#this is what happens when you don’t have a female role model in your life

[torturedblue]

Realizing Leo goes after girls that are like the ones Captain Ryan falls for…

[justforbooks]

Christina Hendricks

The star of Good Girls discusses Mad Men, sexual harassment and squaring her glamorous reputation with her ‘weird, goofy’ personality

Christina Hendricks appears on our video call with the most dramatic backdrop. Art deco gold peacocks bedeck a black wall, making her look, as she has so often in her career, a bit too good to be human. Perfectly poised, perfectly framed, perfectly lit, she is more like a dreamy vision of what humans look like. “I, erm, like your wall,” I say, pointlessly. She flashes a smile, as if to say: “Obviously.”

We are here primarily to discuss the comedy-drama series Good Girls, the fourth season of which will resume in the US this month after a midseason break. The elevator pitch would be Breaking Bad for girls: three suburban women, each hovering on the edge of bankruptcy, unite to embark on a life of cack-handed crime, only to discover they are good at it. The ensemble – Hendricks, Mae Whitman, who plays her sister, and Retta, their friend – works strikingly well, their pacey comic rapport instilling a sense of perpetual motion. You just can’t imagine Good Girls ending. Every time a plot line seems to be reaching its climax, something worse – and funnier – happens.

“It’s funny you say that, because originally, when I read the pilot script, I thought: ‘I love this, but I can’t imagine this being more than one episode,’” says Hendricks. “It felt like it finished itself.” She is unsentimental about it. Hendricks wasn’t looking for a new show – “I was happy doing films, taking my time” – but went into it with her eyes open. It is a network drama, for NBC – it is shown on Netflix in the UK – so producers are always aware that “it’s going into every house in the US on a Thursday or a Sunday and a family is watching it. They’re much more careful about numbers and advertisers and people being offended or not getting it. A cable show is much more: ‘We trust this creator – they’re a visionary.’”

It has a conventional tone – however dark the material, it is handled very lightly. Yet you can’t help but notice some hard-boiled social commentary from the off – if it weren’t for the bracingly callous US health system, the generation of wage-stagnation casualties and the patriarchy, none of the characters would have gone anywhere near a supermarket heist. More than Breaking Bad, it reminds me of Roseanne and the golden age of US mainstream comedy, when you could be poor on TV without that being a breach of good taste.

The 48-year-old has been a household name for almost 15 years, thanks to Mad Men. She was born in Tennessee, where her mother was a psychologist and her father worked for the Forest Service, and educated in Oregon and then Idaho. She didn’t have time for formal acting training; by the time she was 18, her modelling career had taken off. Later, when she had a manager, she took acting lessons: “I did that for almost a year and a half and put auditions on ice. Then I was watching a film – I don’t even remember what film it was or who was in it – and I thought: ‘I’m ready. I can do this.’” She has the most insistent work ethic; as she describes her life’s trajectory, she notes diligently the jobs she had while she was at high school, at a hair salon and a menswear shop.

In 2007, she appeared as Joan Holloway in Mad Men. She played the role for the next eight years, her character growing around the depth she brought to it, until by season seven she was almost the central part. In the early 2010s, Hendricks was talked about constantly, although she says the original focal points of obsession were the male characters: “Men started dressing like Don Draper and Roger Sterling. Suits came back in, skinny ties came back in. It took three to four seasons and then all of a sudden people wanted us [the female stars] on magazines. We were like: ‘This is strange – we’ve been doing this for a while.’”

Hendricks, along with January Jones, who played Betty Draper, came to represent so much. There was a great deal of rumination on their physicality, Jones as elegant as an afghan hound, Hendricks like the pin-up painted on the side of a bomber. What did it mean, people asked, that in the middle of the 20th century there were multiple ideals of the female form, whereas in the 21st century there was only one? How did that complicate the perception of gender equality as a steady march towards the light? Thousands of column inches went on that question – but, from the actor’s perspective, it was an annoying distraction. “There certainly was a time when we were very critically acclaimed, and getting a lot of attention for our very good work and our very hard work, and everyone just wanted to ask me about my bra again. There are only two sentences to say about a bra,” she says.

The signal impression the show left was of an ensemble at the peak of its creativity: actors, writers and the creator, Matthew Weiner, working in almost telepathic unison. It won the Emmy for outstanding drama series four times in a row, but the more notable year was 2012, when it was nominated for 17 Emmys (and didn’t win any of them). The take-home was: everyone involved with this is absolutely brilliant.

That harmonious picture was blurred two years after the show ended, when one of the former writers, Kater Gordon, accused Weiner of sexual harassment. Marti Noxon, a consulting producer on Mad Men, concurred that Weiner had created a toxic environment and said that he was an “‘emotional terrorist’ who will badger, seduce and even tantrum in an attempt to get his needs met”.

Hendricks takes this head on, in a considered, straightforward manner. “My relationship with Matt was in no way toxic,” she says. “I don’t discount anyone’s experience if I wasn’t there to see it, but that wasn’t my experience. Was he a perfectionist, was he tough, did he expect a lot? Yes. And he would say that in a second. We were hard on each other.”

It is impossible, from this distance, to adjudicate on Weiner’s character, but Hendricks’s response reveals something of hers. The easiest response in this situation, and the one 90% of actors give, is: “No comment.” Hendricks is always collected, never evasive, doesn’t gabble. She reminds me powerfully of Joan Holloway – and I am sorry to say it, because she insists throughout: “I’m an actress. I am completely not Joan. Not in any way. I wish I was more like Joan.”

I wonder if, while we were all fixating on Joan’s bras and whether or not, in the asinine words of Lynne Featherstone, the UK’s equalities minister in 2010, she represented a “curvy role model”, the audience was responding to Joan’s deeper life lesson – that self-possession is 9/10ths of the law.

What Hendricks emphatically doesn’t do is minimise the existence of sexism and sexual harassment in the industry: “Boy, do you think anyone in the entertainment industry comes out unscathed and not objectified? I don’t know one musician or one model or one actor who has escaped that. I have had moments – not on Mad Men; on other things – where people have tried to take advantage of me, use my body in a way I wasn’t comfortable with, persuade me or coerce me or professionally shame me: ‘If you took your work seriously, you would do this …’

“Maybe it was my modelling background, but I knew to immediately get on the phone and go: ‘Uh oh, trouble,’” she says. “That’s where it’s very much a job. We need to talk to the producers and handle this professionally.”

Yet, at the same time, she is defensive of her industry. “It gets a lot of attention because people know who we are. I’m sure there’s a casting couch at the bank down the street, I’m sure the same thing happens in management consultancy, but people don’t know who the management consultants are.”

Modelling always sounds like a harsh environment – predatory photographers vying with stringent agents to give everyone a complex about their thighs and stop them eating carbs. But that is not how Hendricks describes it at all. Her career sounds like one out of an 80s Judy annual: innocent and hearty, good for pin money and travel opportunities. “I think I was lucky – I didn’t start when I was 14. When I was about 18 or 19, I went to Japan for the first time, I went to Italy. We’d be lots of girls, sharing a house, and I sort of became the den mother. I’d make everyone egg salad sandwiches and Greek salads, going into this mother hen role.”

That is what they say about being taken hostage: if you want to survive, choose someone to look after. “Oh,” she says, coolly. “I wouldn’t consider being a model as being a hostage.”

She was only ever medium-successful, she insists – an “unusual and quirky” hire, rather than the slam-dunk face of everything. About as far as it went was that she never had to get another job to supplement her income. Probably the most famous image of that era in which she was involved was the poster for American Beauty. Two models were in the frame, so they took a photo of the stomach and the hands of each. In the end, they used Hendricks’s hand on the other model’s stomach. It sounds like a clunky metaphor, but it is true.

During this period, she moved to London with a friend, for the hell of it, living in a flat on Gloucester Road, “surviving on cider and hummus”. It is a glimpse of the oddball she says she was growing up, the outsider as whom she is rarely cast. This has been the story of her CV. “Early on in my career, I would get auditions and I would call my manager and say: ‘I would never cast me in this – she’s a cheerleader, she’s a bimbo. Can I audition for the other one, the weird doctor?’ And they’d be like: ‘No, they saw your picture.’ And I started realising that people didn’t see the weird, goofy me that I saw.”

She made the jump from modelling to acting via adverts, with what looks like fairytale ease. In fact, it was “a lot of pounding the pavement and showing up for auditions and getting rejected – and learning, as a young woman, to not take that personally”. By the late 90s, she was the face of ultimate female confidence, the woman who drinks Johnnie Walker and doesn’t need a chauffeur (these are two ads, not one for drink-driving). “I always thought of modelling as freeze-frame acting. It felt like a scene, and I still consider it that way. There are so many technical things that I think people don’t notice. They see you playing dress-up.”

From the commercials, she learned “how to hit a mark, how to memorise a line”, but acting wasn’t novel. She had been doing community theatre since the age of 10, and grew up expecting an alternative life, supplementing an art-house existence any which way. She never amplifies her creative urges. She is much happier talking about professionalism and graft, but that is strategic more than anything else. “I am incredibly emotional and I take things very personally. But I’ve learned to be a little bit of a politician and a little bit of a producer along the way. As a female actor, the easy go-to is: ‘She was emotional, she was hysterical.’ It can be a million other people’s fault, but it’s easy to point your finger at an emotional artist. So, I realised: if I’m going to be taken seriously, I need to have professional perspective and I can cry about it to my friends later.”

Yet she cares deeply about creativity, as is clear when she talks about Mad Men. “It may eclipse anything I ever did. And, if it does, it was a good one and I’m proud of it,” she says. “I got to bring who I was as a woman. I think I learned some of how to be a woman from Joan. No one would give a shit about me if it wasn’t for that show. I’d still be doing good work, but no one would have found me. If that’s the best thing I ever do, it was pretty good.”

Daily inspiration. Discover more photos at Just for Books…?

[the-himawari]

A3! Nanao Taichi - Translation [SR] Purple Fiancée (1/2)

*Please read disclaimer on blog; default name set as Izumi

---

Taichi: I’m playing the role of Olivia the fiancée, huh?

