#semiotics specifically | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

peregrineggsandham · 2 years

Note

But that’s wrong? Someone can say “Its raining”, but that doesn’t mean the other person hears or even understands them, even if they speak the same language. It means nothing.

I mean, we can just talk about the sequence of sounds that we can write out phonetically as /ɪts ˈreɪnɪŋ/. And yes, those are inherently meaningless. It's just a bunch of noises! As I said, nothing iconic, or even remotely evocative of rain.

But meaning is formed around that sequence of sounds by those who create and hear it - speaker and listener alike. And that meaning is predicated on a wonderful mix of speaker intention, listener bias, historical context, shared cultural knowledge, and a host of unspoken conversational maxims and patterns.

I was definitely focusing on the meaning as interpreted by the listener in that last post, so I'm sorry if that confused things. And I was sort of assuming that the listener and speaker were in an ongoing conversation and understanding each other. But even if they weren't, even if the listener couldn't understand the speaker, that doesn't mean the utterance itself "means nothing". If said with the intent to communicate, then it definitely means something at the very least to the speaker! Like you said - someone can say it! And there lies a full half of the meaning.

Conversation is inherently a collaborative act, but it starts with the speaker's intent behind an utterance. They're taking a complex idea - the concrete "rain", the more abstract "-ing" and "'s", the somewhat idiomatic "it" - and turning that combination of ideas into the movement of a stream of air, following a strict set of patterns and rules that developed organically over thousands of years. That's neat!

If the listener doesn't speak the language, or mishears, then they may not pick up on that meaning. It could just be sounds, to them. Or they may even misunderstand, and pick up an unintended meaning. If they lack some of the required context (e.g. by not knowing a word), or if the speaker is flouting one of those unspoken maxims (e.g. by being sarcastic) and the listener doesn't realize it, the meaning may be warped.

The utterance of the sounds /ɪts ˈreɪnɪŋ/, the writing of the phrase "It's raining", you're right that these aren't inherently meaningful. If the sequence "itsraining" happened to appear in a randomly-generated string of letters, I wouldn't personally assume any meaning to it. And since this train of thought did start on the topic of magic, I'll say I find nothing particularly magical about a string of random sounds or letters either.

(Now, if you did see meaning in that random string, I think you'd effectively be practicing some kind of divination, by believing that there was intent behind the randomness. That the universe or whoever or whatever produced the string was actively trying to communicate with you. That's a pretty common idea when we talk about certain kinds of "magic". I think it's interesting that words, symbols, and communication from some unseen "speaker" are so integral to our understanding of it, and I think there's something to be said there for seeing language itself as an inherently "magical" thing regardless of whether your interlocutor is just your next-door neighbor or... whatever you personally believe is at the other end of an alectryomancy session. But dammit Jim I'm a phonetician, not an occultist.)

Point is, in conversation, in the context of a person speaking to another (regardless of whether it's understood), an utterance (or any sequence of symbols) is meaningful because of the intent behind it. Not the sounds themselves, but the very act of turning ideas into symbols - and back again.

...

I apologize if I'm repeating myself a bit - it's quite late and the question of "what does it mean for a utterance to have meaning" is actually a really interesting and complicated one, anon!

I'm admittedly being more flowery and less technical about it here because in the end my other main point is just "Isn't language really astoundingly neat?", but this is the stuff from which journal articles are written. (Usually involving a surprising amount of predicate logic.) It's an important line of inquiry because it can help explain a lot of where communication goes right and wrong, how misunderstandings happen, and how to effectively convey ideas to others.

That said, to be fair this isn't my specific area of expertise - I'm in the phon/phon corner where we ask people to make noises and stare at spectrograms all day, this is more the sem/prag corner where they put lambda calculus and philosophy in a blender.

@cryptotheism Ach, look what you made me do, I'm rambling about sounds.

#linguistics #semantics & pragmatics & semiotics are entire fields of study for a reason! people can and do spend years talking about this very issue.#I took a great pragmatics class once - the first week of which was titled ''what does 'mean' mean?''#for instance - if a speaker says ''it's raining'' aloud to -themself- without intent to communicate with a separate listener #is it still a meaningful utterance?#it doesn't add things to any kind of conversational common ground #but it may still serve a specific purpose to the speaker in helping them organize their thoughts #and it isn't a random string of sounds said for the sake of making sounds #so we can argue that it does indeed still have meaning #magically speaking I'd jest that the speaker is casting a one-person spell of 'remind myself why I picked up that umbrella a second ago'#now... could a random string of sounds said by a person with the sole intent of making meaningless sounds... have meaning?#it may convey information! that information being ''I am making some meaningless sounds.''#it's not really -language- but does it -mean- something?#does it -mean- something in a different way from how 'it's raining' -means- something?#and from there you get into a couple different definitions of the word 'mean'#the specifics of which I don't remember though now I sorta want to track down the paper we read that first introduced it #it was super interesting and a bit of a mind-bender #sam says stuff sometimes #sam says... a lot of stuff apparently - whoops #I'm sorry anon I didn't intend this to turn into a small essay

20 notes · View notes

snowlithills · 7 months

Text

Theses on Monsters, China Mieville

The history of all hitherto-existing societies is the history of monsters. Homo sapiens is a bringer-forth of monsters as reason’s dream. They are not pathologies but symptoms, diagnoses, glories, games, and terrors.

To insist that an element of the impossible and fantastic is a sine qua non of monstrousness is not mere nerd hankering (though it is that too). Monsters must be creature forms and corpuscles of the unknowable, the bad numinous. A monster is somaticized sublime, delegate from a baleful pleroma. The telos of monstrous quiddity is godhead.

There is a countervailing tendency in the monstrous corpus. It is evident in Pokémon’s injunction to “catch ’em all,” in the Monster Manual’s exhaustive taxonomies, in Hollywood’s fetishized “Monster Shot.” A thing so evasive of categories provokes—and surrenders to—ravenous desire for specificity, for an itemization of its impossible body, for a genealogy, for an illustration. The telos of monstrous quiddity is specimen.

Ghosts are not monsters.

