I've always known that my dad loved us, but nothing's driven that home as much as everything we've found in the After.
Our prominence in his home (pictures, father's day cards, gifts on display, the letter), the way he prioritized us... and a damned good life insurance policy, set up specifically so that if he died early (always a possibility, since driving jobs are more dangerous than many) then we would have enough to get ourselves Set.
He raised us to become as independent as possible as soon as possible. Made sure we knew how to cook, clean, handle our finances (though he was hilariously kind of bad at that, himself), and much more. I've been doing my own laundry since I was about 10 years old, so it's a surprise when I hear about people going off to college still not knowing. Utterly unimaginable to me.
He wanted us to finish college so we could live more comfortable lives than he did. My sister accomplished this in good time. I have not. But with his final gift to us, this life insurance money, it's a very real thing I could do. I could Realistically pay for the rest of my schooling and not even have to work through it. And in not having to work as I take classes, I can dedicate myself to them more thoroughly than ever before, and hopefully Finally finish my degree.
Just as he wanted for me.
I'll always miss him, since having him in my life was worth more than any amount of money I could have. But I'll always be grateful to him for everything he gave to me.
I dont need a mother, however much mine is trying to scrabble for us right now. I haven't had a true mother in a long time (or maybe Ever).
Instead, I had the best father I could've ever asked for. He was the only parent I needed.
13 notes
·
View notes
What are your thoughts on Jane Boleyn, and the role she supposedly played in the fall of 3 Queens (Anne Boleyn, Anna of Cleves, Katheryn Howard)? Do you think she has been too maligned by historians for centuries, especially when it comes to the relationship with the Boleyns (it seems she got along with Anne)?
Now that I've read both works and compared them side by side, I suppose I would say my stance on Jane Boleyn falls somewhere in between that of Julia Fox and James Taffe ('Somewhere in between' is not, btw, Alison Weir); although closer to the former than the latter. Offering critique of both biographies, I would say that of JF is too apologetic (smoothing out wrinkles that exist in her arguments rather than acknowledging them) and JT is too severe.
Especially when it comes to the relationship with the Boleyns? Yes and no. Obviously she was married to George, she sent him a message of comfort while he was in the Tower, and wore only black the rest of her life, which was quite the potent statement. However, I would allow for the possibility that she potentially, inadvertently implicated him or AB (ie, testimony of hers was twisted to suit the crown's case). This is where I think there are flaws in the arguments of some of her defenders-- they cannot allow for even that possibility and so make claims that disallow it; some of which are untrue. 'Jane was only blamed as a means of absolving Henry in the whitewash of Elizabethan propagandists' is not true. Johannes Sleidan in 1545 claimed that Anne and George died by her 'false accusation'. Sleidan was a Reformer, so he would have been more sympathetic towards the plights of these two than the average person, and would have spoken to others that were as well, but the motivation to vindicate Elizabeth did not yet exist; she was at this point the very unlikely third in line to the throne.
I do appreciate that you said 'got along' with Anne, not 'besties', because...it's possible they were very close, certainly, but we must also allow for the possibility of animosity. The linchpin for the argument of closeness is the report from Chapuys that they 'conspired together' to banish Henry's mistress from court. Was this the precise truth? Considering the source I'm doubtful. Probably there was a lady Henry was serving at this time (although that we never have a name makes the story somewhat suppositious), but did they need to have 'conspired together' against her for Jane to be banished from court (which is what happened instead)? Jane might have merely made Anne aware of her, and Henry finding out that she'd been the source would have been enough for banishment. Or, as was presented plausibly in Adrienne Dillard's fictional rendition, Jane might have dropped hints to Cromwell that this mistress was a supporter of the two exiled and contumacious royal women that were Anne's adversaries, Cromwell might have passed this along to Henry, and Henry might have banished Jane for shattering the illusion that this woman had no independent ambitions or ulterior motives and merely let him hit for the sheer pleasure of his company.
If this was evidence of closeness, and it might be, then we also have to remember that the end result was Jane's banishment from court, and that there is, as JT fairly pointed out, no evidence that any of the Boleyns spoke in her defense, favor, or for her return. It would take an extremely magnanimous person to accept all that with equanimity and not feel any resentment whatsoever. So, if there was intimacy, there might have also been rift.
That leaves the question: enough 'rift' for her to seek vengeance? I doubt that much for all the reasons Fox outlines in her biography, but at the same time I wish there was not this relentless push to only defend women that we assert 'deserve' defense, on the premise they were entirely selfless, accepted every insult with grace, never kept any grudges, never had personal ambitions (the actions she took during the queenships of those you mentioned would suggest otherwise), mixed emotions, or conflicting loyalties; that we could acknowledge that acknowledging the agency of historic women also means acknowledging they were capable of making mistakes.
12 notes
·
View notes
Not me using the wayback machine to try to find your old panic fics (yikesssss for that fandom) 💀
In all seriousness though, much respect to you for taking charge over YOUR work. People can be so gross sometimes. Like why plagiarize when you can just leave a nice comment for the author saying you love their work??
pretty crazy how this ask is acknowledging that it's my work and my decision and I should be able to take ownership of it while simultaneously saying that you went actively against those wishes to try and use other means to find said work after I took it down.
it's almost like you're saying "not me being disrespectful lmao! sorry abt everyone else who is also disrespectful!! they suck."
Pot meet kettle.
5 notes
·
View notes