRating": { "@type": "AggregateRating", "ratingValue": "3", "reviewCount": "1" } }

How’s your experience with Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC) Thailand?

How well this software helped you achieve your business goal?

Review Title *

Overall Standard of Service *

What did you like about this clinic? *

What did you dislike about this clinic? *

Reviews - Fields

Phuket International Aesthetic Centre (PIAC) Thailand (approved)

First Name

Last Name

4. Rumer Cosmetic Surgery. Ardmore USA

0 reviews

Dr. Kathy Rumer is a leading aesthetic and reconstructive plastic surgeon with a private practice on Philadelphia’s Main Line. Board-certified in plastic surgery, Dr. Rumer’s practice offers state-of-the-art procedures, cutting edge product offerings, and innovative technologies that achieve the maximum results for her patients. This is a top place for gender reassignment surgery. Her reputation is unparalleled in the field so you can put her high on your list.

Address

105 ARDMORE AVE

ARDMORE, PA 19003

USA

Phone

+ 1(855) 782-5665

Checklist

Procedures Offered

Liposuction

Breast Augmentation

Breast Reduction

Breast Lift

Blepharoplasty (eyelids)

Abdominoplasty. (tummy tuck)

Rhinoplasty (nose job)

Non-surgical Nose Job

Forehead Lift

Otoplasty (ear correction treatment)

Thigh and Buttock Lift

Rhytidectomy (Facelift)

Gynecomastia (male breast reduction)

Labiaplasty

Hymen Repair

Gender Reassignment Surgery

Does Your Clinic Offer Special Packages?

Email Sent

Clinic Booked

Position

Know More Details

{ "@context": "https://schema.org/", "@type": "Product", "name": "Rumer Cosmetic Surgery. Ardmore USA", "image": [ "https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/rumer_cosmetic_surgery._ardmore_usa_1588250761.png" ], "description": "Dr. Kathy Rumer is a leading aesthetic and reconstructive plastic surgeon with a private practice on Philadelphia’s Main Line. Board-certified in plastic surgery, Dr. Rumer’s practice offers state-of-the-art procedures, cutting...", "brand": { "@type": "Thing", "name": "Rumer Cosmetic Surgery. Ardmore USA" }, "offers":{ "@type":"Offer", "url":"https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/listing/rumer-cosmetic-surgery-ardmore-usa/", "price":"0.00", "priceValidUntil":"2030-11-05", "priceCurrency":"USD", "availability":"https://schema.org/InStock", "seller":{ "@type":"Person", "name":"Rumer Cosmetic Surgery. Ardmore USA", "url":"https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/listing/rumer-cosmetic-surgery-ardmore-usa/" } }, "review":{ "@type":"Review", "reviewRating":{ "@type":"Rating", "bestRating":"5", "worstRating":"0", "ratingValue":"3" }, "name":"Rumer Cosmetic Surgery. Ardmore USA", "reviewBody":"Dr. Kathy Rumer is a leading aesthetic and reconstructive plastic surgeon with a private practice on Philadelphia’s Main Line. Board-certified in plastic surgery, Dr. Rumer’s practice offers state-of-the-art procedures, cutting...", "author":{ "@type":"Person", "name":"Pankaj Agarwal" }, "datePublished":"April 30, 2020" }, "aggregateRating": { "@type": "AggregateRating", "ratingValue": "3", "reviewCount": "1" } }

How’s your experience with Rumer Cosmetic Surgery. Ardmore USA?

How well this software helped you achieve your business goal?

Review Title *

Overall Standard of Service *

What did you like about this clinic? *

What did you dislike about this clinic? *

Reviews - Fields

Rumer Cosmetic Surgery. Ardmore USA (approved)

First Name

Last Name

The post Gender Reassignment Surgery – Transgender Procedures, the Facts. appeared first on Best Cosmetic Surgeons.

source https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.com/gender-reassignment-surgery-transgender-procedures-the-facts/ source https://bestcosmeticsurgeons.tumblr.com/post/616827659929993216

1 note · View note

buttercupsfrocks · 6 years ago

Text

Another week, another fatphobic shitstorm, Tumblr, this time in the form of an exercise in projected self-loathing courtesy of Torygraph journalist Tanya Gold. You can find it here if you’re curious, or you can just look at the pictures of my bargain Zara ranty pants plissé culottes; either way I’m afraid I’m going to vent.

For those hitherto unfamiliar with Ms Gold, she’s a self-identified fat woman who has previously written about the pervasiveness of fat discrimination and prejudice; the tyranny of fashion and its fixation with excessively thin models; her serial dieting career; and her struggles with bulimia and alcoholism. Consequently I was a mite puzzled to learn she was appalled at Nike’s recent decision to include a plus-sized mannequin in their London flagship store. This they have done in the spirit of “celebrating the diversity and inclusivity of sport” – and presumably to promote that, unlike exclusionary trend led brands such as Sweaty Betty and Lulu Lemon, Nike supplies workout gear to accommodate those of us at the larger end of the bell curve. Much in the manner of the ground breakingly diverse This Girl Can campaign launched four years ago by Sport England, the message is clear enough: encourage as many women as possible to exercise, thereby improving the health of as many women as possible; everybody wins, GIRL POWAH!

It’s not the first time I’ve used the phrase cognitive dissonance on this blog and it certainly won’t be the last. Unfortunately we live in an era where health has become so synonymous with thinness that even a supposedly whipsmart broadsheet journalist can’t discern they are two different things that aren’t mutually exclusive. “The new Nike mannequin is not size 12, which is healthy,” Gold observes, “or even 16 – a hefty weight, yes, but not one to kill a woman. She is immense, gargantuan, vast. She heaves with fat.” Well of course she does. As I’ve noted before those who hate fat people, including fat people who hate themselves, have a tendency to luxuriate in baroque prose when describing adipose tissue. Personally speaking, my fat does a lot of things but heave isn’t generally one of them unless there’s stewed rhubarb involved. But let’s just back-track a second, shall we? Ms Gold herself is a size 16, or was when she shared this heart rending tale of how she was unable to find a single thousand quid frock to accommodate her UK average-sized arse in Prada. But hey, at least she’s not hefty enough to be dying any time soon. That’s something only fatter fat women do, women who heave, not borderline, amateur chubs like her. Man, if there was ever a women for whom Body Positivity – aka Fat Acceptance Lite® – was invented, it’s Tanya fucking Gold. She even employs the eternal whinge of the aspiration-deprived inbetweenie, “where is the body shape between the tiny and the immense, which is where true health lives? Where is the ordinary, medium, contented woman? Where, oh where, is the middle ground?” In other words, “What about Meeeeeeee?!”

While Gold’s got a point in that it can be highly detrimental to a woman’s self esteem to rarely see her body type represented by the media she consumes, Meeeeeeee! is nonetheless catered to by every single non-couture clothing chain in the country. And while having to be forced to buy from lesser emporia might disappoint, (House of Fraser; the horror), imagine being excluded by the entire fucking high street. Then ask yourself, if that were your reality, how you might be expected to know that a mainstream manufacturer caters to your needs if they don’t advertise it? Call me dim if you must but a display featuring a showroom dummy five sizes smaller than I am would not alert me to this fact. Of the offending mannequin she describes as “in every measure obese”, Gold laments, “She cannot run. She is, more likely, pre-diabetic and on her way to a hip replacement”. Hello? She’s made of sodding fibreglass and weighs approximately 25lbs. Unlike the multitude of actual fat human beings who do indeed run, practice team sports, swim, teach yoga, shot-put and weightlift, as well as attend dance and exercise classes, Nike’s blank canvas can’t do bugger all except encourage other fat women to follow suit which somehow, according to Gold’s bizarre convoluted logic, is a one way ticket to a tragic early death. I know; it’s like falling down a rabbit hole of WTFF. No wonder it’s kicked off such a backlash.

I’ve been sparring with concern trolls like Gold for yonks and they invariably trot out the same old lies, either out of fear, spite or sheer pig ignorance. Gold is no exception; the Fat Acceptance Movement, she opines, “says any weight is healthy if it’s yours”. Yeah, no. In actuality the Fat Acceptance Movement is a fifty year old political initiative born of grass roots feminism, that seeks to highlight and challenge weight based prejudice and discrimination – be that in the classroom, the workplace, the doctor’s office, the fashion industry, mainstream media, (an advertising campaign that portrays the public as abject morons and further stigmatises fat people would seem to fit the bill), local or national government, or anywhere else it has the power to negatively impact the lives of those subject to it. Many detractors confuse Fat Acceptance with Health At Every Size which is an internationally recognised, medically supported programme dedicated to the pursuit of healthful habits without a focus on weight loss. It is, for instance, a useful tool for those in recovery for eating disorders. While many Fat Acceptance advocates practice HAES, just as many don’t; likewise there are those involved in HAES who are neither fat nor politicised about fat.

