#rather than quibbling over this type of thing

[dailyrothko]

Do you have any recommendations for books with large, high quality photos of Rothko's work? I'd love to be able to see some outside the small confines of a computer monitor/phone screen but can't exactly afford a visit to the chapel

Hi

If you're on Instagram, I have a short video about this but I will tell you basically here.

The best reproductions by far are from the recent books published in the last year or two. This has to do with the Rothko family making things available and the curation of large exhibits.

The smallest book in size is the Mark Rothko: Paintings on Paper by Adam Greenhalgh is 8 3/4 by 10 3/4. This book covers just the works from the paper show (Nearly 100) and a bunch of interesting history of his work in this medium. It's a great book and the size seems just fine given that the paintings on paper are smaller anyway. It's worth having this and the book not high priced, but you're getting a sharply focused aspect of Rothko's work rather than all the famous ones. It's a lovely book though. The scans are excellent and it's likely to give you a different perspective on his work.

The Next book is the Louis Vuitton Foundation book that accompanied the show. It's physically the largest book, roughly 11.42 by 13. 32 inches. The size here helps the bigger works some of which are even foldouts. You can see the great devotion to the task in all of these books but this book contains the most historical stuff and anecdotes and is full of interesting material. The show was curated by Susan Page and Christopher Rothko and you can see a lot of effort went into it. This is the most complete of the books, in terms of a career retrospective and is fascinating. It's 312 pages, a big, heavy book. Scans are again very good. If you don't much about Rothko this is probably the book for you, but one could say in centers most on his big oil on canvas works.

The final book is the Rizzoli "Rothko book" credited to his children Kate and Christopher. This is over 400 pages and the most expensive book but it's a very personal and unique document. Rather than the usual history it has essays including one from Hiroshi Sugimoto, that I really enjoyed. The paintings are a mix, more of a selected group as the book doesn't cover a particular show. The scans here might be the best (even though all the books have really great scans) because they really reveal aspects of the paintings that are different than what we are used to seeing all the time. They reveal more subtly. Some paintings are absolutely revelatory, so much so that I use this book as my reference for how other scans reproduce color. This is a dodgy thing because color depends on light and scans are somewhat of an artistic endeavor. This book is a trifle less wide than the Vuitton book but it's big and has a nice slipcase too.

I have seen in person many of the paintings in these books and occasionally I "Disagree" a little with a scan here and there but it's a minor quibble as Rothko just looks different in different places. There's really a lot of work and love in all of these and they all are so much better than what we have seen before it would be hard to go wrong with any of them. These are not cheap calendar type repos, a great amount of time and effort went into all of them.

If you have further questions I am happy to help.

[doberbutts]

Was talking to someone about how it’s not okay to consider transmisogyny the root of all oppression and they agreed, but when I said it’s also not okay to consider misogynoir the root of all oppression either they seemed to consider me racist for that (we are both nonblack poc). I’m sorry if I’m wrong there, it just doesn’t seem fair to believe any one type of oppression is the worst one that causes all the rest. All oppression is interrelated but not in that way to me?

So normally I wouldn't answer this because it reads like bait HOWEVER I know who's asking bc I saw your conversation about it in the discord channel so I'm willing to take in good faith only bc of that.

In the context you were speaking of, I both agree and disagree with the statement "fixing misogynoir would fix all oppression".

Misogynoir is so intertwined with so many things, and while they're all pointed at black women, fixing each hook of the web will inevitably help both non-black and non-women people. I think I referred to oppressive society as a jenga tower a couple weeks ago. Wiggle one block free and the tower shakes but doesn't fall. Remove enough blocks and eventually the whole thing collapses. You can think of misogynoir as a collective of probably a third to a full half of the total number of blocks in the tower. It's not the whole tower, but it's a significant enough portion that removing them all probably does break the whole thing. Even if the tower IS still standing by the end, it's more likely to begin to fail as you remove what few blocks are left keeping the structure upright.

I have never met someone devoted to misogynoir who is not also intensely ableist, homophobic, transphobic, classist, xenophobic, as well as sexist and racist in other ways. This is especially, and unfortunately, true of the black men who refuse to support their sisters and instead push them down while seeking their own freedom. This is a known problem and fairly intensely discussed in black feminism.

HOWEVER I understand that your interpretation is that would then mean that black women are The Most Oppressed. I do not think that is what that statement is intended to imply, but I also get how it could be read in that manner. I think it is dangerous to try to measure oppression on this sort of scaling, because A: personally I think it is too contextual to say any one demographic or combination of identities is "the most" anything, and B: even if there truly is a "The Most Oppressed", people who are crying out for help should be helped, regardless of where they sit on that ladder. If you don't have food you don't have food, let's solve the problem of people not having food first and we can quibble about the details later.

Rather, it is more that specifically misogynoir as said is so interwoven with so much more than simply "racism and sexism towards black women" that fixing all the pieces of misogynoir would make such a vast improvement on the whole of society that many, many, many oppressive structures would vanish.

I also think you can say that about pretty much any intersectional view of oppression, which is why I'm always saying that we need to be joining hands and lifting each other out of the pit rather than fighting over crumbs and our 5 seconds in the spotlight. If I'm fighting misogynoir, and a friend is fighting antisemitism, and a third friend is fighting transmisogyny, and a fourth is fighting for disability rights... all of these things hook together. The other three's fights directly influence mine, and visa versa. So rather than reading it as "abandon your cause and join mine instead", it should be "therefore we are allies because our goals run parallel to each other".

I'm also aware that plenty of people interpret it the first way, and refuse to listen to the second. This is also fairly widely discussed in black feminism, with some having the first interpretation and others the second.

[itsclydebitches]

I roll my eyes when people complained about jaune killing penny claiming it’s be because he didn’t interact with her when that’s irrelevant jaune didn’t do anything in v8 till that moment ruby would never do it ruby killing her is bad writing. She already went through this and itwould go against her stance on James’ actions I also have to point out jaunes sword was reforged using pyrrhas metal who killed penny the last time which penny touched but this time on her terms is fitting

Thing is, none of this acknowledges or counters the problems people actually have with this choice:

It doesn't matter that Jaune didn't do anything in Volume 8 because Jaune has done a great deal over the course of the series, arguably far more than he should have for a B Team protagonist in a show where the title character is now failing to shine. You're suggesting that a side-character has to have some Big And Very Important moment every Volume... and he doesn't.

