#the best example we have is thomas' trial | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

mariacallous · 4 months ago

Text

If you’ve been paying even the slightest bit of attention, you know that the American Experiment took some gut punches over the last week.

Joe Biden – long considered the best hope for preventing another disastrous Donald Trump term – had a shockingly bad debate performance, looking and sounding every minute of his 81 years.

The tainted supreme court then declared, in essence, that a president is above the law, at least when acting in an official capacity. And that came on top of other high court decisions that have blasted away at the foundations of democracy in the United States.

And much of the mainstream news media continued their campaign of false equivalency – treating the president’s age as a worse problem than Trump’s criminality and authoritarian intentions.

But on this Fourth of July, I haven’t given up hope that we will right ourselves. And I’m far from alone.

There is encouraging news in every one of these troubled spheres – politics, justice and media.

I asked one of my favorite thinkers, the author and scholar Ruth Ben-Ghiat, an expert in how democracies can wither under authoritarian rule, for some help. I talked to others, too, especially those who are protecting the vote, fostering good journalism and working for justice.

Here’s what Ben-Ghiat told me: “Part of the reason for so much aggression from the GOP and the courts to take away our rights, including the right to free and fair elections, is because America is becoming more progressive, and Republicans cannot win without lies, threats and election interference, including assistance in that area from foreign powers.”

She sees the US participating in “the global renaissance of mass nonviolent protest against authoritarianism” and notes that, in 2017, we saw the biggest protest in the nation’s history – the Women’s March against Trump, which was then surpassed in 2020 by the Black Lives Matter protests, which involved more than 20 million people in multigenerational and multiracial demonstrations.

“These mass protest movements had electoral consequences in the 2018 and 2022 midterm elections,” she added, as many women, non-white and LGBTQ+ people were elected to office.

Ben-Ghiat is convinced that we are ripe for another round – and the stakes are higher than ever.

On the justice front, I’m not suggesting that we somehow set aside the terrible and hugely consequential decision that gives a president – guess who in particular? – immunity for his official acts.

But at the same time, the courts, including the jury system, are often functioning admirably, if not flawlessly. Just over a month ago, Trump became the first former US president convicted of felonies. Trump allies who wanted to charge that the courts have been weaponized found it harder to make that argument less than two weeks later when Hunter Biden, too, was convicted in a jury trial.

Mainstream journalism, as noted, often disappoints. The moderators of the CNN debate clearly should have been empowered by their network bosses to challenge Trump’s barrage of lies in real time. The stunning New York Times editorial calling for Biden to set aside his campaign for the good of the nation may have been well-reasoned, but it struck me as another example of targeting the president and letting Trump off the hook. To my knowledge, only the scrappy Philadelphia Inquirer has written a similar editorial about Trump.

Too much of the politics coverage is out of whack with reality. The media is baying for Biden’s head, but – with some exceptions – seems mostly bemused by Trump or at least habituated to how dangerous he is.

But there’s good news in journalism, too. Consider ProPublica’s essential reporting on Justice Clarence Thomas’s rotten ethics. Or the way many news outlets have revealed the threats of Project 2025 – the alarming and detailed plan by Trump allies to dismantle democratic norms should their leader win a second term.

I’m also heartened by young journalists who are making their way in a difficult career field.

“No matter what problem we’re talking about, good journalism is part of the solution,” said Jelani Cobb, the dean of Columbia Journalism School (where I run a journalism ethics center). “The young journalists whom we have the privilege to work with here are some of the sharpest, most committed and talented that I’ve ever seen.”

Their work “will be a ballast for democracy”, Cobb told me, “even amid the giant challenges in front of us right now”.

Most of all, I’m moved by the valiant efforts of many ordinary citizens. One friend, active in voter protection efforts, praised “all of the grassroots volunteers working to preserve democracy who I am sure will continue in all the ways possible if Trump wins”. She mentioned the flood of small-dollar donations that followed Biden’s debate debacle, and credited “the courageous judges, court personnel, jurors et al who are working, despite the risks to themselves, to see that justice is served in the cases against Trump”.

Will any of this matter when so much is going wrong and when the threats are so great? The screenwriter and former journalist David Simon offered a dour view this week: “Our American experiment is so over.”

More aligned with Ruth Ben-Ghiat’s big-picture view and the others quoted here, I remain hopeful, if not optimistic about the future of the United States.

On 4 July, at least, let’s remember that we’ve come a long way, and the journey isn’t yet complete.

8 notes · View notes

fideidefenswhore · 8 months ago

Note

Why did any nobles support KofA in the annulment? I can get priests, bishops siding with her if thinking her case was right, but what do courtiers get out of it? If it's loyalty, shouldn't loyalty to Henry come first as king? And his argument was he needs a son to stop civil war, so what's theirs? "Accept you had no son, we'll just see what happens next and hope there's no problems"? A lot of these people were Yorks, which is sus, so I'm starting to think, were they actually planning something, waiting for a chance? By supporting her, are they trying to say to Henry "Look, we support your daughter! We swear we won't do anything when you're dead!" and maybe meaning it, maybe not?

Well, this was complex, and there were different turning points for different people. As I've mentioned before, initially, Reginald Pole and Thomas More, for example (and there are probably more examples, more people that felt this way, but these are the figures of most significance), at least 'cosmetically' (I mean...Reginald Pole actually travelled to argue Henry's side, so...I think his apologists lean into 'cosmetically' pretty far, but that's just an aside) supported HVIII in the Great Matter. However, once it became clear that the matter of succession was to became inextricably linked to the separation from papal primacy, they withdrew their support.

I think also, there was a pretty strong court faction supporting the Boleyns up through Blackfriars, because many believed it was a foregone conclusion in HVIII's favour. After all, Campeggio did travel with the document attesting to his authority to annul after the trial, and he showed this to Wolsey and HVIII. Once it ended in stalemate, however...well, the future suddenly looked more uncertain and less stable. Many defected, hedging their bets that this would maybe end in COA's favour after all (and, ultimately it did, but by the point it did so it was rather a hollow victory).

Speaking of that 'hollow victory', 1529-1534 was such a nebulous time for COA, Princess Mary, and their partie(s), because the Pope did not declare either for or against the marriage until, what was it, March 1534? And had this been declared before all the Parliamentary Acts separating England from papal power it might have had more effect, but as it was, by the point it was finally declared, the decision had no legal authority in England, regardless (but was 'moral' or 'religious' authority to many).

And then, even those that might've believed the marriage to COA had been legitimately annulled by the Church of England, still believed Princess Mary was bona fides, since this was generally the principle applied to such cases elsewhere in Europe. So, we have Princess Mary, considered the heir to the throne of England by much of Catholic Europe, considered bona fides even by many of those not strictly belonging to that group...but it's treasonous at worst, and risky at best, to assert the latter, and yeah, not politic to remind Henry of the former.

Where does that lead us? Well, the awkward part of Chapuys' legacy as Mary's champion is that he sends dispatches to Charles V swearing up and down that many English subjects don't even consider HVIII to be strictly legitimate, arguing himself to this effect; he pulls out the rumored Eleanor Talbot marriage used to delegitimize the children of EW & EIV in the reign of Richard III as if it is some sort of trump card. Of course, again, the awkward continuity of this line of reasoning is that if there are significant problems to the legitimacy of HVIII, then by extension, there are for Princess Mary's as well. And here comes the solution, as it were: Reginald Pole, as the 'legitimate Plantagenet heir', can wed Princess Mary, and they can overthrow HVIII. Chapuys swears that COA is onboard with the former part of this plan, swears that many of her party and Mary's are, as well, and remains silent about whether or not COA is onboard with the latter part.

Does this sound too early, too much like the Exeter Conspiracy? Well, this conspiracy is part of the accusations of 1538- for many that were of Princess Mary's faction, but it's actually bruited by Chapuys incredibly early, like either 1533 or 1534, if memory serves.

(I think there was a rumor that the plan was also to wed Mary to the Courtenay heir at one time also, which is rather ironic considering what happens with all that much later...)

By 1536, COA dies, so there's sort of a correlating lateral move with this faction... AB is still not recognised as Queen by the Pope, by the majority of Catholic Europe (Chapuys speaks of members of this faction, including Princess Mary herself, being 'jealous' of the reverence he made to AB in April 1536, I think this was more like a [quite reasonable] fear, tbh, as by acknowleding her, Charles V was, too), by some English subjects, as well. Henry still needs an heir, but nothing would, or should stop him from marrying another woman, and reinstating Mary into the succession...and how could this be advantageous for them? Again, we have to remember that a woman ruling England alone is, at this point, unprecedented. There's a much more secure future, in their minds, of Mary wed to either one of the Plantagent line, or some Catholic prince, and inheriting the throne married once Henry dies. I'm not entirely sure this faction originally intended Jane Seymour to be Queen (obviously, the Seymours would have had more of a vested interest in this eventuating); more likely is that at the outset, they planned to use Henry's affection for her to secure what they wanted. Actually, most of the risk was on her, according to Chapuys' reports: it was Jane that they asked to speak the controversial 'truth' ('how detested the marriage was by all the people'), and only then that 'well-placed' nobles of this faction would swear to the same.

However, as soon as their real controversial 'truth' emerges (Mary is bona fides, Mary should be reinstated into the succession) by the woman they've chosen as its figurehead, it's viciously shot down by HVIII, and many of them find themselves under suspicion and interrogation, dismissed from the Privy Council, some even arrested, although shortly thereafter released. You can read these interrogations yourself in the state papers, and chart the trajectory of all of Mary's party fleeing the ship they've built and throwing their fellow conspirators under its hull. Some will survive (like Francis Bryan) by continuing to do so at the expense of their former allies, but many are going to find themselves arrested and executed in connection with the former conspiracy in two years' time.

#anon #this in and of itself could be its own miniseries #altho the rights to the king's curse have already been used and networks seem loath to adapt tudor dramas without source material lately.#i will post some relevant quotes on this subject if you're interested; anon...spoons withstanding....

7 notes · View notes

marcianoliterati · 1 year ago

Text

The sunbearer trials, by Aiden Thomas

3.5 stars

This is more of a discussion than solely a review, and does feature some spoilers :

I was really excited for this, but found myself a bit disappointed by the end.

It takes place in a fantasy world heavily inspired by Mexico. It all sounds pretty Aztec to me,the gods mentioned and all that but it's not particularly mentioned anywhere, and all the copy solely reads 'mexican-inspired'

It’s a mix of modern society and ancient stuff, there’s gods and demigods running around, there’s an academy for heroes and every ten years something called the sunbearer trials happens where a demigod child is killed by another so they can ‘charge the sun’ and keep the bad guy in his cage.

Tw: violence, bullying, manipulation, world-ending mistakes

It’s clearly another take on the hunger games and other similar stuff. Only no one here is supposed to be killed till the end.

The main character is teo, a trans boy who has wings he’s ashamed of, and who feels underappreciated due to his mother being a second-rate god which means he’s not seen as particularly important or good enough to be a hero.

Still, he and his best friend are called to participate in the sunbearer trials, and he spends the whole time being unsure of it all and just trying to keep everyone he loves from dying.

It’s a good premise, and it’s entertaining, but it constantly feels like the worldbuilding is lacking.

A thing i don’t like is when the characters, for whom this is all supposed to be their normal, don’t know what they are doing. It’s a lazy form of exposition I find.

And teo is constantly confused about everything.

They say that the trials go back a long time, that it’s a great honour to participate, to kill, to die,

But no one shows it.

Everyone acts like theyre afraid of it ashamed of it.

Even the career heroes that are supposed to be trained for it since birth.

Now, i don’t read a lot of YA, cause i tend to find the teens annoying as fuck.

Which is probably part of why I had issues with this book.

Yes a lot is teens being teens

And i also have issues cause i tend to find them toothless.

Too often they feature kids who are afraid to do anything bad.

Like they sneak out once and its a huge deal and of course they never do drugs or drink alcohol or engage in another common risk-seeking behaviour, so it lets them be bratty teens as long as they don’t do anything teens do?

It feels very puritanical, and it’s boring.

this is about a deadly race, with many obstacles and chances to hurt or get hurt.

but dont worry, everyone will have a miraculous escape! Plot armour for everyone!

it cant be like youre wrapping both the protagonists and readers in a little bubble where nothing bad ever happens and they never need to see anything that could be potentially dangerous

the danger has to be real.

you truly don’t know if they’ll survive, and how

this doesnt mean it has to be some grimdark everyone can die the future is hopeless thing

thg works because it is willing to go that far, it says your faves are in dangers and means it. nobody gets out unscathed.

In thg the danger is real, and the worldbuilding is incredibly detailed. Even though katniss who is confused like 90% of the time is the pov character.

It doesnt feel like someone is pausing and explaining everything every 5 minutes.

derry girls is a good example of where they do show dangerous things, it is political, but it is all filtered though the lens of girls who dont know better, and you feel that.

rick riordan’s catalogue also shows this well. it has kids in trouble, it has danger, it deals with Issues, and so on.

The main problem with this is that it doesn’t feel real.

From the beginning, you know things aren’t gonna go according to plan.

You’re surrounded by danger but nothing bad is actually going to happen.

and theres the ‘the sacrifice is an honour but we all know its wrong’ and the way the approach it , like being sad about it.

their sacrifice is supposed to “charge the stones” and “keep monsters at bay”

But it’s never explained. Why? Why must it happen this way? What does it mean? No one can challenge it, it is just the way it is but it is not explained either.

