#something something anne likes thinking too much about gender's role in society something something | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

sonofanumbranwitch · 3 years

Text

LGBT+ Headcanons for the Phantom Thieves

So I beat the final and post game bosses for Persona 5 Strikers yesterday so to celebrate I want to make a post I’ve wanted to do for a while now. I’m always of the mind that anything can be improved by making it gayer so I have my whole set of LGBT headcanons for the Phantom Thieves. Because the idea of rebellious LGBT kids fighting the evils of society speak to me on a near religious level.

1. So I am very much a “I am Joker” kind of role-player. So my Joker, like me, is gay. He is very much in love with a certain lovable blond beef cake on the team. And he hates it when a lovely lady confesses to him and he can’t just tell them that so they don’t blame themselves when he has turn them down. “YOU’RE BEAUTIFUL I SWEAR! I’M JUST A RAGING HOMOSEXUAL!”

2. Both Ryuji and Ann are Chaotic Bisexual tm. Ryuji definitely prefers girls, but he’s really attracted to anyone he thinks is pretty, like Joker. He’s shows his affection through physical touch mostly. Sitting next to Joker with an arm around him, casually resting his head on his shoulder. ALL OF THE CUDDLES! Ann prefers girls as well but she’s not opposed to relationships with men. That being said she is in a very committed relationship with her girlfriend Shiho. That “I love you” on top of the roof was actually a confession and I do not take criticism on this.

3. Yusuke is a transman. One of the things that really interests me about Yusuke is his expression of masculinity. His arcana is The Emperor which is usually associate with masculine qualities and Yusuke expresses his in a very loud but still soft way, so it made for an interesting idea to have him be trans showing there is no “right way” to project masculinity. He came out really young and this was one of those instances where Madarame shows he wasn’t a complete dirtbag by actually being supportive of Yusuke, and even helping him go on hormones and receive top surgery when he wanted it. If someone tries to misgender Yusuke the rest of the thieves practically have to be restrained. Haru definitely pulls out her axe and just stands there with a smile on her face that says, “misgender my friend again, and I’m going to identify as a problem.”

4. Makoto and Haru are the hard and soft lipstick lesbian couple of the group. They invoke a lot of Ruby and Sapphire energy, in that almost nothing gets done on their own because they’re too busy being wholesome and flirty with each other. When they started dating, after Haru broke off her engagement, Sugimura showed up on one of their dates enraged. He tried to grab Haru, and Makoto was not having any of that. She punched him so hard he lost a couple of teeth. When he ran away, Haru was just so overwhelmed with how hot Makoto was in that moment she just kissed her there for the first time and Makoto brain shut down for a few seconds.

5. I was going to have Futaba be asexual but there is, weirdly, a lot of dialogue where she is fascinated with Ann’s chest… so instead she’s a nonbinary lesbian. As far as pronouns Futaba doesn’t really have a preference. If she was really pushed, she’d say “either she/her or they/them, but whatever”. The hang-ups concerning gender just don’t interest them, so whatever you use they are pretty chill either way. But they do love some pretty girls, particularly red heads.

6. Goro is a trash-sexual. He identifies as trash, lived as trash, and died as trash.

7.Sumire is asexual however. She’s not really sex repulsed per say she just doesn’t feel interest in it. If her partner wanted to she could no problem but she would always prefer grabbing something to eat instead.

8. Sophia does lost of research to try and figure out where her connection to gender and sexuality lie. After doing a lot of soul searching on the matter she determines she is demisexual. She doesn’t really experience physical attraction until she develops a strong emotional attachment to someone.

9. Zenkichi has been around, lets just say. He’s a bisexual man, but he was never really able to act on his attraction to men when he was younger. And he thinks he might be past the point of dating given his career. The other thieves aren’t having this since they can see he wants to form a connection with someone, and also thinks Akane needs another parent in her life seeing at how busy he is. So he starts dating again, this time going to a few men only events to explore that aspect of himself more. Akane just tells him to find someone who makes him happy.

100 notes · View notes

nerdyqueerandjewish · 3 years

Note

I want to ask a question and I hope it doesn’t get taken the wrong way. So please forgive me if I offend you, but can you tell me what made you decide/learn you are trans? Like where did it all begin? I’m just curious because I, someone who is not trans, would like to kind of understand a little more as to what people feel with this sort of thing. You can be as specific or as general as you like obviously. It’s whatever you’re comfortable with. Thanks.

Sure! I feel people tend to assume that trans people “always knew” they were a different gender from a young age, and I didn’t feel that way at all so I like talking about it to challenge those stereotypes.

Tw- gender dysphoria / body talk / dated language, including slurs

Growing up I actually enjoyed being a girl for the most part. I like things that people considered feminine and I even felt sorry for the boys and thinking that I was glad I wasn’t one because they seemed so restricted in how they expressed themselves (didn’t realize at the time that i was actually grateful I didn’t need to deal with the expectations of toxic masculinity). I think as I got older I sort of knew I was “different” because I was bisexual, but I didn’t think about it in a gender way that much. Even though as a teenager I knew trans people existed in an abstract sense, the idea of me being trans wasn’t really on my radar. I do remember sometimes I would just really want facial hair. Like, I thought if I could just be a “bearded lady”, that would be great. I didn’t really think beyond that, I would say it sometimes to friends, like “UGH I’m just so jealous of so-and-so’s beard I know that’s so weird lol (but I guess I’m just weird and quirky like that)!” And in hindsight I’m like Oh that was dysphoria! I was feeling weird about gender but didn’t know what was going on.

When I was in college I got out of my small town bubble and actually was around other out lgbtq+ people, and I think that really allowed me to explore my gender expression more. I said before, I enjoy femininity, and that’s true, but a lot of the looking like what society expected a girl or woman to look like felt like a costume to me. It was enjoyable in the way that dressing in drag can be fun - but it didn’t feel like an authentic expression of myself. Not that like, questioning the sexist expectations society places on women makes people trans, but it felt like, it wasn’t just make-up and woman’s clothes - having a smooth, peach fuzz face felt like drag on me. I had boobs and I thought they looked nice but i felt like they were not an actual part of me and they got to a point where they actively bothered me / made me uncomfortable. My costume wasn’t a bad costume, but having it be my everyday reality was exhausting, and transitioning was a way for me to have a life where I didn’t feel like I was playing dress up all the time.

I identified as genderqueer and nonbinary for a long time because I didn’t know if I was a man or not. I defiantly didn’t identify with the idea of “wanting to be a man” or “wanting to be masculine.” My community was primarily queer women, and a lot of the trans men I knew were butch in the way they presented before they came out so I felt like being a trans man required a certain level of masculine gender presentation. Eventually I just kind of gave up finding a right word for me though and started more thinking like “what would I want to do if nobody was around? If no social pressure existed? Would I want to start testosterone? Would I want to have top surgery?” And the answer to those things ended up being yes. Reading about the trans scene in the 80s - 90s was also really helpful to me because things were a bit less focused on identity labels and more focused on being and doing what is best for yourself personally. Riki Ann Wilkins is an activist and in one of her books she has a quote that’s something like “I’m not invested in identifying as transsexual. I’m invested in being myself and feeling at home in myself, and society has certain words to label and communicate that idea.” And that really helped me start to focus on caring for myself and what I needed instead of trying to find the “right” answer to what I was. It was also reading her books that I found out that there was a subculture of transgender men (identifying as transfags) who rejected a lot of the masculinity that people saw inherent to male-ness and being a trans man and embraced gender nonconformity and their attraction to men. A lot of them also vocal about not wanting bottom surgery. Which, I know these things might not sound out there now, but it was actually pretty radical because adherence to gender roles, heterosexuality, and desire to “”fully”” transition was a requirement to get access to things like hormones and other parts of medical and legal transition. Anyway, I read about their existence and I was like holy shit !!! I can be a man in a gay way ?? And (related to the Rikki Ann Wilkins quote) being trans / being a trans man doesn’t need to be The Perfect Identity Label? It can just communicate some information relevant to my experience ?? Cool I guess I’m a trans man. I still consider myself nonbinary too, because I feel like that also communicates things about my experience with gender. I also feel comfortable using the term genderqueer to describe myself, but I feel like that term isn’t as used as frequently anymore.

I know that was probably long but there were multiple starts and beginnings of things. Gender feelings probably started around me being 15 years old, but I didn’t know they were gender feelings until I was around 19, and I didn’t really get settled in my own identity until I was around 25. So. It’s been a Time lol.

Also I just wanted to add - although I’m sure you get this and it’s just hard to know how to phrase things - there really isn’t a “decision” to be trans / have these feelings or experiences , it’s just what it is. But we do make decisions about what words to use to describe ourselves and decisions about social and medical aspects of transitioning. Some trans folks experience things so strongly that decisions are ones where they needed to pick a certain option. The option of not coming out or not taking certain steps in transitions are just not viable alternatives for them. I personally feel like I could have decided to not do certain things and survived, but my quality of would have been significantly worse and I wouldn’t be honoring my actual Self.

Also I know my experience revolved a lot around my experience relationship to my body, and following that, I know that’s not everyone’s experience. Totally cool to be a trans person who doesn’t experience dysphoria or be someone who really vibes with the newer wave of how we talk about identity, it’s just not me and I can’t speak on that experience 😎

#dysphoria tw #medical tw #long post #I never tag that but I’m trying to be polite lol

17 notes · View notes

ajora · 3 years

Text

When work is slow (usually when I’m waiting for someone to get back to me), I pull out my phone and see what’s on discord sometimes. Most times the connection is so bad that it’s 1x at 0 bars. Or a big X next to the absence-of-bars. Sometimes it connects but I can’t respond because I’m old and can’t thumbtype quickly, and then conversation moves on so quickly that I can’t follow up. It’s a pain and makes me want to ramble about FFV, but I’m kinda afraid to because I ship something a lot of people hate. Maybe I’ll take it all to Dreamwidth, where maybe 2 active people still follow me, but at least I won’t stumble into someone frothing at the mouth at how dare I ship fictional characters in a way they don’t like.

Anyway, it was an interesting discussion in that my experience with FFV was... I played the original game with fan translations. Then I used the game to brush up on my Japanese. When the PSX localization came out and people ragged on me for my IRC ident (I still have Faris there and am not letting it go ever), I kinda dropped things because the PSX localization was terrible. And yes the GBA localization is great, but it’s still a localization. Jokes got added where there were none. The localization was written to appeal to a Western culture and sentiments. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, but...

Eh, I’m gonna put the rest behind a cut because I don’t want fights and arguments over opinions, especially because I am not going to share yours because my familiarity with the Japanese text is not going to gel well with English-only audiences. Also, being a lifelong anthropology nerd (and being part native Mexican), I’m a bit horrified by how Western (let’s be real, primarily US/UK) fandom insists they know better than non-Western fandoms. Your imperialism is showing, y’all.

Lenna’s often treated as boring and/or annoying by Western fandoms who aren’t aware of her background, how she shifts between formal and informal based on her temper, and focus on Faris because of course, Faris is cool and awesome and a lot of people have internalized misogyny and like to latch onto not-like-other-girls types. Someone on discord said Lenna was too passive, which I find bewildering because all the trouble she usually gets into is because she’s impulsive and barges forth and falls into it face-first. I love that about her.

Goddamn but I want to write up a defense for Lenna and how she drives much of the story, and why she too defies Japanese gender norms as a character who was originally designed as a tomboy.

I get why people latch onto Faris and project their own identities on her. Which... is half her problem, honestly. She never says she’s a man, she acts like one because 海ぞくで、女じゃあバカにされるからな (”because among pirates, women are [treated as] stupid/fools”). Her entire performance as a man hinges on social expectations of how men are supposed to act. She actually does say she’s a woman, in Japanese ( 女だからってバカにすんなよ! {”Don’t treat me like a fool because I’m a woman!”}), but it gets lost in translation for something flippant. Additionally, she comes from a long tradition of both East Asian women crossdressing as men to access male privilege, the Takarazuka Review, please compare Lady Oscar to Amano!Faris, and Mary Read and Anne Bonny, both of whom crossdressed. This is not to dump on anyone who wants to claim that Faris is ___, but... she’s a Japanese character, made for Japanese audiences as a commentary on Japanese gender roles (and this is a whole trope in Japanese, Korean, and Chinese fiction), and Western sensibilities don’t really apply.

Also, gender noncomforming women, nonbinary women, and butch women exist. I should know. I’m butch with a very, very tenuous grasp of gender identity in general*. Really wish people wouldn’t throw us under a bus for their trans-but-still-binary rep :/

Also, there was talk about Gilgamesh today in that discord chat and I really wished I could have popped up and said he’s a loving parody of samurai ideals--his bios in the Japanese texts point out that he seems to come from a land that prizes bushido, and that colors his interactions with the gang.