However, it does matter that Jaune and Penny had no real connection to one another because the viewer, in turn, can't connect to him being her killer. Outside of the shock value of her death itself (which exists no matter who does the killing) it's completely, emotionally flat. Plus, I don't really buy the Pyrrha connection when it was her semblance + Emerald's + Penny's own wires that did the deed, not her weapons and their metal. Sure, there's something to the almost-couple both killing the same girl, but I'll be shocked if RWBY actually does anything with that.

No, the Ruby of Volume 8 wouldn't have killed Penny... but that's because the story hasn't bothered to take her through any character arcs lately. We could have had a Volume culminating in that difficult choice for her if the show bothered to give Ruby hard decisions and have her face the consequences of them.

Plus, I'm not sure when Ruby "already went through this"? Do we mean the one scene where she's mourning Penny's first death? Never mind that she should go through that grief again regardless of whether she killed her or not. "it would go against her stance on James' actions" like yeah, of course, but that's the kind of arc you can give a character: have them hold a strong, moral position until something difficult forces them to bend. Kind of like how Jaune also isn't usually the type to kill friends, but ended up doing that due to their situation and Penny asking him to. Why can't Ruby come to the same, difficult decision? All of which isn't even taking into account how often Ruby ALREADY goes against her own moral positions. We can't lie to people about Salem! But it's fine to lie to Ironwood about it. We can't fight our allies and friends! But it's fine to fight the Ace Ops. We can't just run away! But we should totally run away now. Whether we agree with Ruby's choices in each case doesn't matter. If anyone is going, "Yeah, but in THAT situation it was okay for Ruby to do the Thing She Doesn't Like because..." that's the point. Ruby won't kill Penny until it's a matter of saving the world and honoring Penny's wishes. Context matters. Situations change and what characters are willing to do changes along with them.

More importantly though, having ANYONE kill Penny, at least under those circumstances, is arguably bad writing, period. Rather than quibbling over who should have helped the neurodivergent/disability coded character commit suicide after we already had one "Gotcha!" resurrection for her and her friends had just stripped her identity away without her consent, all while the show tries to claim that this is Penny's first autonomous choice when, in fact, she's been marching to her own drum literally since she came on screen and throughout it all the show expects us to disregard basic facts like Jaune's well-established, incredibly powerful healing ability... how about we just get rid of that whole, awful idea?

I mean, by all means roll your eyes at others who dislike that decision, but I for one fully understand why people are disappointed. I'm one of them.

[gascon-en-exil]

There's a lot of drama going on rn in a fandom because of a callout post. The target made the crime of *checks notes* commenting on an incest fic? Not even writing it. And they were harassed off tumblr. It just baffles me as a gay man, seeing people so puritan about it when it's so common in gay porn and erotica, and most consume it without any actual interest in it (if anything most hate their own siblings)

Is this about Supernatural? I'm not part of that fandom, although I've seen reblogs today to that effect and I'm aware that it has a long and controversial history of incestuous fan content.

I do think that queer men* tend to be more open to exploring taboos through kink, because we know that even if we have the most chaste, vanilla sex possible there will still be people calling us dangerous perverts. Incest kink is indeed quite common in gay porn, and the concept of a daddy, with its quasi-incestuous undertones, is so common that it's used as a self-identifier on most gay hookup apps. Of course those undertones are technically optional in those types of encounters, but speaking anecdotally it's more common for a daddy to enjoy leaning into those implications rather than being bothered by them - with men who object to it being more likely to reject the daddy label outright.

That's not even getting into men who do things like watch porn and masturbate with their brothers or male cousins, which apparently some straight men even do as I once learned in response to telling a straight roommate at university that I was gay. It's just not that big a deal for some guys, and I don't see the point in judging them for it because it's not hurting them or anyone else. The panic over incest in fandom conflates it with pedophilia as a rule, conceiving of no scenario other than a minor being sexually abused by an older relative and therefore leaving out the possibility of consensual incestuous encounters between adults...and unless you want to quibble about potential birth defects - which doesn't even come into play in sex between cis men - why judge people for those, much less for being interested in those sorts of scenarios in fiction? (The actual answer to this for the situation you're describing is, I imagine, tied to character wank and/or a shipping war in some way, as it always comes back to something like that with the anti mentality in fandom.)

*There's also the cultural element to consider here; as I am gay and French and a New Orleanian I am exceptionally comfortable with discussing my sex life, even knowing that people from more prudish cultures might find that to be in poor taste. They flock to our city regardless of their inhibitions...and what the tourists do with us in the dark in the Vieux Carré and the Marigny we do not hesitate to mention in the morning.

[thornswithroses]

I finished Holly Black's first adult novel, Book of Night. It's good. Of course, people on Goodreads are complaining about the things that make it good as if they are bad things--- a complex female protagonist, the grit and grime and etheric quality to the setting, a tone bittersweet as dark chocolate.

Now, there are a few quibbles. Black is a great writer but she isn't as descriptive as she used to be when she published Tithe. It's carved to be more clean, images coming forward in selected paragraphs. Which, really, isn't bad, but man, this type of story calls for more decadence. But that's more of a me-thing. I'm like Angela Carter, I like "overblown, purple, self-indulgent prose. So fucking what?"

I also felt that there could have been more time dedicated to developing the heroine's sister. Their dynamic feels too embryonic. Like, Charlie wants Posey to go to college but Posey wants to study magic. Posey resents Charlie for getting things Posey desires. Like, I felt those problems between them weren't explored enough.

But my god, the twists. Every time I thought the story would go one way, it went another way. And the romance was intriguing and something could read about forever.

Also, the heroine is midsized and she talks about how people can be stupid and project things onto her for having big breasts and ass. It's refreshing. I grew up as a fat girl and read too many heroines with small breasts, bemoaning over being "too thin" while that also seemingly gets romanticized like how the Victorians supposedly romanticized tuberculous. I grew up relating more to Laura Danker rather than Margaret Simon, what can I say?

I can't wait to read the next book.

[thequibblah]

This message was why I turned off anon, but then I was like, wait, I can actually give a measured, point-by-point response to this. I blocked this person so presumably they won’t see it, unless they’re dedicated enough to check back in, but for any others still here who might share these sentiments, I’m not worried about being unable to answer them. Here goes!

Sis, what the fuck type of high school passive aggressive—

No. Just kidding. I suppose that joke will already be a strike against me, since a significant problem you seem to have isn’t what I or my friends have been saying, but how we’ve said it. I don’t know how to explain to you that this rhetoric about politeness is constantly used against marginalised people speaking up about their discomfort. If we don’t sound polite, kind, and forgiving, anything we say is automatically dismissed as aggressive bullying. As you say, you experience marginalisation too, so you probably know what I’m talking about.