Why the trials? Why can’t people volunteer?

if this is their religion, the way its been done for thousands of year why are they sad and umcomfortable to talk about it?

like, i feel like at least some people should be going like crazy over them, offer them gifts asks for blessings hell they should be like tell me your stories your wishes your goals so we may complete them for you

like, honour them properly? not this “killing people is a shame but it must be done and instead of facing it we are just kind of awkward about it”

In a way, it feels like it is using modern morals to tell a story where those morals simply don’t work. They don’t apply.

I expect complicated feelings sure, but it is more like ‘it sucks let’s sweep it under the rug’

There’s a whole subplot of Teo having a sister he never knew cause years earlier, she was sacrificed. And his mum never talked about it.

That sounds a lot like shame and fear.

Tributes in the actual hunger games where treated better. People knew they were pawns being sacrificed, and that it was awful, but they also knew there was nothing they could do.

Why isn’t there a memorial somewhere honouring the sacrifices?

If they don’t like it, have they tried doing something else?

There’s this episode of SNW where they also have child sacrifices, and they approach it way better. They also talk about they have to or the whole planet dies, and how they’ve tried to search for other ways and haven’t found any.

So now they face it head on. They do a whole festival they do their best for the chosen ones, and so on. They know it’s an awful thing to do but they don’t hide it. They don’t look away in shame.

And the way shame is constantly everywhere in this story feels weird.

The have the MC and his friends look back into the archives and besides discovering he had a sister nothing much is said of it. There was a moment right there for them to learn of the history and heritage of why and how it is done and…nothing. Completely missed opportunity.

like, the character often feels like theyre being faced with all of it for the first time, rather than actually growing up with it, what happens if someone is chosen and doesnt want to compete? do they become the sacrifice ? has anyone ever tried? have people died doing this shit? what does the process actually entails??

For example,HDM goes into a lot of detail as to the origin the why the motivations and so on.

That’s why i think the worldbuilding feels lacking. The whole foundation of the story is less than great.

What does it mean for this civilization to have this? To grow like this?

what kind of place is it? how does this masquerade change the world?

but i feel like a lot of ��our world but slightly to the left’ don’t take the time to ponder the winder ramifications.

or you could do growing up thinking it was wonderful for everyone involved ,theres luxury and rewards, everyone wants to be chosen and then oh shit its actually dystopic af and ppl have been lied to.

someone slowly becoming aware of the horrors

and this goes slightly over there ‘oh no someone has to die, i dont want anyone to day, last time i was a kid mum didnt even let me watch’ or ‘oh actually the heroes i admire have really tough life’ but it just sort of waves as it goes past, not even bothering to detour

i feel like the premise is great, a whole country, how does it all work?, and they even go on a tour, but we dont get to see much, a lot of good things are mentioned, only in passing.

I don’t know if it’s really the sort of thing that can be improved in a sequel, although maybe with new characters who can bring in a different pov it might be possible.

So that’s why i feel the story loses steam.

I admittedly don’t know a lot about mesoamerican human sacrifices, but i don’t think shame was the prevailing emotion.

It just doesn’t make sense.

It’s a shame cause i was excited about it, i wanna support latino books and you don’t get a lot of fantasy based on latinamerican folklore, but even wanting to hype it up it still felt a bit flat.

I guess it’s a bit like ‘i had this cool idea so i’m gonna sketch some stuff around it to support it’ and never quite getting around it to filling it in.

Like, teo,the MC is trans. This is quickly mentioned as ‘everyone was fine with it’, and i think there might be a mention of a genderfluid god?

But beside that everything is the same. Another trans kid wears a binder. They take testosterone, it’s just like in our world.

Or how Teo is the son of a bird god, he can talk to birds, which we barely see him do, and he has freaking wings.

Which he doesn’t know how to use.

Cause apparently he was ashamed of them so his guardians just let him hide them? What? get that kid a therapist of something what the hell.

And the whole reason he is ashamed is simply cause he found them too girly.

That’s like saying oh my legs are too ugly i don’t wanna use them. And your parents just being like ok here’s a wheelchair?

Maybe there’s more to it but it’s never explained so that’s the impression i get, like it’s such a big handicap!

And he spends the whole time complaining he isn’t allowed to go to hero school! Is someone stopping him from training? No, i’m sure his mother’s palace has a gym, and he could’ve gotten tutors, he could’ve been using his wings the entire time.

Maybe it’s too judgmental of me, but it seems incredibly foolish, and i wish we had more talk about it. Rather than him going “oh i dont want to” or “i don’t like it”

I think it’s a good rec for anyone who likes hp, pjo, thg, or hdm, but i don’t think it is as strong as any of those.

#book reviews #book bloggin #spoilers #the sunbearer trials #fantasy books #it sort of veers into a general critique of ya books for a bit

5 notes · View notes

adittyofdittos · 5 months ago

Text

…virtue & interest are inseparable. it ends, as might have been expected, in the ruin of it’s people. but this ruin will fall heaviest, as it ought to fall, on that hereditary aristocracy which has for generations been preparing the catastrophe. I hope we shall take warning from the example and crush in it’s birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and to bid defiance to the laws of their country.

- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to George Logan, 12 November 1816.

Still the struggle. As we did not crush it. And, to be honest, I am not sure that one can crush it once and for all. It really kind of is a cycle:

First the Corporatists try to ignore the law.

When they can’t simply ignore it they try to buy the law enforcers so they will be ignored when they defy it.

When they can’t buy law enforcement, they buy more lawyers to reinterpret it so they can be seen as within it.

When they can’t reinterpret the law, they try to buy the judges and the juries to excuse it.

When they can’t excuse it, they try to buy the law makers to change the law so it helps rather than hinders them.

When they can’t change it, they buy more advertising space and try to change the populace’s definitions of vice and virtue, so they will demand a new system of law.

When they can’t change the meaning of right and wrong, they buy armies and try to seize the mechanism of law and state. For if they are “King” by right of conquest, then they truly bind the law rather than being bound by it.

When they can’t conquer the state they change the definition of who committed the crimes and try to leave those lesser servants to suffer the consequences while they move on to found new institutions and begin the cycle all over again.

When they can’t escape the consequences of their actions they try to prove that they are individuals, bad actors, bad apples, rather than a dangerous class in need of new laws and regulations to force an entire system back into its proper place.

When they can’t prevent themselves from being hemmed in more tightly to their proper position they try to buy time, history, and memory so they can argue the danger has passed. That was just then, the dirty shameful past. They can be trusted now.

When they can’t buy the expiration of distrust, they buy the historians, experts, and teachers. They try to have the facts rewritten, mythologized, or just plain erased so the need to control them will be forgotten.

When their crimes are unforgettable and unforgivable, they try and turn on their own and get special forgiveness in exchange for fighting against those who are currently running through the cycle.

When they can’t buy forgiveness they go into exile to try and change who they’re in this competitive cycle with.

I don’t know what happens if they can’t go into exile and are forced to a next step. I am not currently aware of any successful next step cases. As far as I know this is the point at which things must end or go back down the cycle. They succeed in exile by restarting or retiring. Or they fail in ignominy or assassination. I think the best example of continuing on after exile is Napoleon who just went back to armies.

And Napoleon SHOULD catch your eye.

Wasn’t I talking about Corporations and CEOs and conflict of interest in the law?

Yes.

The basic argument I am pulling from Jefferson is that monied interests are the current aristocracy. Power may put on all sorts of masks and use all manner of tools. But at the end of the day it is a question of who actually controls the apparatus of power. An elite or the general populace. And how do they do it?

So far, that’s been the struggle under a thousand thousand variations and masks through all our generations.

Corporatists, with Corporations as their power base are the incarnation we’re dealing with. But it’s merely an incarnation of the same forces that once were Royals and the power of Monarchy. Which once were conquering warlords. And on and on back to the first schmuck who realized it could gain advantage over its fellows by gaming the system of governing behaviors.

And I will shut up now.

0 notes

tafsircareercounselor · 7 months ago

Text

How to Choose the Best Online Legal Assistant Diploma Program

The legal profession is a prestigious and challenging field, and becoming a legal assistant is a great way to get your foot in the door. With the rise of online education, choosing the best online legal assistant diploma program is more important than ever. This article will guide you through the critical factors you should consider when selecting an online legal assistant or paralegal program, especially if you're looking at options in Alberta or Calgary.

From flexibility to real-world application, we will cover all you need to know to make an informed decision. So, whether you’re looking to enhance your skills, start a new career, or just expand your knowledge, read on to learn how to choose the program that’s right for you.

Understanding the Role of a Legal Assistant

Before we dive into the specifics of selecting an online diploma program, let's clarify what a legal assistant does. Legal assistants, also known as paralegals, work closely with lawyers to prepare for hearings, trials, and corporate meetings. Their duties may include conducting legal research, drafting documents, organizing files, and other administrative tasks. The right diploma program will equip you with the knowledge and skills necessary to perform these tasks effectively.

Key Factors to Consider

When selecting an online legal assistant diploma program, several factors come into play. Here's what you need to look out for:

by Thomas Lefebvre (https://unsplash.com/@magellol)

Curriculum and Specializations

An excellent legal assistant diploma program should cover all the fundamental areas of legal studies, including civil litigation, corporate law, criminal law, and family law. Some programs offer specializations in areas like immigration law or real estate law, which could be beneficial if you have a particular field of interest.

Faculty and Expertise

The quality of the faculty can make a significant difference in your learning experience. Look for programs with experienced instructors who have practical knowledge of the legal system. Their insights can provide you with a deeper understanding of the material and prepare you for real-world legal scenarios.

Flexibility and Course Delivery

One of the main advantages of an online program is the flexibility it offers. Check if the courses are asynchronous (pre-recorded) or synchronous (live), and whether they require you to be online at specific times. Choose a program that fits your schedule and learning style.

Support and Resources

Online learning can be isolating without the right support. Ensure the program offers comprehensive resources, such as virtual libraries, discussion forums, and technical support. Additionally, access to career services can be a valuable asset in your job search after graduation.

Practical Experience and Internships

While online programs offer great theoretical knowledge, practical experience is crucial. Some diploma programs may offer internships or practical modules that give you a taste of what it's like to work in the field.

Legal Assistant Diploma Online in Alberta and Calgary

For those in Alberta or Calgary, there are specific considerations to keep in mind when choosing a program.

Provincial Regulations

Legal assistants in Alberta may need to meet particular provincial regulations or standards. Ensure the program you choose is recognized by the Alberta legal community.

Local Market Needs

Choose a program that is tailored to the needs of the local market. For example, if you're looking to work in Calgary, a program with a focus on oil and gas law might be beneficial, as the city is a hub for the energy industry.

Networking Opportunities

Even in an online program, networking is essential. Look for a program that provides opportunities to connect with local legal professionals and alumni. This can be invaluable when you're ready to enter the job market.

Comparing Legal Assistant Diploma and Certificate Programs

When choosing between a diploma and a certificate program, consider your career goals and the time you're willing to commit. Diploma programs typically offer a more comprehensive education and may be better suited for those seeking in-depth knowledge or planning to advance in the legal field. Certificate programs might be shorter and more focused, ideal for those looking to quickly gain the skills needed for entry-level positions.

Tuition and Financial Considerations

Don't forget to factor in the cost of the program. While online programs can be more affordable than their in-person counterparts, they still represent a significant investment. Look for programs that offer financial aid, scholarships, or flexible payment plans.

Student Reviews and Reputation

Do your research and read reviews from current and former students. Their experiences can provide you with valuable insights into the quality of the program and what you can expect. Additionally, the reputation of the institution offering the program can affect your degree's value in the eyes of employers.

Making the Decision

by Hunters Race (https://unsplash.com/@huntersrace)

When you've considered all the factors, it's time to make a decision. Remember, the best program for you is one that aligns with your career goals, fits your lifestyle, and provides the education you need to succeed as a legal assistant.

Conclusion

Choosing the best online legal assistant diploma program requires careful consideration of many factors. By evaluating curriculum, faculty, flexibility, support, practical experience, and cost, you can find a program that sets you up for success in the legal field. Whether you’re in Alberta, Calgary, or anywhere else, the right diploma program is out there waiting for you.

Remember, the legal assistant role is crucial in the legal profession, and with the right education, you can embark on a rewarding and exciting career path. Good luck in your search for the perfect online legal assistant diploma program!

#legal assistant programs #legal assistant diploma #legal assistant training #legal assistant certificate #legal assistant course online alberta

0 notes

quasi-normalcy · 8 months ago

Text

So to be clear, science:

Often takes as implicit particular philosophical assumptions that aren't necessarily valid in all cases (e.g., psychologists accepting liberal-individualistic models of human nature and neglecting social causes)

Relatedly, often works with things that are easy to measure, regardless of whether there is any a priori argument in favour of those quantities being particularly relevant (the so-called "streetlight fallacy"--e.g., there are actually rather few results from clonar mice that are directly portable to humans, but clonar mouse studies remain a standard in medical research because they're easy to conduct)

Relatedly, often assumes that entire complicated systems can be reduced down to proxies that are easy to measure and especially to quantify, regardless of whether this is a reasonable assumption or not (e.g., "gene fetishism" neglecting the role of epigenetics, proteomics, etc. in favour of attributing every significant aspect of an organism to its genes)

Often takes as implicit certain perspectives and cultural biases, especially white/male/Western perspectives (e.g., the entire centuries-old body of midwifery lore being ignored upon the professionalization of medicine as a discipline in the seventeenth century)

Often encodes other cultural biases as well (for example, mycology was, until quite recently, extremely understudied and relegated to a minor subfield of botany because Anglo cultures tend to have a low regard for fungus; this in spite of the fact that fungi make up a very significant chunk of the earth's biomass)

Can often present entire models of how the world works that are arrived at based on sociological factors within science itself (Thomas Kuhn's paradigms), or within the wider society (Foucault's epistemes)

Often misstates statistical significance because scientists lack an adequate command of the discipline of statistics.

