#other than reinforce gay marriage

[yhowdy]

Any minute now, Joe.

[personal-progress-dropout]

The Rainbow Sheep

(Yes, I know, very original and creative title, but it gets the job done. Get ready for personal stories and too many parenthesis.)

In my childhood, whenever gay people were mentioned, it was with the same tone you’d use for someone with terminal cancer. It was a tragedy. They were lost, they had distanced themselves from God, and they were grieved like the dead. Sometimes it felt like people would rather their gay brothers and sisters be dead instead of gay. Of course, we should always be kind and welcoming, love the sinner hate the sin, etc., but honestly, it felt like you could never truly be accepted if you were gay. There was a distance, and it was always the gay person's fault.

For example—on June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage in all fifty states. I was thirteen years old. That Sunday, there was a special meeting at church to discuss the new development and reinforce The Family Proclamation. I remember very little of what was said, but I remember what I felt. I remember that the atmosphere felt like the greatest of tragedies had occurred, and I remember being told that we had to defend traditional marriage. We had been given the duty of defending the Family, something that the world wanted to destroy. (I use Family with a capital F because it always seems like we’re defending an unreachable ideal instead of the messy, glorious reality.) Nobody ever used that language directly, but I certainly felt the implication, and the language they did use drew up a stark divide of ‘us vs. them.’ 

I wholeheartedly believed this, and I was going to do everything I could to strive towards the ideal. I was going to get married in the temple and start my own eternal family! There was just one problem with that—I didn’t see men as romantic partners. My future husband was a faceless doll set in the life I wanted to have: my vision for the future included kids, a house, pets, and a job, but I had no idea where a husband was supposed to fit in my life. The ‘crushes’ I had as a kid were a fun game of pretend because girls were supposed to crush on boys. The older I got, the more exhausting the game of make-believe became. Looking back on my high school years, I realize that I was never actually attracted to the boys I wanted to date; I simply wanted to hang out with them. If they were attracted to me, that would be nice, and it would definitely stroke my ego, but I didn’t want them. I wanted to be wanted.  

I’ve always gravitated to women more than men, even as a child. It’s a running joke among queer women that when you see a beautiful girl you don’t know if you want to be her or be with her, but I’ve always been able to make the distinction. Women were easier to develop crushes on than men. I could differentiate between attraction and admiration, and after I came out it was incredibly frustrating to hear people say I was confusing the two. I was enchanted with the sway of a classmate’s hips, the bark of her laughter, the passion of her voice. If I had changed the pronoun to ‘he’, everyone would assume I was in love. 

I realized I was queer when I was sixteen years old, and it was terrifying. Gay people were the ‘other’, they were either set on destroying the Family or they were expected to live out a solitary life in the hope that they would get a heterosexual happily-ever-after in the Celestial Kingdom. I didn’t want to destroy the Family! I didn’t want to die alone! There were certain men that I found handsome, so I determined that I was attracted to men (in theory) and therefore nobody needed to know. I could go through my life with nobody the wiser, and I would never have to risk the alienation that comes with coming out.

And it's a risk. Parents will tell their children that they will always love them and there’s nothing they can do to change that. This is simply not true. I grew up with these same reassurances, but I was never specifically told that I could be gay and my parents would still love me. I’m incredibly lucky. Despite the way my parents were raised to regard LGBTQ+ people (which in all honesty was pretty mild compared to some of my friends' parents), they valued the commandment to love God and their neighbors over anything else. It was still one of the most nerve-wracking experiences of my life because I was walking into unknown, potentially dangerous territory. In the end, I’m so glad that I did. My parents and I understand each other better now, and I don't have to carry the weight of secret-keeping anymore.

Of course, there are still misunderstandings and miscommunication. I was frustrated because my parents didn’t want me to come out to my sisters until we were older. I felt like a dirty secret, and it felt like there was a layer of separation between me and my sisters. There are moments when I feel othered—when I know I can never come out to certain parts of my family, because they would never look at me the same way. (I might someday. Who knows.) When I see legislation that forbids talking about LGBT in schools and how gay literature is being banned from libraries, and how members of my family don't see a problem with this, because aren't they a bit young for that anyways? (I wasn't too young to be taught that I should marry a man in the temple and have children that I should raise in the faith, but that's besides the point.)

I get annoyed when I hear my orientation referred to as a ‘trial’ and something that will be made right in the afterlife. I don't consider it to be a trial--I think it's an aspect of who I am, and the trial comes from people who have a restricted view of the world.

I love my faith. I love the assurance that comes with knowing I'm a child of God, and I love how we as a church believe that we can become greater than we are through living gospel principles, but it should come as a surprise to nobody that the church is an institution made up of imperfect people. We have a long way to go, but I have hope. Look at me! I went from a deeply conservative teenager who believed that gay marriage was a sin (I'm not even sure I knew trans people existed at the time) to someone who accepts their identity as queer and tries to make the world a more accepting place. I can change, and I like to believe that the people around me can too. We can become greater than what we are today.

[eastgaysian]

(after spending several minutes standing silently in the corner of your house vaping) it's like kendall and tom are both invested in waystar like that one dril tweet, i spent my whole life trying to take over the sexual violence factory and now everyone's like oh the sexual violence factory is bad its ineffective fuck off. on a fundamental level they can't really conceive of a different way to operate, certainly not without jeopardizing the power and security they're so invested in. (tom is certainly less familiar with/acclimated to the Roy Mindset, but while their perspectives/behaviors are 'extreme' they are not actually incompatible with a kind of everyman pov, and tom is unwilling/unable to challenge the roys' logic.) they can't shake the idea that, essentially, bottoming is gay and unmanly and humiliating, but someone's gotta do it! you can't fuck, you can't get anything done, you can't win with equals and hand stuff doesn't count! and the bottom can't be them, of course, it's always gay and unmanly and humiliating for 'getting fucked' to happen to you, much less to want it. but at the same time they struggle grappling with the coercive implications for various reasons.

so kendall is more directly uncomfortable, but primarily tries to cope by pretending that the coercive implications don't exist if he doesn't look at them and doesn't invoke them himself. at the same time he continually falls back on aggressive patterns of behavior when he's insecure - i'd argue most prominently in his relationship with rava. all while being, uh, bad at fucking in all the ways that count by the show's logic. while tom technically succeeds where kendall fails, but in a way that is unsatisfying, even miserable for him, and reveals how arbitrary this measure of success is. like, principally, tom can more or less stomach the morality, and then can't figure out a way to comfortably navigate the gender-sexuality tangle and stay emotionally secure. point a, the fucked up evil genderplay that is the fabric of tom and shiv's marriage, but point b, like. while tom and kendall are definitely both guilty of saying bizarre homoerotically charged things without blinking an eye, it's important to distinguish that tom seems to only be interested in/can only justify this if there is a coercive implication.

i think i alienated myself from a chunk of the tomposters while succession was airing, but i feel like people didn't consider this or didn't want to? but i think it's a big part of how tom, like, conceptualizes and lives with deviance from (cis)heterosexuality. if it's coercive no one is actually 'gay,' it's about the power dynamic and not the real people involved (haha). enduring the homosocial behavior reinforces the fact that everyone involved is straight, and that this behavior is to some degree expected of straight men in this environment. if it isn't coercive, if anyone involved wants it as anything more than a show of hierarchy, then it's about you as people and you're a freak and you lose. but this 'safe' transactional realm is devoid of the emotional connection that tom very much desires.

anyway, all this to say, transition could save(?) both of them. really bad sad soggy gay sex with each other would make them worse

