#but if a woman genuinely thinks that women are not capable of high levels of thought | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

sophieinwonderland · 9 months

Note

We have so many thoughts on the "imitative DID" bs

We agree with everything you said. We have DID, we're pretty sure we're diagnosed.

Seeing it is filled with ableism about cluster B disorders is fucking awful. And this whole idea that having headmates alleviates the blame magically just demonstrates how unaware people are. System accountability is a massive thing!

And like different systems may have different levels of amnesia or amnesia for different things. Yeah sometimes we don't remember doing X bad thing! Genuineally. Based on who's fronting. Because usually those "bad things" are done in joint with a reaction to a trigger and us blowing up + going overboard. Who knew that alters with severe reactions because of not being well adjusted and understanding they're no longer in a trauma environment might have more barriers than others.

People also love for some reason to use documented symptoms of having trauma or even documented symptoms of DID as somehow being symptoms of... not having it.

And gods the way they treated that poor woman...

---------------- Now onto the "hysterical group" as they called it which I know they'd lump us under

We have a shit ton of amnesia. We are usually ambivalent to it. Often we both find it amusing and will sob and cry and get angry and feel nothing and laugh. Because with our multiple issues comes no emotional regulation. Shocker we have autism as well which makes us in our case collectively not be capable of comprehending emotions. We feel them but we literally with our form of the disability and how it affects us- are incapable of understanding emotions.

We also have excessive and extreme amnesia- we're one of the very extreme cases. And because we're an extreme case- these people would've shut us down. Somehow being so amnesic you have score "too high" is a red flag for these people?

And yeah we're happy with each other. Which our therapist AGREES with being a good thing. Some alters hate each other too but like eh it happens sometimes. (We're a massive system). And yeah we do actually state who's fronting if asked. Our therapist asks every session. And though we do have a mostly covert form of switching she can pick them out because she's a therapist who has seen this many times before. We when somewhat masking as we tend to irl even in her office have similar voices and unless it's a jump from one alter archetype to another- similar posture. But she can pick up on us dropping off and re-adjustng and asking to go over what was said or the lies of "zoning out" and "oh sorry I got distracted" that we're used to having to do.

We also tend to have our autism cause us to use very big words. And this is in all contexts as well. So I can definitely back that one up.

And then of course the addition sexism, sexualization, mockery, claiming of lying about trauma (because people love to ignore reality- we literally sobbed when our therapist first told us she believed us because that is the first time anyone irl has said that to our face- it is the only time we have felt safe in almost 2 decades).

And not even touching on the false memories topic. Literally earlier today (or yesterday its around midnight as I write this) we told our therapist about how people have claimed this to be real and she got genuineally mad. Incredibly upset and was very helpful in making sure we weren't slipping back into denial and going to spiral because of it again. It's something that is not and never has been a real scientific theory and all "evidence" of it does not meet the criteria to be considered viable.

A lot of people with trauma struggle to accept they have it. And especially in this case where the example they used was a MCSA (mother csa)- it really plays into sexism again. Part of sexism is also the idea women can't be abusers. This is something that has plauged trauma spaces for a while and driven out a lot of survivors. People think it's weird when a survivor is just as scared of women as men. Or is only scared of women and not men. people assume men are seen as scary and women are safe and docile as default. And that just is genuine sexism.

(sorry this was so long lol)

☝️👏

Agreed on all points. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences, and for this incredibly detailed and well-written addition! 💖

#syscourse #multiplicity #sysblr #psychiatry #psych critical #mental health #plural #pro endo #pro endogenic #endogenic #system #systems #system stuff #psychology #imitated did #plurality #actually plural #actually endogenic #actually a system

11 notes · View notes

summersfirstsnow · 11 months

Text

June Reads 2023

A Novel Disguise by Samantha Larson aka Local Spinster Has to Do Everything Around Here. This is the reading experience:

MC: is this a romance me: MAAM YOU BURIED YOUR BROTHER'S CORPSE IN THE BACK GARDEN THREE DAYS AGO MC: okay well I have to prepare this random girl's dead body for viewing, a job that is for some reason mine MC: * physically relocates the dead girl's jaw * MC: okay back to what I was saying about this being a romance! me: the fact that you are capable of contemplating romance in this murder mystery is amazing

Untethered Sky by Fonda Lee: if you watched How to Train Your Dragon and thought "okay but what if the dragons WERE incapable of loving you and would leave you for dead in a heartbeat and might try to eat you, wouldn't that be great" then good news! This is the book for you. I did enjoy this one, it's a very quick read (or listen, in my case). This is about giant birds (love it) and hunting monsters!

Mortal Follies by Alexis Hall: This was. Almost painfully tedious. If you're writing a story where both the romantic leads are women, then you NEED to conceptualize women as active characters who are allowed to be both funny and stupid or your sapphic romance will be so so extremely boring. If your female characters are all reactive rather than active, they will never be able to play off each other, because nobody in that relationship will actually provide the initial motion. And an object at rest will remain. At rest. Until we all die of boredom. Also the narrator choice was genuinely baffling, in all honesty. Like. I don't know why the author went "you know what this novel needed? Someone to constantly comment on how stupid all the events are, in case the reader hasn't noticed." Don't worry, Alexis Hall. I noticed. I noticed.

The Best American Science Fiction and Fantasy 2021 edited by John Joseph Abrams & Veronica Roth: These were varying levels of enjoyable for me, but overall, it was a good collection! And This is How to Stay Alive by Shingai Njeri Kagunda made me cry from older sibling feels, among other things. Beyond the Dragon's Gate by Yoon Ha Lee was also a stand-out for me.

To Shape a Dragon's Breath by Moniquill Blackgoose: only YA novel on the list for this month, I think! I enjoyed this one a lot. Anequs is definitely a main character who pulls her own story along, and I'm looking forward to picking up the sequel when it comes out. I liked the organic integration of different ways of knowing very much! It does have some of the usual debut novel issues, but hopefully Blackgoose's writing will grow and those will get worked out at the series goes on.

The Adventures of Amina Al-Sirafi by Shannon Chakraborty: this book rollicked along well! The notorious pirate captain Amina Al-Sirafi is retired, and for a good reason, but finds herself pulled back into the world of supernatural creatures, mythical treasures, and high seas misadventure when she is asked ("asked" in heavy quotations) to track down a noble family's missing daughter. This book takes place in the same extended universe as the Daevabad trilogy, but doesn't require having read it.

Bad Cree by Jessica Johns: when Mackenzie, a young Cree woman living in Vancouver, begins bringing things back from her nightmares, she finds herself drawn back home to the rest of her family, to try to figure things out, especially as the dreams get more dangerous. This is a horror story about monsters, but also a horror story about grief and colonialism. It's about a family of magical dreamers, but also about the ties of family and the strength of those ties, no matter how tattered, in the face of generations of horror. This one is an atmospheric story that I found somewhat disorienting as a read, and has a couple debut quirks, but overall was a good reading experience. It got spooky and I just went "the only way out is through" and finished it at 1 AM.

Spectred Isle by KJ Charles: I feel like Saul just goes "well this might as well happen" about basically everything in his life at this point, which definitely brought a certain energy to the story. This one isn't my favourite KJ Charles book (not that I've read all of them but still), despite the fact that usually fantasy is me preferred genre.

Into the Drowning Deep by Mira Grant: This is a reread for me, and still the Seanan Mcguire/Mira Grant book that appeals most to me. Still really enjoy the merfolk in this! Deep-sea dwelling and very toothy. Jurassic Park vibes overall. The dolphin sideplot still feels misplaced with the rest of the story, doesn't really accomplish much of anything, which made it a frustrating digression in an otherwise tightly plotted novel.

#and now a word from the blogger #Kel reads books #reading #reading habits #fiction

5 notes · View notes

the-acer-scientist · 1 year

Text

hello, internet. lovely day to ponder into the void, isn’t it? how wonderful it is that I can just posit my queries on my silly little blog secure in the knowledge that probably no one will actually see this, myself included.

so here is my conundrum, my dearest echoing, empty void. is there a way to tell people-pleasing apart from a genuine reason to be concerned? strange question, I know, but hear me out.

I am non-binary. I take immeasurable pride from being able to write that out, and to say it to the friends I love and cherish. It is a core piece of my being, and I’ve reached the point where I am so comfortable in my identity that getting she/her-ed feels like a kick in the chest. One that I am fully capable of dealing with, no doubt, but a swift kick nonetheless.

And so, my dear nonexistent reader, riddle me this: how do I know whether and to whom to come out? Because here’s the dealio. I’m an academic, and it feels like the only faster route to ridicule and discrediting than being a Woman in STEM is being Non-Binary in STEM. Because women have a place in stem that they have carved out for themselves, and frankly more power to yall. I can’t express how much it means that my field is not exclusively rich white men anymore. But, and here I will admit that I’m only an undergrad and have far from the whole view of things, I’ve never met another enby high-level academic. And so, dear nonexistent reader, not only do I fear facing transphobia in a direct way (that frankly and thankfully I’ve never directly experienced because I tend to present andro at best and cisfemme on average), I fear that transphobia will prevent me from reaching the heights that I want so desperately to reach.

Fear number two (thanks, crippling self-doubt!!) is that in coming out, I will pose an inconvenience, or worse, an annoyance to those I inflict my identity upon.

I want to tell Mel because it’s important to me that she knows me for me, but if I tell her, not only will it be difficult for her to adjust but also she then runs the risk of, in her lovely and wonderful and amazingly supportive self, accidentally outing me in a place that would be incredibly unsafe for me to be outed in, and for me to ask her to keep that secret for my own comfort is an unnecessary burden.

I want to tell Dr S, because even though I know it’ll never come up in class because he doesn’t ever refer to us, he just lectures and leaves, I want to be understood and I think given some of his sidebars that he would understand. At least a little. And yet, it’s a huge ask to ask someone 3/4 of the way through a semester, when I won’t even see him for more than two more months or so, to readjust his whole perception of me! what right do I have to add that additional stress of remembering me specifically and my specific pronouns out of the hundreds of students he teaches?

I want to tell Dr F, because by the gods below I need him to perceive me because his mentorship means more than the world to me and I can’t imagine how euphoric it would be to hear my pronouns used in the same sentence as discussions of my thesis project. And yet, again, difficult adjustment and running the risk of outing me to people who have been actively transphobic because said people have known me as ‘her’ for so long that the second Dr F ‘they’s me, it’s going to register and I’m going to have to answer questions I don’t want to answer. And, if the whole point is that I’m referred to correctly, does it not defeat the purpose to then add the caveat of ‘only around certain people?’ to assuage my fears about my own identity?

So, my dearest and most darling echo, how do I know whether the fear of systematic transphobia is a valid reason to safeguard my identity or whether it’s just a mind-blockage because I don’t want to be an inconvenience?