It is pointed out, regularly and endlessly, that the word “monster” shares roots with “monstrum,” “monstrare,” “monere“—”that which teaches,” “to show,” “to warn.” This is true but no longer of any help at all, if it ever was.

Epochs throw up the monsters they need. History can be written of monsters, and in them. We experience the conjunctions of certain werewolves and crisis-gnawed feudalism, of Cthulhu and rupturing modernity, of Frankenstein’s and Moreau’s made things and a variably troubled Enlightenment, of vampires and tediously everything, of zombies and mummies and aliens and golems/robots/clockwork constructs and their own anxieties. We pass also through the endless shifts of such monstrous germs and antigens into new wounds. All our moments are monstrous moments.

Monsters demand decoding, but to be worthy of their own monstrosity, they avoid final capitulation to that demand. Monsters mean something, and/but they mean everything, and/but they are themselves and irreducible. They are too concretely fanged, toothed, scaled, fire-breathing, on the one hand, and too doorlike, polysemic, fecund, rebuking of closure, on the other, merely to signify, let alone to signify one thing.

Any bugbear that can be completely parsed was never a monster, but some rubber-mask-wearing Scooby-Doo villain, a semiotic banality in fatuous disguise. It is a solution without a problem.

Our sympathy for the monster is notorious. We weep for King Kong and the Creature from the Black Lagoon, no matter what they’ve done. We root for Lucifer and ache for Grendel.

It is a trace of skepticism that the given order is a desideratum that lies behind our tears for its antagonists, our troubled empathy with the invader of Hrothgar’s hall.

Such sympathy for the monster is a known factor, a small problem, a minor complication for those who, in drab reaction, deploy an accusation of monstrousness against designated social enemies.

10.

When those same powers who enmonster their scapegoats reach a tipping point, a critical mass, of political ire, they abruptly and with bullying swagger enmonster themselves. The shock troops of reaction embrace their own supposed monstrousness. (From this investment emerged, for example, the Nazi Werwolf program.) Such are by far more dreadful than any monster because, their own aggrandizements notwithstanding, they are not monsters. They are more banal and more evil.

11.

The saw that We Have Seen the Real Monsters and They Are Us is neither revelation, nor clever, nor interesting, nor true. It is a betrayal of the monstrous, and of humanity.

#china mieville #theses on monsters #posting bc i couldnt see it anywhere and im on a real china mieville kick #love this little poem

492 notes · View notes

sabakos · 4 months

Text

Love in sci-fi movies where there's some religious or cultural festival of the far future but the creators don't want to make it to reminiscent of any specific earth religion of today while still symbolically conveying that that's what it is, so to make it semiotically legible to the audience, everyone in the setting just gathers in an amphitheater to watch The Floating Sphere or sometimes The Rotating Icosahedron. Neoplatonism cultural victory, baby.

166 notes · View notes

cryptotheism · 5 months

Note

How do you handle the occult being vague as shit? I keep glancing at Kabbalah specifically, but everything I read is just so vaguely worded that I don't know how to actually DO anything or start it. Is this just something you have to figure out for yourself? Does it come with more in-depth research? Am I just too rigid for the occult? I am pretty sure you've said you just study this stuff, but you're the best person I know to ask.

Understand that Kabbalah is tough even by esoteric standards. If you're Jewish, ask your Rabbi. If you're like me --not Jewish-- don't worry about Kabbalah. Unless you have some dying need to get into 12th century Jewish semiotics, you are gonna be happier looking at other stuff.

I reccomend Agrippa's Three Books of Occult Philosophy. It's a fun little entry point with enough familiar things to ground you, and enough wacky 15th century occultism to make the research fun.

381 notes · View notes

eesirachs · 5 months

Note

Anon who asked about the suicides here. Unfortunately I'll need the specific locations/texts (of at least two, I think). It's not that I don't believe in you!! I'm just trying to show it to someone

of course-

king saul kills himself via the sword in 1 sam 31. i have posted often about how god sees this death and never gets over it, and that is at least partly why he later incarnates as a non-roman (roman citizens would die by the sword: i think god feared dying as saul did)

sign-acts as self harm: see ezekiel's self-harm sign-acts: isolation in ezek 3:31; immobilization ezek 4:4-8; eating over excrement ezek 4:9; see also jeremiah's self-harm sign-acts: exposure to elements jer 13; auto-yoking in jer 27

elijah praying to die: 1 kngs 19:4; knowing elisha will also end up praying to die: ibid v. 20 ("what have i done to you!?")

tobit praying to die: tobit 3 (sarah also has a prayer for death here)

moses praying to die: numb 11:13

jonah prays to die and then attempts suicide via the elements: jonah 4

psalmist 88 also prays to die and, in fact, enacts a semiotic death (writing from the grave). this is one of two psalms that does not end in resolution with god

samuel asking to be put to rest after already dying: 1 sam 28

many close to god also express, without intention to enact and without real plea, their wanting-to-die: see job (all of it), jeremiah (jer 20), and rebekah (gen 27:46)

there are many more than what my post listed. almost every prophetic sign act is self-harm. and, in the second testament, you have (very famously) the apostle paul saying he struggles with suicidal ideation, as well as the suicide of judas, which lacks any affective response precisely because none suffice. keep in mind that in the ancient world, self harm and auto-death looked like, and meant, very different things than they do today. keep also in mind that in each pericope here, god shares in the wanting-to-die, never answering the plea or condoning or condemning, but holding gently unto the pain

#ask #suicide tw #king zimri and david's man ahithophel also commit suicide but they are not described as hashem's people so its complicated

136 notes · View notes

justanotherhh · 3 months

Text

alastor aroace semiotics: symbols/metaphors/codes (oh my!)

thinking about some of the aroace subtext, both in terms of what's definitely intentional, and things that one can pick up on within the burgeoning field of "what the heck does aspec (in this case aroace) semiology even look like in (this particular) narrative?"

there's the really obvious one of course "ace in the hole." funny as well, because ace in the hole could also reference Alastor being the card you play as a hidden advantage (potentially hinting that Rosie knows that Alastor has his own agenda and supports that, like she does in the song). Of course "Alastor is ace" is the main point of the joke, because it's a sentence that comes a little out of nowhere, and clearly confuses Alastor, because he doesn't know Stuff

