genderbinarysunset

[genderbinarysunset]

Tragic Ships Tournament Quarter Finals

Propaganda under the cut!

Enjoltaire:

"Okay so the whole thing with them is that Enjolras is like the leader of the Les Amis; he believes in the revolution in his heart and soul and his being. He is a shining beacon of hope like Victor Hugo calls him Apollo in the book. He believes in freedom and in the future and that beyond the barricade, there's a new tomorrow waiting for them. Grantaire, on the other hand, doesn't believe in anything. He's a drunk and a cynic and he doesn't believe in that new tomorrow. If nothing had something to offer, Grantaire would stop believing in nothing. When he offers to do something to help the Les Amis, he gets distracted and drunk and I think he ends up playing dominoes? It might have been cards. Anyway, that's Grantaire. BUT Grantaire believes in ONE thing. And that ONE thing is ENJOLRAS. No matter how cynical and pessimistic Grantaire is, he believes in Enjolras. If Enjolras is Apollo, Grantaire is Icarus flying ever closer to him. And then at the end. When their revolution has failed and they are facing down the barrel of guns. Grantaire gets up and stands next to Enjolras and asks if he can hold his hand so that they can die together, and they do. It's heartbreaking and heart wrenching and Icarus brings the sun down with him as he falls."

Madohomu:

"madoka magica aired 12 episodes in 2011, with a sequel movie titled “rebellion” released in 2014. it’s been over 10 years since then, and these two have become the face of yuri. if someone makes a meme about loving yuri and makes a collage of example ships, madohomu are 100% gonna be present. video essays, fanart, fics, music videos and all kinds of fan projects featuring them are still wildly popular on all social media platforms.

but let’s talk about them (without going into too many spoilers, so this will be about the thematics in their relationship). they are light and darkness. the ying and the yang. forever intertwined. one would not exist without the other, yet they cannot exist together. for madoka has too much love for every living thing and too little for herself. and homura has too much love for madoka it blinds her to everything and everyone else, and she struggles with deep self-hatred. madoka has forsaken her own existence for the world, and homura has forsaken the world she created for her. the show has a lot of religious imagery, and madoka is akin to a god; there’s a shot of homura, who grew up catholic, kneeling at the feet of a gigantic statue of madoka, praying, but her hands stain her clothes. because if madoka is god, then homura is lucifer - specifically, iblis, the muslim version of lucifer, who loved god so much he betrayed him, for he’d rather defy him than bow to his creation, humans. and homura would rather defy the sanctity of madoka’s wish, rather than obey its laws, for she will take madoka’s happiness in her hands, if she refuses to. in the movie, dolls representing homura’s inner machinations yell, “gott ist tot”, for homura’s god, madoka, dies in the movie, when homura remembers that madoka was human first, and godhood was something she reached to save everyone, against her best interest and happiness. their relationship is one of love, kindness, obsession, devotion, hope, faith, worship - they are the thesis and the antithesis, the beginning and the end, the alpha and omega, an unstoppable force and an immovable object. forever locked in a struggle, never fully embracing, for madoka will always sacrifice herself for the world, and homura will always doom the world and herself for madoka."

[genderbinarysunset]

cannot stop thinking about this skit from the new i think you should leave season

[genderbinarysunset]

[genderbinarysunset]

@margueritestjusts WEESA DO ARSON PARTS

[genderbinarysunset]

Another one, on how misogynistic society impacts the plot of Nosferatu: I've seen Thomas come under fire for ignoring Ellen's wishes to stay and not take the Wallachia job, but I'd like to expand this out into a wider context that reveals how misogyny and the patriarchal system force this situation. I'll talk more about Thomas being infantilised in parallel with Ellen (inb4 comments, it's a feature of the system that even the most infantilised bottom-of-the-social-ladder man would be considered 'master' of his wife), but the framing we're given is: they're newly married, Thomas does not have a secure position but rather seems to be taking contracted work from Knock's firm, and they're already in debt (to Friedrich, Mr. Ur-Patriarchy). It's not just that Thomas wants money for them to have fine things, which Ellen protests that she doesn't need or want; they owe money that needs to be paid back. And we see later in the film that Friedrich's philanthropy is an easily-cracked facade when he rants to Ellen about getting her treatment. So there's some urgency to Thomas getting a salaried job. But more than that, they're operating in a society that does not allow Ellen to work. I mean, she could - there's a Les Mis rant inside me about women as factory workers but I'll fight back those demons - but it's not encouraged and wouldn't be looked upon well. Factor in the fact that she does seem to need some measure of constant medical care, and that she is prone to physically debilitating 'episodes' when separated from her Safe Person (Ellen Thomas codependency real), and it seems unlikely that her even getting work and shouldering the social judgment would be feasible. And blah blah men are so burdened by wielding the cheque and pen woe is them but do you see how a culture that denies women financial autonomy helps to create the scenario where Thomas takes a job even he doesn't want because a man higher up the ladder than him is dangling the opportunity for financial security in front of him (and also sending him as a lamb to the slaughter to be taken advantage of by Orlok). (And also Orlok as old nobility is actively utilising this system to literally lord over the townspeople, though this isn't as much a theme as it is in Dracula.) Idk maybe it's because I pay bills and taxes and owe on student loans but even where I would be content w a min wage job if it was a living wage (it wouldn't be), and I was only providing for myself, carefully breaking even wouldn't put a dent in my deeebt. (In Orlok's mind Ellen owes a debt too and he's coming to collect!)