Izumi: There hasn’t been a female role in Autumn troupe’s plays since Stranger.

Banri: You’re talkin’ about Zero who Taichi played, right? That sure brings back memories.

Taichi: I was way too conscious of the fact I was playing a girl when I first played Zero during our rehearsals… Ban-chan and Sakyo-nii totally laughed at me~.

Banri: I mean, it was legit awful at first. We thought you were doin’ that on purpose to make us laugh.

Izumi: Right, right, that happened.

Taichi: I was seriously trying the best I could to act like a girl back then… Ah, that reminds me. So, I was thinking about discussing something with you, Director-sensei…

Izumi: Hm? What is it?

Taichi: Unlike Zero, Olivia is a mature and sexy woman. I wasn’t sure how I should act or prepare for my role.

Banri: Ah, that’s a good point. Taichi might use the same terrible tone he tried when he played Zero.

Taichi: That’s why I was wondering if I could get some advice from you, Director-sensei.

Izumi: A mature, sexy woman… Well, I don’t think I’m that type of woman, so I doubt I can give any good advice… But when I watch movies and dramas, I feel like those women have a certain luster to their skin, hair, voice, and way the they talk.

Taichi: I see. A luster… writing this down…

Izumi: Another impression of a mature and sexy person would be… Cool and collected?

Banri: Someone who carries themselves well to boot.

Taichi: I also imagine them wearing heels!

Izumi: And someone who’s confident in themselves, I guess?

Taichi: Ah, I know what you mean~! You mean nothing phases them, right? Hm, hm. Alrighty, I’ll choose something that fits Olivia from all the impressions you just gave me… I’ll watch out for that in my daily life and try my best!

Izumi: Great. I wish there was someone mature and sexy close to you who you could use as a role model… …Ah. Speaking of which, there might be someone!

Taichi: Huh?

Izumi: Azuma fits the description of sexy and mature, doesn’t he?

Taichi: Ah! Yeah, you’re right!

Banri: I feel like he’s a bit different from Olivia, but you can try askin’ him.

Taichi: Alright, I’ll get some tips from Azuma-san!

Option 1: “I’m curious too”

Izumi: Advice from Azuma-san… I’m curious too.

Taichi: You are, Director-sensei?

Izumi: I mentioned it earlier, but I don’t think I’m that type of person… I wonder how I could become someone mature, beautiful, and attractive like Azuma-san…

Taichi: I get it! You can’t help but admire that kinda vibe~! But even if you’re not that type, I think you’re super charming in your own way, Director-sensei. You have both cool and a cute sides. You’re the best!

Izumi: Eh! T-thank you…! I feel happy, but also kind of embarrassed…

Taichi: Hehe…!

Option 2: “I’m looking forward how you play Olivia”

Izumi: I’m looking forward to how you play Olivia.

Banri: Same here. All the more since we know how terrible his act was back then.

Taichi: I’ve grown a lot since I played Zero. Just watch, I'm gonna shock you two and the audience by showing that I can play a female role with a brand new vibe!

Izumi: You said it! Your acting range is getting wider and wider, Taichi-kun. I have high expectations.

Banri: Let’s see what you’ve got.

Taichi: Okie dokie. I’m gonna head over to Azuma-san right now.

Banri: See ya.

---

| next

[jedimasterbailey]

Heyyy babe 😘 for the Choose Violence ask game: 1, 2, 9, 15, 16, 17

YESSSSSS I GET TO CHOOSE VIOLENCE TODAY 😁 Thanks dearest 💚💙

Link to original Star Wars Violence Questions linked below!

1.) Give me a compelling argument for why your fav would never top or bottom.

Luminara Unduli would never be a bottom because she definitely that bitch who is ALWAYS in charge. With all the bullshit she has to put up with in both the canon and in the fanon, that woman would have all the pent up feeling to go on all night or go full blown domantrix on whoever that lucky bottom would be (I would personally volunteer my services). No matter where she is and what she’s doing, Luminara gets shit done and that is that. Via osmosis, Barriss Offee is most likely a top too since her mother has taught her how to be a bad bitch like her 💙💚

2.) What character did you begin to hate not because of canon but because of how the fandom acts about them?

Grogu. Like he’s literally just a baby but my God judging from all the mass excessive merchandising you would think that at one point in time Grogu was the only Star Wars character that existed and that’s not necessarily his fault by the annoying group of people who literally only watched Mando just for Grogu and Grogu only. There are so many people out there who will never watch a Star Wars movie or anything else that isn’t Mando just because Grogu isn’t in it and again it’s insane because again he’s just a literal baby. If the show was exclusively about him, it would have been a boring show. If I wanted to look at something cute, I can just go look at puppies or some shit. I don’t need to watch a show for that.

9.) You’re mad/ashamed/horrified you actually kind of like…

I honestly don’t have an answer for this sorry 🤣

15.) Opinion of Anakin’s characterization (I.e the broification of Anakin Skywalker).

This is a very loaded question because I don’t really swing either way with this topic (as in I don’t love or hate it). Like on the one hand, I like how in the CW show they made Anakin more with it and mature when the situation calls for it which makes sense considering he has Ahsoka to consider and he has to be a good role model for her. I also appreciate how in the show Anakin isn’t just bitching about Obi-Wan or obsessing over Padme all the time or being pissy with his other Jedi colleagues. I love seeing Anakin actually being a model Jedi and actually showing that he truly does love and respect Obi-Wan, Ahsoka, etc. However Anakin is seen as more sensitive in the movies and doesn’t always respond with such rage all the time like he does in CW show. Like bro Anakin’s anger goes from 0-1,000 in seconds to the point where he’s just destroying gadgets, kicking Clovis ass, etc. So in short, in some ways I personally think they did a good job expanding on Anakin’s character in the CW however there is no denying there is a huge distinction between Matt Lanter Anakin and Hayden Anakin. They most likely went the bro route because toxic masculinity is in.

16.) Best written female character in Star Wars.

Leia hands down. Her character is one of the very few Star Wars characters that is consistent and true in every single project we see with her in it. And like I’ve never met a Leia hater in my whole life and if I did I would question that person’s character because Leia is a badass that holds everything together when no one else will or when people leave her. She honestly deserves her own show.

17.) What event is Anakin’s point of no return in his fall to the Dark Side?

Shmi’s death. Had that never happened Anakin probably would not have taken those visions of Padme dying in childbirth or Palpatine’s bullshit stories seriously. It was only because Anakin lost his mother that he was insistent on keeping his wife and children safe at all costs because he did not want to endure that kind of pain ever again.

Original Ask Game Questions

[ladyanaconda]

Expecting

Cassiora had been acting strangely for a while now. It wasn’t just about her mood swings or fainting spells anymore. Recently, she’d started eating a lot. That wouldn’t be strange if said food weren’t his ‘overly salted’ dishes, which she previously hated to the point she never let him cook.

No, something was going on… And he had the feeling she wasn’t being completely honest about it.

“Cass, we need to talk.”

Cassiora swallowed the salty piece of diredeer leg. “Is something wrong?”

“Have you been feeling alright? You’ve been acting… strange lately.”

“Other than my recent liking of salt and morning sickness? Yeah, I’m fine.”

Besteel dropped his wooden cup, spilling water all over the floor. 

Morning sickness? Cravings? Bigger appetite?

“Are you pregnant?”

Cassiora choked on the next piece of meat and coughed it out. 

“What?!”

“Think about it, Cass. You’ve been eating my food when you couldn’t even smell it before. You’ve been more… temperamental, and now the morning sickness?”

“But that’s… When was even the last time we did it?”

“…About five weeks ago, if I remember correctly.”

Cassiora thought for a while. That’s around the time when the morning sickness and cravings began.

Her grasp on the diredeer leg faltered, and it fell to the ground.

“I-I could have eaten something bad! It’s happened before.”

“Except you’re exhibiting other symptoms unrelated to eating something bad.”

“When did you become a doctor?”

Besteel rolled his eyes. “I don’t have to be a doctor to see the signs, Cassiora. You’re pregnant, whether you want to admit it or not.”

Cassiora sighed in defeat, face hidden in her hands.

“Goddamn it, no wonder I started liking your salty food out of the blue!”

She was surprised when her husband lifted her by the waist and twirled her around, laughing heartily.

“Don’t be like that, Cass! We should be celebrating! We’re having a litter!”

Cassiora blushed, and a small laugh escaped her. “I know, I know! This changes a lot of things.”

Besteel gently placed his wife down on the living room’s cushions. “And we shall face them together, love.”

“…What if I’m not a good mother?”

“Don’t say that, Cass. I’m sure you’ll be a wonderful mother.”

“I wish I had your confidence…” Cassiora sighed. “It’s just… Well, I didn’t exactly have a good role model, you know.”

Besteel lifted her chin to look into her eyes. “What your mother did does not define you, Cassiora. You’re strong, nurturing, and stubborn as hell. ” He hugged his wife, nuzzling the side of her head. “You’re not alone. We’ll figure it out.”

Cassiora touched his cheeks with her upper hands. “Thank you, Besty.”

Besteel closed his eyes and leaned into her touch, placing his right hand over hers to keep it in place. 

The two stayed like that for a while, their snouts touching.

“How do you feel about becoming a father?”

“I won’t deny it, I’m nervous. It is a big responsibility.” Besteel’s hand tenderly stroked his wife’s still-flat abdomen. “But… At the same time, I’m excited. I mean, we’re creating life together.”

“I’m sure you’ll be a great daddy. How do you think the tribe will take the news, though? Some of the other females were still hoping you and I wouldn’t work out.” Cassiora joked. 

“I don’t care what they think. I already found the love of my life.”

“How do you think your… father will react?”

Besteel sighed in dismay. “Knowing him, he’ll be over the clouds. He’s been pestering Redimus and me for grandkids.”

—*O*—

Aww, someone is going to be a daddy!

[opiatemasses]

Everything you need to know about sexism in sport and why we need to take action

In 2020, 65% of female athletes surveyed by the BBC stated they experienced sexism within their sport. What is more shocking is that only 10% reported the behaviour. Those who didn’t indicated they were unsure who to tell, as many of their coaches were male and they felt they wouldn’t be taken seriously. Evidently sexism is still very relevant both within sport and the culture of sport.