0 notes

raeseddon · 2 years

Text

Well, I can't put it off anymore, I need a pain management doctor to keep using my opiate derivative medication. I've avoided it up to this point because in New Jersey, the ER can't give me anything for pain at all until they consult whichever doctor prescribes the meds, and it was (and still is, for other reasons) counter-intuitive to have a pain doctor, for how draconian the anti-opiate laws in NJ are.

The laws are designed to put people like me in jail, for not having any way to access the medication we need legally through doctors, while making the politicians who signed them look good by pushing non-drug pain management methods-- ignoring people like me who need a base level of pharmacological pain intervention to begin with.

I've been told several times by now that most doctors refuse to do any medicated pain management at all for how restrictive the NJ laws are. I not only can't get any Ativan from my neurologist for my worst migraine attacks but my GP is legally obligated to wean me off of the Tramadol, no matter how much I need it to function-- he'd be breaking the law if he didn't, essentially, punish me for needing something to deal with the pains that make it impossible for me to function otherwise.

A welcome side effect is that even if, deep down my aunt thinks some part of my chronic pain is "in my head" she's much more sympathetic towards the travails of getting the medications we both need, as her anti-depressant is also heavily, heavily regulated and most pharmacies here refuse to stock it.

The most frustrating aspect of it is that for the male pain management doctors I'm going to put calls into, I'll need dad to do the talking because women are universally treated like they lie/exaggerate these things for attention.

Having a diagnosis of anxiety and chronic pain makes it near impossible to find specifically pain management doctors who will take me seriously. They think it's just a big negative feedback loop of the pain feeding my anxiety, even though I've dealt with this for almost six years now and can think rationally through my Dysfunctional Flesh Prison trying to make my life misery. It doesn't matter how calmly and matter of factly I explain things-- I'm a woman. I already went through a year and a half of being told to lose weight (I'd love to, but it's a bit hard when you can't do high impact anything) and to "calm down."

Like, nerve pain is genuinely impossible for people who have never felt it to understand: I know what pain tastes like, sounds like, looks like because at its worst all sensory information was pain. Just pain. More than those "period simulators" all doctors should be given an ENG test so they have some idea what it's like to have two electrodes put on the tip of a few nerves and have a current run through them. It's the closest thing we have capable of even *beginning* to simulate nerve pain.

#chronic pain #disability #medication #opiate medication

0 notes

merrill90mohammad · 2 years

Text

ferragamo belt 7

Amazon And Ferragamo Sue Counterfeiters Allegedly Hawking Faked Belts Don't drop $100+ on a quality belt that does not have a good pair of footwear to go along with it thinking that as a result of it is expensive you can wear it with anything. This is especially true of brown footwear, when you've shopping for a brown belt to match them both purchase them collectively or ensure it's the similar shade. Personally, I wear a LV belt virtually every day and looks just like each different belt in the workplace, aside from the marginally different sample. Arguably the one truthful comparison to an Hermès belt–particularly stateside—the Tom Ford brand belt is quickly becoming a calling card for high powered executives and gents of discerning style. With a price ticket properly out of attain for many and a delicate sideways “T” buckle in each generic and valuable metallic end, the Tom Ford belt is essentially the most exclusive, costly and coveted leather-based accent out currently. Before 1017 Alyx 9SM was collaborating with Moncler and designer Matthew Williams was offering hardware for Dior, the label was a small womenswear line. While growing his women’s assortment, a small element caught Williams’ eye while at a theme park along with his kids—the notorious “Rollercoaster” buckle. As the story goes, Williams tracked down the manufacturer and asked them to supply a customized version for his burgeoning trend business. As far as avant-garde style is anxious, few names are held in higher-regard than Maurizio Amadei. The two brands have introduced customizable belts, remodeling the practical accessory into a singular personal style statement. If you’re unsure of whether the leather-based and steel of an authentic belt is real, you presumably can ask the retailer to ship it for a pattern. You can then evaluate the 2 to ensure you’re getting the actual factor. wikipedia handbags The authentic one is larger and thicker than the replica. The faux is smaller and the textual content just isn't centred within the rectangle. https://phoenet.tw/replica-designer-belts/ferragamo-replica-belts.html The name Salvatore Ferragamo isn't well known in most international locations worldwide, however it is identified as certainly one of Italy’s most iconic luxury options. We work with agencies and multi-nationals alike, helping individuals to develop shows which promote brands & companies and promote enterprise. Our moderators have analyzed the digital content of this itemizing to determine elements of authenticity. Items are considered genuine primarily based on product pictures and data. Salvatore Ferragamo Replica.ru has been a milestone in the industry since its establishment, and we sell high-quality Salvatore Ferragamo on-line at one of the best prices. Just make certain it's quality leather and never bonded leather junk. I accidently bought such a belt some time in the past, and it is crap. Get your a reimbursement, guaranteed 🏅 The Legit Check Club More bang on your buck, with extra benefits. In Australia cutting a belt would require the prof of buy as informed by the SA, however ive by no means have them minimize there, i just used a great pair of scissors to do it myself. I passed alongside the recommendations to my mom and he or she was capable of get her belt sized at her native Ferragamo boutique. The SA was very nice and my mom is pleased together with her belt. When it involves popular methods, the usual could be the ‘size up’ method. Your order will be delivered within 2-7 days in territory of Thailand. In explicit, the Ferragamo Group is present via a network of immediately operated "Salvatore Ferragamo" mono-brand shops . The Group also distributes its products via mono-brand third-party operated shops or corners , complemented by a prestigious presence in high-level multi-brand department shops and specialty shops . WOMAN'S SALVATORE FERRAGAMO GANCINI BELT - BLACK PATENT/BLACK LEATHER Brand new, by no means been worn. At his dying, his wife Wanda and later their six kids ran the company. The company flourished after World War II, expanding the workforce to 700 craftsmen producing 350 pairs of handmade shoes a day. After Salvatore's demise in 1960, his widow, Wanda, took over the operating of the business and expanded its operations to incorporate eyewear, perfume, belts, scarves, bags, watches and a able to wear clothes line. Named after the designer’s infamous Ridgway, Colorado “RRL” ranch, the road is basically reproduction military and classic Americana with fashionable manufacturing strategies and a Southwestern aptitude. While best identified for its denim, not far behind is its artisanal treatment of fantastic leather, most of which is sourced immediately from the Southwest.

#fake ferragamo belt #ferragamo replica belts #ferragamo replica #ferragamo replica belt #replica ferragamo belt

0 notes

sassywitchprincess · 2 years

Text

So… Like… Yes I think that AH experienced abuse. Yes, I think that living with JD while he abused alcohol and drugs and destroyed property was an abusive situation. And no, I don’t think that JD is a good person necessarily or that this case admonishes him of the wrongs that he ALSO did. As one person put it, there are no heroes in this case. But can we STOP infantilizing AH and acting like she’s our new beacon for abuse victims and like her LOSING this case is purely the result of sexism when evidence undoubtedly shows that, at the very least, she was also an abuser? She is literally on recordings saying she hit him. She is literally on recordings mocking him for not wanting to be hit.

Additionally, it’s important to note that the trial in the US was NOT just about whether or not JD was abusive or whether their relationship was toxic. I don’t think anyone doubts that. The case in the US was about, specifically, whether he was PHYSICALLY and SEXUALLY abusive, as it was suggested in the article, or whether those statements were knowingly exaggerated with the intent to destroy JD’s reputation. There is a moderate to high chance that AH was not being entirely honest about the nature of the abuse she experienced. That, although their relationship was abusive, she may not have been physically or sexually abused in the way she describes. There is ABSOLUTELY a chance that she exaggerated some details specifically to destroy the reputation of someone she, at that point, did not fucking like. I encourage you all to step away from the vitriol you see online and actually go review the closing arguments for both sides and see the evidence yourselves if you’re going to have an opinion about this. Do you believe AH because you know the facts of the case and genuinely believe her? Or are you just buying her story because she’s a woman and all women are weak and helpless and can do no wrong in your mind?

Like YES, I believe that this is a terrible terrible thing that is happening and I think that it is going to do AWFUL things for the Me Too movement. That is a fucking TRAVESTY. But I SINCERELY hope that you recognize that a rich white woman is perfectly capable of being manipulative and twisting the narrative to get what she wants and that there is ABSOLUTELY a potential for someone to abuse the Me Too movement for their own benefit. This case is not the same as when a string of women come forward talking about long histories of abuse at the hands of powerful men— This is one woman, coming forward about one man, and there is far more nuance than just “we should believe her because she is a woman and women are more trustworthy than men.” You realize that’s sexist, right? To assume women are incapable of doing harm? You read “To Kill a Mockingbird,” right? You recognize that there is a level of nuance that is far more complicated than “we should just immediately trust whatever people say when it comes to intimate abuse” right? You realize how harmful it would be if we just let white women point fingers and accuse anyone they don’t like? Right? Right??

#opinion #my post #op #rant #rambling

0 notes

freddiekluger · 3 years

Text

Why Cap Being Internally Closeted Is Not Only Possible, But Valid Representation

i wrote this to a lot of mitski and onsind, so you can’t blame me for any feelings that bleed through

now i don’t know if it actually exists, but i’ve heard of there being a lot of discourse surrounding the captains story arc regarding his sexuality- i believe the general gist is that having a queer character that remains closeted to themselves is either unrealistic or ‘bad’ representation, and as someone who really treasures the captain and relates to his story so far a lot, i thought i might break this down a bit.

i’ve divded up every complaint i’ve heard about this into four main questions which i’ll be covering below the ‘keep reading’, because this is gonna be pretty comprehensive. full disclaimer i reference my experiences as an ex-evangelical non binary butch lesbian a couple times, and i spent a year studying repression and the psychological impacts of high demand sexual ethics for my graduating sociology paper, so this is coming with some background to it i swear

the big questions:

can you EVEN be gay and not know it????

but isn't this just ANOTHER coming out arc, and aren't we supposed to be moving beyond those?

but if cap can't have a relationship with a man because he's a ghost, what's the point?

since cap's dead, isn't this technically bury your gays, and isn't that bad?

