Tumgik
#queen charlotte rants
kinslayersadvocate · 1 year
Text
Charlotte: How did you get them to want to marry?
Violet: Well...
Cutt to a 2x compilation of her nagging her kids until they think they're hopeless failures if they don’t marry and live her fantasy of the perfect marriage.
23 notes · View notes
Text
Ughhh the urge to be Venus of Farmer George and stand between the heavens and earth just to protect him
Tumblr media
50 notes · View notes
alrightsnaps · 1 year
Text
i actually expected the QC spin-off to be better based on the trailer and the reviews?
i think handling lady danburys character better could've made all the difference for example. they had an actress like arsema, who shines in every scene she's in, playing an already well beloved character and they just...wasted her? they gave lady danbury the most wretched, miserable arc imaginable.
was the constant on-screen marital rape necessary? couldn't they just establish that she wasn't happy or in love with her husband and be done with it without her being brutalised?
also imagine how different the agatha/lord ledger story could've been had they let him be an attractive man close to her age. they would've killed the forbidden-love-that-couldn't-be trope! bonus points if he was alive in the present timeline and lady d got her HEA#
i mean, when you have george and charlotte as your leads, whose story we know beforehand ends in tragedy, shouldn't you at least give your secondary characters a happy ending instead of torturing them? especially when that character is a black woman.
on the plus side the main couple was solid, michelle fairley was great in her role and brimsley/reynolds were a treat–though same as with lady d applies here: is no one allowed to have a happy ending in this show?? it's an especially bad look given that we're talking about woc and gay men.
on a less serious note, one of the things that made bridgerton popular back when it premiered, which i found lacking in QC, is family being at the centre of the story...and that kinda felt like an issue in s2 as well? i miss the banter and sibling dynamics and chaotic family scenes 🙄 they could've tried to replicate this playfulness with charlotte’s kids (i thought the family scene in the premiere was pretty fun) but they didn't do much with them.
29 notes · View notes
Text
I've now seen quite a few comments regarding Season 3 of Bridgerton and how Colin and Penelope and their season won't be as good/on the same level as QC has been.
I just finished QC, cried like a fucking baby, which is something I hadn't done for either of the first 2 seasons of Bridgerton. QC made me deeply emotional and carried so much heartbreak and bittersweet longing. And it was such a great series to watch. But guess what? While QC follows some of the same characters from the Bridgerton series, doesn't mean that they are trying to tell the same sort of story. Altogether, QC carries a vastly different tone because while it continues to play around with some same tropes, and it's set within the same world, it's story is seeped in a tragic kind of happiness.
I watch Bridgerton for escapism, it's fun, non- consequential. These are fictional characters Shonda can play around with, and while she made something beautiful out of QC, Charlotte and George's story was already written. It was already beautiful and tragic (from what I understand of the facts). This story had consequences, it had an ending you couldn't change, and I think that's what owes to some of it's beauty. I'm getting off point, but I guess what I'm trying to say in as many ways as possible is, Penelope and Colin's story isn't QC's and I wouldn't want it to be. Penelope and Colin have their own journey to go on, and while people may not end up bursting into tears over their scenes because it's not struck something emotionally home to them, it doesn't make their season any less worthy. I am so excited to watch Colin and Penelope fall over themselves to come together eventually, and it will be painful and joyful, and heartwarming and aggravating to watch. Instead of casting down something that hasn't even had a trailer or proper release date yet, why can't we praise the fact that something beautiful and sorrowful was made, and we have something beautiful and hopeful to look forward to?