I really do want to talk more about FFV, but fandom is so much more vicious than it used to be and I keep expecting to be attacked every time.

Oh well.

* I had fits when I was younger over... maybe I was a trans man? but then I sat and had many, many long discussions with myself and how patriarchal society (rural Mexican Catholicism + 1980s Texas) made me think being a woman was so terrible and tried to shoehorn me into a role that didn’t fit. And then I discovered the internet and “butch lesbian” seemed to fit me perfectly.

#ajora talks ff5 #warning: I will talk about gender in a way that doesn't fit modern buzzwords and the insistence on binaries #I am a student of human cultures and have seen many variations of gender expressions that don't fit Western binaries #but a Japanese media cannot and should not be expected to conform to Western sensibilities #I am going to regret this immensely

5 notes · View notes

joannalannister · 4 years

Text

Anonymous asked:

Hey! It’s me again, your GOT secret Santa. Could you please elaborate on what aspects of the Tywin/Joanna ship you like? They’re not a ship I’ve ever written for, so I’d appreciate it if you could tell me why you like them so much. Anyways, I hope things are going great with you and that you’re getting ready for the holidays 😊

I love Tywin and Joanna because this ship is ASOIAF in its simplest form, stripped down to the bare bones, the meaning made plain.

In my opinion, ASOIAF is different from a lot of other fantasy I’ve read because it doesn’t focus on a magic system, and it doesn’t focus on a great war (we still barely even know anything about the Others).

ASOIAF is different; ASOIAF is about what makes us human. (Even GRRM’s term for the enemy, Other, comes back to this central theme of our humanity, because it suggests that humanity is fighting against something other than human beings, something un-human, something inhumane.)

Tywin is one of the most un-human human beings in the entire series. He’s also the villain that we get the most information about, and he still looms large over the text even in death. (Even in the brief glimpses of TWOW that he’s shared, GRRM keeps bringing him up.) GRRM has shown us all of these monstrous things about Tywin, but in doing so, he’s made the tiny glowing embers of Tywin’s humanity burn like the beacons of Minas Tirith.

It’s our joy and our love and our laughter that make us human. It’s our sorrow and our pain. But more than all that, our humanity is the connections we make to other people. It’s shared joy, shared love, shared laughter. Shared sorrow. Our compassion. To build a society is to connect people, to share with others. Tywin and Joanna is a society of two.

(That weirwood net of shared consciousness fascinates me - it’s an idea GRRM has written about before in his other works, and he keeps coming back to it.)

So those handful of smiles: for his wife, for the birth of his (first two) children, for his greatest accomplishments (gruesome as they are).

And the pain in this passage: “when Aerys II announced Ser Jaime's appointment from the Iron Throne, his lordship went to one knee and thanked the king for the great honor shown to his house. Then, pleading illness, Lord Tywin asked the king's leave to retire as Hand.”

And the utter and absolute pain in this one: “With her death, Grand Maester Pycelle observes, the joy went out of Tywin Lannister, yet still he persisted in his duty.”

It’s like a shot glass filled with sorrow. In AGOT through ADWD, the sorrow in those books is slow; it’s (mostly) meant to be sipped, and savored. But the way we experience Tywin’s pain, as GRRM writes it, it’s quick and it burns, and it burns out just as quickly as we move on to Tywin’s next atrocity.

So, for me at least, Tywin and Joanna are like a distilled version of ASOIAF. It’s the moments we share that make us human, and when Joanna died, Tywin’s humanity died with her.

That might not be the most helpful thing for writing a fanfic, so let me give you some other reasons:

My favorite short story is “The Last Rung on the Ladder”. I think I first read it ~20 years ago, and it still haunts me. It hurts. It’s about a brother and sister. It’s about taking things for granted, about the people we depend on, and about what happens when those people are no longer there.

“You're my big brother. I knew you'd take care of me.” “Oh, Kitty, you don't know how close it was.” [...] “No,” she said. “But I knew you were [...] there.”

Maybe this applies to Jaime and Cersei too, and Tywin/Joanna are just a different iteration, but it’s what keeps me coming back: what happens when the people you depend on ... the people you think are always going to be there ... what happens when those people -- those lifelines -- are gone?

Despite Tywin being (imo) a very social person, I think Tywin had very few real friends. In addition to being his wife, Joanna was Tywin’s friend, someone he could talk to, and confide in, and trust. Someone who made it all real. Someone who made it worth it.

And I think Tywin thought Joanna would always be there, the same way that everyone in AGOT-ASOS thought Tywin would always be there, “eternal as Casterly Rock”. I think Tywin always imagined that Joanna would outlive him, like it never occurred to him that she would die first, but instead she died when he was in his early 30s. That’s life-shattering to have the rug pulled out from under you like that.

Similarly, I think Joanna had this idea that she and Tywin would be together, but instead he was “often away”. We’re told that they were children together at Casterly Rock, but then at ~10 Tywin was sent away to be Aegon V’s cupbearer, and later he went away to war on the Stepstones, and then after her wedding Joanna had to be sent away because of Aerys, and we have Tywin sent to Lys at some point. What did it mean to her, that Tywin wasn’t there? For Joanna, I don’t necessarily think that Tywin not being there was entirely a bad thing, at least eventually, although I imagine it was painful at first. I think these forced separations from Tywin allowed her to grow, allowed her to eventually rule the Westerlands in Tywin’s name while he was away.

The thing that I always think of when I think about Tywin and Joanna is this poem, “Mrs. Beast” by Carol Ann Duffy, and I always think of this line, “Bring me the Beast for the night. Bring me the wine-cellar key. Let the less-loving one be me.” The more loving one is Tywin in my mind, no doubt about it. (I played with this poem for Tywin/Joanna here.)

There’s this scene I imagine in my own fanfiction, about a year before Joanna’s death, where there’s these silent tears, this despair on Joanna’s face, and Jaime asks his mother why she’s crying, and she says, “Because your lord father is home.”

I think Joanna always loved Tywin, to the very end, but Tywin is a difficult person to live with. I think his homecomings eventually became bittersweet. On the one hand, the love of her life has come home to her across hundreds of miles through snow, through bandits etc, but on the other hand, whenever Tywin comes home, Joanna has to take a back seat. Tywin sucks all of the oxygen out of the room. Everyone has to take a back seat to Tywin: “It has been hard for Kevan, living all his life in Tywin's shadow. It was hard for all my brothers. That shadow Tywin cast was long and black, and each of them had to struggle to find a little sun.“

This is all kind of leading into another reason I like Tywin/Joanna in that it’s an exploration of gender roles, and the ... the limits that women are under in Westeros, even under the very best circumstances. With Joanna, she’s white, she’s filthy rich, she’s a top-tier noblewoman, she’s beautiful. Contrasted against Rhaella, Joanna has a husband who loves her so much that we get lines about Joanna ruling Tywin and how this man who never ever smiles smiled for her. But there are still limits. We’re told that Tywin was ruled at home by his lady wife. Joanna’s influence is restricted, it’s dependent on what power Tywin gives her. While Rhaella physically was confined to Maegor’s Holdfast, Joanna’s influence is confined to the domestic sphere.

Westeros is a broken place, one that’s always been broken into little pieces (Seven Kingdoms, not one). Westeros breaks people. Like Mrs. Beast in the poem, I think Joanna was able to forget, for a time, about the world’s abused women. She was able to forget that Westeros breaks people, and that it especially breaks women. I think Joanna thought she was the exception, that she would have more, achieve more, do more ... and eventually I think she hits a wall, realizing that Tywin is her limiting factor, even as he lifts her up and grants her the power to do.

It’s these limits that fascinate me about House Lannister as a whole. Like, the Lannisters are introduced to us as infinite. (Thinkin about this a lot lately.) Bottomless wealth, eternal life, unfathomable beauty, all I do is win win win. But over the course of the books GRRM knocks all of this down and shows us that there is a finite quality to House Lannister. Tywin dies. With Jaime, I think GRRM is exploring the limits of redemption imo. Cersei is going to hit a wall. It’s that the culture of House Lannister, their fundamental values -- they don’t work.

Tywin is the poster boy of Westeros - he is the feudal system, he’s the face of its misogyny, he’s the walking embodiment of classism and income inequality and privilege and everything horrible about Westeros.

I don’t think it was ever possible for Joanna to be dealt a winning hand with Tywin, The system is rigged against women, and a woman would have to break the system entirely to win. But Tywin is the system, so it just doesn’t work.

I think of Joanna as a tragedy.

um.

idunno if any of that is helpful, but i sure wrote a lot. Also, I really like power couples and courtly intrigue and stuff like the Borgias. Hopefully that helps a little bit, I’m so sorry.

If you want to read other stuff I wrote, I collect my Tywin x Joanna writings under this tag:

#tjmeta

And these tags might also be useful: #joanna meta and #tywin meta

I’m so sorry, please know that I will absolutely love whatever you write! There are so few fics of Tywin/Joanna that I am excited for anything.

(Also I hate Aerys and he can go fuck himself. I think that Tywin tried to see Joanna as a person, as much as a man in such a deeply misogynistic society can see a woman as a person. I think Aerys saw Joanna as a battlefield. Also I really hate the theory that Tyrion is Aerys’s. Really hate that.)

Ok, im sorry, ILU SANTA! I HOPE YOU ARE ENJOYING BEING DONE WITH YOUR FINALS AND HAVING A BREAK!!!

#tywin lannister #joanna lannister #tywin x joanna #joanna meta #tywin meta #tjmeta #lannister thoughts #secret santa #secret santa 2019 #got secret santa #the meaning of asoiaf

129 notes · View notes

bvbuntin · 4 years

Text

Book Review: A Good Neighborhood by Therese Anne Fowler

I have not had much opportunity to read for fun since graduating college this spring. “Fun” is a very subjective word here, mostly referring to picking something not necessarily related to academia but laced with an underwritten tension of reading something relevant to current events. I ended up borrowing an ebook copy of A Good Neighborhood somewhat at random. I was not looking for anything “serious,” but at the same time, reading with a disconnection to literature’s political implications makes reading for fun—particularly after recently graduating with a degree in English—nearly impossible. Therefore, my conclusions from reading this novel reflect the often simultaneous pros and cons of producing racial discourse. A Good Neighborhood deals in racial politics as its explicit subject, but the narrative itself is also deeply embedded in unavoidable racial politics that may be detrimental to the issues it attempts to illuminate.

The story follows two families in a North Carolinian suburb. One family consists of widowed mother, Valerie, a professor of ecology, and her son Xavier, a freshly-graduated teen preparing to pursue his promising career in music at a school in San Francisco. Next door, the Whitman family has recently moved into their custom-built house: Julia, mother of teenage daughter Juniper, who married wealthy HVAC business-owner Brad and added their grade-school age daughter Lily. It is important to note that Valerie is black, her son Xavier being mixed (but for all intents and purposes, counted as black by society), while the Whitmans are white. Valerie sues Brad for damage caused during the construction of the Whitmans’ new home to the roots of her massive, ancient oak tree; at the same time, the teenagers, Xavier and Juniper, fall in love. The racial politics of the book are evident from the start, with Brad, for example, appearing to assume Xavier is hired help as he does yard work for his mother. Over the course of the novel, these racial dynamics escalate into the main conflict, and the story ends in tragedy.

It is impossible to understand the novel’s complexity without also understanding the circumstances under which the novel was written. Reading the beginning acknowledgements reveals some important information about the author: first, she is white, and second, she wrote this novel for its relevancy to current issues in the hopes of spurring conversation about race. I would be interested to have had the experience of reading the novel without knowing such information first. Whatever the case, this story about racial politics is itself steeped in the racial politics which birthed it.

The novel exhibits an awareness of the many dimensions of power. For example, race, class, education, gender, and life experience all compound to complicate relations between the families. For example, Julia Whitman and her daughter Juniper both experienced a large class jump when Julia married Brad. Julia used these newfound opportunities to place Juniper in a religious program meant to support teenage girls in the way that religious programs often do: emphasizing traditional gender roles and conducting ceremonies such as making a purity vow with her stepfather Brad. We also see that Valerie and her son deviate from the poor urban stereotype often associated with POC: Valerie is a single black mother working as a college professor in STEM, and Xavier has received a generous scholarship to pursue his love of music at a school in San Francisco.

And yet, some of these aspects can feel heavy-handed. Is Xavier portrayed as a “good kid” because of author bias toward what constitutes the “proper conduct” of a POC in society? Does he obtain a scholarship because, as the societal narrative goes, hard work always pays off (no matter your race or privilege)? Readers cannot be certain, but the questions remain. These multi-faceted power dynamics, on the one hand, capture the complexities that arise from conflict, as they do in real life. On the other hand, the presence of these traits may at times reduce characters to tokens, making them feel more like the sum of their traits (as given to them by a white author) rather than complex characters.

