#but that doesn't make her petty privileged motivations RIGHT

[math-is-magic]

Wow the Kipperlilly apologists have really slid from earlier in the season "we don't KNOW she's done all these bad things" (reasonable) to "Actually she's RIGHT to be jealous of Riz's dad being murdered."

[thesporkidentity]

I had not formed this conclusion in consequence of Sir Percival's refusal to show the writing or to explain it, for that refusal might well have proceeded from his obstinate disposition and his domineering temper alone. My sole motive for distrusting his honesty sprang from the change which I had observed in his language and his manners at Blackwater Park, a change which convinced me that he had been acting a part throughout the whole period of his probation at Limmeridge House. His elaborate delicacy, his ceremonious politeness which harmonised so agreeably with Mr. Gilmore's old-fashioned notions, his modesty with Laura, his candour with me, his moderation with Mr. Fairlie—all these were the artifices of a mean, cunning, and brutal man, who had dropped his disguise when his practised duplicity had gained its end, and had openly shown himself in the library on that very day.

so the fact that he demanded she sign a contract while absolutely refusing to let her read it, indeed, making sure she couldn't read it by covering all the text except the signature line with victorian sticky notes, isn't what made them suspicious. no, that could be explained by him being just the kind of petty asshole who would demand unquestioning obedience from laura and start slamming his hands against the desk to scare them because she's his wife and should do as he says. what made them suspicious was the way that he first tried the charm approach to get what he wanted rather than his default demand of obedience. what a fucking nightmare that they don't question when he's violent, but when he's nice.

also, this is unrelated to the quote, but my brain is just reeling at the cognitive dissonance of the attitudes in this scene. and i don't mean sir percival specifically, i mean the general attitudes including percival's insistence, and fosco's declaring that he and his wife have only one opinion (his), both representative of the idea that a wife should obey the husband (it's just that there are acceptable and un-acceptable ways of ensuring that obedience).

like, on one hand is the attitude that a wife should only do as her husband says. and yet on the other hand is the contradiction of laura having some sort of legal right that requires her consent and signature. she should submit to her husband's will, and yet the requirement of her signature means that she is taking on whatever the responsibility of that contract is. she should have no say, but she should bear the consequences of his deciding for her. it's just this catch-22, there's no way for her (or, truly, women in general) to win there. i hate it! a woman has some sort of legal right, except that she shouldn't, she should follow orders, she should be responsible for a contract. it just goes round and round in a circle of contradictions but no one acknowledges that no-win scenario except for laura and marian. the men just either pretend they don't see it (likely fosco) or truly have never examined that situation because their privilege means it doesn't affect them or benefits them (likely glyde). anyway i hate it, it makes me want to tear my hair out

[apinchofm]

*WARNING - Just want to rant lol*: Your latest two additions to your fic made me think of how Penelope is written versus the fan's reactions. When people say that Penelope cannot possibly be a racist because racism has magically "disappeared" in this universe, they're not wrong in that sense, it's just that Penelope as a character brings out the racism in certain fans. No, Penelope is not canonically a racist, and her actions against Marina, and how she writes about Simon or Kate, are not motivated by racism necessarily, but because Marina, Simon, and Kate are poc, people who are fans of Penelope are put at odds with these characters when defending her, so it tends to bring out their racist side. Like, I'm always a little shocked when I see people say that they'd totally throw Marina, a pregnant lower class teenager on the brink of ruin under the bus for purely petty reasons, that she had no one to blame but herself for what happened because she made the decision to have pre-martial sex (the slut-shaming is appalling), that she had plenty of other options than Colin (the 'plenty of options' being that she should just married that old man who was checking out her teeth and would have treated her like a beast and her child as an afterthought, rather than 'ruin' poor Colin), that she was ungrateful and didn't listen to Portia who was just trying to help her (the same Portia who had scorned her from the beginning, slapped her around, locked her in her room for a month, then manipulated/forced her to trap a man in marriage by forging that note and threatening her with homelessness), or that, in general, she was a cunning, manipulative snake that Colin was endangered by (she's a 17 year old Regency farmgirl!), so Penelope actually did a noble, selfless thing by 'sacrificing' her family's reputation to save him from raising Marina's "spawn" (bleck). I mean, even if we take race out of the question, it makes me sad that people willingly admit that in real life, they'd choose their male friend of privilege over a pregnant teenager in trouble, just because they'd known said friend longer. Like, where's your solidarity?? Why does length of friendship get priority over class/race/gender issues?