2. secondly, there's the pilot episode's placing Alastor first next to and then on top of the Ace of Spades. tbh if this was an accident, it sure was a serendipitous one, because the Ace of Spades not only refers to being ace, but specifically aroace (with Hearts meaning alloace, Diamonds meaning demiace, and Clubs meaning grey-ace <- t Ace of Diamonds/Clubs are a more open to interpretation, I've seen some also use them for demiromantic and greyromantic)

3. Body language! Alastor's reactions to being propositioned or involved in a sex joke, or having to listen to romance talk ranges from discomfort (glitching), to blunt refusal/shutting down of the conversation, to boredom/distraction. I haven't made a study of Alastor's body language in detail, but I'd be interested in how his smiles potentially shift when around very sexual and/or romantic discussion, regardless of whether he's the centre of that (but probably moreso if he is). I think this would come more to the fore in future seasons if there were examples beyond Angel Dust, who also made Husk uncomfortable in the first half of s1, but Alastor -- especially in the pilot -- had very visceral reactions to Angel's "flirting/joking," moreso than anyone else, until Angel had really gone too far with Husk in ep4 (and he come onto Alastor as strongly/invasively as he did with Husk)

4. Speaking of Angel... Alastor not being present outside of a flashback in all of episode 4, and not in episode 6 either. Both episodes featured sex heavily, including Angel showing off one of his pornos, and the gang going to a sex club. Also, Valentino was in both of them (makes sense, seeing as they were Angel-centric). I wonder what Alastor feels about Valentino's whole... existence. He's also the only main s1 hotel character to not be involved in the trust exercises that lead them to the bondage/SM club. this has nothing necessarily to do with the character, but he's very much placed outside of sexual scenarios and places by the writing/plot, which is fun to notice, especially in the first two examples, as his not being in the episodes isn't actually explained. No Alastor in the sex episodes, because his fourth wall sex repulsed senses were tingling?

5. boundaries and power fantasies. that is, Alastor is a character who has very clear boundaries and ways of enforcing them. from blowing up Sir Pentious when he grabs his coat, to noping out of any space he wants to, to seizing the narrative from Vox and telling the story on his terms, to shadow tentacles (ironic), nobody touches him emotionally/physically unless they're allowed. Niffty, Rosie, and Mimzy so far appear to be the ones who have crossed into that "allowed" space the most, but considering he lets everyone (barring Lucifer and Husk, who don't want to) hug him in the finale, some of those barriers are coming down, which is another interesting analysis to make at some point

these boundaries aren't all entirely healthy either -- the way he lashes out at Husk who seems to actually be trying to look out for him (which suggests that Husk is emotionally close-ish to him, enough that he didn't realise he was overstepping), and the way he breaks down in the finale, shows that his inability to be vulnerable in front of others is... not actually a good thing. I wrote a whole bunch about how this part of Alastor's writing play into a very aroace-in-feel narrative for him, but suffice to say... a story about someone with boundaries that seems to be completely absent of "romance/sex will fix you" is refreshing. and very aroace coded

there's also a power fantasy in the idea that one can simply bend the space to avoid ones boundaries being trampled over. to be able to either nope out of a room or to make oneself so terrifying that nobody would want to try to get up in your space... it's got a little smthinsmthin of a "wish it were me" in there. being repulsed means an often constant erosion and invasion of boundaries, from people making your disgust and/or obliviousness the centre of their sex jokes, to being hyper-scrutinised and challenged every time you do or don't let someone into your space in whatever way, or challenge their notions of what's "allowed" as an aroace person. sometimes you just want to say "Demonic Powers Be Upon Ye" and be done with it

6. An Absence. most often aspec narrative is defined by an absence of allo-narrative. that is, Angel Dust, Husk, Charlie, Vaggie, Cherri, Sir Pentious, Lucifer, are set up as allo-figures with romance and sex featuring more or less in all of their stories. the only hotel residents so far who don't have that going on are Alastor and Niffty, and Niffty's story has yet to have the foundations laid out for beyond the very bare bones, and she flirts with others (her "bad boy" preference). whatever Alastor's journey is, it's not coded as alloromantic or allosexual in any way, whether through casual jokes/flirting, or a longform romantic and sexual relationship exploration, with the possible exception of...

7. Vox. the characters that Alastor seems closest to in this story are Rosie, Mimzy, Niffty, Charlie, and Husk (with the mysterious figure that owns his soul looming in the back as well). out of them, none of them are coded as anyone he's sexually or romantically involve with or heading in that direction. the last figure in Alastor's life that's very heavily figured so far is Vox. And Vox is obsessed with Alastor in a way that absolutely can be read as a bad one-sided break-up/jilted stalker type framing, with Alastor gleefully recounting his "no" when talking about their past, and otherwise putting Vox out of his mind, while almost all of Vox' big character moments revolve around how much real estate Alastor takes up in his mind (literally, considering his error message is all Alastor messaging)

Vox being a figure who is symbolically the trampler of aroace boundaries is a very good way of showing Alastor's total disinterest and even disgust (depending on whether or not he knows that Vox was/is into him), and can act as a future potential interesting barometer for other characters to be "less" invasive, but still not quite getting it to begin with (see, Angel Dust's casual flirting, Charlie's tendency to see everything from her perspective, who knows how Cherri and Lucifer might fit into this equation, and generally the sex-and-romance framing of a lot of the other narratives)

8. I talked about aroaceness being a humanising factor to Alastor in my other big ol' post I did, just want to mention it here as well. so far it exists somewhat as a Potential, in the sense that we're firmly in s1 and there's still a lot of ways this could all go, but I think it's worth mentioning as a form of foundational signposting work that's been done for his character

he's more on the dark grey end of the grey scale of all of these characters, he's manipulative, sadistic, cruel when he wants to be, petty, selfish, likes being the centre of attention + is easily rankled when he's not, and presumably he went to hell because he killed people for kicks <- these traits are not unique to him, considering the setting, but what is is the beginnings of a storyline exploring his particular relationship to vulnerability and power and why those things are a part of him in the way they are. this from the perspective of someone who is aroace (and possibly repulsed) instantly adds a potential sympathetic nuance to who he's become, similar to the layer of power fantasy mentioned above. both of these turn his narrative from a cautionary tale or a villain-played-straight (haha) trope into something much more interesting

with the semiotics of aroaceness already in place, these affect how we read the foundations for the rest of his narrative and where it's going. quite simply, it's one of the biggest factors right now that make all his other story beats more resonant and interesting, depending of course on where they take it...