The narration style of the novel provides an interesting perspective into racial tension. Written in the collective first person perspective “we,” it is the titular neighborhood that narrates the story. The omnipresent perspective is offset by explicit reminders that neighborhood, despite its collective and wide perspective, is ultimately limited by the boundaries of privilege and the limitations of the human perspective. Though at times the narrative seems to provide a neutral understanding of the situation, we are reminded that this neutrality is not total: the narrative perspective exemplifies the collective consciousness of white society when faced with issues of race. This type of narrative perspective enables the narrative to draw explicit attention to overt and covert racism in ways which feel a bit more organic than if an impersonal third-person narrative were to suddenly launch into an explanation about racism.

There are pros and cons to explicit acknowledgement of racism in narrative: on the one hand, racism often acts very covertly, and pointing it out explicitly means one is aware of the narrative they are narrating/writing and wants to make their readers aware of the issue rather than hoping (white) people will pick up on it. On the other hand, it may make the writing feel inauthentic, a moral lesson to be conveyed, which the collective narrative style mitigates but does not do away with altogether. The novel’s resigned ending feels intimidated by its own implications, edging into the all-too-common resolution of “let us witness the tragedy inherent in being black and use it to make us all more conscientious people.” Such a resolution leaves too much at stake for very real issues of systemic racism and violence, sacrificing the individual for the sake of the whole and reproducing the violence it attempts to combat.

When I was about halfway through the novel, I was chatting with a friend who suggested we start a book club. Because I was reading A Good Neighborhood, I suggested this novel. Upon completing the novel, I feel like I would genuinely discourage my friend from reading this book. What concerns me about this specific novel is that this novel’s reality is not what we need right now, especially in the realm of fiction. Not that creating a fictional racism-free world is the answer—such a perspective exemplifies white desire to simply make the problem go away, to rectify without facing reality—but one must ask the question about how effective repeatedly reiterating the violence enacted on black bodies is in the fiction genre. Coupled with the fact that most readers may not dwell on the complexities of the internal narrative and the external politics that produced it, I do not feel the book is productive for racial discourse and runs a high risk of only adding to the trauma that our society forces black persons to confront daily, ultimately desensitizing us to reality. Though there are black characters and references and quotes to the work of famous black activists, the book lacks a black voice, which I believe it what we need most right now.

I would not prioritize this book on your to-read list. If you choose to read this book, make sure you do not read it in a vacuum. Read what other people—especially POC—have to say about such books. Better yet, read novels and essays by POC. If you are looking to understand racism through literature, there are far better options. This book may serve better as an example of how white writers attempt to talk about race with varying degrees of success.

I understand that this is a difficult subject matter to handle, and I understand that a novel cannot cover everything. However, I think considering all the facets of the narrative, and the circumstances which produced the narrative, is what ultimately produces a productive reading. I am just unsure how many people will have the time or knowledge to do such work, and therefore would recommend other works before this one.

Check out this book on Goodreads

#book reviews #bri's reviews #racism #fiction books #realistic fiction books #ya fiction books

1 note · View note

iredreamer · 5 years

Note

Hi just wanna say I've really enjoyed reading your asks & all your inputs on Ann(e)! I have 2 questions which I haven't found any answers to: 1. Does Anne Lister speaks fluent French? On that note do we know if Suranne Jones is fluent in French as well? 2. We know it was never mentioned but we label AL as a lesbian. Could she be trans considering there was no definition of it either? Did she ever mentioned any discomfort with her female form? (There was 1 scene in the show about her "vessel")

hey :D thank you so much!!! And now, about your questions…

1– When she was in Paris in 1824 she studied French and she was not fluent back then: September 3, 1824 > “I have nothing proper to dress in & cannot speak the language at all & feel as if I could not get on.” September 4, 1824 > “If I could speak the language well I could get on agreeably enough.”

She took French lessons from Madame Galvani for years: September 11, 1824 > “Mme Galvani’s manners are good & I like her manner of teaching French very much (…) I see I have much to learn, much difficulty of pronunciation to surmount but I shall not despair.” September 14, 1824 > “At 12–20, Mme Galvani étoit arrivée chez moi a restoit [arrived, she stayed with me] 1½ hour … read aloud & I read after her. Asked if she thought I could ever get the French accent perfectly. Yes! She thought I could as perfectly as any English person.”

She studied French at least till 1828 (from what I’ve read) and in 1832 she used to read “five or 6 pages of of French vocabulary” in the morning. At some point I guess she became pretty fluent since she used to read entire books in French and used to correct the letters Ann Walker sent her that were written in French. So I guess her French was pretty good in the 1830s.

(All the 1824 diary entries are from No Priest But Love by Helena Whitbread)

2 – She was a lesbian. She never expressed the desire to be a man or to be raised as a boy. You have to keep in mind that back then gender roles were very strict and it’s only normal that she didn’t feel always comfortable in her body. She was bound by gender norms and social norms that didn’t fit her and she didn’t feel comfortable with them. That doesn’t mean she was trans. She was gender-nonconforming, just like (more or less) every queer person in a straight society. She didn’t recognize herself in the image that society painted of women and so she gravitated towards a more “masculine” way of presenting herself. She always ignored gendered prescriptions and she perceived herself (and was perceived by others) as “masculine” because that helped her do what she wanted and cultivate her interests (for example study science and the classics, something women were not allowed to do). In her diary she writes about how people would mistake her for a man (because of how she walked and acted) and how she was annoyed by it. She considered herself a woman who loved women, that’s how she writes about herself and her sexuality when talking about her lovers. She used to take notes in her diary every time she came across a reference about female homosexuality in the classics she read, and when she visited the Ladies of Llangollen she recognized herself in that kind of dynamic, this shows that she did know who she was and she had a sense of “lesbian identity”. She was a lesbian. She was a stone butch. All of this is explained in great detail in Moving between Worlds: Gender, Class, Politics, Sexuality and Women’s Networks in the Diaries of Anne Lister 1830-40. It’s a great read if you’re interested about this matter, it has a couple of chapters that explore Anne Lister’s lesbian identity with some interesting extracts from her diaries.

One of her most famous quotes is maybe this one: “I’m neither man nor woman in society, but the link between the two.” And, as you see, she’s talking about her place in society (a male-dominated, male-identified, and male-centered society), she wasn’t seen as a woman because she didn’t conform, but she also wasn’t seen as a man because she wasn’t one.

It’s interesting how in the show Catherine Rawson says “Well, apparently she’s a bit like a man.” and Ann Walker replies “No, I’ll tell you why they say it. Because she’s unusual and singular and clever, and because she doesn’t conform to the way people think a woman should look or think or be. That’s why.” I really think Ann is answering to your question here. It’s a great dialogue that subtly explains to you why people saw her as if she was (or wanted to be) a man when in reality she was just challenging and refusing the image society had of women to build her own (even tho she wasn’t doing it consciously).

To close this answer I just wanna point out that feeling uncomfortable with your female form doesn’t always mean you’re trans, society can make you feel uncomfortable with your body when you don’t conform.

I hope I answered your questions :) and I’m sorry if I seem too passionate in the 2nd answer but I really don’t understand why it’s in doubt that she was a lesbian. Historians have read her diary, they have read every single thought she had, and they are sure she was a lesbian, so I don’t understand why this is still discussed.

Talking about the show, it makes it pretty clear that she’s a lesbian, she’s always annoyed when someone mistakes her for a man and the way she talks about her discomfort clearly stems from the fact that she’s a different kind of woman from the one accepted by society.

Oh and Suranne is not fluent in French. Maybe someone who’s French can tell us how good her French is in the show :)

EDIT:

french-cosima replied to your post:

French person here! To reply to the anon’s question, Suranne is only reciting the French she learnt, and probably only learnt by ear because even as a native I could hardly make out what she was saying, so no, she’s not speaking French ;)

#ask #anon #gentleman jack #anne lister #real people: anne lister #anne lister: french #anne lister: sexuality #anne lister: gender #me screaming about gentleman jack #anne lister: madame galvani

150 notes · View notes

nellie-elizabeth · 5 years

Text

The Handmaid's Tale: Unfit (3x08)

Um. Well, that happened. That certainly was... something.

Cons:

Can we talk for a second about the utterly clumsy way this show deals with race? It makes me cringe every time. For the most part, they try to pretend this is a totally post-racial society, but obviously they can't pull that off. And then they have some casual moment where Aunt Lydia tells some other aunts that a certain couple doesn't want a "handmaid of color," so clearly casual racism is not only present here, but also condoned by the elite. Because, duh. Gender politics cannot exist separate from racial politics. And yet this show is not willing to grapple with what that means.

Especially considering June, who is the Whitest of White Feminists in this episode, and honestly, throughout the whole show. Her plot armor is seriously becoming a problem for me. June and the other Handmaids are open and unsubtle in their shunning of Ofmatthew, because they are all furious with her for turning in the Martha who was helping June. What happened to the first season, when the rebellion was deep, deep in the shadows? Now the majority of the Handmaids are allowed to be insolent. And then June is even more insolent, right to Aunt Lydia's face. She seems to think that her usefulness as publicity in the hunt for Nichole will protect her, and... that seems to be true, for some reason. But why? June could be flogged, or she could be castrated, or any other number of horrible things that would be invisible to a camera. June's cocky self-assured attitude is only made more frustrating by the fact that she seems to be right about being weirdly untouchable.

There were some things in this episode that I liked as individual pieces, but I'm still frustrated with these aspects as I look at the episode as a whole. For example, the idea of Ofmatthew cracking under the strain of her public shaming, in conjunction with her fear for her pregnancy, is a totally reasonable avenue to explore. But since we haven't spent any real time getting to know Ofmatthew, it feels instead like this big blow-out at the end of the episode is all just a part of June's story, instead of the story of a woman with her own story to tell. There was potential here, and there were moments that came close to tapping in to that potential, but the reality fell short. There are also two other reasons that the ending of this episode, particularly Ofmatthew's death, annoys me, and they are the two reasons discussed in earlier paragraphs.

1) We're seriously going to end two episodes in a row with the death of a black woman while June looks on, untouched by the physical consequences of her own actions? Yeesh. 2) She's pregnant. I give the show props for making me gasp when Ofmatthew got shot, because even as I critique this episode, I will acknowledge that I have very much bought in to the universe they've created. I was shocked that a pregnant Handmaid would be shot, because... it's shocking, and despite that moment of adrenaline, it's ultimately a stupid call for the writers to have made. Aunt Lydia is not as valuable as a pregnant Handmaid. Part of the visceral horror of Season One was the idea that the Handmaids would be punished physically and psychologically, but they never had to fear for their lives, because their bodies were far too valuable. There was something twisted and creative in how the system worked to break these women without ever being able to directly threaten them with death. And now, apparently we're just shooting pregnant Handmaids in the grocery store? That actually really broke me out of the moment.

Let's turn to the flashbacks for a moment. This is another instance where as a stand-alone thing, I quite liked learning about Aunt Lydia's past. I get the sense from other reviews that I'm in the minority on this, but I think Ann Dowd is so talented, and the story worked for me on the level of examining the early symptoms of Gilead, even before things had started in earnest. But on a macro level, these flashbacks still bothered me for a couple of reasons. For one, the themes explored in the flashbacks did not connect with the story in the present-day, other than that both were centered around Lydia. The flash-backs are about a woman who genuinely wanted to help people, turned bitter in part by her evangelical beliefs and in part by her loneliness. The present-day story is about June turning more and more ruthless, and Ofmatthew losing her grip on her sanity. What am I meant to understand by learning a bit more about Lydia's former life? And that's the second problem, honestly - from just this episode, I might get a good-ish understanding of who Aunt Lydia is meant to be as a character, but if you combine these flashbacks with what we've seen of her character so far, it doesn't really track. Aunt Lydia's characterization is all over the place. She seems to slide on the scale of devotion to Gilead depending on what the plot needs from her at any given moment. For a long time, I've held out hope that we would come to some sort of emotional core for this character and finally understand what makes her tick. But if these flashbacks were meant to provide that clarity, in my opinion they failed.

Pros:

Let's talk about June. Because on the one hand, I'm annoyed about the plot armor, as discussed above. And it's tempting to be upset and frustrated by how unlikable June is becoming. Last week, I certainly felt that way. But I'm trying to take the long view. Turning June into something of a villain is... well, it's not a totally crap idea. Maybe the final consequence of the torture she's been through is that there is no coming back for her. Maybe she'll keep being cruel and single-handed, focused on saving Hannah and nothing else. Maybe she'll nod sagely as Handmaids hold guns on her, and maybe we'll be hearing more voice-overs indicating that June is not only willing to inflict suffering on others... she's starting to enjoy it. I can't really sense what the endgame would be here, short of killing June off and letting the story continue without her. But that might not be as crazy an idea as it first sounds. This universe that they've created has legs. There are so many stories to tell. I'd be okay with telling those stories in a world where June is no longer at the center of them. Maybe that's not where this is going. Maybe I'll have to eat my words and be frustrated in the next couple of episodes at the direction the show turns. But for now, the idea of villainous June is kind of interesting!