I think we have a difference of opinion about what constitutes dismissive and passive aggressive and rude — the latter two, I’m not interested in arguing about. I was and am frustrated, snark slips through. Again, if the snark matters more to you than the sentiment, there’s nothing I can say to you. (Also, not to quibble, ha, but I don’t think I was passive. I thought I was and am quite frank!) 

Dismissive — I’m not sure how much of the conversation you have seen, but let me assure you it did not begin with the reblogged ask about Bought. Whole days before that was a teeth-grindingly frustrating conversation in the server in which a Jewish fan and a fan of colour were talked over and around, separately, after very politely expressing concerns. So, again, the issues run deeper, dismissiveness began early, and you can pretty clearly see it if you’d like to scroll up in the same conversation. If you are dead-set on disbelieving me, again, I can’t help you.

As to the calling-out and “shaming” people and the “you know who you are,” nonspecific criticism of this trope got us exactly nowhere, and it’s been happening since at least August 2021. More than one creator who has written this trope has said something to the effect of I wish I’d known how many people were upset by this. So…which is it? Am I supposed to shout my thoughts into the ether, as I have been, and hope they somehow pick it up? Are people supposed to contact them anonymously, only to be dismissed because it’s faceless criticism anyway, what does it matter? I guess you think I’m supposed to direct message them and lay out my complaints, though never through all this have I felt that I would be listened to rather than just politely told well, don’t like don’t read, says so in the tags.

The most specific call-out that I saw was about a spiteful, mean-spirited response to reader concerns. Again, if you’re wondering what an unsafe environment might be, look no further than that post.

People felt uncomfortable chiming in, not because they didn’t agree but because of our tones — again, love to be told how to voice my own frustration. Personally this strikes me as indefensible. If you agree with me, and not with my so-called “methods,” and said methods are apparently enough to turn you off stating your own opinions — not mine, YOURS, phrased the way you want to phrase them — you might as well disagree with me for all the good it does. Or since you are so concerned with politeness, simply express your polite opinion, and feel free to tell me privately that you think things are getting out of hand. I assure you that plenty of people felt comfortable reaching out privately to apologise unprompted, and some even to ask for resources and labour it is not my job or anyone else’s to provide.

And re: people feeling uncomfortable — good. No one was comfortable for that conversation. Not me, not the people expressing frustration alongside me, not those gently supporting us, not those disagreeing with us. Good. This is a conversation meant to address discomfort, and can’t do so fruitfully without causing a little along the way.

You guys made people feel unsafe — about what?? My lack of safety? The ability to express your polite opinion? The ability to disagree? God knows people were doing both of the latter. If I made someone feel unsafe or uncomfortable about the notion of being silent, this is the cost of this conversation and I can’t help it. Like I said earlier on this blog, it seems patently clear that some of you only care about what I have to say when it’s easy to listen to.

Also, the server is not a safe space. I have never made that claim. The entire point of this discussion is that the server is not a safe space and has not been for months. I am the last person who would say that.

Re: apologies, I certainly haven’t asked for any apologies about writing or reading this trope, though plenty were given. (I would like apologies for how people have been treated and spoken to in the server and here on tumblr, not for being a fan or reader.) As I’ve stated repeatedly, apologies about this trope are immaterial to me. So is remorse in search of my (or Kat’s, or Clare’s) forgiveness. Sincere reflection, if you are interested in continued engagement with me, is what I ask for. If you don’t care about engagement with me, go ahead and don’t apologise. It’s that simple and I don’t care, and I don’t want apology anyway.

The patently false part of this is my “gushing,” lol. I can only speak for myself, but I’ve been frankly skeeved out and horrified by the trope since day one. I have countless date-and-time-stamped messages to support that (as far back as August of last year, I’ve literally just checked! The first conversation I had about this almost exactly matches what I’ve been saying this past week, my consistency surprises even me!). But even if I were to share any of that as if it’s your business at all, I would have scores of people up in arms about how I am bashing other writers’ fic. (Which is it, by the way? Am I a horrible person who talks smack about other people’s writing, or a secret fan who for some bizarro reason did an about-face to join a flaming garbage can of a conversation on the weekend of my birthday while on vacation? Like, why on earth would I do that? The only part of this that has been remotely enjoyable for me is finally being able to express my distaste and cement my limits.)

I have had not just the trope tag blacklisted, but also the names of each fic, and in some cases the URL of the writer. So, I don’t even see when other people engage with this content. If my friends have bought anything or gone inside anywhere for the past however many months, I literally would not know. I stopped interacting with and reading stuff by people who interact with this fic aside from a number of writers I can probably count on one hand. That is how thoroughly I have shut myself off from this trope.

Re: the deleting comments, I haven’t so much as liked a post to do with this trope, let alone engaged, reblogged, kudos’d, or commented. (Friends of mine who did read these fics could tell you i very quickly shut down conversation about it even in private messages. Because I didn’t want to talk about them. Because I don’t like them.) But I can’t very well prove I didn’t delete something that never existed, so if you want to disbelieve me on this front too, go right ahead.

As to the other people who did engage with this trope despite their discomfort, some of them have spoken very openly about why. Go read their posts about it. Or hell, go through my ask tag and you’ll find a number of other people who say they “went along” with it despite initial discomfort because the writers who wrote it are well-known, and assumed everyone was cool with it. I have received messages from people who say they did not initially see why this trope could make people feel the way it did and does, but having heard us out, they get it. I have had friends who have apologised for being flippant about it, knowing now how much of my fandom engagement over the past few months has been within lines I’ve had to draw for myself to avoid content I don’t want to see. 

I don’t know how many times I have to say this: this is all fine. I care more about your response to this conversation, now. But of course people want to paint me as unforgiving and hell-bent on shaming those who disagree with me, so.

Re: the conversation about disability, please do not strip it of its context. Kat has spoken clearly and eloquently about how the response in question was not relevant to the discussion, which was about antisemitism and racism. Knee-jerk reactions of defensiveness are not helpful, and derailing a conversation about one type of marginalisation accomplishes nothing.

Re: your marginalisation — I have never claimed to speak for you and would not expect you to speak for me. I don’t know you. Throughout this conversation, and the parts of i have facilitated, I have centred my thoughts entirely around myself, with the backing of those who agree with me. I haven’t said we all feel this way. I have said some of us feel this way. Your disavowal of me is, again, irrelevant. I’m not surprised by it, since we disagree.