9. his smile. since we've gotten deep enough into meta territory now that we're in hc/future theorising country -- the smile is of course a mask, that's known to everyone. there's a lot of future opportunities for how to utilise that alongside aroaceness-as-theme-for-him. aroaceness, or just "someone where there is a noticeable lack of romantic (and hinted at sexual) interest," is usually coded through a certain shallowness. a pathologisation of behaviours -- which is another deeper analysis post to make at some point (jeez there's so many). Alastor is off-putting, yes, but he's also very confident and charming when he wants to be, he can put people at ease despite themselves (see, Charlie). It's a very interesting mask to give someone who's aroace, because it makes him complicated, rather than a simple ableist "point at the weirdo with no friends, that's our Outsider/killer."

(it also hearkens back to the humanising factor, in that his shallowness isn't because he's aroace, it's because he doesn't know how to be vulnerable with people as the person he is in a world that is incredibly amatonormative and focused on sex)

His smile can be unnerving, but it can also be disarming, give others the illusion that he's in control, make it impossible to guess his emotions (etc. basically what he said to Charlie)

so quite simply, his smile as a twisted distortion of society's demands upon people. he's not being abrupt, aloof, asocial, unkempt, or all the things aroaceness is often stereotyped as. he's performing the most acceptable normative person you can imagine. his surface is unscratcheable because of normative ideals

it's a very fun, unique-to-this-story way of potentially telling an aroace narrative. I'd be interested in what it takes to make him drop it (if he can, or if the story takes the route of accepting that he can't -- the man who laughs kinda vibes) and whether that will tie into a piece of his story that itself takes on aroace proportions (perhaps related to worrying for others in a non-romantic way, perhaps in relation to being able to or being forced to be vulnerable in a non-romantic/non-sexual way, etcetc).

Potentials:

we haven't seen him around the aro/ace aroace colours yet as far as I can remember, which is a fun, easy way to signpost (see, Vox flashing the bisexual flag on his screen)

since we've had an "ace in the hole" joke, I think we could have an aro/arrow-based pun in there as well, maybe even as a deconstruction of when they're used in romantic ways -- (no aro going through his heart, too aro for cupid's arrow, idk I'm spitballing here) or as literal arrows in some way. also someone's gotta call him aces at one point, right? just cos? I feel like the "<2" emoji might be too niche (heck, maybe all of this is, but that's part of the point -- all of this should be ways we're able to signpost aro and ace and aroace characters), but there's characters who know modern emoji and online lingo

other asexual symbols I know of include stating a preference for cake or pizza over sex and/or dating and the black and white rings (worn respectively on right an left middle fingers, although since they only have four fingers in this world...)

I've really enjoyed "clueless cannibal about modern lingo" Alastor comics, including the one about serving cunt and the one about eating ass both by @nouverx. it goes nicely on from his being confused about "ace in the hole," with that HH style sexual comedy. there's a whole bunch of that one could play with

speaking of slang, confirmed bachelor has often meant gay, but the aro/ace community and the gay community has overlapped as long as anyone has been non-conforming. @creepysora suggested a gentleman never kisses and tells, either as Alastor being unaware that it's actually about sex, or as an aware deconstruction of the phrase that gives him the space (similar to confirmed bachelor) to sneakily go, "go mind your own fucking business 😊!" I'm sure there are others that could fulfill a similar purpose of allowing Alastor a certain kind of old-timey buffer

similar to the episode of Bojack Horseman that had Todd visit his girlfriend's parents (both Todd and his GF are asexual and not out to her parents), which depicted allosexuality from the perspective of asexuality as something nonsensical and Other, perhaps having something from Alastor's POV in which he's the observer of the rites of romance and/or sex in a way that shows their strangeness when one sits outside of their tenets

would kind of like to see him killing/hurting people for being pushy, either when alive or dead. I already see a lot of potentials for his past as a serial killer to be framed from an aroace POV, but I especially like this idea, similar to how Hannibal often targets people for being "rude."

more on what I was saying about aroaceness as a humanising trait -- more on how this affected him in life, how he feels about Vox's consistent obsessive behaviour, how it potentially makes it harder to imagine his place in a group setting like the hotel (which is rapidly being paired off into romantic couples -- often a nightmare scenario for aromantics), more on how potentially learning these words or something better to describe himself can make it possible for him to assert boundaries without shutting everyone out to a large extent, and also, tbh, to put Big Expectations onto a story that's barely even started, I hope that none of this takes away his less savoury traits necessarily. I hope he's still kind of an asshole, but simply that he is grounded in himself enough to be able to really believe in Charlie's work/aims and support her in them for more reasons than his own ends, and can admit to really caring for something

reiterating: I am interested in how his smile-as-mask will play into all of this

Any symbolism, metaphor, coding, and straight-up telling I've missed in the show itself? Any you'd want to see in upcoming seasons?

#alastor #aroace alastor #hazbin hotel #hazbin hotel meta #i keep saying *there's another analysis here* let's see if I ever do

71 notes · View notes

hadesoftheladies · 5 months

Text

Girlhood Is Surveillance

In the imaginations of most men, oppressive policing is done by a military force or officers of a district. Men are deployed, with weapons and uniform, to enforce the will of the state. They use violent means (or the threat of violence) to intimidate. Certain words are banned by the government and uttering them risks being locked up, done away with, killed.

Yet, the most powerful, pervasive, and far-reaching form of surveillance is the reality for most girls.

Oppressed groups typically go through more surveillance than the oppressing class. They are viewed with more suspicion, afforded less allowances, and must work harder to prove themselves worthy of basic rights. The government is aggressively involved. They mandate what schools can teach, what media houses can publish, what public speakers can say.