One thing this show always does well is showing the creepiness of Gilead through the ceremonies. We have the birthing ceremony that ends in tragedy, as another Handmaid's child is stillborn. And then we have the shaming ceremony. It might be ridiculous to me that June doesn't suffer harsher consequences, but I do like the way Aunt Lydia's role in this shaming ceremony echoes her past as a teacher. The Handmaids are her students, parroting her words and internalizing the harsh messages they are forced to repeat, again and again. It's chilling, and it's meant to be, and it's a good scene, even with the flaws in the larger setup.

As I said, Ofmatthew unraveling and breaking down was actually an interesting idea, in and of itself. The acting and the pacing in that final scene was truly superb. At least in the moment, when I wasn't questioning the larger writing decisions going on, I was totally gripped. I thought Aunt Lydia might be about to die. I even thought Ofmatthew might actually shoot June, although I wasn't thinking June would actually die from it. And then when the shots rang out and Ofmatthew dropped, I literally flinched. I wish this story-line had explored more of its potential, but I did think this high-intensity scene worked really well on its own.

And again, I did enjoy the flashbacks for their own sake. I think it's interesting that Lydia was turned towards a darker, more cynical path because of her attempts to find love again. I read in another review that it seemed stupid to make Lydia evil because she was rejected by a man, but that's not the way I read the moment at all. She breaks so many of the rules she had set for herself on that New Year's Eve. She drinks, and she lets herself be comfortable, and she indulges her desires. Suddenly, she realizes that she's slipped away from the righteous path, and she over-corrects in a big way. That's interesting to me, and I hope that we can get some more clarity on Aunt Lydia's characterization moving forward.

I also like all the hints of the changing world. It reminds me of some of the Season One flashbacks. We learn that Child Protective Services has been replaced with privatized organizations, ones that ask questions like "do they go to Church?" in order to determine if a home is fit for a child. We see how Lydia is uncomfortable and judgmental of Noelle's behavior, and at first it seems perfectly reasonable, because she is neglecting her child. But there's something more dangerous underneath that, as Lydia is judging not only Noelle's parenting style, but her wearing of makeup, and use of profanity, and relationships with men. It all bleeds together, so you can see the sinister creep of Gilead's power beginning in these moments.

So... yeah. This is a very long review, and unfortunately a lot of it is less than positive. There are elements that have promise, and I'm giving this show the benefit of the doubt, because I believe it deserves that. But I'm also starting to feel like the writers need to re-evaluate some aspects of the story, and figure out how they're going to keep moving forward with June as a protagonist.

6/10

#review #handmaid's tale #handmaid's tale review #the handmaid's tale #the handmaid's tale review #handmaids tale #handmaids tale review #the handmaids tale review #the handmaids tale

66 notes · View notes

theowlandthekey · 5 years

Text

We Don’t Need Covens: In This Essay I Will...

I'm a big fan of Sarah Anne Lawless. I never got the opportunity to speak with her personally, but for those of you who've been around long enough, you likely know about her blog discussing traditional witchcraft and her shop. I often found her posts to be inspirational, providing a unique clarity on subjects that most books skip over. To this day her belladonna ointment is one of the few things that can make my wife's back spasms stop.

Unfortunately both her blog and her shop have closed up. All I can find are interviews with her. In a very broad sense, Lawless came out about abuse and manipulation within the pagan community. She named names and instead of addressing the problems and having an open discussion about it, she was harassed until she backed off.

It upset me at the time in a very distant sense. As I said I never knew her, but I admired her passion and the certainty with which she practiced her craft. Though it's now long after the fact, I finally think I have the ability to put my thoughts into words.

We don't need covens. We never did.

I've been practicing off and on for about fifteen years or so. I've played around with different methods of witchcraft, wicca, and pagan worship. I've been the member of a druid grove, a loose coven association, and even a few on-line groups that claim to do all their spell casting via chat. In the end, I've found them all to be much the same. They promise a great deal and frankly fall short of everything from education to community.

I'm likely going to upset quite a few people with this statement. That's fine. You shouldn't trust anybody who thinks they can tell you your business. But for what it's worth, take a moment to read this over. If something here strikes you as familiar, it might be time to consider another path.

IQuick Note: I know there is a lot of grey area as to what could be considered a witch. You have pagans, heathens, wiccans and the like. Some are comfortable being called witches while others are not. But the connotation changes depending upon each individuals definition. So let's look at witches as people who, for whatever reason, have decided to intentionally avoid Christianity in favor of practicing a personal path of self-realization and independence involving magic, spells, enchantments and the like.

Cult Mentality

First thing you ought to consider is the potential for manipulation and control that exists in any group. This is especially true whenever matters of religion and faith are concerned. It's a touchy subject, no doubt. People are particular about religious practices. For my part, I maintain that witchcraft isn't a religion or a faith. It's a craft. But that doesn't change the fact that people will use religion as a method for controlling others. Especially others who are hungry to fit in with a group that they feel represents them. For this very reason, I firmly believe that witches should avoid becoming a congregation of any kind. Too many of us think of witchcraft as a religion, and while you can play pretend all you like most of us were raised Christian and still have difficulty shaking off the mimicry of organized religion. Our power is in our independence and our ability to think for ourselves, and it becomes much more difficult to do this when you form yourselves into a coven.

Respect My Authority

On that note, you can't form a group without some kind of a hierarchy making itself apparent. I have a strong distaste for covens who create arbitrary titles. They're largely meaningless. You don't really need a high priestess or an archdruid to go around wearing robes with more trim than everybody else. It's just an excuse for someone to hold themselves higher and make decisions without consulting anyone. You'll often find that people who hold these kinds of titles become very upset when someone disagrees with them and find ways to flex their authority in a 'funny' or 'joking' way. Basically telling others that if you disagree with them then you don't need to be there. This comes off especially hard on people who may be new to the craft and are still seeking approval.

Calling Ourselves Out

As sexual abuse allegations are on the rise, we have a duty to be aware of people within our community who put others in danger. We have heard it said that 'while not all priests are abusers, abusers tend to gravitate towards positions of authority'. This is no less true just because those leaders are witches and not priests. You don't get a Free Pass. Covens and groves all seem to want that central authority figure to which they can turn to. We tend to protect them because these people act as a spokesperson for us as a whole. But this does not mean they should be protected if they behave reprehensibly! They are not above the law and if we really want to present ourselves as being different from Christians, we should take a stance of pushing out people who are abusers and manipulators.

But here's the thing. We seem to have this self-righteous indignation that comes with being witches and pagans. Any questioning or perceived threats, especially ones that come from outside the community, are deemed as being biased because of Christian society. While this isn't entirely untrue, it also has a problematic effect on us wearing a permanent set of rose-tinted glasses whenever we look at the pagan community and it's 'stars'. Instead of seeing them as human beings with flaws, we view them as celebrities. We avoid using critical thinking skills when someone in the community comes up against criticism and it can end up damaging our reputation as a whole.

Witch n’ Bitch

While this is one of the most obvious issues with modern witchcraft groups, it is far from the bottom of the cauldron. While many groups come together promising to provide resources for education, help learning rituals and practices, and open discussions, I find that very few of them ever deliver on these promises. I've joined more than a few witchcraft 'study groups' only to have them disband after a few sessions for one reason or another. Others have sessions which quickly get derailed from methods and history into a bitching session about over covens, daily drama, or the like. Instead of helping interested parties by providing resources and discussion, it basically becomes a witches tea party. Brooms are snatched.

Exclusion By Design

Something else I want to bring up is the exclusion by design if not by intention concept that plagues covens. I have seen this manifest in more ways then I can count. Most typically it crops up in the form of “you're not experienced enough in our particular tradition”. However, I've noticed a lot of problems with most pagan groups being painfully white. The excuse is that this makes sense because most witchcraft traditions are European. However, that doesn't seem to stop most witches from liberally grabbing whatever non-European cultural paraphernalia they feel fits their witchy aesthetic. The most notable victims being the American Indians, the Voodoo/Santeria practitioners, and Mexican folk beliefs. I've been told by several people that this isn't on purpose. It's just how it ended up. But when you have to triple check everybody on a Norse Heathen group chat to be sure none of them have any racist ideology there is an inherent problem with the community which is long overdue for exposure.

Queer Craft

I’d like to bring up the patriarchal and hetero-normative slant that is heavily enforced in modern witchcraft and neopaganism. I want to preface this by saying that when I think of a witch, I think of a woman who lives apart from societal norms. She is autonomous. She is self-aware. She is unruffled by others perceptions of her. This is what makes her a force to be reckoned with. Yet much of wicca and neopaganism strives to enforce a very heteronormative perception of a woman's role in society by establishing the narrative of the Maiden/Mother/Crone archetype. While there is beauty in each of these phases of life and there is nothing wrong with a woman finding power in them for herself, enforcing them as a role model for what a woman should be has dangerous implications. A woman must be a virgin, reproductive, or too old to bother with. And it should come as no surprise that concepts have no real male counterpart.

This becomes an even bigger problem as we look forward to a more inclusive world where we are learning to recognize a larger spectrum of gender and sexuality. Where does the Queer witch fit in with these very narrow perceptions of the divine within the self? The pagan community loves to talk about itself as an accepting and open community that embraces all sexualities openly. But that isn't very well reflected in its liturgy and conception. I don't think this gets discussed much because people have heralded the God/Goddess, Horned God/Earth Goddess format for so long that we take it for granted despite these perceptions being relatively modern ones. While there are some traditions which put emphasis on the Queer spectrum and embracing it as a source of power and self-realization, they are few and far between.

Psudo Ethics

The final thing I want to bring up is the irritating moral high-ground that people in the pagan community are so willing to put forth any time we are questioned about our beliefs. It is just as irritating if not more so than listening to Christians proselytize. The Wiccan Rede has held a position for a long time as a general set of standards for what witches and wiccans should consider before acting or casting spells. However, I'm pleasantly surprised to see more of a discussion happening on morality in witchcraft. We don't exist to turn the other cheek. While I'm not a believer in the 'strike first' policy, I am a believer in defending myself when attacked.

I see a lot of judgment happening in the wiccan community, especially now that witchery is in the forefront of social media. People poking their noses into how others practice and deciding to take it upon themselves to 'correct' how another practitioner does their work. I understand why some people want to pursue a more positive and affirming lifestyle through wiccan practices. There is nothing wrong with that. But I confess myself irritated when I'm chided by other witches for casting a curse or have a discussion with a demon. My prerogatives are not your moral imperative, nor are any other witches. So long as my actions are not directed against you, it isn't any of your business what I get up to.

In Conclusion

Ironically, one of the biggest issue with discussing if not resolving many of these issues is that we, as witches/pagans and the like, are NOT a unified group. We are a loose collective. We don't have one central figure who decides doctrine. We don't have any of those things that make for dogma. The fact that we can choose to act independently of one another is a big part of our power. It emboldens us to think for ourselves, question tradition, and seek out new methods and practices which are better suited to our needs. Witchcraft does not begin and end with the anathema and the chalice. We can choose to both acknowledge the gods without permitting them too much influence over our lives. We can dance naked under the full moon while enticing a demon or just make a hot cup of tea while we listen to the rain and meditate. All of this is within our grasp.

But before we can practice together, we have to learn how to function together. And right now I don't' see a great deal of that happening. I believe that by learning how to be ourselves first, by practicing as solitary and independent witches before seeing out a group, we can be more confident overall. After fifteen years of practicing, I can tell you truthfully that I haven't learned anything in a group that I couldn't have learned by studying and practicing on my own. Mostly because 90% of the groups out there read the same damned books I do and are more into repetitive ritual than anything else. I would have loved to work with someone like Sarah Anne Lawless, even just to attend a few workshops led by her. Until we can learn to be better individuals as witches first, I don't know if our community can be better together.

#witchcraft #wicca #pagan #witch #wiccan #paganism #anit-coven #covens #critique #rant #problems within the community #pagan community #wiccan community #editorial #solitary witch

26 notes · View notes

thecourtneychronicles · 4 years

Link

“Ever since, Act has enjoyed enormous success. From participating in the Emmy-winning TV show RuPaul’s Drag Race to becoming the first drag performer ever to sing live with the San Francisco Symphony to being in campaigns for big fashion brands to winning Celebrity Big Brother to touring the world with her live shows – there is nothing she doesn’t do! Without a doubt, she is a multi-talent and enjoys her career with full passion.