Can churn out a lot of substandard studies because of professional pressures on academics to publish, publishers' pressures to have the next big thing, and the time constraints of peer reviewers.

Can often just produce straight-up garbage because some fields are beholden to commercial interests (e.g., the pharmaceutical industry maintains entire journals that just exist to give crap drug trials the appearance of scientific legitimacy)

Can be manipulated by dishonest reporting (e.g., the pharmaceutical industry, again, might conduct hundreds of studies and publish only the one that produces favourable results; Facebook might conduct hundreds of studies on manipulating public attitudes and only publish the few that encourage advertisers to give them money)

Is shaped by the priorities of the state and capital (i.e., in terms of what research questions get funded)

Is a structurally collective enterprise that builds largely on trust in the competence and intellectual honesty of one's peers, rather than verification of every previous result by every individual scientist

At a policy level, can produce misleading results just based on what particular types of scientist are invited to the table (e.g., COVID-19 containment measures going disastrously awry because epidemiologists were considered relevant to include on the panel but social psychologists were not)

However, none of this, when taken together, should be interpreted to mean:

Science is made-up

Scientific findings bear no relation to the actual behaviour of nature

You can just pick and choose what aspects of science to believe in based on gut instinct or what makes you feel good

Science is not the best tool we have for distinguishing what's real from what we want to believe.

What I learn from Science & Technology Studies is that you shouldn't blindly trust science because there's a fair amount of fuckery (mostly unintentional but sometimes not) going on in the background, but you also shouldn't *not* trust science in the way that most people who don't trust science don't trust science.

Anyways, hope that helps!

#science #also every single one of these shortcomings could be solved by forming a hivemind; just throwing that out there

4K notes · View notes

legalupanishad · 1 year ago

Text

Rights and Duties in Jurisprudence: All You Should Know

This article on 'Rights and Duties in Jurisprudence: All You Should Know' was written by Anukriti Prakash, an intern at Legal Upanishad.

INTRODUCTION

Often called the philosophy of law, jurisprudence explores the complex network of ideas, beliefs, and principles that form the foundation of the legal frameworks that govern our communities. Fundamentally, jurisprudence aims to disentangle the concepts of rights and obligations that form the basis of our moral and legal systems. Jurisprudence is the intellectual exploration of law's nature, purpose, and limitations. It grapples with questions about what laws should be, how they are justified, and their impact on individuals and societies. Understanding the complexities of rights and obligations is critical for understanding the dynamics of human relationships and government. It affects our expectations of others and serves as the ethical and legal underpinning for just societies. In this article, we will explore the domains of jurisprudence, discussing the meaning, definitions, and interplay of rights and obligations in the complex structure of human existence and the rule of law.

RIGHTS UNDER JURISPRUDENCE

Rights are fundamental to the study of jurisprudence and law. They are the pillars upon which legal systems and ethical principles are built. Here, we explore the various types of rights and their significance Natural Rights: - Natural rights are inherent, universal, and inalienable rights that people possess by virtue of their humanity. They are not contingent on any legal or social constructs. - Theorists: John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are among the philosophers who have advocated for natural rights. Locke, for instance, asserted the existence of natural rights to life, liberty, and property in his "Two Treatises of Government." Legal Rights: - Legal rights are rights recognized and protected by a specific legal system or government. They are contingent on the laws of a particular society. - Theorists: Legal positivists like H.L.A. Hart argue that legal rights derive their legitimacy from established legal systems. Legal rights may include the right to a fair trial, freedom of speech, and property rights. Human Rights: - Human rights are universal rights inherent to all individuals, irrespective of their nationality or legal system. They are protected by international agreements and conventions. - The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, is a pivotal document outlining human rights. Eleanor Roosevelt played a crucial role in the creation of this declaration. Positive and Negative Rights: - Positive rights entail an obligation to provide or facilitate something to individuals, such as the right to education, healthcare, or housing. The state or institutions are responsible for ensuring these rights. - Negative rights, on the other hand, involve the freedom from interference or coercion by others. The right to freedom of speech and freedom from unwarranted search and seizure are examples.

DUTIES UNDER JURISPRUDENCE

Legal Duties: - Legal duties are obligations that individuals or entities are legally required to fulfil as stipulated by a specific legal system. They are enforceable and can lead to legal consequences if not obeyed. - Legal duties are typically formulated and enforced by the state or governing authority, and they are rooted in the legal positivist tradition, as espoused by legal philosophers like H.L.A. Hart. Legal positivism emphasizes the separation of law from moral or ethical considerations. Moral Duties: - Moral duties, in contrast to legal duties, are obligations based on ethical or moral principles. These duties may not be legally enforceable but are believed to be intrinsically right or good. - Philosophers like Immanuel Kant have made significant contributions to the understanding of moral duties. Kant's deontological ethics, for instance, stresses the moral duty to act in accordance with universal principles, such as the "categorical imperative." Enforceability of Duties: - Enforceability pertains to the extent to which duties can be legally compelled. Legal duties are inherently enforceable through the legal system, often involving sanctions or penalties for non-compliance. - The question of enforceability is deeply connected to legal theory and the authority of the state. The work of theorists like John Austin, who emphasized the coercive power of law, is relevant in understanding enforceability. Ethical Implications of Duties: - Duties have ethical implications, as they are closely tied to questions of morality and ethical conduct. The ethical dimension of duties involves considerations of what is right, just, and fair. - Virtue ethicists like Aristotle have explored the ethical implications of duties. Aristotle's virtue ethics emphasizes the development of virtuous character and the fulfilment of moral duties as integral to leading a good life.

THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN RIGHTS AND DUTIES

The interplay between rights and duties is a fundamental and intricate aspect of jurisprudence. Rights confer entitlements and freedoms upon individuals, but these entitlements often imply corresponding duties. This reciprocal relationship is the cornerstone of a just and orderly society. Rights such as free speech imply the need to respect the rights of others and to refrain from damage or discrimination. Similarly, duties, such as the need to provide for one's family, pertain to the right to opportunities and assets for personal and family well-being. Balancing conflicting rights, prioritizing them in various contexts, and defining the boundaries of enforceable duties are complex challenges. Jurisprudence plays a crucial role in deciphering this intricate interplay, contributing to the ongoing evolution of legal and ethical systems.

JURISPRUDENTIAL THEORY ON RIGHTS AND DUTIES

Jurisprudential theories provide different perspectives on the nature, foundation, and interplay of rights and duties within legal systems. Natural Law Theory: - Natural law theory posits that there are moral principles that transcend human-made laws. These principles are discovered through reason and are considered the foundation of all just laws. In this view, rights and duties derive from inherent, objective moral principles. - St. Thomas Aquinas is a prominent figure associated with natural law theory. His work, "Summa Theologica," laid the groundwork for this theory, emphasizing the connection between moral and legal principles. Legal Positivism: - In contrast to natural law theory, legal positivism holds that laws are the result of human choice and are not inherently moral or immoral. The legal system determines rights and obligations, and their validity is dependent on the supremacy of that framework. - John Austin and H.L.A. Hart are key proponents of legal positivism. Austin's "The Province of Jurisprudence Determined" emphasized the separation of law from moral judgments, while Hart refined this theory by introducing the concept of secondary rules that underlie legal systems. Legal Realism: - Legal realism is a theory that emphasizes the pragmatic and empirical aspects of law. It argues that rights and duties are not solely determined by formal legal rules but are influenced by the discretion of judges, social context, and the practical consequences of legal decisions. - Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and Benjamin N. Cardozo are often associated with legal realism. Holmes' essay "The Path of the Law" highlighted the role of judges' subjective judgment in legal decisions. Contemporary Perspectives on Jurisprudence: - Contemporary jurisprudential perspectives encompass a wide range of theories and ideas, reflecting the evolving nature of legal philosophy in the modern world. These perspectives can include critical legal studies, feminist jurisprudence, and postmodern jurisprudence. - Notable contemporary theorists and scholars vary depending on the specific perspective. For example, Martha Nussbaum is known for her contributions to capabilities theory, a contemporary approach that explores the intersection of ethics, law, and human capabilities.

SUGGESTIONS

The field of jurisprudence is dynamic and ever-evolving. To gain a deeper understanding of rights and duties, remain curious and open to exploring different theories and perspectives. Read widely, engage in discussions, and follow contemporary legal developments. Rights and duties are not merely abstract ideas but have real-world implications. As a responsible citizen, critically reflect on your own rights and corresponding duties within your community and society.

CONCLUSION

The extensive structure of rights and obligations found in jurisprudence illustrates the very complicated philosophical and practical issues that are present in the legal system. These fundamental concepts are not only pivotal for maintaining societal order but also serve as a moral compass. Jurisprudential theories, from the enduring natural law theory to the pragmatic legal realism and contemporary perspectives, showcase the ever-evolving nature of legal philosophy. The interplay between rights and duties, balanced and enforced by the legal system, remains a crucial component of human society, influencing ethical standards, governance, and the ongoing pursuit of justice in our complex and dynamic world.

LIST OF REFERENCES:

Suman Acharya, 'Jurisprudence of Legal Rights and Duties', SSRN, 8 May 2019, available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3369653#:~:text=AccordingtoHohfeldrightsand,rightliabilityanddisabilityetc 'Legal Rights: Right Duty Correlation', Toppr, available at: https://www.toppr.com/guides/legal-aptitude/jurisprudence/legal-rights-right-duty-correlation/ Richa Goel, 'Concept of Rights and Duties Under Jurisprudence', iPleaders Blog, 19 June 2019, available at: https://blog.ipleaders.in/concept-of-rights-and-duties-under-jurisprudence/ Read the full article

#Jurisprudence

0 notes

toa-discords-legacy · 3 years ago

Text

~Intro post~

Hi ya'll! This blog is gonna be the sum total of the absolute Mess that is the Mr.A au, made by the lovely toa discord (shoutout to ya'll) <3 In fact, this blog is a collective one, with many of us from the discord as your hosts for you stay here <3

FAQ

Mr.A? Now who on earth is that?

I'm glad you asked! Briefly speaking, Mr.A is an au about pjo!Apollo post-Trials of Apollo, in which Apollo becomes a school history teacher in the school Meg studies at. Shenanigans ensue with a side thing of the mist falling but you know we're gonna ignore that for now

I still don't get it....

Ah, very well. For a more proper explanation of this, check out these three posts (You don't necessarily have to read the first one, it's more of a prelude really):

Meg and mortal schooling

Mr.A's first appearance in the wild

Fero's LOVELY shenaniganry ideas about Mr.A

Make sense now?

...Not really, no

Wonderful! Let's keep going!

Most of these don't really make much sense, am I missing something?

Yep, probably! A lot of the headcannons and pretty much everything we mention on this blog requires at least some level of context, which is kinda hard to get if you weren't there while that exact discussion happened in the toa discord. For example- the blog title. "I know what vaccines are, JACOB" is about this one student that Mr.A hates in his class. Make more sense now?

So yeah, some stuff might not really make much sense, but we'll try to explain it as best as possible as we go along!

MODS

The Mr.A au has developed over a lot of different people bouncing ideas off of each other, but due to various reasons, not all of them are on this blog, so here we are!

I'm sie/si (@sierice)! I remember an unnecessary amount of facts from toa, and I love rambling about it! My tag's #mod sie, nice to meet ya <3

Hii I am your host Fero (@ferodactyl)! I spend most of my time going off about different ToA headcanons so feel free to shoot any to me :]]. My tag is #mod fero, pleasure to have yall on board.

hi i’m aly (@releasemefromthevoid)!! i’m mainly an artist (see blog icon) but i sometimes have ideas about this au in particular!! my tag is #mod aly :))

Hiiii, I'm Ash/Moth (@burning-moths)! I draw and write when inspiration strikes and I adore Apollo so here I am! I'm always happy to ramble about anything!! My tag is #mod ash or #mod moth <3

heyo i'm diya (@thestarsofnyx)!! i have an unhealthy obsession with toa and i have enjoyed watching everyone come up with these shenanigans and i also like to join in on the fun :) my tag is #mod diya

Yellow, I am Txny or Tin (@txny-dragon ), which are pronounced the same. I tend to do a lot of crack and stuff like that. My tag is #mod txny(?)

adfjjfkfd hi i’m jay/jasper/thomas (@manrats), rewriting this bc mine deleted itself :’) iiii. write and draw and cry etc etc feel free to send me anything, including (toa-related) reqs lmao. tag is #mod jay !!

Hi! I’m Kairi/Strelitzia (@rosie-kairi) and I’m the creator of the ToA Discord server! I also get bragging rights as the first person to post a fic about the Mr. A au (Which is here, btw). I like to draw and occasionally write. My tag is #mod Kairi. 🌸

Hey!! I’m Marnie (@m-arnie-xx)!! Like everyone else here, I’ve got an extreme obsession with the Trials of Apollo and also the honour of being the second person to post a fic for the Mr. A au :) My tag is #mod marnie 😊💕

#intro post #don't rb #trials of apollo #pjo apollo #apollogists

50 notes · View notes

popurikat · 4 years ago

Note

Newtmas essay when?

