#but also I don’t like modern rhetoric on any of these difficult topics and I reject it even though I use a lot of the language | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

flamediel · 3 years

Note

yo dont know yashua you cant say he's racist how woulf you feel if someone judged you based on your religion and called you racist and sexist for it? its his right ot believe what he wants and you are being like a nazi attacking him

ok, look. I was just gonna delete this or respond to this w a meme and laugh it off (and the girlies on my snap KNOW this made me cackle) but we’re talking about a particularly insidious brand of racism and misogyny and I feel the need to elaborate. for those who didn’t see this is the post we are discussing.

Let’s start by discussing the tradwife movement. this post was tagged as tradwife, so you can’t tell me it’s not associated with the movement. the hashtag is at the top of the pic and tagged in the description, so it’s hard to miss. Yashua commented on a post with those hashtags being VERY visible saying he liked that, so he v obviously subscribes to those ideas.

What is the tradwife movement? it means “traditional wife” and it originated in alt-right spaces as a means of getting women to subscribe to right-wing ideals. This NYT Opinion piece by Annie Kelly, a Ph.D. student researching the impact of digital cultures on anti-feminism and the far right, describes this phenomenon in incredible depth. Here is a short explanation of where the movement started, pulled from Ms. Kelly’s article

“Some members of the alt-right have been weighing whether the absence of women from their movement is a problem. In 2016, the Swedish nationalist Marcus Follin, who calls himself The Golden One on YouTube, made a video titled “The Women Question.” In it, he urged his followers to dial down the open misogyny and consider new strategies to win over more women to the white nationalist cause. Mr. Follin was responding to statistics from the Austrian presidential election that year, in which female voters helped swing the election away from the candidate of the far-right Freedom Party. “You might not like that women have the right to vote, you might not like that anyone has the right to vote,” Mr. Follin conceded, “but it’s about winning a long-term political victory.

Enter the tradwives.

Over the past few years, dozens of YouTube and social media accounts have sprung up showcasing soft-spoken young white women who extol the virtues of staying at home, submitting to male leadership and bearing lots of children — being “traditional wives.”

If you read through that tiny snippet of the article, what are some keywords that stand out? for me, it’s “alt-right,” and “white nationalist.” The racism there is unmistakable, and while Yashua may not be white he has previously expressed some incredibly racist viewpoints, like how him kissing a Russian woman ended racism and his saying the n-word despite doing the most to separate himself from the black community when it’s even slightly inconvenient for him. If he’s following and participating in tradwife circles, then he’s also v much a part of white supremacist and anti-black movements (yes, POC can be parts of those movements, no it does not make it ok).

The article also makes it incredibly clear how misogynistic the tradwife movement is:

Female fears of objectification and sexual violence remain as potent as ever; the tradwife subculture exploits them by blaming modernity for such phenomena, and then offers chastity, marriage and motherhood as an escape. As one such YouTube commentator, a teenager, told her audience, traditionalism does “what feminism is supposed to do” in preventing women from being made into “sexual objects” and treated “like a whore.”

It’s a lie, of course. Modesty has never been a safeguard against degradation or rape, and we know that a rapist is no less likely to hurt a woman simply because he’s married to her. But it’s not difficult to see how it could be a seductive lie; the continuous headlines made by the #MeToo movement, paradoxically, were eagerly shared among tradwife networks, as supposed proof that sexual liberation had made life unacceptably dangerous for women.

if you read this and aren’t completely appalled by how this movement preys on women’s fears to push them into pursuing subservient roles in relationships with abusive men, then idk how to better explain it for you. White female victimhood has always been weaponized by right-wing movements to tempt them into joining their ranks, but for a man of color with a predominantly brown, Latin American fanbase to be advocating for this shit? He is exposing mostly young, impressionable women of color to a culture that wants them dead, and that will happily manipulate them in order to achieve their ends. he has a platform, and he’s using it to explicitly harm his fans. This has nothing to do with religion, it has to do with the explicit rhetoric of the movement that he showed support for. he isn’t racist and sexist for being Christian (although, Christianity in and of itself is heavily tied to racism and misogyny and, like most organized religions, its members need to evaluate these stances to make sure they don't perpetuate them) he is racist and sexist for supporting ang giving a platform to the tradwife movement.

Now that we’ve discussed the movement as a whole, let’s talk about the meme itself. Of course, the biggest umbrella is Jesus Christ, alluding to how Christian faith protects followers from the “rain” or any harmful things. that’s fine, that’s just Christianity. the problem is what comes next, the husband's umbrella labeled with “protecting” and “providing for the family.” UNDER that, and thus presumably less importantly, is the wife’s umbrella labeled with “managing the home” and “having children.” The meme very clearly positions the wife’s role as subservient to the husband’s. Look, it’s perfectly okay to want to be a housewife and devote yourself to kids, but this responsibility is not less than that of the breadwinner. Housework is literally a necessity in maintaining livable conditions, and the reality is in traditional family setups it’s considered menial. if a wife wants to stay home and take care of the kids that’s fine, and if you want to marry a woman that’s into that then that’s also fine, but that woman is not lesser than you. Her role is equal to yours, and just as necessary to sustaining your life as yours is to sustaining hers. Putting a woman’s role under yours, no matter your ideal family dynamic, is sexist. That is a very basic misogynistic ideal, and we cannot ignore that.

Now, onto your comment specifically.

“how woulf [sic] you feel if someone judged you based on your religion and called you racist and sexist for it”

I am not judging Yashua based on his religion. He is a Christian, and I don’t judge him based solely on that fact. I judge him based on specific problematic things he’s said to support his Christianity. Calling Buddha an “old fat man” is racist, regardless if you’re a Christian or not. Implying that women are subservient to men is sexist, regardless if you’re a Christian or not. These are not isolated incidents with him, and they point to deeper-rooted beliefs that are frankly concerning. It’s not about the fact he’s Christian, it’s about his specific beliefs.

I’m not going to pretend that there are no problematic sects and beliefs in Islam, but I am comfortable in the fact that I don’t support them, and in fact actively advocate against many of them. I’m literally going into Human Rights to help fight the racism and misogyny ingrained in my country’s religious laws. this is by no means comparable to Yashua, and if you’re implying that I’m racist or sexist on the very basis of my being Muslim you are not only wrong but also islamophobic as fuck.

“its [sic] his right ot [sic] believe what he wants”

Yes, it is. So long as those beliefs don’t actively harm other people, especially marginalized groups like these do. and guess what anon? if he has the right to believe what he wants, so do I. and I believe he’s a racist, misogynistic asshole who is in desperate need of self-reflection. The difference between mine and his beliefs is that mine don’t actually harm anyone and are well-founded. his are actively hurting his fans, and he needs to fix up because he is spreading incredibly fucked up beliefs.

“you are being like a nazi attacking him”

um. yeah, NO. it is not like nazism to call someone out for perpetuating alt-right ideas. if anything, calling out pro-nazi propaganda is uhh. probably one of the least nazi-like thing someone can do. also equating me calling out a problematic meme to a literal genocide is anti-Semitic and tone-deaf as fuck. Don’t pull that shit here.

well then, I think this is a good enough response. I am very passionate about these issues, and if someone else wants to discuss them I am happy to, but just an FYI, I expect you to be coming in with proper manners. the only reason I answered this ask is because it was an important conversation starter, but if anyone brings this energy into my ask box again it’s a straight block. I hope that’s clear, and that this was helpful. Let me know if you want me to adjust the tags on this post, I did my best but I know this can be a triggering topic, so if you need anything specific tagged just shoot me an ask or a dm. Stay safe!

24 notes · View notes

whiterosebrian · 4 years

Text

You’re a Wizard, Brian

Within the witch community, there’s a common narrative floating around about how some people have always been witches or wizards—but really, both are gender-neutral terms, so you can expect those to be used interchangeably here too—before realizing that they were. Supposedly, there are elements throughout one’s life directly pointing that way. Was I always a witch? How could that narrative possibly apply to me?

For starters, from my younger years I have gravitated mostly towards books, games, series, and movies involving fantasy, myth, and the supernatural. Those might have influenced my playtime to some extent. I remember when I made up crude spellbooks and magical items. There were times when I also pretended to be some fantasy wizard.

I did once have an imaginary friend embodied as a plush penguin, much in the manner of Calvin and Hobbes. I actually took it seriously as a friend for a while. While that imaginary friend was too agreeable to me to be any genuine entity, that probably shows that I did seek out nonhuman friends. By the way, that was between the ages of ten and twelve—later than most children have imaginary friends.

I actually stopped this kind of magical play when I converted to Catholicism. I was trying to be loyal to Jesus, at least as I understood loyalty. Even during that time, I did still have an interest in myth and fantasy. I was also, sadly, led around the nose regarding the supernatural—I wholeheartedly acknowledge that belief in the supernatural can be manipulated to terrible ends. I’m also sorry that I trusted the Christian Right on other topics, naively believing that they told truth. It didn’t question enough, even if I did question some of what I heard or read. It wouldn’t be until I read websites from respected civil-rights organizations that I began noticing disturbing similarities between Christian Right and Neo-Nazi rhetoric—but that’s for a whole other post.

Towards the end of my time as a Catholic, I briefly wondered if I needed to be some kind of Hermetic Christian magician (I didn’t yet understand how much modern Hermeticism appropriates from Kabbalah or how much it stresses escaping a hopelessly corrupt material universe). Even still, I suppressed that wish, wanting to be loyal to Jesus as I understood loyalty. I simply wanted to be more mystical and not simply some little pious peon. Of course, gradually the tough questions about Catholicism’s real fruits made me question the claims to truth. I was also once in a failed long-distance relationship with a neo-pagan who helped me to better understand and sympathize with people like her.

I should also note that I increasingly had a longing for a new bond with nature and the spiritual presence in nature. That was present before, but I was sadly led around the nose by the Christian Right’s rhetoric about whatever is “natural” (i.e. suppressing sexual minorities). But I did learn finer lessons from the Church’s finer preachers about the divine presence within creation. Pope Francis, as conservative as he leans, is still often mocked as a tree-hugging globalist savage hippie for calling Christians to care for creation and drastically reform society so humans can live in harmony with creation! Anyway, it’s apparently common for artistic people to be interested in nature, but this does seem to fit into the overall pattern too.

I’ve also seen some people suggest that people with autism have very different minds that can lead them towards the paranormal. In light of everything else that I’ve typed, it is indeed likely that the very disability which has induced major challenges in my life has also pushed me out of the mundane norm and towards the other world. Yes, it’s true that I need to maintain ties to reality and science. At the same time, I do believe that there’s a complementary reality. While empathy and nonverbal communication can be difficult—thus, I’m not a full-blown empath—I probably have a certain sensitivity. I also have a need for authenticity and sincerity.

On the other hand, it’s also said that people simply choose the practice of magic and spiritualism. I came out of a crisis of faith wanting a new path to God. I wished for a new way to commune with and serve God, earth, and humanity. My very rough and preliminary looks at Jewish mysticism, along with readings of classical Christian grimoires, led me to understand that a magician can be a blessed servant of God. Of course, I later learned that the majority of Jews don’t want Gentiles poking into their mysticism after it has been crudely appropriated for so long. That’s one main thing that led me to choose the Northern way (with the other being the interest in my own Northern European heritage).

It’s also true that I don’t always hear things or see things. I don’t have super-special senses that came up from out of nowhere. The only possible exception is when I worked at an Amazon warehouse—it was just as rough as you might have heard, and during one boring moment I faintly heard a sweet feminine singing voice that seemed to beckon me. Was that simply an auditory hallucination brought on by such rough manual labor? Otherwise, I don’t think I have special senses. I will have to train such senses.

As much as I despise the Religious Right’s condemnations of modernity (as if the modern humans are mere savages), I must wonder whether I fit in easily with today’s materialistic and myopically empirical culture. Of course, a lot of people are questioning the current world system, as I’ve briefly mentioned elsewhere, and it could be that the crisis in global human society has affected me too, provoking wondering about my place on this world anew.

What can I conclude about being a wizard? Was I always a wizard all along, or did I choose to take up magic? It seems that the truth is somewhere in the middle.

I hope that my journal entries of late haven’t come off as silly navel-gazing. I have been seriously reexamining my life as I embark on new trails within a new quest. In this case I am taking another look at my earlier life and where seminal elements within it have led me. I’ll try to keep these to a minimum so I don’t seem self-absorbed but I may end up having a lot to say sometimes.

#magician #witch #wizard #life #magic

3 notes · View notes

neurodiversenerd · 5 years

Text

How to Include Autistic Women in Your Feminism

Hey, given that this is an activist post, I might be mentioning certain issues that might be triggering to some. Check the tags and stay safe. Ily. ❤️

Ever since activist and feminist Audre Lorde devised intersectionality as a way of describing the experience of multiply-marginalized women, feminism has adapted to include women of color, trans women, queer women, disabled women and religious minority women. Although white, non-intersectional feminism is still pervasive and is the dominant ideology carried on by cishet white women, a significant portion of the feminist movement has embraced the identities and diversity among various groups of women.

Intersectionality allows for us to look at the various ways womanhood affects those experiencing it, instead of just slapping one catch all experience of femininity onto all women. It lets us understand that a woman of color, for example, has less amounts of racial privilege than a white woman and must deal with the burden of specific stereotypes around being a woman of color. Intersectional feminism centers the women with multiple identities, or “intersections,” that society considers unfavorable or marginalized.

However, with all the strides intersectional theory has made in social justice circles, the plight of Autistic women is largely ignored by even the most inclusive feminist circles.

Disabled women as a broader group are often lumped together, even though cognitively disabled, intellectually disabled and physically disabled women contend with incredibly different forms of ableism. Alternatively, the feminist movement also tends to cater to physically disabled women who often have more visibility (which, granted, isn’t a lot) and acceptance than those whose minds are thought to be lesser.

It’s common in the disabled community for people to justify their humanity by asserting their neurotypicality, while erasing and oppressing non-neurotypicals. The pro-Autistic movement itself is mostly made up of women, queer individuals and people of color, and yet somehow it always ends up headed by cis white men. In both feminism and Autistic advocacy, women (especially ones with multiple intersections) are ignored and pushed to the sidelines despite typically facing greater oppression than cis autistic men.

Thus, it’s important to make sure to be inclusive towards autistic women and GNC individuals in both feminism and disabled activism. Here are some ways that I’ve compiled on how to make your feminism both inclusive and accepting as a queer, Autistic feminist.

