#for rich white women

[goldenstarprincesses]

From the photo album of Lord Arthur Kirkland- Amelia, Smith College, 1883

Historical Note: In 1866, the first all women-baseball team was formed at Vassar College. While this first team, and the many that followed, never lasted long due to outside pressures related to fears that such "manly" activities would harm the female reproductive system, many unofficial teams began to pop-up at the women's college of the Eastern United States. One such team was formed at Smith College in 1883. For many of these early sport pioneers, the uniform consisted of wool dresses that went from either the ankle to just above the knee. Often teams would personalize them with embroidery and other design choices.

Color drawing and references under cut

[svdaily]

[curseofdelos]

Thinking about the parallels and differences between Marie Levesque's relationship with Pluto and Maria di Angelo's relationship with Hades

In both flashbacks, we see Hades/Pluto trying to convince them to stay/go somewhere for their and their children's protection and both women refuse his request, but where those scenes differ is in how they respond to him

Maria is so patient and loving towards Hades. She never raises her voice, she repeatedly calls him my love, and yet is firm about not raising their children in the underworld. She only sees the good in Hades - calls him kind, generous, insists the other gods wouldn't be afraid of him if they saw him the way she does. She has unwavering faith that he will protect her, and won't allow any harm to come to Nico and Bianca. There is actual love there, and we get the sense that they did have a good relationship despite him being a god

Queen Marie, on the other hand, deeply resents Pluto. She's angry to the point of throwing and breaking things around her home, and blames him for all of their misfortune. It's Pluto's fault that Hazel is cursed, it's Pluto's fault that people around them are dying, it's Pluto's fault that the police thinks she's a murderer and her clients think she's a witch. Unlike Maria, Queen Marie doesn't believe that Pluto has ever protected them, nor does she want him to, not after how much he has ruined her and Hazel's life. There's little love there like with Maria and Hades, little trust - just bitter angry resentment.

And it makes sense that they would react so differently! We don't get the sense that Hades's godhood has affected Nico or Bianca in any tangible way (at this point, anyway). They're playing together when Hades visits Maria and seem happy. They're not cursed the way Hazel is. They don't have dangerous and harmful powers that they can't control (that we know of). Of course Queen Marie would resent Pluto in ways that Maria doesn't; the wish Pluto granted Queen Marie has actively made their life worse. The di Angelos were fine. The di Angelos were thriving. They had nothing to worry about until the Great Prophecy was issued, and Maria had no reason to believe that Hades couldn't protect them from Zeus when he had protected them thus far. He hadn't done anything to hurt her the way that Queen Marie believed Pluto hurt them.

But here's the thing though: Queen Marie was being manipulated by Gaia. Both she and Pluto tell Hazel that The Voice turned her against him. Just before Queen Marie and Pluto speak to each other in the first flashback, we see her push back against Gaia's request to go to Alaska precisely because Pluto told her it wasn't safe and that he wouldn't be able to protect her and Hazel there. Gaia was the one who convinced her that it was Pluto's fault that Hazel was cursed; after all, it's much easier to blame him than to admit to herself that it was her wish and her greed for "all the riches in the world" that lead to Hazel's predicament.

Gaia preyed on Queen Marie's frustration with herself and with Pluto to manipulate her into bringing Hazel to Alaska to raise her son from the earth. It was this manipulation that lead her to blowing up at Pluto when he tries to convince her to stay in New Orleans. Maria didn't hate Hades because the gods didn't torment her the way Gaia tormented Queen Marie.

Which raises the question: if Gaia hadn't messed with her head, would Queen Marie have loved and trusted Pluto the way Maria loved and trusted Hades? Could Pluto and the Levesques have played happy families the way the di Angelos did with Hades? It's more complicated because Gaia's absence would not have fixed Hazel's curse so it's entirely possible she still would have resented him, but I have to wonder:

Was there ever a world where the Levesques could have been happy?

[expulence]

𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 🤍 𝐢𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥-𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐚𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜❕

[aftgscenes]

Andrew minyard would not listen to Taylor swift

[melaninmanifestation]

600 roses.

[fayevalcntine]

The whole framing of Lestat as the sole symbol of patriarchy that fandom is so desperate to put him in doesn't work unless you deliberately ignore how he was also a victim of rape and abuse before he was turned. People want him to be fit into this strict role of "father figure/violent husband/perpetrator" that is only that and not even a whole person, and in doing so they need to push aside the fact that despite being his family's provider, he was also pushed into that role when his father forbid him from joining a monastery or gaining an education that he wanted. Lestat wanted to run away with a theater group as a kid, and actually managed to do so once Gabrielle gave him her blessing and monetary support in order to go to Paris. He didn't always want to be the provider, he was forced into that role and became despondent when he thought he would never get a chance to leave his home.

