#who's been openly supportive of and even enthusiastic about her success and fame

[buddiekinard]

there are way too many weird jokes about taylor and travis on here for me

[minervacasterly]

Eleanor, by the Grace of God, Queen of the English, Duchess of the Normans & Duchess of the Aquitanians and Countess of the Angevins

“… the young heiress was fair enough to content any king … “Charming,” “welcoming” and “lively” (avenante, vailante, courtoise) are the words used by the chroniclers to portray her … Her education had not of course furnished her with the orderly intellectual baggage fit for an abbess. Though doubtless, like all the heirs of her race, she had her tutors, her real school had been a varied experience …” (Amy Ruth Kelly, Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings)

The END OF THE EAGLETS’ REBELLION AND ELEANOR’S CAPTIVITY:

“Henry had no need of trumpets to tell him that sedition in Poitou had not been quenched by the imprisonment of Eleanor. He had suppressed the rebellion that had threatened the Angevin empire with a success so signal that it was popularly attributed to the miraculous intervention of Saint Thomas. But to the prescient Angevin the conclusion had less the character of finale than of omnious prelude. The whole uprising had revealed, not only to him, but to his enemies, the extent of a many-sided discontent that needed only coherence to be overwhelming. The queen, though in his hands, remained the object of intrigue, the inspiration of her rival foot-loose sons and of the turbulent fortune seekers who found their profit in war and rapine. The king turned over in his mind the problem of what to do with his captive … To divorce her might be tempting; the grounds were excellent –treason and two more degrees of consanguinity than had been sufficient in Louis’s case- but he could not set her free in her own estates to make some new alliance of her own. Capable as he was of reading the lessons of history, he had no mind to repeat Louis’s fatal blunder. He needed legates to suggest to him how scrupulous the King of France would be in the interest of his vassal, if once she were at liberty. To keep her in custody (forever?) might hinder new intrigues … In the court there remained alone of the famous coterie of the Plantagenets the Capetian princess Alais. In 1176 she was sixteen. No fault was found with her person. She was comely, gifted, nobly dowered, and she too had been polished for her role in the school of Marie of Champagne [Louis VII’s third wife]. Why was the Frankish princess alone of all that noble company of dames choises left unwed in the palaces of the Plantagenet king? Why had other marriages been proposed for the Count of Poitou? The world made these inquiries and the Capets pressed them home. In 1177, in extreme agitation, Louis appealed to Rome to enforce the marriage of Alais to the Count of Poitou [Richard] on pain of interdict on all the lands of Henry Fitz-Empress on both sides of the channel … Giraldus relates that Henry, confident of his prospect of getting rid of the queen through his appeal to the Pope, intended to take the Capetian princess for himself, disinherit the fierce eaglets of Poitou as the bastard of a consanguineous marriage, and rear a new progeny to possess the Angevin empire. Giraldus, never more piously enthusiastic than when exposing Henry’s vices, declares that after his separation from the queen, the king turned openly to the evil courses he had long secretly pursued. Briefly he flaunted the beautiful Clifford, and when she had vanished from the scene, he made a mistress of his precious hostage, the daughter of his overlord, the bride affianced to his son.  Did the Angevin mean to erase from his life story the chapter of his union with the disastrous Poitevin and go back to his earlier plan for a primary alliance with his overlord? It was recalled that before he had sold his birthright for Poitou and Aquitaine, he had sought a marriage with Louis’s eldest daughter, the Countess of Champagne …” (Kelly, Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings)

Henry II of England’s relationship and ultimate goal with Alice of France is still being debated. Whether or not he intended to divorce his wife (a woman who had given him plenty of sons) and who in spite of their rebellion, were of a fighting age to defend their respective dominions and perpetuate the new Plantagenet dynasty, is immaterial. Louis VII of France was against the match and so were most of the clergy. Following the death of their eldest son, the young King Henry; Eleanor and Henry II seemed to reach a peace of sorts.When Henry died, he was mourned by his subjects. Whatever his personal flaws, he had governed the country well and restored order to the anarchy caused by the civil war that erupted as a result of his cousin Stephen being chosen over his grandfather’s chosen heir, Henry II’s mother, Matilda. In spite of this, he left a strong inheritance to his surviving male heirs, among them his wife’s favorite, Richard who became the new King of England

“… he had left his inedible stamp on all of France and the British Isles. Until his last years he had mastered every king, duke, and count who had tested him. He was perhaps the most famous man in Christendom. And his fame burned across the ages to follow. For Henry II, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, count of Anjou, Maine, and Touraine, and lord of Ireland, had begun a dynasty that shaped the future of Europe for more than two centuries.” (Dan Jones, The Plantagenet Warrior Kings and Queens who made England)

Despite their quarrels, Eleanor was well aware of the big shoes her favorite son would have to fill. And more importantly whom he’d choose to look after England when he went seeking glory in the Holy land and elsewhere.