1. Mention Autistic Women and Bodily Autonomy

Women’s rights to their bodies are an important topic to discuss in feminism, but Autistic women deal with specific challenges in regard to consent and access to care and their bodies, so it’s important to bring up these issues in your discussions.

For starters, the court case Buck v. Bell still stands to this day. The case itself took place in the early 20th century during the eugenicist movement, and the court’s ruling allowed the forced sterilization of anyone labeled feebleminded. It’s legal for parents and guardians of the disabled to sign paper and sterilize anyone under their control regardless of whether the person in question consent to it even now. This is especially unsettling for women of color, who have historically been abused by eugenicist doctors. (See The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks and the book Imbeciles for more information on these topics).

In the medical industry, there are also barriers Autistic women must deal with. Today, there are still ableist debates about whether Autistic and other disabled people deserve emergency medical treatment and organ transplants. Once again, this is especially bad for women of color who deal with medical abuse and malpractice committed against them in modern times.

The gist is, the most vulnerable Autistic women often don’t have the ability to consent to harmful and damaging procedures.

For transgender Autistic women, the burden is tenfold. Many Autistic trans people on social media have shared their stories about how people struggled to believe that they were trans because of their neurological difference. This makes transitional care and access much harder for GNC Autistic people and trans people, as their gender identity is viewed as a symptom.

2. Talk About Consent

Along with consent to medical procedures, there’s also the fact that Autistic women are particularly vulnerable to the whims of violence against women. Here are some ideas to mention when talking about consent.

First off, many Autistic women use alternative methods of communication. Neurotypical women can usually say an explicit ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ though they still face violence. For Autistic women who are nonverbal and communicate through AAC, in a victim blaming culture such as ours their hindered ability to consent can be used against them.

Through ABA therapy, Autistic women are also further taught that their ‘no’ doesn’t matter. True ABA therapy, created by Ivar Lovaas, is essentially legal conditioning. The aim of this psychological form of abuse is to train Autistic children into seeming more Neurotypical instead of embracing their unique neurology and changing their environment to fit their needs. These kids are taught to obey authority at all times, or else they’ll deal with the use of an aversiv e. This of course, discourages their active consent to a situation and puts Autistic women in a dangerous position.

If they are physically as well as cognitively disabled, they may not physically be able to resist or run from an attacker. In many cases, an incidence of assault is justified by the perpetrator claiming that the victim wouldn’t have had a consensual encounter otherwise because they are “ugly” or unworthy of a healthy relationship. Autistic women are often considered to be such..

Trans women and women of color, who are often assaulted more frequently than cis white, women are of course very vulnerable when it comes to this issue. As such, it’s vital to mention this at any discussion of consent.

3. Know that Toxic Femininity Affects Us More than Neurotypical Women

To preface this, I want to say that there’s nothing wrong with being feminine. I myself identify as a femme woman, out of my own personal fashion sense and aesthetic. I like being a feminine woman and wearing dresses and having long hair, though these also aren’t the only ways to be feminine, of course. Embracing femmeness does not mean that someone is servicing the patriarchy, and embracing androgyny and/or butchness also doesn’t mean said person has internalized misogyny. Everyone is entitled to the way they want to present, and feminism should be about uplifting how people choose to present themselves instead of putting down women they don’t think look “liberated” or “feminist” enough.

That being said, the patriarchy tends to enforce feminine roles on cis women and police the feminine expression of transwomen to make them “prove” they’re really trans and “sure” about being women. I like to call this “Toxic Femininity,” the way that women are pressured to conform to Eurocentric femininity regardless of how they actually want to present, but then oppressed for both their femmeness or their alternate presentation if they disregard the aforementioned. Either way, women can’t win.

Abiding by gender roles is exhausting for anyone, but for Autistic women who have limited energy to go into their daily activities and deal with sensory issues and neurotypicals. As such, gender presentation is often pretty low on our list of priorities. Autistic women are often unable to conform to society as our hindered social skills prevent us from perceiving these norms. It’s hard for us to fully conceptualize what’s acceptable and what’s not. As such, it takes extra effort for us to live up to Toxic Femininity.

With our sensory perception, certain clothes are uncomfortable for us and it’s sometimes a necessity to wear certain textures. Men’s clothing or androgynous clothing are often more comfortable, so it’s not uncommon to find us wearing those. As such, we are often labeled butch or non-femme regardless of how we actually identify our presentation. We are cast aside by Toxic Femininity.

This is of course, even more true for fat women, trans women, and physically disabled Autistic women, who’s bodies already don’t abide by the unattainability that Toxic Femininity forces us to live up to.

4. Downplay the Voice of Neurotypicals in Autistic Women’s Issues

Despite their position of being privileged oppressors of the Autistic community, most of our advocacy is done by parents and relatives of Autistic people who believe that they are more entitled to our community and voices. They are the “Autism moms” and those with blue puzzle piece signs in their backyards, constantly yelling over us.

Most of the Autism organizations are run by these people, who often don’t consult with Autistic people about the needs of our community. Even though most of them don’t think they hate Autistic people and may even share common goals with the community, they still oppress us because they’re centering the voices of the privileges instead of the voices that are affected no matter how supportive they are.

An Autistic inclusive feminist space means downplaying Neurotypical rhetoric, meaning stopping the use of hate symbols like puzzle pieces and functioning labels. Cut out the influence of ableist organizations and monitor the use of words like “retarded” in your space. This will be difficult in a pervasively ableist society, but it will be worth it in making a more united social justice movement.

It also means allowing Autistic people to have input in their own issues, and allowing them to reclaim their agency. Know that no matter how many Autistic people you know, if you’re Neurotypical, you will never truly experience being Autistic even if you know more about the condition.

5. Autistic Women Can Still be Racist, Homophobic, or Transphobic – Don’t Be Afraid to Let Them Know

There are usually 2 stereotypes Neurotypicals believe about us, and strangely enough, they’re complete opposites. We’re either hyperviolent, unfeeling school shooters to them or perfect innocent angels who never do anything wrong. Obviously, these are ableist because they assume that all Autistic people are the same, but most people tend to look at us as the latter stereotype because it’s more “politically correct” even though both viewpoints are hurtful in different ways.

As such, when Autistic people are genuinely oppressive, they aren’t held accountable. I’ve had interactions with homophobic Autistic people who accepted me for my Autism but not the fact that I was a girl who loved girls. I’ve met misogynist Autistic men who viewed me as an object and wouldn’t respect my boundaries and right to say ‘no’ to a relationship. As an Autistic white person, I myself hold institutional power over Autistic people of color and as such, am able to be racist.

Autistic people shouldn’t be given a free pass for their bigotry, and assuming that they should denies them their agency and oppresses others in that space.

Autistic women have a lot to contribute to feminism, and neurotypical women should allow them the opportunity to rise against their own oppression. Thanks for reading and for making your feminism inclusive –

Trust me, it means the world to us.

245 notes · View notes

nerdygaymormon · 5 years

Note

Hey Brother David. I've been struggling with my faith a lot lately. Something traumatic happened to me last year, and since then I've moved twice and only gone to church a few handfuls of times. Part of that was because my work schedule had me either working late nights so early morning church was really hard, or I was working sunday mornings. But at the beginning of May, I left that job to move the second time, and I only have gone to the new ward a few times. Part of me wants to go, to be (1/4

(2/4) part of a community, but I'm also scared. I have social anxiety, meeting new people in new situations is hard, and I'm worried about what I will or won't say if LGBT+ topics come up. I'm trans, genderqueer, and asexual, so being in the church with its strictly defined gender-based guidelines and heavily family-based rhetoric is difficult for me. I'm 28, and I've refused to go to the singles ward several times because I feel it would be so focused on dating and marriage, which isn't what

(3/4) I want. My family's been in the church for generations, probably came over with the original pioneers, and I feel a little pressured to stay in the church even though I'm not really comfortable there. This sunday is my youngest cousin's mission farewell, and I've already said I'll go, but going to church on a regular basis feels almost impossible. I probably need to be in therapy, but being in a heavily LDS community makes me worry I could find someone who will understand. I've also been

(4/4) thinking about joining the queerstake discord or searching out other people who live in my area, but again my anxiety is a problem. I don't think I've even updated my info on the queerstake registry. I've probably opened your askbox half a dozen times without sending anything before. Do you have any advice?

———————————————————————

I’ve been diagnosed with social anxiety, I know how that feels.

Going to church to support family members with the big milestones in their life is not a new commitment to be active.

If you want to go to church, oof, I know how hard it can be to walk through those doors, and how much easier if there were someone with you. You didn’t say what city you live in, otherwise anyone from queerstake reading this could message and say they live nearby and want to attend with you. There’s still another good option--the missionaries. They are always eager to have people come to church, they’ll greet you at the lobby and sit with you.

You mentioned queerstake discord, if you want to join and check it out, here’s a link (I think it’s only good for a day): https://discord.gg/U39jUA You can remain as anonymous as you’d like.

As for your pioneer heritage, that’s something to be proud of. You are a modern-day pioqueer. Your ancestors lived their lives, you live your life. You make your own choices based on your belief, your situation, and what’s good for you.

If being trans, genderqueer, and asexual makes church awkward and not feel right because you don’t fit into the current theology, you don’t have to go. I know for me, one of the big problems with church is they have this big goal we’re all supposed to be working towards, and then the turn to me and say “this isn’t for you, you should always stay alone” and this complicated for me what a “successful” life looks like.

You are loved in a way that the leaders of this church don’t seem to understand. You’re allowed to find other ways to connect with God and understand your path forward, attending this church is not the only way.

As for therapy, if you’ve experienced something traumatic, therapy can help. Even if you haven’t experienced trauma, there’s a lot going on in your life and therapy can help. My advice, look for an LGBTQ-positive therapist, they likely know a lot about the church (because you live in a heavily LDS area) and faith transitions, and can help you undo internalized queerphobia.

8 notes · View notes

beneaththetangles · 5 years

Text

A Shield for Truth

“What is truth?”

Pontius Pilate’s derisive rhetorical question during the trial of Jesus of Nazareth has a strikingly modern — or better yet, postmodern — ring to it (Jn. 18.38). In the postmodern worldview, “truth” is subjective, personal, relative, and often unknowable, much like Pilate’s question implies. I know there’s been a lot about The Rising of the Shield Hero on Beneath the Tangles, but, well, here’s more. The show recently touched on the topic of truth and struck a blow against postmodern doubt, in the process echoing a similar thought from Rascal Does Not Dream of Bunny Girl Senpai.

In episode 17, Fitoria the shapeshifting bird queen insisted that our cynical protagonist, Naofumi, attempt to make peace with the other three Cardinal Heroes. Naofumi refuses. This leads Fitoria to threaten to kill the four heroes if they won’t get along. However, Naofumi believes reconciliation is impossible.

Here Fitoria raises the need to uphold truth. “Did you really try to make up with them? Did you try to clear your name?” she asks. Curiously, Naofumi concedes, “I guess I didn’t bother, thinking they’d never believe me.” Fitoria answers that “If you don’t tell them they’re wrong, you’re basically admitting your guilt.” She argues that for the sake the four heroes’ greater mission, Naofumi must speak truth to power, as it were.

She goes on to explain that if the heroes aren’t acting in concert, the calamities facing the world will be vastly more difficult to resist. “You can’t overcome all those hurdles by yourself,” she tells the Shield Hero. There’s a lesson here in motives. Fitoria bases the need to contradict the slanderous lies made against Naofumi not on a self-centered desire for personal justification, but rather on the greater good of reconciliation and cooperation. We likewise must care about the truth for its own sake, not merely when it benefits us personally.

Naofumi did in fact defend himself and deny the accusations against him back in the first episode. Attacked with a false charge of attempted rape, he insisted he’d gone right to bed after supper the previous night. He denounced the accusations as “not even the least bit true.” He called the situation a setup. That said, following this initial defense, he makes no effort to repair his reputation. In fairness to Naofumi, he has little reason to try, since his fellow heroes responded to his defense dismissively. While his lack of concern over his own reputation is in some ways admirable, Naofumi loses sight of the fact that there is a greater good to be served through defending the truth.

The first arc in Rascal Does Not Dream of Bunny Girl Senpai also questions the value of upholding truth in the face of lies. In the first episode, Mai looks into the rumors surrounding Sakuta, claims that in middle school he committed violent acts and sent three classmates to the hospital. It’s “pretty clear” to Mai that the rumors are false: “Someone who caused such a huge incident couldn’t attend school like nothing happened.”

When Sakuta ruefully wishes, “I wish my class could hear that line,” Mai pushes back. “If it’s wrong,then you need to tell them such,” she says. Sakuta is provoked into a monologue about the futility of defending himself:

“A rumor is kind of like the atmosphere, isn’t it? Since lately, the atmosphere is something you need to read. That ‘atmosphere’ that labels you as a bad person if you can’t read it. And the people creating that atmosphere don’t have a sense of participation, so it’s foolish to try and fight against the atmosphere.”

No one feels responsible for the lies floating around, complicating any effort to squelch them, to the point that like Naofumi, Sakuta considers it a futile endeavor. Mai won’t let him off the hook so easily, however. “So you’re leaving misunderstandings be, and giving up before even fighting,” she prods him. This has no effect on how Sakuta regards his own reputation, but does pay off later in another way.

Where Fitoria pushes Naofumi to share the truth in order to save the world, it’s love that convinces Sakuta to fight the unbeatable atmosphere. In the third episode of Bunny Girl Senpai, he finally declares, “From here on, I must face the atmosphere. The atmosphere that won’t move, even if I push, pull, or slap it around.” He doesn’t do this to defend himself, but to help Mai, whom he loves. The great lie that has taken hold, through a combination of people studiously ignoring her and some paranormal phenomenon, is that Mai doesn’t exist. This Sakuta finds intolerable, and so he goes to battle to force people to acknowledge Mai’s existence.

Each of these shows promotes the concept of unselfishly defending what is true. We don’t want to get up caught in some self-justifying crusade. Nor should “truth” become an excuse to browbeat others. Rather, “speaking the truth in love” (Eph. 4.15), we should uphold truth because truth is foundational to meaningful relationships. False accusations separate Naofumi from the other heroes. Willful blindness separates Mai from her fellow students. Truth overcomes both. Truth is also key to real liberty: “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (Jn. 8.32). God’s creation of the church is a lesson in the reality that we need others just as Naofumi needs the other heroes. Because falsehoods entrap us and cut us off from each other, let us resist the cynical spirit of our age and always pursue truth.