For girls, surveillance starts before they can walk. This kind of surveillance is an extension of the surveillance her mother endures from her peers. She is dressed appropriately in pink, in bonnets, in frills and baby bows. By the time she is five, she is policed by her closest relatives. She may or may not be allowed to run shirtless like her brothers. Especially when her uncles are there. She must not wear nail polish or she must play with makeup. She must wear tutus and dresses.

This also happens to boys, but in a much different way. The reason I describe girlhood specifically as surveillance is because in a patriarchal, pornified world, the boy's body is neutral, that is, not provocative. Not insulting.

The female body, on the other hand, is semiotically significant. It is a symbol of sex, of desire, of lust (at least as a man experiences it) and thus is wicked, crude, and crass. The girl is surveilled because on the streets, in the home, by anyone who looks at her, who she is is interpreted to be provocative. In other words, her femaleness, naked or evident, is hate speech. Or impolite language. Language that polite society cannot be seen to be having. Her shoulders, knees, hands, thighs, breasts, are pornography.

This is just a fraction of the surveillance of girlhood.

As she grows up, she learns there are ways she must sit, things she must not know, things she must not say, and things she must wear. Her mother (and sometimes father) are the chief police on these things. They watch her, check her before going out, frisk her to make sure the skirt is not rising above her knees, the hijab is in place, etcetera.

On the streets, the girl learns, that she is also being watched by others. Men whistle at her as she walks to primary school. She learns how easy it is to be shamed as a girl. By teachers, strangers on the road, girls in school, boys at the playground. For having hairy legs, a crooked (normal) nose, a bare face, a face that isn't bare, too much height, too big boobs, too small boobs, thin lips or full lips, a flat butt, a butt that shows, etcetera.

She censors her womanhood when it comes. For if her brothers or father see her blood in the toilet, that is her body once again being provocative. Perhaps she becomes aware as a teenager, of the inequality and injustice. If she speaks out, she will be met with a host of police ready to put a stop to it. Her best friend will say, "Some women like looking beautiful. It is not a crime to want to be beautiful. You are judging me." Her mother will say, "Girls libidos don't matter. Sex is not for girls to enjoy, but for men." Her father will say, "Don't worry your pretty little head about things you don't understand." They will all dismiss, all shame, all hush her. They will call her ungrateful, a lesbian (which means social outcast, unnatural, inhuman, wrong), a radical, or a child throwing a tantrum. All of which are threats, whether or not they recognize them as such.

This policing system does not need the use of officers or the military much because the narrative is in society's consciousness. The people will police deviants themselves after the government tells them what the deviants look like and gives them the stakes of noncompliance. This kind of surveillance is also older than the government, if not as old as it is. It's oldness makes it that much more difficult to notice and resist.

The people who love you become the police. They will snitch on you to their peers if you do not conform. Your mother will tell your aunts and grandmother. Your father will joke about you with your brothers. Your sister will tell on you to the popular girls. And these are not the worst kind. Most girls, like every other animal, every other human being, will go the route with the most ease and the best chance at survival.

They will conform. They will cross their legs. Do their hair according to their age. Paint or not paint their nails. Wear the hijab. Wear skirts that go over the knee. Wear the pink. Curl their hair. Smear the lipstick, eyeliner, mascara. Put the powder and glitter on themselves. Wear the heels and stockings. Kiss the boy, etcetera.

And now, because they've been told how closely they're being watched, for their looks, whether their clothes are appropriate or not, whether their mothers are happy or not, whether their brothers feel threatened or disgusted by their pads or their tomboyishness or not, whether they are excelling too much in sports or academia or too little, whether they are smart or not, whether they are fat or not, whether they are acceptable or provocative or not . . . it becomes of paramount importance that they surveil themselves. Because they are in a hypervigilant state. They are in survival mode.

Girls are their own self-police. Harsh on every angle and feature. Because they have been told that people pay special attention to them everywhere they go. And to some degree, this is true. Everyone is easily insulted by femaleness, because femaleness is provocative. Please note, not femininity, femaleness. Femininity is camouflage because it signals conformity. Agreeing with the narrative that insists that the female body is the symbol for sex or motherhood. That the female body is pornography. The women that flaunt their bodies and say, "I am sexy and want you to know it!" are conforming. The women that hide their bodies and duck their heads to show meekness toward their God are conforming. None of them challenge the assertion that the female body is by-default provocative, an invitation to sex, shameful.

Now, surveillance has expanded. You see girls tilting their heads in one direction on their cameras because they believe this is their best side. They all have makeup or makeup filters. That thin their faces and enlarge their eyes. That make their lips a little fuller. They gag themselves and retch up nutrients and food in order to keep themselves safe. Obsessed with beauty and meekness because it is their livelihood. What secures them in society.

And yet . . . does it? Little girls are killed for a little hair showing from beneath their headscarf. Young women are murdered by the men whose advances were rejected. Toddlers are whistled at by grown men on the street. Teenage girls are the sex symbol of the generations in TV shows, movies, music videos. Mothers starve their girls, physically and emotionally abuse their girls, to keep them compliant. Girls have burn marks, scars, wounds from conformity. They have blistered feet and bra lines burned into their ribcage.

The government is not inactive, either. It does not punish femicides. It mandates forced birth. It regulates population by regulating the human female, rather than the male that has been left to run amock. Who starts these pregnancies and is responsible for any statistic for violence in the general population. It ensures that women need men to survive the economy. It ensures that women are successfully sold and bought for the economy. The pimps need their money, after all. And the president needs the pimps. The oligarchs need their workers, too. Workers need mothers to create them and wives to sustain them. Girlhood is the governments business.

A girl will blame herself for how her boyfriend treats her, for being raped. She will then, instead of looking at the world, at the perpetrator, will police herself and other girls around her even more aggressively. Violently.

Surveillance is most powerful when privacy is destroyed and the person made into a data point to be exploited. Girls do not have privacy, for their private parts are taboo discussions in public life. They are offensive discourse and so must be suppressed and regulated.