1. "but is it really possible to not know? Isn't that bad representation?"

short answer: no and no.

before i get into the validity of the captain's ignorance about his own orientation as 21st century rep, let's break down how the hell the captain can be so clearly attracted to men and still not even consider the possibility that he might be gay, as brought to you by someone who literally experienced this shit.

the captain's particular situation is both a direct result of the lack of information around human sexuality he would have had (aka clear messaging that it's actually possible for him to be attracted to men. i don't mean acceptable or allowed, i mean physically capable of happening- the idea that orientations other than heterosexual exist and are available to him, a man), and a subconscious survival mechanism. the environment in which he lives is outright hostile to gay people, while the military man identity he has constructed for himself doesn't allow for any form of deviation from societal norms, let alone one so base level and major. as a result of this killer combo of information and environment, instincts take over and the mind does it's best to repress the ‘deviant’ feelings until a. one of these two things changes, or b. the act of repression becomes so destructive and/or exhuasting that it becomes impossible to maintain. the key to maintaining a long-term state of repression of desire is diverting that energy elsewhere, and a high-demand group such as the military is the perfect place for the captain to do this (this technqiue is frequented by religions and extremist ideologies worldwide, but that’s not really what we’re here to focus on).

while the brain is actively repressing ‘deviant’ feelings (aka gay shit), this doesn't mean you don't experience the feelings at all. when performed as a subconscious act of survival, the aim of repression is to minimise/transform the feelings into a state where they can no longer cause immediate danger, and something as big as sexual/romantic orientation is going to keep popping up, but as long as the individual in question never understands what they’re feeling, they’ll be able to continue relatively undisturbed. you know how in heist movies, the leader of the group will only tell each team member part of the plan so they can’t screw things up for everyone else if they get caught? it’s kind of like that.

this is how the captain appears to have operated in life AND in death, and it’s a relatively common experience for lgbtq people who’ve grown up in similar circumstances (aka with a lack of information and in an unfriendly-to-hostile environment), and accounts for how some people can even go on to get married and have children before realising that they’re gay and/or trans.

personally, while i can now identify what were strong homo crushes all the way back to childhood, at the time i genuinely had no idea. there was the underlying sense that i probably shouldn't tell people how attached i was to these girls because i would seem weird, and that my feelings were stronger than the ones other people used to describe friendships, but like-like them in the way that other girls like-liked boys? no way! actually scratch that, it wasn't even a no way, because i had no idea that i even could. i even had my own havers, at least in terms of the emotional hold and devotion she got from me, except she treated me way less well than cap’s beau. snatches of the existence of lgbt people made it through the cone of silence, i definitely heard the words gay and lesbian, but my levels of informations mirrored those that the captain would have had: virtually none, beyond the idea that these words exist, some people are them, and that's not something that we support or think is okay, so let's just not speak about it. despite only attending religious schools for the first couple years of primary, until i got my own technology and social media accounts to explore lgbtq content on my own- option a out of the two catalysts for change- the possibility of me being gay was not at all on my radar. don’t even get me started on how long it took me to explore butchness and my overall gender, two things which now feel glaringly obvious.

when shit starts to break down, you can also make the conscious choice to repress which can delay the eventual smashing down of the mental closet door for a time (essentially when the closet door starts to open, you just say ‘no thanks’ and shut it again by pointedly Not Thinking About It). in the abscence of identifying yourself by your attractions, it becomes quite common to identify with a lack- in my case, this meant becoming proud of how sensible and not boy crazy i was, and in the captain’s case, this means becoming proud of how sensible and not sensuous/wild (aka woman crazy) he was, identifying with his LACK of desire for women and partying (which, even in the 40s, involved the expectation of opposite sex romances and hook ups). i’m not saying that’s the only reason he’s a rule follower, but i think the contrast between About Last Night and Perfect Day pretty much support this. (the captain getting on his high horse about general party antics that he inherently felt excluded from because of underlying awareness of his difference & his tendency to project his regimented expectations of himself onto others, vs. joining in the reception party, awareness of how the environment supports difference in the form of clare and sam, and relaxing his own rules by dancing with men- the captain doesn’t mind a party when feels like he has a place there.)

so the captain was operating in a high demand, highly regulated environment (primarily the military, but also early 20th century England itself), with regimented roles, rules, and expectations. working on the assumption that he wouldn't have had out/disclosing lgbt friends, he would have had little to no exposure to lgbt identities, and what information he did receive would have been hushed and negatively geared. while my world started to open up when i started high school was allowed to have my own phone + instagram account, resulting in me realising something wasn't quite 'right' within a few years (making me a relatively early realiser compared to those who don't come out to themselves until adulthood), in life the captain never had that experience. he didn't receive the information he needed, his environment didn't grow less hostile. with the near-exception of havers related heartbreak, his well disciplined and lifelong method of repression never became destructive/exhaustive enough to permanently override the danger signals in his mind and allow him to put his feelings into words. neither of the most common catalysts for change happened for him, so he continued as usual, even after his death.

BUT, and here’s where we come to why this is actually great representation, arrival of mike and Alison represents the opening up of new world. for the first time, the captain is actively made aware of the fact that his environment is no longer hostile, and better than that, it’s affirming. he’s also getting access to positively geared information about lgbtq people and identities, so option a of the two catalysts for change is absolutely present, and resoundingly positive.

the captain’s arc is also relatively unique as it acknowledges the oppressive nature of his environment, but actually focuses on the internal consequences, and the way that systems like those that the captain lived in succeed because they turn us into our own oppressors. for whatever reason, we repress ourseslves, and often can’t help it, and i find that the significance of the journey to overcome that is often overlooked in more mainstream queer media. perhaps it’s just not very cinematic, or it remains too confronting for cishet audiences, but ghosts manages to touch on it with a lovely amount of humour and hope. Jamie Babbit’s But I’m A Cheerleader is another favourite piece of queer media for the same reasons.

not only does it show this, but as the captain continues to get gayer and lean into some of his less conventional traits (like an interest in fashion and the wedding planning), it shows lgbt people who have been or are going through this that there CAN be a positive outcome. it takes a lot to unlearn all the things that have painted you as wrong, especially when a massive institution is desperate to continue doing so, but you can do it, you can be happy, and it's never too late. (i've been meaning to say that last point for ages for ages, but a mutual beat me to it here)

2. not just another coming out arc

i absolutely support the demand for queer stories that don’t center around coming out (it’s like shrodinger’s queer: if you’re not coming out on screen, do you really even exist?), but i don’t align with the criticisms that the captain should already be out. for the reasons mentioned above, the captain’s particular story is fairly different to the ‘young white teenager who mostly knows gay is fine, it’s just everyone else that’s got the problem, but have a unremarkably straight sounding soundtrack, a trauma porn romance, and a cishet saviour’ that we keep seeing. the captain’s ongoing journey with his sexuality emphasises the overaching theme of the show: recovering from trauma and humanity’s endless capacity for growth, and i think that’s worth showing over and over again until it stops being true.

additionally, while the captain’s journey regarding his gayness is a big part of his character and story, ghosts makes it clear that it’s not the ONLY part, and being gay is far from his ONLY characteristic or dramatic/comedic engine. the fact that i’m even having to congratulate ghosts for doing that really shows how much film and television is struggling huh.

while all queer media is, and should be, subject to criticism, i think if it helps even one person then it absolutely deserves to exist, and i can say i’ve found the captain’s journey to be the lgbt story i’ve found that’s closest to my own, which says a lot considering he’s a dead world war 2 soldier who hangs out with other ghosts including a slutty Tory, a georgian noblewoman, and a literal caveman.

3. if captain gay, why he no have boyfriend????

another complaint that’s been circulating is that since the captain doesn’t, and likely won’t, have a boyfriend, that makes him Bad Representation because it follows the sad single gay trope. i kind of get the logic from this one, and a lot of it is up to personal interpretation, but part of me really enjoys the fact that the captain’s journey towards accepting himself is separated from having a relationship.

coming out is often paired with having romantic/sexual relationships (either as the reason or reward for doing so). my own struggle with repression didn't end the second that came out, and i still struggle with letting myself develop & acknowledge romantic feelings as a result of actively shutting them (and most other feelings in general) down for years, and statistics show that lgbtq youth in particular tend not to live out their 'teen years' until their twenties. by not giving cap a relationship straight away, ghosts separates the act of claiming identity and sexual orientation from finding a partner (two things which are, more often than not, separate), and also provides some very nice validation to folks who have yet to have the relationship they want, especially when lots of mainstream queer media is now jumping on the cishet media bandwagon of acting as if every person loses their virginity and has a life defining relationship at sixteen. it’s essentially a continuation of the earlier theme of “it’s never too late”, and who’s to say the captain won’t get a gay bear ghost boyfriend to go haunt nazis with??? people die all the time, it could happen.

(also, i think him and julian will have definitely shagged at least once. it was a low moment for both of them and they refuse to speak of it.)

lots of asexual/ace spectrum fans have come out to say how much they’ve loved being able to headcanon cap as ace, and while that’s not a headcanon i personally have, i think it’s brilliant that ace fans feel seen by his character- we’re all in this soup together babey (and sorry for cursing everyone still reading this with that cap/julian headcanon. i’m just a vessel)

4. “okay, but cap’s a GHOST- doesn’t that make this Bury Your Gays?”

this is a bit of a complex one, but i’m going to say no as a result of the following break down.

Bury Your Gays (BYG), aka the trope where lgbtq characters are consistently killed off (and often with a heavy dose of trauma, while cishet characters survive) is probably one of my least favourite lgbt media tropes. BYG has two main points:

1. the lgbt character is killed, thus removing them from story entirely- hence the use of the phrase ‘killed OFF’ (killed off of the show/film)

2. the character’s death reinforces the perception that lgbtq people’s lives must end in tragedy, instead of being long and fulfilling, or are inherently less valuable. bonus points if the character is killed in a hate crime or confesses same-gender love right before they die (that one implies that queer love genuinely has no future!)

not every death of an lgbtq character is bury your gays, and i personally feel that the captain is an example of an lgbt death that isn’t.

first of all, while the captain is dead, so are the vast majority of characters in ghosts. the premise of the show means that death is not the end of the line for its characters- for most of them, it’s the only reason we get to see them on screen at all. as such, the captain being dead doesn’t remove him from the story, so point one is irrelevant.

at the time of posting, we don’t know how or why the captain died, but we've had nothing to suggest his death was in any way related to his latent sexuality, so his mysterious death doesn’t actively play into the supposedly inherent tragedy of queer lives, nor the supposedly lesser value. that’s as of right now- since we don’t know the circumstances of his death it’s a little tough to analyse properly. while the captain’s life absolutely features missed opportunities and it’s fair share of tragedy, hope and growth (which seems to be the theme of this post) abounds in equal measure. the captain may not be alive, but we DO get to see him growing and having a relatively happy existence, that for the most part seems to be getting even better as he learns to open up and be himself unapologetically- that doesn’t feel like BYG to me.

while writng this, it’s just occured to me that death really is a second chance for most of the ghosts, especially with the introduction of alison. from mary learning to read, to thomas finding modern music, they’ve all been given the chance explore things they never could have while they were alive, and hopefully grow enough to one day be sucked off move on.

in conclusion,

i love the captain very much and i hope his arc lives up to the standards it’s set so far. i don’t know where to put this in this post, but i’d alo like to say i LOVE how in Perfect Day, the captain wasn’t used as an educational experienced for fanny at all. i am very tired of people expecting me to be the walking talking homophobe educator and rehabilitator, so the fact that it’s alison and the other ghosts that call fanny out while the captain just gets to have fun with the wedding organisation made me very happy.

here’s a few other cap posts that i’ve done:

the captain’s arc if adam and the film crew stayed

a possible cap coming out

the captain backstory headcanon

if you’ve read this far,

thank you!

also check out @alex-ghosts-corner , this post inspired me very much to write this

#i subluxed all my fingers and wrists doing this but worth it #bbc ghosts #bbc ghosts headcanon #bbc ghosts analysis #the captain #caphavers #the captain x havers #ben willbond #lgbt representation #lgbt rep #queer media #lgbt media

205 notes · View notes

song-of-oots · 3 years

Text

Fuchsia Groan: my (un)exceptional fave

A while ago a friend of mine was asking for people to name their favourite examples of strong female characters, and my mind immediately leapt to Gormenghast’s Fuchsia Groan because it always does whenever the words “favourite” and “female character” come up in the same sentence. In fact scratch that, if I had to pick only one character to be my official favourite (female or otherwise) it would probably be Fuchsia. There are not sufficient words in the English language to accurately describe how much I love this character.