24 notes · View notes
thisismeracing · 9 months
Text
I have literally over 20 TWENTY wips to finish (blurb night requests included) yet I decided to watch Queen Charlotte and now I’m thinking about prince!charles and princess!reader who have to marry to save their kingdoms, but reader is in love w the king of spain (yes carlos) and she fight nails and teeth to saver her family without having to marry the prince of monaco but as it happens the prince of monaco fell in love with her and he’s torn between helping her get what she wants because he wishes to see her free and happy or stick with politics, marry her and have the chance of love - or hate because why would she love him when he took her free will from her in the first place? And also what will the KING of spain do? Is monaco ready for a fight? Anyways bare with me and this new wip that I have no idea if I’ll ever even start writing MWAH BYE lol
15 notes · View notes
periandernyx · 11 months
Note
Don’t know if you do asks but I saw ur post so lol 🤷‍♀️
Just sick of them pushing Dom down our throats. Love all of TJD but the belt presentation today was really annoying. It should’ve been a Rhea/Women’s division moment only. The Rhea and Dom split could create so many incredible story lines that could get both of their singles competition careers back on track. I think most people can acknowledge that Rhea is on another level of dominant but she needs to show and prove that weekly with the women instead of just being a fan attracting presence in the men’s story lines.
Hi! I've never done an ask before, so you're my first :)
I agree!! I'm not sick of Dom, though. I'm sick of them always having Rhea and him together. It feels like the same thing each week. I wanna see her wrestle and fued with the women, and I wanna see him on his own. Damian and Finn are the only ones giving us something new.
I really wish Dom and Cody didn't come out for the new belt. That was a moment for the women. Asuka has been champ for less time, and she already has 2 potential fueds! We've only seen Rhea fight with who, Nattie, and Zelina? That's all I can remember. I agree that Rhea should be more involved with the women! I'm a little bored with her reign, and I was really looking forward to it. I really like her character, but as a champ, I just expected her to be more focused on the women.
It's such a disservice to everyone that she doesn't have any "worthy" opponents. I love how they've built her to be strong enough to hang with the men...but what about her own division lol.
thanks for the ask and sorry for the mini rant :) have a good rest of your day!
12 notes · View notes
finalfantasyx · 3 months
Text
Queen Charlotte wrecked me and I am not okay
3 notes · View notes
bookdragonbeth · 1 year
Text
Am i the only person who didnt really like the queen charlotte bridgerton show?
17 notes · View notes
Text
Honestly, (speaking for myself here) there's no way you can watch these Bridgerton shows and not be obsessed with these characters' and their love stories. The writing, my gawd 🔥. And then they always seem to find good-looking people with chemistry to pull it off.
I'm trying really hard not to think too much about Queen Charlotte and George. It's working (not 😭)
7 notes · View notes
thereisnolumos · 1 year
Text
Just stumbled upon the post regarding how much we as an audience supposed to sympathize with Adolphus because he was out in position where he couldn’t refuse marrying Charlotte off and…
No.
No, I am not sympathetic towards him.
I hate him not for marrying Charlotte off, for he really had no choice in the matter, you cannot just refuse the entire British Empire.
No, I hate him for how he treated Charlotte. I hate him for the way he speaks to her, the way he disregards her.
Yes, he couldn’t refuse their proposal, but there were a thousand ways in which he could’ve broken the news to her in a better way. A thousand more for treating her better overall.
So screw sympathizing, he can go eat dirt
1 note · View note
circeyoru · 2 months
Note
collection of overlords??? I love it so muchh 😭💗💗. I have some questions for this, does reader have any connection to Lucifer? By that i mean are they close and does he visit them from time to time. Or does he just ignore them as long as they don't bring harm to his family and to most of the residents of the ring? I feel like for someone like reader that owns all of the overlords soul, Lucifer would at least be acquainted with them (all of your writings are so addicting, I've already read all of them twice by now)
Go to MASTERLIST for the works. This ask is for {Collection of Overlords}.
Thank you for liking this newest story!! And my writings!! I can't believe there are part 2 requests. Now there's ask!! AHHH!!
Anyways. Back to the topic at hand~ A bit of lore too
Simple answer yes. (ok end of this post, just kidding)
Okay, essentially, I see Reader/you with this background. You were the Ruler of Hell, before Lucifer and Lilith's arrival. Since Lucifer was a powerful angel then fell, you let him hold the title of King of Hell since you saw him to be the one with more power. And the fact that if he used holy magic on you, there wasn't much of a way you could counter it. However, Hellborns still see you as a royal of the highest rank, but they don't rebel against Lucifer or Lilith's reign so it's all okay.