[spacelazarwolf]

prompted by a reply on another post, abt the aromantic manifesto. the more i think about it, the more it seems like the authors' definition of "the queer community" and "the queer rights movement" is not in line with the actually queer community and queer rights movement. it seems like they are using "queer" as a stand-in for "all lgb cis people" which is just definitionally not what the queer community is. the queer liberation movement goes back decades and has always been championed by trans people, particularly trans people of color. so for the authors to assert things like "the queer rights movement prioritizes gay marriage over everything else" seems to betray a lack of experience and knowledge about the actual queer community and the actual queer rights movement. also the only time trans people were really mentioned was to paint cis (allo) lgb people as overwhelmingly transphobic (which is a whole other can of worms.)

and like. on one hand i think there is an issue with marriage equality for cis gay people being considered Thee Most Important Thing by mainstream lgbt advocacy groups (though i really need younger people to think about why people older than us considered it to be so important - hint: it has to do with surviving the aids crisis). but also i feel like responding "yes, but" legitimizes their assertion that their uninformed and incorrect definition of the "queer community" and the "queer rights movement." and then we just get stuck in this feedback loop of "well y'all only care about gay marriage" "who is y'all" "you know. queers" "lgbt advocacy groups?" "yeah. queers." "actually this is what the queer liberation movement is about." "yeah but these groups only advocate for marriage equality." "right but those are lgbt advocacy groups, not queer liberation groups." "yeah. queers."

and then even outside of that is the whole point of why i started this ramble in the first place, which is: why does this manifesto structure queerness only around lgb identities? why does it not include transness? does this framework assert that transness is not inherently queer? i think it does, which is another point against them actually understanding what the queer community and queer liberation movement is. so by asserting that the "queer community" is overwhelmingly transphobic, only cares about marriage equality, and does not inherently include transness, you are essentially giving ownership of queerness to cis people, which only seeks to reinforce the hierarchies in queer spaces the manifesto claims to condemn.

so yeah like tldr i think this manifesto sucked for all the reasons i already talked abt in the other post, but also because it tries to assert its fundamental misunderstanding of what and who the queer community is as True Fact, and then uses that misconception to be homophobic. it's just very weird and i think the people who wrote it need to talk to more trans ppl.

[woman-respecter]

https://www.tumblr.com/woman-respecter/765243835629649920/genuinely-the-political-climate-on-this-website

Honestly, the other anon's anecdote and point only reinforces in my mind that the so called "leftists" understand NOTHING about what great activists stood for. They just twisted the past into their own self-serving interests to justify their own do-nothing behavior, and basically spit all over the legacy of great men and women before them who risked everything for a better future.

They're currently more liberal than the actual liberals, and they're too self-important to realize it.

they have NOTHING in common with activists who actually got shit done but they like to larp as if they do. meanwhile its the libs who got us like. gay marriage and the aca

[bagelsunshinecoffee]

I have so many Shannon thoughts. She’s only physically in the show for a short time and I wish it was longer. I would have loved for the show to actually play out the Eddie/Shannon divorce and for us to get to see where Shannon’s journey takes her. I can’t help feeling like maybe the show didn’t know what to do with her character so they just killed her off. And I know a lot of people think Shannon is one dimensional but I don’t really agree.

We see Shannon break down and admit her deepest, most vulnerable fears. We see her stand up for herself. We see her make a difficult decision to step away from her marriage to do what is best for herself and her son. Through her we really understand for the first time that she and Eddie were just kids when they got pregnant and married. They are at the crossroads of deciding, as adults, if the path they started on is one they want to continue or if they have grown past it.

Shannon has grown past it. She loves Eddie but knows that at this point the foundation of their relationship is as much nostalgia and wishful thinking as anything. She is determined to prioritize Chris (and ughhh this is why I’m so mad she died because I want to see her stepping into her role as a mother again and learning and making mistakes and getting to have that relationship). Eddie…Eddie is lost, and he’s still lost in that same way by the end of season 7, chasing Shannon and what she represents long after she’s gone. I think there are a lot of reasons (besides the fact that Eddie is actually gay and Shannon represents the life he was supposed to live but will never be able to while being true to himself) including the fact that he struggles profoundly to deal with pain, probably due to being raised to be strong and having that reinforced in the military and then repressing years of trauma. You can’t grow without dealing with pain.

In a lot of ways their dynamic reminds me of Buck and Abby and I’ve seen people react to the two couples in similar ways: demonizing the women to some degree to focus on the hurt they caused the men. And they did hurt Buck and Eddie, and yes let’s deal with that as part of their characters. But both of these are examples of women who decided they needed space from their all-consuming caretaker roles in order to be ready to have real and healthy relationships and both get lambasted for it.

With Shannon there’s the extra layer that she left Chris. She hurt her child, that’s undeniable. I also think it’s true that there are times a person can not be a good parent. Shannon was raising a child she was not prepared for alone, with minimal contact with her husband, for years. She was also raising a disabled child with greater care needs, expensive treatments, and having to make life altering decisions for her child (surgery, etc) all by herself. When she expresses her fear that she harmed Christopher by causing his CP, there’s ableism there, the assumption that CP is a bad thing. There’s also the reality of a young woman who has seen her child experience pain, surgery, difficulties that other children do not and who has felt the full weight of an ableist society descend on her and her child. The world loves to blame mothers for everything about their children, that’s not made up in her head. She’s absolutely coming at it from the perspective of an able-bodied person who didn’t have to grapple with ableism at all until Chris was born and still has a lot to unlearn, but that doesnt make her evil. When Eddie came back into Chris’s life there were many struggles that were already over, that Shannon dealt with all by herself.

What does our society hate more than a woman who refuses to be a caretaker? And what does fandom love more than a woman who can be demonized so the man who steps up as caretaker or lives without her care can be idolized?

Shannon was right at the cusp of something. She was going to have a chance to be a mother on her own terms, to repair the harm she did, to find herself. And it would have been good for Eddie too, I think, to be forced to let go of the idealized image of Shannon in his head which her death only crystallized forever. And then she died because ???? Reasons. I guess.

[prongsmydeer]

Ayesha Liveblogs Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story

The opening credits are beautiful, I'll give them that

"I know that no one who looks like you or me has ever married one of these people, ever." Bridgerton: Now Even More Suspicious When It Comes to Depictions of Race

Even permitting for the thirteen children, Queen Charlotte seems pretty neutral about her granddaughter's [redacted] LOL

"Very brown. Thoughts?" Me walking into parties in high school

Not Lady Danbury's Crypt Keeper-ass husband removing his teeth to sleep

"Lord Danbury. Imagine." [Tensely] "I am imagining." Lady Danbury knows that a title needs an heir

"You may be too beautiful to marry me. People will talk, given that I am a troll." George is handsome to the point of distraction

"Either way, the choice is entirely up to her." I know it's like bare minimum but I do appreciate George reinforcing Charlotte's autonomy in the matter of their marriage

Charlotte changing outfits is fun for two reasons 1) That she is showing that she will be her own woman as Queen and 2) The superstition around seeing the bride in her dress before the wedding

Honestly, honestly. Get u a man who will bequeath u an investment property and give u ur space whenever you want it.

"Do we not spend this night together? My governness said that is what happens on our wedding night." [Pregnant pause] "Fine. I shall stay." What is George's deal? Surely even the pretense of consummation is necessary?