Finally getting to this, thanks for waiting, I needed to go over a few bookmarks. (Warning, this post contains spoilers from the MAZE RUNNER book and FEVER CODE book, so if you haven’t read either or yet and want the jist of my analysis; just know that in general the fandom interpreting Newt as gay before it was revealed on a twitter post was not just a random headcanon and that Thomas in general is portrayed to have very strong unconditional love for Newt throughout the series; and it shows. To the point that even the director for the movie has stated that Newt and Thomas have a strong bond and portrays that in the movies. I will also preface that I am NOT adding personal opinion anywhere here, these are just backings from quotes and how they are thus meant to be taken/read as. My words are taken as a reader who is currently reading Scorch Trials has yet to fully read Death Cure or Crank Palace.) Anways, without further ado at 3AM today, I’ll try my best to explain how even though Dashner tries his best to make Thomas have other, female love interests; he creates a not so subtle gay subtext for Tommy boy here when in the context of interacting with Newt throughout the lore. Apologies beforehand for any grammar mistakes along the way.

To commence, I am going to start with FEVER CODE, as its supposed to act as the story’s preface to the actual events that play out later. Newt and Thomas upon meeting each other describe their presence as “familiar” and or as a “long lost friend” and they genuinely hit it off from the start to the point that Newt is okay with having Thomas see him cry over the fact that he and his sister are separated since he is doomed to be WCKD’s control analysis as he’s the only one lacking immunity from the flare itself. Once Newt is done being emotionally vulnerable we get our first instance of his personal nickname for Thomas: “That’s the way things are Tommy,’ he said his voice not quite steady. ‘The world outside’s gone to hell. Why should we expect any different here? [...] He said it as if they’d been friends for years” (ch. 14). An interesting note here is that Thomas doesn’t bother to correct him or stifle the moment by feeling that all this information was too much, he genuinely wanted to hear Newt out and is fine with seeing this side of him; if not slightly taken aback by how natural it is that they can converse about such aspects of their lives. In fact, Newt makes such an impact on Thomas that Thomas ends up that same night dreaming of him: “Throughout his shortened night, he dreamed of Newt and Sonya. Of Newt and Lizzy“(Ch. 14). The thing with Thomas though is that the idea of comfort and connection is very foreign to him as he’s been basically isolated all his life with only the adults like Ava to talk to and the one exception being Teresa as his only kid companion. So Thomas didn’t even think he could make others like him for being himself unless they were vital to the overall production of WCKD. Seeing this portion right before the end of chapter 14: “Alby, Minho, Newt, Teresa. Thomas had friends.” shows that Thomas really had to deep dive to see how he deals with personal connections and why he was excited about the notion of friendship. He could’ve been happy with just Teresa, but only fully cemented her bond to him as “friend” when his circle grew and these kids he got to hang with taught him he can be himself, a concept he didn’t realize was possible when all his life was dictated on what he was supposed to learn or do. It becomes especially clear just how controlled his life is with the aspect of sentiment when later on Teresa’s mental communication evokes physcial pain and fear in Thomas. I’ll get back to that later as its more of a small tid bit of Thomas’ view on his forced love interest, Teresa. And yes, I say forced because multiple sentences with Thomas have him even wish he could cease all communication with her. Moving on, let’s talk about mimicking for a second. As humans, we mimic as a behavioral response to become closer to the person we care about. It’s the reason why yawning or laughter is contagious and or why we copy the posture of the person we converse with face to face. Thomas is seen to do this the most with Newt’s quirks. I’ll give the example in chapter 15: “Newt has been promising them that he was saving something special, and he did that annoying zipped-lipped sign every time [...] the little light in his eyes showed he enjoyed every second of their torture” versus Thomas: “Thomas did Newt’s zipped-lipped gesture, and that got him a sharp poke in the ribs”. So, we know enough that Thomas’ mannerisms are developing as a sign that he wants to be closer to Newt and to continue this sense of playfulness they both enjoy from the other. This is the start of their budding bond and a clear indication that they hold each other at greater fondness than the rest through this unconscious copying. Through this copying, they also pick up on emotional cues the other lets up on. Newt is especially good at noticing small things like when Thomas is anxious or overthinking: “He was just shocked that with all their exploring, the others hadn’t already discovered it on their own. And there were supposed to be TWO mazes. How had Newt and his friends not stumbled upon either one of them? ‘Tommy?’ Thomas realized Newt was staring straight at him, eyebrows raised. ‘Sorry,’ he said embarrassed, ‘wandered off for a second there what did you say?’ Newt shook his head in admonishment. ‘Try to keep up, Tommy Are you ready to see the grat outdoors?” (ch. 15). Also in chapter 23: “Tommy?’ It was Newt, breaking him out of his thoughts. ‘I can see your wheels spinnin’ up there.’ He tapped the side of his head”. This furthers Newts perceptiveness on his friend and Thomas’ ability to pick out when he is being looked after. And they bounce off each other really well in that aspect. To the point that Newt can crack a joke he knows will land right on Thomas’ sense of humor: “Newt waggled his fingers in front of Thomas’ face [...] A laugh exploded out of Thomas’ mouth that sent a spray everywhere. ‘Sorry’ he said, wiping his lips on his sleeve” (ch.15). It’s enjoyable to know that at least at a surface level, they have fun together and can cheer the other up if needed or know when to ground the other to reality. It is also through these instances that as a reader I pick up that Thomas’ nervous ticks perhaps allude to an anxiety disorder he has; of which Newt is aware of and never puts Thomas down on for exhibiting. He in fact understands it and deals with it accordingly as he himself has a similar circumstance. SO, what does all this paying attention lead to? Thomas’ devotion to protect Newt. Yeah, thats right I said devotion. Thomas’ actions are influenced by his developed instinct to protect Newt at all costs. Here is the biggest example that comes to mind: “What in the world happened to Newt? -- Less then two hours later, Thomas had spliced together a series of camera clips [...] Thomas turned off the feed. He couldn’t take it anymore...Newt, Newt, Newt, Thomas thought, feeling as if the very air around him were turning black.”(ch.52). Essentially, Thomas seeing Newt plummet to his near death by falling from the maze wall as a result of Newt’s ongoing depressive state, this is the moment that makes Thomas realize WICKD isn’t as good as they seem and that he is going into the maze to save Newt. Its admirable how much self sacrifice Thomas does for someone he cares so much about, to the point that their name is like a mantra. Thats a sensible area of passion and fighting spirit for someone who is “just a friend”. Oh and, the feeling of fondness is mutual mind you if I haven’t been clear. After experiencing the horrors of cranks for the first time, realizing Newt was not immune, and watching Newt until they entered the pits it has been months since they last interacted; this is their first reunion: “What’s up Tommy?’ Newt exclaimed, his face filled with genuine happiness at the pleasant surprise that’s been sprung on him. Thomas couldn’t remember exactly how long it’d been since he’d seen Newt. ‘You look bloody fantastic for three in the morning” (ch. 23). I need to preface this that Newt DOES NOT mean that sarcastically and that out of all the people in the room (Minho, Chuck and Teresa are there in this scene), Thomas only reacts this way specifically toward seeing Newt is okay and back. The characters are also not afraid of being physically close. “Well, look who the bloody copper dragged in,’ Newt said, pulling Thomas into a big hug” (ch.31), “They shook hands, and then the two of them set off...” (ch. 31), and my favorite: “Thomas jumped at the sound, then stumbled. Newt tripped over him, and then they were both laughing, legs and arms tangled in a pile on the ground”(ch.32). I don’t think this far in the novel, Thomas has been AS (emphasis on as) comfortable with touch with anyone else other than Newt. And thats a big step forward on the aspect of trust in a relationship, being able to be comfortable with the presence of another person enough to be as intimate with them as shown here. And all this, is just fever code itself. Mind you this is not the MEAT of the novels as it came out later. But even without it, lets look at Thomas in Maze now, I’ll try to keep this segment a lot more brief. Here’s Thomas looking respectively at boys his age: “A tall kid with blond hair and a square jaw...a thick, heavy muscled Asian kid folded his arms as he studied Thomas, his tight shirtsleeves rolled up to show off his biceps [...] Newt was taller than Alby too, but looked to be a year or so younger, His hair was blond and cut long, cascading over his T-shirt. Veins stuck out of his muscled arms”(ch. 2). Thomas’ initial reaction to being surrounded by boys is to deeply analyze their rugged good looks and heavily emphasize their best physical traits. When reading this the first time, my mind immediately thought this boy at the very least is supposed to be portrayed as bi, especially when later down the line Teresa gets a similar descriptor: “...despite her paleness, she was really pretty...silky hair, flawless skin, perfect lips, long legs.” So right off the bat, we know that be it boy or girl, Thomas emphasizes how attractive someone looks in his eyes when he truly does have a sense of attraction to them. Case closed. Within the same chapter we get Thomas also immediately clinging onto Newt for a sense of grounding, it is now ingrained in him at this point that the boy is his lifeline, a person to rely on. “Thomas looked over at Newt, hoping for help.” And help he does, Newt in this chapter helps ease his worries, explain a general idea of what the glade is and even pats him on the shoulder a bit to ease tension. And Thomas doesn’t bat an eye in the same way he’s weary of literally everyone else. In fact, he’s eager to stay put with him as shown with; “If Newt went up there, then I wanna talk to him.” And if none of that seals the deal, we got early bird Newt being so touch starved he flattens himself next to Thomas to wake him up at the crack of Dawn in chapter 6: “Someone shook Thomas awake. His eyes snapped open to see a too-close face staring down at him, everything around them still shadowed by the darkness of early morning...’Shh, Greenie. Don’t wanna be waking up Chuckie, now, do we?’ It was Newt --the guy who seemed second in command; the air reeked of his morning breath. Though Thomas was surprised, any alarm melted away immediately”. This whole scene follows firstly by Thomas once again impressed by how strong Newt is and then Newt giving him a rundown of what everyone else was too afraid to show Thomas, the grievers. And you know, this scene could’ve ended well and everything as totally platonic, but then we have “Newt turned to look at him dead in the eye. The first traces of dawn had crept up on them, and Thomas could see EVERY DETAIL OF NEWT’S FACE, HIS SKIN TIGHT, HIS BROW CREASED.” Now, look me in the eye and tell me there is a hetero explanation on looking at your best bro like they are the sun reincarnated themselves. But let’s not hog all the homosexual undertones with Thomas here. Wanna know what Newt’s initial reaction to having a girl in the glade was? “It’s a girl,’ he said [...] Newt shushed them again. ‘That’s not bloody half of it,’ he said, then pointed down into the box. ‘I think she’s dead” (ch.8). It’s actually a stark contrast to the other gladers eagerly wanting to know her age, how pretty she looked, and calling dibs to date her; Newt isn’t interested in any of that, he’s more perplexed on her status and not even bothering to remark on her looks, he was the only one not to and even remarks a few other instances that girls are more Thomas’ domain. For instance, he makes a joke in fever code when Thomas remarks that the girls in the institution were going to tackle him down, Newt proceeds to point out sarcastically something along the lines of “wait, isn’t that YOUR dream though?” So Newt is pretty out spoken of his disinterest in girls, and his full admiration and attention on Thomas. Oh, and yes, Newt immediately switches over to “Tommy” the moment Thomas mentions he hates being called greenie, and once again it just becomes a thing between only the two of them. Newt is also the one to be straight forward about the whole Runners business. He warns Thomas about the dangers and doesn’t necessarily turn him down on his desire to be one, he in fact encouraged him to just wait until the right moment. “No one said you couldn’t, but give it a rest for now”(ch. 15). So once again, Newt is the voice of confidence and reason for Thomas to prosper. In turn, this time around Thomas is the one to catch when something is bothering Newt. For instance, “Newt chewed his fingernails, something he hadn’t seen the older boy do before...he was genuinely concerned -- Newt was one of the few people in the Glade he actually liked ”(ch.16). Interesting how we went from fever code “friend” to “like”. And also, when Newt explains his concern about the runners not coming back yet, Thomas pieces together how scared Newt is of the Maze without being told and goes to stand next to him as a physical presence to ground Newt as they wait near the entrance. In fact, this piece is trivial to understand why Thomas does what he does next. When everyone else had given up on the Runners still outside with 2 minutes left til closing, and Newt was escorted away from the entrance, Thomas waited. And when Thomas saw them, he yells to Newt, realizes he’s too far to do anything, and makes a decision himself. He KNEW how much Newt cared about his fellow Gladers, they were like family or “kin” as its said in the book, so what does he do? “Don’t do it Tommy! Don’t you bloody do it!’ ... Thomas knew he had no choice. He moved. Forward. He squeezed past the connecting rods at the last second and stepped into the maze”(ch.16). Yes, Thomas does this because of his empathy for the Gladers, but the chain reaction of Newt’s concern is what sets his decision in stone. And yet again, Thomas enters the maze for Newt. And that’s pretty much the constant for the rest of Maze Runner the book, Newt just sticking up for Thomas and Thomas in turn just being happy that: “He was at least relieved that Newt was there” (ch.17). And thats basically their entire dynamic. Newt just going: “If you really did help design the maze Tommy, it’s not your fault. You‘re a kid -- you can’t help what they forced you to do” to ease the survivor’s trauma Thomas has, as well as saying “I actually believe you. You just don’t have an ounce of lying in those eyes of yours. And I can’t bloody believe I’m about to say this...but I’m going back in there to convince those shanks we should go through the griever hole, just like you said”(ch.51); and I think thats the most romantic thing to hear from him. Just right out being all for supporting Thomas no matter what happens as long as he stays alive and continues to fight, he doesn’t care about what happened before. And Thomas eats that up because it fuels him even more to seek out a means to escape for the people (Newt) that deserve a life outside of running from monsters forever. So essentially, I’ll state again, it’s always been Newt the catalyst for Thomas to run head first into the Maze and seek freedom. And with all this I can clear that these two are shown to if not be romantically involved, at least have unconditional love for the other that transcends the author’s original intention. And with that in mind, here’s the thing with Teresa as a love interest. I can list here quotes of every time she mind speaks to Thomas and how that affects him, but then this would be too long. And this is a newtmas post gosh darn it. Teresa is gleeful to humiliate, control, hurt, and force Thomas to believe they’re in love. In multiple instances we get her barging into his mind unwarranted making him understand that she has full access to his inner most thoughts. Theres nothing romantic about that, and I think its why Thomas ends up being so perceptive to the smallest of gestures that allow him to think on his own and feel like his own person. Something I’ve seen Brenda do later in scorch, and something I’ve seen Newt do since the very beginning is that they allow Thomas to come to his own conclusions in order to create his own opinions on the matters at hand. Thomas’ love language revolves around words of affirmation. He likes it when people confirm his thoughts are valid and that remind him that WICKD can’t hurt him anymore now that he has the power to be his own person. This is where Newt comes in very handy. He allows Thomas to grow in ways his female love interests have yet to show, sorry Brenda but I’ve heard you were trying to unite all immunes together to the safe haven by the end and in a sense still only using Thomas to get by; I still think she was the better call than teresa of course and I have no remorse for Teresa getting smushed by a boulder. But essentially my point here is that, how do you fail to make your initial love interests clash so badly where one has no real care about the others well being so long as everything goes according to WCKD by using a form of gaslighting and manipulation? AND THOMAS HAS STATED HIS DISCOMFORT ON THIS MULTIPLE TIMES, but the narrative always erases these instances from his mind in place of pity for Teresa’s well being (as you can tell, Teresa through this becomes my least favorite character, I can rant about her some othe time though with proper backing). The narrative in turn treats it all like a joke. I understand there are scenes where Thomas is worried about her and looks out to make sure shes ok, but even then he doesn’t know how to react with mental images of her kissing his cheek or when she screams the next minute that she doesn’t know who he is or how hes speaking into her mind. And thats because they can’t properly communicate their emotions to the other, not even in fever code could Thomas give a forward answer if he loved Teresa or not, she just assumed. Come to think of it, Thomas really doesn’t show much affection to Teresa of his own accord. So then, how DOES Thomas show his affection? Thomas provides acts of service as his love language, if he cares about you enough he will risk his life for you. Why? Because Thomas values putting the people he loves foremost knowing full well they are what help him have purpose and succeed in continuing on. In a way, Newt and Thomas’ dynamic works in this instance because they balance the other out and because they have seen each other at their worst and at their best. In a way, that's why knowing the ending of the books makes it harder to accept that Thomas would just easily take the shot...when all his life clung to Newt’s survival. But that’s a story for another time where I compare the movies (of which let me make that clear, yes I prefer) over the books. For now just know that the book may have done this by accident, maybe not, but at the end of the day theres solid proof that Thomas and Newt care about each other in a way that is separately portrayed from their connection to the other glade members, and have this consistency of soft moments running through the entirety of the series. In conclusion; newtmas. Newtmas. NEWTMAS, etc.