What's also interesting about Penelope as a character, in both the show and your fic, is that she uses society's bigotry and class segregation to her advantage, rather than push against it. Her work flourishes because she feeds and encourages the sort of behaviour that continues this oppressive society. True, she can use her work for good, as we saw with her actions against Lord Berbrooke, but she will also use it against women, sometimes lower class women, and the women's rights movement itself. Whatever will tickle the ton the most, she will write about. It doesn't matter if a maid who was involved in an affair with the married lord she's working for will face the most consequences from her writing. Penelope's business is neither feminist or progressive, nor is it an admirable feat of survival in a oppressive society (despite what her fans think, Penelope, like all the other aristocrat characters on this show, was not ever at risk of becoming homeless. Portia just liked her luxurious lifestyle too much to move to a more modest home or cut back on dresses). Penelope does this because she loves it, and because she needs an outlet. She is not on the same level as a social activist or lower class woman. She's also not interested in changing her work or reflecting on her behaviour. When Eloise criticizes the value of LD's articles in the show, or when Edwina calls out the racism of LD's posts in your fic, Penelope doesn't really do anything with that information, and just hammers down on continuing to do things the same way. Because why she should she radicalize her work when her work's success is because of bigotry and conservatism? Popularity over morals is what generally sells.

If it's actually true that the show favours Penelope, then it actually makes sense if you think about it. Bridgerton as a show makes the historically racist/sexist/classicist Regency society now look pretty and desirable. It lures you in. It makes gossip and scandal seem sexy and intriguing, rather than mean and invasive. It makes married life to a Regency man look like a dream, rather than probably the opposite lol. It has the same effect that Penelope has on the ton with her writing. It kind of makes me wonder what the show will look like after Season 3. Will Penelope quit Lady Whistledown? Will the show be more self-aware and realistic if there are now no scandal papers? Or will it continue?

You hit it right on the head!!

A lot of fans seem to think racism is calling people slurs. But particularly in a British context, a lot of it is very subtle and yet not subtle at all. Like, in my fic, I literally look at the same technique that a lot of British columnists describe high-profile women of colour in the UK.

She goes after Marina - an unwed young married black woman because she's jealous. If it was an altruistic action, she could have found a way to tell Colin privately. They treat Marina as some older woman taking advantage of a very willing Colin (who literally says if she had just told her, he still would have married her without a thought!!) but the ways fans react demonstrates the racism.

Adding the way she talks about the Sharmas, really brings out the racism in fans who like to claim this 'girlbossgossipgirl' is doing something special when all her character does is reveal how racist a lot of people are. Eloise and Edwina who are the same ages and do and say stupid things to. The difference is their characters show that they can grow from that. Idk how they are planning to redeem her but if they don't let one character of colour slap her then I don't want it

[navii-blaze]

Any other kid icarus hc?they hace been so cool so far!

anon I love you

- going back to the "dark pit reflects Pit's original/true self" hc, you can rly see more of Pit's character (bc there's not a whole lot of depth to work with in general) through dark pit because he seems so much more human and original than Pit. Pittoo going to be honest I wish he had a better nickname is ambitious, anti-authority, and self-motivated. Almost everything Pit's not, which is: obediant, reckless, naive, and is implied to be rather insecure.