Everyone is influenced by gender norms in their lives, even if they do not know it. These stereotypes commonly portray women as inferior to men and often undervalued. These stereotypes often begin at a young age: boys are encouraged to go outside and play in the dirt, whereas girls are expected to stay inside and play with their dolls. These stereotypes not only affect girls and women, but boys and men too. They are all denied freedom to choose their own life path as a consequence of gender stereotypes. 

So, what is sexism? Sexism is a prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination against women, but it can also apply to men. For now, I will only be discussing sexism against women in sport, but keep in mind there can also be sexism against men. 

Female athletes in the media

Many people still perceive women’s sports to be less entertaining than men’s sport. But could this be because women’s sports have less coverage in the media? Relatedly, could a consequence of less coverage imply that women’s sports are of lesser value or importance? Women make up 40% of all participants in sport, yet only received 4% of the total media coverage in 2019.

The limited media coverage is not just bad for the athletes, but also for young girls. As a result, there are fewer role models for them to aspire to, which may contribute to why girls are two times more likely to drop out of sports compared to boys. Moreover, when the media do cover women in sport, it is noticeably different to the coverage of their male counterparts. 

An example of this is when the Lionesses won the Euros this past summer. The MailOnline faced major backlash after they posted a photos on Twitter of Alessia Russo in a bikini and of her dressed up for a night out, when the topic was about winning the football tournament. Neither of those photos were to do with her football talents, they were posted to objectify and sexualise her for the male viewers.

Women’s uniform in sport

The sexualisation of women in sport is also apparent in their uniforms. Men are supposed to cover up as much of their body as possible, yet women are told they must wear revealing uniforms or face a fine. For example, the Norwegian women’s beach volleyball team were sanctioned for wearing shorts instead of the required bikini briefs.

Part of the problem is the people who make the rules for uniforms in sports federations are mostly males. They want women’s sport to be ‘appealing’ to male viewers and don’t consider the impact that their decisions have on the women athletes. 

Concluding thoughts

What can be done to end the sexism against women in sport? Firstly, we need to see more women in leadership positions across the sporting landscape. More women in leadership roles would mean women having greater influence to be heard and to inform policy-making. Potentially the mandatory sexualised uniforms would cease, and women would be allowed to wear what they feel comfortable in. However, for this to happen, there also needs to be a cultural change within society.

You are part of that society. You can help make a difference.

A simple solution which many people in society could do is support women’s and girls’ sports, whether that be as a player or as a fan. Having more fans of elite level women’s sport could have an impact on how much media representation they receive, which would have many benefits not just for the elite athletes, but also for the grassroot level athletes.

Feel free to leave any comments if you wish to discuss this topic with me further and give your opinions.

Thank you for reading this post!

N0851550

 Here I have added some links to websites if you would like to learn more about sexism and what you can do to help stop it:

https://human-rights-channel.coe.int/stop-sexism-en.html

https://plan-international.org/girls-get-equal/challenging-gender-discrimination-a-how-to-guide/ 

Here are also some links to sexism in sport specifically:

https://nwlc.org/women-in-sports-the-good-the-bad-the-sexist/

https://womeninsport.org/about-us/sexism-in-sport/

[toughgirlchallenges]

Amanda Harris: Overcoming Adversity with Adapted Cycling, Fundraising, and Inspiring Resilience After a Life-Changing Spinal Cord Injury.

Join us on this episode of the Tough Girl Podcast as we explore the remarkable journey of Amanda Harris, an adapted cyclist and dedicated fundraiser who has embraced life's challenges following a spinal cord injury. Living in South Wales with her husband and two teenage children, Amanda's story is one of resilience, determination, and breaking down barriers.

Originally from Devon and a law graduate from Cardiff University, Amanda has spent over 30 years in Wales. Her life took a dramatic turn after a serious bike accident that resulted in a spinal cord injury. Despite the life-altering event, Amanda's spirit remained unbroken. She spent nine months in the hospital, relearning basic skills and adapting to her new reality.

Amanda's love for cycling was rekindled when she was gifted a recumbent bike, allowing her to take on new challenges and raise funds for charity. Her journey includes the ambitious goal of completing the Wales Coast Path (WCP) using a trike, wheelchair, and occasionally walking with crutches. Amanda's determination and adaptability shine as she navigates accessibility issues and relies on friends and family to assist with sections that are not accessible.

In this episode, Amanda shares her experiences, from her early years in Devon to her life in Wales, her passion for cycling, and the various challenges she has undertaken. We delve into her methods for staying positive, setting tiny goals, and focusing on what she can achieve. Amanda's story is a testament to the power of resilience and the importance of embracing life's challenges with a positive attitude.

Tune in to hear Amanda's inspiring journey and her advice for women facing their own challenges. Discover how she continues to push boundaries and inspire others with her remarkable story of overcoming adversity and loving life.

***

Don't miss out on the latest episodes of the Tough Girl Podcast, released every Tuesday at 7am UK time! Be sure to hit the subscribe button to stay updated on the incredible journeys and stories of strong women.

 By supporting the Tough Girl Podcast on Patreon, you can make a difference in increasing the representation of female role models in the media, particularly in the world of adventure and physical challenges. Your contribution helps empower and inspire others. Visit www.patreon.com/toughgirlpodcast to be a part of this important movement. 

Thank you for your invaluable support!

***

Show notes

Who is Amanda

Living in South Wales with her husband and two teenage children

Originally growing up in Devon

Studying Law at Cardiff University 

Living in Wales for over 30 years

Meeting her husband at University 

Bringing her children up in Wales 

Still learning the Welsh Language 

Her early years and spending lots of time outside 

Not being particularly sporty or competitive

Making walking plans for retirement

Getting into cycling before her 40th birthday 

Signing up for a charity cycle ride 

Being in a bike accident which caused a spinal cord injury and multiple other injuries 

Not being able to feel her legs and knowing something serious had happened

Spending 9 months in hospital 

Having to learn everything again

How it changed her life 

What’s happened since

Deciding to complete the Wales Coast Path (WCP) by trike, wheelchair and occasionally a few steps 

Being able to walk a few steps with crutches

Why can’t I do this now

Accepting that there are some parts which are’t accessible 

Asking friends and family to walk that sections that aren’t accessible 

Accessibility on the Wales Coast Path

Research before taking on new sections 

Why everyone has different needs when it comes to access and accessibility 

The need for planning 

Needing to walk the path around work and needing support from other people

Completing approx 500 miles needing to do the North Wales Sections

Raising funds for charity 

Getting back into cycling and being gifted a recumbent bike 

Being involved in different cycling challenges

Winning a competition with - Spinal Injuries Association 

Heading out to Portugal in May 2024 to ride 200 miles over 3 days!

Having moments of doubt

Not going into the dark place

Focusing on the positives and what she can do 

Giving things ago and saying yes to more things (such as doing this interview!)

Wanting to take the tandem bike over to America to do a big ride with her husband

How to connect with Amanda on line 

Final words of advice for women who are going through a challenging time

Not wanting to preach to people 

Try and stay positive 

Setting tiny, tiny goals in a notebook and how this helped during rehab

Find out what works for you and focus on that 

  Social Media

Instagram: @amandah_trike 

Instagram: @amandascoastalchallenge 

  Check out this episode!

[flirting-with-psychology]

Created by xmissmarchxo

you’re female. you’re a senior in high school. you have your drivers license. you live on the east coast in the usa. you have a boyfriend/girlfriend. this is the longest relationship you’ve ever been in. you love animals. you have a dog. you want more dogs! your parents are still together. you have 2 siblings. you’re applying for jobs now. you’re kindof addicted to twitter right now. you don’t have an iphone. but you really really want one. you love the beach! and want to live close to the beach when you get older. you’d rather run then walk. roller coasters are you favorite amusement park rides. you love feeling excited for something. you’re always listening to music. you’re a fan of justin bieber. and one direction. and paramore. and all time low. and breathe carolina. you know who austin mahone is. you’re really close with your mom. (or sister, if you have one)  you’ve been to Canada. you’d love to visit Great Britain. and Australia. and Italy you’ve never been to the west coast in the usa. you live in maryland. (usa) you want to get married when you’re older. you’d like to have at least 2 children someday. you’d love to become a Veterinarian. but you’re not sure where you want to go to college, yet. you love to laugh. you’re usually always in a good mood. you used to curse a lot, now you rarely ever do. you’d trade bodies with a guy just for one day to see what it’s like. you don’t really have a celebrity idol/role model. your mom(or other family member) is someone you look up to. you have no regrets, you believe everything’s happened for a reason. when it comes to abortion, you’re pro-life. you’re actually interested in politics and what’s going on now a days. you’re not a virgin. you’ve lost your virginity at a young age. you’re still with the same person. ^ you’ve tried smoking once, and will never do it again. you’ve never done any drugs. you used to go to parties and drink a lot. you’ve stopped drinking. you don’t like when people judge other people. but you’ve done it in the past, and feel terrible about it. you’re more of a listener than talker. you’re more of a giver than taker. you love making people smile and feel better. your name is very commonyou were born in the Spring. March, specifically. you cannot dance to save your life. you want to take dance classes. you’ve played basketball. and cheered. and bowled. (in a league) you’re addicted to mocha frappe’s from Mcdonald’s. you love Starbucks. chinese, italian and american food are the best. guys that can cook is a big turn on! you’ve read the Fifty Shades books, and actually liked them. Pretty Little Liars is one of your favorite shows.

[uniquejellyfishqueen]

No relationship has ever stuck fully because I was more worried about the other person loving me when I never loved myself.

The right person for you will love you when you’re busy hating on yourself from the cringey shit you did in the past. They will love you because they loved you when those moments happened to you and only made their love deepen for you.

By me internally hating myself, being hard on myself, and breaking my own heart I was also projecting this onto the other person. This is not just romantic relationships this also includes the closest relationships and friendships I made throughout my journey. Ew Scorpio energy is apparently strong?