In a time where gender equality, women’s rights and LGBTQ+ movements have become more visible and important than ever, Courtney Act has played a massive role in the conversations concerning it by engaging and educating people about it.

We’ve had a chat with the versatile drag queen and talked about all things drag race, the conversations around drag, and her future plans.

Hi, nice to meet you!

You too, where in the world are you at the moment?

I’m in rainy London unfortunately, and you? Are you back from Hong Kong?

I’m here too! Hong Kong was good, but a lot of civil unrest which wasn’t so good. But then I went to Thailand for the weekend and had some fun! I have only been once before; I had a marvellous time.

Sounds amazing. So, what’s a typical day in the life of Courtney Act then?

Every day is different! Yesterday, I was flying from Bangkok to London, today [18th November] I’m talking to you and debating politics at the BBC, then tomorrow I’m going to the opening of & Juliet which is a new musical. Thursday, I’m recording music for my new live show – it will be sort of a cabaret live show tour through the USA and Australia, and this time all my music will be original! It’s just super exciting and super daunting. Each Thursday, I’m going to the studio and recording. My mission was to write one song a week and so far, it’s been going really well. This time, it’s a different process to what I usually do. Usually, I will sit in a studio with different songwriters and producers and we are trying to come up with pop songs together. But this show is about my views and experiences in life, so I sit at home, sit or stand on the Tube, and just writing down notes. I’ve written songs that are so personal, there is nobody else writing them with me. So, quite often someone says, ‘we need to change this or add that and so on’ and you feel pressure to make creative decisions. But now, it’s just all me, staying up until 4am if I want, in order to perfect and craft songs.

Wow, that sounds busy! How do you ever unwind and let go of the stress that could come up?

Well, all I do is what I love doing anyway. The songwriting thing is so relaxing; you can sit there and watch TV, it’s a good process just sitting there and be creative all night long. It’s been digging up some old emotions! The show is called Fluid; it’s all about the fluidity of life, gender fluidity, fluid sexuality and all sorts of forms. The kind of work that I do is usually exciting and stimulating but when I have a day off, I usually lie in bed all night long, watch some TV or read a book or something like that. I love doing absolutely nothing, I’m extremely good at that when I get the chance!

Well, we’ve got that in common! So, which TV shows are you recommending then?

Oh, Pose Season 2. It’s on BBC iPlayer! It’s just, ‘Oh My God!’ In the first episode, I was already bawling like a baby; it’s just so beautiful and so tragic and yeah, it was amazing. I’ve been watching Strictly [Come Dancing], RuPaul’s Drag Race UK, and just reading lots of books on feminism and fluidity. I just read that great book, called ‘Mother Camp’. It’s about female impersonators in America, it was written a long time ago. It was super fascinating to read about drag and all that in such a pre-revolutionary era, and so many things were actually quite similar. It was really fascinating!

Sounds amazing! Good recommendations. Going back to work, how was the whole experience of Celebrity Big Brother? Congrats on winning!

Haha, I think when you win, all of it has been wonderful. If I hadn’t won, I’d probably be like ‘Oh, this happened, and oh god, that happened’. But I have really fond memories of it all. It was so wonderful because the reasons for me were mainly that I was sitting with people, talking to people respectfully – whether it was sexuality, or gender, very sensitive subjects which people tend to polarise. People, I think, just appreciated me and the conversations. That part of myself is one of my favourite things – talking to people and hopefully sharing my story, and hoping to bring understanding in times like these.

The interesting thing was when it came down to me and Ann Widdecombe who has literally voted against every single right against LGBTQ+ in all of her years in the Parliament, so basically everything that I stand for and that I am. She not only had a different opinion but literally legislated against queer people, women’s rights, the environment and more, all across the UK. And even though she had those views, we still remained civilised but, of course, distanced. It was kind of like a Brexit, Courtney vs Ann! Although I’m sure the actual Brexit is more important than me winning [laughs]. Let’s see if we even get the Brexit though!

Oh dear, let’s hope we won’t! You said you’re currently in London – considering you’re from Australia and have found major success in the States as well, what made you want to settle down in London for now?

I was living in the US for eight years, and although things might have been a little tumultuous over here in terms of politics and Brexit, it’s practically smooth sailing compared to Donald Trump and his administration. I lived there for eight years and loved the understanding that came to live in a country. We see the world through media and press, but I realised how much I really don’t know about the US at all. So living there, during an Obama era which was much nicer, I came to appreciate the US.

But then after Celebrity Big Brother, it was a calling to come here and I grew to love the country even more. The UK has a long-standing history of camp and queer and punk, and whereas there are posh institutions, there is also this other side that respectfully co-exists, which is all about diversity, and drag and queer identities in the media. You’ve got people like La Rue, Boy George, Graham Norton and so many more on UK television. Whereas in America, you are starting from the bottom and trying to educate people. Like I mentioned early, I’m going to the BBC to discuss politics. The US doesn’t have a broadcaster that is as dignified as the BBC and also, I would have never been invited at a broadcaster in America. Here, there is a respect and it’s not just about how sensational you are!

Gender equality, pride, drag and everything around it is starting to finally become recognized worldwide by everyone. People are getting woke. Why do you believe people who are not in this scene are only properly respecting it now, and not earlier?

I think there has been so much more visibility now. And visibility always leads to understanding. There are TV shows about drag and queer identity, which has made it really accessible to a wide audience. Drag Race is predominantly watched by females aged 16-35. That filters through. Sexual and gender revolution have been going on with the likes of Laverne Cox and Caitlyn Jenner for example. Caitlyn is a visible person and brought a lot to the conversation. I think this is really the first time that we’ve had some transmissibility around gender. The examples of people, like Laverne Cox, are just really interesting people and so public. Of course, there is still misinformation but there is a lot of conversation going on.

Even with RuPaul’s Drag Race – I keep reading about it all the time and people really seem to love it!

It’s such a fun show that celebrates identity, creativity and has drama that people love about reality TV in general. But there is a real hots for the show. The fashion and creativity elements make it belong to the fashion industry which makes it so cool. It’s just a brilliant celebration about drag and a middle finger to what society thinks of us.

How did your appearance on the show change the way people respond to you, in particular?

Drag Race Season 6, when I started out, aired in 2014 and I had been living in the US since 2011. I just started touring around the world and through the States. I was constantly performing and earning money. I’ve done shitty jobs in gay bars, don’t get me wrong, but then we decided to tour and perform in bigger venues. And when it came to the UK it became hugely popular. And during that time, I was performing in Edinburgh for the first time, and everyone came to see me because they watched Drag Race. And then I started working on so many things, and I feel like it really changed the global way people view drag, and I got to be a part of that.

Do people come up to you a lot and ask for photographs?

Yes, for sure! When I was in Bangkok with my ex-boyfriend last weekend, he was asking me the exact same question when we had lunch, literally! And then someone came up and asked, ‘Excuse me, are you Courtney Act?’, so I was like ‘Oh, perfectly timed, haha!’ Sometimes people just hug me, and I just hug back. And they are like ‘How are youuu, oh my god’ and I just go along. They’re usually respectful, but I have learned that I’m kind of public property in a gay bar – so I pick and choose where and when I go out! But I do get a lot of discounts and more, so it’s not all that bad [laughs]!

[Laughs] I bet!

Live performances and being on TV must be two different things; you do both. Which one do you personally enjoy more and why?

They’re different. I love performing live, it’s so exciting and also easier. I did a Christmas special for Channel 4, and it was a big live show, but on TV. I love performing with a live band. I love honing and crafting, and finding out what the audience loves; it’s so gratifying.

Sounds like you are living your best life!

I kind of am! We had this offer for a big TV show in the States and I was so hoping it would happen, but then I was like ‘Meh, even if it won’t happen, I will still do my cabaret show and tour all around the world’. So, I’m doing what I love either way!

Besides your cabaret show, what else does your future hold?

Well, the music alongside the cabaret show is exciting because sometimes music in pop is sometimes pointless in a way. You put it out, a few people listen, and it costs a lot to make and create videos. But we are sort of packaging the music into my live show, so I’m excited to put my original music out.

Also, I have a different TV project that I’m working on. Also, I’m working on YouTube videos in which I want to discuss political topics and current affairs, sort of like a web series. It seems like a lot of people don’t know what is going on in the world, so I want to give them an understanding!”

Courtney’s interview for 1883 Magazine - November 26, 2019

#ca interview #26.11.19 #courtney act #rupaul's drag race #rpdr

2 notes · View notes

aimmyarrowshigh · 5 years

Note

One thing that really bothers me about the new Star Wars canon timeline: there are women of color working for the Empire. Rae Sloane, Ciena Ree, and Iden Versio. Although the latter managed to open her eyes and see how truly oppressive the Empire was, why there are WOC willingly loyal to an oppressive regime George Lucas intentionally modeled after the Nazis makes no sense at all.

I agree with you (although, to be fair, Ciena and Iden both flip and become Rebel Alliance – only Rae Sloane, as far as we KNOW, remains Imperial, and I still hope that we find out that she flipped at some point in her later life?). It bothers me a lot, because I think that it makes it much easier for people to argue in bad faith on behalf of really overt and unsubtle metaphors in the rest of the narrative of the Empire and First Order.

I also think that it’s a really good example of why “colorblind storytelling” doesn’t work. You can’t create a fantastical world – whether scifi or fantasy – and populate it with peoples whose races or ethnicities closely mirror our world’s, and whose politics closely mirror ours, but then claim that they aren’t actually meant to align or matter. They ALWAYS matter, because the audience of your media exist in the real world and are going to bring their experience to their audienceship… whether you want that or not.

It’s really important to remember, whether you’re writing a $50billion franchise like Star Wars or just, for your own fun, yk, that once something becomes public, your authorial intentions don’t matter, your authorial execution and the public interpretation matters. THAT is what “death of the author” means. So it’s true that sometimes people read way more into things than the writers or directors intended – or read totally different themes into them – but the author doesn’t get to say “you guys are the ones who are wrong.” (JK ROWLING, PLEASE TAKE NOTE, DEAR GOD.)

A classic example of that would be how Ray Bradbury thought that he wrote a book about the problem with television when he wrote Fahrenheit 451. THAT BOOK IS CLEARLY FUCKING ABOUT CENSORSHIP, RIGHT? It was his execution of the themes that determined what everyone read into the book, and although he thinks that literally every English class since it was published is wrong, ::shrug::

More akin to your original message, and people bringing the real world to a text – John (fucking) Green thought it was cool and sexy and romantic to have Hazel and Augustus make out for the first time in Anne Frank’s house in TFIOS.

That’s not cool and sexy and romantic. It’s insanely disrespectful and antisemitic.

John Green brought his own bias, that Anne Frank’s life and death didn’t matter, to writing the book. And I bring my bias, that her life and death mattered more than his ever could, to reading it and was disgusted and offended. (And so were the curators and caretakers of the Anne Frank house, who have asked people not to fucking make out there.)

Whatever his INTENTION with the symbolism there – which… I do not understand; cancer is not equivocal to the Holocaust, and I feel like that’s probably offensive to people with cancer as well???? – the execution failed in the real world.

Having women of color serve the Empire is, on the side of the Lucasfilm Storygroup going, “We need to have more female CoC in leading roles,” a good idea, because most of the novels and comics have been about the Empire and FO [since thank goodness, the movies have been about the good guys still]. But, they didn’t think through to the second step, which is, “We’re calling these women of color Nazis/neo-Nazis.” Yikes.

I do think that in some areas, Star Wars has gotten better with that and does okay; certainly, JJ Abrams’ attentiveness and willingness to change aspects of Finn’s relationship with Rey to be more positive and less competitive or combative than “Sam’s” relationship with Rey, when John Boyega expressed concern about how it would come across with him playing opposite Daisy, was a really great thing. So was JJ listening to Oscar’s concerns about playing yet another “Latino man dies to set up white heroes’ adventure.”

But Rilo Jon wrote Rose as overbearing yet timid, and Finn as “comic relief” to the point of mistrelsy. He wrote Paige, played by a FUCKING HUGE STAR, as *silent* (and fridged). He decided against all existing canon that Poe, whose canonical heroes are Leia and his mother and whose best friends are all women, has too much Latino machismo and needed to learn a lesson from some random white lady to earn his place in the franchise.

When given the latitude to create an alien race from scratch – the Lanai – he also gave them 1950s fucking Cleaver Family gender roles, where the males go out and sail and adventure and the females stay on Ahch-To and wear dresses and keep house and cook because they live on an island so remote and basically uninhabited for thousands of years so WHY WOULDN’T their gender roles work like Rilo Jon’s masturbatory WASP society???? BARFO! ARUGHGJGHH TLJ IS SO GROSS.