“Richard processed to Westminster behind ranks of bishops and abbots, barons, knights, and the solemn officers of England ... Perhaps the proudest of them all was Eleanor of Aquitaine. To see Richard crowned king of England represented the apogee of his mother’s ambition, fulfilling as it did a famous prophecy of Merlin: “The eagle of the broken covenant will rejoice in [her] third nesting.” Immediately on Henry’s death, her beloved son had released her form captivity and restored the lands and revenues that had been taken from her as punishment for the rebellion of 1173; even before he had arrived in England, Richard had sent a command that his mother, now aged sixty-six, should occupy a preeminent place in English government. She had spent the weeks preceding the coronation traveling around the country, holding court, and extracting oaths of allegiance from the great and good of the realm …” (Jones, The Plantagenet Warrior Kings and Queens who made England)

When Richard I of England died, a part of Eleanor died. But she remained resilient as ever, doing what had to be done to safeguard the new king of England (her youngest son, John “Lackland”) throne. As a result, John came to her aid when she was about to be captured by her grandson, Arthur of Brittany, son of her late second son, Geoffrey. Since war had broken out between Philip II of France and John I of England, the former believed he could gain the upper hand by showing his first ace under his sleeve in the form of Eleanor’s grandson. The teen (arguably) had a better claim than his uncle. John was the youngest of the eaglets, Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine’s brood while Arthur was the son of their second son. Angered by Eleanor’s decision to support his uncle, Arthur pushed back by laying siege to the Castle of Mirebeau, where she was staying, in Aquitaine (modern day Western France).

Eleanor had been through all sorts of adventures and survived all kinds of treacherous plots and court intrigues. Her determination, wit, ambition as well as her struggle to preserve the courts of love and other knightly romantic culture through her granddaughter Blanche of Castile, are a testament to the incredible woman that she was. After that foiled attempt though, Eleanor opted for a rest that was long overdue. Like many aristocratic women of the medieval world, she took the veil and became a nun. She died three years later in 1204 and was entombed Fontevrault Abbey in the county of Anjou next to Henry II.

[americanroyalwatcher]

Why we love Kate, not Meghan

I’ve been seeing the “If you love her (Catherine) you don’t need to hate her (Meghan)” meme going around on IG. I had to clear things up for myself and anybody this resonates once and for all. Let me first start off by saying my feelings for Meghan Markle are not of hate. I find her and Catherine beautiful in their own respective ways. I only abhor Meghan’s behavior, actions, total disrespect for the Royal Family hierarchy, trying to curry favor with the public through her PR attempts, and blatant sense of entitlement.

We are only typing words online making it difficult to decipher a tone of voice. Since there is none to be heard or facial expressions detected, you can take it much more worse, dramatic, and catty than it really is. I try to write as clearly as I can to convey my meanings as fast I can churn it out for everyone to read. I do it so my opinions are not misunderstood to be of jealousy, hating, bullying, or racism. I feel I have to restate this as I’ve gained many new followers and likely new spies or just plain curious folks. It would be truly wonderful to meet everyone I interact with online, follower, spy, or passersby. That human interaction is missing from this very anti-social media platform.

So, let me say I am none of those four things above. In fact, I was quite enthusiastic initially with Meghan Markle’s debut into the royal scene. She of course is a far cry from the typical posh British blondes Harry dated. It was refreshing and new. She was a Californian, ethnic, and American just like me, who came from a disjointed family. She was a breath of fresh air as a new addition, but that quickly turned into mush when that engagement interview revealed her domineering, controlling, and insincere personality with the camera. I took her saying she didn’t know THAT MUCH about Price Harry, not that she didn’t know him or the royal family. This is often restated incorrectly. Her statement during the interview came off as if Prince Harry’s royal-ness wasn’t a big deal to her. That they’re equally on the same plane and their names hold the same weight as far as that statement went. That initial interview showed her ego on display and the Vanity Fair magazine she interviewed for as a tell all after it was revealed she was Harry’s girlfriend. Shortly before that, in November 2016, she had Harry write a foolish statement asking the public to leave her alone after she made a false report of someone breaking into her Toronto home. Then she goes on to do that Vanity Fair magazine. The hypocrisy. Harry could never turn back after that. It was more binding than a wedding if you ask me.

Even her ex-best friend Ninaka Priddy told DailyMail, “I know the Royal Family was something she found fascinating. She had one of Princess Diana’s books [Diana: Her True Story] on her bookshelf, and even when she was with Trevor she told me she wanted to go and stay in London for at least a month. I can’t remember exactly when this was, but she was married to Trevor and starring in Suits. She mentioned about wanting to go to London a couple of times. I wasn’t shocked or even surprised to hear about Prince Harry. I know she used to love The Princess Diaries — films about a commoner who becomes part of a Royal Family. She was very taken with that idea.”