Gold’s assertion that the War On Obesity® (aka fat people) has been beaten into submission by political correctness is risible, as evidenced by her own poisonous prose, which – pardon my plagiarism – fairly heaves with internalised negative stereotypes: the Fat Acceptance advocate as deluded and self-deceiving; the fat athlete as a myth. We are self piteous, unreliable narrators of our own lived experience; sugar-guzzling runaway trains on a surefire collision with death; we’re narcissistic, (yet self-hating), sick by default, entirely unacquainted with the diseases correlated with obesity, (all incidentally correlated with age and heredity too); in denial about our physical appearance; feckless, and – because no anti-fat screed would be complete without it – lacking in Personal Responsibility. But she would “never want a woman to hate herself for what she finds in the mirror”, perish the thought.

The War on Obesity, despite being ramped up a hundredfold since I was a was first indoctrinated into – and lastingly damaged by – diet culture as an eleven year old child, has not resulted in a healthier populace. Western society is collectively mired up to the lugholes in mass neurosis around issues of food and weight; eating disorders are on the rise across the gender spectrum, in some instances developing in kindergarten, so Gold can fucking bite me with her cod “what about the children?!” shtick. Mental health is a key component of overall wellbeing, and shame is not conducive to mental health. Meanwhile society is getting fatter – along with the wallets of bariatric surgeons and all the other opportunist outfits in "partnership” with the National Obesity Forum, (Canderel, LighterLife, SlimFast, Roche, Glaxo Smith Kline, et al; all organisations whose revenue is dependent on as many people as possible fearing, hating, and being fat).

It’s time to try something else, like recognising that body diversity, along with death and disease, are simple facts of life; that healthful practices are beneficial to all regardless of the size of the body practicing them; and that weight is not an indicator of health or moral character. It also wouldn’t be a bad idea to get to grips with the reams of documentary evidence confirming there is no reliable way to make a body naturally inclined to fatness lastingly thin, and move the fuck forward already.

I’ll shut up now.

#OOTD #Fatshion #Zara #Got my ranty pants on #Tanya Gold

39 notes · View notes

streamacademe · 5 years ago

Text

Week 110, Day 765.

It has been a manic week, hence the delay in my blog post. My trip to Scotland was totally worth it as I finally managed to collect more service reservoir material, which is now on its way to the US to undergo a variety of analyses in a weeks time or so! I spent approximately 60% of the weekend sleeping, which I’m super grateful to myself for as the last three days I have been doing lab work, data analysis, sample shipment arrangement, preparing for my trip to the US, and answering questions as a panellist on a Chinese online community network called ScienceNet. The latter involved myself and five other volunteers answering questions from whoever wanted to write in (mostly undergraduate and graduate students) on research career related topics. I thought that it would be useful to share the questions I was asked (in bold) and my answers (in italics) on here. I have had some brilliant and heart-warming feedback from ScienceNet, so I hope you also find them useful.

Q1. Do you think female PhD students face different stressors as compared to their male counterparts?

I think that both male and female PhD students face the same stressors in terms of workload. However, I also think that female PhD students face EXTRA stressors. These include sexism in the workplace, which unfortunately still exists, and especially sexism if your PhD involves manual labour. For example, as an engineer, I have a lot of fieldwork with contractors and I am usually treated differently as a woman in that the men on site tend to think of me as someone more fragile and in need of assistance. It can be very frustrating. I have also been in situations where there are no female bathrooms at some of the sites I’ve visited, for example at water treatment works. It is also more difficult for women to get the appropriate protective wear e.g. hard hats, high visibility jackets, steel toecap boots etc. in their size.

I also believe that women are expected to dress well and look nice at all times and especially at work related events. There is a lot less pressure on men to do this. Furthermore, it is not taken into consideration how hard work can be for a woman when she is on her period, especially for those who suffer from conditions such as endometriosis. I think that the world is changing for the better in terms of gender equality. However, we are not there yet and so it is very important to always tell someone if you feel like you are being treated unfairly and express your concerns to a staff member you trust or a student support officer. Just don’t suffer in silence.

Q2. As a PhD student, how did you manage to balance your study and personal life?

This can be very hard to do, and even if you do find a balance, it is difficult and unrealistic to maintain it at all times. However, one of the biggest lessons I quickly learned is how important self-care is. A PhD requires a lot of brainwork and can be really damaging on you mental and physical health if you push yourself too hard, which in turn will negatively affect the quality of your work. If you practice self-care, a balance between your personal and work life will naturally follow. Therefore, here are some of the ways in which I personally do this:

Spend time with animals and in nature - Honestly, if I had to choose just one bit of advice, it would be this. Animals are the definition of joy, and being in nature always reminds me how beautiful the world can be.

Sleep - Getting enough sleep makes my anxiety more manageable, my mood better, and means I have more energy to deal with what life has to throw at me. Don’t listen to how much sleep you “should” have, instead listen to your body and work with it. Personally, I aim for at least 8 hours a night.

Routine - Something that can be tough to do because a lot of PhDs do not follow a specific schedule, but trying my best to stick to a routine makes me feel calm and prepared for what’s ahead. It also means that when it comes to taking rest days, I can take full use of them.

Read - I use books as a form of escape from reality, typically reading either before bed or in the morning before work. It helps take my mind off the stresses that clutter my brain.

Exercise, eat healthy, and drink plenty of water - I know you’ve heard it all before, but here it is again. It works.

Focus on genuine priorities - Procrastination/dedicating your time to non-essential tasks are your no.1 enemies. PhD’s are extremely unpredictable and you have to try and be ahead of the game or you risk falling too far behind. So make sure you know exactly what your priorities are and treat them as such.

You have to learn to say ‘no’ - This will probably be something you’re not used to or are comfortable doing, but I have learned from personal experience that this is literally the most important thing when it comes to looking after yourself and avoiding burnout.

Remember that your PhD is your work not your life - As hard as that may be.

Q3. The PhD program in China usually lasts four years (but many students spend longer than this to get their degree). Is the situation different from this in Western countries? Do you have any advice for PhD students on what career choices they should make when they’re no longer “young” upon graduation?

The situation is different in the UK, but very similar in the US. In the UK, a PhD usually lasts 3 years, but a student may complete it (with or without funding) in 3.5 years. Sometimes, there are exceptions, for example, some PhD’s can be completed in 5 years, but this is VERY rare, with funding usually capped at the latest at 4 years. Career choices are very personal, so I cannot advise on that. I will however say that age is not a reflection of ones abilities. I think the biggest decision that a PhD student needs to make early on is whether they want to stay in academia or go into industry. This will change the trajectory of their PhD, for example, if they don’t want to stay in academia, there is less pressure to publish papers etc. but a higher requirement to have some work experience in industry.

Q4. What if my research topic diverges from my supervisor?

This shouldn’t happen as your supervisor is on that project because the topic of your PhD is what they specialise in. However, differences can arise in how research questions are approached e.g., your supervisor may feel you should do one type of experiment and you may disagree. To overcome this, talk to your supervisor about your concerns and provide evidence to back up your points.

Q5. Is it a big burden for PhD students in the United States to afford the tuition? I’ve heard that supervisors may pay part of the tuition or even daily expenses. Is that true?

I am not personally from the US, but do know a little bit about how their system works. Usually a PhD supervisor covers tuition costs, which are approximately $15,000 per year. The student is also provided with a stipend to live on, which is between $22,000 - $30,000 (for the duration of the PhD) depending on the institution. Some PhDs are self-funded, but most follow the structure mentioned above. A lot of PhD students will pick up tuition style work to earn some extra cash.

Q6. When doing a PhD is western countries, do you have any suggestions for choosing schools and supervisors? Any advice on something we should be careful with when contacting supervisors for the first time? Are there any qualities and traits of candidates that supervisors may prefer?

I would choose a university that specialises in your field and is ranked in the top 100 universities for that country. For me, as I do a research based PhD, it was important that my chosen university was part of a Russel Group.

It is hard to predict what a potential supervisor will be like, but it may be helpful to contact some of the students that are already supervised by that person to get an idea of what it is like to work with them. It is also helpful to read some of their published work.

When contacting supervisors for the first time make sure that you have very good grammar and keep your email/letter short as they are very busy people and are unlikely to read long pieces of text.

A supervisor needs to know that you can handle yourself in difficult situations, are reliable, punctual, hardworking, and in some way unique. You also have to show how passionate you are about the research you want to do and why.

Q7. What factors need to be taken into consideration when choosing your destination countries to do a PhD?

It is difficult for me to answer this question as I stayed in my home country for my PhD, but I guess it depends on how far you are willing to step outside of your comfort zone. It is very easy to feel isolated in a new country, especially if you do not know the language of that country well. If having a community of people from your home country is important to you, make sure you research this before choosing where you want to go.

Q8. If my goal is to publish papers in top journals and get real world experience, do you have any tips for me on choosing supervisors?

At the end of the day, you will be the one writing your research paper, so I do not think your choice of supervisor is too important here. It helps if your supervisor has published plenty of papers in respected journals, but it is more important that your supervisor can find the time to review your work and advise you on how to improve, rather than being super famous.