The issue was that I’m not sure Fuchsia Groan can accurately be described as “strong”, and until my friend asked the question, it hadn’t even occurred to me to analyse her in those terms…

Actually this isn’t completely true; Mervyn Peake does describe Fuchsia as strong in terms of her physical strength on multiple occasions. But in terms of her mental strength things are less clear cut. She’s certainly not a total pushover, and anyone would probably find it tough-going to cope with the neglect, tragedy and misuse she suffers through. In fact, this is something Mervyn Peake mentions himself – whilst also pointing out that Fuchsia is not the most resilient of people:

“There were many causes [to her depression], any one of which might have been alone sufficient to undermine the will of tougher natures than Fuchsia’s.”

Anyway, this has gotten me thinking about Fuchsia’s other traits and my reasons for loving her, going through a typical sort of list of reasons people often give for holding up a character as someone to admire:

So, is Fuchsia particularly talented?

No.

Is she clever, witty?

She’s definitely not completely stupid, and her insights occasionally take other characters by surprise, but she’s not really that smart either.

Does she have any significant achievements? Overcome great adversity?

Not really, no.

Is she kind?

Yes. Fuchsia is a very loving person and sometimes displays an incredible sensitivity and compassion for others. But… she can also be self-absorbed, highly strung, and does occasionally lash out at other people (especially in her younger years).

So why do I love Fuchsia so much?

Well, I’ll start be reiterating that I don’t really have the vocabulary to adequately put it into words, but I will try to get the gist across. So:

“What Fuchsia wanted from a picture was something unexpected. It was as though she enjoyed the artist telling her something quite fresh and new. Something she had never thought of before.”

This statement summarises not only Fuchsia but also the way I feel about her (and for that matter the Gormenghast novels in general). Fuchsia is something I’ve never really seen before. On the surface, she fits the model of the somewhat spoiled but neglected princess, and yet at the same time she cannot be so neatly pigeon-holed. It’s not just that her situation and the themes of the story make things more complex (though that is a factor); Fuchsia herself is so unique and vividly detailed that she manages to be more than her archetype. She feels like a real person and, like all real people, she is not so easy to label.

Fuchsia is also delightfully strange in a way that feels very authentic to her and the setting in general (which is particularly refreshing because it can all too often feel as though female characters are only allowed to be strange in a kooky, sexy way - yet Fuchsia defies this trend).

She’s a Lady, but she’s not ladylike. She’s messy. She slouches, mooches, stomps and stands in awkward positions. Her drawing technique is “vicious” and “uncompromising”. She chews grass. She removes her shoes “without untying the laces by treading on the heels and then working her foot loose”. She’s multi-faceted and psychologically complex. Intense and self-absorbed, sometimes irrational and ruled by her emotions more than is wise, but also capable of insight and good sense that takes others by surprise. She is extremely loving and affectionate, and yet so tragically lonely. Simultaneously very feminine and also not. Her character development from immature teenager to adult woman is both subtle and believable. She has integrity and decency – she doesn’t need to be super clever or articulate to know how to care for others or stand up for herself.

Fuchsia is honest. She knows her own flaws, but you never catch her trying to put on airs or make herself out to be anything other than what she is. She always expresses her feelings honestly.

She’s not sexualised at all. I don’t mean by this that she has no sexuality – though that’s something Peake only vaguely touches on – but I don’t really feel like I’m looking at a character who was written to pander to the male gaze (though her creator is male, I get the vibe he views her more as a beloved daughter than a sexual object).

Finally, I find her highly relatable. I am different to Fuchsia in many ways, but we do have several things in common that I have never seen so vividly expressed in any other character. This was incredibly important to me when I was a teenager struggling through the worst period of depression I ever experienced – because she was someone who I could relate to and love in a way I was incapable of loving myself. Her ability to be herself meant a lot to me as someone struggling with my own identity and sense of inadequacy. It didn’t cure my depression, but it helped me survive it.

What am I trying to say with all this?

I love Fuchsia on multiple levels. I love her as a person and also as a character and a remarkable piece of writing. I mention some of the mundane details Peake uses to flesh out her character firstly because I enjoy them, but also because it’s part of the point. Her story amazes me because it treats a female character and her psychological and emotional life with an intense amount of interest regardless of any special talents or achievements she happens to exhibit. She doesn’t fit the model of a modern heroine but neither does she need to – she’s still worth spending time with and caring about.* To me the most important things about Fuchsia are how different and interesting and relatable she is – and how real she feels.

* To be honest, this is part of the point of the Gormenghast novels in general. The story is meant to illustrate the damage that society – and in particular rigid social structures and customs – can do to individuals with its callous indifference to genuine human need. Fuchsia is one of many examples of this throughout the novels. These characters don’t need to be exceptionally heroic in order to matter – they just need to exist as believable people. And despite how strange they all are, they often do manage to be fundamentally relatable.

Why am I talking about female characters in particular here?

The focus on “strong” female characters and the critique against that is pretty widely acknowledged. Growing up, I definitely noticed the lack of female characters in popular media and the ensuing pressure this then places on the ones that do exist to be positive representations of womankind – someone girls can look up to. It’s very understandable that we want to see more examples of admirable female protagonists, given that women were traditionally left to play support roles and tired stereotypes. The problem is that the appetite for more proactive female heroines can sometimes lead to characters who are role models first and realistic human beings second (characters who I mentally refer to as Tick-All-The-Boxes Heroines). It’s not a problem with “strong” proactive heroines per se, but rather lack of variation and genuine psychological depth (not to mention a sometimes too-narrow concept of what it even means to be strong).

Male characters tend not to have this particular problem because they are much better represented across the whole range of roles within a story. You get your fair share of boring worn out archetypes. You get characters who are meant to represent a positive version of heroic masculinity (and now that I come to think of it, having a very narrow and unvarying presentation of what positive masculinity looks like is its own separate problem, but outside the scope of this particular ramble). We don’t usually spend time obsessing over whether a piece of fiction has enough examples of “strong” male characters though, because we’re generally so used to seeing it that we automatically move on into analysing the work and the characters on other terms. And because there are often more male characters than female, they don’t all bear the burden of having to be a positive representative of all men everywhere. They exist to fulfill their roles, and often exhibit more variety, nuance and psychological depth. They are also often allowed to be weird, flawed and unattractive in ways that women usually aren’t (which is a damn shame because I’ve spent my whole life feeling like a weird outsider and yet this perspective is so often told primarily through a male lens).

Tl:dr; Fuchsia Groan is a character who feels like an answer to so many of those frustrations that I felt growing up without even truly understanding why. A large part of why I love her is simply because of how much I relate to her on a personal level. I admire her emotional honesty and her loving nature… But there’s also a part of me that was just so relieved to find a female character who exists outside of the usual formulae we seem to cram women into. She is unique, weird and wonderful (but non-sexualised). Psychologically nuanced and vividly written. She isn’t exceptionally heroic or talented or a high achiever – but she does feel like a real person.

Female characters don’t need to tick all the right boxes in order to be interesting or worth our time any more than the male ones do.

#fuchsia groan #gormenghast #mervyn peake #female characters #mental health #depression #long

29 notes · View notes

lichfucker · 3 years

Note

i would love to hear about why all of the ted lasso characters would fail survivor but especially rebecca

hhh ALL of them... okay the vast majority of the players can be explained away with just "physical prowess enough to make them a threat in individual challenges but dumb as bricks and would not be able to strategize themselves out of a bad spot"

this is abt to get long lmao so I'm putting individual ppl under the cut

nate is the most obvious first boot I honestly feel bad about it. bumbling, socially awkward, has NO idea how to assert himself without being an asshole about it (in the rare instances when he does assert himself at all), and even if he's smart enough to be a great strategist (which he absolutely IS), he can't convey it well enough to convince his tribe to overlook his (probable) lack of challenge ability. most of the time, people don't want to draw harsh lines in the sand on the very first vote so they can pretend everyone's getting along and still friends, so nate would be a sort of freebie vote that it'd be easy to agree on.

beard is too much of a follower. what ted says to dr sharon abt him is, "that man has had many lives, many masters." he's very comfortable being led by people with stronger personalities, and even when he disagrees with their calls he will still execute them like a perfect little lackey. the thing about beard is that I think he'd go VERY far in a season of survivor! I think he could EASILY make it all the way to the end! but I just don't think he can WIN. he's genius-level intelligent and SO strategically savvy, but more than that he is fiercely loyal. he'll attach himself to the right person (or the wrong person, as it were), and even if he is whispering in that person's ear all the way through, he would be TOO content to let them take all the credit, he wouldn't push back against them if they disagree with his plans and make a lesser move instead (the whole beginning of 'beard after hours' is him berating himself for not standing up and making the hard calls even when he knew they'd be better), he wouldn't turn around and slit that person's throat at the end to further his own game, and he would make himself socially impenetrable to everyone else. nobody could get close to him, nobody could like or understand him, he'd probably be seen as good collateral if the opposition couldn't strike directly at whomever beard works with, and if he DOES make it to final tribal, I think he'd have a very difficult time convincing the jury that he deserves the credit and the limelight. he wants to win, I just don't think he believes he deserves to.

ted and roy actually would have the exact same problem, which is "physically and strategically competent, but so FUCKING ANNOYING to live with that they get booted for the sake of tribal quality of life." roy would isolate himself socially with his aggression, and ted...

ted is the antithesis of what a "good survivor player" ought to be, which I actually think could work to his advantage in a number of ways? like I think more typical players would find him incredibly unpredictable because he's sharp enough to see what the best moves are, but generous and self-sacrificing enough not to make them. like, there's a reason he's a coach and not a player. there's a reason he says that he doesn't measure success in wins and losses. if he could survive the first few votes, his social game would be AMAZING-- the entire first season of the show is about him wearing rebecca down through the sheer magnitude of his friendship! lesser survivor players would be so endeared to him that they couldn't fathom voting him off, but they're the ones who are getting picked off in his stead. moderately savvy survivor players would not trust a single word out of ted lasso's mouth; there's no fucking way a man can be this kind and this sincere, not on survivor, it's just not possible, he must be plotting something MASSIVE, we have to strike first before he gets his chance. and the truly brilliant survivor players would realize that he IS genuine, he IS sincere, he IS loyal and giving to his core, and that's DANGEROUS. you can't let someone like that make it to the end or they'll take your million dollars. best to shut it down at the jump.