You were the one to help Lucifer and Lilith rise to power once they arrived, nothing like what you did to the Overlords. You introduced them to the demon nobles and the sins of different Rings of Hell. Naturally, they were stationed in Pride where you were formerly. The Overlord system wasn't in effect yet, it only started when Lucifer and Lilith's reign became less public and their focus shifted. You suggested a new hierarchy ranking that was specific to Sinners since there were a vast number of them and they do aim to stand in power. There can't be a rebellion and the Hellborns were in line because of their respective Ring's Sin. What of Pride? Because either the King or Queen were taking their duties, you took the role of maintaining a balance.
Your relationship with Lucifer in the beginning was a mentor and mentee type, since you had more experience with ruling, you showed him the ropes. Then it turned to friends when he was in his Kingly position. While others may see you two as rivals with your 'army' of Overlords and Lucifer's angelic powers, you two respect each other on serious matters. Plus, Lucifer understands that you basically still hold authority over Hell like back in the old days, but you just don't show it. Your history as the Ruler of Hell was painted as a legend that the Hellborns passed on to their children from generation to generation.
You notice how there are eyes everywhere? I'll adapt it to you being everywhere and nowhere at the same time. That's how you keep an eye out for things and know when to act.
Fun fact: Lucifer makes you ducks too, it's basically like a private phone between you two. It's still a bit awkward when you hold up the ducky to your ear. You're also his unpaid therapist when it came to listening to him rant and whine about missing his daughter, Charlotte all the time.
147 notes · View notes
kinslayersadvocate · 1 year
Text
SHE MADE A 18th CENTURY POWER POINT
about sexual positions
.
20 notes · View notes
Text
When he says I love you but King George set the standard too high by saying I love you! From the moment I saw you trying to go over the wall I have loved you desperately. I cannot breathe when you are not near, I love you…my heart calls your name to Queen Charlotte 🤌🤌🤌
9 notes · View notes
jwalsana · 1 year
Text
Love.
Watched Queen Charlotte 3 days ago and I can't stop thinking about how it portrayed love in its purest form. We met Charlotte and George for the first time back in Bridgerton and when they were going through one of their bad days. Back then I used to think that George lost his marbles much later into the marriage and Charlotte just had to step up and put up with it. It made watching Queen Charlotte so much more beautiful cause she has always loved him for who he really was.
Charlotte and George had their good days and their bad ones but they always had each other and that's love. I once read that love is a choice. Every morning you have a choice to just wake up and leave. Or you could stay. When you choose to stay, you've made your choice. You've chosen to love.
I would once again like to rant about the ending and how well written it was. I still remember myself sitting on my bed at 3 am crying but with a smile on my face cause that was the happiest and saddest ending one could get. I love how they switched between their old and younger selves, how Charlotte knew how to deal with George when was on his bad days through all those years. That's love. At its finest form. And i love them for it. Love isn't a fairy tale with a happily ever after. Love is hard. Love is full of sacrifices. But it is the most beautiful thing in the world.
"You did not go over the wall"
"No, George. I did not go over the wall"
567 notes · View notes
lemonhemlock · 1 year
Text
tried watching the new queen charlotte series but was immediately put off by the ridiculous anti-corset propaganda, so get ready for another rant.
first of all, this is the georgian era so what she's wearing are called /stays/ - corsets are a victorian invention. why do we still not know this in 2023 when period productions have remained consistently popular throughout the years? the concept of tighlacing (the goal being a reduction of the waist) is also victorian and was not the norm at all and v much an extreme practice. this understanding of history is so superficial, it's as if an alien were to open up People magazine and conclude that all human women resort to butt injections and lip fillers to stay with the fashion of the times. also, no, you cannot tighlace in stays to obtain a waist reduction because they are shaped like a funnel (picture 1 = long stays, 2 = short regency stays, 3 = corset)
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
charlotte goes on to complain about how dangerous whalebone is and that it might kill her if she makes the wrong move. what the actual fuck? whalebone was actually the very best material to use for this because it was sturdy yet flexible and allowed the /stays/ to completely and comfortably mold around a woman's unique body shape. one of the reasons why today it is v difficult to replicate the same effect in corsetry is because we do not have access to whalebone (killing whales is not cool for obvious reasons) so corset-makers have to resort to other materials like plastic or metal, which CAN break. whereas whalebone doesn't really break as easily. furthermore, stays/corsets were NEVER worn on bare skin, but with a chemise/shift underneath.