His new life prior to being turned is pretty much the antithesis to the whole "Lestat is a manly man who would sooner throw up than be compared to a woman" spiel: he lived with another man in Paris while also being an actor, having left his family and "responsibility" to them. The only family member he was ever close to was his mother, all the other male members shunned or ridiculed him. Add onto that the fact that his turning firmly placed him within the role of the damsel/victim: he's kidnapped from his bed by a stranger, taken into a tower and left to rot while being fed on for a week, before then being raped and violently turned all while never even being asked if he would consent to it in any normal circumstance. But you of course have to ignore all of this if you want him to only represent the aggressor/patriarch while Louis is the helpless unhappy matriarch of the family.

My issue isn't that I think Louis isn't a victim, it's that it's not unrealistic for Lestat to be an aggressor/abuser while also displaying traits that aren't regularly assigned to stereotypical depictions of male characters. He's abusive to Claudia while also having been a victim of abuse from his own family. He's not a good maker/teacher, but he also didn't even have one when he was turned. He's the provider/attempted protector of the family and seemed to like being that, while also having run away from his own family prior to this to act in a theater in Paris. He's a rich white man while also being obviously effeminate in public spaces, even to Tom's own bigoted humor.

Like Louis' own complicated story with being his family's benefactor and provider, you can't firmly place Lestat as being one thing or another in terms of gender ideals without deliberately ignoring parts about him that don't fit this. And I don't think it's an absolute necessity, when even in Louis' own story, Lestat isn't stripped of his effeminate mannerisms or behavior while also being the abusive maker/father/lover.

[theereina]

[halfateabag]

so i was a Sandman (I cannot separate the artist from art when it comes to sa, sorry) fan, and let me tell you

I wasn't going to say anything because I'm not all that active in the fandom or familiar with most of his work, but a lot of people are doubting the women's claims because they'd gone to a right-wing news source apparently?

I've read many posts arguing whether the new site (or podcast??? Kinda confused) is right-wing or not, but the thing is, these two women, who are victims of a dude who has a cult following in a lot of leftist spaces, obviously went to a news source that believed them. And honestly, they were right to, because the amount of posts I've seen defending the rapist is frankly disgusting.

Believe all women, not just ones coming from your trusted leftie news sources. Who on earth would set themselves up against a beloved rich figure who is regarded as a good person unless they are confident that they're telling the truth, huh? And I'm saying this as a socialist, queer person.

If you're yapping out there saying 'these women could be lying for political gain' or 'this is a shmear campaign', just listen to yourselves.

The man guilted them by basically threatening suicide and then called the allegations 'false memories!' That's obvious manipulative behavior. I'd go as far as to say textbook even. Because guess what, I've known of actual assaulters who use that excuse.

Because if you can believe that two women could be lying about the same man, then you better have the capacity to think that maybe, just maybe, the man could be lying about his own actions too, especially when they are as heinous as they say.

[ciderjacks]

idk why ppl ignore that women, regardless of race or class, experience police violence for being female. Both from on duty and off duty officers. That 40% cops thing is thrown around a lot but no one acknowledges that as hate, that police officers off duty will often use their power as a man and as an officer to beat/kill women. Theres also the cases of police on duty using abortion as an excuse to brutalize and stalk women, police officers raping and murdering women using their power as officers to do it and getting away with it. and then also something no one talks about: the justice system unfairly punishes women if it can. The justice system hates women being free.

Also, “crime of passion” laws still exist, female murder victims and missing women (regardless of race, but especially native women) are rarely taken seriously. And let’s not even get into how women are treated in female prisons, male guards frequently use female prisons as his own personal brothel, and this behaviour is allowed for sometimes years. Oh, and shit let’s also not talk about how many laws are really only created to protect men and arrest girls. Let’s not talk about how many women end up in jail for minor things like drugs and property damage, compared to men.

Let’s also not talk about how poverty and drug addiction connect, and how the patriarchy keeps women in poverty by intentionally underpaying female dominated fields, reducing wages on any field when it becomes female dominated, and underpaying the female workers who happen to work in male dominated fields to keep them poorer than their male counterparts. Let’s not talk about how keeping females and female communities poor is directly contributing to the kind of crime that women are then unfairly targeted for.

let’s really not talk about how all these things connect, how the men in charge of society have set up a system that keeps women poor and trapped, then the men in charge of prison facilities setting up a system where women are locked up in places where they have no control for minor charges, then said men, who now have complete control over these women, use the women who’ve been trapped in these facilities (again, very often for things a man wouldn’t be criminally charged for) as sex slaves, even forcing them to get pregnant….yeah, let’s not talk about how all that connects.

[allamericansbitch]

its genuinely so crazy how far up taylor’s ass some of you are. even a colonoscopy can’t get you out.

[hellwurld]

every day i think about how great of a character eloise bridgerton could've been. like she has her fantastic moments and i did love her and theo, but truly i think so much of her feminism falls flat, and it's a shame because she is so spirited and dedicated, but she's written in such like . a shallow ? way despite that if that makes sense

[read-write-thrive]

I wanted to get a head start on palasaki week and now I’m building out a reverse AU. why do I keep doing this to myself I can’t keep starting new stuff without finishing the old stuff 😭

[genericpuff]

Do you know "Eggnoid"? It's a rather old webtoon about a girl being put into circumstances on taking care of a robot guy who hatched from an egg (hence the title) the robot guy appears to be a grown man, but he has mental capabilities of a toddler and even acts like one. So, it's like those types of "born sexy yesterday" tropes but the gender reversed. The girl also repeatedly shown crushing over the robot guy and at some point, she called him her boyfriend despite she's supposed to be his caretaker.