and above all that, I just think that ted... ted would thrive in the pre-merge, in the tribal portion of the game, he's SO team-oriented, but post-merge, in the individual game... perhaps if he had a solid alliance he could also feel that way about, then it might suit his temperament, but ultimately I think he just. wouldn't want it badly enough. I just think the significant majority of people would be vastly more self-interested than ted would be, so they'd take the shot first.

higgins is an interesting midpoint between all three of nate, beard, and ted, in that he's a henchman through and through even when he disagrees with his boss, he's a pushover who'd be seen as a liability in physical challenges in the early game, and he's off-puttingly friendly and polite to the point that nobody would trust that he's being sincere even though he absolutely is. early boot, maybe second or third.

maybe it's just because I've got cook islands on the brain, but jamie (esp season 1 jamie but like. season 2 as well lmao) would play A LOT like early ozzy. an arrogant wonder-boy who's good at everything (did you know there's literally a survivor casting archetype called the "amazing ace"?), with a heart-wrenching underdog story (playing for richmond, that is), an absolute beast in challenges, a huge threat but always immune, he'd win his way to the end but ultimately be beaten out in final tribal by someone smart enough to have dragged him along as their meat shield the whole game.

and as for rebecca... g-d. this one I think hurts me the most because she has everything going for her, she doesn't have a single one of the problems I've listed for anyone else, but I do genuinely believe that rebecca still loses. she's strong and she's smart and she's assertive and she's ruthless and she's sociable and she's a great liar and she's ambitious and she's ADAPTIBLE (she immediately bounces back after not getting the sun to run the photo of ted and keeley and comes up with an alternate plan that will still serve her own endgame, and by g-d being able to roll with the punches and change course is the single most important thing a survivor player can do), but rebecca still loses.

even if we set aside the fact that survivor on the whole is not particularly kind to women over 40... season 1 rebecca, especially early season 1 rebecca, is spite-motivated to the point of self-destruction. she will set her sights on one target and she will be relentless in her effort to get that person out and it'll make her so myopic that she won't see her own end coming immediately afterwards. nobody on that tribe wants to be her next victim-- better get rid of her once she's proven what she's capable of.

she's also dreadfully insecure in the wake of her divorce and when her polished veneer cracks enough to let it show (how many days of being rained on do we think it'll take for her to slip? my guess is five), some people will see it as the vulnerability that finally allows them to connect with her on a human level, while others will see it as a threatening endgame storyline and an exploitable weakness.

there are some juries, particularly old-school juries, that wouldn't vote for her in the end purely based on the fact that a million dollars is just a drop in the bucket to a woman like rebecca mannion welton. that would be a real shame, and a disservice to the game she would have had to play just to make it that far.

what's more likely than that, though, in my opinion, is that rebecca... loses the drive to win. I think that somewhere along the way survivor stops being a game that she is playing, stops being a competition, and instead becomes a journey of personal growth through adversity. I think she, like ted, stops measuring her success in wins and losses. I think she proves herself more capable and resilient than she ever thought she could be, and that is worth more to her than the money or the title of sole survivor, and she stops fighting for it. and maybe the jury admires that, and gives it to her anyway, rewards her transformation. or maybe they don't. maybe they view it as a concession, a forfeit. but I'm not certain that that moment of revelation happens at the final tribal council. I think it happens just before. I think it happens after the final immunity challenge, and she tearfully and valiantly allows herself to be voted out just inches from the finish line. I think rebecca is the fallen angel of the season, and she goes off to the jury with her head held high, which is nice, and so very noble of her, and the fans would be DYING to have her play again but she wouldn't, because she'll have gotten everything she could have wanted out of her survivor experience, and she doesn't need the crown on top of it.

I think rebecca COULD win. she just WON'T.

#jockjamsandjellies #thanks jack #bluh bluh #honestly I'm a little tipsy and this hurt me to write #rebecca's arc in the show of her becoming a better person is literally an arc of her becoming a worse survivor player #and that's not to say that it's impossible for someone who's kind and honest and open-hearted to win survivor!!#bc plenty of those people have!#it's just that... I think she'd end up pulling a rafe in guatemala and valiantly falling on the sword right at the end for NO REASON #when victory was otherwise all but guaranteed!#also I didn't mention ted's panic attacks at all because I do not believe they would matter lmao I've seen multiple seasons #where people had panic attacks during challenges that they weren't even participating in #and then those people made it all the way to final tribal and one of them even won #survivor #ted lasso

14 notes · View notes

backofthebookshelf · 4 years

Text

One of the nice things about the way the TMA fandom has reached full large-fandom levels of toxicity is that I no longer care if people get mad at me for my opinions on characters! So, some Georgie meta.

(Because fandom is and always has been Like That, I do feel the need to clarify here that I love Georgie, she's one of my favorite characters, characters are more interesting because of their flaws, and I have no investment in the idea that women or female characters are inherently better or more emotionally competent than men or male characters. If I talk a lot about her relationship with Jon, it's because Jon is our point of view character and also the person she interacts with the most. Also, this rambles, sorry.)

I've been thinking about the Season 4 Jon Trauma post and how much I liked the way it talked about Georgie, and it's convinced me that if Georgie could feel fear, she's the one who'd be most afraid of Jon out of all of them. She's the one protagonist we have whose only interaction with the powers has been as a direct victim of them. She doesn't know what they feel like from the inside, like Jon and Melanie; she doesn't know what they're like when they're someone you love, like Basira; she doesn't even know what they're like as petty middle management, like Martin and Tim. What she knows is that one time a monster ate her (only) friend and traumatized her so badly she spent a year in a suicidal depression.

And now her ex - and yes, Jon and Georgie have a remarkably comfortable relationship in the beginning of season three, but they're still exes and they broke up for reasons, even if we don't know exactly what they are - has turned up on her doorstep, shaking and possibly bloody, with nowhere else to go and no access to his home. He's clearly lying about what's going on. He repeatedly violates her house rules. And then he tells her that he's turning into one of those same kinds of monsters that traumatized her and ate her friend. It's clearly enough to override any remaining affection she had for him, and by any definition he has now positioned himself as a trigger.

(Through no fault of his own: the only real response he has to Georgie's statement is "I can't believe you didn't tell me." She's the one who assumes that he Knew, somehow, that she also had a statement; she's the one who suggests he had alternatives. Both suggestions are plausible but we don't actually know for certain that either are true.)

But Georgie isn't afraid of Jon because Georgie can't be afraid -at least, according to her. I'm not sure how much I believe this in the grand scheme of things; it seems like an extremely unlikely mechanism for one of the fears to have. It seems much more likely to me that she's just never met anything as terrifying as that encounter was, and her subjective sense of fear has been massively recalibrated. In which case not only meeting but having hosted in your home another monster who self-describes as similar to the one that was so terrifying that literal threats to your life are no longer distressing would...probably ping. But she's conceptualized herself as a person who doesn't feel fear; it's even possible that was part of her recovery, identifying this as a possible benefit of what would otherwise have been a universally terrible, soul-breaking experience. She looked existential terror in the face and survived, and came out of it a person who cannot be afraid of anything left on this earth. That's kind of a superhero origin story, and I can't blame her for it. I think anyone with a mental illness has at least tried to find ways in which their suffering has made them a better, stronger person.

But whether she's suppressing and rationalizing away any fear she feels or she genuinely doesn't feel any of it, she does frequently behave as though her lack of fear gives her a more objective view of the situation than anyone else. I don't believe she actually uses the word "just," but it drips from her every interaction with Jon after Dead Woman Walking. Why doesn't he just stop reading the statements? Why doesn't he just quit? And, in Zombie, I honestly can't interpret her reaction to Jon when he wakes up from his coma as anything other than, Why doesn't he just die? If he hates being this so much, if he really doesn't want to be a monster, why doesn't he just die?

I really would like to think that it goes without saying that this is, at the very least, a massive failure of empathy, but she's so explicit about it and fandom spent so much time basically agreeing with her that apparently it doesn't. Not only is Georgie not afraid of the situation, but (and this is the part that makes me wonder if she's not rationalizing, rather than being supernaturally unable to feel fear) she can't possibly fathom how afraid everyone else is, and she never tries. She persists in treating the whole awful situation, as @findingfeather's post says, like this is a mundane problem with people who are refusing to help themselves, rather than a supernatural trap that has been specifically built to be inescapable.

Now, let me be clear, even if she were talking to, say, a drug addict who nearly killed themselves because they were in denial about how much of a problem they had, her attitude would be unforgivable. But in this case Jon had no choice in whether or not to become addicted to statements; it was done to him in such a way that he didn't notice it was happening until withdrawal was already incapacitating. He also didn't have the option to leave, as Tim's extended vacation made clear. And, on top of all of that, the whole reason he was in a coma in the first place was that he was trying to save the world. (Neither he nor she knows at this point that he was doing nothing of the kind, so that's really not relevant.) And - look, when Jon came to her after the end of season two, he was asking for help. When he rejected the kind of help that she offered it was because he knew it didn't apply to the problems he actually had, but she treats that like it's his problem, which is something like offering a leg splint to a person bleeding out from a gunshot wound and getting offended when they tell you that won't work. He was very clear that what was happening scared him and he didn't know what to do about it, and her only suggestion was "walk away," which he literally could not do, for multiple reasons.

She's lucky Jon has pretty much precisely zero self-worth at this point, because anyone else would have cut her off completely for behaving like a fucking asshole.

I say "she's lucky" because frankly, even though she says that she wants nothing more to do with him, she turns up at least twice in the Institute after that, with the excuse that she's picking up Melanie to take her to therapy. I don't know about you, but I have never once gone to someone's workplace to pick them up and gone snooping around inside, and no matter how fascinatingly weird that workplace is, I definitely can't imagine doing so when I know that workplace also contains a person I have definitely decided I never want to speak to again. She goes into the Archives, for Christ's sake, and she listens outside Jon's office door for long enough to catch a bit of the recording before letting herself in (so it's very clear she knows who's in there).

Now I'm not trying to paint her as a monster here; Georgie would hardly be the first person to have second thoughts about cutting off someone they still care about, or to break that boundary that they set themselves when they realize they do still want to know how that person is doing. But the fact is that she positions herself as having the moral high ground in every single discussion they have and that's just not true. She is not literally a supernatural monster, true, but if season four did anything with the concept of monsters it was breaking down the difference between "supernaturally driven no-longer-human" and "person capable of caring and empathy." (That's a whole different meta, though, one that I will get around to someday.) Not that Jon is any better, in that encounter specifically, at dealing with a complicated and contentious relationship - he deliberately goads her, even if he doesn't use compulsion. But that's the thing, they're both exes who have had a falling out and aren't handling it very well. Neither of them is in the right.

All of which makes me really wonder what her relationship with Melanie is actually like. We don't actually see hardly any of it directly, and of what we do, well, Melanie sounds like she's still high on painkillers, so it's hard to take that as an indication of anything. But given that people (who are not intentionally trying to manipulate those around them) tend to, y'know, be fundamentally the same person in their various relationships, though it may manifest in different ways, we can probably make some guesses.