#anime #christianity #tate no yuusha no nariagari #the rising of the shield hero #rascal does not dream of bunny girl senpai #seishun buta yarou wa bunny girl senpai no yume wo minai #truth #articles #Author: Jeskai Angel

1 note · View note

thought-corner-blog · 5 years

Text

My Hot Take on Morality

Morality is a very very very sticky subject that few people want to fully delve into (including myself for a very long time) because if one comes to the wrong conclusion, that can be VERY stressful. What do I mean by the “wrong” conclusion? I mean an answer that explains why people do the wrong thing, but doesn't explain why people do the right thing. Or explains why people do either, but doesn't explain why one should do the right thing. Coming to the conclusion that nobody has any choice in it at all can also be quite stressful. This subject is a source of anxiety for a lot of people, myself included, but I've been thinking about it more because of some pieces of literature that I've been forced to read for school. Yes, the thing that prompted me to seriously think about the issue of morality is a high school literature course that I had zero choice in taking, and yes it is pathetic. But I'm thinking about it now, and here's what all of my thinking has got me to.

First of all, why does it matter? Now don't worry I'm still going to cover this issue (I know you were probably shaking and shitting in your boots out of fear of me not rambling on and on about an issue that only really pretentious and/or old people remotely give a rats ass about). This hypothetical question is mostly just to assuage my own anxiety. What I mean is, if we have no choice in anything, and we're just a bunch of pissing, cumming, sweating, expostulating, hugging, fucking, loving, angry, deranged animals who learned to speak on a moldy, stone space ship spiraling through the universe, why does it matter if I have all the answers? I still want to know, but it's more for the sake of sating my curiosity. Now it's more that I want the answers, not that I need them. Enough about me, though, what even the fuck is morality? What is justice? In this essay I will attempt to answer these questions.

Let's start by exploring the idea of free will in relation to determinism, because it was the conclusion I reached about this subject which lead me to even write about this at all. And this time I'm actually going to use a source (pretty crazy right? Gonna go all out and use MLA like a big-boy writer). The source is an excerpt from Not Guilty: a Defense of the Bottom Dog by Robert Blatchford, relating to a defense of “hard determinism.” There's a lot to unpack in this excerpt, and a lot of things that I agree and disagree with, but lets start with what I agree with. So Blatchford (I'm not sure how to feel about that last name cause it's kind of bad-ass but it's also sort of nonsense) claims in this excerpt that man is not responsible for having a “virtuous” or “cruel” nature, because these things are dictated and influenced entirely by “heredity” and “environment.” Before we get to the big fat and in Blatchford's claim, lets look a bit deeper into this statement. Blatchford says this claim is very difficult to refute, and I agree. No human being has any control over the different things that make them up. If different environmental and genetic factors led to a person becoming virtuous, it's not as if that person had any control over those factors. Let's take an extreme example: Hitler. Before I say anything about Hitler, I want to make it clear that I hate him. He sucks and is a very awful shitty person and he makes me wish hell existed so that he could go there. But the thing with Hitler is, he had no control over the factors which led him to become a deranged sociopathic piece of radio-active pig meat, and he didn't even believe that he was a deranged sociopath in the first place. This is true for everyone. Obviously I am oversimplifying the human condition, but you get my point: humans do not choose to be initially good or evil, and evil people generally don't even think that they're evil at all.

I don't disagree with Blatchford on this point, but I reject his interpretation of these facts. Blatchford claims that this inability to choose one's own nature means 1). That human beings cannot be held responsible for their actions and 2). That human beings have practically no free will in making moral decisions. The reason I disagree with this is because there is no way that a child molester does not deserve punishment, and there is no way that people are completely bound to a fate of enslavement to their heredity. But how can this be if a child molester was born with a lust that is stronger than their virtue? Something that is completely outside of their control? Well this is where we need to define what justice is.

And this is where my Hot Takes come in, which should be taken with a very large grain of salt because I have absolutely no philosophical expertise (but honestly, neither did most ancient Greek philosophers. A lot of them were major dipshits but they are practically worshiped by modern day thinkers. I would also like to note that this statement is substantiated by absolutely zero facts). Here is my personal definition of justice: justice is an equal and opposite reaction to injustice. It is the representation of a battle between two sides who both believe they are doing what is reasonable. Those on the side of justice are individuals who's virtue is stronger than greed or ambition, and those on the side of injustice are individuals who are won over by self-satisfaction at the sacrifice of others. Do people have any choice in whether or not their virtue is stronger than their need to satisfy the self? Sort of. This is another place where I disagree with Blatchford, and it lies in the area of free will, which is a different topic so I'm going to start another paragraph to talk about it.

Blatchford's view on free will is much too rigid. He views humans as mechanisms following out a protocol which was programmed into them through development by outside factors and “heredity.” I agree with Blatchford in that I think that human beings cannot choose what they want. I cannot choose whether or not I like tomatoes. I also cannot choose whether I initially want the best for the world or not. Nobody can control their heredity or their environment. Blatchford believes this means that nobody has any choice in the decisions they make, and his rhetoric makes it seem pretty reasonable at first. But when you just strip away all the bullshit and look at the “if then” statement made to reach that conclusion you realize that that's a pretty big leap. IF human beings cannot control the factors which assemble the parts of their character THEN they cannot make any ethical decisions at all. What the fuck? Now that's some dumb bullshit right there. In my oh so humble opinion. The reason this is some dumb bullshit is because Blatchford assumes because some choices are omitted due to an individual's nature, there are no choices that can be made at all. Let's use a much too simple and fallacious metaphor to dissect this claim. Let's say that I have the choice between butterscotch ice cream and chocolate ice cream. Blatchford is essentially claiming that because actual fecal material is an omitted choice by nature, we don't really have a choice in anything at all. Yes, human beings cannot choose their nature, and they cannot choose what they want, but they can choose to do what they want, and to change themselves however they want, and this is determined by the nature of a human being, something that human beings cannot control. It's assumed that the collective “you” is the factors and building blocks which make you, and the things which went into turning you into who you are. You have no control over these factors, but you are yourself (that's sort of a given). The collective you can choose between two paths, and can choose what to become, and can choose what to prioritize in life, and can choose between chocolate and butterscotch ice cream, goddammit!

Bottom line: humans can decide to do what they want but they cannot decide what they want. Some people are born wanting one thing and others wanting another thing. This is called virtue or lack of it, and justice is an equal and opposite reaction to injustices acted out by people who were born with lust or greed or ambition which was greater than their virtue. Thus it is a constant battle between two combating sides who both think they are doing what's reasonable.

Also here’s the name of the picture I used to write pretentious words on: Nocturne:Blue and Gold- Old Battersea Bridge,1872-5,J.M.

Works cited:

Blatchford, Robert. “A Defense of Hard Determinism from: Not Guilty, a Defense of the Bottom Dog.” University of Washington, 1918.

#philosophy #writing #blog #morality #existentialism #atheism #essay #free will versus determinism #why do i have a fucking blog on tumblr #human nature

1 note · View note

the-busy-ghost · 6 years

Note

🔥 st Margret (and her husband Malcom Canmore too if you’ve got time for him)

Damn I have a lot of thoughts about these two. And really it’s not their fault like 90% of the time because we know so little about them, but I DO have a lot of words about their historiography over the years.

Basically I am uncomfortable with many of the views about Margaret that reign in popular historical literature (and since that’s often based off of the views espoused in more serious nineteenth century works, I am very tempted to blame the Victorians for this, though I know it’s not just their fault). On the one hand you have the rather patronising image of St Margaret as this beautiful, usually blonde, and above all English (despite her childhood) princess who was sent to ‘civilise’ the barbaric Scots. Now in the Middle Ages when this kind of rhetoric could also mean ‘help restore faith in the Church’ as well as ‘tame the barbarians’ it’s not quite so bad but it’s very irritating when people still describe her role like that nowadays. Which isn’t to say that eleventh century Scotland wasn’t maybe in need of a bit of a kick in the backside, but firstly it’s unclear just how far Margaret really affected cultural conditions there beyond the Church and the royal court (and the latter is suspect), and secondly even if she DID contribute to some small cultural shifts I think that in the 21st century we should have grown past the thoroughly cringey narrative of the gentle southern princess ‘civilising’ the northern barbarians. In the Middle Ages this sense of ‘civilising’ didn’t quite have the Victorian colonial secular connotations it has acquired since as well, and when people referred to Margaret’s ‘civilising’ in the Middle Ages they generally referenced St Paul (’for the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his believing wife’ - note the religious sense rather than the secular) which isn’t to say that there was NO secular element to the ‘civilisation’ that was attributed to Margaret in the Middle Ages, but it was rather less marked than it became in later eras.

AND YET ON THE OTHER HAND. I ALSO have an even more virulent dislike of the ‘St Margaret destroyed the Celtic Church’ narrative. In the first instance, the image of the ‘Celtic Church’ that has been sold to us over the past few centuries is one very much skewed by the Protestant Reformation, which sought to portray Scotland’s original, national church as more egalitarian and small and hence purer in its simplicity, and accused the Gregorian reform movement of destroying this. Now this is actually a fascinating phenomenon and I think it’s interesting to try to understand why this narrative became popular both before and after the Reformation, but in the case of St Margaret I don’t think that excuses misinformation. In the reformers’ defence, I’ve not come across much anti-Margaret material in the works of the great sixteenth century Protestant writers, but some writers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries latched onto this ‘Celtic Church’ narrative with great zeal. More importantly though the nineteenth century also loooved its ethnic version of history, where the events of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, and sometimes right down to the end of the Middle Ages, were often portrayed as part of a long-running between ‘Celts and Teutons’ (yes, Celts, for the twelfth century), or, with slightly more accuracy ‘Gaels and Anglo-Saxons’. So the Celtic Church was not just portrayed as proto-Protestant and egalitarian in character, it could also be given all the attributes that related to the Victorian ideas of the Celt- if it was a writer who favoured the Celtic side of things the egalitarian nature of the ‘Celtic Church’ showed an early democratic and constitutional spirit in the Scots, if it was someone who favoured the Anglo-Saxon side of things then the loss of the simplicity of the early Celtic Church were something to be lamented but were just another example of how, though romantic and to be applauded for their independence, the Celts were essentially behind the times. This all got connected to St Margaret by the nineteenth century and suddenly everyone had an opinion. Some were eager to claim St Margaret as having an interest in the ‘Celtic’ Church and so still deserving of her place in Scottish history, others, possibly aggravated by the civilising portrayal of Margaret alluded to above, were very vocal in their portrayal of her as being responsible for the wholesale destruction of native institutions in Scotland. In fact, while Margaret did patronise both native institutions and reformed orders, her actual religious accomplishments for which there is surviving evidence- though by no means small or insignificant- were nowhere near large enough to destroy or reform an entire country’s religious system in one fell swoop and though Margaret may have begun the process of introducing new orders to Scotland, it was her descendants who really promoted them (though I’d once again like to make clear that suggestions of any of them having destroyed the ‘Celtic Church’ either should be viewed with extreme caution given that, as explained above, the ‘Celtic Church’ as we usually think of it wasn’t really a thing).

So yeeeeaah basically all of the historiography of St Margaret up until the twentieth century I have issues with- BUT it is really fun to go into and try to understand where these ideas came from, and they were instrumental in bringing about more modern historiography. And since popular history updates itself slowly, it usually plays into one of these two major tropes and either way I’m likely to start spitting something foul (even though I’ve previously been fooled by them in years gone by. Analysis of her legacy’s effect on Scottish queenship and national identity, however, is always welcome)

As a person? I can’t say. As I said above she did not have such a major and direct influence as she is often credited with having, and a lot of the credit must be due to her legacy’s effect on her descendants as much as during her lifetime, but she was not an insignificant figure either, and I don’t think that everything Turgot wrote was exaggerated. She does strike me as a bit of an austere figure at times, and was not a mother who spared the rod, but then it’s really difficult to judge things like that from a modern perspective since it was the eleventh century. But it’s certainly not one of my favourite things about her but then we really can’t know for sure what her relationship with her children was like, and from what little we know they seem to have held her in some regard.

As for Malcolm, again a lot of my problems come with the historiography. I hate in particular when it’s implied that he was some big dull-witted barbarian, in order to serve as the foil to the noble princess Margaret even if he likely did not have her education and intelligence. Weirdly though he also overshadowed her for a while in some historiography. During the late Middle Ages chroniclers from Fordun onwards raised the profile of Malcolm to that of almost Margaret’s equal in piety, though the queen was still more popular. However over the course of the sixteenth century Malcolm’s reputation grew even further and by the time we get to George Buchanan it is Malcolm who is given all the credit for all the various (often exaggerated) benefits Margaret is supposed to have given Scotland, and basically all that is said of her is that Malcolm was known to been ‘assisted’ by his good wife. I’m not sure if this was due to the Reformation’s aversion to Catholic saints, or misogyny, or a concern for Scottish nationhood, but whatever the case it was pretty irritating to come across for the first time, even though Margaret’s reputation has largely been restored in the centuries since. Mind you Malcolm I think still gets too much credit for religious influence, since there’s even less- almost no- evidence to prove that he was particularly concerned for the state of the Church. But I think there are other ways of measuring his success as a king.

Ok apologies for the rant, I wrote an essay on this and other similar issues about a year back and have been filled with Profound Thoughts about the historiography of the ‘Canmore’ dynasty ever since.

Send me a 🔥 and a historical topic/figure and I will go off on a rant about it

#I have been a bit unkind to the Victorians and the Protestant Reformation here and I want to say I actually find their narratives interestin #But I'm not sure they should be shaping our views of St Margaret in the modern day #St Margaret of Scotland #Scottish history #Kings and queens

1 note · View note

cavedraconem · 7 years

Text

Katie and Cato the Elder Episode 1: Ars Brassicae

As we all know, Cato the Elder - great censor, destroyer of Carthage and Only True Roman - loved cabbage. The De Agri Cultura, a didactic treatise on farming and farm management, has two full chapters on the wonderful properties of this vegetable, including three recipes for cabbage soup (some possibly spurious). Cabbage soup is obviously integral to Cato’s vision of the mos maiorum: the customs of the ancestors, by which all good Romans should strive to conduct their lives. So, as a good student of Roman history and with the aid of my coquus/flatmate, I decided to lay aside for a time my dissolute, post-lapsarian ways and return to the mores of the man who spent his youth digging rocks out of the Sabine fields.