[genderbinarysunset]

I HAVE seen readings of this where this is 'revenge' on Thomas for being about to stake Orlok, or that it's Ellen's sexuality manifest dominating him. And I'm like. Okay okay we can't be so deep in the metaphorical weeds that someone having unwanted sexual contact forced upon them can be read as justified or liberating. We are flying too close to the 'men should be sexually taken advantage of in the name of equality' sun, which to be fair I almost never see but you can contribute to me not seeing this by not repeating this take. Not a conversation I want to spend a ton of time on but then again it is my blog and the space is theoretically endless. And the low-key 'vengeful rape' framing of Thomas's encounter with Orlok is like. Teeth suckingly concerning to me.

Anyways here's my most neutral Nosferatu take: we can't read bloodsucking as sexual without then admitting that Thomas was raped. This is the second supernatural-on-male sexual assault in an Eggers' film (2/3 unless you wanna get deep into the dynamics of The Lighthouse) so it doesn't feel at all out of place. One thing I like about Eggers is that when he's examining dimensions of consent he never excludes the fact that men and boys can be sexually vulnerable and taken advantage of. In a culture that so often denies that men can even be raped, it's a relief to me that Eggers rejects that, and I continue to read Thomas's actions throughout the film as those of someone processing their own recent assault.

[genderbinarysunset]

I also think we are not yet at a point as a culture where we're setting up conversations about hypersexuality that neither fall into misogynistic spike traps nor frame it as the same as lust uninformed by trauma. And I think it's incredibly hard to thread that needle because you're trying to strike a balance that both allows for the survivor's expression of autonomy and doesn't strip them of it to fit them into a preconceived idea of victimhood, and understand that the hypersexual brain is by definition wired in a way where sexual behaviour can indeed equate to self-harm, whether it's intended to or not. And I think this is due in great part to not having a society where women (or anyone frankly) can be sexually vulnerable (not the same thing as sexually submissive) without being taken advantage of or shamed. Like it is hard enough for hypersexual people, with 'ethically dubious' turn-ons and perceived 'devious' behaviour, to navigate their own issues. How do people who haven't experienced hypersexuality, especially continuous hypersexuality, then enter a conversation about it without being demeaning or enabling? And I don't have an answer, but I think at its root you need to be ready to listen to ideas that might upset you, and also work to accept that a hypersexual person's opinion may suddenly change, and that that's part of the experience/condition. And I don't really know that text-based social media is the best place to have these conversations, but they do offer certain advantages in time and distance. So. We move I guess.

I'm working on an actual essay on Nosferatu, not a tumblr post, that examines both the CSA and gothic romance aspects of the film and why they exist and what they serve, but I will say that some of the ways people are responding to actual CSA survivors who see themselves in this film are like. Extremely gross. Like even survivors themselves who indulge in dubcon and rape kink (this is morally neutral to me) might want to contemplate whether or not celebration of this warrants not just the dismissal but some pretty nasty, vicious remarks aimed towards other survivors - 'if you see this as rape you're stupid, you're a misogynist, you're illiterate, etc.' Eggers makes some VERY complex films about female-centric horror and your reading is not the only reading, and saying CSA victims who were triggered by this film are stupid or anti-feminist is like. So beyond the pale. Step off the soapbox for a moment and remember those are actual people.

[genderbinarysunset]

Anyways here's my most neutral Nosferatu take: we can't read bloodsucking as sexual without then admitting that Thomas was raped. This is the second supernatural-on-male sexual assault in an Eggers' film (2/3 unless you wanna get deep into the dynamics of The Lighthouse) so it doesn't feel at all out of place. One thing I like about Eggers is that when he's examining dimensions of consent he never excludes the fact that men and boys can be sexually vulnerable and taken advantage of. In a culture that so often denies that men can even be raped, it's a relief to me that Eggers rejects that, and I continue to read Thomas's actions throughout the film as those of someone processing their own recent assault.

[genderbinarysunset]

Ellen is fictional the people you're calling idiots for seeing their rape in this are real. I don't give a fuck about people doing readings where this is subversive and wholly metaphorical and sexually liberating, but a modicum of decorum and a little reality check would go a long way to making the discussion place less of a nightmare cesspool.

Idk I just think it's inherently misogynistic to enter a discussion about consent and to wholesale come down on it with 'the voices of survivors who find this upsetting don't signify here'. Why is that the play.

[genderbinarysunset]

Idk I just think it's inherently misogynistic to enter a discussion about consent and to wholesale come down on it with 'the voices of survivors who find this upsetting don't signify here'. Why is that the play.

[genderbinarysunset]

I'm working on an actual essay on Nosferatu, not a tumblr post, that examines both the CSA and gothic romance aspects of the film and why they exist and what they serve, but I will say that some of the ways people are responding to actual CSA survivors who see themselves in this film are like. Extremely gross. Like even survivors themselves who indulge in dubcon and rape kink (this is morally neutral to me) might want to contemplate whether or not celebration of this warrants not just the dismissal but some pretty nasty, vicious remarks aimed towards other survivors - 'if you see this as rape you're stupid, you're a misogynist, you're illiterate, etc.' Eggers makes some VERY complex films about female-centric horror and your reading is not the only reading, and saying CSA victims who were triggered by this film are stupid or anti-feminist is like. So beyond the pale. Step off the soapbox for a moment and remember those are actual people.

[genderbinarysunset]

I can access adrenaline strength whenever I want by imagining phrases like "what pocket is my wallet in?" And inducing a panic state

[genderbinarysunset]

Most intriguing sentence ever

[genderbinarysunset]

the fish in an aquarium when you feed them their pellets  

[genderbinarysunset]

depressed dracula: i vant to suck your... nothing :/

[genderbinarysunset]

if they wanted me to think mr. burns was unattractive and creepy and gross then maybe they shouldn't have made him a cute little gumdrop

[genderbinarysunset]

clap along if you feel like a wraith without a tomb!