Meghan would relish the thought of living a real life Princess Diaries scenario. Everyone in her family circle knew she was infatuated with the idea of being a modern day princess with power. She admired Princess She-Ra. In her defunct Tig blog she wrote, “I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power. And grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate.”

That was a huge red flag to me. Her best friend knew her since she was 11 and they were inseparable like sisters, like family. So, I take her words seriously as to who Meghan really was. She stopped talking to her after three seasons of Suits. Fame got to her head. She left her then husband Trevor, who helped her get on the show. She was out for a more “empowering” position in life. She used who and what she could to get where she is today. She downplayed her knowledge and awareness of the royal family big time and it really came back to bite her.

Meghan had her sights set on expanding her name and fame somehow someway since Suits was wrapping up with her supporting role being axed soon. Unhappily, her marriage to Trevor Engelson ended abruptly by her (mailing her rings back my mail), after almost 10 years of supposed true happiness finding The One. According to her ex-best friend she knew since she was 11 years old. She left him for Corey Vitiello, a highly celebrated chef in Toronto after her career took off some with Suits. Corey was also cooking for Prince Harry when Meghan first met the royal. He runs a chicken restaurant chain called Flock. Roast chicken, anyone? Yes, Meghan has commented time and time again her specialty is roast chicken. She picked up this talent likely from living in common law marriage with Corey in Toronto. That’s also what she was cooking when Prince Harry proposed? Gosh, what a coincidence. The Sun said, “The pair split in May 2016 - with the Telegraph reporting that Meghan was still with Cory when she first met Harry. The prince was in Canada to promote the Invictus games in May 2016. The chef refused to comment on the rumours that the Prince was part of the reason their relationship ended.” Hmmm, also a suspicious coincidence.

I don’t knock her for watching out for herself and trying to put her name out there. It’s a dog-eat-dog world in the acting industry. She was only successful in Toronto with Suits. Hollywood was the ultimate goal and dream. Her father Thomas Markle was a successful Emmy winning lighting director for Married with Children. She basically grew up on set and likely salivated at the fame and attention she would get being one. As a narcissist, this would feed her ego majorly. She was never going to be more famous than an extra in those random comedies or low-budget made for TV movies. She was pushing nearly 40. That’s the career death age of actresses in North America, maybe everywhere. She wasn’t a Meryl Streep or Viola Davis. She had to think fast. She did. Man, did she hit the jackpot with Harry. Apparently, their relationship wasn’t even revealed to Harry’s family until 6 months into it. All that time, Thomas Markle kept his mouth shut about it. He was loyal to his favorite daughter and paid for her expensive upscale schooling her entire life, even some in college. She ghosted him for making a foolish mistake with the media when he didn’t recieve an invite to the wedding. This time period was key to her sinking her claws in to Prince Harry’s vulnerability, weaknesses, broken and damaged self. She does want to be another Diana, but all she is now is a mother-wife to Harry. As her ghosted former best friend said, she is very calculated.

Using others as a stepping stone or tool to get where you want is extremely cold-hearted, but that was her MO. There is a reason a trail of ghosted, dejected lovers, family and friends have come out of the woodwork since Harry said his family was the one she never had. HAH. Cry me a river. Samantha only came out when that was openly said. What a stupid, hurtful, foolish statement Harry. This was during the Christmas Service at Sandringham she attended when they were only engaged. That’s unheard of. Even Catherine Middleton, wife of the heir didn’t even get invited to any outings until they were officially married. I commend Prince William for his caution as he had much more to lose than Harry with his choice of a wife.

Prince William was extremely worried about the tabloids and press doing what they did to his beloved mother to Kate. They chased Kate around and staked out their cameras at her flat. They followed her to work. They shoved cameras in her face getting in and out of cars. She was very chill about it. Alarmed, but civil. It was chaos. She was a BIG DEAL. She was marrying the heir to the British monarchy. Prince William was a dreamboat. Many of us were very fascinated by who his choice was. When they married, there were years and years of ridicule with comments about her “Waity Katey” nickname. He made sure she has as much time living a normal private life before becoming a royal. She needed to withstand the public scrutiny as his on and off again girlfriend first. It wasn’t a matter of him getting coldfeet. He was protecting her. They were college friends first then fell in love over the course of 6 years or so. They had a solid foundation.

She even had a few incidents where her skirt flew up too high revealing too much as well as her chest. It’s all trivial superficial things, I know, but it matters as a royal. We do the same with Meghan. It’s the optics that need to be taken into consideration. I’m fine with critiquing dress style, as there’s a certain decorum needed in a royal family. She, Kate, needed to dress more prudently to avoid mishaps. There were several in her first few years. She has improved beautifully and has her style down to science. Kate had many of the criticisms Meghan shares as far as entering in the royal family goes being a commoner having to do with dress code and keeping her mannerisms appropriate at events. There are many comments on old articles saying how Kate was smiling way too much at this same event years ago. How her hair was too long. She needed to stop twirling it and have some respect for her role and the dignity of the event. It was the Remembrance Day Sunday event at Whitehall in 2013. The two years before that, she garnered the same scathing reactions from the public.

