#protofeminism

[caffeinatedmonologue]

Yet men will boast of knowledge, which he took, From Eve's fair hand, as from a learned book.

— Aemilia Lanier, Eve's Apology in Defence of Women (1611)

[the-hype-dragon]

idk everyone blaming feminism for the state of things is so tiresome lmao. historical illiteracy at its finest

[theeversocelebratedmarktwain]

‘All right, then, I’ll go to hell’

Hello again all!

The latest readings we have conquered as a class has been Mark Twain’s classic The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Huck Finn is a best seller for Twain and is known as one of the all time favorite for being a ‘boy-book’. So, let’s dive in.

The book opens on the boy named Huckleberry Finn that readers have more than likely already met in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Huck within himself represents the struggle of unlearning the doctrination that America was facing at the time. There was a lot of kickback, a lot of unsettled churches, and a lot of unhappy families to hear of a book holding a conversation about where America may had went wrong when it comes to the treatment of Black Americans. 

Now please, do not get me wrong. The book and Twain himself still holds on to harmful racist ideologies and stereotypes that are in this modern day painful to read, hear, and visualize. This is where my brain has led me to a crossway of confusion, understanding, mercy, and growth. I am just unsure in which direction I am coming from, and where I am going.

Last spring, I was in a survey course covering British and American literature. The specific week I am recalling, we were learning about the Tudors, King Henry VIII, his six wives, and so much more. [I assure you there is a point to this random storytelling-just stay. with me]. Within my lessons, I learned how one of King Henry’s wives aided his slaughter of a wife, when in turn she received power. The feminist within myself felt rage. Because in this day and time, progress forward is not progress is one had to step on the backs of women to achieve it. My teacher at the university blatantly reminded me of my privilege as a (white) woman in a country where freedom is given a lot more, with rights these women could never fathom of having. How my every day life may have struggles, but none of them struggles include fighting for my life and right to breath in a country rooted in tyranny. In this class she taught me the term as ‘protofeminism’. The googled definition of this word is “a concept that anticipates modern feminism in eras when the feminist concept as such was still unknown.” In this modern time, where I pass my judgement and my snarls at Mark Twain for his book that by the ends condemns racism, while still contributing to it- my brain is only understanding the picture from inside the frame.

My connection to Mark Twain this week is asking the questions: Is there a term called Protoantiracist? If there is, is this considered it? Is this America’s first work that asks the conversation to the table or not just slavery, but the oppression that we as a nation placed on entire ethnicity that we stole, raped, killed, and massacred from another land? Is Mark Twain the beginning of Protoantiracism?

By the end of the story, Huck Finn decides that the bond he has built with his friend Jim was worthwhile, and he did care about his livelihood. These feelings came from a genuine place within Huck’s heart because- as the naivety of child will have, he believed that caring for Jim meant condemning himself to Hell. Yet, he still made the decision to. Hence the infamous line titled this week’s title “All right, then, I’ll go to Hell”. 

Granted this world has developed into a completely different reality in this modern era, but it raises the question of what does Huck’s change of heart equal to in today’s world? I don’t believe it equals the work that should be done by white antiracists who use their privelege to guard the bodies of black Americans when a cop points a gun at them for having a black back pack and is on his knees. But what does it equal to? Or maybe I am looking at this text the wrong way. Did Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn make the way for other literature to know the path of going against the grain, of questioning their nation, or of testing the boundaries of our democracy. What was the impact of Huck Finn? Was this Twain’s intentions?

I am sorry to the readers who feel I should have answers to these questions. I, myself, still am trying to figure these out. In the meantime, more Twain content to be consumed.

Until next time,

Toni

[allthetropes]

some of you folks were NOT listening to the Baroness Schneider when she was talking to Captain Von Trapp and it shows

[danyseastar]

there’s genuinely no point in taking certain fans of That character seriously because they’ll be the first to purposefully misunderstand the story in order to uplift their own useless fav + any other female character with the slightest bit of autonomy is reduced to a girlboss caricature.

it’s basically the ‘masculine’ vs ‘feminine’ women trope and how all of these women suffer from the same system but some have fought their way towards having basic bodily sovereignty and others have assailed themselves within their circumstances, “you desire not to be free but to make a window in the wall of your prison,” and either perpetuate the abuse they deal with OR sit back and take it like a ‘good’ woman, hence the lack of culpability the stans of said character allow her to be responsible for. the mentality at play here is ‘she is a victim but she cannot possibly ALSO be a victimizer’ but both *can* be true at the same time.