Q9. Any suggestions on improving the efficiency of your research?

To do lists and GANTT charts are lifesavers – On difficult days, refer to these to reorient yourself and stay on track. Make sure they are always up to date, kept neat, and, most importantly, realistic.

Find a balance between feeling terrified and apathetic, and stupid and self-assured - PhD’s are terrifying, which I appreciate can be exhausting and can lead to feeling apathetic. However, apathy is both a blessing and a curse. It may make you feel calmer and more able, but it will not motivate you to try harder and do better. The same applies for feeling self-assured; yes, you are clearly clever for getting this far and you should acknowledge and celebrate that, but feeling stupid pushes us to seek knowledge, which is what science is all about.

Rely on your supervisors for help - THIS IS SO IMPORTANT. You DO NOT have to do everything alone. Ask questions, talk to them about your problems, and seek their advice. If they make you feel inferior, uncomfortable, stupid, or make themselves unavailable to you, contact your student support office/r, because a supervisor should NEVER do that. Furthermore, don’t be afraid to voice your opinions and stand your ground with your superiors, they are only human, just like you, and if you feel like they are misguiding or misunderstanding you, tell them. This is your PhD, not anybody else’s.

Q10. I’ve heard that the PhD tuition is very expensive in western countries. Is it common that PhD students do part-time jobs to make ends meet?

I can only speak for the UK, and in the UK, this is not true. Yes, tuition costs are high but these are typically covered by a scholarship or something alike. PhD students are paid enough to live relatively comfortably. However, most PhD students will pick up some extra work within the university e.g. tuition to get some bonus cash; this is personal preference. It also depends on the location of your university, for example, studying and living in London is much more expensive than some other places in the UK.

Q11. Do all universities in the US cover tuition? How can I find out these details? What happens if I don't get university funding? Are there other options for me?

I am not from the US, so I cannot say for sure, but I do know a little bit about how their system works in general. Usually a PhD supervisor covers tuition costs, which are approximately $15,000 per year. The student is also provided with a stipend to live on, which is between $22,000 - $30,000 depending on the institution. Some PhDs are self-funded, but most follow the structure mentioned above.

To find out exact details for your university of interest, contact the university directly. I do not know about alternative options other than there may be some scholarships that you can apply for, but these are usually highly competitive.

Q12. Can you please evaluate the influence of your senior fellow students on you during your doctoral study?

It has been helpful to see senior fellow students progress through their PhDs and share their experiences and the lessons they have learned. They also tend to be more clued up on the way things work at your institution etc., which is helpful. However, because PhDs are so unique and every students approach to their PhD is different, it is very hard to be influenced much by others doing something completely different.

Q13. What was the difference between the focus/weightage on dissertations and papers when you did your PhD?

You do not do dissertations as a PhD student in the UK, just your thesis. However, there are two main types of thesis style, you can do either a classic thesis or thesis by papers, if it is the latter then you have to write and publish a lot more papers than the former.

Q14. If you could go back to when you started your PhD, what advice would you give yourself?

Do little things before they become too hard.

Write as much as you can as early as you can.

Focus on genuine priorities.

Practice self-care.

Q15. How should one deal with the relationship with one’s supervisors? Do PhD students in your country have a specific way of managing this relationship?

Supervisors are only human, just like you, and so they can be very different people. Some prefer a stricter, professional relationship, but from my experience, most are happy to go out for coffee with you and have a less formal rapport.

Your supervisor will be your no.1 support system throughout your PhD, so learn what they are like, find common ground, and do not be afraid to have a professional friendship with them. Your supervisor is there to help carry you through the tough phases, make sure they like you.

However, remember, if they make you feel inferior, uncomfortable, stupid, or make themselves unavailable to you, contact your student support office/r, because a supervisor should NEVER do that.

Q16. Would you let your children do a PhD in the future? Especially if they are girls?

I would let my children follow whatever career path they wanted to choose and I see absolutely no reason why women (not girls) should be advised against doing a PhD.

Q17. Why do so many postgraduate students’ superiors want them to go onto do a PhD?

I do not know if this is necessarily true in the UK. A student is only advised to do a PhD if their lecturers/supervisors/senior researchers believe that they have great potential to complete a PhD, especially if they supervised them during a Masters research project. However, in the UK students are not pushed to do something they are not interested in doing.

Q18. In China, PhD students are required to publish SCI papers before graduation. Is it the same situation in your country? Or do you have any other requirements?

No, you do not have to publish SCI papers before graduation in the UK, although it is preferable if you can. There are no other requirements of this kind that I am aware of.

Q19. I did a Master of Arts degree in China, and then studied English in the US for a year. I want to do a PhD abroad in the future, but haven't figured out what to study. Would it be possible for you to give me some advice on this matter?

Only choose a discipline that you know you are passionate about as PhD’s are tough and it is easy to lose love for your project. Also think about what you’re good at, for example, I like physics, but I would struggle to do a PhD in that discipline. Aside from that, I cannot advise as choosing a career is very personal.

Q20. What would you consider as “hot” subject areas for PhD programs in your country? (please specify country)

There is no such thing really in the UK. I guess any of the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) degrees are quite popular, and medicine.

Q21. I find that I always end up procrastinating while doing research. What should I do? Are there any good suggestions for improvement? I feel that the pressure is immense.

Trust me; everybody struggles with procrastination in one way or another. However, my best bit of advice is to treat your research like a job, which to be honest, it is. You wouldn’t procrastinate at work, would you?

Furthermore, try your best to separate work and social life. For instance, I try hard not to not work on weekends because that way I feel refreshed and motivated to get back to work on Monday.

You can also create a reward system for yourself, for example, if you work 8 hours a day Monday-Friday you can buy yourself a small present, or if you finish an essay, you can treat yourself to an extra day off, that sort of thing.

I appreciate that the pressure of doing research is really high, but the more you delay a task and the more you procrastinate, the worse it will get.

Q22. If there is an academic dispute with the supervisor or if the supervisor is not happy with the student’s working progress, does the supervisor have the right to suspend the student’s living expenses or send him/her home?

Absolutely not. If your supervisor makes you feel inferior, uncomfortable, stupid, or makes themselves unavailable to you, contact your student support office/r, because a supervisor should NEVER do that. The only time you can be suspended from your PhD is if you fail to meet certain requirements set by the University itself, NOT the supervisor.

Q23. When applying to a PhD program, would you prefer a university with a good reputation, e.g. ranking 200-500 globally, or would you consider the supervisors’ experience and research in the industry as more important?

I would consider the research topic as a priority, because it is very easy to lose passion for your PhD and want to quit when things get tough, but if you believe in the value of the research that you’re doing, it is easier to get through those difficult periods.

Following this, I would consider the University, simply because it is a lot easier to find out what the reputation of an institution is like, compared to a specific supervisor. Furthermore, supervisors may change throughout the course of your PhD.

Q24. I don't know why my supervisor keeps persuading me to study for a PhD degree. I personally prefer to start working after finishing my Master's degree. Should I refuse my supervisor even though he is insisting?

You should definitely refuse to do a PhD if it is not something that you want to do.

Q25. What do you think is the most important quality you need for being a PhD?

There are many. However, if I had to choose one, you have to be excellent at self-motivation and time-management.

Q26. When the research topic is finalized, how to design the research?

Read literature from the field of study, converse with your supervisors, and just start. There is never a perfect plan for how to do research, it is all about trial and error.

Q27. PHD students are invited to dinner by their tutors in China. It's said that in foreign countries, they usually go dutch between PhD students and tutors in such a situation. And that graduate students have to attend a tutor's dinner at their own expense. Is that so?

No, this is not the case in the UK. Here, supervisors or your project budget should cover the costs of such meals/events.

Q28. Is it true that PhD students must follow the supervisor’s instruction exactly? If the process does not work out well, the supervisor can suspend the student’s scholarship?

Absolutely not. If your supervisor makes you feel inferior, uncomfortable, stupid, or makes themselves unavailable to you, contact your student support office/r, because a supervisor should NEVER do that. Furthermore, don’t be afraid to voice your opinions and stand your ground with your superiors, they are only human, just like you, and if you feel like they are misguiding or misunderstanding you, tell them. This is your PhD, not anybody else’s.

The only time a student can be suspended from their PhD is if they fail to meet certain requirements set by the University itself, NOT the supervisor.

Q29. I am doing doctoral joint training in the UK, and I plan to return to China next year after graduation. What do you think would be a better choice? Hunting for a job after I get the PhD or the continuation of overseas postgraduates studies?

Unfortunately, I cannot answer this question as the choice of any future career decisions should be your own.

Q30. For subjects like branding, public relations, is it necessary to study for a PhD degree in foreign countries?

As someone whose career is not related to any of these fields, I cannot answer this question. Your best bet is to contact companies/institutions in this field directly.