I couldn’t see my own worth and expected the other person to be the one to tell me. But this is a Eureka moment because why would I feel like I need my partner to determine my worth? It’s because I have never made a decision of my own in my life. I never followed the beat of my own drum (this was much more punny to me than you I swear.) I constantly chose to do what the other person wanted and not what I WANTED. The same goes for my thought process, I allowed myself to constantly follow the beliefs of others even when it didn’t make sense. But I see now that it almost became more confusing the longer that went on. To explain on that I mean unfortunately enough the topic that comes to mind first is Politics. No this is not going to be a debate, this is me explaining that I was never taught about debates in itself, the two sides to a story type of thing. It was “my way or the highway” or in the household I grew up in: “that will make your ass hurt.” Yes I’m 31 and yes I was recently told that. The other topic that I was expected to follow was that of interracial relationships. I was told “mixed babies don’t have a right to be brought into this world.” That was a sucker punch to the gut because who says that? I am accepting the fact that I was raised in a Racist household but I broke free from that negativity. I have a child of mixed ethic backgrounds, just because her coloring is white doesn’t mean she isn’t mixed. THERE IS NO PERFECT. THERE WILL BE NO PERFECT STANDARD. THERE WILL ONLY BE THE PERFECT YOU CREATE. And that has to be enough for you. We can’t worry about the expectations of others and how that will affect you everyday of your life.

So I guess this puts me at the starting point on the board. A fresh start to love myself? To be nicer to me? I am sometimes, I’m pretty funny and I’m not hating how I look at the moment (although i think I’m always going to hear that my face is fat..)

My trust issues need work and I will eventually go to therapy I promise. But when you are 17 years old and have an abortion the state makes therapy mandatory, and I loved my therapist. All I remember is that she was young, blonde, and so sweet. She made me feel comfortable when I was low. One day I had a session, the next thing I remember is my mom explaining to me that she moved away and that the therapy wasn’t needed anymore. I was 17 and went through something horrific, if this was charlotte and the therapist told me that I would have found her a new therapist. IDK maybe the benefit of the doubt is necessary for Susan, or maybe my gut is right when it says that she felt insecure that I found a female role model that wasn’t her? Who really knows. Therefore right now the thought of sitting in a therapists room makes me feel sea sick. It’s on the agenda I just for once am ready to dig myself out of my own shit that I need to do it at my own pace, thats what I need and I’m fighting for my right to live the way I want to.

My bucket list is longer than the last Harry Potter book. My dreams are as wide as the ocean, but really at this moment all I want is a hug. I’m easy to please but i make it hard to love me, but i’m learning that I want to be worth it. I want to be a writer. But I want to learn how to draw with charcoals. I want to spend nights in a field of flowers star gazing. I want to be taught how to play guitar, thats the big one, you see when I was a little rascal I had a big dream (I’m sweating as i type this so please don’t laugh hard ok.) all I fucking wanted to be was Leann Rimes. Fuck I sang One Way Ticket everyday. Then we went on a family vacation to Dollywood and my dream died. The next thing I remember anytime i would sing i was told that I couldn’t carry a tune even if i was holding it in a bucket. I belted out my own little tune mowing the grass recently with headphones in and i didn’t realize that I was loud enough that my neighbor heard me. I ran around the side of the house and threw up because I got that nervous. So like I said I do want to learn, I don’t promise to be good at it, but I’m tired of not trying at all.

[lizzygrantarchives]

Prefix, November 21, 2011

Lana Del Rey isn’t going to be your role model; she doesn’t want to. The 24-year-old singer, who first tried out a career under her given name, Lizzy Grant, shies away from directly interacting with the public, which is one of the reasons she’s received so much attention since her summer debut, “Video Games.”

After capturing the hearts of indie boys and bloggers, Lana Del Rey’s stint as Lizzy Grant became an outed “secret,” which she didn’t seem to take responsibility for. To her advantage, conversations about her authenticity and where her music belongs made more noise than her songs, “Video Games” and “Blue Jeans.”

As skittish as she was when we spoke on the phone, Lana Del Rey is at least consistent. And alluring, considering her handful of singles have sustained her fans and critics while her debut record is still months away. No less wide-eyed than when she started as a watering hole performer in Williamsburg, Lana Del Rey/Lizzy Grant seem to awaken the same question: How much control should female performers have within their work?

We posed this question to her and hashed out her thoughts on faith, suicide, and Bon Iver.

You’ve sang in church choirs and wear a cross in promo photos. Is your faith something that you want people to associate with your music?

I don’t really think that my faith is something I planned on people associating with my music. Although I did sing in church choirs when I was little, it was more because it was a small town and that was what you did. The faith that I have now doesn’t really come from organized religion. That’s such a hippie answer. But it comes via my own experiences in life, praying my way through hard times. It’s my understanding of a universal power. I’m not sure how much of it comes from the church. I do wear a cross but it’s because I like the image of it. I guess all of those points together might culminate into a sort of type you might think I’d be but they’re kind of just coincidences.

When do you pray?

I hope people don’t make me out to seem like some kind of evangelical. It’s not like that. I pray when I feel I need help, if I’m in trouble. Last night [I prayed]. I think when you go through a lot and you sort of run out of all of your resources, and you’re laying in bed at night, you don’t really know what to do, your last alternative is to pray to whoever is out there.

What inspired you to pray last night?

I’ve been nervous about the way things are going. I don’t want anything big to happen to myself; I just want to maintain the peace I’ve sort of had for the last five years of my life.

Peace with your career, or mental peace?

Definitely mental peace. I didn’t have peace with the way things were going at first but I just settled into it. I wanted a career where I could make the music that I wanted and sort of tour if I wanted to, but that is actually a huge ambition! I had no idea. I thought if you were a good singer that was in reach. But there’s so many good singers out there and it’s hard: it takes money to tour, and it takes money to make records– especially if you want to do them the way you want to do them.

I did become at peace with the way that things were going, which was sort of singing in New York and having my friends and my own small fan base. I had mental peace because I’ve felt like I’ve been doing the right thing with my life, and being a good person, and that gives me mental peace.

You said you wanted to make music in your own way. Are you going to retain complete control over your record?

It looks like that’s possible. Four weeks ago I signed with a couple of big labels but, from what I understand, the reason that they signed me was because what I was doing was working. So, in the last four weeks everyone has just been helpful in letting me get what I want.

I’m tired of making my own videos, I don’t want to do it anymore. So, I met this French movie director [Wood Kid] who I really loved and wanted to work with me and the label totally supported that and thought he was the right choice. He seems like a much better extension of what I was trying to do alone. And I wanted to continue working with my best friend who’s a film composer in Hollywood– not in pop music but movie trailers and things– and they love him too. I think making the record is going to be the easy part actually. It’s the other stuff that comes with it, which is what I’m not to sure about.

I feel like it’s a step in the right direction: still working with people who have a lot of integrity but they’re just much better at shit than I am.

It seems like the character in “Blue Jeans” lacks agency. What is your relationship to that character?

The more that I do interviews the more that I’m understanding that that is the impression people are getting, with the combination of “Video Games” and “Blue Jeans” together. But I think what I was trying to do with that song was more of an homage to true love. The fact is that I don’t actually let men rule my life. I’ve kind of learned the hard to way to live by my own values and do things for myself, but in that particular song I did find someone who I loved very much but in the end couldn’t be with. It’s the same premise in the third single for January, which is just honoring true love even though destiny brings you apart and not jumping into another relationship even though your old love has to be over. For me, it was more about paying tribute to a person who visually affected me at first and then also became a real soul connection. And it was like regardless of the way things turn out, in my heart I know that I’ll be true to you. I know that people think there’s sort of a masochistic thing but in a way I was trying to be wholesome about it because I felt like I would stick with him even if he wasn’t there, and maybe some people wouldn’t agree with it. But I think if you’re the kind of person who’s particular in love, that’s what you do.

I don’t think that power is a stable thing in relationships. Often it changes hands, and people can look at a relationship at one moment, see a bad side, and take that away. But how important do you think it is that women have agency in the songs they sing?

That’s a good question and I’m not really sure. I think it’s important to have agency within your own life, very important because otherwise you’ll get into trouble. But artistically I’ve explored different routes. I think what we’ve all learned is that you have to be accountable for yourself and inspired by music, but maybe not look to it for direction and guidance. It’s not usually a good source for fucking life 101. Everyone ends up killing themselves.

Have there been times when you’ve looked to a song for guidance, even when you were trying to get through the breakup with whomever this guy was?

I’ve sought comfort in melodies that inspired me, or reminded me of the beauty of things, and maybe saw inspiration in things, but in terms of guidance, no, I don’t look for guidance in music. I look for particular role models– I think that’s a much better idea. If I wanted a life like someone else’s I would probably study their life. I know music is powerful but it’s not my biggest power.

Would you want girls to look at Lana Del Rey as a role model?

I don’t know. What do you think?

I think one of the most inspiring things about Lana Del Rey is that she doesn’t try to mask her femininity at all, which is something I think a lot of indie singers do.

I think that’s true. I certainly enjoy my femininity but I don’t take advantage of it in my everyday life. I also didn’t plan on using it as a vehicle to get further along in music, because I’ve been singing for a long time and if people aren’t interested, they’re not interested. Looks don’t change that, I know from personal experience.

The pictures I’ve seen of your career as Lizzy Grant seem a lot less sexualized than promo shots for Lana Del Rey.

Maybe, but there are only a few, and they were taken by my sister. It’s hard to know from the inside looking out. I don’t think I was going for sexualized because I’ve found that sex isn’t a long lasting power. I think I was going for something beautiful, my own version of what I’ve found aesthetically pleasing.

What do you think the idea of femininity is within the indie community?

It’s hard for me to figure out what the indie community is. Like, Bon Iver is considered indie but everyone knows who he is, so he’s not really indie anymore.

There’s different levels of the indie community. There’s the real indie community, the super fucking underground people like who no one knows about– that’s the real indie community. And then there’s people who have sort of blown up and there’s a lot of information out about them and they tour and that’s like the A-level indie community. I’m trying to think of what girls are in that community, I don’t really know.