I haven't read it, but I can definitely attest that there's a double standard when it comes to gender roles and age gaps / situations of grooming / etc. in literature but especially in webtoons. And by that I mean I've legit seen people hold comics like Lore Olympus accountable for their gross dynamics between a young teenage girl and the much older and richer love interest, but then turn around and say it's "couple goals" for a teenage boy to hook up with a much older woman. At the end of the day there's still a power imbalance due to the age gap and the massive differences in life experiences between the two, gender doesn't really change that.

Big ole' sip of hot tea as a take, but speaking as an AFAB, a lot of women are just as capable of grooming and taking advantage of younger men in the same way as men towards young women, it's just that on the surface people tend to get skittish about addressing that because they don't want to sound like they're going "yeah well actually women though-" and dismissing the notion of toxic masculinity. Which yes, that's a fair thing to worry about, some people do use that as a way to dismiss the arguments made regarding patterns of grooming behavior in men towards young girls (among many other problems in which men and toxic masculinity are held accountable), but like any topic of this nature, it's not always a cut and dry black and white thing. Toxic masculinity and the grooming of teenage girls by adult men is a very real problem! But just like how we can understand the nuance that being a man by default doesn't immediately make you a predator, we should be able to understand the nuance that being a woman doesn't give you a free pass to do the same things we call out men for doing without consequences. It's like the double standard in LO that it's okay for Persephone to do the same things - if not worse - than what Leuce and Minthe and Thetis do, because she's the main character and she's not some scummy "mud-sucking" lower class person, she's rich and a Queen and she's wearing a giant hat so it makes it okay /s

Unfortunately the saying of "I support women's rights and women's wrongs" is being used in a completely tone deaf "literally excusing the main character of her crimes and wrongdoings against others because she happens to be a woman" kind of way, while missing the real point of the saying - supporting women's wrongs doesn't mean you celebrate their abuse towards others, it just means women shouldn't automatically be viewed as irredeemable "crazy bitches" for making mistakes like any other human does, and like any other human, they should be given the opportunity to grow and heal and learn from their wrongs.

When it comes to Persephone specifically, it can't even be chalked up to a "one time mistake" anymore, she's literally been showing patterns of abusive behavior for years now and refusing to take accountability, and now even Rachel is meme'ing on it knowing fully well it's what people are calling Persephone out for in the critical spaces. That's not "supporting women's wrongs", that's enabling the wrongs of a person because they happen to be a woman, and that's not okay. Persephone isn't a "girl boss", she's a bully.

I think the double standard in these age gap romances also speaks to the idolization and fixation on women as being nothing more than conquests for men as well. People who romanticize age gaps between a young woman and an older man think, "Wow, that woman is so mature for her age, enough that an older richer man would choose HER to be his wife! So romantic!" when in reality those who know those dynamics are unhealthy and toxic recognize it as an older man taking advantage of a young woman who's being love-bombed into believing she's "mature for her age" so that she'll sleep with him. Meanwhile, on the other side of it, those who romanticize young men getting with older women tend to come at it from the angle of "well she's so old and washed up, no man could ever love her, her chance for love and a happily ever after is gone now! it's so wonderful of that young man to give that sad and lonely old woman love and attention!" and yet fail to see it from the same perspective of an older person manipulating a young person with zero life experience, because there's still this deeply-rooted ideology that women are "used up" by age 30 and any man who gives her attention beyond that age range is a hero. Completely neglecting the fact that relationships aren't off the table at all for older single people and they don't need to involve robbing the cradle.

I blame the lack of older couple representation in media tbh, so many mainstream romance stories are basically just this:

To pull it out of the perspective of LO and webtoons for a second (sorry, I'm going on a hell of a tangent here), remember how gross it was when it was revealed in Fifty Shades Darker that Christian had been introduced to the concept of BDSM at age 15 through one of his mom's friends (i.e. an older woman!) who Anastasia calls "Mrs. Robinson"? And they had that relationship until he was 21? And they never really did anything about that, it was pretty much just there to explain why Christian was fucked up but he still got married to Anastasia, an innocent woman who he was repeating the cycle of abuse with, and lived happily ever after anyways?

Yeah. That was pretty fucked up.

[superkitten-poison]

to me velvette doesnt lie about *being bisexual* for attention but she lies about being bisexual *for attention*. like admitting to being attracted to women would make her a dyke and manly and f/f relationships dont even count bc her internalized misogyny goes so crazy she subconsicounsly does not see women as full people and needs men to validate her own personhood, and since men hold most of the power, surrounding herself with men is in fact a means to power. so one way she feels she Can have sexual contact with women is through excuses: it's for attention, for convenience, as a power play. but never because of her own desires and it can never mean anything. can you imagine? two women in a loving relationship. who would want to see that?

[hussyknee]

cant put my finger on it, but Taylor Swift feels like walking racial microaggression