That is all for this week folks! Have a spooktacular Halloween! 👻

Photo: You’re welcome. Source: Pinterest.

7 notes · View notes

diarrheaworldstarhiphop · 6 years ago

Photo

youtube

I’m five minutes in and already this seems like something beamed in from an alternate universe. Did this crowd just cheer “doctoral degrees” and then, specifically, “psychoanalysis”?

This big arena debate world where people cheer academic qualifications like wrestling belts is obviously Peterson’s world. And it’s really off-putting. He sits in his chair looking expectant and deep in thought, occasionally letting slip a brief acknowledgment of the surreality of the situation. Zizek, on the other hand, looks bewildered. When his introduction is concluded, he simply shrugs and does a brief facepalm.

Peterson, by contrast, barely flinches. He’s obviously used to this… And that’s the weirdest thing of all.

I’m not really sure what I’m in for here as I sit down to watch this. I’ve heard interesting things about this debate from those who have already watched it — apparently it’s not a complete waste of time — and so I have been tempted to give it a go for myself…

But I’m already aware of the kind of discussion I’m hoping for — and unlikely to get — and this anticipation is probably going to inform my viewing for better or worse…

So, first things first, I feel like I should declare my biases.

I like Zizek (generally speaking). He’s the sort of cantankerous sniffling voice I’m happy to have in the public sphere. I have a soft spot for him, in a way, because, perhaps like many other people my age, he was the first contemporary “Public Intellectual” that I paid any attention to; the first living philosopher I remember hearing and reading about.

However, that’s not to say I know his work all that well. The only book of his I’ve read with any seriousness is his first: The Sublime Object of Ideology — which is still a good read — but the majority of the rest of his written work is unknown to me. (Those films of his are, at the very least, entertaining.) I have, however, read a lot of his earlier articles and writings on communism, but I’ll come back to those shortly.

My understanding of Peterson’s general project is even more limited. I haven’t read his book. All I’ve seen are a few lectures and some click-bait “Peterson destroys…” YouTube appearances. That being said, I’ve found very little to admire or relate to in what I have heard him say. (I’ve previously critiqued one of his UK television appearances here.) But he’s nonetheless on my radar as a cultural figure and I have found his discussions around masculinity to be interesting, if only because of what he leaves out.

I want to briefly talk about Peterson’s views on masculinity because they seem integral to his overall position and you can see much of the same logic that is applied to this topic leaking out into his other opinions. For instance, on at least one occasion, he’s compared the modern “femininsation” of men to the Nietzschean death of God. It’s an apt comparison in some respects — although I’d take it more positively than he seems to do. His argument seems to be that men have lost their purpose, their drive, their grounding, like peasants without God, or a state without its sense of nationhood — the latter being a particularly important similarity, I think, when considering his popularity amongst hypermasculine nationalists. Point being: men are lost without their own inflated (and gendered) senses of self. Peterson is here to give it back to you. It’s not a bad project in and of itself, but he’s pretty terrible at it. His success despite this perhaps says more about the depths of the crisis that we’re willing to accept him as a savior.

What Peterson decries as taking the place of traditional gendered duties and positions within society is what he regularly defines as “contemporary nihilism”. This nihilism is, of course, a huge freedom to many others who have felt traumatically constricted by societal expectations and in contemporary philosophy more generally we have seen the emergence of a new nihilism which explores the outsider epistemologies of occultism with as much rigour as scientific rationalism — you could say it was precisely this crossover that gave the world Reza Negarestani — and so Peterson’s nihilism is, in itself, a very limited concept.

Ray Brassier’s old nihilism, for instance, is a nihilism that grounds itself on the “meaninglessness” of rational truth, which is to say, nihilism is an attempt to decloak oneself of the stories and “realisms” which we allow to structure (but also inevitably limit) our realities. Truth and meaning are not the same thing and so a life of facts and rationality is far closer to nihilism than the popular conception of the term allows. By contrast, despite warning of its dangers when it applies to something he doesn’t believe in, Peterson seems to champion the adoption of ideologies in order to give your life meaning. It is in this sense that he’s often positioned by some as fascist (or at least fascist-adjacent).

Masculinity, for Peterson, appears to be just such an ideology in being held up as an Idea that gives gendered subjects purpose and a sense of duty. But what is odd about this is how much Peterson otherwise critiques ideology. Because, for Peterson, it seems ideologies are only ever collective. Individualism, in particular, is not an ideology…

youtube

… And that’s ridiculous. As Zizek writes himself:

[I]deology is not simply a ‘false consciousness’, an illusory representation of reality, it is rather this reality itself which is already to be conceived as ‘ideological’ — ‘ideological’ is a social reality whose very existence implies the non-knowledge of its participants as to its essence — that is, the social effectivity, the very reproduction of which implies that the individuals ‘do not know what they are doing’. ‘Ideological’ is not the false consciousness of a (social) being but this being itself in so far as it is supported by a false consciousness.

He defines ideology as Marx does (at least implicitly): “they do not know it, but they are doing it“. Such is Peterson’s argument — don’t pay attention to any of that stuff which supposedly defines (or fails to define) your existence, just get on with it; tidy your room. (His insistence on personal cleanliness is, I’ve always felt, near identical to an army induction into self-presentation, and if that isn’t the ultimate immersion in ideology then I don’t know what is.)

Today, despite Peterson’s attempts to rehabilitate it, we see that the particular ideology of patriarchal individualism has been in crisis and so the left embraces the ideological crisis of masculinity, understood as a by-product of a broader crisis of patriarchal capitalism, in order to encourage the emergence of a new consciousness; the emergence of something altogether different. This is not to try and destroy men as such — well, okay, that depends who you ask… — but rather the ideology of Masculinity. In response to this general vibe, Peterson’s blinkered response to this is to try and save patriarchal capitalism by focussing on the individual and selling them an anti-feminist magical voluntarism.

What Peterson doesn’t get is that the argument is not that this crisis of manhood is a result of capitalism’s “failure”, per se — which is presumably why Peterson wants to defend its honour — but rather that this crisis is a direct result of capitalism’s own internal development and indifference.

(It would also be interesting to see what other takes people have on this, actually: “the feminisation of men” — a marxist feminazi psyop or a by-product of free market automation reducing the need for big strong physical labourers? You’d think Peterson, for all his citing of anthropological evidence, would be more on board with the latter, but he’s not… Responses on a postcard!)

The relevance of modern masculinity, and its crisis, to this particular debate is that masculinity is, more often than not, framed as an ideology in being not just a gender but a gender identity. To be a Man, in the sense that Peterson describes, is — sociopolitically and, that is, ideologically speaking — not that different from being a Communist. It is a declaration that says something about your view of the world and how people should expect you to act within it; indeed, how you should expect yourself to act within it. In this way, his is an individualised ethics — and that is how many contemporary men’s groups, for better or for worse, present themselves on both the left and the right, in defining masculinity as an ethics first and foremost — whilst communism instead strives for a collective and communal viewpoint, a “collective subjectivity”, a collectivised ethics, far broader than Peterson’s consideration of (but of course not ignorant to) these kinds of identity markers.

I want to keep this in mind going forwards because I think Peterson’s framing of masculinity actually gives us a good entry point for talking about communism (and his particular framing of communism) and this may help us understand just how flawed and limiting his conceptions of both these things are.

As I mentioned in passing, over the last few years I’ve started to read more and more of Zizek’s earlier work — particularly his articles on communism and, specifically, “the Idea of Communism“. When writing my Master’s dissertation back in 2017, reading a lot about Maurice Blanchot and his Bataillean conception of “community”, the Idea of communism emerged as a central framework through which the questions Blanchot (and others) raised have been continued into the present, and Zizek — as a writer and an editor — at one time contributed a fair amount to this discourse.

I’ve written a lot about the “Idea of communism” before on this blog, albeit under various different guises — the Idea of communism as an event horizon; as a “community which gives itself as a goal”; as a sort of ethical praxis in and of itself, a sort of politico-philosophical First Principle, rather than a solidified (statist) political ideal — it’s under the surface of a lot of my patchwork stuff.

To be clear, what I mean by the “Idea” of communism here is perhaps something akin to the Platonic Idea. To quote Plato himself, writing about his own philosophy:

There is no treatise of mine about these things, nor ever will be. For it cannot be talked about like other subjects of learning, but out-of much communion about this matter, and from living together, suddenly, like a light kindled from a leaping fire, it gets into the soul, and from there on nourishes itself.

The Idea, in this sense, is a sort of ephemeral thing, an event in a process of becoming. It is fuel for discourse and politics but is not, in itself, either of these two things. It’s something else unique to philosophy.

To many this may sound like the beginning of some wishy-washy apolitical intro to communism, but the intention here is to emphasise — what Deleuze & Guattari, in What Is Philosophy?, call — “the Concept” of communism. (This is, arguably, also the intention of U/Acc, in giving philosophical priority to the Concept of Acceleration over its conditioned political vagaries which leave the concept in the corner to their detriment — i.e. the rejection of a state-accelerationism on the same terms as a state-communism, with both being as sensical as the other despite how the latter is so often understood.)