Girlhood is living under the most extreme and powerful form of surveillance, where everyone is the girl-police, including the girl herself.

#radblr #radfem #radical feminism #girlhood #feminism

100 notes · View notes

blood-orange-juice · 7 months

Text

About Childe and his weird gender again, expanding on this post.

I think it has a lot to do with how gender is constructed. Male gender has very clear-cut prescriptions, mostly it's everything that is considered "good" or "human" in current culture. The expectations it places on a person may not be realistic or achievable but they are very clear. Great importance is also placed on separating itself from Everything Female. Things That Are Too Much. Things that break the current culture meaning-making procedures.

Women, while having quite a few prescriptions of their own, also deal with whatever fell through the cracks. Someone needs to ensure the world still functions and reality is never completely covered by whatever official model of the world we currently have.

So women deal with the things men have the luxury not to notice. Mostly bodily and psychological aspects and societal injustice that are not supposed to exist in the ideal picture of society men have imagined. (to be fair, it happens to anyone oppressed and othered. the task of not letting the oppressors meet with reality is delegated to them. I'm just talking about women specifically in this post. but there's a reason oppressed minorities always have ties to supernatural in folklore)

In a way, feminine women are very scary. Walking semiotic horrors.

And I explain all this to say that Childe can be perceived as feminine in two ways.

First, with his disregard for all and any societal norms he just doesn't follow the normal gender prescriptions. He plays a superhero/knight role because it's shiny and it reminds him of the stories he loved as a kid. He doesn't suppress his love for his family because it brings him joy. He looks pretty because looks are a weapon too. He does all these things that would be either stereotypically masculine or painfully unmasculine for anyone else who cares about what society thinks, but he doesn't really see any difference between them. He truly, genuinely doesn't care what others think.

Second, he's also painfully aware of the dark and insane parts of the universe everyone else has the luxury to ignore. He also knows no one cares so he dances around the things a normal guy would never have to deal with (it's such a stereotypical female experience. sometimes I wonder if that's why women rarely like Lovecraft. it's not scary or exciting to them, it's just Tuesday).

But that's just our perception, a trick of light. These are not necessarily gendered.

He also gives an impression of someone extremely vulnerable, yes, but I don't think he handles his vulnerability in a feminine way. He just doesn't hide it and we are used to labeling everything vulnerable as feminine.

He also doesn't really do anything feminine-labeled in a characteristic female way. He isn't really in contact with his emotions (despite having a lot of them), him caring about people takes the form of "protector and provider". his cooking... have you seen his cooking? He doesn't look for support and doesn't try to build things that last. He doesn't accept his vulnerability. If anything, he's trying to pretend he has no vulnerabilities and maybe no psyche at all. He's self-sacrificing in a very male way too. Because he was there and because he could and because it's a cool thing to do.

So he's just that. Himself. Someone outside of gender.

(or rather his gender is knightcore)

If we perceive him as feminine it says more about how our culture perceives gender than about who Childe is.

Also, quoting my previous post, it's a part of him being full of contradictions. For every thing that he does he also does the exact opposite, and this holds for gender too.

Yes he lives the male power fantasy. He also does it in an incredibly feminine way. I think this was Hoyo's original intention and then it blossomed into this human disaster we see.

And to end up on a joke, surely you all have seen that leaked art that is theorised to be Skirk but could have also been an early design of Childe before Hoyo decided to make him a guy.

#any gender is a wound #men are wounded by rules that are too strict #women by the violent lack of sense in the world #some of us by both of those #childe #tartaglia #genshin impact #I also think that's why nb folks are sometimes seen as flavours of being female #because male gender is so restrictive #so everything that doesn't fit into it is perceived as female by the broad public

90 notes · View notes

lambergeier · 4 months

Text

silviculture - 13.1k, alhaitham/kaveh

in which alhaitham switches places with his younger self and everyone handles this extraordinarily badly. we will improve this situationship or die trying. now on ao3! first two scenes below for ur reading pleasure.

Alhaitham, being no longer in his living room, decides the first thing he should do is sit down. He does so.

He’s in an Akademiya dorm room. It’s early afternoon. A few moments ago it was late at night and he was speaking with Kaveh, who was in the kitchen of Alhaitham’s own house. Alhaitham was leaning against the couch in the living room and flipping through a book that wasn’t worth the paper it’d been printed on. The book is also gone.

Alhaitham only began dreaming again eight months ago, but he’s confident that this isn’t a dream. It looks, with a great deal more specificity than could be possible even for his sleeping mind, like Kaveh’s dorm room. Books of design, materials science, desert exploration, runic translation, and piano theory are piled on the desk. There is, laying on the bedsheets by Alhaitham’s hand, a cheap but fashionable earring he remembers vividly for the way it had caught the light in their single shared lecture, late afternoon in the hall below the Sanctuary. Semiotics and Glassmaking in Deshret’s Kingdom. He skims the earring briefly with a fingertip then moves his hand to his lap.

He considers what this might mean.

The door swings open and Kaveh says, “Haitham, can you take some of these? I borrowed everything I could find on desert Seelies but it’s really almost nothing, like I can’t tell if we’re running into another ridiculous knowledge restriction again or if genuinely no one’s ever tried to track the Seelie courts in Upper Setekh, which would be so typical, wouldn’t it, so I grabbed everything else I saw on the–”

Kaveh’s face is bright, young, flushed, freckled, happy. He’s wearing an Akademiya uniform and is as tall as the last time Alhaitham saw him (fifteen minutes ago) which means he’s an inch or two shorter than the last time Alhaitham saw him, because the uniform boots are heeled. He’s staring at Alhaitham with the aforementioned flush spreading like dye over the silk of his cheeks.

“Kaveh,” Alhaitham says. “Don’t freak out. I believe I’ve been displaced in time.”

“Oh, I,” Kaveh says. His hands start to go slack beneath the stack of books leaning against his chest, so Alhaitham takes the books from him and sets them on the chair beside the desk.

“You–yes,” Kaveh says, the flush climbing down his neck and up to his ears now. “I–oh.”