#Newtmas #long post #Skquill #ask #The ending gets a bit ranty with Teresa I must admit #but for the most part its just me recalling the best newtmas moments from the novels I've currently read #Please add on more newtmas proof to the thread

93 notes · View notes

oakensherwood · 4 years ago

Text

Okay, let’s talk about Maid Marian. Let’s really talk about Marian. So often I see her character disparaged as a damsel in distress without agency of her own, but that is honestly so far from the truth. In fact, Maid Marian is considered to be one of the earliest examples of the “strong, independent woman�� character archetype. Not only is it untrue to call her a damsel in distress, it’s also unfair.

As with many stories, Robin Hood is a story filled with men. I love it, but there’s no denying it’s a story filled with men. As the only prominent female character in a story that has been retold for close to 1000 years, centuries of ideas about femininity have been funneled into this singular character. Among the array of male characters, we see many ways to be masculine: smart, witty, artistic, strong, brave, charitable, loyal, both fighters and lovers. All of the characters have been adapted through the years, but Marian can still be distinguished as the only canonically present female character in the main cast.

Other women we traditionally see include Alan’s bride, the Prioress of Kirklees Abbey who murders Robin, Marian’s serving woman, and a few queens. Various contemporary novels, films, and TV representations have added women to the cast to even it out, but Marian is still the only primary female cast member. As such, centuries of what it can mean to be a woman have been reflected through her.

Let’s take a look at what exactly that has looked like through the years.

One of the things I love best about Robin Hood as a legend is that it is constantly evolving and changing for the needs of the audience. Across centuries and decades it has been changed to suit the ideas of the day. Even the oldest extant documentation of Robin Hood is not considered the “original version” because there is no way of really knowing when or how these stories started, or how long it took for them to be written down.

So, just as there isn’t a standardized Robin Hood, there isn’t a standardized Maid Marian. We know that she was added later in the Robin Hood tradition, during the 15th century as part of May Day celebrations, and quickly became a common character in future iterations of the Robin Hood story. Her origins are still murky at best, and it’s impossible to pinpoint the very first time she was introduced.

Her many origins include a shepherdess named Clorinda from Child Ballad 149, an unrelated Marian character in 15th century May Day games who happens to also have a lover named Robin, and a historically based woman named Matilda Fitzwalter appears in Anthony Munday’s “Huntingdon” plays from the 15th century. Furthest from our understanding of Marian is a play titled Robin Hood and the Friar, very merry and full of pastime, proper to be played in May Games. In this play we find Marian as a “trull” a.k.a. prostitute, employed by Friar Tuck. A far cry from how we know both Marian and Friar Tuck today. So far, she’s a working woman, a noblewoman, a romantic interest, and a prostitute.

The best known and most enduring of these early variations is Child Ballad 150 (you can read it in full here). In this ballad, we see Marian dress as a boy, and go into the forest fully armed, to seek out her lover, Robin Hood. When she finds him and does not recognize him, they begin to fight and Marian handily beats him in their sword fight. Robin immediately asks her to join the Merry Men, they recognize each other, and return to camp for feasting and a “happily ever after” full of adventures.

youtube

- Child Ballad 150

“With quiver and bow, sword, buckler and all,

Thus armed was Marian most bold.”

This ballad is reminiscent of introductory stories of the Merry Men -- Robin meets a stranger, they fight, the stranger wins, and Robin offers them a place in his band.

We can clearly see in Child Ballad 150 that Marian was considered Robin’s equal and a regular member of the group from early on her individual tradition. Other parts of her early tradition survive as well -- she’s a romantic partner for Robin, and a noblewoman.

As we progress forward in Robin Hood traditions, we continue to see the story change. Notable changes occur during the Victorian period, when general interest in Robin Hood stories was revived thanks to the publication of Sir Walter Scott’s Ivanhoe (1819) and Howard Pyle’s The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood (1883). Marian does not appear in Ivanhoe and is mentioned only once in Pyle’s book, and is effectively written out of the story entirely.

Despite this, we see other novels and stories released as Robin Hood grows in popularity, and here is where we begin to see the idea of a damsel in distress begin to gain traction. As is true in every retelling of Robin Hood, the story changed to suit its audience and to suit the ideas of contemporary society and intended audience.

Victorian literature is full of interesting and lesser known works of Robin Hood, as a result of a Victorian obsession with medievalism and with Robin Hood. Maid Marian and Robin Hood: A Romance of Old Sherwood (1892) by J.E. Muddock features a very distressed Marian who does need rescued and has very little agency. Other Victorian works take a similar tone and cast Marian as a damsel, but this is not the narrative that ultimately survives this period of Robin Hood resurgence.

Thomas Love Peacock published a novella simply titled Maid Marian (1822). Interesting to note, because Robin only appears briefly as a supporting character in Ivanhoe, this is actually the first true Robin Hood novel as a story by itself. Here we see an active, and independent Marian, evocative of Child Ballad 150.

‘Well, father,’ added Matilda, ‘I must go into the woods.’

‘Must you?’ said the Baron, ‘I say you must not.’

‘But I am going,’ said Matilda.

‘But I will have up the drawbridge,’ said the baron.

‘But I will swim the moat,’ said Matilda.

‘But I will secure the gates,’ said the baron.

‘But I will leap from the battlement,’ said Matilda.

‘But I will lock you in an upper chamber,’ said the baron.

‘But I will shred the tapestry,’ said Matilda, ‘and let myself down.’

- Thomas Love Peacock, Maid Marian (1822)

Matilda does indeed go to the woods, takes on the name Maid Marian, and rules the forest with Robin Hood. Other Victorian works take a similar approach to Marian and show her as involved and capable including Maid Marian, or the Forest Queen (1849) by Joaquim Stocqueler, which follows a more traditional Robin Hood storyline filled with adventures and danger.

Later classic works include an active Marian as a member of the outlaw band, as well. Roger Lancelyn Green (1956), Charles E. Vivian (1927), and Paul Creswick (1917) all write a Marian who speaks for herself and works with the outlaws, often dressed as a man.

Hollywood enters the scene of Robin Hood retellings as early as 1908, but the oldest surviving Robin Hood film is Douglas Fairbanks’ Robin Hood (1922). This silent movie, groundbreaking in budget and sets, features Marian (played by Enid Bennet) as a strong character who holds her own throughout the film. After this, we see another groundbreaking film, The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) starring Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland. This film is widely thought to be the gold standard of Robin Hood films, and I am definitely in that camp. Marian has more agency in this movie, and the lovely Olivia plays a rather coy noblewoman. While we don’t see her taking up a sword in this film, we see her developing the plan that ultimately rescues Robin from the hangman’s noose, successfully warning Robin and his men of Prince John’s plans, and standing her ground while on trial and defending her ideals. Yes, she is rescued from prison in the climax of the movie, but she also plays a vital role in rescuing Robin earlier in the story.

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991) begins with a woman of action, but at the end sees Marian rather helplessly forced into a marriage and moments away from being sexually assaulted when Robin literally catapults himself through the window to save her. 20 years later in Robin Hood (2010) Cate Blanchett’s Marian is fully capable in combat and is shown to be a responsible and dedicated lady of Loxley, working the fields and caring for her home.

Meanwhile in a contemporary TV adaptation, Marian is depicted as a Robin Hood figure herself, known as the Nightwatchman. (2006, BBC’s Robin Hood) Although the writers later did a disservice by (unpopularly) killing her character as a season finale, Marian was still depicted as competent and in charge of her own choices and actions, and in fact rescues herself from an unwanted marriage.

Contemporary Robin Hood literature also features an active Marian. Jennifer Roberson’s Lady of the Forest (1995) and Lady of Sherwood (1999) present Marian as a noblewoman who, over the course of the text, takes control of her own story in her capacity as a member of gentry, Lauren Johnson’s The Arrow of Sherwood (2013) sees an incredibly historically inclined retelling of the Robin Hood story, and includes a dedicated and politically savvy Marian. She doesn’t run into the forest, but makes a real difference through her smart decisions and political manipulation. Robin McKinely’s The Outlaws of Sherwood features Marian as an excellent archer, better than Robin, and she easily slips in and out of the outlaw camp as needed, is skilled in woodscraft, and is a valued and substantial member of the outlaw group. Honestly, I think it would be difficult to find a literary retelling that doesn’t include an active Marian character.

So where do our ideas of Marian as a damsel in distress ultimately come from? I have a few theories.

First, we see the archetype of damsels in distress throughout other fairy tales and folklore, so it’s tempting to assume that Marian is the same and portray her as such, and there are examples of her character playing that role either in whole, or for part of the narrative.

There are unfair assumptions made about medieval women in general, that ignore the powerful positions women could hold, and the amazing things that women did during this period. When people picture medieval women, they are often embroidering tapestries, being forced into unwanted marriages, being beaten by their husbands, and dying in childbirth. There is truth in stereotypes, but there’s also room for deeper understanding of the historical context, and a wider story to be told that includes women standing up for themselves and exercising their own strength and skills. (It’s not good feminism to overwrite real women’s history.)

We see this stereotype most often in movies and TV adaptations, which are highly visible and memorable, cementing ideas about the Robin Hood legend (and Marian) in the general psyche.

Children’s picture books, perhaps one of the first introductions a person might have to Robin Hood, tend to play out the story like a traditional fairy tale and Marian is again likely found in an upper tower, calling for help.

Some find it demeaning for Marian to ever require saving, or to be saved by anyone other than herself. I feel differently about this. People rely on other people, and it’s not inherently weak to ask for support from someone, especially from a romantic partner. The story of Robin Hood is good fun, but it’s also full of danger and peril. It’s not surprising that various characters need to be rescued by friends and lovers throughout various tales. Robin Hood, Little John, Will Stutely, Sir Richard of the Lea, Alan A Dale’s bride, and yes, Maid Marian. All of these characters have stories where they require smart and daring rescues, and they’re exciting stories! Because Alan’s bride and Marian are women, this does not exempt them from the support of their male friends. They deserve to have someone watching their back. I am not offended by Marian needing help; it’s not only human, it’s a staple for a multitude of characters in Robin Hood lore.

As with much of media, Marian is the single female in what’s otherwise mostly a boys’ club. She has been the single point of reference in this story for women for centuries. I find that incredible. She was my favorite character as a child because she was the only woman, the only person I could potentially see myself in. With a global story such as Robin Hood, that’s not an insignificant role. No matter what her part may be in any given retelling, there are pieces of women from centuries long past and not so distant. I find that fascinating, worth respecting, and that’s why she’s my favorite character to this day.

tldr: Drink your respect Maid Marian juice.