This was... a little more difficult than it might seem. The thing about De Agricultura is that, despite Cato’s highly authoritative future imperatives, it doesn’t actually make a lot of sense. After the very nicely rhetorical preface, the structure of the rest is a complete mess, with sections organised apparently at random and sometimes repeated (whether caused by him or by a series of overzealous copyists). There is nothing very similar to the kind of farm Cato describes anywhere in the archaeological record for the second century. The work completely ignores the existence of any sort of long-distance wine trade even as it advises you to make a ridiculous amount of wine. Shortly after Cato’s death, the Romans brought over and translated the agricultural works of Mago, a Carthaginian, and they became the standard handbook for agriculture. Basically, following Cato too closely is probably a mistake.

The cabbage chapters are no exception. The three cabbage soup recipes are, largely, the same and contain exactly four ingredients: cabbage, water, salt and cumin (yes, that cumin). But perhaps more concerningly, they are classed not as food, but as medicine. Specifically, largely the same soup is prescribed as an emetic, for colic and for difficulty in urinating. Unless the Roman brassica was significantly different from the modern cabbage, I’m really not sure what is in there that makes Cato think it’s medicinal (as opposed to one of his other cabbage-related suggestions, which does have the now-extinct medicinal plant silphium in it). But based on other recipes in the DAC, I don’t think Cato understands cooking at all, so I decided to let it slide and make a cabbage soup that would be food. To make up for it, we restricted ourselves to ingredients that a Roman could have reasonably got their hands on (at least at some stage of the empire).

There is the cabbage, some already used for an earlier meal because oh gods I have an entire cabbage now. In the pot is our first major alteration to Cato’s recipe: since it is September VI Kalendas and thus the anniversary of the foundation of the Temple of Venus Genetrix, we decided to sacrifice a pig and add it to the soup. By which I mean, I like my food to have some protein and flavour so I bought a bacon hock at the supermarket. Another amusing difference between this soup and Cato’s is that we added some pepper at this stage, which judging by Pliny’s rant on the topic, Cato absolutely would not have approved of. But look, we can’t all be Catos (cf. Plutarch, Vita Catonis 19.5).

My coquus, a highly-skilled panarius, made the executive decision to engage the services of a bread-slave (panarium?) to make us some bread. With wheat flour, of course, we are not barbarians.

Other vegetable additions: onion, lentils, parsnip (chosen instead of carrot because there were no orange carrots in Roman times).

A soup taking form. Not pictured: us having a conversation about whether Cato would approve of us listening to metal as we cooked. Conclusion: probably some strange new mystery cult and/or barbarian screaming, absolutely not acceptable.

This soup didn’t end up incredibly faithful to Cato’s intentions, but we definitely got some cumin in there. Is anyone else having a moment of weird dissonance at the fact that the Romans apparently used cumin? Just me?

A soup and a bread complete! The bread was topped with salt and poppy seeds - I thought it was appropriate to use another food that was treated like a medicine in ancient times to go with the medical benefits of cabbage.

Food for the whole familia, or it would have been if our other flatmate had been home (the bread-slave didn’t want its share). Also pictured: some potentially Isiac imagery, lending credence to the suggestion that I may be the follower of a mystery cult (or at least it’ll look like it in the archaeological record).

Also did I mention oh gods I bought an entire cabbage.

Results: the soup was highly tasty, although that probably had very little to do with Cato and more to do with the bacon hock. Despite my corrupt lifestyle (starting with having plastered walls and having read far more Greek literature than is appropriate), on this day I feel that I have come closer to the great ways of the maiores, they who conquered the Mediterranean one nothing but bread, salt, cabbage and general grumpiness.

Tune in next time when we try and work out whether Cato actually wants us to put 14 Roman pounds of cheese into a cake recipe.

#ancients #tagamemnon #katie and cato

113 notes · View notes

miseriathome · 6 years

Note

Nah, queer theory is very much actively pushed by academics, who are people with real power over others - maybe not as much as some other category of people, but don't try and pretend that tenured faculty are weak and powerless outsiders. Besides that ... I can't dissuade you from your choice of ideology, but ime it was made very clear that "queer" was Not For Me, and I'm ostensibly one of those multiply-marginalized people who were supposed to find it liberatory.

[ presumably the same anon as this one ]

If your life experience doesn’t lead you to feel swayed by the really cool work that queer theorists are doing, then… whatever. I don’t feel particularly swayed by theoretical physics. But as somebody who is multiply-marginalized (aren’t we all?) who actually loves social theory, I’m still going to use my own blog as a platform to talk about it:

I don’t think you understand how broad the field of sociology is. Tenured sociology professors teach a whole broad range of topics. You know what tenured professors’ sociology classes really are? History, historical theory (pure theory, no applications), psychology, anthropology, economics, a lot more history, political science, and methodology courses. Things I’ve learned from tenured sociology professors: the history of capitalism as it developed from feudalism; Marx/Weber/Durkheim (which were beaten to death in every. single. course) ; the history of labor unions; pseudopsychology; a lot of statistics about population distributions based on things like age and sex; ethnographies about big industries; the history of factories; critical race/class/gender theory in the abstract; some weird shit about the function of sports in society, fuck if I know; the American Dream across time; modern cultural differences around the globe; political processes for passing legislation; fucking pussy hats, everyone couldn’t stop talking about the goddamn pussy hats; classifications of professions; lots of American history.

Social theory, economics, psychology, anthropology, political science, etc all are valid approaches to sociology. But being a tenured professor means being stuck in a niche all your life, never bothering to reach out of your own area of expertise. And you know what kinds of people have had a much more difficult time entering the present day class of tenured professors? People of color, disabled folks, queer people. You know, people who like queer theory. And research about minority issues doesn’t get funded as much as broader, “more applicable” research does., which makes it harder to enter academic fields and research positions if that’s your specialty.

You have to realize that people who are currently tenured professors have followed a career path to get there over the past 10+ years (if they’re even a newly tenured professor), and that’s in light of the changing political climate of that time which–as you go backwards to their early college days–would get more and more socially conservative, making it harder to have had that career path. Then there’s the fact that in a given sociology department at any university, there’s only so many professors that can specialize in identity politics, narrowing the potential for university-level teaching positions even further. Finally, a lot of queer theorists aren’t… even… sociologists? Like I said before, queer theorists are ordinary people who write about their lives and experiences, who sometimes come from other backgrounds like political science/anthropology/human rights and then sort of get swallowed into academic sociological queer theory. So you don’t have to have any specific credentials to write cornerstone pieces of queer literature, but you do have to have them to teach in a university, and thus I don’t think it’s very fair to assume that queer theorists are entering universities in hoards to push their queer agenda. (Also, colleges don’t really want to hire people who are too ~radical~ because of controversy–even liberal colleges.)

Or, if you’re trying to imply that the few professors who do teach queer theory are intentionally pushing it as much as possible… it’s probably because it’s such a relatively new, unexplored, and underrated area that deserves attention? I don’t see how gender/sexuality professors are any different in that respect than every other professor who gets super enthusiastic about their own research.

The people I know who teach queer theory are grad students, aka they aren’t tenured?? I mean I’ll give you some benefit of the doubt if you mean women’s gender/sexuality studies professors, since my avenue is sociology, but even then. And you totally can’t act like grad students have power, given how poor and exploited they are and how easily they can be dismissed for toeing a line at their institution.

I legitimately do not think professors are people with any significant amount of power over others–especially not broad social power a a class. Like, there is soooooooo much social theory that could go into breaking down this ask. I literally just pulled up my class notes on the social distinction of professions. It’s the nature of the public to try to deprofessionalize certain skills and knowledge bases, and university professors are frequently attacked in this regard.

I also established already that most queer theorists aren’t actually people who have fulfilled an academically-acceptable career in queer theory. Faculty are the people who synthesize documents and structure syllibi around them in order to teach them effectively. The people who are “pushing” queer theory (still unfortunate rhetoric with queerphobic implications) are queer people. Non-professor queer people. Many of whom are multiply-marginalized and find writing about their lives liberatory. You’re getting uncomfortably close to “marginalized people actually have tone of power” conspiracy logic. It’s a lot simpler than all of that. Professor teach queer theory because a good education requires a broad representation of multiple sides, and queer theory is just another lens, just like neocolonialism, neoliberalism, neo-Marxism, and critical race/class/gender theory are. Like, my social theory textbook has one section about queer theory (which is literally only about Judith Butler, actually) which is only one part of one chapter on postmodernism.

But like… aside all of that, most theory–except maybe music theory, because fuck that shit–is descriptive. Theory is developed through observations and life experiences and quantitative/ethnographic research. If you read prominent works within queer theory, they’re either what are essentially memoirs/opinion pieces, argumentative essays that build off the work on philosophy-style theorists, or published, peer-reviewed studies. And considering the fact that those things are present in all branches of sociological theory, I don’t think you can be against that, either.

I definitely gave myself a headache trying to condense all of the things I’m trying to think of, and I’ve been chipping away at this ask for multiple hours. The bigger fact is that one person sending me super short, super vague anons is not a good start to a productive and meaningful conversation, because I’m just grasping at straws trying to make inferences about what’s really being conveyed. This might be an inadequate job but it’s a starting point and is hopefully broad enough that it hits on some meaningful points.

Also, anybody who doesn’t find the word queer liberatory but still calls themselves queer should really ask themselves why they want to be called queer in the first place when it’s a choice.

#anon #ask #queer theory #reply #I...?#long post #academia

4 notes · View notes

yuvilee · 4 years

Text

5th November 2019 Student-led seminar 3

Text: Twemlow, A. (2006) No muscles, no tattoos. Available at: http://www.eyemagazine.com/feature/article/no-muscles-no-tattoos (Accessed on: 1st November 2019)

Table of content: Introduction Main part: Reality proximity against intimidation A closer view on BUTT Magazine Heritage? Conclusion Notes: Books and articles Pictures

About the author: Dr. Alice Twemlow earned a Ph.D. from the History of Design program run as a joint venture by the Royal College of Art and the Victoria & Albert Museum, London. Her research addresses design’s complex interrelations with time and the environment and manifests in writing, exhibitions, conferences, and education. She is Research Professor at the Royal Academy of Art, The Hague (KABK) where she leads the “Design and the Deep Future” readership, and an Associate Professor at Leiden University, in the Academy for Creative and Performing Arts, where she supervises design-related PhDArts candidates(1).

About the Magazines:

BUTT Magazine was founded in 2001 by Gert Jonkers and Job van Bennenkom in Amsterdam. It was a quarterly magazine for gay men, written in English and printed until 2011.

In 2005, The Guardian named it as one of its top twenty magazines(2).

Fantastic Man, founded in 2005 by Gert Jonkers and Job van Bennenkom, is a men's fashion magazine printed semi-annually. It focusses on men's fashion in their 30s with interviews of male celebrities and intellectuals with a big variety of backgrounds.

In 2008, the magazine was praised for its art direction, winning it the British D&AD award for Best Magazine & Newspaper Design(3).

Aaron Britt, in a review of men's fashion magazines for the San Francisco Chronicle, lauded:

'It comes out only twice a year, allowing the sticker shock to wear off between purchases, but you'll never throw away an issue. Fashion-forward, clever, deeply engaged with the fashion world without the half-baked political exposes Esquire insists on running, (...) is better designed, better photographed and rafts more stylish than the competition. If you buy only one men's fashion magazine, it should be this one.’(4)

Introduction

We are surrounded by advertisements of a broad variety, including fashion and beauty, telling us of contemporary aesthetics of what to wear and how to look, what kind of hair-cuts and shoes are ‘in’ this Autumn and what to look for in Spring 2020, what kind of beauty routine and diet is good for you to look like your favourite celebrity and where to buy your favourite celebrities dress look-a-likes.

In the fashion industry, models are presented as perfectly shaped: superficial, anorexic young girls and very muscular men with not a single hair on their body. In Magazines, they are presented in eclectic pictures and photo collages, with a focused layout and printed on glossy paper.

Flipping through UK’s most famous magazines like Vogue, Glamour or men focused magazines like GQ, or Ape-to-Gentleman, their aesthetics are strongly stylised and typified. I wonder how you don’t feel a tiny bit intimidated - even as an adult. How must this appear to younger people or teens trying to figure out their changing roles from child to adult and searching for role-models? How must it be for teens that don’t feel like fitting into the black and white man-woman framework?

There must be alternative aesthetics, alternatives for alternative people. How do magazines which focus on such audiences present themselves? Clean-glossy, like their mainstream counterparts? In her profile of Jop van Bennekom and some of his magazines, Twemlow presents some very different examples.

Above: My screenshot of BUTT Magazines 8-11, WorthPoint, (2019)

Above: My screenshot of Fantastic Man Spring/Summer 2010, #11 (2019)

Above: My screenshot of GQ Magazine Collage, Freeport Press, (2019)

Reality proximity against intimidation

Nowadays, Jop van Bennekom and Gert Jonkers are well known for their magazines for gay people. When being asked by James Anderson from i-D Vice online about his motivations to create BUTT Magazine, Gert Jonkers responded that he wanted

‘something for the contemporary homo. A journal for and by gay men. A meeting ground, figuratively speaking. We wanted the magazine to feel like meeting an amazing man on the train or in a bar and have a great interesting conversation with him.‘(5)

Their focus was as it seems to create something relatable, something close instead of intimidatingly perfect like fashion Magazines in the mainstream are known for. Jonkers also stresses this part: people shouldn’t be living objects for fashion or beauty ads. He reflects on the rhetorical question whether the most stylish charm isn’t actually natural charm. He underlines his previous response about the motivation as BUTT should mirror real, ‘normal un-self-aware’ men.

This strategy seems to work, as the eye-magazine shows in an interview with Andrew Sloath:

‘It has given voice and visual presence to those of us who are trying to figure out our own worlds.’(6)

Bennekom sums this up perfectly:

‘I wish Butt had been around when I was 22 and insecure (…). Other gay magazines have cut-and-paste, retouched bodies unlike any you’ve ever seen in real life and certainly not like mine.’(7)

Young Bennekom, as a graphic design student, found his inspiration in the work of fashion design students at his university in the Netherlands around the 90s. With newly founded anti-fashion magazine Purple in 1992 and a shifting fashion photography rising, he started to interview his friends and published this in the style of a Q&A.