I think in my screenshotting hurry I cropped out a bit of that ask by accident, now that I look at it — I imagine that last line was something like we do not condone the discussions you have about how to be an ally. To that I say, okay. Again, I never said I spoke for you.

Since apparently this needs to be said time and time again — I don’t care what other ships you read. By all means read a different HP ship featuring a Death Eater, I don’t care. I have zero stake or investment in those spaces, nor do I care to apply my opinions that are grounded in this space, the Jily space, to them. I don’t demand an apology from anyone. In fact I’m pretty sure the mutual readers I have with DE James fics have unfollowed and unsubscribed by now without a word, which is good. That’s what I asked for. This is my personal line.

I am okay with being called insensitive and abrasive. I’m okay with this so-called popular opinion you cite. I’ve received support where I could count on it and even where I didn’t expect to, and that’s way more than enough. And I don’t say this for sympathy or to prompt people to tell me no, really, they want me to stay, as nice as the sentiment is. I cannot overstate this — I have been disengaging for months, and I don’t much care about how the spaces I’ve left behind see me.

[dwellordream]

“I can’t believe I have to write this down right now, but my dear friends, medieval people bathed regularly. Yes. I assure you. I am very serious. It is true. In fact, medieval people loved a bath and can in many ways be considered a bathing culture, much in the way that say, Japan is now. Medieval people also very much valued being clean generally in an almost religious way. This is not to say that getting clean was as easy for medieval people as it is for us now.

But medieval people were very clever and had ways of getting around that. So, say you are an average-ass medieval person. That means you are a peasant, because 85% of the population or so were peasants. This meant that you were working very hard doing manual labour in a field. How would you stay clean? Well you would probably wash daily at home. This usually involved filling an ewer with water, heating it and then poring it into a larger basin which allowed for ease of scrubbing….

Say that you couldn’t or didn’t have time to heat up water though, what then? Well people would just bathe in a local water source… So, fine, regular people figured out how to get wet, right? Well, the other thing that is important to note here (and I can’t believe I am saying this), when washing at home medieval people used soap. Yes. I am serious. They did. In fact soap is a motherfucking medieval invention. Yes. It is. The Romans – whomst I don’t see a bunch of basics going around accusing of being filthy – did not, in fact have soap, in contrast. They usually washed using oil. Medieval people? Oh you better believe that they had soap.

It was first introduced from the East, like most good stuff was at the time, but it took off rather quickly. Your peasant ass would likely have been making soap at home, and books of secrets often included various recipes for soap, all of which can still be made today. The general ingredients were usually tallow, mutton or beef fat, some type of wood ash or another, potash, and soda.

However, soap could also be purchased. As early as the seventh century soap makers guilds began to spring up , trading it as a high value commodity. If you were fancy enough to be buying soap you could also get the good imported stuff initially from Aleppo, which was traded heavily and involved laurel oil rather than animal fat. After importing rather a lot of this to Castille, in the twelfth century the denizens there got to thinking that they could probably create a similar product using the local olive oil. Voila! Castille soap was born and also became a popular trade good.

Even if you couldn’t get the good fancy soap, many people would scent the water that they bathed in, often with thyme or sage. People often used herbs not just for washing, but in deodorant as well. Yes. They had deodorant. It was often made of bay leaves, hyssop or sage. In fact, one of the more popular medieval deodorant recipes came from Dioscorides, a Greek physician active in the first century AD. His De Materia Medica was super popular throughout the medieval period and advised readers on how to make a deodorant using salvia and sage.

Medieval people also regularly washed both their hands and faces both before and after meals when in between baths because – stay with me here – they knew that dirt and grime could be hazardous to their health if ingested. Yes. They did. They really really did. In fact, the whole washing after eating thing was an explicit health concern, because as medieval medical writers such as Magninius Mediolanesis noted, If any of the waste products of third digestion are left under the skin that were not resolved by exercise and massage, these will be resolved by the bath.

Our girl Hildegard of Bingen even had a recipe for face cleanser because apparently she was a skin-care bitch. She advises that, one whose face has hard and rough skin, made harsh from the wind, should cook barley in water and, having strained that water through a cloth, should bathe his face gently with the moderately warm water. The skin will become soft and smooth, and will have a beautiful color.

So yes, medieval people, even regular old peasants were pretty clean types of people. In fact, they were so clean that for them bathing constituted a leisure activity. So the average person would likely wash daily at home, but once a week or so they would treat themselves to a bath at the communal bath house. That is where the party was at.

…You, my gentle readers may have picked up on something here, and that is that our girls the sex workers be showing right TF up in the public baths. This meant that whether or not you admitted them made the difference between whether you were keeping a bathhouse or a brothel. Here in London, of course the Stews in Southwark were essentially brothels where you could also have a bath (and were largely owned by the Bishop of Winchester (as you do).

Having said that, there were plenty of people who went to bathhouses just to go to bathhouses and by 1292 in Paris, there were at least 26 running that could give you just a bath. Medieval people related to this very much as we do having a spa day, and medieval bathhouses often included steam baths along with big wooden tubs where you could sit down and enjoy a meal. In order to stand out from the crowd, the Parisian bathhouses would even employ criers to advertise themselves.

And, I cannot stress this enough, this was just for regular ass people. Rich people? Oh, you better believe they were bathing, and often had dedicated rooms for washing unlike the poors. They also might go places simply to bathe, like Bath in England, or the thermal baths in Pozzuli in Campania, which was so famous it had a whole ass poem, De balneis Puteolanis written about it. They could also afford that nice soap and perfume and all that good stuff. In fact they were so into poncey baths that most medieval knighthood ceremonies involved having a scented bath.

So OK, clearly, fucking clearly medieval people bathed and were clean and into it. So why am I telling you all of this? Well the idea that medieval people didn’t bathe is a persistent myth that some basics on twitter will come at me with at least once a week. Why is that? Well part of it is a modern misunderstanding of the idea of bathing. It’s true that we have medieval sources which warn against “excessive” bathing. But here’s the thing, that wasn’t really about being clean, it was about hanging out naked in bathhouses with the opposite sex. They didn’t want you to not be clean, they wanted you to not be going down the bath house and getting your fuck on.