Kate has really come into her own despite the awful criticisms and judgement on her class. She has bore the years and years of cruel digs to her with great decorum and stride. She has NEVER COMPLAINED. She has come in to her own identity as a mother, wife, future queen consort, charity patron, and most importantly a genuine person with the public. I quote The Sun highlighting past labels calling her a "work-shy social climber, the lucky girl whose sole job in life was to sit around looking pretty until William proposed." That's all turned into something solid and magical.

She has an ease with others that makes them comfortable in her presence you don't expect from such a senior royal. She has bloomed. We love her for that and how she lets Prince William shine by supporting his role as heir through their duties and appearances together. She also shines equally if not more than Prince William. Her children are absolutely gorgeous and a delight. We have all come to adore her because she has earned it. Yes, with the public you have to earn our love.

With Meghan, it seemed as if they were marrying then having a baby at warp speed before Harry decided to change his mind without knowing her family and past. They weren’t allowing the public to let us see Meghan in a positive gradual light, but a social climbing one with all her past history written online for all to see; also through the testimony of friends, families, her attention-seeking Instagram posts, colleagues etc. She hadn’t proved herself worthy yet to the public like Kate. It was hitting the ground running to be her own brand and name through Harry’s family.

On a superficial level, Kate and Meghan are not fashionistas or supermodels. But they are always photographed with what brands they’re wearing for all to see. That’s the fun part of watching all royal women, their outfits and accessories. But with Meghan it goes PAST and BEYOND outfits and style. It’s an entire plethora of reasons. She’s a whole different “beast” as she likened her unfair treatment in that Africa interview. All that have nothing to do with her ethnicity. The criticisms we non-Markle fans share with her are as followed:

• ghosting those friends and family members she used to put a notch on her belt

• using Princess Diana’s name to beautify her tainted image

• using Harry and his weaknesses to crawl her way into the royal family

• portraying such an affected manner in which she speaks, interactions with others, and overall pretending to be royal instead of being herself

• wearing inappropriate revealing attire to events, not adhering to dress code

• being rude and demanding to royal staff and even film and restaurant workers before marrying Harry

• constantly stepping in front of Harry as if he was the non-royal at events, inserting herself in conversations and trying to be the center of attention, a know-it-all

• making herself out to be a self made millionaire when she was more like a thousand-aire after Suits owning no real estate, cars or possessions to note beside an expensive heel collection

• taking credit for things that she did not do entirely on her own but passing it off that she did

• upsetting Duchess of Cambridge who she should have allied with for assimilation

• planting her PR stories to try and break up the image and marriage that the Cambridges have naturally built

• constantly trying to one-up the Cambridges while they go about their duties, her seething envy is quite evident by trying to take the light away from their causes

• inconsistent stories of how she and Harry met, supposedly it's Misha Nonoo, but who knows

• implying she was pregnant, all but announcing it with that navy blue coat halfway open at Princess Eugenie's wedding

• overly flicking her coat open constantly and prancing around with her hand on her ever changing bump (whether real or not we will never know)

• embellishing her character by feeding us accolades of herself every chance she gets, especially on Sussex Royal

• rarely ever using the titles of more important senior royals, but overusing her HRH on herself

• having famous Hollywood friends constantly speak for her and how amazing she is, many whom she had NEVER met prior to marrying Harry, but invited to the wedding anyway; leaving out her own family members (especially her loving father who made a foolish mistake) on both sides who did nothing to warrant such cold-heartedness

• preaching about carbon footprints, only having two children, and saving the environment all the while jetting around in private jets around the world sparing no expense

• portraying this image of a humanitarian when she herself is seen constantly in astronomically priced bespoke, couture, and designer clothes and accessories that taxpayers find (well over a million now dollars as the 6th in line’s wide); paid or not by designers to advertise for them

According to The Star, “It’s a figure so staggering it’s worth revisiting. According to estimates — based on totalling up the approximated or stated retail values of everything she’s been seen wearing since November 2017 — the number is hovering around the $1.5 million mark. On her and Harry’s official visit to Ireland this spring, for instance, Markle wore over $52,000 worth of fashion in just two days.”

They also stated “The majority of Markle’s expenditure this year went toward her two wedding dresses: That Givenchy ceremony dress is thought to have cost around $330,000 and her Stella McCartney dress (or the capsule collection’s 46 replicas released after the wedding, at least) sold for $5,800. That’s a bargain compared to the $93,000 she spent on the Ralph & Russo frock she wore for some of her engagement shoot. Add in a $6,500 Oscar de la Renta dress to a wedding here, a $5,000 bespoke Carolina Herrera frock to a Trooping the Colour there, and well, you get to that million mark pretty quickly.”