Above: My screenshot of BUTT Magazine, Summer 2008, #23, (2019)

A closer view on BUTT Magazine

For the BUTT Magazine, this kind of interdisciplinary mix of fashion and art, the eccentric way to display people around him in their natural clothing and living style, must have been a revelation to his like-minded audience. Real people with normal body types, with hair and used looking clothing, with wrinkles and real tousled hair, set in real surroundings with imperfect but familiar settings. They could be a neighbour, a person on the street, at the grocery shop, in the pub. Their stories and themes are as casual and boring as anyone’s, although it starred gay artists and celebrities as well. In this mix of content, one might find confidence about one’s outing, clothes, thoughts, about their body shape, their hair zones, and their sexuality. It seems like this kind of exhibition of normality can liberate people. And it did. People started to imitate the Q&A style interviews and photos and sent in their own content, together with stories, letters, and so on.

Maybe it was also due to its clean layout that readers could imagine to be published and to copy this style. A design that feels like ‘nothing’ can be very complex, dense and tightly controlled in its design process, as Twemlow summarises(8).

This passion and the approachable magazine team created a more significant collaboration and value than the cheapish Zine styled papers would suggest:

‘They’re something you don’t buy and read and throw away,” says Bronson. “You end up keeping them in plastic envelopes, even though they’re kind of cheap.’(9)

Following the trend with an online presence, BUTT Magazine became an even more interactive meeting platform for its readers. Looking at the page, it, however, looks like it has not been very actively moderated in recent times.

Heritage?

While researching BUTT Magazine and Fantastic Man I was reminded of other magazines that are known to me, like the ZEIT Magazin MANN. Their visual language and layout are similar.

Another example is a rather new niche magazine from the Netherlands, called MacGuffin Magazine, related to Hitchcock’s definition in film. While I could not find a proof in time whether those examples indeed found inspiration from van Bennekom and Jonkers, the visual connection is quite clear. To be decisive on this assumption this would need additional research.

ZEIT Magazin MANN was named magazine of the week by MagCulture:

‘MANN is a standalone, bi-annual that costs €8.50 and aims to fill a gap in the German market which notably lacks obvious alternatives to the big titles like GQ and Esquire.

We’ve selected it as our magazine of the week because, quite simply, this is something that would never be produced by a newspaper in the UK.’(10)

During my research I saw MacGuffin Magazine was also named magazine of the week by MagCulture:

‘The magazine’s strangely dreamy yet academic rigor is matched with soft yet crisp design (...)’(11)

My point here is that niche and eccentric looks in magazines don’t seem like a high-selling product. I believe there is an interested audience on a broad variety of topics. While ZEIT Magazin MANN seemingly found a well-balanced position due to missing supply, it could be difficult for magazines of similar niche focus. ZEIT Magazin MANN is part of a bigger company, DIE ZEIT, hence they can rather easily advertise new magazines. What about new magazines by younger people like van Bennekom and Jonkers without big starting capital? Could new niche magazines still survive in our fast-paced culture, that mainly lives online?

Above: My screenshot of MacGuffin Magazine Issue N° 5 14th December 2017, (2019)

Above: My screenshot of ZEIT Magazin MANN 1/2018, (2019)

Conclusion:

The printed version of BUTT Magazine ended in 2011, after 10 years. A new generation and with it a modernism shift in aesthetic and culture came with a postmodern approach. A rather hipster or emotionally one with a different approach to modern gay life. Also, the style of communication and connectivity switched from MySpace, Facebook, and websites to more fast-paced means like Twitter, Snapchat, and Tinder. At the same time, porn saw changes due to Social Media.

The question here would be if a contemporary re-make still could work or if Social Media got it all covered, no need for a printed version that could be kept for years?

As Nicholas Mirzoeff portrays it:

‘(...) ‘the postmodern is the crisis caused by modernism and modern culture confronting the failure of its own strategy of visualising. In other words, it is the visual crisis of culture that creates postmodernity, not its textuality. While print culture is certainly not going to disappear, the fascination with the visual and its effects that was a key feature of modernism has engendered a postmodern culture that is at its most postmodern when it is visual.’(12).

Notes:

Books and articles

Twemlow, A. (no date) About. Available at: http://alicetwemlow.com/about/ (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

Armstrong, S., Dugdale, J., Gibson, J., Gibson, O., Hepworth, G., McLean, G., Tod, A., Viner, K., Wells, M. (2005) 'Covered in glory’, The Guardian, 12th December. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/dec/12/mondaymediasection.pressandpublishing?gusrc=rss&feed=global (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

D&AD (2008) Available at: https://www.dandad.org/awards/professional/2008/magazine-newspaper-design/16666/fantastic-man (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

Britt, A. (2009) ‘A quick guide to men's fashion media’, SFGATE, 15th February. Available at: https://www.sfgate.com/living/article/A-quick-guide-to-men-s-fashion-media-3171839.php?forceWeb=1 (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

Anderson, J. (2014) ‘Forever butt: discussing the revolutionary gay magazine with founder gert jonkers’, i-D Vice, 26th November. Available at: https://i-d.vice.com/en_uk/article/kz8bam/talking-forever-butt-magazine-with-founder-gert-jonkers (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

Twemlow, A. (2006) No muscles, no tattoos. Available at: http://www.eyemagazine.com/feature/article/no-muscles-no-tattoos (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

ibid.

Haskell, D. (2008) ‘Very Graphic Design’, New York Magazine. 27th December. Available at: http://nymag.com/arts/art/features/53148/ (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

Morley, M. (2016) ‘Magazine of the week: ZEIT Magazin MANN, #1’, MagCulture. 5th October. https://magculture.com/zeitmagazin-mann-1/ (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

Morley, M. (2015) ‘Magazine of the week: MacGuffin #1’, MagCulture. 17th June. https://magculture.com/zeitmagazin-mann-1/ (Accessed on: 1st November 2019).

Mirzoeff, Nicholas (1998, p. 21) The visual culture reader, London: Routledge.

Pictures

WorthPoint, (2019), [Screenshot]. Available at: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/butt-magazine-lot-issues-11-michael-1725891166 (Accessed on: 31st October 2019).

Magpile, (2019), [Screenshot]. Available at: https://magpile.com/fantastic-man/spring-10/(Accessed on: 28 October 2019).

Freeport Press, (2018), [Screenshot]. Available at: http://freeportpress.com/gq-stares-down-a-multi-channel-revenue-stream (Accessed on: 31st October 2019).

Larson, A., (2008), [Screenshot]. Available at: http://www.andreaslarsson.net/portraits.html (Accessed on: 31st October 2019).

MacGuffin Magazine, (2017), [Screenshot]. Available at: https://www.macguffinmagazine.com/issues/macguffin-the-cabinet (Accessed on: 28 October 2019).

Zeitungen und Zeitschriften online, (2018), [Screenshot]. Available at: https://www.zzol.de/objekt/18099/20180001 (Accessed on: 28 October 2019).

0 notes

cloudytian · 7 years

Text

Understanding Gender Dynamics in Touhou and Historical Japan (Part One)

tl;drs in bold, so you can skim parts that you’re not interested in.

This is the first half of a two part essay on the interpretation of gender dynamics in Touhou, which is part of a larger series of essays on the geared to help western consumers of eastern media recognize how their cultural values differ from historical eastern ones so that they may better learn to understand the cultural background of the media they consume. While the focus will be on Japan because of its current cultural dominance in entertainment, the epistemological guidelines I give can be used to better analyze our approaches towards understanding different cultures with a more critical eye.

I started writing this in response to this video post by @thejorlosopher (provocatively titled “There Are No Women in Gensokyo”), because @turbobyakuren was the only watcher to recognize that imposing western values upon a Japanese work that draws heavily from historical Japanese values erases their culture AND results in a faulty analysis.

I then realized that it was difficult for consumers immersed in western culture to realize that a different set of values govern eastern media because:

A) their cultural dominance is rarely challenged enough for them to realize that their values are not universal and unequivocal across all cultures

B) understanding current eastern values requires a historic and government context of the ancient philosophies that influenced them because of the strictness by which governments imposed the enforcement of their values, and there concepts so fundamentally interconnected that any overview will always be incomplete.

B draws from a tenet true for all pursuits of knowledge; the further you go, the more context and scope is required, and so it is not possible for any singular person to possess the absolute expanse of experience to know everything about a singular subject. There are those who can be called masters in a field, but never those who can be said to have mastered a field. It is therefore imperative that we all approach education with the mindset of students.

So, this first part focuses critical thinking practices that have helped me as a student of global customs with learning to identify ignorance of cultural and behavioral mores and how to work to lessen it.

You don’t need to watch Jorlosopher’s video to read this analysis because A) I cite the specific line I am referring to when using it a segue and B) I find it to be deeply flawed and shallow. That said, I encourage you to watch the video first and freely form your own thoughts if you intend to participate in that part of the discussion so that my views will not colour your interpretations of it.

POOR CRITICAL META-ANALYSIS AND IGNORANCE OF IGNORANCE

Jorlosopher, there were some good points made in your video, but many more mistakes. For one, you're ignoring the cardinal rule of artistic interpretation: do not assert that your interpretation is the only correct one. That discourages constructive discussion and invites meaningless echoing or argumentative head-butting that does not serve to constructively develop ideas, and narrow-mindedly discounts the possibility of others coming to different conclusions because of their differing experiences and background. Or, as ZUN put it (though I can’t find the exact quote), everyone has their own personal Gensokyo, and they're all equally real.

So, I'm not going to argue that your interpretation is incorrect, because it is a valid prediction of how our societal constructs might appear in Gensokyo according to your existing cognitive schema, but I will argue that your interpretation is weakly supported and too drenched in existing prejudiced rhetoric to be valid as a thoughtpiece on gender dynamics, and give you some advice on how to rectify those mistakes.

First off, from a purely structural standpoint, you lack a coherent message on gender dynamics in Touhou other than the title, because your statements about Gensokyo blatantly ignore the vast Eastern influence on the setting, and have no supporting evidence for your insubstantially simplistic claims.

"But Cloudy, this is a casual thing, it's made for fans of Touhou who are already familiar with the world I'm talking about!"

Again-- your interpretation of Touhou canon is not the only correct one, and as it is expansive, you will forget and misremember some things and continuously form interpretations as you read that will influence interpretations of future things you read. Therefore, it is imperative that you cite sources when interpreting large bodies of work and promoting your interpretation so that people can see the chain of thought behind your reasoning. Also, by applying academic scrutiny of gender dynamics to Touhou, Jorlosopher invites not only academic counter-scrutiny and meta-scrutiny but also the nerds who take that stuff super seriously, and I am nothing if not a huge nerd.

So, friendly advice: please kindly cite your sources, and evaluate your own biases, or nerds will beat you up and steal your nerd card and also possibly your lunch money.

REFUTATION OF “THERE ARE NO WOMEN IN GENSOKYO“

You have next to no supporting arguments for your claim that “there are no concepts of womanhood in Gensokyo”, as you have no sources or examples to base your claim on. The strongest argument that you have is not, in fact, your rhetoric but rather a quote from @asa-turney misrepresented to suit a simplistic and shallow model of the concept of gender that does not even acknowledge the existence of nonbinary spectrum of gendered concepts in Touhou and eastern media as a whole. Asa has repeatedly and thoughtfully explored the relationship between androgyny of traits in anime and our modern conceptions of gender, so the fact that you would use a quote from an advocate of diverse gender expression to justify an interpretive view that marginalizes diverse gender expressions demonstrates a lack of credible ability to analyze the context of ideas.

It’s also a useful gauge of academic validity, because good scholars must know how to evaluate the not only the context of their field, but also the context of their arguments. You cannot trust someone to possess the intellectual integrity to thoughtfully analyze broad, complex topics if they cannot thoughtfully analyze their own narrow claims.

Jorlosopher’s claim: "The fact that there is only one gender creates a plain in which there are no genders [in Touhou]."

Asa’s quote: “What does ‘being a female’ mean in Gensokyo? It means something, and means nothing at the same time. They’re all female because they’re drawn with a certain aesthetic in mind, but gender identity never comes into play because no one is treated differently for filling any particular role as any particular gender.”

Asa's quote focuses more on the inequality of gender dynamics than the expression of gender identity-- Gensokyo is appealing because in its internal logic, there are none of the dynamics that reward masculine traits and demean feminine ones, or punish people for possessing or lacking masculine or feminine traits that society says they shouldn't. This does not mean, however, that the association of masculinity and femininity do not exist, as they are cultural concepts held and dictated by the society that Touhou is based upon and explores the traditions of. By failing to identify or acknowledge these masculine/feminine associations and dynamics, however, you strip away a deep level of complexity and artistic accomplishment of Touhou as a series and deminishes the impact of Japanese culture upon the world of modern media.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO ANALYZE GENDER DYNAMICS?

However, I disagree with Asa’s claim that “gender identity never comes into play because no one is treated differently for filling any particular role as any particular gender,” because it restricts the exploration of gender dynamics only to how they are used to deprecate people, and thus implies that gender dynamics can only be used for prejudice. This conflation of “gender dynamics” with “gender prejudice” is what Jorlosopher’s claim relies on, when gender dynamics can and have been used to artistically and scientifically further our understanding of human experience, such as in the romanticised strength and valour of literary heroes like Karna or Mulan or in the appreciation of human beauty spurred Renaissance artists to pioneer the modern field of anatomy. We must consider what it means to explore gender in a way that is not purely dictated by ignorant opponents in order to promote the positive awareness needed to overwrite this ignorance so that more constructive debate and discussion can occur.

I define gender identity from an epistemological perspective as the words and ideas used by people to describe and communicate a specific permutation of “feminine” and “masculine” traits, whether they be visual, biological, social, or mental, as well as absent, concurrent, or contradictory, both in terms of how they are used to describe oneself and how they are used to describe others. The key to exploring gender, by that definition, lies in recognizing what standards and values define masculinity and femininity across various cultural contexts.

And there definitely exists a deliberate interplay of masculine and feminine motifs in Touhou names, designs, and personalities, most prominently with Marisa and Miko, which serves to highlight the ephemerality of social constructs like gendered associations and lampshade the futility of trying to simplify such natural ambiguity by confining it to rigid absolutes, but that’s a topic that can’t be tackled without an exploration of the impacts that the philosophies behind eastern religions have had on perceptions and the development of common modes of thought.

A LACK OF MEN DOES NOT MEAN A LACK OF CONTEXT FOR GENDER

Jorlosopher’s claim: "There is no significant population of men impose traits onto...therefore these traits will not be discouraged in women."