The Concept, in this sense, is a provocation, an invention. To pin it down, to attack it or defend it, is to condition it and use it — which is fine in most circumstances — but there is always something that comes first which we mustn’t lose sight of in the process putting concepts to use. We must be “critical” — just as Peterson describes his preferred mode of thought, which we’ll discuss in a minute — by which I mean that we must not lose sight of the process of engineering which produces the concept when we put it to use. That is the purpose of the Idea or the Concept: that which philosophy always hopes to produce: the simultaneous product of and originator of thinking. (I’m writing on this in relation to accelerationism for somewhere else at the moment so I won’t go into this too much further or else I’ll start plagiarising myself.)

The Idea of communism, then, becomes this original seed which existed before the horrors of state-communism and continues to exist after them. It is a communism produced communally, lidibinally; a kind of communist consciousness; an outsideness; a view to that which isn’t. It is, in this first instance, the Idea of the future, of the new, of what is to come, held in the minds of those affected by it at the expense of that which is. When Kodwo Eshun called himself a “concept-engineer”, this is no doubt what he was positioning himself in favour of, and against the “great inertia engine”, the “moronizer”, the “futureshock absorber.” That’s what the Communist Manifesto calls for too. It’s a provocation, a call to revolution, not just of politics and economics but, more fundamentally, of thought and thinking.

Masculinity — reconfigured as a concept — (and femininity too, for that matter) can be thought of in much the same way, as a becoming, which may signify certain horrors, past and present, but as a future may instead be something which gives itself as a goal. And there is every chance that that goal might be unrecognisable to our current sense of the cloistered Ideal.

Like it or not, the best word we have for this process, related to gender anyway, is queering.

Everything else is cage.

Anyway, I’m rambling…

What does any of this have to do with anything? Well, it has everything to do with Peterson’s opening statement.

The Idea of communism is seemingly an alien concept to him. The very Idea of philosophy seems alien to him, for that matter. He’s a man of blinkered systems and boundaries and “truths”, and to such an extent that “truth” ends up undermining his own arguments. His pursuit of an absolute logic — so common to many North American conservative pundits; “facts don’t care about your feelings” — only makes the holes in his reasoning more apparent. Encapsulated in a wall of logic that he has built around himself, he starts to undermine his own apparent superiority by being incapable of giving himself the room to breath and produce thought. He’s like a real life Vulcan, his ironic flaw being the bemusement which erupts from his consideration of the adaptability of those illogical and mentally vulnerable humans (read: leftists).

What makes this difficult for some to see, however, seems to be the effort Peterson puts into superficially privileging the opposite within his own work. Early on in his opening statement, for instance, he says:

It doesn’t seem to me that either Marx or Engels grappled with one fundamental — with this particular fundamental truth — which is that almost all ideas are wrong … It doesn’t matter if they’re your ideas or something else’s ideas — they’re probably wrong. And, even if they strike you with the course of brilliance, your job is to assume that, first of all, they’re probably wrong and then to assault them with everything you have in your arsenal and see if they can survive.

Such is philosophy — and, on that note, I’m reminded of a particular passage from Deleuze and Guattari’s What Is Philosophy? where they write that the Greeks distrusted the Idea, the Concept, “so much, and subjected it to such harsh treatment, that the concept was more like the ironical soliloquy bird that surveyed the battlefield of destroyed rival opinions (the drunken guests at the banquet).”

And yet, for Deleuze and Guattari, the Concept doesn’t seek truth. It might emerge from certain judgments and appraisals, from thought, but truth is not its end. If truth were the goal for Marx and Engels, it might be called the Truth Manifesto. But it’s not. It is called the Communist manifesto because communism is its goal — a politics of multiplicitous and unruly communality.

Here we see the first glimpse of Peterson’s own nihilism — again, despite his apparent rejection of that -ism and its affects on thought. We might ask ourselves: What is it to introduce your position with a statement as vacuous as “almost all ideas are wrong”? Deleuze and Guattari, again, do a far better job of articulating the stakes of this suggestion which, again, seem totally lost of Peterson:

A concept always has the truth that falls to it as a function of the conditions of its creation. […] Of course, new concepts must relate to our problems, to our history, and, above all, to our becomings. But what does it mean for a concept to be of our time, or of any time? Concepts are not eternal, but does this mean they are temporal? What is the philosophical form of the problems of a particular time? If one concept is “better” than an earlier one, it is because it makes us aware of new variations and unknown resonances, it carries out unforeseen cuttings-out, it bring forth an Event that surveys us. But did the earlier concept not do this already? If one can still be a Platonist, Cartesian, or Kantian today, it is because one is justified in thinking that their concepts can be reactivated in our problems and inspire those concepts that need to be created. What is the best way to follow the great philosophers? Is it to repeat what they said or to do what they did, that is, create concepts for problems that necessarily change?

From this we can say that the prevalence and continued existence of “Marxists” and Marxism is that the problems Marx (and Engels, of course) pointed to remain relevant today because we remain under the problematic system of capitalism. Many further concepts have been added to the arsenal but the original ground remains unresolved. Capitalism — as another -ism — endures for the same reasons. We have yet to settle the problem of capitalism as a response to the end of feudalism and instead treat the conceptual framework of capital as eternal rather than temporal, a being rather than a becoming.

Now, the Idea or Concept of communism can perhaps be summarised in similar terms. Communism is the name of a becoming-to-come, a postcapitalism. Peterson, instead, in wanting to rehabilitate what we already have, doesn’t get this. But still he continues to use the language of someone who does whilst nonetheless remaining trapped in his own circular argument.

For example, again in his opening statement, he calls Marx and Engels “typical” — as opposed to “critical” — thinkers because they accept things (that is, the problems of capitalism) as they are, as given and self-evident (to capitalism), and don’t think about their own thinking, which is to say that they also present their critiques to their readers as if they were self-evident. Peterson says no — these problems are inherent to nature, not capitalism. But in shifting the goal posts rather than engaging with the text directly he portrays himself as guilty of what he decries in them.

In doing this, Peterson sidesteps the entire point of the Marxist project, particularly as it is framed in the Manifesto: a project which attempts to systematise a deep understanding of capitalism (as in Marx’s Capital) and then critique the material reality of capitalism, provoking action against it (as in the Manifesto). If anything, Peterson might have come out of this better if he’d read anything but the manifesto. Instead, he misses the entire point, failing to get under the skin of Marxism because he fails to acknowledge its attempts to get under the skin of capitalist realism and reveal to us the ways in which that which is, that which we see and accept as the nature of reality, is instead a contingency. In this sense, “all ideas (capitalism tells you) are wrong” could be the brainlet summary of the Manifesto in itself, and in this sense, if it is an ideology, it is one which defines itself by what it escapes.

It is here that the circle of Peterson’s argument completes itself before its even really begun. What is it to critique critical thinking in this way? What is it to critique critique through naturalised tradition? Does this make Peterson a critical-critical thinker? Or is he instead just a critical-typical thinker? Either way, his is a position that eats itself. Peterson, however, seems good at supplying the gall to ignore your own inability to take your own medicine.

This is the entire problem with Peterson’s argument going forwards too, which might be summarised as: “Marx and Engels say that this is self-evident within capitalism and must be challenged — I say, actually it is self-evident within nature and nature is sacrosanct so back off.” Peterson’s form of “critique” is simply to take pre-existing critiques of our sociopolitical world and place them within a broader (supposedly) scientific context and, in the process, turn his own critical thinking back into (by his own definition) a typical thinking. He’s literally bending backwards over his own arguments.

Take, for instance, his analysis of the first “axiom” of the Communist Manifesto — his summary of Marxist historical materialism being that the very engine of history is economic class struggle. Peterson flippantly throws out the relevance of economics and says, sure, class struggle exists, hierarchies exist, but they exist in nature too so why are we so upset about them and put all the blame on economics?

In framing it this way, he seemingly misses the main point that our hierarchies are not “natural” — they are instantiated by capitalism as an economic system. To say that hierarchies have always existed ignores the sense in which economics defines class. It is to ignore the very nature of our hierarchies, in the present epoch, as economic — that is, how economics forms them — which we can interpret as not just being about how much your earn but also how much you are worth, connecting slavery to wage-slavery and encompassing the fallouts of both. Contrary to this, Peterson’s is the sort of argument that takes scientific observations of the natural kingdom and then uses them to reconstruct a sort of secular Divine Right of Kings. It is a gateway to a racist and eugenic thinking.

It is from this flawed analysis that Peterson goes on to make the point that went viral in the aftermath of the debate. He says:

it is finally the case that human hierarchies are not fundamentally predicated on power and I would say that biological / anthropological data on that is crystal clear. You don’t rise to a position of authority that’s reliable in a human society primarily by exploiting other people. It’s a very unstable means of obtaining power.