I have always been bothered by, and I really can't ignore, the fact that they were getting together at the same time that Melanie was doing what Georgie has been demanding of Jon since season three: she did whatever it took to get out. I have to wonder if Georgie knows about the nonconsensual surgery part of Melanie's process of getting out, and if she does, if she understands how vital it was. I certainly wouldn't be surprised, if she does know, that she's managed to compartmentalize it: Jon inflicted this terrible trauma on Melanie, Melanie escaped the entity that took her over. (Subconscious implication: Jon is a monster; Melanie is better than him.) I would be very surprised if Georgie is interested at all in the fine distinctions between entities; she's shown no interest in learning what is actually happening to anyone in this situation beyond "it's bad and they should get out of it." But it's relevant, because by the time Melanie makes the decision to blind herself, she's in a much different position than Jon, enslaved by an entity but not consumed by one. She herself admitted to Jon that she would never have voluntarily escaped from the Slaughter.

And given how difficult Melanie finds it to talk about any of this - you can hear her dragging the words out from behind her teeth in her conversation with Jon in Flesh, truly incredible acting by Lydia Nicholas, my god - if Georgie doesn't want to hear it? I can't imagine Melanie insisting. Yes, Melanie is going to therapy, but let me tell you, I've been going to therapy for twelve years now and I have yet to have several of the important conversations my therapists have insisted I have. That shit is hard. But I can imagine a scenario where, having been told by her therapist (who, remember, doesn't have the first idea what Melanie is actually going through, because Melanie isn't telling her about the supernatural so she has to leave out a lot of really relevant details) that she ought to tell her friend/potential girlfriend/new girlfriend about these things, Melanie attempts to bring it up, Georgie says kind and reassuring things and refuses to let her clarify any of the details, and Melanie gives up in relief, thinking, well, I tried. Super valid all around, but it doesn't mean that Georgie has any clearer picture of what Melanie's traumas actually look like, never mind Jon's. There's no world in which I can imagine Georgie actually internalizing the idea that Melanie loved the Slaughter when it had her, and she would gladly have stayed with it if Jon and Basira hadn't intervened.

In Georgie's eyes, Melanie is being a Good Victim. She was hurt but she was strong; she fought it until she won; now she's going to therapy and setting boundaries and trying to heal. She got away.

(Except, of course, she didn't, because as of The Eye Opens no one has gotten away, because this is the entire world now. We have no idea how this has affected Melanie. Presumably she's out of reach of the Eye, given that Jon can't see her or Georgie (and there's some evidence on the side of Georgie's encounter genuinely having stripped her of fear, if she's also invisible to the Eye), but she spent a long time under the influence of the Slaughter. It had her firmly enough that her attacking Jon was enough to give him his Slaughter scar. If nothing else, Melanie certainly hasn't had her fear removed, and talk about a situation bound to retraumatize someone who had such a visceral revulsion to being trapped that Elias chose it as his mechanism of control over her. Melanie probably doesn't look like a Good Victim any more, and I'd bet her relationship with Georgie is suffering some serious strain because of it.)

We don't know when exactly Melanie and Georgie got together; the last time one of them mentions the other is, I'm pretty sure, when Georgie tells Jon that Melanie is back from India. So we know that Georgie and Melanie were friends; that's good, that's a good foundation for a romantic relationship. At the very least they know each other, they have some idea of what to expect. I'd be surprised if they were dating during that season 3/4 hiatus period, though, or frankly any time before Melanie's surgery, just because Melanie seems much too consumed with rage to have room for any other emotions, and I can't imagine Georgie putting up with that.

What seems way more likely to me is this: Melanie comes back from India, arranges to meet Georgie for drinks. Probably they don't talk about anything serious; possibly they talk about Jon, honestly, since we know Melanie was looking for him and Georgie talked to him about Melanie, but very likely in the same "stuck-up pompous ass" way that Melanie talks about Jon in early seasons. (I bet Melanie's roasts are amazing.) Shortly after that Melanie joins the Magnus Institute and then, very likely, either she never tells Georgie about it and therefore they don't talk much or she does tell Georgie about it and Georgie tells her that place is bad news and she won't have anything to do with it and they don't talk at all, until, whichever way that went, the Unknowing happens and Tim dies and Jon winds up in a coma and everything goes to shit. We know Georgie visits Jon in the hospital; we don't know if Melanie does, but frankly it seems unlikely. If they did cross paths during this time, it was probably very brief and superficial. Then: the surgery, and Melanie's recovery.

I'll be honest, I have a hard time imagining Melanie deciding on her own that she should go to therapy. It's possible Basira suggested it, but it really does sound like a Georgie thing to do. So I picture something like this: from the way Basira talks it sounds like they've all been pretty much living in the Archives for a while, and on top of that everyone in the Archives has just badly violated Melanie's trust, so Melanie pulls up her Facebook DMs and talks to the only other person she has. You were right, she says, this place is terrible, I can't handle it, there's no one here I can trust and I'm so alone. And Georgie, who is generous with help and advice (so long as it's accepted) and (like anyone) weak to being told she was right about something, starts talking to her. We know Georgie's got good boundaries, and we know she doesn't want to hear details about what's going on in the Institute, so I can see her saying, I can talk to you, I would love to talk to you, but not about this. For that you need a therapist.

So Melanie gets a therapist, and the prospect of going out amongst the monsters they know are stalking the Institute without that protective shield of rage (never mind the emotional vulnerability of going to therapy in the first place) makes public transit an unthinkable option, so she asks Georgie to take her, and she does, and she keeps taking her to therapy, which is, as far as we know, the only time Melanie leaves the Archives in season four, until she blinds herself and escapes it completely.

And so they have this relationship that's built up almost entirely around Melanie's trauma - with a foundation of friendship, certainly, so I do think that if they are willing to work through it they could make it a working, healthy relationship, but (and again this isn't stated in canon but is my speculation based on what we know about these characters) it is a romantic relationship that's built around the process of Melanie recovering from multiple traumas. Ones that we know that Georgie a) doesn't know many details about, and b) more importantly, refuses to know any details about. Now, I have no experience with romantic relationships and serious trauma; I might be wildly off base here. But. I know that boundaries are important and I know that trust is also important. And if Georgie is holding similar boundaries with Melanie that she has with Jon (and, as I went into excruciating detail about earlier, she has very solid emotional reasons to protect herself with those boundaries), that's drawing a hard line around what's basically the past two to three years of Melanie's life, and undeniably both the worst and most important things that have ever happened to her. That seems...difficult to manage in the long term.

(This is a bit more of a stretch, more of the germ of a fic idea than an argument I'm prepared to defend, but I also would not be surprised if Georgie told Melanie that she wouldn't date her while she was still working at the Institute. That's a very reasonable boundary, and it's good motivation - and probably healthy motivation, I do like the idea that Melanie had something to reach toward in escaping the Institute, not just the desperate flight from - but it's also something of an ultimatum. Which is not inherently bad, but it is the kind of thing that can fester, given other problems.)

Now it's entirely possible that Georgie isn't that internally consistent. People aren't! (See: Basira's attitude toward Daisy vs her attitude toward Jon in season four.) Maybe she's more flexible about being willing to listen to Melanie, maybe she's starting to understand some of what was happening and how genuinely impossible a situation it really was. But that has to be a struggle for her, too; it's not a perfect, sweet, unconditionally good situation that teaches you that you've been unfair to the point of cruelty to someone you used to care about. And by the time the apocalypse rolls around, Melanie is, if she's lucky, just barely able to say she's healed from the plain physical trauma of blinding, never mind all the other baggage. They've got to be having a rough fucking time of it, at the very least, even if you assume that they're suddenly both the kind of people who will sit still and listen supportively and talk honestly about their own messy and complicated emotions, when neither of them have been that kind of person before.

(Another disclaimer because Fandom Is Like That: This is in no way a condemnation of or argument against fluffy What the Girlfriends fic; fic is for making fluffy things that you want to happen to your faves, or building fluffy content that you desperately need for whatever reason. Gods know there are plenty of unhealthy parts of Jon and Martin's relationship that I ignore in most of my fluffy fic. This is me attempting to work through my thoughts and feelings about the relationship I see in canon in the hopes of actually being able to write some fic about these girls myself someday, because I personally can't write fic until I understand canon, and so much of them happens offscreen because they're not main characters, and they're written with such depth and complexity that you can't just slap a stereotype on them and call it good. Which is awesome! But it means I gotta do the work, and I post it because a) it's work, and this is fandom, and I want validation; and b) I'm hoping other people have insights that might also help me clarify my thinking.)

#the magnus archives #tma #georgie barker #jonathan sims #melanie king #long post #real fuckin' long post #sorry #it's a meta party #cw suicide #cw addiction

580 notes · View notes

janeaustentextposts · 4 years

Note

Why didnt the Bennets have a governess? Were they unable to afford one or was it not as necessary as Lady Catherine made it seem?

It’s not really said why they don’t have a governess--and to pay the salary for one person to see to the education of five girls would be relatively cheap for the Bennets to get their daughters educated as a package deal (but oh my god that poor woman would not be paid NEARLY enough for all that work,) so I don’t think it was a case of them being unable to afford one. But for female education, especially, families could really pick and choose what level of investment they wanted to make. Elizabeth admits that they had whatever masters they wanted (presumably for dancing/art/music,) and fancy-work could be picked up from female friends and relations, so it doesn’t seem as though they were entirely neglected by Mr. Bennet’s refusal to have them educated in accomplishments; but more that it was very self-directed by the Bennet daughters, and if none of them asked for a governess or bothered Mrs. Bennet to teach them things (and it feels unlikely she’d have the skills or will to do so in the first place, so I doubt any attempts went very far,) they could just...do whatever. Imagine if a house full of girls these days were home-schooled but allowed to set their own curriculum and nobody ever made them take any kind of standardized test.

Elizabeth has eked out her own education by reading--as has Mary, though with different results in what they do with that reading. Elizabeth’s is more for personal enjoyment and enrichment, and Mary’s is more along the lines of making her reading another ‘accomplishment’ to display in how she dispenses her nuggets of wisdom in a performative way for social cachet. Kitty and Lydia no doubt enjoyed their dancing lessons, and do that very well, but everything else has been neglected. The Bennet girls essentially have very little structure, and it is their parents’ fault for leaving their educations to their own wills (and young girls/teens are not very likely to get strict with themselves, especially to apply themselves to subjects they may not enjoy.)

There are probably families who COULD have reasonably well-rounded educations for their daughters at home and without a governess (Austen herself only briefly attended school before illness forced her to return home, and I’ve never heard that the family employed a governess, so her mother and father saw to all other aspects of her education, and encouraged her to read widely.) But without some adult to provide structure and encourage disciplined application to learning, it’s almost entirely up to chance whether a girl could scratch out a meaningful education for herself.