First, there's no unshakeable evidence either way on just how many men exist in Gensokyo. There's not even the argument of stable populations to consider because for all we know, the Human Village could be 99% gays granted fertility through prayers and divine intervention, so I'll grant you benefit of doubt for the premise, instead of immediately refuting it with, "The Human Village has a notable male population, and Gensokyo split off in the 1800s when human society in Japan had already developed gender roles and biases which then influence the youkai they create and bestow them with those same gendered preconceptions, so while sexism might be nonexistent in Gensokyo thanks to the importance of traditionally feminine professions such as shrine maidens in their society, this does not mean that sexism never existed in the first place, but rather that it was overcome by granting all people the same agency of opportunity that used to be reserved exclusively for men."

I will, however, strongly imply that instead.

Second, your representation of gender discrimination against women revolves solely on men, and only addresses one possible avenue of prejudice when in fact the rationales between all sorts of prejudice are connected. The prejudice formula can be broadly boiled down to down to “If discrimination of groups exist, then comparisons of groups exist. If comparisons of groups exist, then contradicting opinions will arise. If contradicting opinions exist and we try to diminish the validity of one opinion solely to validate the merits of another, then ignorance takes hold and prejudice spreads.” Note that discrimination, in the sense of recognizing the distinctions between one thing and another, is not inherently bad in itself, but only becomes harmful if we use our differences to justify an ignorance that demeans the value of opinions we poorly understand.

Third, it fails to acknowledge the feedback loop of tribalistic demonization of an entire dissimilar group, and then the consequent demonization of even the traits of that dissimilar group that causes prejudice to entrench itself. By attempting to eliminate all exposure to a group, the internal tribe removes positive exposure to that group that would challenge and contradict the prejudices they hold and confront them with the burden to change.

And lastly, it fails to acknowledge the existing standards of feminine and masculine traits that were present in Japan that ZUN chose to include and explore in Gensokyo, out of a complete ignorance of historical Japanese culture.

I believe that you have good intentions and genuinely attempt to acknowledge the existence of and refute the justifications of sexism, and thus hold no ill feelings towards you, and in fact welcome your thoughts! There's a sort of underlying dissociation between entertainment media and academia, as there isn't nearly enough discussion on the themes, merits, and influences of pop culture, even though it's such a large part of our lives and by definition, the most popular form of artistic and cultural expression today. But I cannot feel positive about the messages espoused by someone without the intellectual integrity to examine and compensate for their own intrinsic biases when making a statement about gender politics while claiming to be a philosopher. Work towards correcting your biases by expanding your scope, and never stop learning.

Remember that Remilia built a house-rocket and flew it to the moon with only her unshakeable self-efficacy holding it together and then literally powered it on faith and prayers, because the “common sense” frameworks of the modern, westernized outside world that you attempted to enforce upon themes illustrated in Touhou in your limited understanding of cultural context don’t automatically translate to Gensokyo. You can try to adopt the sense of Gensokyo to explore the fantastical wonder within that world, but you absolutely cannot impose your sense upon Gensokyo so as to limit it to the meagre surface banality of your personal world so that you can claim that you have explored it.

Learning and self-improvement is a personal journey different for all. I cannot and will not attempt to dictate the means by which you grow as a person, but I will attempt to give my fellow students a tool for furthering their understanding so that they may meander less and reach further than those who have come slightly before.

The latter half of this essay (which will be posted tomorrow) will examine the expectations for the roles of women in historical Japanese society, particularly around the start of the Meiji Period during which the westernization of Japan began to diminish the hegemony of the “traditional” values that Touhou celebrates and satirizes in equal measure. Understanding the expectations and values that define womanhood allows readers to better identify what qualifies as masculine and feminine motifs in Touhou in the context of the oft-ignored retro eastern perspective that it draws from.

#touhou #meta analysis #epistemology #gender #wall of text #analysis #I'm exhausted and going to bed now #my formatting got deleted TWICE #ugh

97 notes · View notes

danieljbockman · 7 years

Photo

Power, who doesn’t want more power in their life, their work, their business? Power has been a game of humanity for as long as time itself and yet the rules and the resemblances of power aren’t all that different in today’s power plays. When I first got into business for myself, I wanted to be a powerful businessman and hold the king's scepter in my hands of business. I then started thinking about how we feel about powerful people in our modern society. There is a lot of disdain for the rich and powerful and I had to make sure I was alright with being painted with that brush, - turns out, I was perfectly okay with this!

Power has always had a bit of a nasty stigma attached to it and it’s a common belief amongst those of us that were raised in a normal household of the middle class that the rich and powerful were to never get much sympathy. The powerful always seemed to us, to be powerful as a result of their money and born-in-to privilege so it wasn’t hard to listen to the rhetoric coming from people who griped about the rich and powerful and buy into the notion and the feeling that being powerful is kind of a bad thing. But every time I hear something like this, I have to ask the question, “If being powerful is a bad thing, then is being powerless a good thing?” I think you know the answer to that right away! No, being powerless is not a good thing. On those same lines, I even read one time that there are a certain people that think being poor is much nobler than being rich. Hmmm… I would have to say no to that one as well.

My journey to attaining power was very educational because I had to find most of it out on my own. There are really no fast track reads or lessons on the subject of power but I did read Robert Greene’s, 48 Laws of Power. I loved this book mostly because Greene takes you on a trip through the power plays of the renascence period of kings, queens, and courtiers of history.

My first discovery of becoming a powerful businessman is that no one is going to give you your power like the great kings of history could. Today, you have to find your own power and I’m going to tell you that it’s not as hard as you might think it is. I have found that of most of the rich and powerful and self-made people were actually very powerful long before they were successful. This was such an interesting finding for me because it completely changed the way I was thinking about power. All of the sudden, I was finding that power could be procured first, then the wealth would start to come in. I was going to use my power to get rich vs my using my money to get power. I write in my book titled, The Better Business Book, that if you want to be rich and powerful, be powerful first!

I also bring up another topic in the book that I like to call, poor man’s power. It’s a subject I am going to make my masterpiece in one of my next writing because it is so hotly contested. Even my editor had never heard of such a thing as poor man’s power and asked me to explain this because whoever heard of the poor man with power. I said, “Have you ever heard of Mahatma Gandhi”, but I went into a better version of what poor man’s power is. Essentially, it’s having the ability to move mountains without owning the machinery. We all know it would be easy for a rich person to just buy the machinery and pay workers to move the mountains but how does a poor man orchestrate the same thing and make just as much impact. Put simply, it’s using others people’s brains for ideas and other people’s money to pay them.

I truly believe it was my being naïve to business that was my greatest source of power. That doesn’t make much sense, does it? But the fact was, I knew very little about business when I first started and I had to ask a lot of questions. The most powerful question I would ask was the question, “Why?” Why do we do this? Why do we do that? Why can’t I buy this? Why are you doing it that way? I would ask why so many times that I even had some employees quit my company over me questioning them. The answer I am always looking for when I asked ‘Why’ is – “It’s the way we’ve always done it”. If I hear those seven words, be ready to be challenged!

The one thing that I want from my power the very most is to not only have a powerful presence but also have a powerful absence. You’ve seen these people before and probably worked for them, the ones that have an immense amount of power when they are not even in the room. I strive for this kind of power by employing incredible people in my organization. These competent reports represent my best interest and my customer’s best interest when I’m not there. It’s not easy finding these kinds of people but if you do, hang on to them as long as you can and treat them like they are your greatest asset, (because they are)!

So what are the good things about power in business? I mentioned that it was not good to be powerless in business so what are these power affected success stories? Love them or hate them, I don’t care but there is no denying that any Apple product, (i-this, i-that, mac-this, mac-that), was founded and developed by a very powerful man. He was one of those, powerful before he was rich, type people and demanded nothing less than a superlative performance from his people! Lou Holtz was another prime example of how power exertion on an organization can take you from being a loser to being a winner. Lou Holtz went to coach at the University of Minnesota when they were the losing-est division one football team in the country. Lou simply said that he would only accept the position as head coach under the condition that everyone from the ticket sellers to the parking attendants, from the electricians to the plumbers at the stadium, from the popcorn sellers to the assistant coaches, he didn’t care, - If each person involved with the success of that team was not 100% committed to excellence in their job, he would fire them! End of story. Holtz took that team on to become winners and he never replaced a single person.

I think it’s time to put power back into your company. You don’t have to become a tyrannical dictator and scream and yell at everyone slamming your iron fist on the table. But… do like Napoleon Bonaparte said and, “Put your iron fist, inside a velvet glove”. Yes, you can be very nice and still be very powerful, in fact, it’s the most effective form of power there is. Have you ever heard the saying, “Kill them with kindness” or “Be nice to your haters, it will piss them off”? Kind power has the most leverage there is in the power game. Be kind but be firm and never let anyone see your kindness as weakness. Power has to be controlled and anger is a loss of control, hence loss of power. Stay cool and true, hold the course and only change your mind on a decision after long and thought out reflection.

I feel that most people don’t realize that power can only be lost, power is really never gained in modern society. This is something I found out on my own. What I mean by ‘never gained’ is because you already have all the power you will ever need resting inside you. This can be a difficult concept for a lot of people to comprehend but let me just say that my experience with my own power was self-manufactured inside me. There is no one more powerful than me in my social circle that gave me my power so it must have been all me!

#business #entrepreneur #entrepreneurship #hustle #enterprise

2 notes · View notes

diogenesofamerica · 5 years

Text

Forgotten Power

I believe there are a few simple exercises that will always be valuable to us. There are a handful of ideas that (if they really speak to us) will develop our emotional and intellectual understanding better than any others.

Here I turn to the words of Bertrand Russell. From the 1959 program Face to Face, Bertrand Russell was asked to give a message that he believed could benfit future generations. His two-part answer is as filled with wisdom as is possible; I consider it one of the most important pieces of knowledge we ever recorded because it holds instructions for not only the head but also the heart of humanity. Regardless of the generation or the culture, these words will always help us.

From Face to Face, The word of Bertrand Russell:

“I should like to say two things, one intellectual and one moral.

The intellectual thing I should want to say to them is this: When you are studying any matter or considering any philosophy, ask yourself only what are the facts, and what is the truth that the facts bear out. Never let yourself be diverted, either by what you wish to believe, or by what you think would have beneficent social effects if it were believed. But look only and solely at what are the facts. That is the intellectual thing that I should wish to say.

The moral thing I should wish to say to them is very simple. I should say: Love is wise; hatred is foolish. In this world, which is getting more and more closely interconnected, we have to learn to tolerate each other. We have to learn to put up with the fact that some people say things that we don't like. We can only live together in that way. And if we are to live together, and not die together, we must learn a kind of charity and a kind of tolerance, which is absolutely vital to the continuation of human life on this planet.”

No one has ever or will ever reach a point where that knowledge is not useful to them. And because of that, if there is ever supposed to be some kind of grand book that educates us all, I believe this piece should figure prominently.

I'll end this with an idea I had a few years ago that I truly wish I could work to develop. The phrase I use is Word Wall, and I'll give just a quick description of how the idea came to me.

I was watching a debate during the national elections, and on one particular night there was a backdrop that featured text from the Declaration of Independence as its decoration. And, as always, my mind raced with different degrees of cynicism:

I like that as a background, it reminds us of what's important. But actually, do I need a 50-foot tapestry of the Declaration hanging in front of my face to remind me that it is important? I love that document, don’t get me wrong, I have a copy that still hangs on my wall. But if I need large copies of documents hanging in front of my face to remind me of their importance, my entire life would be plastered over with endless documents. But it is a nice thing to do, and it shows that they consider it important. And besides, what else would it be? Just a plain backdrop?

That cynical exchange is usually how it goes when I'm first questioning something. Thankfully, (like we always should) I did not end with the overly-cynical assessment. With the above story came the idea of a simple background that could significantly raise the level of discourse on this planet - a claim I do not make lightly.

The best way to understand it would just be to hear a description of the ideal form:

During a debate it can often be difficult for an audience to follow all the points being argued. Not only are many subjects covered in a short period, but the topics discussed are often complex and issues we have been dealing with for years. On top of that, it is important to never forget the skill of oration.

The person with the best ideas is not guaranteed success; a large part of a public debate is winning over the audience, and often the one with better oratory skills will win - regardless of the merit of their points. This is clear evidence to the power of rhetoric, or the art of winning an argument. The problem has been with us for thousand of years, the idea that a great speaker can overcome logic and reason, yet now in the modern age we are reaching a point where we have a chance to overcome it.

The best way to combat this power of rhetoric over fact is an informed public. unfortunately, many people (myself included) can find it sometimes difficult to be well-versed and up to date on every global isue that is affecting our society. I mention this, because all it takes is one audience member to be unfamiliar with one topic, and then the skill of a speaker begins to matter more than the facts at hand. We must agree that this is a terrible situation that must be avoided whenever possible.

As I mentioned, the best way to deal with the problem is an informed public; however, I believe the easiest way to deal with this may be by developing a Word Wall, as I call it.

Imagine a large stage with two podiums and two people. Behind them is a large screen, but instead of displaying images or stationary words, it is continually keeping a transcript of the debate. It is however doing much more than just keeping a running transcript. The size of the screen (at least 40ft x 100ft) allows it to display the past 1-2 minutes of conversation in readable text on the screen. And within seconds of the transcript being put on the screen, an advanced program will begin fact checking every word they say.

This is the most important part of the machine. It can sound ridiculous to imagine every single word dissected and fact check, but that is where the color coding helps everything.

How many times have you heard a politician confidently make a statement? And how many times have you wondered if they were lying to you? Even the process of fact checking things online has become difficult due to manipulative forces. Imagine a speaker makes a bold claim about the problems facing our country. Those words carry unbelievably heavy meaning, they should be held up to criticism. A statement is made and behind them, 20 feet high above their head is their claim. the audience then waits to see if those words hold true; the statement becomes a pleasant green, we know they are speaking the truth, the phrase becomes red, we know there is an issue.

As I mentioned, this is not the best way to handle the issue - simply the easiest. In a way, we are turning it into a video game, a passive experience we only slightly interact with. I will always wish for an informed public that dissects the claims of the speakers in real time, but I believe that for many this is a good starting place. At the very least, this would make it more difficult for people to make ridiculous claims. If I could imagine a plausible machine that would create an unceasingly inquisitive public, I would be describing that instead. Since that isn't the case, I believe that something like the Word Wall could make it more difficult for liars and anyone else that wants to manipulate people in order to spread their own deceptions.