#maid marian #robin hood #long post #my gang to me 2021

61 notes · View notes

yourdeepestfathoms · 3 years ago

Text

for anyone curious, my newest book is about the Salem Witch Trials! it’s at the point of view of Mary Warren and how she went through trials, ultimately ending in her downward spiral into madness as the trials deteriorate her mental health. it’s called Servant of Evil.

here’s the first segment of the first chapter!

— — —

She was gathering crops the first day she caught wind of the hysteria.

It was late January and sunny, the last warm day in what would soon feel like forever. The sickle in her hand was wickedly sharp and gleaming in pale yellow light, and the stalks of the corn she was cutting away were rough and sharp beneath calloused fingers. Already, the skin on her hands was shredded, oozing ruby droplets of blood and staining bright green stems. Her legs ached from crouching in the dirt, muscles locked up and tense. Somewhere beyond the pillars of corn stretched out before her, she could hear her master’s children talking in high-pitched voices, dogs barking, and horses neighing. Even closer than that, however, she could hear heavy footsteps tramping through the field, and she knew the owner of this land would not enjoy such galumphing through his crops. But she also knew that the one who appeared through the stalks wouldn’t care much for the fiery point of John Proctor’s scorn.

“Something weirdish is going on in Salem.”

Without looking up, Mary Warren answered the unexpected visitor, “Something is always going on in Salem.”

That much was true, at least right now. Salem was a town of rich trade and sea salt, characterized by a sparkling harbor that was bested only by Boston’s and a habit of fighting with itself. For years, Salem had been split between two forces: the nobles up in Salem Town and the farmers down in Salem Village. The two territories were never not fighting with each other; they were always mad about something the other did, and it was easy to lose track of who hated who and for what reason. Salem Village didn’t like the control Salem Town held over it, while Salem Town was annoyed by Salem Village thinking it was its own settlement, but they all detested the British church, which was mutual. Salem Town often pulled men from Salem Village to be a part of the national guard, which made Salem Village nervous because then they would have nobody to protect them, and Indian attacks were a regular fear throughout the civilization. Aside from its harbor, the other thing Salem had to owe to its popularity was its unfortunate position in front of frequent ambushes. And if it didn’t suffer ambushes first-hand, then it suffered ambushes through the survivors of such raids, many of which populated the city and would soon help with the grisly events that turned the community over on its head.

But the only other thing Salem Village and Salem Town could agree on was that the Indians were an issue. Unfortunately, that was where agreements ended and arguments began- Salem Town wanted more men to train, promising protection; Salem Village refusing, saying they knew how Salem Town lied, and if they didn’t, then they only saved them because of their bountiful trade and not because they were their people. It wouldn’t be long until the yelling broke out, testaments from the Bible were quoted, and grown men argued like two children fighting over who was their parents’ favorite kid.

However, Salem as a whole had fallen silent recently. Things were peaceful. It was as though a grace period were opening up before them all--or, perhaps, it was actually ending.

Except for right now, in the Proctor corn field, of course. Because her visitor would only bring silence if she were dead, and she had proved to be too slippery for death’s fingers three times over after surviving several Indian attacks throughout her young life.

“This is different.”

Wiping a sagging green sleeve over her damp brow, Mary looked up and squinted through sweat and sun to look at none other than the Putnam’s maid, Mercy Lewis.

Mercy was a fine example of everything the Puritans didn’t want. Despite her name’s sake, she was stubborn, brash, and spitfire, though she was smart enough to never act in such a way in front of the church. And she was, indeed, smart. She was more clever than a fox, easily outwitting several situations despite the minimal education women had in their lifetime. The only thing she was merciful to was her younger cousin, Ann Putnam Jr. Her parents were better off naming her Big, Loud, and Vulgar.

Mercy was nineteen-years-old, two years older than Mary, and built like a small bear. She was short, compact, and sinewy, her muscles and joints well-honed from rough maid work. Her temper was black and her teeth were sharp. Her curly dark brown hair was tucked up in her blindingly white bonnet, and she was dressed in a nondescript dress of purple. Storm cloud grey eyes bore down on Mary with bright amusement.

The two of them met three years ago in Elizabeth Proctor’s tavern. Mary had been struggling to wipe away a sticky stain on one of the tables; Mercy was looking for fresh meat. They both were in the right place at the right time.

Mary hadn’t heard her come in. It was as though the shadows of the tavern itself had unfolded the sixteen-year-old before her because she was suddenly there, towering over the front of the table, and Mary ended up spilling the bowl of soapy water she was using all over herself upon noticing her.

“My, are you jumpy,” the strange girl had observed, peering over the edge of the table. She didn’t offer Mary her help or even an apology. Mary didn’t ask for one. “Were your parents murdered by savages, too?”

“What?”

“Ooo, no, then. Got it.”

Mary blinked up at her for a moment, then carefully got up out of the sudsy puddle and retrieved a dry rag to clean up the newest mess. The entire time, the strange girl watched her as she dripped droplets and beads of white soap from the bottom of her old lavender dress.

“Can I help you?” Mary asked as she got back down on her hands and knees to clean the floor.

“Oh, no,” the strange girl answered. “I just came to say hello. Introduce myself. You work for the Proctor’s, yeah?”

“Yes,” Mary nodded.

“Interesting, interesting. I work for the Putnam’s. Thomas is my cousin, actually.”

Mary nodded again. She looked back down at the puddle, trying to focus on that. The girl didn’t move.

“Mercy.”

Mary looked back up again. She blinked. The strange girl blinked back. Was this a game?

“Pity.”

The girl stared at her for a moment, then burst into loud laughter that seemed to shake the walls. Mary was startled; she had never heard anyone laugh so hard in her entire life. Especially in a town as strict as Sakem.

“No, that’s my name,” the girl said after calming down. “My name is Mercy. Mercy Lewis.”

“Oh,” Mary’s ears heated up. “Right. Your parents were feeling pretty creative, weren’t they?”

Another bout of laughter. “Yes. Yes, they were.” She squinted at her. “And you are?”

“Mary. Mary Warren.”

“Well, Mary ‘Pity’ Warren, I think we are going to be very good friends.”

And she was right.

Mercy, as menacing as she could be, made life in Salem a lot more bearable, especially when Proctor’s whip frequently began lapping at Mary’s bare back. Together, they formed a cohort of sorts, sneaking away into the woods with other village girls, hiding away from the Lord’s watchful eyes to discuss the most sinful of things.

And today, Mercy wanted to carry on with their long-running traditions.

“Different in what way?” Mary asked.

Mercy rolled her eyes. She kicked a cloud of dust at Mary, and Mary sputtered, nearly falling backwards into the corn.

“Different-different,” Mercy answered. “Something is wrong with Abigail. Betty, too, I hear. We’re gonna go up to the Reverend’s house and see them. They’re ill, you know?”

“No,” Mary shook her head. “Mister Proctor didn’t tell me anything. They’re sick?”

“Yeah. Real sick. Ain’t wakin’ up. The Reverend has been throwin’ a huge fit over them.” Mercy explained, “I’m surprised you never heard him howlin’!” Then, doing a horrible imitation of Reverend Samuel Parris’s voice, she wailed, “Oh Betty, Betty! Wake, my sweet daughter! Wake! Why won’t you wake?!”

She clung to Mary’s arm dramatically. “God! God! Why have you forsaken me?! What have you struck my little girls with?!”

Mary couldn’t help but giggle softly. Still, her mind was made up on the whole ordeal.

“Tell them my pardons and prayers,” she said, grabbing the fallen sickle. “My master said I gotta tend to the crops. Then I can go to town. But I am not spendin’ my free time meddlin’ in someone else’s affairs.”

Mercy groaned loudly and snatched the sickle away from Mary, making her yelp.

“Live a little, will ya? Let’s go see poor Abby and Betty!” Mercy urged. “To Hell with your master right now. You can’t let him lead you around by a leash all the time. Deal with the consequences later. Let’s go!”

Mary stared into the older girl’s eyes and then sighed, giving in. She stood up- Mercy was taller than her, as she always had been. “Lead on, Mercy.”

Mercy brightened.

Together, the two of them snuck out of the Proctor property, careful as to not get caught by one of the many children roaming the plantation.

Technically, the Proctor’s had eighteen children, though four were dead and eleven were brought forth by two different women, both of which had also passed over the seasons. The only living child of John Proctor’s first wife, Martha Giddens, was Benjamin, a tall, lanky man who could never seem to grow a beard, yet had hair down to his shoulders. He was thirty-three and didn’t talk to Mary very often, but when he did, he greatly critiqued her work in the field. That farm was his pride and joy, and it was a challenge to not roll her eyes when he would go on about the importance of their crops and proper plant care.

Elizabeth II was the second oldest at twenty-nine, and helped Elizabeth Proctor run the tavern with her other siblings: Martha IV, twenty-six (the first two Martha’s had died when they were both infants, along with the woman they were named after); Mary II, twenty-five; John II, twenty-four; Mary III, twenty-three; and Thorndike, twenty. Why Proctor decided to have TWO daughters named Mary was beyond Mary herself, but it wasn’t uncommon for things to become confusing when their name was shouted for whatever reason.

Elizabeth Proctor’s children stayed on the farm, helping clean and take care of the livestock: William, eighteen; Sarah fifteen; Samuel, seven; Elisha, five; Abigail, three; and Joseph, one. Mercy often made jokes that Elizabeth had obviously been the one to name the kids, as they were actually creative and not repeating several times over.

But with so many watchmen on the property, Mary was surprised about how easy it was to slip away unseen.

The road was loose and crunched loudly beneath their footfalls. Mercy kept kicking a rock, and Mary watched it bounce across the ground.

“So, what’s wrong with Betty and Abby?” Mary asked.

Mercy smirked widely.

“There be witches about, Mary.”

#servant of evil #lizzie’s dumb book #my writing #original story #salem witch trials #mary warren #mercy lewis

28 notes · View notes

subtlereferencetomyinterests · 4 years ago

Text

I Taste Honey but I Haven’t Seen the Hive - Chapter Four

Ao3, Masterpost, C.1 C.2 C.3

Relationships: eventual queer-platonic intruality, mentioned platonic relationships

tumblr edits out my italics when i copy/paste, and its midnight on a school night, so. italics arent in the tumblr version of this chapter cuz im not manually replacing them rn :P

Warnings: Taxidermy, swearing, fights (verbally, not physically), mentions of death, sexual innuedo (thanks remus), sympathetic everyone but there is Conflict.

Word Count: 2,645

Patton had learned, in his many years of emotion-filled life, that every person interacted with others uniquely. An obvious thing to learn, maybe, but in his younger years he felt like it really wasn’t made clear enough.

When it finally hit Patton that other people didn’t feel things in just the same way he did, it came with slow disbelief. Shocked was he to learn that not only were people so vastly different inside, but that he might’ve been one of the most different of all- even with the other sides. After all, each of them had seemed to understand all their differences like it was second nature, while Patton tried to come to terms with the information.

And come to terms with it he had, throughout Thomas’ late teens to early twenties. It was just Patton’s nature to try and learn about his friends, and that didn’t change when the task got harder. If anything, he’d become furiously determined to know how to care for all his family better than anyone, even if it more than once sent him spiralling in thought.

Logan, for example, was at his best when he was around other people; calmly talking, debating, doing work in the same space, anything that amounted to time spent together. So, even when Patton didn’t know what he was going on about, he did his best to at least be someone Logan could talk at. Which must’ve have worked somehow, because Patton couldn’t even count the times anymore he’d realized it had been hours after starting a conversation with his best friend, the both of them grinning and talking and enjoying each other’s company. Color Logan understood!

Roman, an even easier case to crack, didn’t really care what kind of attention he got- as long as it was positive. Which Patton was of course happy to provide! Though Roman became easily suspicious of any signs of friendship, Patton liked to think he’d weaseled his way into being a close companion, if the amount of times Roman dragged him off on adventures was any indication. Roman, too, was a check!

Virgil had been harder to figure out; not enough support and he got nervous, too much and he’d get overwhelmed. Fine balances did not come easily to Patton, so there had been more than a little trial and error. He’d eventually landed on treating him not unlike a wild cat: to just exist in the same space and let Virgil do whatever he wanted in his own time (a method that had found resounding success!). Virgil, much as he wanted to seem mysterious, was also marked off the list of understanding.

Janus was deceptively easy to work out. He just needed someone to challenge him, all in good sport, to be friendly and frustrating at the same time. Call it environmental enrichment, but with people! Patton was more than happy to be one of those people, pushing and pulling in equal parts banter and genuine conversation. Janus, surprisingly, was clear as well.

Patton wondered if it was weird to think about it so much. He thought about all of them, and he wondered if they took time to decode him, too. Or maybe they just knew already- they saw the heart on his sleeve (or chest, as it were) and had him all figured out right then.

He liked to believe they did spend time thinking about it, though. It was nice to think he wasn’t the only one that cared enough to take the time, and he knew that they cared about him already! Even if they didn’t say it as much as he did, even if they showed it all differently, and even if sometimes it felt like they didn’t understand him…

They still cared. The hoodie around his shoulders said so. The card framed on his wall said so. The stray dog dander on his clothes said so. So long as he had that, who needed the luxury of understanding?

Patton shook his head, no, he wasn’t worrying about all them right now. Right now, there was someone else to worry about.