George from Bridgerton 🤝Derek from Swan Princes: How to Offend Women in Five Syllables or Less

Charlotte does not mince words for her Virgin and Whore Adult Children:

"Your father and I made 15 royal babies all by ourselves. I do not see why the whole lot of you cannot make just one." Mad props for surviving 15 rounds of childbirth in Georgian England

Say what you will about Charlotte's currently loveless marriage, at least she's eating good food

HAHAHAH we finally get gay characters in this show and it's Five Steps Behind Brimsley and There's Nothing Wrong With His Bits Other Guy

Justice for Benedict and Eloise, who are bisexual and lesbian to meeee

"I do not know a single soul here except for you. I'm completely alone, and you prefer the sky to me." Even if George refuses to be a husband to Charlotte, he can at least be a friend

"What if he puts another one of his gigantic babies inside me?" Am I to take this as Lady Danbury has living children or nah

George sending Charlotte a dog is another green flag

Thank God for Lady Danbury, no one will ever tell the Bridgerton women what sex is when they ought to

"But it can be such a pleasure." "Or it can be a painful, lifelong sentence." Danbury vs. Bridgerton: Marriage dichotomy edition

"I do not like the part where my head hits the wall over and over again. Is there a way to avoid that?" "Yes, there is a way to avoid that." George said: I want to be on bottom 🥰

George said: I am about to ruin the energy of our whole marriage in less than a minute

Is the King's tremor meant to represent his already being in the midst of his disease? :((

"Mother was going on and on to all the ladies at tea that their love means we now live in an unnatural society." Violet's mum said: The energy of this show isn't rank enough, time to be racist

Violet's dad calling her both Beauty and Brains as she asks questions 💝I love him

"So they are exactly like us. Better in some cases considering that several of them are from royal families of their own, and have much more money than we do." Violet said: I'm an ally

HAHAHAH George and Charlotte working out their issues in classic Bridgerton style, via sex montage

"It would be difficult for you to hear about the Queen being with child long after the fact, would it not?" Lady Danbury said: I will go to ANY length to avoid spending time with my husband (fair)

"I planned some correspondence that I need to write, so the time was useful." Agatha, Master of Dissassociation

Not Mama Ledger dissing the Tween Mozart LMAO

"I told you that I enjoy science. Part of that science is agriculture. I enjoy farming." "So King George is... Farmer George?" There's the Farmer George I've heard so much about

"Why do you not understand that you hold our fates in your hands?" Something something the distance from the nobility to the class it rules something something labour from women of colour (and specifically Black women) something something Bridgerton bringing up the outward dynamics of racial inequity while refusing to interrogate the fact Nearly Every Single Black Female Character of Significance AND Simon Has Had Their Reproductive Autonomy Taken Away (Simon's mother, Marina, Lady Danbury, Queen Charlotte)

Shout-out Brimsley and NWWHB (Nothing Wrong With His Bits) for being my emotional support background couple

"You can be a person with me." George and Charlotte uniting over their common understanding of their duty to support the nation ❤️

Lady Danbury and Lord Ledger ending racism one dance at a time

"Thank you." "You never have to thank me. We are a team." This line would've absolutely KILLED IT had it not been for the fact that Voltron already used this line in 2018, in a more emotionally substantive context (Shout-out my boy Shiro)

Not Lady Danbury and her homie Coral giggling and hugging because Lord Danbury is deceased (good for them)

Flhkfjhfkjhf Lady Danbury's 'Sorry I offended you about your dead husband, mine sucked,' tea is a social event on its own

"I was in the sky, but now I am going inside. Into Buckingham House." Charlotte immediately understanding that she needs to work within George's delusions :(

"Tell me, what would the people prefer: A royal baby, or cheap bread?" These principles do make for a good ruler, it is a shame about The Illness

"You command an entire kingdom. You can command yourself." George said: Friendship ended with early-onset neurological dysfunction, now personal affirmations are my best friend

(I really hope someone has done fanart from this ep with George and that meme 'I am no longer mentally ill')

Tfjfjhfjfhf imagine if instead of finding me the right meds for my nerve pain, my doctor just slapped me in the face and told me to get a hold of myself. Georgian England Medicine do be rough

"Her perfection is matched only by my deformity." Fuck. I did not anticipate how deeply Farmer George's story would hit from a place of like. Self-imposed exclusion due to living in a broken body. But damn

Did it really take until four episodes in for NWWHB aka the King's Man aka Brimsley's boyfriend aka Reynolds to get a name?

I am enjoying the retrospective on all of these events from George's side of things

"And just like an animal, I will break you." I no longer enjoy the retrospective on George's side of things

It really is the Ultimate Gesture that he's getting tortured so he can get be well enough to know his wife

If nothing else, the King has a solid homie in Reynolds

Really fair of Charlotte to be upset to be uninformed of what George was going through, but brutal that he's going back to Doctor Mon(ster)ro

"Do you suppose the Queen ever seeks...?" Omg I wouldn't expect Violet to be so saucy

Why are all the middle-aged women rising from their beds in the night is this going to be like that Glee song where everyone simultaneously discovers masturbation

"Loneliness is a battle even queens must fight for themselves." Penelope Featherington, somewhere: I gotta make fun of the Queen for having a mentally-ill husband

I'm pretty sure this captioning is incorrect, and what George is saying is, "Doctor! Doctor!" and not "Torture! Torture!" But both are accurate I suppose

Hahahaha not to add insult to injury for Violet, but Lady Danbury made eye contact with Violet's dad at Lord Danbury's funeral like she was thinking he was beekeeping age

"It's not surprising you should mourn him, he was your husband." You don't have to like someone to feel weird that they're dead

"I was three when my parents promised me. When a deal was struck. Three years old. So, I was raised to be his wife." Agatha's parents said have you heard of grooming? We have brought it down to a science

The People of Colour in Nobility raise fair points about succession

"I am sorry to report that she remains alive and well, Your Majesty." Brimsley said treason is allowed if it's funny

"Paint her skin lighter. Pale. His Majesty wants her to glow." 70% of fanart for any given fandom LMAO (also shout-out to the real world contention around images of Queen Charlotte)

"I will see you here tomorrow. Same time. You will wear better shoes. We can ramble together." I KNEWWWW there was some eye contact going on [Agatha as Animatronic Fox voice] I'm gonna fuck your dad, Violet

"Your garden is in bloom." "It is blooming out of control." It IS going to be like that scene from Glee

"Georgie, be a good boy and approve your brothers' marriages." "...I approve." The Princes forgot that there is one power that trumps even the monarchy: Being a mama's boy

"Your body is not your own." Welcome 2 having a uterus

At least Aldophus would be willing to intervene if his sister were in physical danger

"Rambles are there." "Rambles are there." "I am there." This would be so romantic if it were not directed at her future friend's dad LMAO

Agatha, somewhere in the present: My garden bloomed for your father once, Violet

"The hard part is done," said Princess Augusta, as if being married to a person losing grip on themselves for the remainder of their life is not a hard part

There is something that feels like empathy about Augusta saying that Charlotte never has to see her husband again, even if it's immediately followed by the clarification they could need another heir

Brimsley reaching out to Charlotte but unable to reach her due to Georgian social graces

I do feel for Reynolds, in his being caught and unable to do anything to help his partner or his friend/King

It is funny that we have not once seen Agatha interact with her children, given how family oriented the main plot of the show is. Historically accurate, mayhaps, but omg

"What do any of the women of the ton know of true friendship?" Agatha said: FRIENDSHIP IS FOR MEN AND THE POOR

"We are untold stories. And yesterday, you told me something of your story. And I, thank you." "You are most welcome." I love Lady Bridgerton and Lady Danbury's friendship ❤️

"It did not bloom until after he was gone." With your dad, Violet!