This clip has done the rounds online already, as it gets a very audible laugh from the crowd, and rightly so. It’s perhaps the most moronic comment anyone could make — but it is also a comment that can be split into a right half and a wrong half, further demonstrating Peterson’s circular reasoning.

People do rise to positions of authority through exploitation — that is true not just of capitalism but the feudalism that birthed it and it is also, arguably, true of the animal kingdom too (depending on how you define exploitation — the exploitation of behaviours, habits, circumstances?) — but it is also right to say that this is an unstable means of obtaining power. Rather than that instability meaning people don’t do it, it leads to the sort of resentment and protest that Peterson dismisses as unfounded. His entire logic system starts to fall into place. Reading the Communist Manifesto at aged 18 and presumably reading it with all the nuance of an 18 year old, Peterson has embarked on a career of self-fulfilling criticism based on the logical fallacies of a teenager.

From this point, it is very hard to take anything else he says seriously. What follows is a long, meandering and confused rant that ends with the basic point: “Actually, relatively speaking, the poor are richer now than they once were… As are the rich…” Thank you, Dr. Peterson. Truly insightful.

I’m left wanting to bail out at this point. I feel like I’ve wasted 40 minutes of my life but I try and stick it out for Zizek’s opening statement at least.

From the outset, it is far more interesting. Taking on the three topics of the debate’s title — Communism, Happiness, Capitalism — he considers the ways in which “Happiness” is not such a simple and virtuous goal for us to give ourselves, especially under a system like capitalism which does all it can to grab the steering wheel of our desires. (It’s an argument I’ve made myself before when writing about Mark Fisher’s Acid Communism — a communism that is “beyond the pleasure principle”.) Zizek says:

I agree that human life or freedom and dignity does not consist just in searching for happiness — no matter how much we spiritualise it — or in the effort to actualise our inner potentials. We have to find some meaningful cause beyond the mere struggle for pleasurable survival.

Zizek’s statement from here is actually quite brilliant, and subtle. He eschews any temptation to echo Peterson’s polemic book report and instead implicitly skewers everything wrong with Peterson’s own body of work and, indeed, the entire situation of their meeting under the cover of the debate’s own title. It’s very cunning.

For instance, he says a few minutes later:

Once traditional authority loses its substantial power it is not possible to return to it. All such returns are, today, a post-modern fake. Does Donald Trump stand for traditional values? No. His conservatism is a post-modern performance; a gigantic ego trip.

Whilst Zizek takes firm aim at Trump, Peterson lingers on the edge of his seat. You wonder how much he knows that he is also in Zizek’s sights. Whilst Peterson through criticisms at a 170-year-old target that just don’t stick, Zizek DESTROYS his opponent in a philosophical proxy war.

If Trump is, according to Zizek, the ultimate postmodernist president, Peterson appears, by proxy, to be the most successful postmodernist public intellectual — the attack-dog of YouTube conservatism, the spewer of the very postmodernism he declares his enemy through his snake-oil salesman act of Making Men Great Again as a neo-traditional ideology.

Zizek powers through point after point from here and everything starts to blur into one. It’s not easy to follow without the post-stream benefit of stopping and starting, but there is substance here — substance, I am nonetheless told by the better informed, that Zizek has already repeated again and again through his most recent books and public appearances. There is nothing new here, but it is in part worth listening to just to see Peterson’s face. He is out of his depth. And it shows.

Whereas Peterson’s history lesson is under-informed, Zizek’s history lesson, encapsulating the 20th / 21st century development of hegemonic ideologies, ends simply with a door through which Peterson blindly walks, being the capstone to Zizek’s own argument simply by being himself. Little else needs to be said. The undertone of Zizek’s argument seems to be: “You want postmodernism? You’ve just seen a masterclass… And wasn’t it shit!” It’s very entertaining.

But honestly, I’m burnt out. It’s hard to adjust to Zizek’s rapid-fire drive-by of our contemporary moment after Peterson’s lacklustre ahistorical ramble. Maybe I’ll come back and watch the follow-up back and forth at a later date… But I doubt I’ll want to blog about this any further.

UPDATE: This, from Quillette of all places, is spot on:

The debate about whether there’s a straight line from Marx to Stalin is an important one, especially given the revival of interest in socialism in the contemporary West. Everyone should want the key participants in that debate to be as well informed as possible. Marxists should want to sharpen their minds by having to confront the best versions of anti-Marxist arguments, while anti-Marxists should want a champion for their position who knows Marx’s writings inside and out. Unfortunately, as he’s shown on many occasions, Jordan Peterson doesn’t fit this bill.

#xenogothic

22 notes · View notes

khazelton98-blog · 6 years ago

Text

The XX of Equal Pay

In this blog post, I will be writing about the Gender pay gap and I will touch on factors that cause the pay gap. I will talk about the dark truth of media companies who are I may add owned by old rich billionaires which I will include their opinion on the matter (eyeroll) and see if there are issues with the gender pay gap in their company mainly focusing on the BBC issues with the gender pay gap.

As we know the BBC gender pay gap caused a lot of questions in the media industry on unequal pay for women. This happened because of the UK government demanded that the BBC had to release figures of those who work at the BBC who earn more than 150,000 pounds as a part of it’s so-called “royal charter’ ( which basically guarantees that the corporation will receive its license fee for another 11 years). The BBC published those who earned more than 150,000 pounds of the 96 only a third of them were women. The BBC consistently objects to the disclosure describing it as “poachers” that will drive salaries up in the media industry and that it helps others in the media industry headhunt its staff. (Ruddick,2019) Even though the list is not very long it is important to note that it is the payment that the BBC was directly paid from the license fee. This means that payments made to other staff members from independently run production companies and BBC worldwide is not included in this so-called “headhunt”. This is why some absolute BBC legends are missed off the list such as Sir David Attenborough, David Dimbleby, Matt Leblanc to name a few are missed off the list due to the fact the cut off is 450,000 another example is Sherlock which stars Benedict Cumberbatch are not included due to been made by an independent production company. (Clarke and Clarke,2019)

The gender pay gap shows of the 96 that 62 were men and 34 were women. This reveals even more than just a simple lack of women that there is also a lack of ethnic diversity among those who are earning the big bucks at BBC. In 2016 it revealed that British journalism is 94% white. (Hitsch,2019) There is even evidence that the industry is lacking diversity and that people from a less snooty background are being overlooked. Mr. David Lammy (a Labour MP from Tottenham) on the 14th April 2016 made this statement in parliament “ I beg to move, that this house notes the crucial cultural role the BBC plays in modern Britan; welcomes the fact that one of the public purposes outlined in the BBC charter is to represent the UK, its nations, regions and communities; notes with concern that the last employment census in 2012 showed the number of black, Asian and minority ethnic people working in the UK creative media fell by 30.9% between 2006 and 2012; believes that a BBC target of 14.2% for 2017 is insufficient.” (Hansard.parliament.uk,2019)

This is after BBC editor Carrie Gracie resigned in January after she said that women employees were discriminated over equal pay. In response to her claims a BBC spokesman (no surprise there) said:

“While we still have more to do, much of this report is already out of date. Recent disclosures by other media organizations show that the BBC’s gender pay gap is amongst the smallest and well below the national average.” Here is the funny thing about this statement he says it’s amongst the smallest but yet there shouldn't even be a slight gender pay gap. So he carries on saying...

“But we do hold ourselves to a higher standard. This is why our action on pay has seen the BBC make real progress in addressing equal pay cases; carrying out an independent audit of equal pay; introduce independent oversight so that disputes can be resolved; take clear steps to rebalance top talent pay; reform out pay structure to ensure fairness and give an unprecedented level of transparency and information about pay ranges for all staff; and set up independent reviews to see what further steps should be taken on pay transparency.

That's why so many colleges have contributed to project were doing- on gender, ethnicity, disability, LGBT and socio-economic diversity. We all want to make this a great place to work, where people are properly rewarded for their expertise and experience” (Press Gazette,2019)

Going off from this statement what a load of pretentious old tosh to come out of BBC ( from a MALE spokesman had to type MALE aggressively their).