Anyway, tl;dr, I agree with you, and I think that it’s a byproduct of the LF storygroup recognizing that they wanted to have leading women of color, but not fully thinking through the repercussions of “colorblind storytelling” and making those leading women of color lead stories about people who, if looking at the stories as mirrors and windows, would want to kill them. And that’s a big bowl of yikes. Also TLJ was bad.

#|franchise| star wars #**star #asks

20 notes · View notes

peckhampeculiar · 5 years

Text

Jade’s journey

WITH A CAREER SPANNING TV, THEATRE AND FILM, ACTOR AND POET JADE ANOUKA CAN TURN HER HAND TO ANYTHING.

She talks about filming with Idris Elba, her one-woman show Heart and how she took hundreds of local youngsters for a night out at Peckhamplex

WORDS: EMMA FINAMORE; PHOTO: LIMA CHARLIE

Some people just seem made for storytelling, and the magnetic Jade Anouka – equal parts actor and poet – is most definitely one of them.

Now living in Camberwell – near her favourite brunch spot, Kurdish cafe Nandine on Vestry Road – Jade grew up in Bexley, later moving out to Dartford. She kept up her local connections though, going to secondary school in Lewisham, and it was here in south-east London she had her first proper break in acting.

Inspired by Saturday drama classes, a 17-year-old Jade entered a competition in the local paper and landed a week-long workshop at Greenwich Theatre. It ended with a production of the musical Golden Boy, alongside Olivier-nominated Jason Pennycooke – now in hit West End show Hamilton – and Sally Ann Triplett, whom Jade describes as a “musical theatre legend”.

“I was actually doing a project on her at school when I went to Greenwich Theatre,” she says. “Whenever I was in a play I enjoyed it so much, it would become my world. My parents could see it too, before I even knew I could do it as a job. I just loved it.”

It was a love she grabbed with both hands. Jade headed to the National Youth Theatre on a scholarship and then on to university, to Guildford School of Acting.

“It was a bit of a culture shock,” she remembers. “There were lots of people there who knew the whole ‘acting world’, they knew people’s names, they knew playwrights – and I didn’t know anything. I just liked messing about on stage.

“There were people there whose worlds were so different, who’d had totally different upbringings to me. So that was a bit of a shock. But I made mates for life, friends from different worlds, which is really good but also from the point of view of an actor – to be able to empathise and not be closed into your own world. It was amazing to meet an array of people and make friends.”

Despite once being told by her voice teacher she would “never do Shakespeare – I got completely slated for my voice”, Jade was hired immediately after graduating in 2007 by the Royal Shakespeare Company in Stratford-upon-Avon, where she not only landed a spot in an internationally touring play but earned a postgraduate award in teaching Shakespeare.

She was hired by the RSC for a role in The Penelopiad, Margaret Atwood’s twist on Homer’s epic The Iliad, focusing on a group of women who make just a brief appearance in his original. The all-female cast took the production to Atwood’s home country of Canada, where she came to see it, setting Jade up for a 14-month stint with the company.

Since then, she has taken the worlds of both stage and screen by storm – picking up numerous awards and accolades. In 2011, she received a commendation at the Ian Charleson Awards for her performance as Ophelia in Hamlet at the Globe, and in 2014 she won the Stage Award for Acting Excellence for her one-woman show at the Edinburgh Fringe. She was also named among InStyle’s Bafta breakout stars for 2018.

A woman of many talents, Jade has landed television roles in Doctor Who, Chewing Gum, Stan Lee’s Lucky Man and Trauma. Earlier this year she appeared alongside Sheridan Smith in Cleaning Up, a six-part drama on ITV.

Her most recent adventure in television is alongside megastar Idris Elba in his Netflix comedy series Turn Up Charlie, based in London and Ibiza, in which he plays a down-on-his-luck DJ, while Jade is Tommi – a slick, successful sound engineer.

“That was so much fun, I’ve never worked so long on a comedy before. I’d done a bit on Chewing Gum but nothing like this,” she smiles. “And he [Elba] created such a great vibe on set, because he was producing it too. I loved the cast – Piper Perabo [of Coyote Ugly fame] is great, she’s so cool. We went to Ibiza to film too – I got the jammiest deal.

“Idris is great – he improvises a lot, so we’d finish the scene but then keep rolling. If it feels like something’s fizzing they’ll keep it going.”

She has fond memories of when the cameras switched off too. “Oh my God, I swam in that sea,” she laughs. “Everyone was there, cast, producers, crew... we all had a dip and I remember looking round and thinking, ‘This is mad! Work should not be this fun’. I was proper pinching myself.”

Jade had another pinching-herself moment in March, when her film Fisherman’s Friends hit the cinema screens and made the top four movies in the UK – behind only Dumbo, Captain Marvel and Us. It follows the story of 10 fishermen from Cornwall who get signed by Island Records and achieve a top-10 hit with their debut album of sea shanties.

Jade plays a key role in the story. “It’s a proper feel-good British film,” she explains. “I play the head of Island Records, who signs the fishermen, who is a real person in real life, but is a man.”

Gender-hopping in roles isn’t unusual for Jade, who despite proudly flying the flag for female actors – in Phyllida Lloyd’s all-female Shakespeare trilogy at the Donmar Warehouse in 2016, for example – has played parts such as Henry IV’s Hotspur and Mark Antony in Julius Caesar, and has spoken previously about wanting to tackle James Bond.

“I was thinking about that the other day. And I also play roles on stage that are ‘male’ roles too. I kind of love that,” she smiles.

The idea of playing with identity feeds into her other life as a poet, in which she writes and performs verses, often exploring issues like gender and ‘otherness’.

Poetry has been with her since drama school and it was something she embraced on the road on acting jobs. “It was a way to be creative and be in control,” she explains. “When I couldn’t be in control in the acting world, I could be in control of my poems.”

In 2016 this led to her publishing a volume of verses – called Eggs On Toast – and last summer she gave a TEDx talk at Theatre Peckham on “being black, being a woman, being other”, featuring many of her own poems. Bounty, for example, explores the complexity of race and identity, with powerful, emotive lines.

“It ended up that the talk was going to be about identity,” Jade explains. “I knew I had to use poetry, because that’s how I can communicate with my voice best.”

She closed the talk with I Am A Woman – a powerful homage to Maya Angelou and her seminal poem Phenomenal Woman – peeling away societal expectations of femininity, getting to the root of what being a woman means to Jade.

What it means to be a woman of colour, and an actor, is also important to her, and it inspired a local event she organised last year called Black Panther Peckham.

“I love superhero films,” she explains. “I grew up obsessed with them, but there were so few black women. I was so disappointed with Halle Berry as Catwoman, because I love Halle Berry and thought it would be amazing... and then it was such a bad film. The script was just all wrong.

“So when I heard about [superhero film] Black Panther I thought, ‘Oh my God this would have been my absolute life when I was young’, and I just thought that people like my little cousins needed to watch it.”

Seeing Oscar-winner Viola Davis raising money in the US to send underprivileged young people to see the film, Jade sought to do something similar here in London. “We shouldn’t take it for granted that everyone can just afford to go to the cinema. Peckhamplex is obviously good anyway – £4.99, get in! – but even that for some people is a luxury. So I just started a GoFundMe page, and it went absolutely mental!”

Jade raised thousands of pounds for hundreds of local children to see Black Panther at Peckhamplex, with popcorn, drinks and Disney merchandise donated to the evening, along with a post-show Q&A for the young audience.

“It was so heartwarming,” she smiles. “It was so great that we could do it. I kept popping into the cinema and hearing the crowd’s reactions. There was something about a load of young people being in a room alone with their peers, that kind of shared experience, that was really special. They were having so much fun.”

Jade recently took another 140 young people from Peckham and other parts of south-east London to see the play Emilia in the West End. “I just thought it was so important for young people to see this production,” she says.

“The first of its kind with three women of colour in the lead and on the poster, in a play set in Shakespeare’s time about a forgotten, hidden story of a woman who found her voice. I was able to use some money left over from Black Panther Peckham to help make it happen.”

The second half of this year is set to be as action-packed as the first, with Jade appearing in A Black Actress – a photo exhibition celebrating black actresses that is set to open this summer. She will also appear alongside Blake Lively and Jude Law in The Rhythm Section, a big release hitting cinemas in November.

When we meet, she has just finished a run of her own one-woman show, Heart, at The Vaults under Waterloo Station, and it marks another branching-off in her creative life.

The 50-minute monologue is a journey of the heart, following a woman from her wedding day for the next seven years. “It’s a kind of call-to-arms, a call to look at society,” she explains.

“Really, again, it’s all about identity, and maybe feeling ‘other’. The idea of that and of heartache –where that sits you in society. It’s funny, but most people were crying at the end. They said they could recognise their own stories or moments in it.”

Opening on International Women’s Day with an all-female team made it all the more poignant, along with the fact that Jade was performing her own material in the setting of a play, rather than someone else’s script, or speaking poetry.

“It was different because it was my words,” she says. “There’s nothing to hide behind, but it was amazing. It was the start of a journey – I’m definitely going to do it again [Heart will be coming to a London theatre this autumn] and hopefully publish it. I just want it to live on, I want it to be told and told.”

2 notes · View notes

dominushq · 5 years

Photo

Hello everyone! Below the cut will be a sample application to act as a sort-of guide for all of you. Please take note that this is only a guide and that we, in no way, shape, or form, expect everyone’s application to look like this. This is only provided as an example!

Congratulations, HENRY! You have been accepted for the role of MARCUS with the character JOHN MARCUS ELLIS. Please head over to the checklist page for any final reminders and send in your blog within twenty-four hours. Congratulations on your acceptance and we can’t wait to have you with us!

OOC.

Name/Alias: henry Pronouns: they/them or he/him Age: nineteen Timezone: gmt+1 Activity Level: i’m one of the two admins of the roleplay, so i’ll probably be around a lot! the exchange program will probably be an issue, though i promise to still try and pull my own weight. weekends will probably see me more active more often than not. for a numerical rating, i’d say 7/10. Triggers: removed for privacy. Anything else? removed for privacy.

IC.

Name: John Marcus Ellis

— JOHN: The name of an Evangelist, the Beloved Disciple, the only one who stood with Mary the Theotokos at the foot of the cross as Christ hung crucified—your father named you John in great anticipation of the works of faith he hoped you’ll come to exemplify and you’ve somewhat followed much of the example your namesake set. Even now, the words of the Gospel of John is still seared onto your brain, a piece that you memorised once when you were bored that your mind never quite let go of.

— MARCUS: How convenient that your name in Sodalitas has already been, in some respects, your name. The Stoic Roman Emperor had never held your regard but you can somewhat see the respect people had or him. When the society gave you that name, you began using it in your daily life as well, seeing no point in keeping John when all the people you knew called you Ellis or Marcus already. Sometimes, when you’re with your parents at Lambeth, the sound of your own first name feels like a stranger’s now.

— ELLIS: Your last name has never really been that notable until your father became the Archbishop of Canterbury. It was noble, to be sure, but it was a minor noble family, one that accorded no mention in history books. In fact, it had been your mother’s family that was the more notable when you were younger, the Grosvenor family one of the few who share the privilege of being close to the Queen and her family. With the passage of time, the star of your father’s rise began to shine brighter and it is his name that draws attention now. When you introduce yourself, it only takes a second for them to realise that you’re that child of the Archbishop, and you realise that there’s a possibility that you will remain forever in the shadow of your father.

Age: Nineteen Faceclaim: Niels Trispel Gender ID: Nonbinary Pronouns: They/them Field of Study: Theology and Religion College: St. John’s College

Biography.

trigger warnings: stillbirth

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ( John 1:1)

These words spill out of your lips, over and over again, as if you’re a broken record. Your father asks you to continue and you try to recite the next verse from memory alone, the Bible in front of you only ever to be consulted if strictly necessary. This could almost be a vigil, except you’re far too young to know what the words really mean, and so it ends up meaning nothing, the words just remaining words instead of whatever phenomenon your father had hoped to conjure up. It’s not that you’re stupid—you could, if you concentrate hard enough, conceptualise of a word given Being (and, even now, you know it’s with a capital B)—but the concept of divinity itself is foreign to you, even as your father exemplifies it with his very being and your mother takes great care to ensure that you’re brought up in the faith.

You know he’s an important man and that you are, in some ways, blessed for having such a man for a father but his title means nothing to you—at least not for now. It will in the future, but the future’s a long way away still. For now, you are a child.