• then there’s the vacant Forgmore Cottage that wasted taxpayers money if $3 million to renovate; apparently they don’t even live there as she’s in SoHo accommodations and he in his Nottingham Cottage

• playing media games with the facts and dates surrounding the birth of Archie and never allowing him to be photographed until it was on African soil for a docu-drama

• pleading for privacy over and over then showing up unannounced at events uninvited,

• filming a tone-deaf tactless documentary in Africa, revealing how she felt she's didn't have a fair shake in the royal family, the absolute nerve of she and Harry

• suing the press for racism and hate stories when she herself courts the press daily (she did pap walks in London right before it was announced she was Harry's girlfriend), when she has herself and Harry to thank for all the negative press as there's not one story pointing out criticism of her ethnic background

• lastly, there are the extreme fans called the “sugars” who go around defending MM every chance they get in a rageful manner like packs of rabid dogs if we comment on how we don’t like her style of dress or try to reason with a differing opinion to theirs on a certain news story

Have I missed anything? Likely so. I’m still new to this whole Markle debacle so excuse my errors and typos. The soap opera does go on and there are so many details and shady ways Meghan has portrayed herself past and present. From what I’ve seen, heard, and read from her own mouth and those who knew her well, “she’s a witch” as Candace Owens put it bluntly. I truly wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to her when she kept shooting herself in the foot.

She is NOT where Kate was when she married Prince William either. Kate was 29, unmarried and very close to her family with no previous marriages. Today, her family appear to be her rock solid support outside of Prince William. She assimilated well with the other royals who she now calls family. She listened to counsel, respected the centuries of tradition the monarchy had always followed. She won our hearts. Through and through, she can credit her great inner strength she possessed to overcome the constant ridicule to become the well loved future queen consort of Britain. That is no easy feat.

Meghan was 37 and many times divorced (one annulled with Joe Giuliano, an attorney she married after college), so maybe three if you count the common law marriage with Cory in Canada. Trevor was her first official one. So Harry may be her 4th! She had lived many lives before with connections to SoHo, being a yacht girl, then there are her ties to the wretches Jeffery Epstein, Hillary Clinton, Weinstein and their global agenda machine I would have to write a dissertation on to explain.

She appeared to have used her first official husband Trevor, a successful producer in his own right (she got a cameo in his film Remember Me with Robert Pattinson) to get her role on Suits as he’s done excellent for himself in the film industry as a producer. Meghan was somewhat popular in Toronto from the supporting role. She was being phased out soon after her relationship with Corey started as well. She needed a plan, along came Prince Harry one fine clucking night. Then, she set her sights on getting setup with him by Markus Anderson or Misha Nonoo; who knows with all these conflicting stories.

I said good for her at the start. At first it was incredible to see an ordinary girl from LA had married into such a high profile family, to a real titled Prince, no less! It was inspiring and fun to fantasize. Nevertheless, Meghan’s actions listed above, the various first-hand testimonies of people who were family and friends pre-Harry, her hellbent PR attempts to heighten her name, her lack of honesty, her contrived behavior pretending to be a coy ingenue, the scary desire to be Princess Diana by hunting Harry like a sport, and all the stories coming out about how she was searching for a famous British man to elevate her profile, and likely so much more to come, are why we are here with these accounts today.

Hate is such a blanket word overused nowadays in the media. But she has earned that word all on her own. We’re here to disprove and retort the stories churned out daily by her team Sunshine Sachs that continue to deceive the public. Everything is out there to see. Her character is out there to decipher online. You just have to stop reading the fluff and self-promotion and find her true nature pre-Harry to see her scheming social climbing insincere self-serving ways. So, please don’t make us out to be hating, racist, jealous, bullies because we don’t love her like we do Kate. Move past that because we’re tired of hearing it. There’s no other argument anymore for her sugars it seems. Excuse me for not buying Meghan’s pseudo feminism and humanitarian image. She is far from that of a humanitarian. Everything is written on the wall for her. She only has herself to thank for it.

[runictrolls]

1, 16, 21, 28 for Jerath and Pertha!

Readmore because holy moley there’s a lot

1: What does your OC feel is important to be talented at?

Jerath puts a lot of emphasis on literacy, and considers trolls who are well-read and well-spoken in high regard. He enjoys arguing points of history, literature, grammar, and foreign language with anyone who will give him the time to do so, and the more heated these exchanges get the more Jerath considers them to have been a rousing success. He also believes that martial prowess is a must for a troll, and if a troll is incapable of defending themselves (at the very least) his respect for them tends to plummet--though his pity levels might go through the roof. Jerath also holds art and industry in high regard, so if your troll can create something beautiful or useful then Jerath is usually very impressed--especially if it’s something that he could never do.

Pertha recognizes that each person is unique, and possesses their own innate skills and talents. That said, she does think that each person should be good at something. Trolls who have no discernable talents, or who are content to sit around watching Grubtube all day, rarely get any respect from her (not that she’s generous doling that out in the first place). Like Jerath, she considers fighting skills quite highly, though she tends to prefer flash over substance--she’d definitely rather watch the WWE than the UFC. It’s the one talent that she would actually enthusiastic support; a lot of the time she tends to react underwhelmingly, even if she privately is impressed by somebody’s talent.