That being said, governesses and schools are hardly a guarantee that a girl will develop into an educated person--but then it depends on your definition of education. The famous dialogue about what makes an Accomplished Woman in Pride and Prejudice rather reveals a lot--the Bingley sisters were educated at a very fine ladies’ school in London, and while they have accomplishments such as the things Caroline Bingley lists, (and to master several languages and talents such as music and art is no mean feat!) the sisters are still not quite on Elizabeth’s level, where Elizabeth’s more self-directed reading has perhaps enabled her to better develop her own critical thinking skills and to think outside the box.

Then there is Mrs. Goddard’s school in Emma, which is an unpretentious place and a very good sort of school for what it is--but the text admits that it is not turning out any particular geniuses or artistic talents, but fitting its girls up to be reasonably appealing and capable managers of middling genteel households. But for all that, it’s described rather lovingly: “Mrs. Goddard was the mistress of a School—not of a seminary, or an establishment, or any thing which professed, in long sentences of refined nonsense, to combine liberal acquirements with elegant morality, upon new principles and new systems—and where young ladies for enormous pay might be screwed out of health and into vanity—but a real, honest, old-fashioned Boarding-school, where a reasonable quantity of accomplishments were sold at a reasonable price, and where girls might be sent to be out of the way, and scramble themselves into a little education, without any danger of coming back prodigies. Mrs. Goddard's school was in high repute—and very deservedly; for Highbury was reckoned a particularly healthy spot: she had an ample house and garden, gave the children plenty of wholesome food, let them run about a great deal in the summer, and in winter dressed their chilblains with her own hands.” It reads as the next best thing to solid instruction at home by a capable and motherly sort of woman, so between this and Austen’s own education I think we can tell of her views on female accomplishments--a certain measure of flexibility and freedom is good for children as they grow, as well as a dignified simplicity which is in stark contrast to the sort of school the Bingley sisters attended in order to become the multi-accomplished beasts they are.

Almost every novel has something to say about female education--Mrs. Elton and Lucy Steele, I think, are school-girls in a similar vein to the Bingley sisters, and they have grown up to be two-faced and supercilious creatures. But then we have Mrs. Smith, who was at school with Anne Elliot, and is one of her truest friends from the beginning. In Mansfield Park we see the difference between the Bertram sisters and Fanny, though they all share the same governess. In these contrasts we can tell that the manner of a girl’s education is as much about developing her social persona in many ways as it is about giving her skills to befit a genteel woman, and the differing notions of what Society thinks an accomplished woman ought to be. Some of Austen’s least ‘educated’ characters are also some of the sweetest and kindest, whose seemingly inborn good sense carries them through difficulties; and some of those who have had a high degree of professional investment in their formal educations have turned out to be the meanest and/or most useless of women.

To bring it back to the Bennets and Lady Catherine, it’s almost certain that Lady Catherine is inquiring about their education and whether or not they had a governess in order to be a snob as well as nosy about Mr. Bennet’s income--hiring a private tutor for one’s child was basically the most expensive educational option available--and while Elizabeth is well-aware of the particular defects in how education has proceeded in her own family, she knows that is more due to her own parents’ lack of structure and discipline, rather than something which could have been fixed by the hiring of a governess. Even if they had one, it seems unlikely Mr. or Mrs. Bennet would exert themselves to make Kitty and Lydia mind the woman and apply themselves to scholarly things. (Other novels make it clear that girls ill-disciplined by their own parents can pretty much get away with murder when it comes to disobeying or ignoring their governesses.) Of course Elizabeth isn’t going to give Lady Catherine the ammunition of admitting that her parents dropped the ball, but she goes as far as she can to defend the general practice of at-home education without a governess, because many families did so (Austen’s included) and their daughters turned out just fine with a little genuine effort, thank you very much.

#Ask Me Anything Austen-Adjacent #AMAAA #Jane Austen #Pride and Prejudice

225 notes · View notes

iridescentides · 3 years

Note

hi again dia! happy first day of december ❤️💚 i wanted to ask you what, in your opinion, are the 5 most underrated dcoms? i remember you saying before that you've watched all of them so i'd love to hear your opinions 😊 - 🎅🎁🎄

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH secret santa you are so good! asking me all the best questions 💜

okay so i literally had to make a list of all the dcoms i consider underrated and then narrow down a top 5. theres lots of dcoms that i love, but that i think got the right amount of attention and care (like lemonade mouth and the teen beach movies, for example), so this list just focuses on ones that deserved more hype for their quality level.

5. The Cheetah Girls: One World (2008)

okay so even as i type this i feel like a hypocrite. i have only watched this movie one time. BUT i can acknowledge that its one of the most criminally underrated dcoms ever, tons of people didnt watch it simply because raven wasnt in it. thats why i avoided it as a child, and i didnt get around to watching it until i did my big dcom binge in 2016. and it was so good. theres a really long post floating somewhere around tumblr full of specifics on why its actually the best cheetah girls movie (my favorite is the second one purely out of nostalgia), so to paraphrase some points from that post:

its a solid example of cultural appreciation, rather than appropriation, as the girls go and learn about bollywood and indian culture together

the indian characters arent treated like props or unimportant sides, they get their own agency and storylines that are important

the songs are good!!!

basically this movie was overlooked and slept on even though in terms of role modeling and social value, and just like the first two cheetah girls movies it was important and impactful.

4. Sharpay’s Fabulous Adventure (2011)

okay so as someone whos very neutral and occasionally negative-leaning towards the hsm franchise (mostly bc its overhyped and not really representative of all dcoms), i was pleasantly surprised by sharpays fabulous adventure. this is another one that i know lots of people skipped right over and dont hold with as much esteem as the main hsm franchise, and that doesnt sit right with me.

i do not agree with the “uwu sharpay was the real victim in hsm” arguments bc in their efforts to look galaxy brained the people who say that overlook the fact that she was a rich white woman who used her power and status to exercise control over opportunities that should have been fairly and freely available for all; they were not “making a mockery of her theater” in the first movie, they were literally just kids who wanted to try out a new school activity that everyone was supposed to be allowed to participate in; and despite allegedly learning her lesson and singing we’re all in this together with everyone at the end of the first movie, she literally showed no growth in the second movie as she fostered an openly hostile environment and favored troy so heavily that it literally cost him his friends, all as part of yet another jealous plan to take things away from people who already have less than her. she was NOT the victim in the main franchise, and she did not seem to exhibit any growth or introspection either.

and that!!! is why sharpays fabulous adventure was so important. in focusing on sharpay as the main character, they finally had to make her likeable. they did this by showing actual real growth and putting her outside of her sphere of influence and control. we saw true vulnerability from her, instead of the basic ass “mean girl is sad bc shes actually just super insecure” trope (cough cough radio rebel), and this opened us up to finally learn about and care about her character. throughout the movie we see her learn, from her love interests example, how to care for others and be considerate. she faces actual adversity and works through it, asking herself what she truly wants and what shes capable of. and in the end, when she finally has her big moment, we’re happy for her bc she worked hard to get there. she becomes a star through her own merit and determination, rather than through money and connections. this movie is not perfect by any means, but it is severely underrated for the amount of substance it adds to sharpays character.

3. The Swap (2016)

okay i know im gonna get shit for this but thats why its on this list!!! just like sharpays fabulous adventure, its not perfect and definitely misses the mark sometimes, but it deserves more attention and love for all the things it did get right!

the swap follows two kids who accidentally switch bodies because of their emotional attachment to their dead/absent parents’ phones. and while i normally HATE the tv/movie trope of a dead parent being the only thing that builds quick sympathy for a young character, they definitely expanded well enough to where we could root for these kids even without the tragedy aspect. we see them go through their daily struggles and get a feel for their motivations as characters pretty well. as a body switching movie, we expect it to be all goofy and wacky and lighthearted, but it moves beyond that in unexpected ways.

the reason the swap is on this list is for its surprisingly thoughtful commentary on gender roles. its by no means a feminist masterpiece, and its not going to radicalize kids who watch it, but it conveys a subtle, heartfelt message that deserves more appreciation. the characters struggle with the concept of gender in a very accurate way for their age, making off-base comments and feeling trapped by the weight of expectations they cant quite put their finger on. we watch them feel both at odds with and relieved by the gender roles they are expected and allowed to perform in each others bodies, and one of the most interesting parts of the movie to me is their interactions with the other kids around them. as a result of their feeling out of place in each others environments, the kids inadvertently change each others friendships for the better by introducing new communication styles and brave authenticity.

the value of this movie is the subtle, but genuine way it shows the characters growing through being given the space to act in conflicting ways to their expected norms. ellie realizes that relationships dont have to be complex, confusing, and painful, and that its okay to not live up to appearances and images. jack learns that emotional expression is good, healthy, and especially essential to the grieving process. one of the most powerful scenes in the movie comes at the end where, after ellie confronts jacks dad in his body, jack returns as himself to a very heartfelt apology from his father for being too hard on him; the explicit message (”boys can cry”) is paired with an open expression of love and appreciation for his kids that he didnt feel comfortable displaying until his son set an example through honest communication. this is such an empowering scene and overall an empowering movie for kids who may feel stuck in their expected roles, as it sets a positive example for having the courage to break the restrictive societal mold. for its overall message of the importance of introspection and emotional intelligence, the swap is extremely underrated.

2. Freaky Friday (2018)

this is my favorite dcom, and probably my favorite movie at this point. ive always assigned a lot of personal value to this movie (and i love every freaky friday in general), for the message of selfless familial love and understanding. i know i can get carried away talking about this topic; i got an anon ask MONTHS ago asking me about the freaky friday movies and i wrote a super super long detailed response that i never posted bc i didnt quite finish talking about the 2018 movie. and thats bc on a personal level, i cant adequately convey all the love i have for this movie. so i will try to keep this short.

first lets state the obvious: the reason people dont like this movie is bc its not the lindsay lohan version. and i get that, to an extent, bc i also love the 2003 version and its one of my ultimate comfort movies, and grew up watching it and ive seen it a billion times. i even watched it a couple days ago. but the nostalgia goggles that people have on from the early 2000s severely clouds their judgement of the wonderful 2018 remake.

yes, the 2018 version is dorky, overly simplistic plot wise, a bit stiff at times, and super cheesy like any dcom. the writing isnt 100% all the time. the narrative takes a couple confusing turns. the song biology probably shouldnt have been included. i understand this. but at the heart of it all, this movies value is love. and its edge over all the other freaky friday movies is the songs.

on a personal level, the movie speaks heavily to me. i cried very early into my first viewing of the movie bc i got to see dara renee, a dark-skinned, non-skinny actress, playing the mean popular girl on disney channel. that has never happened before. growing up, i saw the sharpays and all the other super thin white women get to be the “popular” girls on tv, and ultimately they were taken down in the end for being mean, but that doesnt change the fact that they were given power and status in the first place for being conventionally beautiful. so, watching dara renee strut around confidently and sing about being the queen bee at this high school got to me immediately. and in general, the supporting cast members of color really mean a lot to me in this movie. we get to see adam, an asian male love interest for the main character. we have a second interracial relationship in the movie with katherines marriage to mike. ellies best friend karl is hispanic. and we see these characters have depth and plot significance, we see them show love, care, and passion for the things they value. the brown faces in this movie are comforting to me personally. additionally, the loving, blended family dynamic is important to me as someone in a close-knit, affectionate step-family.