Surprise surprise.. the gender pay gap just doesn't happen in the BBC it happens all over the media industry it's funny because all these other big cats sure like to jump to the gun about BBC but yet their only doing the same thing. Many women are losing out to men in pay, with them earning more, more senior roles and getting big bonuses, the government gender pay reporting service revealed. The press Gazette showed that 91 percent of UK-based media companies paid men more than women on average based on the mean hourly rate, and 85% paid more in mean bonus pay. This is not because us women are less qualified or few enter the industry. Prime minister (bless her a lot of sarcasm there) choose the Telegraph to write about the issue about the new gender reporting rules she says “ By making this information public, organizations will no longer have anywhere to hide. Shareholders and customers will expect to see improvements and will be able to hold organizations to account if they fail to achieve them.” (Ruddick,2019)

Yet this lovely little statement in the Telegraph is so biased because they have the highest gender pay gaps in the media, with women getting paid 35% less than men on average. 3/4 of the Telegraph highest-paid staff are men, with women working 61.6% of the lower jobs. Men received bonuses of almost twice paid to women on average. Even though it is an issue in the Telegraph it is the only media company that targets to have a zero gender pay gap across the company. Nick Hugh (Telegraphs groups chief executive) has set 2025 as the year by which the company must achieve this saying it “demonstrates where we see the future of the telegraph.” They pledge to monitor frequently and improved maternity benefits. It has offered the option for more flexible working, while 50/50 gender shortlists were introduced for all of its roles. Some others in media want to reach a zero gender pay gap sooner but only within higher brackets, while others have said they are aiming for total gender parity without setting a deadline. For example, The Financial Times aims to achieve gender parity across its global leadership by 2022, Sky pledges to fill half of its senior roles with women by 2020 and The Guardian targets a 50/50 gender balance in the top half of the organization within 5 years. (Press Gazette,2019)

BBC’s TV competitors ITN, which produces news for ITV, Channel 4 and 5. Paid men an average of 19.6% more than women and bonus payments jumped to 77.2%. (National Union of Journalist,2019.) Their excuses for this are even funnier they mainly have more men in senior roles with 17 of its 20 top earners being men. The company has published “TARGETS” which are a 50% reduction in the pay gap within 5 years and a third of the 20 top earned will be occupied by women within 3 years, that it will publish salary bands, introduce a development program for high potential women and men, family-friendly working policies. Yes, this does sound all lovely but the fact is still why 5 years why not now. There shouldn't be a program they should see potential from now and why do they need to make targets it should just be automatically in place now we should be equal now not in a few years. Women at ITN and BBC set up a Whatsapp group to discuss concerns on the pay gap. Natasha Morris legal and equality officer for NUJ says “ It is clear from the latest figures more needs to be done to support women into senior positions within the workplace, ensuring the maternity leave does not mean the end of career progression. It is vital that companies are transparent about pay and where inequality is identified and immediate measures are taken.” (Press, Gazette 2019)

A book called Lifetime Disadvantage, Discrimination and The Gender Workforce by Susan Bisom-Tapp (a professor of Law in California) and Malcolm Sargeant (a professor of Labour Law at Middlesex uni). Which as your reading this I recommend you have a mental checking list in your head ticking if you feel like this is you because for me personally I totally agree with their points and I agree that being a woman in 2019 still has disadvantages and have handled a lot of discrimination on a daily basis.

They write about Gender-based factors which effect from a very early point in their lives as girls and later as women. One of the factors is education and training whilst education is an area where young women have made progress, young women are maximizing their potential. In terms of educations access, attainment, and ambition. In terms of education access, attainment, and ambition, girls on average in OECD counties ( The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development which included the UK.) Amongst OECD counties, girls on average are more likely than boys to anticipate in high-status careers. Side note I as a women hope to be in a high-status career. Young women clearly are more into undergradute study as on average in OECD counties 59% are female university graduates. So from this, no media company can’t technically say women are not qualified because there is the proof in the pudding we are more likely to have a degree so, therefore, why are we not seen to be more ambitious than males just from that fact.

Stereotyping is the second factor in the model. Which begins in the classroom and extending into the workplace, gender beliefs about the different characteristics of male and females may lead to differential treatment. In the classroom, boys tend to receive more praise than girls are more frequently accepted. Research reveals that girls are likely to be rewarded for quite and compliant behavior. Which I agree with I felt like this was a problem personally primary and secondary school it was like its accepted for girls not to have a voice and that we should be quiet and poised which is completely wrong we should be outspoken because without it change will not happen. Despite the long-standing prohibition of sex discrimination in the workplace as well. These biases may infect articulation of a given jobs description and skill requirements and the way employment decisions are made. Due to this stereotyping, this has an enormous effect on occupational advancement over time. Which kind of suck for us women because it feels like these companies are writing rubbish job descriptions to hold us back which is not fair.

Income inequality is another factor is the UK is high, with a rank of sixth amongst the (OECD). The top 10% average income in 2012 was 10.5 times that of the bottom 10% owning 47% of the country’s net wealth. Multiple discrimination women may occupy statuses that further complicate the way in which they are being viewed and treated. One complicating factors is the issue of ageing which I think is so ageist that older workers are viewed as less competent and more difficult to train and more expensive than a younger worker. Which in my opinion is wrong because older people have earned their stripes, their experience so therefore they should be an expense its only fair. Women can encounter other issues and their position in the workplace including minority race-ethnicity, migration status, religion, disability, and sexual orientation. This is terrible not only just because we are women it's all these so-called attachments that can affect us which shouldn't be the case. Who cares where you from, what you believe, what you like or what you believe in. Those with children may collide with a ‘maternal wall’, which diverts or even terminate career paths when women become pregnant, give birth or choose to work in part-time or flexible work arrangements in order to meet family responsibilities. Whilst some women may have to choose a ‘zero hours’ contracts (which are vile and should be full stop banned). Their pay may suffer from working in such positions and which could affect retirement savings and planning. Women can find the unpredictable hours of work be troublesome with caregiving responsibilities.

To finish this off the gender pay gap will always be a burning issue in the media industry due to being an “a mans world” and fat cats such a Mr. Murdoch, the brothers, and other idiotic pigs it will not change until there is a change in the upper parts of the media industry. It should be an industry for everybody but sadly it is not. I believe there should be a constant review on the gender pay gap and it should be changed instantly it shouldn't take years because if they can give bonuses to men so easily, they can do the same for women. The disadvantages of being a woman in the media industry out ways the positives it is very sad to see in the 21st century we are still dealing with issues of women not been seen the same as males. Women have fought for decades before for equality and yet we seem to be in the same boat decades later. I can see how women feel unfortunate to be a woman because of the way they are being treated but we need to stand up for what we want and not just look at the basic gender pay gap but look at all the others issues such as race and factors that are simply out of our control and more importantly stereotypes. This is what news should be about rather than the fat cats slating each other when they are all as bad as each other. The change will happen but it looks like it will be a long time till it is in reach.

word count: 2402

#unequalpay #bbc #genderpaygap

1 note · View note

adorkablegrrl-blog1 · 7 years ago

Text

Regarding Andrew Blake

So I deleted my last post because it was truly a TL;DR word vomit that made me, personally, seem incredibly manic and disorganized. I was pissed when I was writing it, because I keep seeing AB’s stan, Chris, making comments calling my best friend’s honesty and integrity into question. And, while I feel like everyone in the “Andy Awareness” biosphere has been doing a good job of calling that nonsense out for what it is (thank you @theteablogger, thank you @kumquatwriter, thank you @returnofthenecromommycon) seeing Molly and/or Chris and/or any of our friends who interacted with AB dragged in any capacity makes me feel quite stabby. It’s probably the pregnancy hormones that have exacerbated it to the word vomit state... I blame everything on pregnancy hormones right now. As is fair. I am growing a human.

I have pretty much said what I needed/wanted to say about the chronology and facts of what happened with Andy in LA here, so I’m not going to rehash the entire timeline. Besides it’s not my story to tell, really. It’s Molly’s. And, she’s doing a fine job of doing just that. And, I have been assured by her that she is not afraid of or worried about being dragged by either AB or his minions. (I still worry, but I will take her word at that and try to not go Mama Bear on people talking shit about her unless she asks me to.)

That being said, as a witness to these events, there are a couple of important things I feel like I want to share. These are conclusions I came to after spending an ungodly amount of time going down the Andrew Blake rabbit hole this past weekend to try to wrap my mind around the largeness of this mindfuck of a story which is his life.

#1: Andy has all the hallmarks of an addict -- in so much as he “lies, cries, and denies.” He lies about his past and present circumstances. He cries/deflects/minimizes to make it seem like he’s a victim of gossip and mean-spirited people projecting their own personal problems/experiences onto his behavior, and when confronted with the truth he denies that he has done either of the previous two actions. He also claims frequently to be reformed with no tangible evidence that he actually is (further signs of an active addict.)

I have intimate experience with addicts. Both those who are active in their addiction and those who are in successful recovery. And, I am here to tell you -- that the number one bedrock, hallmark, tenant of recovery is accountability. You have to be completely transparent about your life, where you are at, your past mistakes, and your present struggles. If you are lying about ANY of this, you are not a recovering addict. If you are minimizing your behavior (past/present) you are not a recovering addict. If you are deflecting responsibility for what you do and have done onto other people... you are not a recovering addict. Andrew Blake is not out of fandom. He is not done with leading cults. He is not done using people for money, connections, concrete daily needs for living. This has been clearly demonstrated by not only how he behaved in the past, but how he behaved with us before we even KNEW his past. And, this behavior was enough to set me on edge (and I only met him IRL twice) and set at least 8 other people outside myself, Molly, and Chris on edge. We were all creeped out by him, none of us wanted him around... Here is a brief list of 5 major things he lied to me directly about: 1. He said he’d never been to LA before and acted shocked at how expensive living here was.