( But were you ever really a child? )

This is an account of the heavens and the earth. ( Genesis 2:4 )

This is how your life starts: you are born to The Right Reverend Thomas Weatherby Ellis and a schoolteacher named Lady Margaret Anne Grosvenor. You are their only child, after complications from a birth after yours resulted into a stillbirth and the inviability of your mother’s womb to ever bear fruit again. The years of your childhood pass by without consequence, and you are hard-pressed to remember the details that surround your early life. If you concentrate hard enough, you can think of the feel of leather under your cheek as you dozed off while studying, the way you thought that gilding at the edges of the Bible would rub off on your fingertip and the disappointment when it didn’t, and the way expectation always seemed right around the corner, a familiar and dark thing that has been your nurturer more than either of your parents.

Beyond these, however, there is nothing much else—not for the reasons of tragedy or great harm, but because you’ve always been mature for your age: an adult in a kid’s body was what they called you, and you’ve realised through the passage of the years that you were never really a child in the conventional way other children were. In a way, you’re more mature than any of your other peers. (In another, this repression has made you capable of a childishness that shocks even you, resulting in a fearful wanting that only children are capable of—a wanting that you deny exists but continues to do so nonetheless.)

You do not remember much of your childhood because it blends from this day and the next and so on, an almost stunning replica of your life right now that it feels as if you have stood unchanging since the dawn of time. However hard you try, you can’t ever remember a time when you haven’t always been like this, as if the void has always been inside of you, swallowing any vestiges of real emotion, sapping you of the vitality that you keenly feel is so present in other people but not you, never you.

( Have you always been wanting? )

Pray, then, like this: our Father in Heaven, hallowed be thy name. ( Matthew 6:9 )

There is a great bustling in your life one day, a great rupture in the routine schedule of your day-to-day living. People tell you your father is a great man—no, a good man, a holy man—and they say this as if it should mean something to you. They hail your family as a paragon of virtue and they think that the knowledge you have is proof of your father’s upstanding virtue. His titles change and you move into a new place called Lambeth, a veritable palace in comparison to your former residence, which you are quick to forget. (Some days you forget even its name, until it hits you suddenly: Bishopthorpe.) It’s a stretch to say you’ve flourished in your new residence, but the library at Lambeth does become your home, for whatever it’s worth, and your mother often found you passed out in between stacks of books.

You stay for only a couple of years or so at most before you get shipped out to boarding school. It’s a tradition, after all, and that is what your family has stood for ever since time immemorial. The decision is not without its detractors—for how, some say, can a man who profess to follow the example of Jesus Christ justify the use of so much money?—but then you test as a Queen’s Scholar and the news of the extravagance of your tuition fees is swept away by news of your precociousness. They begin whispering that you will be like your father some day, a scholar in the service of Christ, knowledge pursued and discovered for the greater glory of God.

You don’t know what to think about that.

( And so it goes, and so it goes, and so it goes— )

Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, practices divination or conjury, interprets omens, practices sorcery, casts spells, consults a medium or familiar spirit, or inquires of the dead. ( Deuteronomy 18:10-11)

Your father tells you the history of your family one night when you are home after Michaelmas term.

It is a long and proud history, he says, one in which he and your mother took part in, and which you will take part in one day soon. Oxford’s secrets will be laid bare before you, as well as the secrets of the universe and the meaning of life, but—perhaps most importantly—you will come to know the most important people who will undoubtedly make changes in the history of your nation, if not the world. The preparations have already been made, he tells you. A boy should have come up in Eton to befriend you and tell you all about it, but he’s just making sure.

The last statement confuses you. You have no friends. It’s the first fact anyone at your school knows about you. You’re the student that always keeps to themself with their books, distinguished academically but not much else. Your father frowns when you tell him this and tells you a name, while in the same breath asking if nobody has truly come to you before he said all this.

You recognise the name as a boy who you’ve ignored all throughout the year. You realise that your father probably won’t like it if you tell him you’ve ignored who was supposed to be your... mentor, you supposed (for lack of better term), so you tell him nothing and just shrug, saying you’ll follow it up when you get back for HT.

You never do. In fact, you don’t acknowledge the boy as someone who exists at all, and he does the same to you. You take your A-Levels and get into Oxford to read Theology and Religion and you expect nothing to come out of the heritage you inherited from both of your parents—but then comes the invitation and the initiation. You don’t refuse but neither do you really accept it: you just went along with everything, an almost fatalistic and nihilistic apathy tinging your actions. They give you the name Marcus not knowing that it already is your middle name, purely because of your reputation as an academic, never mind the fact that you don’t really follow the philosophical code championed by Marcus Aurelius. You say nothing about it: you don’t think they’re the sort of crowd to care much for historical accuracy, anyway.

Your membership is one that is at the sidelines. You are an audience member to the theatricality of the whole thing, knowing as you do that every words is blasphemy and realising that your father and mother (holy folk, people called them) have committed idolatry several times over—and that now you will follow in their footsteps: singing hymns to a pantheon that’s now defunct, toasting to spirits that aren’t even there, and committing cruelties that would make the hunting sessions some of your father’s friends go to look tame.

You take part in it, but you don’t believe in it. You believe in nothing, really, and perhaps that’s been your most fatal flaw. You’ve been oversaturated with holiness, with sacredness, with belief—so much that you must have gotten sick of it over time without your knowing, and now you’re condemned to a life half-lived as punishment for a sin you didn’t even know you committed.

It has always been like this, and it always will be like this.

( So it has been, and so it shall be, forever and ever. )

Interview.

What is your name and what was your relationship like with the deceased?

the silence that greeted the first question is almost deafening in its suddenness, but marcus has grown used to long silences from long reading sessions in the library with nothing but books to keep them company. they regarded the officer in front of them and blinked slowly, owlishly, almost boorishly. “my name’s john marcus ellis,” they say finally, “but people either call me marcus or ellis.” there was a short pause, as if they were waiting for an acknowledgement of their statement from the officer, but there was no answer forthcoming and they were left to continue their thread of conversation. in the silence that filled the empy space, marcus became all too aware of the soft ticking of their wristwatch—a quick look at the device and they realised that they were going to be late in handing in their old testament paper. “i suppose people will call hardwicke and i friends,” they said at long last, their tone a smidge distracted by their realisation, “but we’re not that close really.” although perhaps some would also say shared membership in a secret society was close enough. then again, marcus didn’t really care what other people thought. “i knew him since we were kids, and he was an associate of mine in eton as well as in oxford, but there’s nothing else to tell you beyond that.”

Can you tell us a little bit about yourself before we start?

they knew, almost detachedly, that they could say a lot of things as an answer to this question, but their mind came up blank. usually, marcus introduced themself simply with their name and, if some odd people still needed clarification, announced their link to their father. it would almost be a proud claiming of a heritage, but the words just fell flat with their deliverance, and it sounded more like a shameful thing rather than a point of pride to be the child of the archbishop of canterbury.

somehow, they realised that such a performance would not be welcome now, and so they struggled to fill the silence. “there’s nothing much to tell,” they say. “i’m just a student at oxford. i don’t really know how i can help you in this investigation of yours, honestly.”

Do you possess a reason we should know about for having murdered the deceased?

"of course not,” they said quickly, and it was true. edward hardwicke never posed a threat to them and whatever political machination that caligula and agrippina tried to wrought upon their group didn’t really interest marcus. they were apathetic in most things, the politics of their secret society simply being but one of the many things that just existed for them but nothing more than that. “hardwicke and i were at the very least amicable.” and this, too, was true, for edward did treat them civilly enough, a behaviour which they mirrored right back until the fateful night that they didn’t.

then again, that was what the authorities would kill to know, wouldn’t they? logically speaking, a profile of a killer must have already been written up by them somehow, and they could just imagine the profile they have right now: esoteric, highly intelligent, familiar with religious symbols, and possessing a connection to edward hardwicke—traits which marcus knew they fulfilled to the letter.

how amusing to know that the law could be so wrong yet so right at the same time. “i don’t know what to tell you,” they said. “i’ve said all that i can say: i have no reason to kill hardwicke, and that’s it.” this, too, was true; but having no reason didn’t stop them from plunging that knife into his chest anyway.

Did the victim have any enemies? Was anybody threatening the victim?

marcus shrugged, an easy motion of the shoulders that didn’t really come easily to them as much as they like to think it did. “maybe?” they said. “hardwicke’s very well-known in oxford. they’re very active socially and i think they’re in all the political clubs.” a false lead would work well in their favour now, especially when such a lead was likely in the eyes of the authorities. “he can be a bit abrasive and forceful, but i don’t know anyone specifically whom he offended.” they could, of course, drop caligula’s name—and a small part of them did want to, merely to see what repercussions it could hold—but a threat to caligula was a threat to the society, which will ultimately result in a threat against marcus themself. as much as they were curious to see how that potential chain of events might unfold, they had to be smart too.

Can you give us any information that might help the investigation?

"i don’t know,” they said, their voice feigning sheepishness. “as i said, i don’t really know how i can help you, because i really know nothing about the whole thing.” this has been, they realised, the most impassioned they’d been in quite a while. it was a pity, then, that this was in the end just another fabrication, a simulation designed to keep what needs to be secret secret. “in fact, the last time i saw him, it was in a lecture last term about the poetic elements present in the prophetic books. he told me we should catch up during the summer, but i never had time to take him up on his offer.” a pause. “it’s a pity, really.”

Where were you on Sunday morning?

removed to keep the mystery alive.

Extras.

I have a Pinterest board here.

A playlist here.

And a mockblog here.

Their character tag can also be found here.

And a general tag for Dominus as a whole can be found here.

#lsrp #lsrpg #skeleton rp #new rp #rpg #sample #accepted

1 note · View note

lapeaudelamemoire · 6 years

Text

Brain leakings: I think women are on the whole, much more interesting than men. I also think this is due to that women, on the whole, rebel more (often? ?) than men do, when they do. (Bc) The sheer suppression that is rebelled against because it is so all-encompassing necessitates interestingness. Now before the usual 'I'm making all this about gender, again' thing, I want to point out that gender roles are acknowledged to be a thing and that people do in fact try pretty hard to enforce them; I'm not pettily coming up with some gender divide. Considering the amount of control society attempts to exert upon women, in almost all aspects of their lives, or, to boil it down to basics - men/boys more or less can do what they want, women can't; or at least have significantly larger scope allotted to them, i.e. 'allowable' job ambitions; not being expected to be a father the same way women are seen as all wanting or given the duty of being a mother; qualities, such as being loud/heard (girls should be seen and not heard, anyone?), etc. - the amount of things to escape or get around is proportionally significant to what is not allowed us/the amount of blockages or closed doors met with. The prompt for this thought: I find female writers much more interesting and much more often cross-genre or just... complex. Men, when and who actually buy into - because gender roles are given and enforced on everyone, not just women - the idea of what they should be, are generally quite unassuming about it. It's not like anyone is for the most part telling men they can't do a large majority of things. There are too many doors open and opportunities given and helping hands held out for that. It's comfortable, for the most part, and continues in that brilliant abstract linearity that we're all suckers for - like an figurative bloodline of privilege. Men don't have to weasel their way out of as many things or as much as women do. Visually, one could imagine it like this: two rooms, or rectangles, from which a person might want to get out of. In one room, an entire wall is open; it's more like a balcony. In the other room there are no exits, or maybe a couple of small holes, like Alice in Wonderland (and just as arbitrary). In the former there's an obvious and most straightforward, unthinking, way out, and it's easy. In the latter one has to come up with something, and the ideas likely vary. One breeds blandness, for its being easy; the other requires some ingenuity. Maybe I'm wrong, talking out of my ass, or something; but I was reading a piece on Anne Carson and it struck me how many women there are who write interestingly, things that can't be classified, who defy genre, whose writings are electric - there's Cixous, Carson, Lispector, Winterson (whose writing incorporates everything from biology to physics, just consider Written on the Body and Gut Symmetries), Sarah Kane, perhaps even Woolf. On the other hand I struggle to think of 'name-brand' male authors who really stand out as having the same kind of lightning-singularity or even just goes beyond the usual scientific/logical reasoning approach or rote formatting, besides e.e. cummings, and perhaps William Carlos Williams (??? perhaps???). Pessoa I will note is different for his fragmentary Book of Disquiet (which he was always sore over never producing a 'finished' or 'full' novel) and for his heteronyms, but stylistically in syntax or closer deviation of formatting even all the male authors I love and enjoy never quite break new ground in the same way. I must say their styles may differ, but nothing really is ethereal, otherworldly. And if one considers the notion that is not uncommon, that women inhabit a men's world, then it reasonably follows that women must or have been made otherworldly. To put a finer point on it, I think I should have said simply summed up: Men are more likely to follow tradition, as tradition has been kind to them and benefitted them, but as such less likely to be forced to true innovation; women's lot necessitates their creativity.