but on a more general level, this movie is underrated for its skillful musical storytelling and the way it conveys all kinds of love and appreciation. in true freaky friday fashion, we watch ellie and katherine stumble and misstep in their attempts to act like each other. its goofy and fun. but through it all, the music always captures the characters’ intimate thoughts and feelings. the opening song gives us a meaningful view into ellie and katherines relationship and the fundamental misunderstandings that play a role in straining their connection. ellie sings about how she thinks her mom wants her to be perfect, and her katherine sings about all the wonderful traits she sees in her daughter and how she wants her to be more open and self assured. this is meaningful bc even as theyre mad at each other, the love comes through. the songs continue to bring on the emotional weight of the story, as ellie sings to her little brother about her feelings of hurt and abandonment in her fathers absence. the song “go” and its accompanying hunt scene always make me cry bc of the childlike wonder and sense of adventure that it brings. for the kids, its a coming of age, introspective song. for katherine who gets to participate in ellies body, its a reminder of youth and the rich, full life her daughter has ahead of her. she is overcome with excitement, both from getting to be a teenager again for a day, and from the realization that her daughter has a support network and passions that are all her own. today and ev’ry day, the second to last song, is the culmination of the lessons learned throughout the movie, a mother and daughters tearful commitment to each other to love, protect, and understand one another. the line “if today is every day, i will hold you and protect you, i wont let this thing affect you” gets to me every time. even when things are hard and dont go according to plan, they still agree, in this moment, to be there for each other. and thats what all freaky friday stories are ultimately about.

freaky friday 2018 is a beautiful, inclusive, subversive display of familial love, sacrifice, and selflessness, and it is underrated and overlooked because of its more popular predecessor.

1. Let It Shine (2012)

this is another one of my favorite dcoms and movies in the whole world. unlike the other movies on this list, it is not the viewers themselves that contribute to the underrated-ness of this movie. disney severely under-promoted and under-hyped this movie in comparison to its other big musical franchises, and i will give you five guesses as to why, but youll only need one!

let it shine is the most beautifully, unapologetically black dcom in the whole collection. (i would put jump in! at a notable second in this category, but that one wasnt underrated). this movie was clearly crafted with care and consideration. little black kids got to see an entire dcom cast that represented them. the vernacular used in the script is still tailored mostly to white-favoring audiences, but with some relevant slang thrown in there. in short, the writers got away with the most blackness they were allowed to inject into a disney channel project.

the story centers on rap music and its underground community in atlanta, georgia. it portrays misconceptions surrounding rap, using a church setting as a catalyst for a very real debate surrounding a generational, mutlicultural conflict. this was not a “safe” movie for disney, given its emphasis on religious clashes with contemporary values. it lightly touches on issues of image policing within the black community (cyrus’s father talking about how “our boys” are running around with sagging pants and “our girls” are straying away from god), which is a very real and pressing problem for black kids who feel the pressure (from all sides) of representing their whole race with their actions. its a fun, adorable story about being yourself and staying true to your art, but also a skillful representation of struggles unique to black and brown kids and children from religious backgrounds.

on top of crafting a fun, wholesome, thoughtful narrative and likeable protagonists, let it shine brought us what is in my opinion the BEST dcom soundtrack of all time. every single song is a bop. theyre fast, fun, and lyrically engaging. “me and you” is my favorite disney channel song of all time due to its narrative significance; i will never forget my first time watching the movie and seeing that big reveal unfold onstage, as a conversation and a plot summary all wrapped into a song. the amount of thought and care that went into the music of this movie should have been rewarded with a level of attention on par with that of other musical dcoms.

if disney channel had simply cared about let it shine more, it couldve spanned franchises and sold songs the way that other musical dcoms have drawn in success. i would have loved for a sequel that explored and fleshed out cyrus’s neighborhood a little bit more, and maybe dipped into that underground scene they caught a glimpse of. i wanted a follow up on the changed church community once cyrus’s father started supporting his sons vision. i want so much more for these characters and this world than disney gave them in just one movie.

for its bold, unabashed representation of blackness and religion, subtle, nuanced presentation of race-specific issues, strong, likeable characters, and complex, thoughtful songs, let it shine is the most underrated dcom.

and because i made a full list before i started writing this post, here are some honorable mentions:

going to the mat (2004)

gotta kick it up! (2002)

tru confessions (2002)

dont look under the bed (1999)

invisible sister (2015)

#this took me embarassingly long to write #i cant help myself i literally think about this all the time #youre doing a great job with these questions secret santa!#dcoms #disney channel #answered asks #anons #gcwca secret santa #Anonymous

8 notes · View notes

whitewolfofwinterfell · 4 years

Note

Oh, I would Love to hear your opinions about Klamille and Klaroline (especially how ist was portrayed in the beginnend and how ist evolved, because I think the portrayel Changed quite a lot)

I’ve spoken about Klaroline previously and this is what I said:

Klaroline is one of those ships I actually don’t have much of an opinion on. I don’t ship them, but I don’t hate them either. For me, I see it as a crackship more so than anything else. I can see the potential and intrigue in regards to the possibilities with them that can be used for fanfiction and AU’s etc. but in regards to canon, I’ve gotta admit I don’t really see it. I find it to be a very shallow relationship. Klaus fell in love with Caroline although he barely knew her and I can’t really understand what it is about Caroline - an ordinary 17 year old high school girl - that would make a 1000 year old hybrid fall in love with her? And in regards to Caroline’s well-being and happiness, being with Klaus definitely isn’t the right thing for her. I mean, she married Stefan who is quite literally the polar opposite to Klaus and that just says it all. I just don’t see how Caroline could ever love Klaus. She was attracted to him and intrigued by him, yes, but in regards to a real emotional connection and a long-term relationship I just don’t think it’s there between them. Also, as someone once pointed out, a big theme of the Klaroline relationship that the shippers seem to hold onto a lot is the whole idea of Caroline wanting to see the world and travel. But it’s actually something she herself never once expressed. Klaus is the one that projected that onto her, telling her there was an entire world out there for her to see, offering to take her to Paris, calling her up when he was in New Orleans to tell her he wanted to share the art and culture with her - yet when did Caroline herself ever express wanting to travel or see the world? Basically, Klaroline is a ship that was never really supposed to happen but because the Klaroline fandom turned out to be so huge, the writers did a tonne of fan-servicing and made them into a lot more than it was supposed to be. For that reason there isn’t much of a basis for them, which is why I don’t ship them. But I can see why others ship them, particularly in regards to the non-canon possibilities.

I don’t really have much more to add to this because I still feel the same way. I think Joseph and Candice have great chemistry, but to be honest, Joseph/Klaus has chemistry with every single person he interacts with. I understood Klaroline when it was Klaus just having a little unreciprocated crush on Caroline, but anything beyond that I don’t really buy into. Their scenes on The Originals felt so forced to me. Like that whole line “you’ve never been the villain in my story”..... cringe. And their general behaviour towards each other with the flirting and reminiscing over their fond memories which were non-existent (are we just gonna conveniently forget that their entire relationship on TVD consisted of Klaus obsessing over Caroline and Caroline despearately trying to swerve his advances because she wasn’t interested and was in love with and committed to Tyler?) I just think that narratively speaking, Klaroline were taken to places that didn’t make sense to appease the shippers. And I know that the shippers are probably still disappointed/angry and might say they didn’t get justice, but being an outsider looking in, I can see that the writers gave Klaroline shippers way more than they ever intended. Klaroline would’ve withered away and died as quickly as it developed if it hadn’t of been for how popular they were.

Now we come onto Klamille. I’m very meh about them. I don’t care for them. I said Klaus has chemistry with everyone, but his chemistry with Cami was poor considering she became his main relationship on TO. I just find their chemistry very flat and their relationship to be like every other relationship on TVD (particularly the vampire-human relationships). It was all about Camille fixing Klaus and being this little snowflake of purity and goodness that made Klaus vulnerable and capable of love. Cami felt more like Klaus’ therapist a lot of the time. It’s like he was a project for her. He was so broken and had so much emotional baggage, and she was intruiged by him and wanted to try and help him. I never really bought into her loving Klaus. Camille wasn’t messed up enough to fall for someone like Klaus. We’ve seen humans fall for vampires so many times and it’s always hard to comprehend, because I genuinely do think that is vampires existed in reality it would be very, very, very rare for a human to actually fall for a vampire. But Klaus? He takes it to an entirely different level. He was one thousand years old, a hybrid, a monster and by far the most evil character in the whole of the TVD/TO universe. I know that Klaus had his good side and that Cami saw parts of that, but I still don’t think she’s the sort of person that would fall for him. The early stages of their meeting showed that. Cami started out having feelings for Marcel and was pretty much repulsed by Klaus, but then suddenly started to get a crush on him. Don’t get me wrong, Klaus and Cami clearly had a connection and stuff in common, but I saw her as being more of a friend and/or sister figure in his life rather than a lover.

Klaus was such a complex character that any romantic relationship he had had to be very different from any other TVD ship (or ships generally), and they weren’t. That’s why they didn’t work for me. Klaus’ darkness went too deep for women like Caroline or Camille to seriously love him and want to be with him. They might’ve been intruiged by him and eager to unravel the mysteries of his long life, but that’s as far as it would’ve gone. Likewise, Klaus was not the sort of person that fell in love easily and yet with Caroline and Cami (Caroline in particular) it did seem to happen easily, and I never bought it.

This is also the reason why Klayley is my favourite romantic pairing for him, because it was different. Hayley wasn’t the light to Klaus’ darkness or his therapist or somebody whose sole life purpose was to fix him. Hayley accepted Klaus for exactly who he was. She saw the goodness in him but she was never blinded by it. She wasn’t delusional or filled with false hope that he could somehow change and become this beacon of love and good. She wasn’t surprised when he did bad things and she didn’t turn away from him either, because she knew that was who he was. It was also more likely that someone like Klaus would fall for somebody that he spent lots of time with over a prolonged period of time through shared experiences and the building of trust and common ground. That’s what he had with Hayley. Not to mention, Hope was the greatest love of Klaus’ life and the fact that he shared Hope with Hayley was enough by itself to cause him to fall in love with Hayley. Sorry, this has just descended into a rant as to why Klayley were the superior ship haha.

To sum up, I don’t really like Klaroline or Klamille, but I don’t hate them either. There are nice parts to both ships, but overall, I think neither relationship made sense for Klaus’ character. Not to mention, they both probably deserved a lot better. Then again, any woman in the universe Klaus could’ve ended up with would’ve deserved better lol.

#answered #anonymous #my meta #tvd meta #to meta #anti klaroline #anti klamille #klayley

71 notes · View notes