"I want to be gardened as much as possible." Violet said: Now that I have found my libido, I am open for business

Dominic Danbury is sooo cute I want a million more scenes of the world's tiniest noble:

I do love how they give specific context to what royal connections the Danbury family has in Sierra Leone, rather than leaving their noble connections in ambiguity

I know Charlotte's the queen but damn imagine having someone who has just stationed their whole business in your drawing room before you got home

"Where will Your Majesty go?" "Why, I have come here." Charlotte said: Be a pal and commit treason with me, Agatha

Agatha and Charlotte deciding to start their friendship sincerely 💗I love women

"I'm afraid." "Afraid of what?" "That I will not be able to love her." "Love is not a thing one is able or not able to do based on some magic. Some chemistry. That is for plays. Love is determination. Love is a choice one makes." Charlotte said: Love is companionship, William

"And these youthful fits shall become mere embarrassing memories." 1) Adolphus, you say this with the slightest bit of context as to why Charlotte left and 2) Not a good time to use the word 'fits,' it's a sensitive topic

"And I am not... coming inside." Finally the prophecy of dad fucking is fulfilled

Charlotte said: That's enough of this medical malpractice

You know, I didn't really keep a good count of Agatha's kids. Are there four already or does she potentially give birth to her homie's half-sibling LMAO

Also: It is deeply weird that Papa Ledger's method of hitting on people is the birthday hat he also makes for his daughter

Violet has now found the birthday hat; to be expected but unfortunate for all involved. Does she think it was her husband or does she know it was her dad?

"I see them. Do you not?" Brimsley is ride or die for Charlotte 4ever

"I love you. From the mo... from the moment I saw you trying to go over the garden wall, I have loved you desperately. I cannot breathe when you are not near. I love you Charlotte. My heart calls your name. I wanted to tell you. I wanted you to know." COMMUNICATION

I love the double meaning in the last two lines, because it bridges right into him telling her about his condition so it's both "I wanted to tell you (that I love you)," and "I wanted to tell you (that I have been bearing this)."

"Perhaps one day [Violet] will have an unimpeachable reputation. Just like yours." I think this is how Papa Ledger has chosen to break up with Agatha

"I do not remember names. I am female." Me when I lie

"You do not know us. Any of us. You do not learn about us. You do not care for what we care for." Generational trauma: Royal edition

"They will be together, have a marriage, grow old as one. We would serve them together." "A lifetime." Gay marriage: Royal aide edition

"Losing a husband is... inconvenient." Augusta said: Sorrows, sorrows, prayers

"I will not engage with the princess. I've promised the Queen friendship." Agatha said: Loyal homies before royal homies

"Brimsley. Have you any family? Did you never marry?" Incredible that after approximately 30 years, Charlotte has not once asked Brimsley about his personal life. Oh, rich people

Lady Danbury is too honourable to ask Charlotte for help, even though she needs help with title succession :(

"I have loved and been loved. And that is all I shall say." Lady Danbury said: I will never admit to sleeping with your dad, Violet

"There is womanly work afoot." HAHAHA me when I want a man to leave

Were I Charlotte, I would not take kindly to the horse comparison, no matter how helpful it was

"And over the years, I learned I need not be content to surrender myself to the uselessness of female pursuits. Instead, I secured my son as King." Augusta said: Crying is for women, we are politicians

You know, all this talk of Parliament has suddenly reminded me how anachronistic George's haircut is. I wonder if he will finally put on a wig

"You have been an admirable adversary thus far. Our battles bring me satisfaction. So this, will not do. You are not allowed to come here and sob. You may not quit. Cover your bruises and endure. Do not lose control of your fate, Agatha." HAHAHAHA I can't believe Augusta is giving Agatha a pep talk and a shot of alcohol mid-title negotiation. That's mentorship

"I am sorry." Is George hiding under the bed? LMAO

Update from ten seconds later: He is

Sometimes, love is not about who will pull you out from beneath the bed, but who will get under the bed with you

"Not a full me. Not a full marriage. Only half. Half a man. Half a king. half a life." "If what we have is half, then we shall make it the very best half." 💘Oh Charlotte

I know Agatha doesn't NEED to marry a Prince, but I think it'd be fun if she did

"I will not say words with hearts and flowers, because I know you are not a hearts and flowers woman. But there is something here. Between us. I believe we could be happy together." Yet another marriage of companionship about to be tossed over for passion. Why does no one on this show what to marry someone who simply wants to provide them a life of kindness!!! (I know in Agatha's case, Lord Ledger is also kind, but not kind enough not to cheat on his wife and introduce his daughter to his mistress. Soooooo)

Why do they cut to the back-and-forth between invitation and sex like it is necessary preparation for the ball hahahhaa

George is representing a very real mental health experience of when you spend a long time in your house and then you experience like mild agoraphobia when you have to be outside again

Literally no one at this ball has hair like George LMAO. But why am I seeking anything historical in the Shonda Rhimes Cinematic Universe:

"I cannot marry you, but only because I cannot marry anyone." I respect this position if it's coming from a point of independence rather than for a different man. I love her regaining agency over the direction of her life!

HOWEVER. HOWEVER. AGATHA. GIRL. YOU HAVE NO INCOME. WILD OF YOU TO DENY ALL SAFETY NETS FOR YOUR SURVIVAL

"You make him happy. Thank you, your Majesty." This is the closest thing to a compliment Charlotte will ever receive from her mother-in-law

This show is pretty bittersweet, given all that we know becomes of the Queen and King in the future

Shout-out to Brimsley and Reynold's relationship for being the saving grace of this show

Hahahaha Charlotte finally gets her one (1) legitimate grandchild after 50 ones that she does not care to know about

"I only did not wish to place my burdens on top of your own." Agatha 💞

"I suggest your shift your fear into faith and come to us with your concerns directly. To do otherwise would suggest we are incapable of addressing them." Charlotte is such a good Queen

Charlotte said: Your mum WAS right about my child-bearing hips!

"I believe you should leave the hats where they are. They are lovely. As you say, cheerful." This is as close as Lady Danbury will come to acknowledging the dad-fucking

GEORGE NOW BEING THE ONE TO JOIN CHARLOTTE UNDER THE BED. THEMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

"Your line will live on." "Our line." "Our line." Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

The splicing between the young version of George and Charlotte and their younger selves. This is really getting to my heart.

"You did not go over the wall." "No George, I did not go over the wall." I'M GOING TO CRY, THIS IS MY FAVOURITE OF THE BRIDGERTON SEASONS 😭😭😭 ROMANCE!!

[jaycrr]

Blog Post Due 10/3

What are some ways we see online racism being implemented in video games, and what is the impact it has on gamers?

In the Ted Talk by Dr. Lisa Nakamura, it is mentioned that one form of racism that is circulating is visual profiling and voice profiling. With the rise of people using headsets and mics to communicate, it was a way for people to find out more about each other, especially in video games. Visual profiling is when gamers make judgments based on another player's avatar design. Voice profiling is also making judgments based on another gamer's voice. This is problematic because it creates environments that are toxic by reinforcing stereotypes through online gaming. This affects people's mental health even if we don't realize and can diminish peoples online experience.

What is a real-word example of online discrimination in video games?

There is a clip shown in the Ted talk of a guy playing Halo who decided to change his name and just join a lobby where other users are waiting with mics to talk and it is a space where you see everyone else's user ID. His new user ID is xxxgayboyxxx. It is important to keep in mind Xbox is a commercial space although it is not regulated by any sort of people. In the video of the terrible comments, people were saying things like: you are going to burn in hell, i hope gay marriage never gets past, and f*** you. All these nasty comments simply because of his name change.