I kind of feel like I’ve been operating as a sole agent for a long time. I wanted to be a part of the indie community, but I wasn’t really in the indie community because I didn’t really have a community. I don’t really know about that stuff. It’s only recently come to my attention that people are trying to decide where this genre would fit.

It seems like you have a community now.

Yes, it does seem like I do. I’m not really sure who they are. All I know is that three months ago nothing was happening. I’ve been talking to a lot of people in the last few months and something has changed. I think people really like that one song and maybe “Blue Jeans” too. I guess I’m finding where I belong, but it doesn’t really matter because I’m just going to do my own thing anyways, and it looks like my managers and my label are okay with that. I’m not really sure where it’s going to go.

Do you feel pressure to look a certain way in the community you’re in now?

Not within this community or within the entertainment business. I have my own visions of beauty for a woman or a man. I have my own taste and preferences. But, do I feel pressure? Sometimes. I’m pretty happy though. My press shots are kind of glossy or whatever but, I don’t know, I cared about telling my story– not for anyone in particular but just ‘cause I wanted to, for my own sake.

You’ve said that you didn’t try to create a persona. How important do you think that persona is within music?

I think it’s important to some people. I think it was important to me a long time ago, when I was like 16 and I wanted to have fun with it, but nothing is that important to me now. I want to sort of do my thing. I sing and I like making records, that’s what I think about. I want to make my records and that’s sort of it.

Originally published on prefixmag.com with the headline Q&A: Lana Del Rey.

[adamwatchesmovies]

The Dragon Spell (2016)

I see low-budget animated films make the same mistakes made over and over again. I don’t understand why. I’m not saying the people behind The Dragon Spell aren’t talented but they had to know they didn’t have Toy Story 4 money, so why do they and their kin try to reach for the stars when they could so easily go for the cookie jar on the counter instead? Clumsily written, ugly and stiff, I wonder who could sit through this movie and honestly say they had a great time.

Years ago, a ferocious dragon terrorized the world until a tanner named Ciryll (Mike Pollock) defeated it. Now, the dragon’s spirit lingers in the body of the sorceress Siringa (Melissa Schoenberg), waiting for the day when it can re-claim its true form and resume its reign of terror. Meanwhile, Cyrill's son, Nicky (voiced by Kate Bristol) is determined to live up to his father's glory. When he and a magical talking bat named Eddie "The Magnificent" (Allen Enlow) accidentally travel through a portal to another realm, they embark on an adventure to return home.

Trying to scratch together a synopsis for this film must have scraped at least a couple of months off of my lifetime. I feel like I’d need to go on and on to properly explain what this movie is about to make you understand why the writing is so bad. The film begins with a promising flashback showing us the tanner defeating the dragon. It’s all done via stylized, 2-D animation and looks great. Cut to the main story. You assume the dragon was killed thousands of years ago, that what we just saw was one of the cornerstones of the vast library of myths and legends this world has to offer, but no. What we just saw happened less than a decade ago. The tanner? He’s still alive. The dragon’s skin? It’s just up in the rafters of his home. When the camera shows it for the first time, Nicky wows. What? Why? Has he never seen it before? It’s been in his house since he was born, hasn’t it? The wizard, Adler (William Tost), knows the dragon’s spirit is after the skin but he hasn’t gotten the monster slayer to destroy it for…. reasons. Keep in mind, this is the first few minutes. This gives you a hint of the sort of penmanship we’re dealing with.

While the textures, hair, etc. are detailed and professional, they’re slapped on top of ugly character models. You get strong “Local grocery store chain” vibes from everyone. Objects don’t have weight, the bat’s anatomy is all wrong, and a flying wooden ship sails through the air like its pilot is a pro when they’re actually at its wheel for the first time. The dragon, meanwhile, moves as gracefully as a duck on land. It doesn’t make any sense as a deliberate choice. Even as something incidental, it’ll have you scratching your head. The people at work HAD to know this wasn’t going to work. I don’t mean story-wise, I meant visually, someone had to - at some point - say “Hey, are we sure the art director isn’t perpetually drunk? these designs don’t work together at all.” The worst offender is Rocky (Alyson Leigh Rosenfeld) and her sidekick, a female squirrel so grotesque you swear there’s something wrong with its genes. There’s a twist about Rocky that’s so badly fumbled I had it figured out, then second-guessed myself just before the actual reveal. It’s one of those movies that’s so predictable it circles around again to surprise you, except when we’re talking about the witch, whose ultimate role in this story is so obvious it would’ve earned the writer a big, fat, red ‘F’ from their teacher.

Conceived as a comedic adventure for kids, the only time The Dragon Spell is funny is when you listen to the lyrics of its only song. I don’t know what’s going on there. The words make no sense in any context. Key verses include:

Nothing can go wrong if you know the animation

Life is a movie and you’re the animation

Sometimes life can be like a lead hole

Let your life play out like a movie

Live the life shine it every day

Make your movie with the computer of the day

...

Yeah. You read that correctly.

While these make for some laughs - the equivalent of a delicious cheeseburger in the middle of a barren wasteland - it’s not enough to recommend the film, even as something “So bad it’s good”. Though the screenplay isn't good enough to make me think slam-dunk character designs and movements would've made a difference, that's a big issue with this film - and others like it. The film is too ambitious for its budget and can't compensate with "easier" elements of the filmmaking process. By this, I mean the writing, songwriting, voicework, etc. the kind of things a single, hardworking and dedicated person could polish off on their own. If you can't get the animation down, you have to make up for it in another department.

The Dragon Spell only lasts 85 minutes but it feels like so much more. I can't even say that it's enlightening or educational as a failure. It's just dull and disappointing. “Magical lands have their downsides” indeed. (English Dub, May 27, 2022)

[asarunelson999]

Watch "Tabitjet Setting The Whole Mess Straight!!!" on YouTube

The ones who are liars 

"78. You claim that I, Paa Nabab: Yaa-Nanan “The Master Yaanuwn” was your master teacher and that you trust in what I teach and that you accept myself as your role model.

79. Surprisingly enough, you actually did not trust myself. You only used what I teach for your own ego. In fact, you only trusted in the evil ones and the lust and lusters they offer. You are totally committed to deception.

80. To us of Wu-S'abat', it is preferable to have trustworthy people who practice Wu-S'abat', our own doctrine, RATHER THAN TO TRY AND MIX OLD DOCTRINES of Bible and Quraan to gain followings as you do. Holding onto that which has EXPIRED.

81. You also maintained that you trusted in The Actual Facts, The Way, The Secrets of Yaanuwn and other things I presented to you in spite of such declaration. YOU ASSAULTED MY TEACHINGS WITH YOUR OWN INTERPRETATIONS of them and even try and eliminate parts you don’t wish to use to support your own gain.

82. The most outrageous atrocity of all is your fabrication of the culture and way of life of us as The United Sabaeans Worldwide, Yamassee Natives. You and your alterations and deceptions which you ascribe to myself that I am the one who appointed, selected, chosen, delegated, designated, nominated, assigned, authorized, YOU ARE A LIAR and I did not make you any such position.

83. The Omni-verse appointed me when the time was right for my incarnation June 26th, 1945 A.D., one second past 12 midnight on Tuesday. So I was named Kobina “Tuesday” and given many attributes over the years to represent each school I was sent to convey. WHO SENT YOU AND WHAT DO YOU HAVE THAT I HAVE NOT ALREADY SAID if you are indeed my successor? Stop the lies.

84. The only one who sent you is your own greed, lust, ego.

85. How many people have you preached to over the years that in OUR OLD EXPIRED DOCTRINE you were right and now you be man or woman enough to say you were wrong so you pretend we are still in the old outdated schools. Is this your pride being tested or your ego won’t let you say ‘he gave me answers to what I asked and all I asked was what I believed. As a Bible or Quraanic believer, I don’t know how to return to those I preached at and say this is what he really came to teach us. Put your pride aside.

86. It is best for you if only you know what is best for you.

87. EVERYTHING THAT I TOLD YOU WOULD COME TO PASS HAS HAPPENED.

88. I also told you back in Brooklyn that I had a vision of this day and time. I put this Islamic world in a book I did on Revelations. I told you and showed you the men in the news. I told you the Islamic world is being taken over by demons in human form, did I not?

89. I TOLD YOU IT IS TIME FOR US TO MOVE ON OUT OF ISLAMISM, MOORISH or otherwise. Some of you can’t let go. That is your choice yet if we were still Ansarullah community dressed as we both males and females dress, what would begin happening these days if we lived that life as Ansaars?"

                          'The ones who are liars                  

                and the ones who are deceivers'

                By: Baa'ah Baa'ah Yaanuwn

#FreeDrYork 💯☀️☀️☀️💚💚💚🥰🥰🥰🙂😎👍🏿

[alicefromwhichplanet]

Hello dear friend, I’ve been following your account for a while and find that I resonate with many of your thoughts. I try not to disturb you with long replies when reposting, but this topic is really interesting and I so much want to share my thoughts.

I’ve had a discussion with a close friend @xiaoddexingjiutang with whom I usually discuss transformers fandom issues with. We’ve had a kind of deconstruction of these three views and the mindsets/people with these mindsets behind them. Here’s the tentative conclusion:

Category 1: People who seemingly only care about and glorify Megatron’s image and do not care about Optimus.

These people are:

a)trying to show off their “difference” and “rebellion” by using Megatron as a prop. i.e. beautifying Megatron’s political stand and attacking on the conservatism/conventionality Optimus may represent. So instead of really reading the plots and analyzing the characters’ personalities and dynamic, they’re more like pouring their anger/frustration about life on Optimus or trying to show a sense of superiority by bragging some anti-mainstream political view but uses Optimus as a straw man.

b)Simply preferring the label of “antagonist” or “strong/cool villain” on Megatron without in-depth character analysis.

Category 2 and 3 are very, very common in Chinese social networks and on some platforms they take up 80% of our megop contents, making them unbearable to look at. These two views has something to do with the patriarchal portrayal of gender roles/heterosexual relationship.

In our case works like these are deeply connected to the generally accepted love pattern in East Asia, where a man plays dominant and “giving” role while a woman plays a submissive and “receiving” role. And it’s a traditional heterosexual relationship.

