#salon for womens

[spoiledbratblog]

The Queen 👑

[sunshinewalks]

Black hair fierce stare, my hair speaks volumes.

[blackbackedjackal]

As a Gévaudan Lycan, June’s design is supposed to give off an unknowable and melancholy energy.

Gévaudan Lycans are mimics, and their emotions alter their form, especially if they have little to no control of themselves when they shift.

The way June was changed into a lycan and her experience during first shift were extremely traumatic, and over time, her lycan form reflected her feelings of loss and self-loathing. She fronts as this charming and confident woman, while holding back her deeper emotions that eventually leached into the form that reflects her true self.

Fear, sadness, loss, and rage all mixed into this one entity she cannot control. Once a month, she's forced into facing all of those emotions, reliving that trauma again and again for nearly 30 years.

[saydesole]

It's maintenance week 🫶🏽🩷

Hair photo IG: @crownedbymiks

acrylic toe set IG: @jalissanouvelle

[1818havefaith]

FAITH’S TOP PICKS FOR AUTUMN HAIR

1. DUTCH BRAID HALF UP-HALF DOWN

2. CRIMPED HAIR

3. NATURAL HAIRSTYLES

4. SEW IN

5. BRAIDS

6. DUTCH BRAIDS

[marzipanandminutiae]

i feel u on 1920s hate. when everyone is like ‘finally women are free of ~restrictive~ corsets’ and its like . first of all. didnt need to be. second. how do u think the curvier women were achieving the 1920s silhouette. quickly.

Exactly. I mean, yeah, it’s not their fault at all that people were saying things like that, or that it’s reached a fever pitch in recent years. Great material gains WERE being made for women, and I’m absolutely not discounting that. But much in the way that people tend to throughout history, though, they firmly believed that everything they were doing was the best and most progressive that it had ever been. And that idea has been hugely amplified in later years

I think it also has a lot to do with the fact that the 1920s were, in many ways, the beginning of a world that looks familiar to us now. Widespread film technology, continued rise of electricity, clothing-ways that seem familiar to us today in contrast to what came before (for example the advent of bras and panties, although people tend to forget there was usually also a girdle involved),  Air travel, cars becoming more popular, etc. because it seems less foreign, we accept all too readily the idea that it was better in all respects than everything earlier

(And ignore all the ways in which it would still have been foreign. Like… The 1920s were not actually the Proto – 2020s, guys. It owed for more to its immediate predecessors re: era mentality and technology and even fashion than some people would like to admit)

I don’t actually hate the 1920s – that would be pointless and reductive, since it’s an entire decade that happened over countless countries, demographics, cultural groups, etc. I think I’m with you, though, in hating the way it’s been put up on a pedestal as the perfect progressive era that was unilaterally better for women in particular

(Also, I read a book from the 1951 about the history of undergarments, and this mindset is in FULL force even three decades later.The guy finds ways to inaccurately rag on the Victorians even in chapters that aren’t about that time period, and concludes with a stirring statement that they are now living in the perfect time for underwear and that everything is so much better and more progressive than it ever has been in the past. The fact that this man- Cecil Willett Cunnington -was considered one of the highest authorities on dress history for a long time probably explains the current state of the discipline, In terms of “you can say basically whatever you want and people will believe you”)

[girlsdressingrooms]

Curly Lab, Diputación, Eixample district, Barcelona, Spain,

Courtesy of Miriam Barrio Studios

[diemelusine]

Portrait of Frances Sherborne Ridley Watts (the author's childhood friend) (1877) by John Singer Sargent. Philadelphia Museum of Art.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Nine people died as a result of the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection that Republicans pretend was a "normal tourist visit." Four rioters and five police officers lost their lives during the attack or in its immediate aftermath, in ways that likely would not have happened but for the Capitol riot. This death toll is rarely discussed in the media coverage of the attack, likely because journalists don't want to argue with gaslighting fascists who want to get into bad faith debates about whether the assault "caused" the heart attacks and suicides that took lives. But there is one death that no one can deny was due to Jan. 6: That of Ashli Babbitt, the QAnon-believing insurrectionist who was shot by a Capitol police officer as she attempted to lead a charge of rioters to run down fleeing members of Congress.

Instead of erasing her death in their efforts to pretend the riot was "peaceful," Donald Trump and his goons have turned the 36-year-old conspiracy theorist into a MAGA martyr. As with much of Trump's campaign antics, it calls back to the tactics of the Nazis, who turned a murdered scumbag named Horst Wessel into a fallen fascist hero honored in iconography and song. Babbitt is even easier to prop up as a sympathetic figure, she was both pretty and female.

Trump in particular likes to get maudlin, calling Babbitt an "innocent, wonderful, incredible woman." He also spent months demonizing the Capitol police officer, Michael Byrd, who was forced to shoot Babbitt that day. (Byrd's actions have been exonerated through multiple investigations, though anyone who has seen the footage of the shooting can see he had no choice.) Trump has suggested Byrd should face extra-legal execution, complaining, "if that were on the other side, the person that did the shooting would be strung up and hung." It's language that should remind us that his "bloodbath" talk is both serious and literal.

So really, it should be bigger news that recently released testimony from a White House valet shows that Trump's reaction when told about Babbitt's death was utter indifference. It's buried in a New York Times report on this recently released transcript of an interview the anonymous valet did with the House committee investigating Jan. 6. The Times reporters are more focused on the valet's recollections of how Trump told his vice president, Mike Pence, that it would be "a political career killer" if Pence refused to steal the election for him. In passing, however, they also mention Trump did not care about Babbitt's killing — and the timeline suggests he understood perfectly well at the time that Babbitt was to blame for her own death.