- it's also interesting on how strong of a bond that Pit and his "counterpart" have, considering how dark Pit's existence was basically erased when Pit was trapped in the ring and so can be threatened if Pit dies. This part leans more towards canon but I hc that Dark Pit starts actually caring about Pit besides just wanting him alive for his own sake, since he can't help but pity how dependent Pit is on Palutana for her guidence and powers.

- I am now taking suggestions on what to call Dark Pit except for Pittoo, he deserves better and I'm tired

- Pit and Pittoo are both ace/aro respectively

- I love the idea that after defeating Hades, Pittoo stays with Viridi because she lets him do what he wants, but he still keeps a casual friendship with Pit

- *in a literal warzone* "hey you want some Italian after this?" "yeah I'll have a chicken fettucc-" "no, just text me it, I'm not going to remember" "but you're right here!" "just fuckin text it"

- Pittoo doesn't care that this is an E10+ game

- Thinking about how Pit is technically the last angel of his kind since Medusa didn't kill him bc of his lack of flight (survivor's guilt much?). Thinking about how Pit would want to desperately prove himself to Palutana and throws himself into danger because there's no way he can't stand by when he has the privilege to fight and serve under Palutana.

- since killing off Hades would likely bring a whole new load of problems in the natural order of things, he's still alive but on house arrest and makes passive aggressive comments on Palutana's authority

- a headless Medusa is his "warden" and she loves her job with the occassional visits from her bff Viridi (who also hates mankind and together they spread petty rumors about Palutana)

- Palutana needs a break.

[goodshitpostedhere]