And yeah, some holy people didn’t bathe, notably saints who would forego bathing themselves but bathe sick or poor people. But if you bring that up you are missing the point. Medieval people thought that bathing and being clean was really nice, so giving it up and living with your stank was a sign that you had given up on the corporeal world and only thought of heaven. It was holy because it was uncomfortable, like wearing a hair shirt, or eating vegan, and hitting your chest with rocks and sitting in the desert trying not to wank. You know, standard saint stuff. It is mentioned because it is uncommon and uncomfortable.

These things, while they make sense in context are often taken by people who have never learned a damn thing about the middle ages and read in the worst possible light. If you intrinsically believe (and it is a belief) that the medieval period is the Dark Ages, and very bad, then you read stuff like this and just assume people are gross and dirty, even if there’s no real evidence of that.

You know what else helps? Well, in the modern period sometimes people were gross. In both the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, there were times when some doctors claimed that bathing was harmful. This was often linked to the idea that bathing with warm water would open the pores and allow contagion in. And here’s the thing about that – a lot of people just don’t know what the medieval period is, but they are pretty sure it is when stuff was gross. So if they hear about doctors telling you not to bathe they are like, “LOL medieval people were gross”, even if that is going down smack bang in the modern period.

Now on the one hand we can see this as a historical quibble. After all it’s not like I don’t have a history of getting big mad about someone incorrectly relating to the medieval period. But here’s the thing, allowing myths like this to perpetuate allows us to keep upholding harmful ideas about the medieval period that furthers our colonialist ideas about history, and simultaneously allows us to gloss over all the harmful and gross stuff that we as modern people do. If we always blame medieval people for everything difficult it allows us to deny their humanity and write off a thousand years of thinking and culture that still influences us now. So, like, could you not?

- Eleanor Janega, “I assure you, medieval people bathed.”

[ultrahpfan5blog]

Retrospective Review: Casino Royale (2006)

So after thinking about it, I figured that with No Time to Die coming out soon, the Craig Bond era Bond movies deserve a post per film. Casino Royale is the film that got me into Bond. I had seen some of the Brosnan films by then, but they didn't really stick to me much. Perhaps also because I was reasonably young when the Brosnan films came out. But Casino Royale came out during my teen years, where I was starting to get into more dark and gritty movies. To me, this movie and Batman Begins, are cut from the same cloth. Both rebooting characters that had gotten too campy in previous iterations, both brilliant origin stories, and both grounded in reality and gritty. Its no wonder that both version of these characters ended up being my favorite versions. Casino Royale is still easily my favorite Bond film to date.

Truthfully, to me this film is near perfection as an action-thriller. For classic Bond fans who have grown up with the franchise and want specific things like Moneypenny and Q and various gadgets, this film may not be as endearing because it very specifically goes away from being gadget heavy and doesn't give Bond a support staff other than Mathis. I think the most high tech thing in the movie was a portable defibrillator. But this film had me from the very beginning in the black and white sequence and how it showed Bond's two kills to become 007 and how it reimagined the classic opening shot of Bond shooting and the blood red soaking over the screen. I just new we were in for something special from the very beginning. What's amazing is the pacing of this film. This was the longest Bond film since OHMSS at the time. I have watched all prior Bond films and I have felt restless at times while watching them, but not when watching Casino Royale. There is constantly something happening and it keeps you engaged. Not once was I bored in the movie.

The action in the film is absolutely high class. I think its the best Bond action that I have seen. The most classic scene of course is the incredible Parkour chase. Its incredibly exhilarating and major kudos to the guy who did the stunts for the bomb maker. You also get a real understanding of what a brute force this Bond is. While the Bomb maker chooses to jump through the window, Bond will burst through the wall. The Bomb maker will climb construction rods, Bond will just drive a bulldozer and destroy the construction and climb up. When the bomb maker throws the gun at him, Bond just catches it and throws it right back. Little things like that give Bond a personality that is different. But this is only the first great action sequence. There is the Miami airport truck sequence that is also brilliant. You have to love the smug smile on Bond's face when the bomber accidentally blows himself up. There is the staircase fight which is brutal and visceral. Then there is final fight scene in Venice which is emotional and tragic and is the true making of Bond. In between it all, there is the Poker game which is surprisingly entertaining given it takes up quite a chunk of time. There are also some incredibly tense sequences which are laced with humor, like the Bond poisoning scene where Bond almost gets killed and then returns with a classic one liner to leave Le Chiffre dumbfounded. There is the torture scene which is hilarious because of how Bond reacts to the torture and eggs him on in a way. The film never lets up in the action and the thrills.

An enormous part of the success of the film is the casting of Mads Mikkelson as Le Chiffre. I had not known Mads from anywhere before this, but he is immediately compelling and enigmatic. More importantly, rather than just being an all powerful villain to foil, he feels like a human. The tearing blood is a great, sinister gimmick, but you feel like he is on the edge when he loses money in the stock market due to Bond. You feel his desperation in some of the Poker scenes, as well as when the african fighters find him at the hotel, and then when he is torturing Bond to find the location of the money. I am not sure whether I like him more than Bardem's Silva or not, but its telling that the best Bond movies of Craig's era have the best villains. This film put him on the map for me and I loved him as Hannibal, saw him Dr. Strange, and I want see how he does as Grindelwald in the next Fantastic Beasts movie.

However, what elevates this film beyond any prior Bond movie is the casting of Eva Green as Vesper Lynd. She is the best Bond girl ever put to film and the romance between her and Bond is one of the most heartfelt and tragic romances that I have seen. The chemistry between the two actors/characters is electric from their very first scene in the train. The film gives them everything. There are deeply intimate scenes between the two which are not remotely sexual such as the tender shower scene where Bond comforts Vesper after the stairwell fight, many instances of witty repartee, scenes of romance, and then the bitter tragedy of her betrayal and her death. Even her death scene is picturized in a way where you really feel the connection as you can tell that Vesper can't bear to live with what she's done. The film doesn't flinch when showing her drown so it engulfs the audience in the same horror and sadness that Bond is feeling. In general, you experience the same emotions as Bond does as you can't help but fall in love with Vesper and just at the point of happily ever after, it all turns to ash. Its a phenomenal character arc and it also does a great job of establishing how Bond became so cold. Its a fantastic performance from Eva Green, and yet another instance of an actor who put herself on the map in my eyes.