Fame, too, is something that Pertha is generally in awe of. Somebody who is renowned, especially online, will get instant respect from her.

16: How openly does your OC show their emotions?

Jerath has a veneer of civility that is actually quite easy to break down. It’s not a facade, he just has a rather rigid idea of how a Blueblood Must Act, and this includes a degree of stoicism. Among friends, however, Jerath opens up a lot more; and even in public, whether pleased or displeased, Jerath is rarely shy about telling people how he feels. He just does so in as measured a tone as he can muster; swearing notwithstanding, Jerath tries to remain ‘civil’ in discussions. He is also not shy about heaping effusive praise on his friends. Jerath is almost always genuine; he never lies, and at worst he’ll tell a half-truth, or he may lie by omission if he has to. Jerath is also very gullible for this reason, and tends to take everything at face value. The only detail in which Jerath may not be totally genuine are the self-aggrandizing, braggadocious statements he sometimes indulges in; Jerath has a big ego, but it’s very fragile, and it’s unclear how much of this is due to genuine confidence or to cover up his own insecurities.

The only time Jerath really completely loses his cool is when he goes Berserk, which is like an actual state he enters related to his SGRUB Aspect. I haven’t used it literally in years, it’s more of a plot device than anything else, and it hasn’t come up recently. This is called Jerath Gets Mature and Gets a Handle On His Rage Bullshit.

Pertha is very open with her emotions, when her typical emotion is “disdain.” This can quickly change to “joy” or “excitement,” especially when fighting or eating. These, however, are more surface feelings, and when it comes to talking about actual emotion, she tends to get tripped up. Actual red or pale emotions are hard to draw out of her, partly because she thinks she’s ‘above’ feeling these emotions or expressing them--or, more likely, she feels she’s incapable of them. This has been challenged recently in her moiraillegiance and budding matespritship, and since she’s pledged herself to trying her best in the pale quadrant, she’s trying her best to open up more. She’s finding it somewhat difficult, but I think she’s made some very important progress.

Pitch emotion is different. Because a large component of it is ‘disdain,’ and the other component is flirtation, Pertha is very comfortable feeling and expressing these emotions. As she settles into her pale and red quadrants, I think she will find a great deal of satisfaction in opening up as a genuine person. Pertha seems to consider herself something of a joke, or an instigator of A Good Time; I’m hoping that, as she gains healthy quadrants, she will consider herself a troll of value and become more in tune with the side of her that craves genuine interaction. However, I don’t know if she’ll ever settle down in the black quadrant; it may be her one outlet for aggression, and it seems unlikely that she could remain committed in that particular quadrant.

21: How much of an attention seeker is your OC?

They both are huge attention seekers. The biggest difference is that Jerath craves positive attention; he wants to be beloved by everyone, and not necessarily because of his caste. In his own, awkward way, he tries to reach out to other trolls and really wants a close group of friends who have each others’ backs and admire one another. This is why he sometimes flips between arrogant and obsequious; he thinks that bragging will elevate his position in the eyes of his peers, and if this fails, he will stoop to any level to regain a modicum of respect or amity from his peers. This often backfires as well. He willingly gave up his eye to avoid losing the only friend he thought he had left. It’s kind of sad!

Even in rivalries, Jerath thinks a healthy level of respect is important; otherwise the rules go out the fucking window, people get hurt, and collateral damage is inevitable. For this reason he tries to cultivate some measure of decency, even amongst people that he despises. In trolls that he has designated as Worthy Enemies, however, he will revel in negative attention, which he often couches as ‘jealousy.’

Pertha constantly seeks attention from everyone around her, whether this is positive or negative. Negative attention is easier for her to get, in her mind, so that’s what she often goes for. This is why Pertha’s current M.O. is to just show up at peoples’ houses and start eating their food (she does this to Jerath particularly); it’s a very easy way to immediately piss people off and get their eyes on you. She also keeps up a presence on social media for the same reason, and is addicted to garnering as many views, likes, and shares as she can, by any means necessary. Recent and near-future events will cause her to re-evaluate this stance, however; again, getting settled into the conciliatory quadrants will calm her down somewhat, and she’ll appreciate genuine warmth and affection a lot more than attention just for attention’s sake. Right now she has to be the loudest, brashest, cussingest person wherever she is; being around other trolls who are popular and love attention (such as Starla) who don’t resort to just screaming and fighting everyone in sight has altered her stance on this somewhat. Soon she will be getting alternate, casual outfits; part of the reason she continued to wear her current attire, which she is not shy about saying she hates, is that 1) it’s distinctive, and often leads trolls to comment on it, 2) it’s not what trolls would expect her to wear, leading to further commentary, and 3) it gives her something to complain about--loudly. It’s another outward manifestation of her unhealthy relationship with her lusus, and changing her wardrobe will allow her actual personality to shine through and give her a more understated way of getting attention--namely by actually meeting trolls and getting to know them on a more genuine level.