rhaenyra is fighting to be the first ruling queen of westeros, a position that has been set in place before (aerea/rhaenys), but never come to fruition. her heirship has been contested since day one simply on account of her womanhood, not her political prowess or the dubious parentage of her first three sons. this is a fact, and the consequences surrounding her ascension have facilitated a civil war all in the name of the status quo. one side is attempting to honor the wishes of a deceased king, the other wants power, and uses the patriarchal standards already in place to further that goal. this leads to the death of rhaenyra, all but two of her biological children (to her only one survived), her former good mother, her husband, and the assured extinction of dragons.

rhaenyra is looked down upon by a certain portion of this fandom because the concept of protofeminism doesn’t exist to them. the idea that a woman being allowed to take a position of power during the medieval ages might lead to greater precedents involving women’s rights, which is exactly on par with westeros relying on the precedence of male preference primogeniture and the ruling made by the great council of 101ac. rhaenyra, obviously, didn’t make significant changes to women’s positions in westeros because she only ruled for a six month period in king’s landing and was beset by betrayal and treachery consistently during this period.

she was involved in a war that annihilated almost her entire family for the baby step progress of ‘daughters can inherit over sons,’ there was no time to help others when she was losing allies left and right to this very war. cases like the rosby and stokeworth situation are used to back up this take, dispite it being agreed upon rhaenyra verbatim chose to pass over them for fear of losing even more allies AND to protect the girls from being sold to violent misogynistic rapists as war prizes, not just because she believed herself to be the exception to the rule (corlys, in fact, is the one to state this). we also have no definitive proof showwise, either, that she truly believes in the system of men come before women -always- when the only thing said in regard to this is a throwaway line of jacaerys and baela’s sons inheriting the iron throne followed by her stating lucerys and rhaena’s children will inherit the driftwood throne, which is most likely a poor writing choice behind the scenes rather than any concrete proof to the latter.

brave baela, named after her grandsire baelon ‘the brave’ TARGARYEN, daughter of daemon TARGARYEN and laena velaryon, who had TARGARYEN ancestry, granddaughter of rhaenys TARGARYEN ‘the queen who never was,’ rider of the dragon moondancer, identifies completely with her targaryen ancestry and it is an integral part to understanding her character. she is of blood and fire, not salt and sea, and believes driftmark should pass accordingly to someone who corlys would value much more than her, the little girl he’s constantly overlooked on account of her gender.

baela is fighting to put rhaenyra on the throne and in turn jace and herself as the future king/queen. it’s not just for herself or for her stepmother, but for those who have now fallen as well. “i grieve my grandmother who loved me, but i carry her on with me. i will see rhaenyra ascend the iron throne, as rhaenys wished. as rhaenys HERSELF should have.” this cause is bigger than baela, bigger than rhaenyra herself, and baela knows this. yet somehow she’s ‘boring’ and ‘cringe’ in her dialogue or ‘nothing but a cheerleader,’ because she does not carry hatred in her heart for her kin over things they themselves cannot control.

what they have in common is their will, their wants, their ambitions; something that can’t be said for the other character because the writers want her to be a lead but don’t know what to do with her. she’s been relegated to nothing more than her hypocrisy, her self righteousness, her victimhood. she sleeps with a man whilst not married, she takes abortive teas against her religion, she abandons her children in their need for comfort, she’s spat on by the men around her and her own sons when seeking to place herself back into a familiar position of power. this isn’t the first time she’s experienced misogyny, but it is the first time she’s feeling the full ramifications of ridiculing and conspiring against the female claimant redirected at her, on account of the same reasons she took advantage of to propagate herself and her eldest son.

in the grand scheme of things rhaenyra and baela wouldn’t even typically be considered ‘masculine’ women, they’re just outspoken, assertive, and proactive; prone to not taking every bad thing that happens to them without at least some type of their own get back, and it doesn’t revolve around abusing other women to uplift themselves and the men they surround themselves with. which isn’t to say that the ‘feminine’ women’s strifes don’t matter, but to certain stans if they aren’t sitting back and being a pretty passive victim their struggles as a woman don’t count, for whatever reason.

[horizon-verizon]

The Greens literally admit they can’t ask for Jeyne Arryn’s support because them usurping Rhaenyra will make Jeyne’s own rights questionable; Rhaenyra’s ascension sets the precedent which does make a change.

And it’s not a rocket science, Rhaenyra becoming queen and ruling means women in Westeros won’t have to die in childbirth trying to produce a male heir, giving birth to a girl will be enough.

Well anon, I'm not that interested in going toe-to-toe with any of them about it for at least a few weeks (facetious); if they wish to forgo being able to read, that's on them. I've said similar things before in this blog. It certainly would begin to open more options for girls...begin.

I suggest reading @rhaenyragendereuphoria 's post abt why feminism is still interested/Rhaenyra's rule as a prospect is still within a feminist interest HERE as well as PhoenixAshes/ozymalek's Youtube videos explaining the history and lesson to be learned about Empress Matilda (the inspiration for Rhaenyra) HERE...their video on protofeminism in Westeros HERE.