why did women in the past resort to this type of undergarment, you ask? well, apart from the fact that women need bust support, the stays also serve the purpose of allowing all the many skirts and petticoats to be placed comfortably onto the waist. you try piling on that much fabric around your bare waist and see how you like it and if you can even carry it all around without it cutting into your stomach.
clothes throughout human history did cater to the popular fashions of the time, yes, but they also reflected the technological limitations and there was thus a practical aspect to it. this is a time before elastic bands, before industrialization and fast fashion, clothes are v difficult to make, everything is done by hand, so a lot of care is put into preserving them, because they are /expensive/ and labour intensive. you don't want your fancy outergarments to get ruined so you wear a lot of undergarments to absorb your bodily fluids since those are easier to make and don't have to look "pretty", can be stained and patchy etc. again, why do you need so many layers in the first place? because this is a time before comfortable heating, with poorly isolated and drafty houses, and it's bloody cold otherwise.
the third reason why that monologue was so dumb is because CHARLOTTE is the reason regency court dress was so preposterous. long story short, in a few decades, the fashionable silhouette changes wildly from the late 1700s to the 1810s.
Tumblr media Tumblr media
the regency waistline was much higher and the gowns were much more flowy and unstructured than the late georgian ones (what's commonly known as the empire waistline). the long stays of the late 1700s were now replaced with short stays that really were similar to modern bras. the scene in the first season of bridgerton where they squeeze penelope's sister into what looks like a pair of long stays (?) is bonkers bc no one would wear a waist-constricting boned undergarment under a regency dress. why would they? the natural waist is not even emphasized in any way. this is just another reason to peddle the women-were-oppressed-by-their-lingerie agenda. so if charlotte really hated long stays that much, regency would really have been her time to shine, right? wrong. the woman loved the fashions of her youth so much she forced everyone who came to court to still comply to them, which is why we get the absolutely atrocious regency court dresses - essentially a combination of the georgian style with side panniers, but with an empire waistline.
Tumblr media
yeah, this is how daphne SHOULD have looked like when she was presented at court in front of charlotte. i can understand why the showrunners decided to just leave her in a regency silhouette because this is ugly af. but, anyway, queen charlotte is the last person on earth to be complaining about how uncomfortable stays are.
creative licence aside, the reason this pisses me off is because it is SUCH lazy storytelling. the show wants us to know charlotte is a spunky pseudo-feminist character so the easiest way to do that is to have her complain about the evil 'corset' trying to kill her. it is so profoundly ahistorical and does nothing to contribute to the conversation about women's true problems and true limitations during that time. instead of genuinely exploring social history and women's actual lived experiences, we are STILL, in the year of our lord 2023, diverting the discourse towards fabricated issues that never existed in the first place.
the reasons actresses complain about boned underwear in interviews are manifold. costume designers are very overworked, they have to produce clothes for hundreds of people in a very short time, so they simply do not have the time or resources to construct corsets/stays that fit the actresses like they are supposed to. in the past, these garments were made individually for every person and completely to their own requirements. they also make these actresses wear the boning on BARE skin to look extra sexy to the audience or to emphasize their oppression - that never happened, a shift was always worn underneath (hello dakota fanning scene in the alienist??).
moreover, they lace them up until they constrict their ribcages - these women are already super thin and their bodies cannot support more reduction - instead of relying on the historical practices of padding and illusion. nowadays, body parts are what's fashionable - that's why so many resort to fat transfers or breast implants or starving themselves to achieve a flat stomach. in the past, anyone of any size could have accomplished the fashionable silhouette because they had a wide array of accouterments to plop underneath their garments - panniers, bustles, hoop skirts, padding of any sort. it didn't matter how big your waist was, you just padded other areas until you achieved the desired shape. fat women wore corsets/stays, too. working women, who did a lot of physical labour, did the same. how were they able to perform all of their tasks if they were incapable of moving or breathing? even today, people wear medical corsets all the time.