28: Is your OC loyal or more prone of take advantage of people close to them?

Jerath is the least likely person to take advantage of somebody close to him. As I mentioned above, he is very trusting of those around him, to an almost naive extent, and he constantly seeks their adulation and praise. As I mentioned in earlier asks, Jerath also thinks it’s his job to look out for other trolls, and sort of assumes that the people around him are looking out for him as well. He is incredibly loyal, to the extent that he’ll make oaths upon meeting a new friend and punish himself if he ever goes back on his word, even by accident (see the above incident with the eyeball, which was because he didn’t show up to a friend’s house at the time he was supposed to). This can have even more disastrous consequences; Jerath killed Vide’s lusus because she was 1) abusive toward Vide, and 2) preventing her from becoming matesprits with their mutual friend (or so he thought). Womp.

Jerath’s loyalty should also be evident in his quadrants; Jerath firmly believes that all of his quadrants are serendipitous, and betraying their trust is not a thought that even enters his head. He’s kind of the Dale Gribble of trolls; outwardly suspicious and wary, but almost stupidly loyal to people he considers “trustable.” Jerath only loses friends when they leave him, or when they do something absolutely unforgivable. In short, Jerath is far more likely to be taken advantage of than the other way around.

Pertha, on the other hand, takes advantage of everyone she knows--to an extent. She’ll use them to get information, or food, or for entertainment value, but that’s about the extent of it. People she ‘likes’ get this treatment, in which she is more of an annoyance than anything else. She has no qualms about messing with people outside of her ‘friend group,’ and while I wouldn’t describe her behavior as overtly malicious she certainly doesn’t seem to have many scruples when it comes to trolls she isn’t personally invested in. Interestingly, Pertha seems to think that all trolls have inherent worth, whether this is as an individual worthy of some manner of respect or as someone she can ask for a favor of later--this is part of the reason she stopped using guns, and instead favors a nonlethal approach to combat.

All that said, though, and I’ll sound like a broken record here, she is at least trying to change her stance when it comes to her very first quadrant ever--her moirallegiance with Vide. Pertha has kind of taken the lead, and retained her ‘annoyance’ status, but this time with the intent to help! Vide, I’m sure, is trying to cope with this rather aggressive meddling as best she can, and has made it clear to Pertha that this relationship cannot be a one-way street. Pertha is gradually opening up, however, and is beginning to realize that she isn’t beyond reproach, either; rather than trying to ‘fix’ Vide, she has to open herself to being ‘fixed’ as well. This includes, among other things, trying to see trolls as trolls, and people that she can have a genuine connection with--rather than just a means to an end.

[fitnessexpert00-blog]

When Americans tried to breed a better race: How a genetic fitness 'crusade' marches on

New Post has been published on https://fitnessqia.com/must-see/when-americans-tried-to-breed-a-better-race-how-a-genetic-fitness-crusade-marches-on/

When Americans tried to breed a better race: How a genetic fitness 'crusade' marches on

(CNN)They started swarming across America’s border, millions of desperate families fleeing poverty or seeking political asylum.

One leader even thought of a radical way to keep them out.

“Can we build a wall high enough around this country so as to keep out these cheaper races?” he asked.

That scenario may sound familiar, but it’s actually a description of early 20th century America. The country was gripped by a demographic panic. That fear, along with mounting anxieties about crime and poverty, led to one of the most shameful episodes in American history.

“The Eugenics Crusade,” an American Experience film that premiers on PBS Tuesday night, recounts how America responded to those fears. The country’s leaders tried to breed a better race, and millions of American citizens were enthusiastic backers.

It was an ugly time. The eugenics mania that swept the country in the late 19th and early 20th centuries led to forced sterilizations and the passage of laws in 27 states designed to limit the numbers of those considered genetically unfit: immigrants, Jews, African-Americans, the mentally ill and those deemed “morally delinquent.”

How American laws inspired the Nazis

The engrossing two-hour film, though, is about something deeper than science. It is about fear — how fear of “the other” can corrupt even the most brilliant minds. The film shows how an iconic inventor, a Nobel physics laureate and a brilliant Supreme Court justice all embraced the pseudoscience.

The crusade also found champions in social reformers like birth control proponent Margaret Sanger and W.E.B. DuBois, one of the founders of the NAACP. DuBois saw no irony in calling for African-Americans to “breed for better brains, for efficiency, for beauty.”

The film, written and directed by Michelle Ferrari, is filled with jaw-dropping moments: newsreel footage of white American families merrily competing in “genetic fitness” contests at state fairs where they were measured like livestock; a retelling of a pivotal court case where a teenage mother was forcibly sterilized by her mother; and the story of how the irrepressible inventor of Kellogg’s Corn Flakes became a champion of eugenics.