[waxdream]

I think if I was in Flatland, my orientation would be West facing. I would be upright in that situation, and in order to see eye to eye with a fellow west facing person, one of us would have to be upside down. Unless you subscribe to the book and not the film, so your eye would be in the centre of your side, and your mouth in the centre of your opposite side. Though that assumes even sides... I wonder if having an odd amount of sides would be slightly awkward? Like, your mouth wouldn't be parallel to your eye. So that brings us back to the orientation problem. And so, if I was perhaps a Heptagon, I would be west facing. I wonder if there's a social divide between east and west facing flatlanders? It would only effect every other generation though... but it might effect the triangles more, we do know that triangles have strict class divides based on angles after all. Then again, I'm taking a very 3D approach here. Upside down probably doesn't matter to Flatlanders, it would instead be 'does your voice come from my north, or my south?'. Would that matter? To a society where your lower class is only able to feel their way around, I bet it would. It could be a quick distinction, assuming two flatlanders are seeing eye to eye. Would they even know they were eye to eye? I'd assume they would, they have the ability to feel after all. But perhaps not, and if so, maybe it wouldn't matter in the lower classes, and only the upper classes who are trained in sight recognition. It could be like a life hack you use to determine odd or even sides, and then you triangulate to estimate angles. Perhaps like a party trick among high sided society - I bet there's a flatlander out there who can spot a Triacontagon by sight.

Of course, I'd be a chromatist line segment who identifies as a circle haha, so it wouldn't matter to me.

(The chromatism movement assigned line segments and circles the same paint colours, which can be read in the book as either 'women being put on a level with Gods' or perhaps, 'God is a man with the aspects of a woman', or my personal favourite being 'chromatist line segments are all trans men assassins with God Complexes'. When read under the eye of protofeminism, this book is awesome haha)

[moon-meerkat]

i asked bc it really intrigued me that a whole class would be like that but with the specific demographic it makes more sense ig. but omg that sounds like a really cool class!! i'm really interested in that, the societal view and treatment of children is one of the two main themes (the other is protofeminism) in an essay im gonna write this semester for my history class (the two works i'll discuss are mary wollstonecraft's a vindication of the rights of woman and charlotte bronte's jane eyre)

never related to authors being like "childhood is such a blessed innocent time", catch me with that jane eyre shit like "such dread as children only can feel" and "I then sat with my doll on my knee til the fire got low, glancing round occasionally to make sure nothing worse than myself haunted the shadowy room"

[2024ardn632isobelchilberto]

Week 8 - Gaps/To Do List

Staging: Make fake blood, props

Add post-editing techniques to look more 50s e.g. grain and black + white

Research X franchise for case study specifically Pearl - set in the 40s?

Look at horror photographers

Read Book of Veles and watch video

Photo shoot cleaning up blood, blood face shots, axe shots

Look at horror films and image manipulation

Look at protofeminism

Make call sheet

Make more compositions

Add text

[tenth-sentence]

By the twelfth century Buddhism, protofeminism, and economic growth had transformed older gender roles.

"Why the West Rules – For Now: The patterns of history and what they reveal about the future" - Ian Morris

[whats-in-a-sentence]

The exams created unprecedented social mobility within the educated elite, and some historians even speak of the rise of a kind of "protofeminism" as the new openness expanded to gender relations. We should not exaggerate this trend; the advice to women in The Family Instructions of the Grandfather, one of the commonest surviving eighth-century books, would have shocked no one a thousand years earlier—

A bride serves her husband

Just as she served her father.

Her voice should not be heard

Nor her body or shadow be seen.

With her husband's father and elder brothers

She has no conversation.

"Why the West Rules – For Now: The patterns of history and what they reveal about the future" - Ian Morris

[kindtobechurlish]

Horse face bastards, you want to lie on your back and get fucked in the mouth, many of you have taboo and you need someone to sheer you least you are perverse or you are a fuckface bastard. A guy straddle your neck, or instead of a woman saying she has negro balls little girl feet make you shoot off 🚀

Call a spade a spade, you don’t want to all have the hair cut or NEAT fro, you all are assholes, negroes. A GENTLEMAN says negroes have been gypped and they need the god called osiris just so he can preach and be one of the first. I say the barber is the leader of society.

Women are afraid of protofeminism, established by men, The Republic, and woman does her “mock” that is “cute.” That is what “he’s a cutie” means? George Washington with a Santa hat? “He’s a cutie.” It’s just a story? You think this is “fun?”