He couldn’t be more than eighteen. Which would make it, assuming this is in fact the past Alhaitham remembers, which he really has no way to determine without further investigation, the year Alhaitham himself turned sixteen.

“I developed a bodybuilding habit when I was twenty and attempting to do some metabolic experiments that ultimately proved unfruitful,” Alhaitham says. “You can touch my shoulders if that would get this over with.”

Kaveh, whose left hand had begun to drift with little apparent thought towards Alhaitham’s bare deltoid, snaps back so hard his head smacks into the doorframe. “I’m so sorry!” he says. “I’m so sorry, this is so rude of me, I should never have assumed, I’m so sorry, and you’re so much older, and you never said–”

Alhaitham sighs.

Kaveh stands bent over the kitchen sink, working his jaw and watching his cuticles slowly go to ribbons in the soapy water. Not literally. Literally enough. He should have let Alhaitham buy the stupid gentle dish soap that didn’t ruin Kaveh’s cuticles. Kaveh stops himself from thinking further on Alhaitham’s incredibly domineering dish soap opinions.

Alhaitham has gone quiet in the living room, but that doesn’t mean very much. The state of their immortal souls could be at stake and Alhaitham would still bar himself from Celestia before he continued a conversation he continued boring. Or a fight.

Kaveh works his jaw harder, tension dull and radiant above one eye. It’s not impossible for him to wait Alhaitham’s silence out. He’s done it before and he could do it again. It’s a way to end a fight, and wouldn’t it be nice, ever, to end a fight? Without starting another? Could they hope for that much peace, at the least?

Suds climb up Kaveh’s wrists. The number of nights he’s spent in this same position, mirroring himself like silvered glass over the past year and whatever he’s lived in Alhaitham’s house, frustrated and sad and exhausted by this whole situation, feels suddenly like a millstone around his neck. What a joke.

“Look, I get that you don’t think conversation is worth your time!” Kaveh shouts as he slams the cutting board into the sink. “But pretending like this isn’t a problem just because you’re bored is not actually a long-term solution to the problem!”

Silence. “Haitham, I know you’re still out there!”

“Kaveh?” Alhaitham calls back. His voice ends on a high and uncharacteristic quaver.

Kaveh throws himself through the door to the living room.

There’s a different Alhaitham standing in the soft streetlamp glow of the window. There’s an infant Alhaitham. He’s skinny, teetering, his hair too long over his ears, where are his headphones?, god, look at those stretch marks on his shoulders, red as fresh paint—

Alhaitham is looking up at the ceiling, head tipped back, balancing poorly on his heels as he turns. His head follows the lines of the woodwork. “Is this—” His voice cracks, squeaking in a way that Kaveh was viciously self-conscious of when he was young and Alhaitham never gave a shit about. Alhaitham didn’t start the masculinizing meds until he was at least fifteen, supplies a portion of Kaveh’s heart that very rarely forgets. His voice hasn’t cracked since they were—

Alhaitham looks from the vaulted ribs of his home to Kaveh. His eyes are enormous. He appears full of stars. “Is this the research center… you designed?” he asks. “This is our project?”

“Oh, no,” says Kaveh.

He’s wearing the undershirt and trousers of an Akademiya uniform. The permanent frowning divot between his eyebrows has yet to form. The longer he looks at Kaveh, his pale eyes flickering from Kaveh’s face to hands to chest to belt, the more he appears, ludicrously, to blush.

“Oh, no,” says Kaveh, as Alhaitham trips backwards over the footstool and lands flat on his ass.

and u can get the rest of this over here 👍👍

#genshin impact #haikaveh #hkvh #kavetham #this bitch fought me good but she's finally done and i love her 👌👌

33 notes · View notes

reflections-in-a-critical-eye · 8 months

Text

I've asked myself many times over the course of three years about how would I react to information that comes to contradict a specific image I have about people. And the answer would differ, more or less, depending on a myriad of factors, such as my mental wellbeing, my attitude toward the fandom, the group, the members, etc. The truth is, I only knew how I would respond the moment it happens and I was pleasantly surprised in a way. I see it as a sign that I'm doing better or at least I'm on the path of doing better.

These are things that I didn't want to allow to come to surface in the way I used to handle the BTM blog. Perhaps because the point was to create a platform in which I could offer the rational, researched perspective which I considered to be the correct one. I'm not retracting any of that. I still believe that it is possible to offer a more complex perspective if I can back it up with knowledge from various fields, but it was also one of my defense mechanisms.

Without expanding on the personal reasons, it has become very easy for me to separate my rational and emotional side. So much, that even when I should be staying in the moment and let my emotions take space, I can't really do it, I need to come up with a rational explanation so it can make sense. I then applied this to BTS as well. I couldn't just say I like this group when someone would ask, I would have to tell them about all the studies I read and how my fascination is mostly intelectual, when in truth it was both. I used to talk about jikook only in the context of analysis, be it GCF through semiotics or various types of interpretations when it came to their performances or fandom reception in terms of their dynamics. It had to be in the context of rational fascination and curiosity because I was merely trying to justify myself on why I care that much about two strangers that I look at on my phone. Again, my intellectual curiosity is real, but that has always been only one side if the coin, but it was one that I pushed.

It's about shame actually. I can't actually accept that I have such an interest. It doesn't fit with the idea I have of myself. And sometimes I don't like it because it makes me question my intellect, my critical thinking. How can I be so good academically and at the same time I fear that I've fallen into a fandom trap? I'm smart, right? Right?

I'm sure a lot of people have dealt with or ar going through this process of cognitive dissonance. How does one deal with the mere idea that something they believe in based on their understanding of the world, their ability of decoding (not in a conspiracy sense, but in a Saussurean way) can turn out to be wrong? We see something that resembles a specific behavior that we are surrounded with our entire lives, sometimes we ourselves engage with, but we've identified it wrong on others? Of course, it's through the visual medium, one that is edited. It's a puzzle with large chunks missing, but we're getting a general idea of it. But we can be wrong. So how do we deal with that? Well, I don't have a correct answer.

Me in 2020/2021 would have been more affected because my mental health was not good. I was functionally depressed and I clinged so much onto BTS, Jikook and the small community that I found myself in at that time, that I would have felt a lot more torn than I am now.