When talking about gaming culture, in what ways do stereotypes about Asians shaper how they are portrayed?

Stereotypes about Asians are influenced heavily in gaming culture by creating a double image. That they are hard workers, almost "workaholics" and that they are seriously great gamers. This leads to the perception/stereotype that they are seriously competitive and cannot have fun and simply enjoy themselves. It creates almost a misconception that they always approach any activity with the same seriousness as work rather than relaxing and doing activities for the fun of it.

How does race interact with social identities in the gaming world?

When race crosses with gender, class or sexuality, it affects how players interact with one another and the dynamics of various gaming communities work. Online interactions usually lead to racial discrimination, which is something that seems to be heavy on pretty much any online/social platform. It is said that in the gaming world, white straight men are privileged shaping who is included and who is not represented in the gaming community. This highlight how complex identities can be and the use of power within video game communities.

Fickle. Ludo-Orientalism and the Gamification of Race 

Nakamura, L. [TEDx Talks]. (2011, October 11). 5 Types of Online Racism and Why You Should Care. [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT-G0FlOo7g

[papirouge]

what the fuck does it matter what's in someone's pants or what they think they are. leave trans folk alone, it ain't your business.

Also, if it's such a sin to be gay or trans, the Bible says you can mix fabrics or eat seafood.

Oh and did you know the original translation for "man may not sleep with man" was "man may not sleep with CHILD" it was about pedophilia. Not gay bitches.

"leave trans folk"

What did I even do to a trans person?? 😭

But yeah, it actually becomes my business when they try to skinwalk femalehood. Because, you know, I'm a female 🙃

And pleeeease anon, for the Love of God, never try schooling an actual Christian to what the Bible actually says.

Do you even realize there's a difference between Civil, Moral and Ceremonial laws to which Israelites abided to? That's what the whold chapter of Deuteronomy 19 is about (the fabric mixing is on Deuteronomy 19:19)

The not fabric mixing was one of the civil laws of the kindgom of Israel, which CHRISTIANS don't abide to anymore. Because we're not Jews - but Christians. And that we don't live in the kindgom of God, but through plentiful of countries in the world . Israel civil laws reinforced circumcision, forbade eating pork, etc. Christians don't abide to such laws because *Jesus* happened. These laws symbolically represented how the people of God should not mix with impure things/ungodly yoke (fabric mixing, impure food). The ceremonial laws are moot cause the Temple of Jerusalem has been destroyed and Jesus is the ultimate sacrificed that fulfilled the Law & definitely erased the sin of humanity.

Only the immuable morals laws of God are those we still have to obey to this day (not killing, worshipping God only -not idols-, respecting our family, etc.)

The whole "bUt tHe sOdOmy pasSaGe Was AboUt PeDopHILiA aKtcHualLy" cope is stupid.

The strong translation are just here anon...

Peep the translation for man (376) and mankind (2145)

None of these translation remotely points towards "child"....

But if you want a passage where Jesus condemns pedophilia/harming children, Matthew 18:1-6 is a better pick :

At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me. “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea"

When the Bible wants to talk about children, it will explicitly talks about children. The translation don't lie

Peep the translation number for the word translated as "(little) child" (3813)

*pretends to be shocked*

Oh and the marriage is exclusively stated as between and man and a woman in the Bible. Not two men or two women. So even if Leviticus was about sexing minors, Christianism still wouldn't allow gay marriage. Cope.

Christianism also establishes marriages as exclusively monogamous which is one of the most based thing ever (compared to other religions allowing scrotes to have several wives). Funny how suddenly none of your are trying to argue about it and argue that aKtcHualLy Christianism is pro polygamy 🤔

Have gay sex as much as you want but stop trying to shove this activity as biblically sound. It's not. Why don't you try to gay marry in temple of religion where gayness is allowed? Be honest, you only want to bother Christians just because. On that aspect, you're no better than transpeople trying to force themselves into spaces that aren't made for them and then claim victimhood. Deranged behavior.

[small-strong-bookish-butch]

“The majority of my experiences as a trans activist and spoken word artist have taken place in what is increasingly becoming known as the "queer/trans" community. It is a subgroup within the greater LGBTQ community that is composed mostly of folks in their twenties and thirties who are more likely to refer to themselves as "dykes," "queer," and/or "trans" than "lesbian" or "gay." While diverse in a number of ways, this subpopulation tends to predominantly inhabit urban and academic settings, and is skewed toward those who are white and/or from middle-class backgrounds. In many ways, the queer/trans community is best described as a sort of marriage of the transgender movement's call to "shatter the gender binary" and the lesbian community's pro-sex, pro-kink backlash to 1980s-era Andrea Dworkinism. Its politics are generally anti-assimilationist, particularly with regard to gender and sexual expression. This apparent limitlessness and lack of boundaries lead many to believe that "queer/trans" represents the vanguard of today's gender and sexual revolution. However, over the last four years in which I've been a part of this community, I’ve become increasingly troubled by a trend that, while not applicable to all queer/trans folks, seems to be becoming a dominant belief in this community, one that threatens to restrict its gender and sexual diversity. I call this trend subversivism.

Subversivism is the practice of extolling certain gender and sexual expressions and identities simply because they are unconventional or nonconforming. In the parlance of subversivism, these atypical genders and sexualities are "good" because they "trans-gress" or "subvert" oppressive binary gender norms. The justification for the practice of subversivism has evolved out of a particular reading (although some would call it a misreading) of the work of various influential queer theorists over the last decade and a half.

To briefly summarize this popularized account: All forms of sexism arise from the binary gender system. Since this binary gender system is everywhere in our thoughts, language, traditions, behaviors, etc. the only way we can overturn it is to actively undermine the system from within. Thus, in order to challenge sexism, people must "perform" their genders in ways that bend, break, and blur all of the imaginary distinctions that exist between male and female, heterosexual and homosexual, and so on, presumably leading to a systemwide binary meltdown.

Another way that one can be "transgressively gendered" is by identifying as genderqueer or genderfluid--i.e., refusing to identity fully as either woman or man. The notion that certain gender identities and expressions are inherently "subversive" or "transgressive" can be seen throughout the queer/trans community, where drag and gender-bending are routinely celebrated, where binary-confounding identities such as "boy-identified-dyke" and "pansexual trannyfag" have become rather commonplace. On the surface, subversivism gives the appearance of accommodating a seemingly infinite array of genders and sexualities, but this is not quite the case. Subversivism does have very specific boundaries; it has an "other." By glorifying identities and expressions that appear to subvert or blur gender binaries, subversivism automatically creates a reciprocal category of people whose gender and sexual identities and expressions are by default inherently conservative, even "hegemonic," because they are seen as reinforcing or naturalizing the binary gender system. Not surprisingly, this often-unspoken category of bad, conservative genders is predominantly made up of feminine women and masculine men who are attracted to the "opposite" sex.

One routinely sees this "dark side" of subversivism rear its head in the queer/trans community, where it is not uncommon to hear individuals critique or call into question other queers or trans folks because their gender presentation, behaviors, or sexual preferences are not deemed "subversive" enough. Indeed, if one fails to sufficiently distinguish oneself from heterosexual feminine women and masculine men, one runs the risk of being accused of "reinforcing the gender binary," an indictment that is tantamount to being called a sexist. One of the most common targets of such critiques are transsexuals, and particularly those who are heterosexual and sender-normative post-transition. Indeed, because such transsexuals (in the eyes of others) transition from a seemingly "transgressive" queer identity to a "conservative" straight one, subversivists may even claim that they have transitioned in order to purposefully “assimilate" themselves into straight culture.