[lesb0]

as a persecuted outed gay man with 0 noble ties Leonardo spent his entire life as a strong advocate for female superiority in an extremely hetero/patriarchal culture. there aren't enough surviving statements we can use in his journals so we have to use his art as further evidence of the ideas he worked through. And every depiction of his women have same common thread, to elevate them. You could take ANY of his female subjects as pretty strong evidence for his support of protofeminism, we absolutely know for certain what his agenda was. but dumb people are so concerned with his "secret illuminati code" it makes me lose my minddd

Leonardo was constantly centuries ahead of other Renaissance psuedoscientists, especially wrt race, namely in support of African women and proving female reproductive organs are what creates humans.

He was so close to innovating oil painting too, if only he were born flemish or dutch (as most central Italians denigrated colors as gendered female, insignificant, and unintelligent)

[wearycopiedwizard]

I am nowhere near nerdy enough to actually hold a conversation with the types of nerds I like. Like geez, I don't know shit about regular nerd crap, then again, video essay mode is one of their charms, just kinda wish I could join in with their bullshit. (What is the gender neutral version of fanboying/fangirling? There has to be one, right) anyways I have a feeling if I ever meet someone who i can bullshit with about four humors medicine or italian protofeminism, we are going to fuck marry or kill eachother before the end of the week.

[i-am-nobody-poetry]

“Eve’s Apology in Defense of Women” by Aemilia Lanyer

Now Pontius Pilate is to judge the cause Of faultless Jesus, who before him stands, Who neither hath offended prince, nor laws, Although he now be brought in woeful bands. “O noble governor, make thou yet a pause, Do not in innocent blood imbrue thy hands;     But hear the words of thy most worthy wife,     Who sends to thee, to beg her Saviour’s life.

“Let barbarous cruelty far depart from thee, And in true justice take affliction’s part; Open thine eyes, that thou the truth mayest see. Do not the thing that goes against thy heart, Condemn not him that must thy Saviour be; But view his holy life, his good desert.     Let not us women glory in men’s fall.     Who had power given to overrule us all.

“Till now your indiscretion sets us free, And makes our former fault much less appear Out mother Eve, who tasted of the tree, Giving to Adam what she held most dear, Was simply good, and had no power to see; The after-coming harm did not appear:     The subtle serpent that our sex betrayed     Before our fall so sure a plot had laid

“That undiscerning ignorance perceived No guile or craft that was by him intended For had she known of what we were bereaved, To his request she had not condescended. But she, poor soul, by cunning was deceived; No hurt therein her harmless heart intended:     For she alleged God’s word, which he denies,     That they should die, but even as gods be wise.

“But surely Adam cannot be excused; Her fault though great, yet he was most to blame. What weakness offered, strength might have refused; Being lord of all, the greater was his shame; Although the serpent’s craft had her abused, God’s holy word out all his actions frame;     For he was lord and king of all the earth     Before poor Eve had either life or breath,

“Who being framed by God’s eternal hand The perfectest man that ever breathed on earth, And from God’s mouth received that strait command, The breach whereof he knew was present death; Yea, having power to rule both sea and land, Yet with one apple won to lose that breath     Which God had breathed in his beauteous face,     Bringing us all in danger and disgrace;

“And then to lay the fault on patience’s back That we (poor women) must endure it all; We know right well he did discretion lack, Being not persuaded thereunto at all. If Eve did err, it was for knowledge sake; The fruit being fair persuaded him to fall.     No subtle serpent’s falsehood did betray him;     If he would eat it, who had power to stay him?

“Not Eve, whose fault was only too much love, Which made her give this present to her dear, That what she tasted he likewise might prove, Whereby his knowledge might become more clear; He never sought her weakness to reprove With those sharp words which he of God did hear;     Yet men will boast of knowledge, which he took     From Eve’s fair hand, as from a learned book.

“If any evil did in her remain, Being made of him, he was the ground of all. If one of many worlds could lay a stain Upon our sex, and work so great a fall To wretched man by Satan’s subtle train, What will so foul a fault amongst you all?     Her weakness did the serpent’s words obey,     But you in malice God’s dear son betray,

“Whom, if unjustly you condemn to die, Her sin was small to what you do commit. All mortal sins that do for vengeance cry Are not to be comparéd unto it; If many worlds would altogether try By all their sins the wrath of God to get,     This sin of yours surmounts them all as far     As doth the sun another little star.

“Then let us have our liberty again, And challenge to yourselves no sovereignty. You came not in the world without our pain, Make that a bar against your cruelty; Your fault being greater, why should you disdain Our being your equals, free from tyranny?     If one weak woman simply did offend,     This sin of your hath no excuse nor end,

“To which, poor souls, we never gave consent. Witness, thy wife, O Pilate, speaks for all, Who did but dream, and yet a message sent That thou shouldest have nothing to do at all With that just man; which, if thy heart relent, Why wilt thou be a reprobate with Saul     To seek the death of him that is so good,     For thy soul’s health to shed his dearest blood?”

(pub. 1611)