A couple of years later and having to actually go through a situation in which my understanding of people's relationship might not be accurate, I realized I'm fine. And I think it's because it made me really register just now that I finally learned how to have fun with it. It took me three years. By having fun, I mean genuinely being able to simply enjoy the little things. I'm still on the path of not being ashamed for liking kpop or spending time talking about the dynamic/relationship of two people.

What prompted this post was reading what is currently being written in the jikook tag. Yes, I had this big introductory chunk that perhaps people won't bother reading, but I'm doing it for myself. If I can't be honest while writing stuff into the void for strangers to read, then what is the point?

I get frustrated very easily. I like debates and contradictory points of view, but not always. And that's because I like to be right. Almost all the time. So when I see something that I believe it lacks logic or I find it absurd, then my fingers are itching. I don't comment or DM people, I can control myself. I'd rather get out of the app and do something else.

What I want to say is I was surprised at how much fanfiction is being written. More that usual. Shipping contains a big deal of fanfiction by its nature. Gestures and events taking place at different times are interpreted and having information added that fills the gaps. People do that because they have to make sense of what they see.

They like to make relationship timelines. They speculate on first kisses and first sexual experiences. That's their imagination. None of us has any way of knowing. The element of fiction is heighted when people feel like they are losing control of the narrative. When they are unsure of what they are seeing. Which is what usually happens in the shipping community on a yearly basis. Anons flooding the bloggers' inboxes because they need confirmation or they didn't get any ship content in a month or two which means something is wrong.

There's this understanding that the shipper/supporter is delusional while the one who stops shipping is the rational one. From what I've observed throughout time and mostly now, that is a false distinction. The so-called rational fan makes use of fiction just as the shipper. The difference is in purpose. One talks about why the supposed romantic relationship is real and the other tries to refute that. But both categories seem to need fiction in order to build their arguments. That is because none of them have access to someone's private life and relationship, so the gaps need to be filled with speculation. There is no right or wrong version here, despite how much the idea is being pushed. And me writing about this won't make a difference. It's simply how the fandom works. The one who position themselves on the side of anti-delulu will always be seen as the less crazy one. The similarities will fade for the collective consciousness of the fandom.

I think it's difficult for a lot of people, regardless on which side they find themselves on, to accept that the option of simply not knowing is enough as well. Or knowing, but without getting anal about it. But it's hard and they write posts after posts, anons are sending asks over asks because there has to be a firm answer. Only a few allow themselves to be in between lines.

I'll bring back something that I always used to say. Shipping and involvement in the fandom is a lot more about us and less about the people we're talking about. It's about fullfiling some needs, of needing a community, of focusing on the idea of love. Those things can still be done in a way that still makes the experience enjoyable. But not everyone can and I'm not blaming it.

There's a way to just like how people behave with each other and imagine things without adding so much weight to it. Regardless of the true nature. It's our imagination, there's no need for a moral inquisition to tell anyone how to think or that they should stop thinking a certain way. Touching some grass is a cliche and an expression I ended up hating, but I do believe that being connected to discourse on a daily basis can really alter our sense of reality and what we consider to be real issues. We really should pay more attention to that and take some distance if necessary.

#m thoughts #jikook #kpop shipping #bts shipping #fandom discourse

52 notes · View notes

ohnoitstbskyen · 1 year

Note

i was wondering what happened to boss design of elden ring?

and on the other note, would you like in hades 2, depiction of aphrodite as patron of cosmic/maternal love? with more body fat etc?

The semiotics of body type in character design is always such a thorny thing, because it's this constant push and pull between calling on existing meanings and associations in culture, vs pushing boundaries and trying to redefine those meanings and associations.

Aphrodite isn't really associated with maternal love I believe (classics nerds can correct me in the replies), more like erotic and romantic love, pleasure and passion. I think her design is well served by simply Being Hot™ in whatever way most readily communicates that "this character is meant to be hot" visually to the audience. It is annoying and shitty that "hot" almost always means "skinny" to a general audience, but that's those troublesome semiotics.

I cite Dionysus as a character who's a natural fit for a soft body, too. To me, it sort of doesn't comport that he of all gods has a gym jacked physique - specifically because of the amount of self-denial and struggle it takes to achieve that kind of physique. Again, not to say that Dionysus HAS to be fat because fat = hedonism (it does not), but I think it is a flaw in his visual storytelling to make him Gym Ripped because my man in a party boy who likes his drink and his food and his f... rolicking, and does not like getting up with a hangover at 6am to run 5K and do a crossfit regimen. That's more Ares' or Hermes' kind of style. Dionysus, at least in Hades, is more about softness and self-indulgence and letting loose and being cool about things, letting stuff slide and just having a good time.

Zeus or Poseidon, with their affable patriarch / unreliable uncle characters, also would make good fits for dad bods. Specifically, the bodies of dudes who used to be extremely gym fit, but who have gotten comfortable and gone a bit softer around the edges now that they no longer have to show off and prove themselves all the time. Zeus perhaps along the lines of a powerlifter, Poseidon more like a former competitive swimmer.

For Hades himself, on the other hand, I think it DOES make sense to keep him muscled up, low in body fat and jacked, because the man, as a character, is such a self-denying, self-punishing workaholic. He fills the emotional void in his heart with Fulfilment Of The Duty, which includes being the final gatekeeper of the underworld who must be ready to defend it. Like, yeah, he WOULD have a rigid, inflexible diet and exercise routine optimized to keep him in peak shape to do battle if the duty should call him to it, because he does not think he deserves to take a rest, he does not think he deserves softness or pleasure or joy. That's part of the resentment he keeps taking out on Zagreus as the game opens.

Anyway, the semiotics of body type in character design is inherently problematic from literally every angle, there is no perfect or morally pure way to do it, we live in a complex web of conflicting meanings and cultural assumptions and we all just have to do our best with it.

EDIT: Oh, and Elden Ring will be back Soon™

#tb answers #tb essay #hades #hades supergiant #hades aphrodite #hades zeus #hades poseidon #hades dionysus #hades hades

187 notes · View notes