One the most chilling parts of the film involves an appearance by Adolf Hitler. Ferrari shows how America’s sterilization policies inspired Nazi Germany’s leaders to launch their own eugenics program, which later led to genocide.

Hitler actually wrote a fan letter to one of the biggest backers of eugenics in America, a wealthy lawyer named Madison Grant, who wrote a book, “The Passing of a Great Race.”

“Your book was my bible,” Hitler told Grant.

Few people today, however, know about this period in American history.

“It’s like this dirty secret that people whisper to each other once in a while,” says Nathaniel Comfort, a professor at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore who is featured in the film.

“It’s uncomfortable. It’s ugly,” Comfort says. “It’s a nasty part of our country’s history that’s not very fun to confront. It’s not very pretty to think about ways in which Nazi eugenics policies were practically modeled on American eugenics policies.”

Why eugenics was so seductive

Behind every movement there’s a powerful personality. The eugenics crusade had Charles Davenport, a slender, Ivy League-educated scientist whose dignified demeanor exuded an air of authority. The PBS film shows why Davenport was the right man to spread the wrong idea.

He was ambitious, a shrewd manipulator of the media, and he knew how to attract the support of wealthy patrons to spread his eugenics ideas to powerful politicians. It was Davenport who called for a wall to be built around America to keep out the “cheaper races.”

Davenport was inspired by the work of Sir Francis Galton, who is credited with starting the eugenics movement during the late 19th century. A cousin of the famed naturalist Charles Darwin, Galton theorized that humans could control their own evolution. His proposal: Pair the most intelligent and fit so that their children would boost the “breeding stock” of the human race.

That proposition, of course, led to the next question: What do we do about those deemed not fit or intelligent? The eugenics crusade provided a monstrous answer: Ban them from reproducing.

The solution was so seductive because it bore the authority of science. The America of the early 20th century was torn by social ills: massive inequality, urban squalor, tensions over immigration.

Eugenics gave reformers a scientific answer to these problems. If social ills were caused by “feebleminded” people with bad genes, as many eugenics champions argued, why not make the world better by eliminating bad genes?

“Just as we have strains of scholars, military men, we have strains of paupers, of sex offenders, strains with strong tendencies toward larceny, assault, lying, running away,” Davenport once told a reporter. “The costs to society of these strains is enormous.”

It was a planned extinction of the most marginalized people in society — dressed up as a way to better society.

Why eugenics ideas persist

The crusade to build a better race eventually became a quest to build a whiter race. The film shows how lobbying from eugenics proponents helped push Congress to pass the Immigration Act of 1924. It banned the entry of Asian immigrants and limited Eastern and Southern Europeans for more than four decades.

“To some extent humanity has always been about ‘othering’ — there’s us and there’s the other,” says Adam Cohen, a writer and historian featured in the film. “The eugenics movement gave this scientific punch to this idea that there’s us and there are others, and we are the right people. We’re the people that’s not only important to favor now, but we’re the people who have to own the future.”

The film shows how the eugenics crusade was finally stopped by several factors: A counterattack from the scientific community, changing attitudes toward poverty triggered by the Great Depression, and later revelations about Nazi atrocities.

But the core idea of eugenics — an overwhelming faith that everything in human nature is determined by our genes — persists, says Comfort, author of “The Science of Human Perfection: How Genes Become the Heart of American Medicine.”

He calls this notion “genetic determinism” and alluded to some of its assumptions in a recent article for Nature magazine.

Want to explain why students of color do poorly on tests? Look at their genes, the theory goes, not lack of support.

“But the benefits of good teaching, of school lunches and breakfasts, of having textbooks and air conditioning and heating and plumbing have been established irrefutably,” Comfort writes. “And they actually are causal: We know why stable blood sugar improves mental concentration.”

Then there is another disturbing shadow from the eugenics movement that lingers.

People talk openly now about creating “designer babies” due to advances in gene therapy. This is the world envisioned in sci-fi movies like “Gattaca,” where society is divided between wealthy people who engineer physically perfect babies and those who can only have children the natural way.

Comfort writes that such a world would be a nightmare:

“People would be defined at birth by their DNA. Expectations would be set, and opportunities, resources and experiences would be doled out — and withheld — a priori, before anyone has had a chance to show their mettle.”

Comfort is not so sure that humanity can resist the eugenics impulse to breed better human beings. The belief that genes are the primary determinant of a person’s success is seductive because it can absolve people of blame, he says.

“The allure of the innate is very real. Genes. Blood. Your basic inborn identity. It sounds like the ultimate answer to life, the universe, and everything,” Comfort says.

“What makes a eugenicist is this overwhelming faith that everything in human nature is determined by your genes,” he says. “This takes different forms in different places. We need to know how it manifests itself in these different periods right down to this day.”

In some ways the eugenics crusade marches on.

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/