But since patriarchal society and gender stereotypes are common practice of the world I guess we suffer similar problems.

Both of these two categories are stuffing Megatron and Optimus into models of traditional heterosexual relationships with fixed, stereotypical gender roles. But there are differences:

Category 2: Stressing that OP is inferior to Megs and has to lean on him, playing the submissive role. The inner logic of these people is that what makes two people attracted to each other is not because how they are special to each other (being emotionally/spiritually compatible or have mutual understanding/respect and sparks of passion or sexual tension, etc.) but because one displays femininity and the other displays masculinity. In their tiny minds all romantic love happen only between a “man role” and “female role” constructed by the patriarchal society, one dominant, one subordinate, one leads the other follows. They feel they don’t need other conditions to explain “why they are in love” if it’s a boy and girl relationship, or something similar. A lot of Chinese fans do shipping like this. Huge logical fallacy to me.

Category 3: generally following the logic of category 2 of male/female dynamism, but this time try to portray Optimus into a “holy goddess”, a morally perfect being, betrayed and hurt by his (her) boyfriend but is still faithful to him till the day he changes his mind and again pamper him (her) like a princess. This is a pattern/model plot in online fiction, in Chinese it’s called “追妻火葬场”. Behind it is a twisted logic: the heroine (or the bottom in Boy love stories) has her/his life’s value defined by getting the hero(top)’s love. And as long as she/he waits long enough the hero who has been gaslighting her/him in the first place will eventually change his mind to love her and treat her like a queen, so this way she gets her eventual success in life.

Also category 2 and 3 in our country call themselves fans of Optimus but actually I don’t think they like either of the characters. Thay barely know the real characters. They just use them and stuff them into their stereotypical fancy.

It's really hard to make clear all these but you can see that after a close look none of these people are really paying attention to the characters/plots. They are in general exploiting the characters as props to act out their own twisted worldview. As my friend @xiaoddexingjiutang said, their works don’t show who Megatron and Optimus are, but who they are. So their creations are basically a farce and a illustration of their bad taste.

They miss the chance of perceiving the power dynamic between two strong and charismatic equals, each representing a complex worldview, that are both conflicting and encompassing at the same time. Instead they use new characters to repeat their own problematic world view, like running in circles.

We need to pity them.

Think my fundamental problem with engaging with a lot of MegOP content is that, for a ship composed of characters who are the Ultimate Archnemeses type who are each other's only equal (in almost all continuities), there's a lot of MOP content that seems to either 1. overwhelmingly prioritize Megatron even though Optimus is just as interesting a character or 2. all but makes Optimus subservient to Megatron, be it by making him intellectually inferior or by straight up making him into an uke/borderline straightwashed partner for the burly, manly Megatron. And it's annoying slkdfjlksd

Edit: I forgot the secret third option which is 3. make Optimus "interesting" by turning him into a victim constantly bullied/taken advantage of/brainwashed and make Megatron be the one who saves him like a knight saving a damsel.

[tetsuslove]

Warnings: just Actor! Sukuna who is actually a softie in real life and your hubby <3૮ ˶ᵔ ᵕ ᵔ˶ ა no proofreading

ᥫ᭡ Sukuna x gn.Reader

🤍: some hcs of this man🥰 suggestions are open for a while!

Actor!Sukuna who is really happy that he got the chance to play the king of curses of the series Jujustu Kaisen and gets popular for being a good actor! His fan base is rising and it makes him so happy!

Actor!Sukuna who is known for his good looking, manners and his humor. It’s quit a shook how he can change his gentleman manners into his role as the killer curse also named Sukuna. Since the director liked his name so much that he even took it for the curse’s name

Actor!Sukuna who is happily married to you! Seeing him holding your hand gently with the beautiful ring he always like always wears, shows the world that you are the power couple! When he is playing, he ofc has to take it off but soon as the scene is done, he wears it right away again. It gives him comfort and when he looks at his rings, he always thinks of you<3

Actor!Sukuna who is also a model and is also seen in some big brands! He gets exited when a new brand wants him to model but he always makes sure that you are also comftable with it when they shoot with some other models. He doesn’t like when some female models touches him after the shooting, as if it’s okay to touch him like in the shooting. He only glares at them and ignores them after showing them his ring with a smirk telling them “ you see that?”

Actor!Sukuna is maybe big man and has lots of muscles but can be a little, lost puppy if you are too busy :(( he wants your attention as soon as possible when he is at home after a long filing for the new season which is coming out soon and needed to retake some scene after forgetting the line or other reasons. When you are sitting at your big on your big bed, watch him putting his head on your legs and pounting what happened today. Pls pet his head! He gets so weak for it<3

Actor!Sukuna who also like other celebrities can get hate for what ever reason. He also have a “ i don’t give a fuck” life style but it can also have an affect on him! But he always finds his comfort from you! You don’t know how happy he is to have you:(

Actor!Sukuna who gets MAD when somebody makes a joke on you or tries to hit on him! It can be about your appearance, you humor, you personality or what ever. If a so called “fangirl” or even a female model he had a shooting with commenting on his post with you “ such a handsome man ! We should have a shooting again, alone this time ;) ” or “ why are you still with them ??” He wouldn’t leave the comment igrnored like his hate comments. He would write a big ass essay or the funniest comment that you even have to laugh. Seeing you smiling after what he wrote makes him the happiest husband ! He just likes to show the world that he is your husband!

Actor!Sukuna who can actually ride a bike. It adds another plus why he is a auch an interesting man. He likes to ride it at night in a big city. All the lights and night vibes gives him chills. If you want, he likes to take you to a fast food restaurant:) just having a lovely and interesting couple moment<3 If not, he is also totally okay with it!

Actor!Sukuna also known as your husband, loves his job and can’t wait to see together with you the second season when it comes out!

[toughgirlchallenges]

Sophie Pierce: Healing Through Nature – A Journey of Grief, Love, and Wild Swimming

In this episode of the Tough Girl Podcast, we sit down with Sophie Pierce, a writer, broadcaster, and passionate wild swimmer from Dartmoor in Devon, UK. Sophie shares her profound journey through grief, particularly the loss of her son Felix in 2017, and how the healing power of nature has been an anchor in her life.

Sophie talks about her memoir, "The Green Hill," which explores themes of love, loss, and the transformative effects of wild places. She also discusses her work as a journalist with the BBC, her love for exploring new places, and the growing popularity of outdoor swimming. We delve into her co-authored wild swimming guides, including her most recent book, "Wild Swimming Walks Exmoor and North Devon.”

This episode highlights the mental health benefits of outdoor swimming, the importance of community, and how nature can help reset and heal us. Sophie offers insights on navigating grief, the support she received from friends and family, and how she continues to find solace in nature.

Join us for an inspiring and heartfelt conversation with Sophie Pierce as we explore the intersection of nature, grief, and resilience.

***

Don't miss out on the latest episodes of the Tough Girl Podcast, released every Tuesday at 7am UK time! Be sure to hit the subscribe button to stay updated on the incredible journeys and stories of strong women.

 By supporting the Tough Girl Podcast on Patreon, you can make a difference in increasing the representation of female role models in the media, particularly in the world of adventure and physical challenges. Your contribution helps empower and inspire others. Visit www.patreon.com/toughgirlpodcast to be a part of this important movement. 

Thank you for your invaluable support!

***

Show notes

Who is Sophie

Being based in Dartmoor in South west England

Living close to the sea and a wild moorland media

Working as a journalist for many years

Her love of exploring 

The loss of her son in 2017

Where her love of exploring and swimming came from 

Her childhood and growing up with 3 brothers

Being quite ferrel when younger

Getting back into outdoor swimming 

Connecting with friends and exploring new places

Outdoor swimming and it’s increase in popularity

How outdoor swimming have changed over the past 25 years

Why its about your mindset and having a desire to be out in nature and explore

Why all you need is a map, a swimming costume and a pair of walking boots

The benefits of communities 

Looking out for one another while in the water

The importance of having fun at any age

Going wild swimming in the River Dart ever day during the summer 

The impact cold water can have on your mental health and how it can help reset you

Dealing with the loss of her son, Felix

SUDEP ‘the Sudden, Unexpected Death of someone with EPilepsy’

How her life changed afterwards

Learning to incorporate her grief into her life 

Finding spending time in nature to be helpful

Charity SUDEP Action

Dealing with grief 

Book: The Green Hill: Letters to a Son 

Writing a series of letters to Felix – composed during walks and swims taken close to his burial place by the river Dart

Still feeling connected to Felix 

Why it was hard to go back to the places where her and Felix had spent time

Wanting to explore new places and create new memories

Remembering Felix as a child

Processing her grief 

Having some counselling but not finding it helpful 

Book: Weathering By Ruth Allen

The narrative imposed about grief by society 

Not feeling the urge to process grief

Making something beautiful out of something terrible 

Feeling a loss when the the book was published and not having anything to focus on 

The support from friends and family and what helped 

Living in a small town and having to face people

What happens when a year or two passes

Getting use to living with the loss 

Why the second year can be tougher than the first

Published Wild Swimming Walks guide books

Wild Things Publishing

Artist - James Lewis

Push back from locals who don’t want to share their beauty sports 

The impact sewage is having on beautiful wild places

Surfers Against Sewage App

Doing a risk assessment before getting into the river/water

Writing to your MP and complaining about the sewage situation

How to connect with Sophie on social media

Advice for women dealing with grief and the loss of a child

  Social Media

Website: www.sophiepierce.co.uk   

Instagram: @mssophiepierce 

Twitter/X: @sophiepierce 

  Check out this episode!

[radlymona]

At one point in time, you people have to admit you didn't actually read the books (or did so with your eyes closed):

Lily feels no remorse, nor does she think it's wrong to half-smile at the bully who’s targeting your so-called friend.

We know that they're already on the outs by this point in time because Snape has been hanging around would-be Death Eaters who are implied to have attacked her friend, Mary MacDonald. She's obviously a lot less sympathetic to him because he's changed from the boy she originally met.