As the transcript shows, the investigator asked the valet about a note that was given to Trump, shortly after the shooting, informing him that "1X civilian gunshot wound to chest at door of House Chamber." The valet affirmed that he saw Trump with the note, and that they also knew of the killing because it was being reported on cable news, which Trump was watching avidly throughout the riot.

"But there was no, like, reaction" to the news, the valet explained. Trump said nothing. But shortly after being informed, he did send out a tweet telling the insurrectionists "to remain peaceful, no violence," and to "[r]espect the law and our great men and women in blue."

Everyone understands — and understood at the time — that the tweet was just a CYA measure from Trump, who stubbornly refused for hours to ask the rioters to chill out, despite drinking in all the violent images on TV. But that he issued it after being told a supporter of his was shot makes it all the more clear that his main focus at the time was disavowing responsibility for the violence he fomented.

That Trump did not actually care about Babbitt's death, outside of fears that it made him look bad, is not a surprise to most Salon readers, journalists, or anyone who is honest about Trump's utter lack of morality. Perhaps this is why this revelation isn't getting more press attention. There's a tendency in the jaded press to assume "everyone" knows that Trump has never in his life cared about anyone but himself. But not all voters know that Trump is for-real sociopathic, and they may be surprised to find he reacted to a deluded woman dying for him like normal people react to stepping on an ant.

But this should be a huge story. Trump is making his phony concern about the fates of the January 6 insurrectionists the centerpiece of his campaign. He opens his rallies with elaborate ceremonies to honor the rioters, characterizes them as "hostages" and "unbelievable patriots," and promises pardons for people convicted of assaulting police and seditious conspiracy. He pretends to care about these people to valorize his selfish efforts to overthrow democracy. His feigned love of them is also about keeping up morale among the nastier members of the MAGA movement because Trump unsubtly expects them to use violence on his behalf again.

Trump's exploitation of Babbitt's is also part of a larger habit of faking outrage over imaginary threats to innocent white womanhood from dark-skinned men. Trump loves to brag that "I protect women," which is a lie like most words that come out of his face. But he definitely likes to share his elaborate fantasies of men of color raping and killing white women. That goes back to his 2015 campaign kickoff when he said Mexicans were "rapists." He has falsely declared that, because of immigration, "women are raped at levels that nobody has ever seen before." He's recently been hyping the murder of Laken Riley, a Georgia woman who was allegedly killed by an undocumented immigrant.

Trump's lurid obsession with violence against women is dishonest on two levels. First, he's lying about the racial dynamics of gendered violence. Most men who sexually abuse, beat or kill women target those they know, and who are usually of the same race. It's not the dark-skinned strangers lurking in bushes of Trump's imagination. Trump knows this personally, as nearly all the over two dozen women who have come out with stories of being sexually abused by him are white women who met him through normal work and social situations.

Thus, Trump not only doesn't care about violence against women, he's a big fan of it. He bragged about sexually assaulting women on the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape. A New York jury found he did sexually assault journalist E. Jean Carroll in the 90s. He's repeatedly used the word "fortunately" when asked if he thinks rich men have the privilege of sexually assaulting whomever they wish. Over and over, Trump goes out of his way to defend other men who are accused of sexual harassment or abuse.

Babbitt's death is an outlier in the sense that she was the person at fault and gender had nothing to do with it. Still, Trump talks about her with the same tones of fake outrage he brings when exploiting the deaths and rapes of genuine victims. Pretending to suddenly care about violence against women when it suits his political needs is doubly gross, given Trump's otherwise lengthy record of cheerleading for gendered violence. But the mainstream media tends to avoid contrasting his pretend views on this issue with the substantial real-world evidence that he has no problem with violence against women.

The Babbitt case is especially egregious because, ultimately, her death is his fault. If Trump hadn't spun up ordinary people with lies about a "stolen" election, she wouldn't have been in the Capitol, foolishly dying for a man who does not care about her. That he's now using her corpse as a campaign prop is disgusting. Most MAGA voters will refuse to see this, of course, or make false claims that "all" politicians do it. But if they knew how little he cared, maybe a few would wake up and see that Trump would happily let them all die for him.

[nr1-logo-design-inspiration]

This is a color palette for a make-up project ♡

What are your thoughts about this? Write your favourie color code 💬👇

[sunshinewalks]

Black On Black

[draconicsplendor]

Was just getting a haircut and the lady beside me along w a couple hairdressers were saying how nice it would be to have short hair and not feel the hair on their neck and such and I, a transmasc, was like “well, you could try if you want? I personally like it a lot and if you don’t, it’ll grow back eventually”

And they agreed, but like, do I think they’ll try? Nah

[marypsue]

“What is it? What’s happening to me? How do I stop it?” “I can’t name what you are now,” Chavez says, almost mournfully. “I tried to warn you all. I saw our paths ending in blood.” “Please, if there’s something, anything I can do -” But Chavez is already shaking his head, slow. He’s rising to his feet as he says, “It’s too late. The hunger will eat you whole.”

I watched (most of) Young Guns (1988) and got The Lost Boys (1987) brainrot all over it. In my defense, vampire cowboys.

[oldfilmsflicker]

new-to-me #135 - Salone Love