And then there is the man himself. Yet another actor who I knew very little about. At that point everyone thought Craig wasn't good looking enough, not tall enough, not charismatic enough etc... to play Bond. But boy did he just blow expectations away. He is my Bond for sure because his performance is just exceptional in every way. He is built like a tank and is a force of nature, but Craig brings a tender vulnerability, perfectly suited for a young Bond. He looks dapper, is charismatic, is great in the fight scenes, and you genuinely feel he could beat the crap out of people. As I have already mentioned, there are so many touches to his performance that is unique to him. The brutality he brings in the fight scenes, the smirk at the end of the Miami scene, the heartfelt tenderness in the shower scene, the twinkly eyes humor, the rage when he is betrayed, the devastation at Vesper's death, and then the coldness that comes after that. He gets to show a full range, and he delivers every aspect with perfection.

One of the major carryovers from Brosnan era, was Jud Dench as M. And she gets a lot more to do during the Craig era. She is phenomenal as she always is. The dynamic between her and Bond is slightly more stern maternal in the Craig era compared to Brosnan and their interactions are great. Jeffrey Wright brings Felix Leiter back into the fold for the first time since License to Kill and he's a welcome presence as always. Giancarlo Giannini is also pretty great as Mathis and I'm glad he came back in QoS. Jesper Christensen has a quiet presence as Mr. White, who makes recurring appearances in the future.

I feel not enough people give Martin Cambell credit for what he has done. Twice he has launched Bonds successfully. GoldenEye was really good and Casino Royale is just outstanding. I have never paid much attention to the Bond song but the song for Casino Royale is pretty great. Again its telling that the two songs that I remember from Bond movies are from Casino Royale and Skyfall. Anyways, Casino Royale is a near perfect movie, especially for someone who is new to Bond. It really launched Bond into the modern world and got him away from the cold war era type plots. If I had to quibble about something, I would say some of the scenes in the Bahamas are a little slower and maybe 5-10 minutes can be edited down but even those scenes are great character scenes and we get a new origin of the DB5. A 9.5/10 for me.

[urupotter]

Fic Review: A dealer not a Death Eater

By Jaxon

I had originally started this story a while back, yet abandoned it due to being put off by the authors style. A while after that, I got into Tumblr, and finding out that @deathdaydungeon was the author of that story convinced me to pick it up again due to how much I enjoyed their meta. And I’m glad I did.

The basic premise of the story is that Severus Snape did not become a Death Eater and is in a relationship with Lily Evans. While he is not a Death Eater, he is also not a member of the Order of the Phoenix, and makes a living primarily by dealing in illegal potions via Lucius Malfoy, a man with whom he has mantained a friendship/business like relationship of sorts. You find out how all this came to be as the story develops.

The prose, while originally what put me off, is actually one this stories core strengths. Harry Potter has a particular style of writing which lends itself exceedingly well towards the whimsical and magical. Pulling it off is often extremely hard, and success or failure can elevate a story or sink it. Deaths prose is completely different, and is actually better for the type of story the author is trying to tell. This isn’t a story about magic and wonder. This is a story about love and war.

One of the main strengths of the tale is how much it makes the first blood war come to life. Wether it’s the machinations of the ministry, the power struggles and jockeying for position among Death Eaters, or the way the Order of the Phoenix functions, everything is beautifully described and feels real. Many characters of which we know little about get developed into actual characters with virtues and flaws (I particularly like how he develops the Evans, especially David, and love Cato Avery’s character, he’s delightfully repulsive yet surprisingly human).

Voldemort in canon always felt like a somewhat innfectual villian, and was occasionally almost comical in how unthreatening he was. This Voldemort really feels like a threat. You really feel a sense of oppression and despair over the state of the wizarding world, a kind of slow but spreading corruption.

Another of the stories strengths is the characterization of Lily and Snape, which is vital in any Snily story. Snape feels realistic in that he is still a huge ball of issues and trauma, yet is lacking that misery, self loathing and misanthropy he did in canon, due to having made different choices. While it’s practically impossible to write an OOC Lily, due to how little information we have on her, this one feels like a character with real flaws and virtues. The relationship dynamic itself is excellent in how in many ways they have excellent chemistry, yet there are still huge problems, wether internal or external, and how they slowly work things out. The relationship is not idealized, yet you truly feel that they love each other.

With regards to criticism, I do have some. The author kind of misses the mark with some character’s characterization I believe. Nothing too big, yet I feel he could have done better. The main one is Peter Pettigrew. While the relationship with Peter and the other marauders is delightful to read, as it really shows the cracks in the group, this wormtail is a lot less sociopathic than he was in canon. Canonical wormtail blew up a street and murdered 12 muggles and didn’t give a shit. He condemned the Potter’s to death. This is not a man whose concience holds sway. Another character with who I have some quibbles in regards to characterization is Dumbledore. While some of his qualities are portrayed very well (his capacity for ruthlessness, his ability to manipulate, his aura, his ability to control a conversation, his belief in the power of love), I feel the author misses the mark on others. Dumbledore is supposed to be charming, and he often shows empathy. The stories Dumbledore never felt charming to me. While some of this is explainable due to reading from Snape’s pov who distrusts him, not all of it is. Additionally, it is important to show that Dumbledore is capable of showing empathy and caring deeply about people. It’s what makes his ruthlessness over sacrificing those same people for the war effort all the more powerful later on. Dumbledore in this story feels rather more cold than he’s supposed to.

As a final criticism, I would add that so much happens that the various plotlines can often be a bit confusing, so I would recommend that the author write a summary chapter, refreshing it every 40 chapters or so.

One last bit of praise, is that the story really feels of it’s place and era. There was a lot of research put into this story and it shows. It really feels like the 1970’s, and both the language dialects and little details make it feel authentic.

The story is a WIP, but is already very long (650k+ words). It updates on sundays every one or two weeks, and the author has shown no signs of stopping, so I recommend even those who only read completed stories read it, as there is little chance of it being left unfinished. I recommend everyone give it a read.

[doberbutts]

What do you think about the term transmisogyny exempt (tme)?

In honesty it's a New Term for me because I do not engage with the majority of the trans community online, and thus only learned about it just halfway through May. Admittedly my understanding is still fairly minimal and I do not claim to 100% Get It, but...

From my understanding, it rebrands transmisogyny to only apply to trans women and transfems, and thus those who are trans men and transmasc are somehow "exempt" from transmisogyny.

This is a really bizarre way of thinking for me. People who are transmasc are not exempt from being affected by misogyny, nor are they exempt from the specific form of transmisogyny that transfems are subjected to. In fact, I can recall a relatively recent gross interaction with a chaser/fetishist that specifically was talking to me because he thought I was a trans woman and did not understand the difference between trans men and trans women. I had to explain to him several times before he finally got it, and then he expressed that he thought I was really gross for "wanting to be a homo". WTF, dude. You're just as obsessed with sucking cock as I am, just because you're straight for wanting a woman's penis does not mean I'm wrong for wanting a man's, but okay I guess.