This type of hazing was pretty common during British schools in the 1970s. Many teenagers would have found this funny because it was so normalised. It's almost as if a) Hogwarts is meant to satirise aspects of the British school system and b) show that Lily wasn't a perfect person despite what Harry might have conjured in his head. She was just as capable of having a mean thought/reaction. Because that's how teenagers act, they can often be pretty nasty to even close friends. Harry was a wee bit distracted with what his dad was doing to give it much thought. You have to look at characters/relationships in the context they were written in rather than what you personally think they should act like.

She portrays Draco Malfoy as an irredeemable, terrible character because he’s a rich kid spoiled by his parents, using his power and influence to bully those weaker than him. Yet, she gives James the benefit of the doubt, even though he behaved exactly the same way: a rich bully who used his status and his friends to gang up on the vulnerable.

I think one of the reasons why so much recent HP criticism falls flat on its face is that fails to remember that the series is written from Harry's point of view. Obviously JKR's authorial voice can be seen in the books, but Harry's values and perspectives are written from the point of a teenage boy.

Harry is going to be a lot less sympathetic to Malfoy, who he's personally witnessed years' worth of racism and classism from, than he is to his own father that he knows sacrificed his own life to protect him, worked in an anti-Voldemort organisation, and who he knows acted as an extraordinarily loyal and loving friend.

From early interviews, Rowling claimed Pansy Parkinson is practically the reincarnation of Satan, even though, of all the antagonists, Pansy is probably one of the least relevant and harmless. This is simply because Rowling projected onto her the stereotypical “mean girls” who mock those who read and study—something Rowling clearly couldn’t stand

It's almost as if early on, Pansy was a more important antagonist, given that schoolyard feuds dominated the series pre-Voldermort's return? It's almost as if authors draw from their own experiences, and that a schoolyard bully rather than a genocidal maniac is going to be a lot more relevant for most kids reading the books. It's almost as if when JKR was conducting these interviews, the true recipient audience was meant to be children.

In Rowling's world, there are always two kinds of women. When it comes to younger, adolescent characters, there are the "good" women—those who don’t fit the typical feminine mold, the weird ones (like Luna), the tomboys who are “one of the guys” (like Ginny), or the overly studious ones who don’t have time for frivolous things like reading magazines or talking about boys (like Hermione). In other words, the cool girls, the ones who are supposed to be role models, are those who "aren’t like the other girls." But not because they’re deconstructing gender roles consciously—they just happen to embody the fantasy of the woman who can give you kids while still being one of your bros.

It's interesting that you pick three very different female characters who have no real common interests or personalities and who get along and clash at different times and yet consider them to be one type of female character. It's almost as if in children/young adult fiction, social misfit-type characters have always been the central focus because authors know that these kids are far more likely to be their audience.

And it's also isn't even true? Ginny is a cool girl, she's a great quidditch player, pretty, popular, and known for being great at offensive magic though she isn't a prodigy or a genius. If anything, she's sort of a breath of fresh air in that she isn't this super-skilled character for the love interest to glorify, but a regular if not talented girl whose spirit and nerve are what makes her stand out.

On the other hand, she glorifies characters like Ginny, who has a pretty nasty attitude towards any girl she doesn’t consider cool or "not like the other girls." Ginny treats Fleur like a witch when Fleur has done nothing wrong—her only crime is being incredibly beautiful, knowing it, and not constantly apologizing for it.

This must be projection at this point because she just doesn't do this "towards any girl...", she is mean to (1) adult woman who she obviously feels insecure towards for being exceptionally beautiful. You know...because she's 14. And the story immediately contradicts Ginny when Harry reminds her that Fleur was good enough to be a Triwizard Champion! It's almost as JKR writes a tongue-in-check about the experiences of being a teenage girl, through characters like Hermione and Ginny.

These are "manic pixie dream girls," hiding a deeply internalized misogyny as they are presented as individuals opposed to the “other” women—the “other” being less cool because they lack traditionally masculine traits, and thus are less than.

Again, nothing in the text actually supports this. None of these girls have deep internalised misogyny, beyond what a normal teenage girl might have. Just because they don't get along with every other teenage girl in the vicinity, doesn't mean they secretly hate other women. The manic pixie dream girl is actually a very specific male fantasy from male-written stories, that doesn't apply to every vaguely gnc female character you come across. You're projecting your own expectations for how non-hyperfeminine female characters might act.

We see this not only with how Fleur is treated but also with the disdain or prejudice Hermione shows towards girls like Lavender or the Patil sisters, just because they act like normal teenagers instead of validating themselves through academia to compensate for their inferiority complex (cough, cough).

The way Lavender and the Patil sisters are viewed, is because the series is from Harry's point of view. And surprise, surprise, teenage boys have a tendency to think teenage girls are either one dimensional or so emotionally complex that they need a manual to figure out. Hmm, I wonder what point JKR is making here? Perhaps she is poking fun at teenage boys' perspective here?

You're like so close to getting what JKR is trying to say with Hermione but so very far away. JKR is making fun of herself and the way she acted as a know-it-all kid in school via Hermione. She's blatantly said it more than a few times. Hermione alienates her friends throughout the books because of her too-logical approaches and lack of empathy. Just because the books don't come out and say it, doesn't mean it isn't there. When Lavendar's rabbit dies, Hermione pretty coldly tells her off for believing in Trelawney. JKR leaves it up to her teenage audience to realise that maybe swallowing your words and being empathetic to a friend in need is more important. It's almost as if there are implicit lessons in these books for literal children, that you seemed to have to miss.

I'm going to hold your hand gently when I say this- being an unfeminine girl, who isn't considered pretty, and whose self-value entirely rests on their intelligence is a very alienating experience for a teenage girl. Especially one from the pre-2000s. That is what Hermione represents, and just because she isn't the sanitised picture of "girls supporting other girls" type feminism, that doesn't mean her characterisation is worth nothing. You have all the sympathy in the world for "cool girl" type characters who rarely suffer socially in real life, and little sympathy for Hermione-like girls who are socially ostracised throughout school. If you don't understand this very core concept to Hermione's character, you're unsurprisingly going to misunderstand what JKR is trying to say through her.

Then we have the adult female characters, where Rowling’s toxic and incredibly conservative view of motherhood kicks in. Except for McGonagall, the rest of the adult women who are seen in a positive light are either already mothers or end up becoming mothers. And for them, motherhood is everything. They are mothers first and women second, in every case.

I know this going to be hard for you to understand, but JKR was raised in a very transitional period for women in human history. She was attending school just as women were mass entering the professional workforce and leaving the domestic sphere. She was also writing the books after just having become a single mother, and reflecting on her relationship with her own mother. Ergo, there is a significant and very affectionate role mothers play in the books.

Molly as the matriarch of seven children in a poor family is obviously drawing upon the experiences of British working-class housewives in the late 20th century. The seemingly cool, distant and refined Narcissa is obviously based on perceptions of upper-class British women. JKR plays with many stereotypes and tropes in British culture, the books are sort of built on them. But she does her best to add complexity to supporting characters she doesn't have the page time to add in-depth storylines for.

She does so by having Molly enter the Order and fight Bellatrix one-on-one in the final battle. Narcissa making the single most important choice in the entire series, was her way of showing that people we consider to be cold and cruel are capable of deep love and affection. JKR giving these two important moments to Molly and Narcissa wasn't done to keep them in a conservative box, but to show her deep love and appreciation for women of an older generation who were traditionally stuck in the domestic sphere. Contrastingly, Tonks going out to fight in the Battle of Hogwarts two months after giving birth is a nod to a new generation of working mums.

Lily's sacrifice for Harry contrasts male-centred media, where the father would traditionally be the most important parent. Even the books deconstruct the initial focus on James to switch to Lily later on, even highlighting that Harry's much more like his mother in nature despite everybody's expectations of him. JKRs' portrayal of motherhood is thus her own exploration of the changing role of women and mothers in the latter part of the 20th century. It's about her context, her feelings about a very complex role that even many otherwise, progressive millennial women find hard to dissociate from and remain wholly distinct individuals.

She presents characters she sells as "good," whose attitudes are absolute trash, yet she continues to insist that they’re good and perfect.

Quite honestly, I don't think you understand how to write a complex, layered character. People aren't going to be good or bad 100% of the time. JKR does not tell us they're good and perfect, in fact there's about seven books worth of deconstructing how Hermione's lack of emotional intelligence is a complete hindrance to how she interacts with her loved ones.

Ginny is probably a projection of who Rowling wishes she could’ve been, and Luna is the quirky girl who isn’t “threatening” to other women, and is treated with a condescending, paternalistic lens. They are either Rowling’s aspirational figures or archetypes that don’t bother her, or they’re reduced to filler characters who are mistreated by the narrative.

You have made this up in your head. Looking at two very female different characters with layered personalities and storylines and reducing them to archetypes/filler characters is your misogyny talking. Ginny's growing bravery and sheer nerve becomes important when she becomes a central DA member and later one of the three leaders defying the Death Eaters at Hogwarts. Luna's out of the box thinking encourages Harry and the others to think creatively. She is someone who helps Harry process his grief and makes him feel less alone, without any romantic undertones which is actually a very progressive male-female friendship for the early 2000s. Are Ginny and Luna ultimately supporting characters? Sure. But so are Fred, George and Neville and they are treated with a very similar level of complexity/development. There's just not as central to the storyline unlike the golden trio...like almost every other character in the book series.

I didn't even include "Hermione is a self-insert" because it's a very common thing for authors to have an Author Avatar, but people (read: misogynists) only seem to have a problem when female authors do it, even when they are lovingly poking fun at them.

When it comes to Lily, the problem is that Rowling spends half the saga painting her as some kind of Mother Teresa. She’s the quintessence of motherhood—but not a conscious, modern motherhood, but one rooted in traditional Judeo-Christian ideals. This is the kind of motherhood that can do no wrong, the one that represents women because, in this view, a woman can’t be fulfilled unless she’s a mother.

No she doesn't. You again made this up all up in your head. The whole point is that Harry tragically knows little about his actual parents, because the Durseys told him next to zero and the adults who were their friends can only tell him a romanticised version of who his parents actually were. This is a sort of common thing when it comes to talking about dead people- you're much more likely to focus on their positive attributes. Talk to anyone who's lost a loved one like ever.