Remus. Remus, who always chatted on and on, but sometimes went dead quiet for no reason at all; whose expression never seemed to match his words, who laughed when he was happy and when he was angry, who yelled when he was bored and when he was overwhelmed. Remus, who threw himself around a corner for a cheap jumpscare every five minutes, limbs broken and wrapped in ragged, punk-style clothes. Who would also drape himself all the way across Patton gently and calmly, wearing something baggy and impossibly soft (but still neon as ever), talking and talking and acting like it was all perfectly normal. Remus, who Patton wasn’t even sure was officially his friend yet.

Patton wanted him to be. But there was still… something in the way. Some kind of frustrating, tense, unknowable barrier that left him on edge around the trait. If Remus could just tell him something, anything, or give him any hints at all about what Patton was supposed to make of him, then it wouldn’t be so downright impossible. But he was inscrutable, an open book written in a language Patton didn’t know.

Whenever Remus walked into the room, it was almost like nothing had even changed since his acceptance.

Speaking of-

Patton barely had time to dodge out of the way as Remus leapt onto the couch, landing in a sprawl and taking up as much space as possible. He looked out of breath, so he’d probably booked it down the hallway and stairs, too. Just as probable was him having no reason for doing so at all.

“Hello,” Patton said.

Remus, from his laid down position, arched his neck up until he was peering upside-down at Morality. He had a reserved look in his eyes, but it was obvious he was fighting not to grin.

“Guess what I did.”

Patton paused. There were… a lot of ways that could go. Most of them weird.

“Um-”

Remus made a disturbingly accurate buzzer noise, exclaiming, “Took too long!”. He flipped over onto his stomach and propped himself up on his palms, his legs draped over the arm of the couch, and rocked back and forth excitedly. “I made you something!”

The worry slipped out of Patton’s mind, replaced by curiosity. He hummed, smiling, and asked:

“Like a gift?”

Remus beamed.

“Something like that!”

As Patton laughed by response, he ran his thumb compulsively over his bead bracelet (that he hadn’t taken off even once since getting, of course).

“That’s so sweet!” he chirped, “You didn’t have to do that.”

The Duke puffed out a breath, ruffling the white section of his hair. He rolled his eyes and shifted around, pushing up until he sat upright.

“Yeah, I know. Haven’t we done this dance before, Morey?”

“Okay, okay, I know,” Patton shrugged, his expression turning sheepish, “What is it, then?”

Remus’ grin widened in that almost impossibly way of his, and something about the glint of his teeth was distinctly threatening. It probably wasn’t intentional, but Patton could never really tell, when his claws tapped impatiently against his leg and something mischievous wormed into his expression.

“Well, you have to close your eyes, first!” Remus clapped his hands together, and there that glint seemed to get brighter.

“Oh, uh-”

“It’s not gonna be my dick, if that’s what you’re worried about.”

Patton yelped, covering his face with his hands in embarrassment.

“Well I wasn’t worried before you said that!”

Remus shrieked with laughter. Patton didn’t move his hands from his cheeks, a flush of discomfort starting at his ears and pricking his skin.

“You’re hilarious, but no- not this time, at least,” -Remus winked- “But just close your eyes, okay?”

Patton took a couple deep breaths, glancing up to give Remus his best approximation of a stern glare. He then let his hands drop to his lap, palms up, and squeezed his eyes shut.

There was a soft whoosh, and something small was dropped into Patton’s waiting hands. He ran the pad of his thumb over its surface, tracing something like fur. Soft, short fur, but when he pressed it was far too stiff to be a plush animal.

“Remus,” Patton felt along the object with both hands, jolting when he felt something scaly at the end, “What-”

“You can look now!”

Patton did as told, staring down at his lap.

There laid a rat.

A dead one, to be precise. A dead, taxidermized rat, posed up on its hind legs like some goofy little cartoon character. It’s eyes were impersonal glass orbs, but its skin was perfectly, horribly real.

Patton looked up, his eyes wide with disgust, to see unfiltered excitement shining on Remus’ face.

“I made it myself!” His pride echoed in the words, that grin stretching his lips looking all the more unnatural.

It was then that Patton’s body caught up with his brain, and he realized what exactly he was holding. He dropped it- all but threw it, actually- kicked it and scrambled back and anything to just get away.

The gift fell to the floor with a dull thump, toppling under the coffee table and out of sight. Patton pressed his hand against his mouth, the other one tightly fisted in his lap. He felt sick- sick enough that his brain was leagues away from rationality. Because he’d really touched- held- that corpse, that thing that used to be a cute little critter, what was now a homemade trinket of horror.

He turned his attention back to Remus, and a million thoughts and feelings rushed him. Betrayal, horror, fear- and weirdest of all was surprise.

Remus’ smile twitched, and he tipped his head from side to side.

“You dropped it,” he pointed out, “I thought you liked rats?”

The noise Patton made was something between a gasp and a cry.

“I like alive ones!” He exclaimed, pushing himself back until there was a good cushion’s distance between himself and Remus.

Remus’ smile dipped lower.

“Well, this way you don’t have to take care of it! It’s all of the cute with none of the trouble!”

“You think this is cute?!”

He couldn’t believe this was happening, after everything- he hadn’t gotten through to Remus even a little? It was all still a game for him to terrorize Patton? To shove dead things into his lap and laugh about it?

But Remus wasn’t laughing, strangely. In fact, he was very still.

“You don’t like it?”

In hindsight, Patton would look back on what he said with remorse so strong it gave him headaches. He had scores of memories like that, of course, but this one’s sting would never fade, not even long after they’d moved on from it. But in that moment of fear, of revile, he could not think about anything else but the feeling of being tricked by his almost-friend laying heavy in his stomach.

“Like it? Is this- are you joking? Remus, you made me touch a dead animal! I thought we were starting to be friends, but- oh my God, what is wrong with you?!”

Patton was sure he stopped breathing right after he said that, his voice choking out. In the silence that followed, you could’ve heard a pin drop.

Remus stood up, and everything about the way he moved showed a woundedness that didn’t suit him. He looked at Patton with an awful intensity, his ruby-red eyes practically glowing. There was nothing vulnerable about him when he was hurt, nothing at all like how Patton would respond to something like an argument. There was only anger and tension.

He didn’t smile, but his voice stayed pitchy. Gleeful.

“Everything,” Remus hissed, “I thought you’d catch on before now, but.”

Remus spun on his heel, and the floor beneath him bubbled with oil and acid and plague as he sank into the ground and out of the living room. The carpet shriveled, sick-green, in his wake.

That was when the understanding hit him. A lot like a train.

“Oh, no,” whispered Patton, “Oh, no.”

Patton struggled to his feet, as if on autopilot. Was he going to go after Remus? No, no, that definitely wouldn’t go over well. He was probably halfway into the Imagination by then, anyway, ready to take his anger out on his creations and not do any talking at all.

Patton tore his eyes away from the spot where Remus had sunk out, stumbling over to the coffee table instead. He crouched, reached his hand under it, and let his fingers touch the fur of his discarded present. He grabbed it, looked down at it. The wave of nausea when he saw the little rat was now less disgust, and much more regret.

He cradled the preserved creature in his hands with all the gentleness he could. There was a slip of thick, yellowish paper attached to it, that in all the upset had gone completely unnoticed. It was folded in half, tied with twine to the rat’s neck.

Patton looked into the rat’s shiny, empty eyes for far too long, watching his reflection be distorted by the spheres. He took a shuddering breath, then, and thumbed the edge of the paper, felt its grain, and flipped it open.

“This is Jenner. You can have him, because even if you’re a priss, if you can handle me you can handle having cool shit like this. Plus, you’re weirdly nice to me, so I guess I don’t mind being nicely weird to you.

-R (the funnier one <3)”

Patton read the note once. Twice. Three, four, maybe six times the words ran over each other in his head.

The paper slipped from his fingers. He held his rat in both hands and stared down its coffee-brown snout. Patton couldn’t help bringing the figurine to his chest and hugging it tightly, like it was the thing he’d hurt so badly, serving as surrogate. Its sharp fingers and tail poked through his shirt like needles, but he ignored it, holding the irrational hope that the inanimate object could forgive him somehow.

Jenner was creepy, that was probably intentional; his proportions and pose were so uncanny it couldn’t have been an accident. And it was so, so very Remus of a thing that Patton couldn’t stand to hate it. His shift in view was so sudden, and in some sad way he realized that the conflict had been the final piece he’d needed. What let that understanding crash into Patton’s mind, painting the picture of somebody layered.

The picture of Remus, who he was, had finally clicked into place- and at the exact worst time for it to do so.

Patton had fucked up. Massively.

He didn’t react how he thought he would when he realized it. He didn’t grow weary and exhausted, desperate to apologize and then collapse into unthinking sleep for days. Gone was the emptiness of making promises that he hoped he could hold true on, just wanting to have gotten it right the first time. No, Patton felt something burning under his skin, something itching him to take action because he’d learned from a mistake. He knew exactly what he’d done, and he was ready to do better right damn now.

Patton breathed in deep and exhaled sharp, because first…

He sunk out to his room, Jenner tucked into the crook of his elbow. He rose up at his bedside and shoved a handful of knickknacks off the nightstand. With enough space cleared, Patton set his rat down on the table and stood it up on his alarm clock, facing the bed. And then, as just a final touch, he smoothed back the fur of its head and gave it a peck on the forehead.

Now, he had some planning to do.

Chapter Five

Taglist: @shrimp-crockpot @glitter-skeleton-uwu @donnieluvsthings @intruxiety @thefivecalls @did-he-just-hiss-at-me @gayformlessblob

#sanders sides #ts #intruality #my writing #fanfiction #fanfic #platonic intruality #qpr intruality #patton #remus #ts fanfic #sanders sides fanfiction

26 notes · View notes

neroushalvaus · 4 years ago

Text

Top 10 favourite characters from any fandom

I was tagged by @limalepakko , thank you! Since I have recently listed male characters here (or you know, in August, but we all know time hasn't been a thing for many moons), I took the liberty to list characters in general this time. I also went with which characters feel right at the moment, so does not show all my favourites. I also try to keep these short. (edit: okay so these are not remotely short, I will post a list first and have the explanations be under the cut, read if you want to hear my ramblings c': )

1. Fantine, Les Misérables 2. Javert / Jean Valjean, Les Misérables (yes i am cheating) 3. Carrie "Big Boo" Black, Orange Is the New Black 4. Jane Marple, Agatha Christie's Marple 5. Aunt Lydia, The Handmaid's Tale 6. Bridget Jones, Bridget Jones books & movies 7. Rock Lee, Naruto 8. Sarah O'Brien, Downton Abbey 9. Marilla Cuthbert, Anne of Green Gables / Anne with an E 10. Sister Monica Joan, Call the Midwife

1. Fantine, Les Misérables

I love Fantine with all my heart. I remember reading Les Mis for the first time and her story sending chills down my spine. Her character development makes me so sad, from a girl who falls hard and fast and won't deny anything from her lover, to a woman who is so beaten down by society that she can't do anything but laugh at her fate. But I love how she doesn't lose her pride or her fighting spirit and how she still has the guts to spit in Valjean's face when she sees him after being arrested. And I love how all she does is for her daughter and how despite selling "the gold on her head and the pearls in her mouth" she is content, because all that matters to her is that Cosette will live.

2. Javert & Jean Valjean, Les Misérables

I was really trying to limit this list to one character per fandom, but alas, I am but a weak little person. Thus, I am cheating already. The thing is that when it comes to Les Mis characters, Fantine, Javert and Valjean are the eternal top 3 for me, but I'm never quite able to say who I love the most. Last time I picked Javert for the male character meme because I love the symbolism and critique of society his character embodies, but let it be known that Jean Valjean is the best character in all of literature and I will fight you on this. The original soft on crime icon (aside from Jesus Christ but they're the same and you know it). Valjean's character journey is such a complicated one from an ordinary man (no worse than any man) to a person, who had been shaped by society and criminal justice system to be a very dangerous man, to someone you could compare to a saint if you wanted to... To an ordinary man, who would do anything for his daughter. He has so many character-defining moments, the biggest ones being in my opinion the trial of Champmathieu and letting Javert go instead of killing him. I just love Jean Valjean so much and could speak about him for hours.

3. Carrie "Big Boo" Black, Orange Is the New Black

Hopping away from the Les Mis hole and into a OITNB hole. I was debating on whether I'd put Boo or Pennsatucky on this list since I love them both so much, but I've been feeling so much love for my angry butch king that it had to be her. First of all, I'm just so happy to see butch lesbian representation where the butch identity is not just a joke. I know OITNB sometimes uses Boo questionably, but in general she is a nuanced character and one of the most interesting ones in the series in my opinion. I'm so sad they forgot all about her on the last seasons. I love everything about her, how she has trouble with feelings besides anger and often deflects serious stuff through humor, how fiercely protective she is of those she loves (boosatucky otp forever fucking fight me), how proud she is of her butch identity ("i refuse to be invisible")... Also, not to express attraction, but... Mama I'm in love with a criminal. And not to be a slut for how characters view religion/spirituality/God, but the relieved smile she has in one of her flashbacks when she says "there's no God... there's nothing", like you can't just do stuff like that and expect me not to love the character to bits.