#personal #unpopular thoughts

1 note · View note

guacaaflockaa-blog · 6 years

Photo

Makeup and Masculinity

I’m someone that has been able to go through quite a big cultural shift in the environment around me in my life. It was like jumping into a new world when I moved from the small town I grew up in to Ann Arbor for when I ventured off to school. I started working part-time as both a barista in a university-owned coffee shop, as well as a temp in a gift shop. I’ve been grateful to have lived a fairly privileged life throughout my childhood and into my teens, and the first jobs I ever had were ones that I got when I went off to school. I finally had some money to my name and that meant I had money to BURN. I put it towards things I needed, like clothes, food and textbooks. However, I also put it towards things I wanted, like laptop stickers, more clothes and—something I’d never been truly able to get my hands on— makeup.

It’s funny sometimes when I talk to my parents about my sexuality. I never really had to “come out” to them, because they always kind of assumed when I was growing up that I was gay. They say things like “Oh, you used to play with barbies and tutus” and “You used to steal mom’s makeup” and that those things were early indicators of my sexuality. From my perspective, I do see how that the correlation comes to be, and how it makes sense, but it’s interesting to me how things as small as an interest in toys, and things that one might typically attribute as something “feminine” at a young age could be an indicator of my sexuality, something that I wouldn’t personally even fathom until halfway through junior high.

But yes, I was a young makeup thief. I used to steal my mom’s eyeshadow, eyeliner, all kinds of things and mash them on my face to see what kind of monstrosity I could create, and I loved doing it. Most of the time I wasn’t able to get it all off, so the crimes I had committed would have been painfully obvious. But as I got older, I got more creative and crafty, using things like art supplies on my face. While I’m sure that acrylic paint can’t be too good for your skin, I made do with what supplies I had to turn my face into a canvas, subject to only my own creativity. When I first invested my money into buying makeup, I was inspired by the media I indulged myself in. From RuPaul’s Drag Race to Jeffree Star and NikkieTutorials, I was convinced that I needed to dive in head-first into Ulta.com, and get myself enough products for a full face. I did this without really considering the fact that I shared a small 9x11 dorm room with someone I barely knew, let alone one that knew that I was a man that wears makeup. But, the ability and the artistry behind transforming my face was more than enough incentive for me to drop my dollars on everything from primer to finishing spray, and to really make a commitment in my purchase.

Truth be told, I’m not someone with much experience wearing makeup, as it’s not something that I really want to commit to putting on daily (I can barely wake up, let alone have time to pack foundation onto my face). However, the night-life scene living in a city was something that really drew my attention. Friday night is the local club’s designated “gay night”, and draws in crowds of LGBTQ+ individuals, friends, allies, and everyone in between. I personally figured that this is the perfect opportunity to test out my skills and to gauge the reactions of other people as-to what my skill level might be (how good I look), what I can improve on (how good I look), and if my orange eyeshadow really does bring out my blue eyes. I’ve experienced a lot of different reactions based on the fact that I wear makeup, the fact that I’m even interested in makeup, the fact that I would even consider indulging in something that’s typically considered “feminine”, and it’s even personally caused me to consider why I would want to do it in the first place, and what it makes me think about myself and the way I want others to perceive me. But I think the aspect of me that really continues to drive my interest in makeup as a man is plain and simple: I like to push buttons.

I am a person that likes being in control. By that, I mean that I enjoy being someone that makes their own decisions based on what they think is best for them, best for those around them, and chooses their options based on what they want for themselves, not necessarily what others want for them. In other words, as a result, I despise gender roles. I loathe the idea of a prescribed formula of what a human being should be buying, wearing, doing, and saying simply based on the gender that they were assigned at birth, or even the gender that they identify as. The idea that it was socially questionable that, as a child, I played with hot wheels AND Bratz dolls, is something that I didn’t even consider at that age, and it’s a concept that I still don’t really understand to this day. The toys that the young child I used to be played with, in reality, had nothing to say about my gender. Only the meaning that people prescribed to those toys really determined anything, resulting in my behavior being slightly “abnormal” and having to be an indicator of something being “different” about me.

I want to emphasize that I don’t blame anyone individually for how gender norms are both perpetuated and perceived, and I most certainly don’t assign any blame to my parents for assuming my sexuality based on my interests. But what I do want to discuss is how our society encourages us to make these assumptions. I want to emphasize how much value we as a society place on restricting freedoms from one another, and how these values can lead to a false perception of causation, and has an overall detrimental impact on one’s development of their own individual identity.

Makeup on its own has nothing to do with my gender or my sexual orientation. Yes, wearing makeup as a man is much more acceptable in gay environments, but in reality, I enjoy wearing makeup because I like to change my appearance. I enjoy wearing makeup because I like to push boundaries, and I like to get people to think. I enjoy wearing makeup because I think it’s fun to test the waters of androgyny. It’s interesting to experience how rubbing powder onto one’s face can suddenly make me seem like less of a man in the eyes of society. As a man, I take pride in my own masculinity, but I also take even more pride in my confidence and my freedom to do as I please, and to look as pretty as I want to while doing it. It doesn’t make sense to me that society should tell me how I should behave, what my interests should be, and what I should be valuing. To a large extent, these are things that I believe I should do on my own, and things that everyone should do individually, because that is where creativity, diversity and perspective really start to shine through for me.

3 notes · View notes

pimpedcheerios · 5 years

Text

Boredom Strikes

🌸 full name: Anna 🌸 birthday: 12/12/88 🌸 sexuality: Mostly straight? 🌸 gender: Female 🌸 single?: yes

💘 favorites 💘

🍭 person: My sister or my mom 🍭 movie: Sound of Music and Wonder Woman 🍭 song: Too many to count- I really love “Let her Cry” by Hootie and The Blowfish 🍭 celebrity: Julie Andrews 🍭 color: Green 🍭 food: Cereal 🍭 animal: Golden Retrievers (but any dog really) 🍭 word: Awesome

🦄 questions? 🦄

🌼 how many siblings do you have?: 1- biological sister 1- step sister 1- step brother 🌼 how many pets?: I don’t have any unless you count the family cats and one dog at my mom’s, the cat at my dad’s and my roommate’s cat Asami 🌼 do you like sweets?: depends on which ones 🌼 what year are you graduating?: uh I’m not in school 🌼 do you like yourself?: most of the time 🌼 do you have a crush?: Maybe? I don’t know 🌼 do you have any nicknames?: Yep- Banana, Ann, and Anna Pooh

1. Do you like blue cheese? Nope

2. Have you ever smoked? Nope

3. Do you own a gun? Nope

4. What flavor Kool-Aid? Fruit Punch

5. Do you get nervous before the Dr? Depends on what I’m going to the doctor for

6. What do you like on hot dogs? nothing- I”m picky

7. Favorite Movie? It's a tie between: The Sound of Music and Wonder Woman

8. What do you prefer to drink in am? Water or Milk or Apple Juice

9. Can you do a push up? Maybe a couple

10. What's your favorite piece of jewelry? Two of my rings

11. Do you have a favorite hobby or past time? Watch Netflix? Write, photography

13. Do you wear glasses? nope

14. Who was your childhood idol? Julie Andrews

15. Name 3 thoughts at the moment: 1) Am I going to make it to a town 35min and back for my lunch or should I wait until this weekend? 2) I need to be more patient 3) I’m bored

16. Name 3 drinks you regularly drink: 1) water 2) Apple Juice 3) Lemonade

17. Current worries: Lots of stuff going on at once right now, Am I going to get a reply from a text message tomorrow?, etc.

18. Current hates: Bad drivers, when I have to squint in the sun, Close-minded people, Lots of politicians and our current president, that no one is helping people in need- poor people, especially the immigrant children, pink tax, gender roles, people who are mean to other people, animals, nature, etc., annoying pedestrians, having to hide your emotions and keep it all inside because society says so...etc.

19. Favorite place to be? My bed or in the woods

20. How do you bring in the New Year? nothing lol

21. Where would you like to go? back to sleep in my bed

22. Name 5 people that will do this questionnaire.

23. Do you own slippers? nope

24. What color shirt are you in? green with multicolored flowers

25. Do you like sleeping on satin sheets? not my favorite

26. Can you whistle? nope

27. Where are you now? work

28. Would you be a pirate? no

29. What song do you sing in the shower? stuff that is on my phone that is playing

30. Favorite sport team? Longhorns or Mizzou Tigers

31. Favorite food? Cereal

32. What's in your pocket? ID badge

33. The last thing that made you laugh? Something on New Girl last night

34. What's your favorite animal? Dogs- specifically golden retrievers

35. Worst injury? foot and ankle

36. How many TV's in your house? 2

⚠This is seriously going to get personal, you ready?

⚠If you were caught cheating, would you fess up? Yes but I never would

⚠The last time you felt honestly broken? A couple of years ago

⚠Are you craving something? Nope

⚠If you could have one thing right now what would it be? My bed

⚠Would you rather have ten kids, or none? None for sure

⚠What do you hear right now? Music, people talking

⚠Is your bed against more than one of your walls? yes

⚠What’s on your mind right now? Not much

⚠Are you there for your friends? Try to be

⚠Last person to see you cry? me?

⚠What do you do when you get nervous? tap my feet, pick at my lips, tap my foot..

⚠Be honest, do you like people in general? most of the time

⚠How old do you think you will be when you finally have kids? never

⚠Does anyone completely understand you? maybe my mom, Sister, Jessica and Friend lara

⚠Do you have a reason to smile right now? I’m really tired right now so I don’t feel like smiling

⚠Has anyone told you they don’t ever wanna lose you? not in those words

⚠Would you be happier if life had a rewind button? Sometimes but then I wouldn’t be who I am now and learn from my mistakes and challenges

⚠Do you tell your mum or dad everything? almost everything

⚠Does it matter to you if your boyfriend or girlfriend smokes? I would prefer them not to

⚠Are you going to get hurt anytime soon by someone? I don’t know

⚠This time last year, can you remember who you liked? Yes

⚠Do you think more about the past, present, or future? Past and future

⚠How many hours of sleep do you get a night? 7-8

⚠Are you easy to get along with? sometimes

⚠Do you hate the last girl you had a conversation with? nope

⚠What was the last drink that you put in your mouth? water

⚠What size bed do you have? twin

⚠Do you start the water before you get in the shower or when you get in? yes

⚠Do you like the rain? yes

⚠Do you think someone is thinking about you right now? no

⚠Have you ever done something you told yourself you wouldn’t do? yes of course

⚠Would people refer to you as a goodie goodie, bad news, or neither? Goodie Goodie but that’s because that’s what I am for the most part

⚠Who were you last in the car with, besides family? Nana

⚠What’s the last movie you saw in theaters and with who? Aladdin with my mom

⚠Have you ever kissed someone who had a boyfriend/ girlfriend? Nope

⚠Have you ever been hurt by someone you never thought would hurt you? Yeah I think most people have

⚠Your parents are out of town. Would you throw a massive party? Nope I don’t like massive parties. And then you have to clean up after? Ugh.

⚠Do you regret a past relationship? No, not really. I wish I hadn’t spent so much time with some of my friends but it is what it is. I learned a lot.

⚠Would you rather spend a Friday night at a concert or a crazy party? Concert for sure

⚠Do you tend to fall for the same type of person over and over? Um sort of?

⚠Have you made a joke about somebody that made them cry? no. I hope not.

⚠Do you care too much about your appearance? nope

⚠Are you a jealous person? Not super jealous

⚠Have you bought any clothing items in the last week? No actually

⚠Do you miss anyone? Yeah of course

⚠Last person who made you cry? myself lol

⚠Does your ex piss you off? don’t really have any so no

⚠What are you doing tomorrow? working as always

⚠Are you the type of person who has a new boyfriend/ girlfriend every week? hahahha no

⚠Is there anyone you want to come see you? yeah plenty of people

⚠Have you ever been cheated on? nope

⚠Ever given your all to someone who walked away? friendships yes

⚠Do you like cotton candy? not really

⚠Who was the last person you had a serious conversation with? online friend, Jessica

⚠Do you have siblings? Yes I have 1 biological and 2 step

⚠Have you ever fallen asleep on someone? yes once

⚠How has the past week been for you? It’s been fine same old same old

⚠Do you have a friend of the opposite sex you can talk to? Yes I have a few

⚠What’s on your mind right now? I want to go back to sleep

⚠What were you doing at midnight last night? sleeping

⚠What is your current mood? tired

⚠Who was the first person you talked to today? one of my coworkers

⚠Will this week be a good one? sure

⚠Anything happen to you within the past month that made you really happy? I got to see one of my friends that I haven’t seen in years

⚠Who were you with last night? Myself

⚠Did you talk to someone until you fell asleep last night? yeah

⚠Next time you will kiss someone? who knows

⚠Who should start the kiss, the girl or the boy? either or

⚠Do you have any plans for the weekend? Get my car checked up, drop off my father’s day present to my Nana, sleep.

0 notes