0 notes

strange-goodfellows · 7 years

Text

A Sweet Friend: Power and Erotics in Doctor Faustus -- A Summary

So, let’s talk male-male relationships in this time, shall we? Hey y’all! I actually am getting around to this now! Now some disclaimers overall: I am an undergrad. I’m not like an expert in any way shape or form. This is just the conclusion I reached in a 9-12 page essay for a 10 week class on renaissance literature. Additionally I feel as though I may have misrepresented the amount of this paper that is explicitly about the use of the word “sweet.” It is an important part of my paper because it complicates the topic in a weird way. I am in no way done with this paper, it’s something I want to continue to research, refine my thesis, and eventually maybe get this shit published. But for now, I’ll talk about the stuff that I have done. Probably gonna put this under a cut because this could get aggressively long.

My main topic was to determine the power dynamic between Faustus and Mephistopheles through a lens of the erotic. We’d spent the whole term looking at how the Elizabethans were actually pretty into having power over others, thus the erotics of a young boy’s body on stage (there’s lots of shit with this). So I thought, well if we can identify erotic elements of a relationship based on the difference in power, we should be able to go the other way, and determine a power dynamic based on the erotic elements.

I started this paper going there is clearly something going on between Mephistopheles and Faustus, right?? Like surely there will be no shortage of scholarship identifying the homoerotic language in this play... RIGHT? Well as it turns out it was actually difficult to find scholarship on the erotics in this play specifically. Weird. So I had to turn to more general topics-- how do men show affection to each other normally in this period? By determining the norm, and attempting to quantify how the relationship between Mephistopheles and Faustus does or does not fit within it, I could study the queer qualities in their relationship, and hopefully from this I could determine who holds the power between the two of them.

So, let’s talk male-male relationships in this time, shall we? I relied heavily on the works of Alan Bray in this particular regard. He wrote an article titled “Homosexuality and the Signs of Male Friendship in Elizabethan England” in around 1990 that summarizes what he considers to be the normal relationship between two gentlemen of equal or very similar rank. An important detail: this relationship that I am about to summarize is not in fact queer because it was a perfectly normal relationship. That’s not to say they are not gay as hell (pun not intended). As we define relationships now, this absolutely would constitute a gay relationship so please don’t panic as I continue to use the term “gentleman’s friendship.” I am with you all. I just want to point out the weird intricacy of this relationship. It was not considered sodomy to the Elizabethans, and they didn’t have the identity concept of homosexuality we have. It doesn’t mean we are trying to erase the queer aspects in any way, it just means we need to deal with it slightly differently (one reason I put off writing this so long is I’m very afraid people will be like ‘you promised us gay code and now you’re just calling them friends’). That said, Bray outlines two very important features of a friendship between two gentlemen: an outwardly-directed physical relationship, and an inwardly-directed emotional bond.

Let’s break that shit down now. What do I mean when I say outwardly-directed physical aspects? Bray explains that these relationships included public displays of affection. Gentlemen could embrace in public, kiss in public, and in fact share a bed with each other. While the bed-sharing would not be public in itself (they weren’t like hey look watch us sleep!), people would make it very clear who they were sharing a bed with and people would know they were “bedfellows” (Bray 4). This public side of the relationship was incredibly important because these relationships between gentlemen of rank were often power plays in themselves. Everyone wants someone to cuddle and smooch, but at this point in time two gentlemen could essentially protect each other’s rank by showing their bond. Same concept as having powerful friends to my understanding. You have someone to call on if someone wrongs you, who will undoubtedly be on your side. Looking at the public aspects of this, it opens our options for finding examples of this relationship in Faustus a little bit more--rather than just looking for examples of them kissing or embracing (relatively scarce seeing as no stage direction like ever)-- we can look for examples of favors between them (literally everything that happens).

That said, there are some very real places that we do see evidence of Faustus and Mephistopheles sharing a bed. Take for example when Faustus and Mephistopheles visit Rome, Meph has this lovely little present for Faustus:

...and because we will not be unprovided, I have taken up His Holiness’ privy chamber for our use.

(3.1.843-845)

Now ok so a privy-chamber isn’t exactly a bedroom, though some privy chambers may in fact have had a bed, the intimacy of sharing that space remains. So is this in fact an implication that Faustus and Mephistopheles would share a bed there, perhaps even with the Pope (ok but a threesome with the Pope and a literal devil?? Marlowe buddy)? Another piece of evidence for Mephistopheles and Faustus sharing a bed is that right at the end of his life, Faustus confesses to some fellow scholars, crying to one:

Ah, my sweet chamber fellow! Had I lived with thee, then had I lived still, but now I die eternally!

(5.2.1390-1391)

So maybe Faustus and this scholar used to be close and share a bed, but they no longer do. Why? Most likely because Faustus has been bedding down with somebody else recently. Also note Faustus’ use of the word die there, because it has one of my favorite double meanings. “Die” was at this point very much a slang word for orgasm. Amazing Faustus super subtle bro. (I mean to be fair he likely means his actual impending damnation here, but also Marlowe most certainly chuckled as he wrote that shit, and it is still significant that elements of their relationship are coded as erotic).

And I’m not gonna get into the specific favors that I covered in my paper because this is already super long and I haven’t even touched sweetness yet. But idea being, go through the play if you’d like and note all the favors Mephistopheles does for Faustus. You can argue that Faustus “owns” Mephistopheles and thus Mephistopheles has to follow his orders, but I think the next section may complicate that understanding.

OK NOW WHAT MOST OF YOU ACTUALLY WANTED: “sweet.”

The source you should all start with for interest in the use of this word is Jeffrey Masten’s “Toward a Queer Address: The Taste of Letters and Early Modern Male Friendship.” It is incredibly interesting, and covers what Masten discovers to be “a rhetoric of sweetness between men” (Queer Address 370). First of all, what a fucking great way to put that. he examines the use of “sweet” between Valentine and Proteus and Hamlet and Horatio (”Goodnight, sweet prince” anyone? literally kill me it’s so good). So maybe it wasn’t “queer code” then because that relationship was normal but it sure as hell points to a queer relationship in modern view. Now looking at Faustus, this play is absolutely fucking littered with the word “sweet.”

Now the angle I used from this article was actually Masten’s examination of the etymology of “sweet” as coming from the word meaning “to persuade” and therefore its use in persuasion between men (think “my good sweet honey lord” Poins turning on that charm to get Hal to play along). But remember how I said the play is littered with sweetness? The thing that struck me when I was looking more into it is that I could not find one example of Mephistopheles addressing Faustus as sweet. Ever. Maybe I missed one but I don’t think I did. So in an equal relationship, Faustus and Mephistopheles ought to share this rhetoric equitably right? So what is up with this why does Faustus call Meph sweet all over the damn place and Meph never reciprocates?? Like honestly what a dick move Meph. This is where my thesis comes in (and I will reiterate, I’m not fully sold on this thesis myself) -- their relationship is not equal. The power truly rests in Mephistopheles’ hands; however, Mephistopheles is clever and knows he cannot let the proud Faustus realize this. So, Mephistopheles allows their relationship to become framed as a gentleman’s friendship in order to rhetorically dominate Faustus.

I ended up looking specifically at the situations in which Faustus uses “sweet” and it is most often at times when Mephistopheles has appeared unwilling to follow his order. Take for example when Faustus asks Mephistopheles to bring him a wife

Faustus. …let me have a wife, the fairest maid in Germany, for I am wanton and lascivious, and cannot live without a wife.

Mephastophilis. How? A wife! I prithee, Faustus, talk not of a wife.

Faustus. Nay, sweet Mephastophilis, fetch me one, for I will have one.

(2.1.587-592)

Mephistopheles immediately denies Faustus’ request, and this drives Faustus to flex his persuasive rhetoric with his use of “sweet Mephistophilis.”

Basically this is where my paper fell apart in my opinion. I don’t think my thesis is necessarily wrong, but it does not cover the intricacies of their relationship. I also am unsatisfied because I essentially draw the conclusion that Mephistopheles only ever is doing his job to drag Faustus to hell and never becomes really close to him, which I just don’t think is true. It bugs me to no end that Mephistopheles never uses the word “sweet” in reference to Faustus. So I’m still examining the text, looking for new sources, I may dip into the B-text a little bit sometime because I used only the A-text for this because it is the one more accepted as “accurate.”

I hope this interested some of you, I’ll include my whole bibliography that I used for this paper (lots of it was not covered in this summary, and also several things didn’t even make it into my paper because I hit 12 pages very fast). There were a couple more relationships I wanted to examine the erotics of, but I really only got to talk about 2 of them in my full paper.

Thanks for your interest though y’all! I’m very proud of this work, even though it has a very very long way to go and I’d be interested to hear thoughts on this one.

Bibliography:

Barrie, Robert. “Elizabethan Play-boys in the Adult London Companies”. Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 48.2 (2008): 237–257. Web.

Bray, Alan. "Homosexuality and the Signs of Male Friendship in Elizabethan England." History Workshop 29 (1990): 1-19. Web.

Cox, John D.. “Devils and Power in Marlowe and Shakespeare”. The Yearbook of English Studies 23 (1993): 46–64. Web.

"die, v.1." OED Online. Oxford University Press, March 2016. Web. 29 May 2016.

"familiar, n., adj., and adv." OED Online. Oxford University Press, March 2016. Web. 29 May 2016.

Goldberg, Jonathan. Sodometries: Renaissance Texts, Modern Sexualities. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992. Print.

Masten, Jeffrey. “Between Gentlemen: Homoeroticism, Collaboration, and the Discourse of Friendship.” Textual Intercourse: Collaboration, Authorship, and Sexualities in Renaissance Drama. Ed. Stephen Orgel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. 28-62. Print.

---. "Toward a Queer Address: The Taste of Letters and Early Modern Male Friendship." GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 10.3 (2004): 367-384. Project MUSE. Web. 29 May. 2016. <https://muse.jhu.edu/>.

"ravished, adj." OED Online. Oxford University Press, March 2016. Web. 29 May 2016.

Richmond, Velma Bourgeois. “Renaissance Sexuality and Marlowe’s Women.” Forum. 16.4 (1975): 36-44. Electronic.

Smith, Bruce R. Homosexual Desire in Shakespeare’s England: A Cultural Poetics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1991. Print.

Stockholder, Kay. “‘Within the massy entrails of the earth’: Faustus’s Relation to Women.” “A Poet and a filthy Play-maker”: New Essays on Christopher Marlowe. Ed. Kenneth Friedenreich, Roma Gill, and Constance B. Kuriyama. New York: AMS Press, 1988. 203-219. Print.

Weil, Judith. “‘Full Possession’: Service and Slavery in Doctor Faustus.” Marlowe, History, and Sexuality: New Critical Essays on Christopher Marlowe. Ed. Paul Whitfield White. New York: AMS Press, 1998. 143-154. Print.

#Doctor Faustus #queer studies #elizabethan literature #christopher marlowe #my work #scholarship #long post #so horrendously long #this took me like 2 hours to write #the paper is stupid long #and this isn't even based on the full paper right now because my copy of my very full paper was not on my computer for some reason #this is based on the shortened version I did for the conference I went to

395 notes · View notes

jade4813 · 7 years

Text

Jane Austen’s Iris

My submission for Westallen At the Movies (or at least the first chapter of it)! The Flash in the style of modernized Emma, by Jane Austen. I expect this story will have six chapters, which will be posted in completion in a couple weeks, when voting is over. (It is mostly done; I just have two chapters yet to write, but voting has taken priority.)

As this is still unfinished, it is also unedited, so please consider this more of a preview of the story than the concrete first chapter as small things may change in editing.

Title: Jane Austen’s Iris, or Struck by Lightning

Rating: PG

Synopsis: A Flash AU, inspired by Emma.

Chapters: 1/6?

Dear Struck by Lightning –

My best friend has been in love with someone else in our friend group for a while now (over a year), but she’s never gotten up the nerve to confess to her feelings. This is putting her through an emotional rollercoaster, but she won’t do anything about it! I know I promised her I would never tell him, but would it really be that wrong to drop him a few unsubtle hints? If it means the end of the secrecy, isn’t that better? – Trying to be Helpful

Dear Trying –

While I certainly sympathize with the impulse, I have a question for you: Which is more important to you: your friend’s trust or your desire to get involved? I’m sorry to say this, but the only person who can get her off of this emotional rollercoaster is herself. I know you’re hoping that if you spill the beans with unsubtle hints, he’ll return her feelings, but what if he doesn’t? Not only will things be awkward between all three of you, but you’ll have shattered the trust of someone you describe as your best friend. Broken hearts mend faster than broken trust, in my experience.

As difficult as it is, sometimes you have to let your friends run their own lives. That said, for very good friends, you can certainly point out that there are only three options in this situation: doing nothing (with the knowledge that then nothing will change), rolling the dice and confessing her feelings, or trying to let him go and move on. She can continue to choose to do nothing, but doing nothing is in fact a choice.

As for you, you should respect her decision, but there’s nothing wrong with drawing lines of your own for your own emotional wellbeing if you need to. What she does about her feelings is her choice. How long you can be (or are willing to be!) a shoulder to cry on if you know she’s never going to try to resolve her situation one way or another is yours.

“You know, when you look that pleased with yourself, I get worried.” Iris pulled her attention away from her computer and looked up at the opening of the door, smiling when she saw it was her old friend, Barry Allen. They’d been friends for as long as she could remember and bonded by affection if not blood for nearly as long.

She threw him most innocent expression, which she knew he wouldn’t buy for a second. “I don’t know what you’re talking about,” she protested.

As expected, Barry looked skeptical. “Uh huh.” He slid into the seat across from her and placed a slightly greasy bag on the table between them, scooting it around the edge of her laptop. “I brought you lunch.”

At the smell of hot fries, Iris’s stomach grumbled. She hadn’t realized how hungry she was until that moment, and she snapped her laptop closed and shoved it aside with more force than was necessary as she made a hasty grab for the bag. She knew what she’d find before she even pulled it open. Two double cheeseburgers and fries – her favorite. “Barry, you’re an absolute lifesaver!” she cried.

Now it was his turn to look smug. “I know,” he admitted, snagging a fry as she pulled them out of the bag.

“Hey, those are mine!” she protested, yanking them away.

He snorted. “Like you won’t be stealing some of mine.”

She pouted and said in a low grumble, “That is hardly the point.”