2. He said he was working “in-house” for the summer for an established costumer who was working on a “big” project. For those not familiar with the industry, that implies he was working in a more permanent capacity, for a film or television production -OR- that he was a staff member at one of LA’s various large costume production houses. That was not the case, he was doing piece work on an “as needed” basis and that alone was not foundation enough to warrant moving to LA for. (Nor was it lined up before he got to LA, to my understanding.)

3. He said he was staying the whole summer with Molly and Chris. Which was not true. As Molly told me, after I questioned her as to why she’d let someone live rent free for three months, that she had agreed to let him stay a week in exchange for a costume commission.

4. He said he had more costuming experience than he did. And, in fact, pointed me to an IMDB page for a different Andrew Blake who is an established costume designer in the UK. (And, my fault lies in believing this, as I didn’t do more than just look briefly at the page and go “oh cool, he has an IMDB page and some experience, he might be good to recommend to [name redacted] as a second assistant or something.” Had I looked more in-depth I would have realized his lie IMMEDIATELY and brought it to Molly’s attention.)

5. He told me he was 23. I believed him. He told me he was a cis-gendered man who was born a cis-gendered man. I believed him. He has a young face. I do not question people’s gender... though it gave me great pause to find out that he was transgender, presenting as cis, making transphobic and homophobic comments to my good friends. And, when confronted with those lies, he has either said “oh no, no- you misunderstood me, that’s not what I said, that’s not what I meant” (gaslighting 101) or directed his minions/stans to try to discredit those confronting him with his lies. This is addict behavior 101.

#2 He is SO not out of fandom...

Of course he knew who the Because Science guy was when questioning my friend C about her boyfriend (the Because Science guy.) Of course he pushed Molly to introduce him to the Critical Role cast (including that RIDICULOUS menu he suggested for a dinner party... hamsters and peacocks? JFC.) Of course when he found out that both Molly and I ran close with the Geek & Sundry crowd (Molly still does, I do not convention or comic con or podcast anymore due to stuff) and that we know Wil Wheaton and Stan Lee (frankly, who doesn’t?) he pushed us to make introductions. BECAUSE HE’S NOT OUT OF FANDOM.

It was suggested by one of his stans that he wanted to make those connections because it would bring him costuming work. Um. No. Celebrities have ZERO, zilch, nada, niente, nothing to do with hiring staff at the level Andrew was/is at. Knowing celebrities is only good for two things: 1. Getting into parties, B. Stroking your own ego and sense of self-importance in a very impersonal and tough industry. And, sometimes actual friendship, but rarely. Also one rule those of us who know and/or are friends with famous people follow is that we don’t introduce randos to them, no matter how big a fan, how well intentioned we believe them to be. And, given the stalky-stalk-mcstalkerson-from stalksylvania-ness of AB’s LoTR and SPN fandom scams (and, possibly a Bucky Barnes/Avengers scam? I am unclear how close he did or did not get to Sebastian Stan) -- it’s as obvious as the nose on my face why he actually wanted those introductions. And, that is not only creepy AF, but it is calculated and not at all about getting costuming work.

#3 He’s NOT DONE with being a cult leader...

Like I said up top (I know, this one is TL;DR, too... Sorry, I have things to say) I went down the Andy Blake rabbit hole this weekend and read as much of the information out there about supernova shitstorm of a life he leads that I could before my head exploded. That includes the incredibly trainwreck-y book that was written about the LoTR scam; Abbey and Diamond’s accounts of their time with them (which ripped my heart out, I cannot even,) and the horrifying account of AB’s involvement in and exacerbation of the circumstances/climate which lead to Brittney’s murder (which is ghastly.)

What I noticed about all these circumstances was a pattern. Specifically, a pattern about how Andy interacts with couples. He finds someone who is kind and has empathy and other good attributes who shares a geeky aspect with him; he engenders himself to them and lovebombs them and disorients them and ingratiates himself into their social circle; he then moves into this person’s real life space; he creates conflict and friction between the person and their significant other or friends, thusly isolating them, making it into a “them against us” situation; and, finally he maneuvers into that that person of importance’s place in his target’s life. He then builds an insular group of people around them who share the “them against us” mentality. And, then the real fuckery begins...

He clearly did this with Abbey, he clearly did this with Brittney, he seems to being doing this with his Chief Stan... and, based on the behavior I observed, he was trying to do that with Molly AND if he hadn’t succeeded he had already decided he was going to move in on the relationship of another couple within our social circle.

This is horrifying to me to consider. Though I am proud of Molly and Chris that they recognized what was going on (before they were told about AB’s actual past and before they realized the scope of his lies.) But, it garners the thought of “what would have happened had he succeeded?” Was he trying to install himself into the LA cosplay scene and create a new cult around some fandom or another? I think he was. He surely targeted the group who he thought most likely to accept or tolerate his nonsense. He didn’t count on the fact that we’re all really close, already, and we are also adults who are pretty established in LA, in our careers, and in “the scene” and we’ve seen enough of this kind of bullshit before (though not on such an epic scale) to immediately throw up red flags when a pattern begins to appear. Where would his manipulations have led had he been successful? I don’t care to speculate other than saying it would not have been good. Which leads me to my conclusion:

#4 Andrew Blake is still dangerous....

This might seem like a given. In fact, it is a fact. And, though I honestly wish nothing more than he actually was being sincere about his desire to reform his life and start fresh, his behavior -- even in this narrow two week span of time -- belies his actual intentions. Is his pathology a sickness or is it deliberate? I don’t know how to tell. As someone with mental illness issues, I resent him blaming his bad behavior on mental illness, so I don’t think that’s true. Is it possible he is a sociopath or has a BPD that he cannot control? Maybe? But, then again, much of what he has done in the past and present show a particular cold calculation designed to best manipulate emotions and behavior of others. Some are pathetic and transparent (like The Stickening) and some are more insidious (I’ll leave others to detail those instances since I have only heard about them second hand, not experienced it myself.) Further I’m not a qualified diagnostician, so I cannot speculate on his mental stability, other than to critically look at what he has put out about himself.

I will say this, however -- personally, due to a really intense triplet of tragedies, in 2015 I had a complete nervous breakdown. Of which I was totally incognizant, but which was observed by those close to me. They intervened and pretty much strong armed me into treatment. For about a year I had a “care team” because I was considered very fragile and it was thought that I might backslide into my breakdown psychosis. That care team was in weekly, if not daily, contact with me, my husband, my parents, my friends -- and, EVERYONE had a list of warning signs to be on the lookout for that would indicate that I needed more help and support and possibly a medical intervention. And, given my diagnosis (C-PTSD, Major Depression, Social Anxiety, General Anxiety) it required the utmost focus and work from me... I couldn’t even think about making major changes to my life, let alone being social, I was in (sometimes daily) therapy and trying to recover for a whole year before I could even think outside myself enough to make changes to my work, residence, relationships, etc. And, I was never outwardly destructive, but the intervention and treatment was that intense.

I’ve read various pieces around the different blogs about AB saying he has a care team and that he’s being held accountable and that he’s better and in treatment and he’s burned fandom to the ground, etc.... all I know is this: If that is true, and multiple people have “had productive conversations” (and, yes I’m the one who talked for two hours to Chris whatshisname) with people who are supposedly on said care team (though, has someone called the Players about this LA nonsense?) saying they had witnessed troubling behavior patterns that were indicative of a serious backslide.... and the care team haven’t acted on implementing an intervention for him? That calls into question if said care team actually exists and/or if he was or is in any kind of treatment for whatever his problems actually are. Are his problems actually diagnosed or just an additional layer to his “backstory” he made up to garner sympathy? Having been there, done that, got the t-shirt with serious, in-depth mental health care, I’m guessing the latter. It just doesn’t pass the sniff test. Anyhoodle... there are my eighty-bajillion words about Andrew Blake. I am hoping that now that I’ve spit them out I can stop ruminating on his latest fuckery and it’s impact in my group. Mostly, we here in LA are just glad AF that we excised him from our lives so quickly and with such precision. And, we hope that the pro-Andy stans leave Molly and Chris and the rest of our community alone. He ain’t welcome around these parts. If you have questions, comments, please don’t hesitate. Please be aware that any aggressive, mean spirited shit will not be acknowledged. Otherwise this is the one and only Andy Blake specific post I am going to ever make on Tumblr. Because I just don’t have the time or bandwidth for this brand of crazy anymore.

#andrew blake #andy blake #thanfiction #tentmoot #tf-talk #crazy

42 notes · View notes

letsimportanttreecollection-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Fort Leavenworth Kansas Cheap car insurance quotes zip 66027

"Fort Leavenworth Kansas Cheap car insurance quotes zip 66027

Fort Leavenworth Kansas Cheap car insurance quotes zip 66027

BEST ANSWER: Try this site where you can compare quotes: : http://saleinsurancequotes.xyz/index.html?src=tumblr