…in our culture, the meanings of "bold," "rebellious," and "dangerous" -- adjectives that often come to mind when considering subversiveness are practically built into our understanding of masculinity. In contrast, femininity conjures up antonyms like "timid," "conventional," and "safe," which seem entirely incompatible with subversion. Therefore, despite the fact that the mainstream public tends to be more concerned and disturbed by MTF spectrum trans people than their FTM spectrum counterparts, subversivism creates the impression that trans masculinities are inherently "subversive" and "transgressive," while their trans feminine counterparts are "lame" and "conservative" in comparison. Subversivism's privileging of trans masculinities over trans femininities helps to explain why cissexual queer women and FTM spectrum folks tend to dominate the queer/trans community: Their exceptional gender expressions and identities are routinely empowered and encouraged in such settings. In contrast, there is generally a dearth of MTF spectrum folks who regularly inhabit queer/trans spaces.”

——The Future of Queer/Trans Activism, chapter 20 from Whipping Girl by Julia Serano (bolded emphasis mine)

[mmoodd-jobutupaki]

So. Happy pride month everybody!! For pride month, here's a simple story time of my experience with the lgbtq+ culture

Introduction: My introduction to the lgbtq+ community was..not a good one. Some parents in the parents group chat of my class wanted to boycott a David Williams book for having lgbtq content. Homophobic bigots, I know (their kids are of equally poor quality as well). And that was it, first impression of the lgbtq+ community and it was terrible.

Homophobic era (is not hot): There's no way to soften this. After my first encounter with the lgbtq+ community I was homophobic. I would actively block lgbtq+ content from my for you pages. I did not ship wolfstar (and my friend has smacked me for it, multiple times). I basically hated lgbtq+ people for something they couldn't control. And being in a class surrounded by people who were also homophobic further reinforced it. Side note that this class was not a fun time. I genuinely still have trauma and grudges against this class. During my time with them my mental health was down the drain.

Allying: Eventually, things did actually get better. First off, I got allocated into a different class, away from the homophobia (yaayy). And eventually became more tolerant of lgbtq+ culture. Starting small, I stopped blocking lgbtq+ content, eventually learning to appreciate some as well. It was a slow process, more than a year, but eventually I began to accept the lgbtq+ community as people who just had different preferences, and that was fine.

Questioning: This is probably the most embarrassing part. After a while I began to question my sexuality as well. I had a friend, looking back I realize we weren't that close, that I held some slightly more than platonic feelings for. Nick Nelson said it best once: I'm having a full on gay crisis.

And yep that was me.

Yep I'm bi: After about a year (yes a year) of questioning myself, getting into an amazing girl's school I eventually figured that I was bi. As I was falling asleep one night I just thought to myself "Yep I'm bi"

Repeal: Basically, my country had this colonial law that criminalized gay sex between men that was never really upheld (cuz you don't just go around asking male identifying people if they had sex with other male identifying people). Anyway it was finally repealed in August. While it doesn't affect me, as a fem identifying person, it's a step and hopefully a sign that our government is willing to make some changes to better accommodate and represent the LGBTQ+ community at last. (Seriously, we still don't allow they/them in our media wts)

And so it goes: So it's been a year and a little more since. I only really started coming out to people this year. I've been working from the outside-in of my social circle, coming out to some close friends and allied/lgbtq+ classmates. I haven't come out to everyone yet, but I'm working on it and maybe someday I'll get there. And hopefully my country legalizes same sex marriage. Till then ig.

[uncleasriel]

Disgust is a subjective response, both culturally.

In some cultures marrying first cousins is considered acceptable. In others, it's considered vulgar to show the soles of your feet to another person. It's considered distasteful to touch someone who works in an unclean industry like butchery or sanitation, or for women to be seen talking to a man who they are neither related nor married to without a chaperone.

Do you disagree with these sorts of things? From the point of view of these cultures, you're just saying that because you were brought up wrong, e.g. don't have correct cultural values. You probably think women being allowed to vote or divorce at will is okay, or that gays should be allowed to get married, or probably think sex for something other than proceration is okay! So therefore you should you shout louder, proving that you are, indeed, correct, unlike Those Backwards Savages!

Except, oops! You just acted like an 1800s colonizer, insisting that You Know Best because you, of course, have the Culturally Correct outlook! This is, funnily enough, just like the person who rejected your critique in the first place - what a nice little impasse that leave you at!

Surely, this must lead cultural nihilism! There is no correct answer to these questions, and so anything is permissible! Oh no! This will turn us all into post-modern neo-Marxists! Quickly, call Jordan Peterson before we all turn into lobsters!

Except-

Maybe there really is some way to evaluate the morality of certain actions beyond simply your gut feeling?

Like, say....exploring them by acknowleding your feelings of disgust as feelings unique to you (and probably encouraged by the cultural milieu you were raised in), and then setting that aside to explore how thoae actions work in other ethical frameworks?

You can also make claims about the first-cousin marriage about how such actions increase birth defects and congenital health conditions in children born of those marriages, or how they reinforce unhealthy family dynamics or patriarchal socio-economic patterns of culturally limited wealth inheritance, or create really awkward family dynamics between close-knit communities. You don't have to find it gross to realize there might be problems with that kind of rpactice.

Same with squicky things like child marriage - there are plenty of arguments beyond "I find it icky" to condemn those actions . One can be against child marriage based on trends health outcomes for children, a framing of healthy intimate relationships as between equals (which is impossible with children and adults) and how the healthiest adults grow up from childhoods when they are raised to with open enabling the widest options options for personal, educational and economic development - something which is fundamentally at odds with child marriage.

I find processed cheese and bubblegum fundamentally disgusting. Those flavors and food products turn my stomach. That doesn't make people who enjoy them immoral.

For the love of God, stop and explore why you find something disgusting immoral, before you start condemning anything that turns your stomach. Or I'm coming for every last one of you bubblegum-loving velveet cheese fucks with a machete, because you are sick and wrong - because I said so.

Disgust has absolutely no ethical weight. If you are basing your ethical positions on the emotion of disgust you should stop, it is entirely unjustified and leads to a huge amount of harm.

[shamelessrabbithole]

A lot a man😂 Okay, so we can talk about Gallavich here? What are your thoughts on S11 “monogamy”? I've had serious discussions with friends about this, because it seems like it's a very open thing for Ian Mickey, but I don't think they can stop the jealousy, and they've done it, and kind of gone in the middle of figuring out what their relationship need 🤔

Every time I think season 10 and 11 weren't that bad, I begin to look back on the plot points and I'm yet again reminded of the true narrative dumpster fires we endured. Mickey and Ian's relationship was fueled very much by jealousy because neither really understood how much the other meant to him until someone else came along to threaten that bond.

Mickey pummeled nearly every guy who'd ever gotten close to Ian physically and Ian's insane jealousy when Mickey got married led him to join the army and possibly stress-triggered the start of his bipolar disorder. So, no, I don't really think an open marriage was the next logical step for Gallavich. 😆

I recall Cameron saying in an interview or panel I recently watched that many of the Shameless writers were LGBTQ+ and that most storylines originated from true events, or exaggerated true events, the writers experienced. It's possible that questions of monogamy are, in fact, prevalent even in committed gay relationships and the writers wanted to explore that for Mickey and Ian. Which is fine, in theory. And it could've sparked some interesting dramatic tension.