They ate silently for a moment, and then Barry asked, “So, why did you look so pleased with yourself?”

“Mmm,” Iris began, wiping her mouth with a napkin. “Mason just green lit my latest article.” When his eyes lit up, she hurried to interject. “That is, my Struck By Lightning article.” She’d been trying for a while to be allowed to write more serious articles, and her editor had so far allowed her to work on a few. However, as the most junior reporter at the paper, she still had dues to pay before he promoted her for good.

Barry knew how much she wanted off the obits and weekly romance column beat, but he didn’t let disappointment on her behalf show. Indeed, his smile didn’t slip an inch. “That’s great! I read your last one. Your advice to the girl whose family won’t accept her boyfriend was really good.”

She beamed. “Yeah, I think I might actually be pretty good at this. I mean, I did get Cisco and Caitlin together.”

He threw her a stern look, pointing a rapidly cooling fry in her direction. “That was luck.”

“That was a stroke of brilliance, you mean. Everyone swore it would never happen, and what do you know? They get back from their honeymoon today.” Her smile was more than a little smug. “You know, I’ve been thinking. I clearly have a talent for matchmaking. Maybe I should try it again.”

His expression fell, to be replaced by a look of genuine alarm. “Iris, I don’t think that’s a good idea–”

She wasn’t deterred. “Nonsense! Let’s see…who should I set up next?”

“I really don’t think–”

“There’s Wally, of course,” she began, heedless of his protest. “Though he doesn’t seem to have any problems finding a date. In fact, he could probably stand to slow down a little. Hm. What about yo–”

His lunch completely forgotten, Barry straightened abruptly. “No!” he practically yelped.

It took her a second to realize the source of his alarm, and she forced a smile even as her stomach twisted. She didn’t know why she felt uneasy at the thought of setting him up with someone made her feel slightly sick, but she pushed that feeling aside. “I wasn’t going to say you!” she reassured him on a forced laugh. “It’s obvious you wouldn’t go along with it anyway.”

His shoulders sagged a little bit in relief, and the corners of his mouth lifted in a tight smile. “No, probably not. I’m not really interested in matchmaking.”

Iris regarded him closely, her eyes narrowed and her head cocked slightly to the left. “Are you sure?” she asked tentatively, “You know, you don’t date very often. Don’t you want to fall in love?”

Barry didn’t meet her eyes as he stood and grabbed their leftover trash, turning to throw it away. His voice was subdued as he replied, “I’m just waiting for the right person. When I find her, I’ll know.”

Iris looked back at her computer screen and dropped the subject. She didn’t know why the topic of Barry being in love made her uneasy, but she wasn’t enough of a masochist to press the issue. “Well, what about Julian?” she suggested in an attempt to change the subject, picking the first name that came to mind. After a second’s thought, she straightened. Actually, it wasn’t a bad idea.

Her companion didn’t seem to agree with her. “Julian?” he repeated in astonishment. “Julian Albert?” She nodded. “We’re talking about the same guy, right? A little shorter than me, blond hair, allergic to the concept of joy?”

She was undeterred by his skepticism. “Maybe if he found love, he wouldn’t always be so grumpy,” she pointed out.

She could almost feel him rolling his eyes at her. “You’ve met him, right?” She rolled her eyes in return and shook her head, turning her attention back to her computer. The more she thought about it, the more the idea grew on her, but she still needed to find the perfect person for him. That would take some thought.

As her lifelong best friend, Barry could tell when the battle was lost, but he still tried one more time to get her to change her mind. “Iris, I know you mean well, but I still think this is a bad idea. Julian isn’t going to appreciate being set up, believe me. If you do this, I’m afraid someone is going to get hurt.”

Iris snorted. “Get hurt? Honestly, Barry. Knowing about love and relationships is kind of my job. It’s going to be fine, you’ll see!”

A few days later, Iris was pretending to enjoy a cold cup of coffee at her desk after work when Linda Park approached and collapsed into a nearby chair. “Rough day?” she asked, though the expression on her friend’s face made the question more or less rhetorical.

“Don’t even get me started,” the other woman grumbled, kicking off her shoes to rub her aching feet. “You know, I love sports. In fact, that’s kind of my job. But when I’m doing my job, I wish I didn’t have to prove I actually know something about them all the damn time.”

Iris threw her a commiserating smile, which turned quickly into a speculative look. If she wasn’t mistaken, Linda was single. “You know what? I think you need a beer.”

“No, what I need is a margarita large enough to drown in.”

“Well, I know a good club nearby. Let’s go! If you don’t mind, I might call a couple of friends to join us!” Her mind was already racing as she tried to figure out how she could get Julian and Linda together. It perhaps wasn’t the most obvious of matches, given their equal propensity for snarky, sarcastic comebacks. But that quick wit might make them perfect for each other.

Without a clue what she was walking into, Linda shrugged and grabbed her bag. “Why not?” she asked, slipping her shoes back on and standing with a wince. “The more the merrier!”

The place was packed, but the two women deftly made their way to the bar and ordered some drinks before Linda excused herself for a moment. Iris craned her neck, looking around at the crowd. She’d made a few calls on the way over and was fairly certain she’d convinced Barry to bring Julian by. However, since she knew he still wasn’t entirely on board with her plan, she wasn’t certain he would actually do so until she saw them cut through the crowd towards them.

“Hey!” she greeted Julian with a warm smile, causing his brow to furrow in mild confusion. They’d always been cordial, of course, but they’d never gotten to know each other enough to be overly friendly. “I’m glad you could make it!” Barry tried to throw her a warning look, but she ignored him, turning to wave the bartender over. “Let me get you a drink.”

“That’s all right,” he protested, stepping next to her. Once he’d ordered, he turned his attention back to her. “I was a little surprised at the invitation.”

She nudged him with her shoulder and teased, “Well, it occurred to me that we don’t know each other very well, and since you and Barry are friends,” it was something of an overstatement, “we should get to know each other better! Speaking of which, let me introduce you to Linda Park.” She gestured to the woman who had taken position at the bar on Julian’s other side, and Iris took her impeccable timing as a sign. It was almost like destiny was helping her along, and she had to fight back the smile at the thought. “She works with me at CCPN, covering sports.”

“Oh, really?” he asked, turning to the woman in question with what Iris decided to consider genuine if subdued interest. “What’s your favorite sport to cover?”

Linda visibly braced herself for another challenge to what was both her passion and her profession and responded in a voice that edged on a dare, “Football. You a football fan?”

He shrugged slightly, though Iris could swear he offered the slightest ghost of a smile. “American football? Don’t know a thing about it, I’m afraid.” In the absence of a challenge, the tension seeped from Linda’s shoulders.

“There’s a game on this Sunday!” Iris interjected, inspired by a flash of brilliance. “You guys should come over to my place! We can watch it together! There’s nobody better to watch a game with than Linda,” she gushed, with such effusive enthusiasm that her friend looked at her askance. Iris’s interest in football had never been so marked before.

Julian considered her suggestion for a second and then nodded, taking a sip of his drink. “With an offer like that, how could I refuse?” he agreed, and for once, he didn’t sound the least bit disgruntled. As he and Linda engaged in conversation, Iris shot Barry a triumphant smile. Rather than compliment her brilliance, he just shrugged, muttered something she didn’t catch under her breath, and walked off.

A short time later, Iris heard Barry call her name and looked around to see him gesturing for her to come over. She started to move away from the bar when Julian’s voice stopped her. “Can I buy you another drink?” She glanced back at him in surprise, having forgotten for a moment he was there. He looked from her to Linda, whose glass was still half full. “I would be happy to get something for you both.”

Was it possible he was nervous to be left alone with Linda? Could her plan be working so quickly? Buoyed by optimism, she said, “Maybe in a few minutes. I’ll be right back. Save me a seat?”

She and Linda shared a look that had the other woman glowering. “Subtle,” Linda mouthed behind Julian’s back. Iris just shrugged and with an unrepentant grin, walked away. Linda might not be thrilled to be set up like this, but if the two of them fell in love, she would come to realize it was for the best.

When she came near Barry, he nodded towards the door. She tried to follow his gaze, but the crowd blocked her view. “Want a boost?” he offered, gesturing as if he planned to lift her, the corners of his mouth twitching with mirth.

“Ha ha,” she replied dryly, looking around desperately for another option. It would be beneath her dignity to have him pick her up; she’d never hear the end of it from him if she did. “You know, there was a time I was taller than you,” she reminded him.

“When we were ten, maybe,” he admitted, crossing his arms over his chest as he watched her grab a nearby stool and pulled it closer so she could stand on the rung and look out over the crowd.

As reward for her efforts, she saw what had caught his attention. Caitlin Snow and Cisco Ramon had just come in. Their heads were bowed, the two of them lost in each other as they walked through the crowd, and with as little attention as they paid to their surroundings, it was a miracle they were able to get anywhere at all.

Iris waved her arms in an attempt to get their attention and called their names, but they didn’t seem to hear. As her efforts grew more enthusiastic, her balance became more precarious, but just when she thought she might tip, She felt an arm go around her waist to steady her. “What would you do without me, Elf?”

She stuck her tongue out at him. “Have peace of mind?” she suggested in an innocent voice. “And don’t call me elf.” One misjudged Halloween costume at age sixteen, and she’d never lived it down since.

He chuckled, but he waved his free hand and called out his friends’ names. With the two working together, they finally caught the attention of the newlyweds, who made their way over. When they were close enough, Iris cried, “Welcome back!” and hopped down to pull Caitlin into a tight hug. “How was the honeymoon?”

“It was wonderful.” Caitlin’s voice was as warm as her smile, though Iris noticed her gaze wandered towards her new husband, who was talking to Barry. “We almost didn’t want to come back.” The newlyweds shared a look, and Caitlin’s blush was visible, even under her mild sunburn. “Don’t think I’ve forgotten that it probably wouldn’t have happened, if not for you.”

Her grin was irrepressible. “All I did was give the two of you a little push.” Well, several significant pushes, but who was counting? “The rest, you did on your own.”

“Well, thank you, regardless. He makes me,” she paused and looked over at Cisco again. Whatever reminder the sight of him brought to mind, her blush deepened, and she finished, “very happy.”

When the look between Cisco and Caitlin grew uncomfortably long, Iris coughed to discretely remind her friend of her presence. It barely worked. “Anyway, not that I’m not glad to see you, but what are you doing here?”

“Oh, Barry called us!” Cisco interjected, sliding next to his wife and resting his hand on the small of her back. “Though we may not be able to stay too long. We’re pretty jetlagged.”

Iris made a sound in the back of her throat as she shot her old friend a quick look. She figured his intent had been to call in reinforcements, that together they would talk her out of her matchmaking scheme. If so, he’d miscalculated. Seeing their happiness only strengthened her resolve.

“Now, if you don’t mind, I want to dance with the most beautiful woman here tonight.” He grabbed Caitlin’s hand to give it a quick tug. “Come on; they’re playing our song.”

She grimaced. “I’m not even sure what they’re playing qualifies as actual music!” she protested, but she didn’t resist as he led her out onto the floor.

“You know, they may be a while. We should wait for them at the bar,” Barry suggested, grabbing her hand and leading the way. She was a little disappointed, since she’d hoped to give Julian and Linda a little more time to get to know each other. On the other hand, she was dying of curiosity to see how things were progressing.

Much to her disappointment, when they did find Julian, he was alone. Iris was momentarily afraid that Linda had bailed, but her fear was allayed when she saw her phone, still on the bar, and she was informed Linda had stepped away to the bathroom.

“Look who I found!” she exclaimed to justify her absence.

“Sorry I disappeared on everyone. I ran into some old friends,” Barry explained, gesturing at where Cisco was mortifying his wife on the dance floor. Still, as embarrassed as she clearly was, she danced with him like there was nowhere else she’d rather be.

Following his gaze, Iris winced. “He really is the worst dancer in the world, isn’t he?” she murmured affectionately, just loud enough for Barry to hear.

“Clearly you’ve forgotten our senior prom,” he returned, causing her to snicker.

Julian followed their gaze and raised his eyebrows at the sight. “They’re friends of yours?” The question was rhetorical, his tone unreadable.

“Caitlin and Cisco. I’m sure I’ve mentioned them to you before.” Barry’s tone was light as he waved the bartender over. “They just got back from their honeymoon.”

His frown lifted, and his voice softened. ”Oh, the engineer and the doctor? I think you–”

Whatever he was about to say was cut off as Linda returned. The first thing Iris saw was her smile, which lit up the whole place. “Sorry I took so long. You wouldn’t believe the line to the restrooms! Oh, there’s my phone! I was looking for that!”

Iris went from wanting to see Linda and Julian interact to wishing she had her friend all to herself in a heartbeat. Her friend’s expression implied things had gone well in her absence, and she was dying for the juicy details.

She was still tamping down her overwhelming curiosity when the bartender came over. There was a brief flurry of confusion as orders were placed and Caitlin, having dragged her husband off the dance floor, all but collapsed against the bar and begged for an appletini.

For a man who had appeared to be suffering from full body seizures moments before, Cisco wasn’t even winded. “I’m driving, so I’ll have a soda.”

Caitlin frowned at him over her shoulder. “You sure? We could get a cab.”

“I like watching out for you. Besides, I’m hoping you find it sexy when I do.” She snorted, but the corners of her mouth twitched. Whatever she said in return was drowned out as the bartender called out to Julian over her head, indicating it was his turn.

“Nothing for me, thanks,” Julian replied, waving the other man off and shrugging into his jacket.

“Oh, you’re not going, are you?” Iris asked, shooting a quick glance at Linda, who was deep in conversation with Barry, her hands cutting through the air as she punctuated her story with emphatic gestures.

“I’m afraid I am,” he replied, offering her a slight smile. “I have an early appointment tomorrow, and I’m sure you want to catch up with your friends. Tell them I said congratulations.”

“Oh, but I’ll see you Sunday, right?” she asked, eager to continue her matchmaking scheme.

Julian grinned. “Definitely,” he reassured her. “I’ll see you then.” He bumped into Linda as he passed and paused long enough to say goodbye. Considering the entire evening a tremendous success, Iris turned to Barry to gloat. She couldn’t get his attention; he was too busy glowering at where Julian had disappeared in the crowd. With a huff of irritation, Iris pushed his obstinacy out of her mind and asked Caitlin and Cisco for more stories of their honeymoon, instead.

#westallen #westallenatthemovies #my fanfiction #jane austen's iris #struck by lightning #fanfiction

46 notes · View notes