Clearly, she must be a saint, because everyone describes her as such. And while the narrative does question James’s perfection, even if vaguely and unsuccessfully, it doesn’t do the same with Lily. Harry questions his father’s actions but never his mother’s.

He doesn't know her. She's dead. How the hell are you going to question the morality of a dead person who you've only seen a few memories about (most of which he sees in the last portion of the series)? It's almost as if one of Harry's most important characteristics is that he's an orphan whose greatest wish is to know his family and that apparently went completely over your head. Incredibly media literacy going on over here.

He never stops to think about how problematic it is that his mother almost laughed at Severus or refused to hear his apology, or that she couldn’t empathize with what he was going through, knowing full well the kind of situation Severus had at home.

2. I'm sorry but why the hell would he? This is not yourfaveisproblematic.tumblr.com circa 2013. This is a teenage boy who's been bullied by a grown adult for five years. A few glimpses into a poor childhood isn't going to change that. Especially when a) Snape has been pretty cruelly delving into his own memories and b) does so even more intensely straight afterwards.

Rowling is obsessed with showing her own moral line through her characters and doesn’t realize how incoherent it is to portray Lily as someone who always does the right thing when what we actually see of her suggests that, if she really liked James all along, not only is she a hypocrite, but she’s also quite superficial with questionable principles

Again, the tragedy of Lily is that she's dead. She died at 21. We don't what changed between her and James for her to fall in love with him, nor the extent to which he bullied Snape (and how mutual it was). Their whole point is they act as the ghosts looming above the main story. In fact, their last appearance has them literally return as practically ghosts. What's not clicking. We're not supposed to really know who they are beyond broad strokes. Otherwise, it would be less of a tragedy.

But Rowling brushes all this aside, as she does with so many other things, because to her, Lily was a role model, despite the fact that anyone with common sense can see she was just a terrible friend who got tired of justifying why she hung out with a poor, scruffy kid and ultimately decided it made more sense to date the rich, handsome bully.

No, she didn't. Lily isn't a glorified role model. She did what many loving parents would do by sacrificing herself for the sake of her son. Parental sacrifice has happened commonly in wars globally throughout all of human history. Molly, Arthur, Remus, Tonks, Lucius, Narcissa, also make sacrifices for the sake of their children. It's actually almost anti Judean-Christian (a term that's practically a misnomer in itself) because if you've read any part of the bible, you'll see that it's patriarchs sacrificing their sons (Abraham-Issac and later God-Jesus). This tends to happen when you have a pop culture knowledge about important literary influences.

The actual reason Lily hung out with the poor kid is because he's the only magical person she knows before Hogwarts. They even have a fight during their first conversation. The reason they stop being friends is because he's hanging out with the wizard equivalent of Hitler Youth and then later calls her a slur. Which you seem to have tiptoed around throughout this whole stupid post. Which seems to be a long, uninformed cover story for the fact that you don't like that Lily was slightly mean to Snape one time when they were 16.

More than anything, you seem fixated on "show don't tell" but what you really want is the author to spell out everything according to your own set of values and principles. You want every complex question answered for you and seem utterly clueless to the lessons contained in the book, and the culture and tropes JKR is referencing.

Tldr: Examine characters and relationships in the context they were written, not from your own perspective of what you think should happen. i.e. Have media literacy.

On an unrelated note, please never write a book.

Lily doesn’t seem to think she’s done anything wrong by insulting his poverty and aligning herself with his abusers - only Severus is remorseful, and the trauma that caused him to lash out was considerably worse than the trauma that caused her to lash out. She believes he deserves it, as apparently she believed his abuse was amusing. And I’d be totally fine with this from a character perspective because it’s the teenage condition to be self-centred and poor at self-reflection. But the *narrative* (and the author in interviews) doesn’t believe Lily was in the wrong here. And it believes Lily made the correct moral judgment on the two boys when she casts Severus off for his crime and falls in love with James despite his. But I just don’t buy into that framing, and I didn’t even when I was 10. The use of the word ‘mudblood’ while in considerable distress is not a greater sin than sexual assault.

Lily feels no remorse, nor does she think it's wrong to half-smile at the bully who’s targeting your so-called friend. She doesn’t even consider that this might be why your supposed best friend insulted you in the first place. But here’s the thing: this isn't Lily's fault. It's J.K. Rowling's fault, and the way she portrays ethical dilemmas throughout the series, blurring the lines between what's morally right and wrong. Now, if you’ll allow me, before diving into the dynamics between Lily and Severus, I’d like to provide some context as to why I believe the biggest issue with many of the characters’ attitudes in the series lies in Rowling’s constant attempt to project her own moral compass through her writing. In doing so, she falls into repeated inconsistencies and creates a narrative that’s all over the place when it comes to how certain characters are treated.

Rowling is never consistent. She portrays Draco Malfoy as an irredeemable, terrible character because he’s a rich kid spoiled by his parents, using his power and influence to bully those weaker than him. Yet, she gives James the benefit of the doubt, even though he behaved exactly the same way: a rich bully who used his status and his friends to gang up on the vulnerable. From early interviews, Rowling claimed Pansy Parkinson is practically the reincarnation of Satan, even though, of all the antagonists, Pansy is probably one of the least relevant and harmless. This is simply because Rowling projected onto her the stereotypical “mean girls” who mock those who read and study—something Rowling clearly couldn’t stand. On the other hand, she glorifies characters like Ginny, who has a pretty nasty attitude towards any girl she doesn’t consider cool or "not like the other girls." Ginny treats Fleur like a witch when Fleur has done nothing wrong—her only crime is being incredibly beautiful, knowing it, and not constantly apologizing for it. And this treatment of female characters throughout the series deserves a proper gendered critique, because they fall into every stereotype and archetype set by the traditional male gaze.

In Rowling's world, there are always two kinds of women. When it comes to younger, adolescent characters, there are the "good" women—those who don’t fit the typical feminine mold, the weird ones (like Luna), the tomboys who are “one of the guys” (like Ginny), or the overly studious ones who don’t have time for frivolous things like reading magazines or talking about boys (like Hermione). In other words, the cool girls, the ones who are supposed to be role models, are those who "aren’t like the other girls." But not because they’re deconstructing gender roles consciously—they just happen to embody the fantasy of the woman who can give you kids while still being one of your bros. It’s a common male fantasy, where women abandon the graceful, ethereal, delicate image to fit into a set of needs the modern man has. These are "manic pixie dream girls," hiding a deeply internalized misogyny as they are presented as individuals opposed to the “other” women—the “other” being less cool because they lack traditionally masculine traits, and thus are less than. We see this not only with how Fleur is treated but also with the disdain or prejudice Hermione shows towards girls like Lavender or the Patil sisters, just because they act like normal teenagers instead of validating themselves through academia to compensate for their inferiority complex (cough, cough).

Then we have the adult female characters, where Rowling’s toxic and incredibly conservative view of motherhood kicks in. Except for McGonagall, the rest of the adult women who are seen in a positive light are either already mothers or end up becoming mothers. And for them, motherhood is everything. They are mothers first and women second, in every case. Lily is Harry’s mother, who sacrifices herself for him. Molly is the Weasley matriarch, whose entire life revolves around her kids—she hasn’t even looked for a job (which wouldn’t be a bad idea, considering the family’s financial situation), nor does she have any aspirations beyond knitting sweaters and worrying about her children. Even Narcissa, a negative character throughout most of the saga, earns her redemption solely because she loves her son and is willing to risk everything for him. Nymphadora Tonks, a 25-year-old woman, ends up pregnant by a man 13 years older than her and goes from being an independent Auror with her own life to a passive housewife waiting for her man, who is off having an existential crisis. The adult women in the saga aren’t independent individuals—they’re extensions of their children. And any woman who isn’t a perfect, self-sacrificing mother (like Merope Gaunt) is either a psychopath or portrayed as a terrible person.

What I’m getting at is that Rowling is far from impartial in the moral narrative of the story. In fact, she’s absolutely inconsistent. She presents characters she sells as "good," whose attitudes are absolute trash, yet she continues to insist that they’re good and perfect. This is especially obvious with her female characters, because throughout the seven books, she constantly emphasizes her ideal of the "perfect woman" in terms of tastes, motivations, and behavior. Hermione is a self-insert, Ginny is probably a projection of who Rowling wishes she could’ve been, and Luna is the quirky girl who isn’t “threatening” to other women, and is treated with a condescending, paternalistic lens. They are either Rowling’s aspirational figures or archetypes that don’t bother her, or they’re reduced to filler characters who are mistreated by the narrative.

When it comes to Lily, the problem is that Rowling spends half the saga painting her as some kind of Mother Teresa. She’s the quintessence of motherhood—but not a conscious, modern motherhood, but one rooted in traditional Judeo-Christian ideals. This is the kind of motherhood that can do no wrong, the one that represents women because, in this view, a woman can’t be fulfilled unless she’s a mother. Lily dies for her son, and that love creates a divine, protective magic. She’s beautiful, popular, and one of the most popular guys at school is after her. Clearly, she must be a saint, because everyone describes her as such. And while the narrative does question James’s perfection, even if vaguely and unsuccessfully, it doesn’t do the same with Lily. Harry questions his father’s actions but never his mother’s. He never stops to think about how problematic it is that his mother almost laughed at Severus or refused to hear his apology, or that she couldn’t empathize with what he was going through, knowing full well the kind of situation Severus had at home. When a narrative tells you something but never shows it, and worse, never questions it, that’s a problem. Something doesn’t add up. Rowling is obsessed with showing her own moral line through her characters and doesn’t realize how incoherent it is to portray Lily as someone who always does the right thing when what we actually see of her suggests that, if she really liked James all along, not only is she a hypocrite, but she’s also quite superficial with questionable principles. But this is never addressed, never explored. It would be fascinating if it were, giving the character more depth and making her more relatable. But Rowling brushes all this aside, as she does with so many other things, because to her, Lily was a role model, despite the fact that anyone with common sense can see she was just a terrible friend who got tired of justifying why she hung out with a poor, scruffy kid and ultimately decided it made more sense to date the rich, handsome bully.