Like if they'd attended a grittier, darker version of the loft party in season four, and the option to swing had come up, and each had to choose whether or not to go down that path. It could've been left open-ended or not fully resolved for the viewer, but done well and with intelligence and finesse. Instead, what they gave us was shit. Unfunny, clichéd nonsense. It diminished Gallavich as a couple, and reinforced Mickey as some dumb, oversexed clown whose core values can be easily swayed by nothing more than some free food and free dick.

You guys are more than welcome to jump in and disagree with me on this one, but I felt really betrayed watching that orgy episode in particular.

[gatheringbones]

[“Without delving into a psychoanalytic overview of my childhood, suffice it to say that I had a negative self- image, deep- seated insecurities, and an excessively dependent personality. I successfully internalized the role of the helpless female who fears being alone and without a mate.

Other than working for a living, I had no concept of self-reliance. I passively waited to be chosen by my mates, rather than assertively selecting whom I wanted for a partner. Leaving someone meant that I would have to actually seek other womyn on my own, a thought that terrified me. I had never entered gay bars alone and interpreted it as demeaning, equal to that of a heterosexual “pick- up." Unless someone came to rescue me, I felt trapped!

Without consciously self- identifying as a victim, or understanding the dynamics of gay oppression, I perceived myself a social misfit, perhaps crazy, definitely second- rate, and- because I was gay— passively accepted it all. Thus, in order to feel good about myself, I was drawn to other such victims— womyn I could feel sympathy for, who had life a little harder than mine, yet who seemed to possess a sense of personal power and independence that I did not.

Anna had been physically abused by her parents as a child, particularly by her father, a police officer. Catherine*, my second partner, was sexually abused by a female relative during her adolescence, and was in a heterosexual marriage she detested for over ten years. Thus, in both relationships, we could alternate between the two roles of victim and rescuer in a pattern that bound us together.

None of us ever sought professional counseling out of fear that our lifestyle would be revealed and that any therapist would view homosexuality as “the problem." Anna and I had read all the literature we could find, but that only reinforced our secret fear that maybe we really were “abnormal." To live with that self- image every day is perpetually demeaning and a form of psychic mutilation. On a deep subconscious level, I felt I got what I deserved.

I basically accepted my relationship as common to the “gay experience." Most other couples I knew in our lesbian clique also had physical fights, so it seemed to be normal. Although I didn't like it, I saw no acceptable alternative.

Our social life was limited to gay bars where physical violence was also the norm. While we disliked the bar scene, as working-class lesbians we found no opportunity to meet other lesbians. The bar atmosphere reinforced violence, jealousy, and self- denigration, and our lack of knowledge regarding diversity in lesbian lifestyles kept us isolated and ignorant. Victimization proliferated.

Like most contemporary couples of any sexual persuasion, we had few acquired skills in communicating or in coping with stress and anger. Likewise, our concept of primary relationships was based on the heterosexual model of jealousy and possessiveness as proof of love, unquestioned expectations of monogamy, and the double standard of infidelity forgivable for the “butch," unforgivable for the “femme."

There was also internalized pressure for us to stay together forever, even though we knew no lesbian couples whose relationships lasted more than ten years. The average was three to five years. Today I know of many couples together for over twenty years. That factor, itself, played a large part in why I remained with Anna for eight years. It was as though the duration of our relationship was more important than the quality, a phenomenon I believe still exists today for womyn in general, crossing all sexual orientations.”]

naming the violence: speaking out about lesbian battering, edited by Kerry lobel, 1986

[checkoutmybookshelf]

Little Town, It's a Shifter Village

I'm not sure what it is about old New England towns that literally predate the US, but they're often where tbe weird stuff happens. In the case of Virtue--a little town in upstate New York--the weird stuff is that it's a shifter sanctuary, which makes the town even more insular and uncommunicative with the rest if the world than even somewhere like Stars Hollow. Most people stay in Virtue their whole lives...but Zane Bellamy didn't. He had to come back to Virtue to meet his fated mate. Let's talk Wear Wolf.

This is your SPOILER WARNING, people. There are SPOILERS below the break.

The circumstances of a meet cute can range wildly, from a random happenstance coffee shop meet to something absolutely improbable like getting kidnapped by pirates. Somehow, Zane and Victoria manage to meet under just the wildest circumstances. Victoria is a long-term substitute teacher who has a year-long contract in Virtue. Her students talk her into entering a contest for a custom coture dress, and her win brings Zane back to his hometown. But that's just the SETUP for the meet cute. The actual meet cute is Victoria goig headfirst out a bathroom window to avoid the press (literally cannot blame her for that one) and Zane diving underneath her so she doesn't break her neck on the concrete. It's actually super cute and awkward.

And of course thats where the fated mate bond clicks in for Zane. The interesting twist, however, is that Zane has face blindness-- or prosopagnosia, for those of you wanting the SAT word. Zane doesn't see and click.with faces, so it more or less doesn't matter what Victoria looks like. What he does see though, is fashion. Partly because Zane is a world-famous designer, and partly because it's how he copes with and manages the ace blindness. So it takes him less than a second to clock Victoria's "everyday cosplay," which was honestly delightful in the context of their first spicy scene and jut a lovely little marriage of character quirks. It's not a secret that shifter romances--and particularly those shifter romances written under the Zoe Chant name--are meant to be sweet, fluffy, cozy, and spicy, without too terribly much in the way of depth. But even with those genre expectations, Murphy Lawless manages to do small, clever character things like this that give me just a little bit more to hold onto.

Like, yes of COURSE the fashion designer is going to clock the first grade teacher's subtle-enough-to-pass-muster-at-an-elementary-school sexy secretary and sexy librarian cosplays. And yes of course nobody else in said first-grade teacher's life is going to notice because humanity at large is bad at nuance (and also, let's be real: the US in particular would absolutely crucify [loaded word choice is intentional] any teacher for something like that if it wasn't kept 100000000% private). So to have these two beautifully complimentary character traits mesh just reinforces the fated mates thing and goes a long way towards feeling like yes, actually, even if there wasn't a shifter and a fated mate involved, these two characters have a reason they would work well together.

The other really lovely thing that this book does that I don't think I've seen in shifter romances before is that it codifies LGBTQIA fated mates. Dion and Aaron aren't a main couple by any stretch of the imagination, but they're there, they're gay, and they are absolutely adorable fated mates. Now we just need a book where the LGBTQIA couple is the main couple. I'm...fairly sure these exist and I just haven't found them yet? I hope these exist?

Overall, this was a delightful read, and I was over here kicking my feet and screeching "WHAT" at the book when the paparazzi pictures of Zane and a younger woman popped up. I think I literally yelled "THERE IS NOT ENOUGH BOOK LEFT FOR THIS" but it turned out there was, and it was adorable. I highly recommend Murphy Lawless (both as Lawless and as Zoe Chant) if you need a cozy shifter romance read.

[rememberingtheunremembered]

Further Recom. + Notes: Humanizing sex work (SW) & the threat of the law

The Nordic Model, partial decriminalization…How it relegates sex workers to a space of precarity?

(Sweden, Norway, Iceland, N. Ireland, Canada) — selling sex is not illegal but buying sex or profiting from the SW of somebody else is… sometimes referred to as “ending demand” & “exit services” are set up to try and help get SW out of the industry — it is seen by many as a very progressive & feminist way of protecting SW

Issue: a worker could come forward with complaint but a client couldn’t (say especially if you want to report a child being used) + ^selling of sex itself is not a problem but all the parallel activities are criminalized, which leads SW living under the constant threat of police violence & the danger of black market

Whereas legalization would require a lot of licensing, maybe specific venues, and tends to lead a sort of brothel system… creates a two-tier system where if you don’t have the money to afford the licenses & fees or the the right ways, then that leads to criminalization or the pressure to work for some wealthy capitalist who has the money to own a brothel & pay for all their licensing in exchange for them to be under his thumb

^ impacts marginalized communities (trans, queer, LGBTQ+ communities, homeless, immigrants, racialized, disabled)

Although public health is often a concern when it comes to SW, it’s usually approached only in terms of risk of STD… there isn’t much discourse about police violence, deportations, evictions, and poverty, all of which are hazardous to health (less about the health of the workers themselves but more about the imagined health of the community)

Wider structural problems: main issue is the stigma, eviction, lack of healthy mental health care facilities, gynecologist

AGAINST DECRIMINALIZATION: not about morality!!!