TLDR the media's obsession with portraying modern women as so liberated because they wear bras instead of "patriarchal" underwear is so tedious.
EDIT: Some very basic chronological tadpoles to make this easier to place within historical context. "Georgian" is used to denote the 18th+ century when Great Britain was ruled by several kings named George, so roughly 1714-1830. Within this interval, we refer to the Regency period as encompassing the regency of Prince George, future King George IV, when his father George III was incapacitated by mental illness. The official political regency took place during 1811-1820, but culturally speaking, this was extended to roughly the end of the 18th century up to maybe 1830 or 1837. This is the time period of Napoleonic wars and Jane Austen novels, so all her heroines should normally wear Regency styles. Think "empire waistline" as in Imperial France and Napoleon. The Victorian era (and its corsets) follows throughout the rest of the 19th century. Queen Charlotte was a contemporary of Marie Antoinette's, so they should be dressed in similar fashions (robe à la française vs robe à la anglais).
533 notes · View notes
bohemian-nights · 11 days
Text
Like clockwork, the moment that Sophie is almost surely going to be played by a Black woman there is a sudden uptick in the Sophie should be a man or trans because that would be “true representation” discourse.
Representation for all communities is important(although that’s not what this rally is about), but Sophie Beckett is the last character in Bridgerton who should be gender-bent or made trans since her story is directly tied to her being a working-class biological woman.
It's because she's a woman that her only means of employment is as a maid. It's because she's a woman that she was almost raped by a pack of men. It’s because she’s a biological woman and fears birthing children who will be illegitimate and who may have to go through life as she did that she refuses to be Benedict’s mistress.
You can’t just plop a (white cause that’s what the real issue is) man or a (white) trans woman into her place without changing her story which is unique in the Bridgerton universe and dare I say the most empowering. So while yes it would be nice to see a gay love story on the show or a trans person, Benophie isn’t the couple to turn to for this representation.
And said representation definitely shouldn’t come at the expense of representation for Black women who are rarely shown as love interests or get to be leading ladies in media. Representation for Black women may not be your representation, but it's still representation for an under-represented marginalized group.
Seriously if your idea of representation hinges on the fact that Black women should step aside and wait “our turn”(aka we shouldn't be represented because y'all always come up with some excuse for why it isn't “our turn”) you need to reassess some things because that isn't going to happen any longer.
This also goes out to the people who keep saying that there are “too many” Black people on show therefore Sophie shouldn't be Black when the only Black woman* that has been featured has been Lady Danbury who is a side character who most certainly does not have a happily ever after(HEA).
*I love Queen Charlotte and both India and Goldie’s portrayal of her and I loved the spin-off, but both women are mixed.
Let’s not forget the people who said Sophie being Black would be too “problematic” since she’s slave(she’s not a slave you’re insulting the enslaved when you refer to her as such) while cheering on every other group of women playing Sophie.
That was what some said a year ago when people suggested Sophie could played by a Black woman, but now that it’s coming you’ve moved on from that excuse to needing to see two white men on your screens.
So once again this isn't about representation it's just another instance of fandom misogynoir aka trying to keep Black women off your screens useless we are there to serve you or be tortured.
Cause somehow seeing Patsey getting wiped and raped 23 million times is “powerful” representation, but seeing a Black woman being loved and cared for and getting a HEA with a man who adores her is “problematic.”
Again I do understand the ones who genuinely want to see themselves represented on screen, but to make this much of a fuss about a Black woman in the role of Sophie Beckett, it’s inexcusable.
Reference point to this rant.
41 notes · View notes