Bernie's Defeat Shows Why Socialism Doesn't Work

Senator Bernie Sanders, berated his staff, forced female staffers to sleep in the same rooms as men, exposed them to sexual harassment, spread hate, allied with terrorists, all to win two elections he lost. The only thing the socialist got out of his failed campaigns was membership in the 1 percent. That and memories of flying around the country and the world on private jets, and his three homes, and bulging bank accounts paid for by an army of gullible idiots who believed in his cause more than he did. Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren could be locking up the Democrat nomination right now. Instead they wasted $300 million and lost to a crooked senile hack who can barely complete a sentence. The two socialist candidates had raised the most money directly and through PACs, $182 million for Bernie, $151 million for Warren, had the most passionate supporters, and the best media coverage. Why then did these two sprightly septuagenarian socialists lose? Because they’re socialists. Socialists believe in redistributing other people’s things, but fiercely cling to their own. The greediest people in the world are lefties. The two socialist senators were full of big ideas for what to do with other people’s money, but don’t touch their homes and their millions. And don’t redistribute their voters. When other Democrats dropped out and united behind Biden, Bernie and Warren couldn’t make way for each other. Even when Warren dropped out, she refused to endorse Bernie, dooming him to defeat. Bernie and Warren were running on the same basic issues. When Warren refused to endorse Bernie, it was a suicide bombing that not only blew up his campaign, but took down her own platform with it. It wasn’t about the issues. Bernie and Warren were really motivated by greed and ego. Neither Warren nor Bernie could do what all the other candidates in the race did, drop out and endorse somebody else. The socialists stayed in and doomed each other in a political suicide pact because they were too petty and greedy to overcome their differences for a higher cause. That’s how socialism dies. Socialists pretend that they want everyone else to sacrifice for the greater good, but they never do. The Soviet Union’s Communist leadership reacted to Chernobyl by moving radioactive dairy products away from Moscow and to other parts of the country. China’s Communist leadership dealt with the coronavirus by lying to their people and to the rest of the world to maintain their regime’s credibility. The EU has descended into infighting in every crisis, from Muslim mass migrant invasions to the coronavirus, over who has to make the sacrifices. New York City’s Mayor Bill de Blasio insisted on going to the gym, with an NYPD detail, while others were told to practice social distancing. Chicago’s Mayor Lori Lightfoot decided to get her hair cut even as the city’s small businesses were being closed down. It’s easy for politicians to tell ordinary people to sacrifice while they live it up Masque of the Red Death style during a plague. But what happens when a trolley problem of two top socialist politicians arrives, and they have to decide which of them makes the sacrifice for the greater good? The answer is deeply revealing. Socialist leaders won’t sacrifice for each other. Not for the sake of their cause. Or for anything. Ideology didn’t unite Bernie and Warren. Instead, one by one, the two socialist politicians were forced to drop out, leaving both of them alone with nothing. Socialism doesn’t unite us. It divides and isolates us. Like the Chinese Communist virus. Socialism doesn’t work because instead of the noble altruistic leaders the ideology calls for, it actually attracts meanspirited and greedy control freaks who use it to set up their own private fiefdoms. Once implemented, actual socialism never turns into a utopia of angels, disdainful of materialism, but descends into a hell of demons who fight each other over the last stale cookie on a tarnished plate. That’s why idealistic revolutions end in cycles of purges fueled by ego, malice, and greed. Bernie and Warren couldn’t put each other up against a wall, so they had to settle for the next best thing. He brought down her campaign and then she brought down his campaign. Neither would serve in heaven and won’t even have the opportunity, like Milton’s Satan, or Stalin and Mao, to rule in hell. Before the two of them become footnotes in electoral history, there is a question they should answer. How dare they demand that everyone else sacrifice for the greater good, when neither of them would? Where did these two socialists get the chutzpah to lecture Americans on everything from how much deodorant they use to how much taxes they pay? Where is their commitment to redistribution? Bernie Sanders quadrupled his net worth since he began plotting to run for president in 2012. He made his millions from his national profile. And he also used that profile to funnel money to family members. Every time he ran for President on a platform of taking away everyone’s money, he came away richer. Why did Bernie take so long to drop out? Because even ActBlue idiots wouldn’t go on paying for his private jets if he dropped out. It took a pandemic and the effective shutdown of the election for the scam to end. If it wasn’t for the Chinese Virus, Bernie would have dragged it out to the last million. But there’s no private jet flights paid for by ActBlue donors to the Vatican in a pandemic. Bernie’s campaign slogan, “Not Me, Us”, was the biggest lie since, “Hope and Change.” It was always about “Me”. It was about Bernie, his book deals, his houses, his private jets, his interviews, and his fame. At his age, he knows that he will probably never run again and never cash in again. None of that makes Bernie a hypocrite. Worse. It makes him a socialist. Bernie Sanders has spent his entire miserable life figuring out a way to make money without working. The socialist lifestyle of collective farms wasn’t for him. He wanted to get into politics because he’s lazy, narcissistic, a control freak, abusive, greedy, and incompetent. Those character traits left him with two options: Hollywood and Washington D.C. And Bernie is a bad actor who can only memorize a few lines. His career was built on pandering to the same radicals when he first got into politics and when he tried to crawl into the White House. Along the way he completely changed his views on any number of issues from immigration to gun control. But he never stopped figuring out how to cash in on his politics. And now he’s done it. Bernie leaves his great socialist crusade as a 1 percenter, a millionaire with three homes, despite accomplishing absolutely nothing. Socialism isn’t real for ordinary people, but it’s real for socialists. “Not Me, Us”, Bernie claimed. What have the “Us” gotten out of the Bernie campaign beyond the opportunity to pay for all his stuff? The same thing anyone gets under socialism: the privilege of paying for the lifestyles of their leaders. Socialism isn’t about helping people. It’s about helping socialists. Between the two of them, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, brought down the socialist cause. But nobody destroys socialism like socialists. It was the Communists who really brought down the USSR and if the EU and Communist China’s leadership fall to the pandemic, it will also be entirely their own doing. Lefties have always been the great destroyers of their own movements. Bernie and Warren followed in that proud tradition, sacrificing their own movement to their greed and egos, and leaving the dumpster fire of their campaigns with millions in book payments from the very corporations that they condemn. And if you think they were a grifting disaster, wait until Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez runs for president.

SOURCE:: http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2020/04/bernies-defeat-shows-why-socialism.html