4. Jane Marple, Agatha Christie's Marple

Last time I listed Poirot and was a bit frustrated I couldn't list Marple, but now it's time to right that wrong! I love this little old lady so much. I love Agatha Christie so much for just going "you know who is the person who knows everything that's going on in a community, and thus would make the perfect detective for a detective story? the nosy old woman". As she is introduced in The Murder at the Vicarage: "Miss Marple is a white-haired old lady with a gentle, appealing manner — Miss Weatherby is a mixture of vinegar and gush. Of the two Miss Marple is much more dangerous." She is so likable and witty, you can't help but love her. My favourite portrayal of her is by Geraldine McEwan, she looks so gentle but has such a sharp gaze. I would spill all my secrets to her any day. I also am compelled to tell you that when I was a child we had a costume party at my school and I dressed up as Marple and learned some old lady things in English (it was before third grade so I didn't know much English back then) just for the occasion (such as "thank you, my dear", "what a lovely necklace you are wearing" or "there has been a murder"). Teacher might have thought me rather morbid but I remember that day being quite good.

5. Aunt Lydia, The Handmaid's Tale

The Handmaid's Tale is such a great series and a book and Aunt Lydia is such a great character. The way she's capable of being absolutely cruel and vicious, but how she is also protective and caring in her own way. One of my favourite scenes in this series is when Serena Joy (my other favourite, can you tell) tells Lydia to "remove the damaged ones" from a line of handmaids and Lydia tries to argue with her. Sure, she is responsible for some of the punishments these women are now "damaged" by, but she truly believes those punishments were for a greater good and now the handmaids deserve their place with the others as much as anyone else. It is chilling and the character is such a dark shade of morally gray, but I can't get enough of it. The actress who plays her, Ann Dowd, has so interesting thoughts about her, like here. I just love this character so much I could scream.

6. Bridget Jones, Bridget Jones books & movies

I'm mostly talking about the movies here because Renée Zellweger's performance is iconic. Plus the movies are what made me love this character first. But I'll give it to the books, they're one of the few books I've laughed out loud while reading. Anyway, how do you even begin explaining the love I have for Bridget Jones... I love how she is a character so many people can relate but who would be a comic relief side character in some other story. Yes, yes, it is really bad that she is constantly described as fat when she really is not, but when I was growing up she gave me hope that people who are viewed as fat and/or unattractive by other people can be admired and appreciated, and they don't have to be super talented at everything and highly intelligent and some kind of a super smooth social butterfly to "make up" for what they "lack". And also that they can have standards (i once dodged a bullet by rejecting someone by pretty much subconsciously quoting Bridget Jones so..). I also love how the comedic tone of everything does not dismiss Bridget's feelings. For example in some other movie we maybe would concentrate on how "stupid" Bridget was to trust that Daniel was in love with her, but in Bridget Jones we concentrate on how Bridget was hurt by Daniel cheating on her, how he is the one who did wrong. Idk I just love Bridget Jones so very much can you tell.

7. Rock Lee, Naruto

Aka the boy who would have kicked Madara in the balls if Kishimoto had any sense of drama and good storytelling. I think I robbed Lee by not putting him on the fav male characters list. You know that post that goes like "gays be like 'these are my comfort characters', 1 literal ray of sunshine, 2 war criminal" etc? This child is the sunshine. I've been reading and watching Naruto again ( @hapanmaitogai is my sideblog for that nonsense) and I'm so ready to adopt Lee and/or Gai. Rock Lee is just such an earnest character, he has a goal he will give anything to achieve and he's the one true underdog in this manga. I love how he's so kind and polite (it's not so clear in English but in the Finnish translation he speaks as formally as he does in Japanese, he uses singular polite "you", calls Sakura "Sakura-neiti" = "Miss Sakura" etc... i love one polite boy). Also, he has the best fights in the series. Like Lee vs Gaara is a Classic, but we simply can't forget that time Lee absolutely crushed Sasuke in just a few minutes, or that time he politely asked Kimimaro not to kill him while he drinks his medicine. The best boy. I love that boy so much.

8. Sarah O'Brien, Downton Abbey

Last time it was Thomas' turn, so now I must talk about the snakiest snake, the queen of weaponized handmaidenry, Miss O'Brien. She is such a great character especially in the first two seasons (I obviously love her on season three as well but Julian Fellowes really tried to make it hard by not explaining her actions at all, didn't he. Well, luckily I am ready to stuff the gaps with my headcanons). She has some of the best comebacks in the series and brings some needed realism in some conversations. I also love how she uses her position as a lady's maid for her advantage and how she is proud of her profession despite being highly aware of the power structures in the Abbey. And then there is the soap. That is such a good character moment, because for a character who always plans ahead, who is ruthless and cunning and intelligent... I don't think O'Brien thought about the soap thing at all before she left the room ("Sarah O'Brien, this is not who you are" hit me like a train). Just once she did something with nothing but anger motivating her and that became one of the defining moments of her character. And one of the defining things of the future relationship between her and Cora. That's why I find the Sarah/Cora ship so interesting, because there will always be the undercurrent of bitter regret. Also Sarah O'Brien and Thomas Barrow are the greatest brotp and Fellowes was a coward for driving the smoking scheming gay best friends apart, and

9. Marilla Cuthbert, Anne of Green Gables / Anne with an E

I'm not saying L.M. Montgomery is entirely responsible for me having a fondness for strict, older women who first act unkind but have a heart of gold, but she most certainly did not help. Between characters like Marilla Cuthbert and Elizabeth Murray, how can you not fall in love with the type? It's been a while since I read the Anne series, but I really love how Marilla's character has been adapted into the Anne with an E tv series. Geraldine James looks like she was born to play her, she has me in tears so often. She has the ability to portray someone like Marilla, who is a very hard and stern person but feels deeply for her loved ones. I was watching the episode that dealt with Matthew's heart attack and Marilla berating her brother while hugging herself like she was trying so hard to hold herself together absolutely destroyed my heart.

10. Sister Monica Joan, Call the Midwife

It was a tough choice between her and Sister Evangelina. I just love these nuns very much. Sister Monica Joan is such a lovable and wise character. She is so knowledgeable of many subjects, from the Bible to astrology, and I feel like her unspecified memory problems and confusion are handled very tastefully. I also love how she's such an important part of her community despite not working as a midwife anymore. She is such a kind woman and gets visibly upset when others are treated poorly. And how could I not mention her saying "I do not believe in weeds. A weed is simply a flower that someone decides is in the wrong place", like... I love her so so much.

I won't tag anyone, but if you read this and you want to do this, consider yourself tagged and you're no allowed to mark me as the one who tagged you!

11 notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 4 years ago

Text

Populism is good for your health

Back in 2016, Thomas Frank_'s "Listen, Liberal!" forcefully explained that "liberals" are not leftists, and that while we on the left might sometimes ally with liberals, we are not on the same side.

https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781627795395

This is something that most of the world outside of the USA knows, but the USA has largely forgotten. I'll never forget my first day of university in the US, when a classmate told me I had "liberal" views; having grown up in Canada's NDP, I knew the difference!

In the US, this manifests as excessive credit for Donald Trump - AKA excessive blame for Donald Trump - as though he was bright enough and had enough executive function to be a cause, rather than an effect.

If you're impressed by the Lincoln Project - a collection of war criminals and grifters from the Reagan and GWB administration and former Romney campaign backers - you're probably a liberal.

If you think that those guys should be dragged in front of an American Nuremberg Trial for their role in dirty wars and Forever Wars; mass incarceration, mass deportation and mass surveillance; financial fraud, torture and worse, you're probably a leftist.

The Lincoln Project doesn't object to Trump's most substantive policies - they just want them executed in ways that don't say the quiet part out loud - they don't care if the rich shit on the rest of us, they just abhor gold-plated toilets as unforgivably gauche.

Writing in Le Monde (and, tellingly, not in a US publication), Frank describes the role that America's dysfunctional, profiteering, world-trailing health care system played in the pandemic (recall that the DNC just voted AGAINST Medicare For All).

https://mondediplo.com/2020/08/02populism-expertise

Liberals didn't turn pandemic into a culture war with mask-refusal and astroturf "reopen" protests, but they legitimized it when they overweighted the role that the recklessness of GOP science-refusal played in the pandemic's spread --

-- and underweighted the role the broken health-care system played. My hometown of LA is not a hotbed of plague because of mask-refusal; the major spread events are in unsafe businesses where precarious workers can't afford health care and can't risk narcing on their boss.

Meanwhile, anti-science mask-refusers AND pro-universal-health-care activists (who are following the undeniable scientific conclusion that universal care is cheaper and better) are both lumped together as "populists" and dismissed by liberal and conservative establishments.

As Frank describes, the origins of American populism are in a decidedly pro-science movement: "Populists produced homages to technology and scholarship and education that were so earnest and ornate that they are embarrassing to read today."

These pops fought the establishment, who leaned on pseudoscience to declare the status quo as ordained by the inevitable forces of "scientific economics," which decreed that only the "best" people could hope for a decent life.

By the 1930s, health care was a flashpoint for populism. Frank tells the story of the medical co-op of Elk City, OK, "in which farm families would pay a modest sum each year for guaranteed access to doctors, dentists and a modern regional hospital."

Elk Point was fought tooth-and-nail by the AMA, which declared war on the co-op's doctor, the socialist Lebanese immigrant Michael Shadid, who called himself a "Doctor for the People" and believed that health care part of America's bulwark against dictatorship.

The AMA tried to revoke Shadid's license, excluded him from AMA membership (and thus malpractice insurance) and warned other doctors that they'd be blackballed if they went to work with him.

As Frank says, this was not a "popular war on science" - it was "science's war on populism." That is, the ruling class, having cloaked itself in "scientific economics" declared those who upheld more durable (and urgent) scientific truths public enemies and waged war on them.

The AMA - whose wealthy members were certainly part of the ruling class - boycotted orgs that researched "medical economics," threatened reprisals against doctors who tried to repeat the Elk Point experiment, and denounced any Congressional investigations of these tactics.

When a federal inquiry into the AMA's anti-co-op activity convened in 1938, AMA's president rejected it: "That is not scientific medicine and that is not scientific economics."

As Frank says, the AMA's position was that government oversight was "a perversion of the social hierarchy, with the laity demanding some quack remedy and bawling that the experts must prescribe it to him."

And when Truman won in 1948 on a promise of universal healthcare, the AMA called such care the "discredited system of decadent nations" and raised a special warchest from its wealthy members to pay the pioneering Campaigns, Inc to run a propaganda campaign against it.

When Canada's CCF - precursor to the NDP - created the first medicare system in Saskatchewan in 62, doctors walked off the job en masse, and SK doctors raised their own warchest to fight universal access to care.

They were backed by a suspicious, far-right org called "Keep Our Doctors" that appeared out of nowhere and fought medicare "by means of public demonstrations, red-baiting, and racist innuendo."

Thomas holds this up as an example of a "democracy scare": "in which society’s high-status groups come to believe that their privileges have been placed in mortal danger by the actions of the vast, seething multitude."

Democracy scares have popped up whenever left populism arose in America, from William Jennings Bryan to FDR. What was at stake wasn't science, it was privilege: the conversion of health-care from an industry that enriched its backers to a human right.

Opponents of Saskatechewan's medical system called it "a battle for the professional men in this era of mobocracy," and warned that we were moving from a world where everyone knew their place to a world who's motto was "I'm as good as you are."

Populism was leftist. As Steven Brust explained to me, all you need to ask to cleave left from right is: "What's more important: human rights or property rights?" Anyone who says, "property rights are human rights" is not on the left (I used this in Walkaway).

Or as Corey Robin says in The Reactionary Mind, the unifier of all rightwing schools of thought - from eugenics to dominionism to imperialism to libertarianism - is the belief that some people are innately better than others, and they should rule.

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-reactionary-mind-9780190692001

Democrats are not a leftists. Frank: they're "the bought-and-paid-for vehicle of affluent and highly educated professionals. It dutifully bails out the geniuses on Wall Street. It responsibly obeys the economists who tell us about the wonders of ‘free trade.’"

"And when our modern Democrats propose healthcare reform, they do it from the top down, by convening experts from every affected field and asking them to redraw the system amongst themselves — and then are astonished when the public erupts in outrage."

Today, private-equity backed, highly concentrated hospital chains and pharma companies have taken over the AMA's role in fighting universal healthcare, and the Dem establishment dismisses M4A advocates as "populists" and lumps them in with Trump-addled mask-deniers.

This ideology locates the world's problems in the unruliness of The People: "Democracy is a problem, they tell us, because democracy allows the common people to ignore the authority of expertise. Disobedient democracy is to blame for Trump."

"Disobedient democracy is why we can do nothing about global warming. Disobedient democracy is the reason we can’t beat the Covid pandemic. And all of it is the fault of We the People."

But The People aren't the reason that we don't have universal testing, that we haven't hired an army of contact tracers, that workers fear reprisals if they reveal their unsafe working conditions, which breed and spread pandemic.

We The People aren't why we don't have universal healthcare, they're not why we aren't paying people to stay home or stemming the tide of evictions. The policies that created the pandemic disaster aren't Trumpist aberrations, they're mainstream Republicanism.

They're the Republicanism of the Lincoln Project, which supported consolidation in pharma and healthcare, erosion of workers' rights and health and safety regulation.

And they're the policies of the mainstream of the Democrats, too: the brutal austerity of Pelosi's Paygo and Brooker's votes against taming the pharma industry.

Trump's criminal, lethal mismanagement of the pandemic would have slaughtered Americans by the tens of thousands regardless of this, of course - but hundreds of thousands more would have been spared infection, eviction and death if it wasn't for the system he presides over.

He didn't make that system, and the professionalized, elite-worshipping DNC won't unmake it. As Frank says, "In our awful current situation, a dose of authentic populism would be a remarkable tonic."

#pluralistic

50 notes · View notes