Trans men may not be killed at the same rates of trans women, but that is because trans women are hypervisible (which is not great) and trans men are invisible (which is also not great)- meaning when someone "clocks" a trans man they usually think he is either a trans woman or a butch lesbian, and comes under fire for that assumption because it's not like those identities are safe at all in larger society either. Trans men are still killed for being trans, as well as subjected to beatings and rapes and homelessness and drug addiction and more, for similar and yet different reasons that trans women are.

In other words, I think all transgender identities are more alike than they are different, and I think pitting ourselves against each other to try and claim that one is more oppressed than the other will get us no where. I think recognizing that we all come under fire because of our gender expression and that while these things may affect us in different ways, the problem is not that one identity or gender has "more danger" than the other, but that these problems manifest in different ways because we still live in a very gendered society and are marginalized from the getgo.

Caitlyn Jenner may not be TME due to being a trans woman, and I may be TME due to being a trans man, but she has more privilege in this world than I will ever have, while still having a target on her back due to the simple fact that she is a trans woman. I don't think it's fair to erase others' struggles and oppression simply because one group's problems are more visible than the others'.

Additionally, transmisogyny was coined to include both binary genders and nonbinary genders and how it was misogyny and the closeness to women that fueled violent acts of transphobia. The idea being that trans men are women, trans women are men who want to be women, and nonbinary people are a mix of soyboys and confused tomboys, and thus it's all bad because it all relates back to women in the end, and thus our fellowship in misery because the world cannot accept that we are what we say we are.

At some point, there was a gear shift, and transmisogyny was put fully on trans women and transfems, which entirely erased trans men and transmascs from the discussion. If I were to hedge a bet on exact timing, I would say likely whenever the idea that all men including marginalized men are bad also spread, and trans men and transmascs began to be attacked and forced back into the closet and made to feel ashamed for being male or male-adjacent. This is also about when the argument to use the words transmisandry or transandrophobia came about, to differentiate the struggles between the two "sides".

As an aside I really wonder where peopble who are gender neutral or agender get sorted in this discussion, and whether those nonbinary who do not claim "transmasc" and "transfem" as a term to describe themselves feel similar or different regarding this discussion. I have always been very binary so I really can't tell you, but I do find that these discussions tend to leave this group out to argue on a gender binary level.

[lemontrash]

From LAM's personal account~! For the OTP meme - 1x3 for #1, #3, and #13? :D

Ooh! Interesting. I haven't written out much that's 1x3.

1. Who is the most affectionate?

I kind of see them as being one of those couples which other people are surprised to learn they're a couple because affection tends to be kept fairly private. No grand gestures or overall sentimentality. I suspect being affectionate both physically and in other respects is something that takes them a while to figure out and might evolve into something which doesn't look like it to the untrained eye. Having said that, Heero is perhaps more closely attached to his emotions that Trowa is - in bad times Heero tends to feel too deeply where Trowa tends to go blank - so I think he'd be the first to actually name the feeling as affection and then being Heero, act on it. Trowa might jump the gun on him though by performing acts of affection before the rest of him quite catches up.

3. Most common argument?

Really hard to say what they'd argue about. They're both pretty stubborn personalities and the type who may say 'this isn't worth the energy' over a disagreement, but that's neither a good thing nor a bad thing because they're both a bit single-minded and might let things rankle rather than resolve it. Each may rely too much on his own perspective or intuition rather than discussing the problem to find out why it's a problem. But what would set them off?

I dunno. I can't see them quibbling over small stuff. One voices his annoyance and the other goes 'fine' and redraws the line. Like that, because they know if they blow up, then they'll really blow up and neither really wants to risk going too far.

Perhaps they pick safe 'pet' topics they can row over which are low stakes enough that it gets the feeling expressed and out the way without having to deal with the bigger stuff that neither is really equipped to resolve, say if Trowa's more cynical about life and his snark bothers Heero or Heero's hamfisted or impatient with Trowa's more friable state of mind and that bothers Trowa.

Past that stage maybe stuff like 'if you're going to come and 'join me for the evening' can you put the fucking laptop away', or 'can you ask before using my stuff?' or 'please put the lion somewhere that is NOT THE HOUSE'.

13. Who reaches for the other’s hand first?

Probably Trowa because he's that smidge more likely to pick up the idea that this is a thing people do and that it could also apply to them. It's only after Heero does it to him that Trowa's like 'Oh. oh. This is an actual thing we do now.'

[arcticdementor]

Discussions of genes and behavior results in a lot of what I’d call lawyering. That is, there’s a ton of nibbling around the edges of the argument to disqualify the debate rather than grappling with the heady philosophical issues straight on. I’ve complained about this in relation to the definition of “heritable” in the past - yes, there are some conceptual and linguistic complexities there, but many debates get derailed by quibbling over that term rather than getting to the meat of how we might act in a world where we knew human talents were influenced by our genes. And this seems pointed, to me, in the sense that I think the avoidance aspect of these debates is the whole point. People just do not want to engage with this stuff. With the publication of Gideon Lewis-Kraus’s recent New Yorker article, there’s been heroic amounts of lawyering going on.

…

I don’t want to pick on Quiggin here, as there’s a lot of people expressing this sentiment. But I find this attitude… a little crazy? If human beings are in any sense unequal in their innate cognitive and behavioral abilities, in the way we all accept they are in their athletic abilities, then this has massive policy and politics implications. I wrote a whole book about one obvious place where there are profound policy consequences, which is in education. And nowhere was blank slate thinking more destructive in education policy than with No Child Left Behind.

NCLB was, notoriously, a massive disaster. It was so obviously a disaster, in fact, that when the endless war between Barack Obama and the Republican Congress was at its height, the two sides still came together to get rid of the law. What made NCLB such a profound failure? Well, for one thing, the collision of Common Core and NCLB created onerous testing requirements that drove parents to rebel and passed down huge costs to states, resulting in the opt-out movement that has become woven into today’s social justice movement. More relevant here, NCLB essentially mandated perpetual improvement in student scores and in effect demanded 100% compliance with state standards. Schools that failed to meet these requirements faced harsh sanctions. This resulted in both states and the feds devising workarounds for what was the law of the land - states set standards that were so low it strained the very definition of a standard, and the Obama Department of Education issued exemptions by the bushel. It turns out that you can do a lot of talking tough about how you’re going to insist on excellence, but that doesn’t change the fact that excellence can never be mandated, particularly when dealing with the crooked timber of humanity. And while NCLB is gone, its replacement (the Every Student Succeeds Act) still enshrines unmeetable goals for our education system, just largely toothless ones. Meanwhile, states, schools, and teachers continue to shoulder the burden of the “no excuses” rhetoric that led to No Child Left Behind.