There is an argument that if the money is the only consent (you wouldn’t do it otherwise), then all SW is rape… but could we say the same for the lack of “enthusiastic consent” as actors? Difference between sexual intimacy as job v sexual assault at workplace

SW don’t do “productive work,” so, they shouldn’t sell themselves since there is nothing valuable produced except for $$ — emotional aspect is also part of the service world, thinking of labor of only in terms of products & manufacturing is bs

concern of sending a bad message — it sends the message that women’s bodies are for sale to men (ignores all the women who pay for sex & all the men who pay for sex with other men, & all the people who pay SW for things that aren’t really sex)... even if a women chooses to do it… still doesn’t mean it’s a feminist cause, if you’re choosing to buy into this very patriarchal & misogynistic industry, you’re reinforcing the idea that women exist for male consumption (which isn’t just an abstract concern about optics but an idea that regularly gets women of all backgrounds harassed & even killed)

Post WWII in N. America, there were heightened concerns about the future of the nation that coalesced in concerns about the proper sexual development of teenagers

A strong nation = strong families guided by a monogamous, heterosexual, reproductive/procreative couple

Role of sex ed.:

Abstinence-only: often argues that sex before marriage is harmful & that having more than 1 sex partner is wrong & destructive

Abstinence-plus: highlights abstinence as the only sure way to avoid pregnancy/STIs (teaches about safe sex practices but rarely pleasures)

Importance of comprehensive sex ed.: teaches about safe sex practices, LGBTQ sex, casual sex (some curricula teach about pleasure but not all)

Florida’s “Don’t say gay bill,” legislation to outlaw the teachings of LGBTQ

The conservative pathologize, if not criminalize — sex & sexuality as a threat

^these political/religious narratives lead to laws criminalizing non-normative forms of sex — sex work

Riley Reyes, adult performer, chair of Adult Performer Advocacy Committee (a labor group by and for adult performers — APAC)

SWERF: sex work excluding radical feminist… entering popular usage & leftist spaces

In the book, “Prostitution Policy in the Nordic Region,” scholars May-Len Skilvrei & Charlotta Holmstrom say that there really isn’t such a thing as “the” Nordic Model… pimping is legal yet landlords & friends of SW are vulnerable to pimping charges since the law cannot distinguish between the third parties who are helping & the law parties who are hurting

Inconsistencies in law protection can be better understood from thinking of Nordic model as a philosophical approach than a legal one 

SESTA & FOSTA are federal bills in the US that have criminalized certain kinds of sexual speech on the internet — illegal to talk about sex or SW on online platform & they’ve made the platforms liable for that speech — say selling sex on YouTube, then YouTube could be criminalized… that is why craigslist shut down their personal ad section & why tumblr is no longer a place where sex exists

Book “Sex at the Margins,” anthropologist Laura Agustin — how “trafficking” & “rescued” are used synonymously — in actuality, you’ve been arrested, imprisoned, your wages have been confiscated, & you’ve been deported back to a country you didn’t even want to be in without trial or even charges… “anti-trafficking operations”

^ if the law wants to cut down on migrant SW & immigrant workers of all kinds, being exploited & endangered, decriminalize the human moment — no more detention centers, visas, language tests, income requirements…

Decriminalizing SW… sex trafficking would still be fully illegal, labor rights violations are labor rights violations, & people under SW would be able to report

Some do it for enjoyment, some do it for money (poverty or SW)... survival

LEGAL to buy & sell sex… but if you do it in a flat with someone else (brothel-keeping), illegal… outdoors (solicitation), illegal… advertise (depending on where you do it), might be illegal… help a SW book gigs because they can’t use a phone, if you borrow money from a SW, if you’re a driver or a bodyguard of a SW, then you’re profiting from someone else’s SW & technically that is pimping, which is illegal

ILLEGAL… working in a flat with someone else & having a security guard would be safer but it is against the law. If you’re working outdoors and want to talk to clients about prices and condom use before you get in a stranger’s car… must do it in a rush since if you’re spotted, you could be charged with solicitation or hit with a prostitute’s caution, which will show up on a background check

Is money taken away if police suspect (not prove) that it is based off of SW? Renters cannot rent to SW (illegal… eviction)? In Northern Ireland, you could face a potentially unlimited fine, eviction from home, be charged — all w/o trial for doing something that is completely legal.

Testimony on being arrested in the video (migrants being deported w/o trial, arrested w/o clothes)

There’s an unspoken assumption I think that arrest, imprisonment, or threatening somebody with those things is morally neutral… but they are forms of violence since the SWs are harmed by it.

Book: Playing the Whore, Melissa Grant

Note that since the 70s & earlier, many SW consistently identified the police, not clients, as the major source of violence in their lives.

“It doesn’t feel like that these laws are there to protect people since they clearly don’t, it just feels like they want to see SW disappear”

There’s distinction between “SW is violence” — no amount of SW is ever okay & some kind of criminalization is the only answer — v “the sex industry features violence & exploitation” — we can have a chat on ways to reduce it

Radical feminist Julie Bindel & many others argue that SW is bad in itself… a lot of SW acknowledge their exploitation, not wanting to do SW, & yet argue that decriminalization is the best way to reduce them… if you want to be an abolitionist, it is not enough to say Sex industry features violence but that SW is violence

How SW accommodates disabled communities

Oliver discusses the complicated patchwork of the demonizing, patronizing, and problematic American laws against world’s oldest profession with a rather humorous undertone. He refrains from moral policing sex work and argues that it is inarguably labor (LastWeekTonight). His critical and human-rights centered approach allows me to apply 

Oliver touches on the absurdism of the “legality” which is established based on camera presence, how consensual sex for money or goods off camera remains illegal (LastWeekTonight). 

Oliver critiques the wrongful premise of the impossibility of consent in practice and reduction of all sex workers to exploited “victims,” the cliché of sex work being synonymized with trafficking, police and white supremacists selling themselves as “the saviors,” and the hyper-surveillance and mass incarceration of sex workers (LastWeekTonight). 

Oliver recounts how the legal processes and policies harm those that they claim to protect — the irony of police sting operations in the United States since they are fundamentally arguing that police should be able to have sex for their jobs legally to stop other people from having sex for work. 

The threat of arrest for people of color, the provision of prohibition against loitering for the purpose of prostitution (a stop & frisk policy for sex workers — NYPD has interpreted completely legal activities like talking to pedestrians or dressing “provocatively” as the basis for an arrest... seized condoms and used that as evidence of prostitution or charged with the misdemeanor of possessing an instrument of crime/criminalizing condoms... unsafe sex), and how criminal record limits sex workers’ future for both people who want remain or leave the field — for example, a woman in Alaska has a record as a sex offender since was charged with trafficking herself because the law changed from “promoting prostitution” to “sex trafficking.” 

that just like with any other job, fundamentally the only way to make sure that people have a choice in the way they earn money is to make housing affordable, healthcare accessible, and to not burden marginalized people with a criminal record