I really must underline this point. A little back-of-the-envelope math suggests that more than 100,000 public school teachers in this country operate under merit pay systems. Those teachers are seeing their wages fluctuate based on the outcomes of their students. Thousands of teachers in this country have been fired (or had their contracts not renewed) on the basis of poor academic performance in their classrooms, and hundreds of schools nationwide have been closed based on test scores and other quantitative educational metrics. But this whole edifice depends on the notion that student outcomes are more or less under the control of schools and teachers. If, on the other hand, we pay attention to decades of research, the experience of many teachers, and common sense, we would rather assume that different people have different levels of intrinsic underlying academic ability, and that this inequality prompts the remarkable stability of relative academic performance over time. And if we thought that way, we would have never passed NCLB in the first place. A truly ruinous law, passed with great fanfare by liberals and conservatives working together, would have been avoided had we taken genetic influence on cognition seriously. How could you say that this scenario doesn’t have policy relevance, Dr. Quiggin?

“No excuses” thinking was always based on blank slatism. The entire school reform movement was predicated on the assumption that talk of inherent ability was just excuse making, lazy teachers and corrupt unions trying to shirk their professional responsibilities. That movement, though wounded in the present moment, has had immense political and policy consequences. Meanwhile, speaking as someone who reads a lot of education research, the topic of student ability sort of flits around the field, not expressly forbidden but rigorously avoided. In study after study, including ones that expressly seek to understand parental influence, the question of any given student’s inherent tendency to struggle or excel is studiously avoided. Similarly, wonks of all types who work at nonprofits and in media conspicuously avoid discussing whether everyone has the same academic potential. When inherent ability is referenced at all in the literature it tends to be a vague handwave that does not factor into the final analysis. But if what we’re interested in is how people learn and why some succeed and some fail, this is totally nuts!

…

Again, I’m left with the same basic point: it is not remotely scientifically contentious to say that literally all elements of our physiological selves are influenced by our genome. If that’s true, how could it possibly be the case that there is no influence of our genes on our behavior or cognition, which arise from the physical bodies that we all acknowledged are built by DNA? That notion is so obviously untrue that almost no one is willing to come out and state it directly. But since denialists also don’t want to acknowledge that it’s unthinkable that our genomes could mean everything to our bodies but nothing to our behavior, they partake in the previously-mentioned lawyering as a means of avoidance. I have already read several reactions to Dr. Harden’s book that fixate on minute details, the typical methodological criticisms of kinship studies and GWAS, without once engaging with the question of whether it’s even remotely conceivable that bodies that are built with DNA can house minds that are completely uninfluenced by that DNA. But that’s the fundamental question, the essence of this whole debate. If given perfectly matched environments, will two people with different genomes have the exact same outcomes? And how could such a condition square with 150+ years of research suggesting that genes change everything?

Also, to return to Quiggin’s tweet, we are already changing the gene pool. Assortative mating, which has massively increased in recent decades, is among other things an effort in genetic engineering. Mate selection among humans is a very complicated thing, but there’s no doubt that we are in part selecting for reproductive fitness, broadly defined. If someone decides that they want to partner up with someone else because that person will help provide financial stability - a very common concern in marriage and a perfectly legitimate one - that person is, to some degree, selecting based on genes. Physical attraction is also, among other things, related to our perceptions of the desirability of the genes that potential partner might pass on to our children. But of course it is; we are the products of evolution, and evolution forces us to want to produce offspring who are more likely to produce lots of offspring. Those professional class liberals who are delaying marriage and kids until later and later in life are practicing excruciatingly exacting mate selection, looking for just the right person to make some babies with. That is genetic engineering; the fact that it’s the polite kind does not change the fact that, if such trends continue, on a long enough timescale we will have a rigidly stratified species based on genetic parentage. I do not need to share the extremely durable research showing that more highly-educated parents have more highly-educated children, which has serious consequences even if you suppose that influence is entirely environmental. If it’s even partially genetic, the consequences are civilization-altering. But how can we think through that condition if we must pretend genes and behavior are totally disconnected?

[tiliamericana]

Muay Thai: 1.13

“I can’t believe you’ve done this,” said Agatha acidly as Nairi held the door to the pizza place open for her.

“I’m sorry,” said Nairi, no longer feeling particularly apologetic after a week of saying nothing but. “We’ll only be here for what, an hour? And then we can go.”

She didn’t love that she was already on edge. It was hardly the first time in her life that she was deliberately sitting down to spend a couple of hours with an unpleasant man, but it was still frustrating. She liked spending time with Agatha and Linden who were only occasionally frustrating, but they tended to get tense and catty with each other, and Nairi’s teeth were aching at the thought of dealing with that on top of Simon.

Well. They were usually catty, but when not talking about relationships they could be relied on to be friendly-catty rather than terse-catty.

Linden was sitting alone at one of the tall tables near the centre of the restaurant, and she waved at them as they approached, her smile wide. “Hey guys!” she said as Nairi sat down across from her, and if her smile was fake then she at least sounded pleased—or, well, relieved, at any rate.

“No boyfriend yet?” asked Agatha archly, sitting next to Nairi with a disapproving curve to her lips as their eyes met.

“He’s running late,” said Linden, clasping her hands together in front of her and making her bracelets jingle. “Promised he’d treat me to a nice big pie and dessert to make it up to me, though!”

“Nice of him,” said Nairi, snagging a complimentary breadstick, more out of habit than hunger.

“Very,” said Agatha, inspecting a menu without looking up.

Linden’s expression faltered. “Yeah,” she said anyway.

Nairi knocked their ankles together under the table in an attempt to reassure, and Linden flashed her a grateful look, the tension across her shoulders loosening a little. “Things are going well then?” she asked, pouring herself a glass of water and pushing the jug towards Agatha, who ignored her.

“As well as they can be,” said Linden, nodding a little too much, her bracelets jingling again. “I mean, things get bumpy occasionally, but we really haven’t known each other for long in like, the grand scheme of things. We already know we like each other, so we’re just feeling everything else out as we go.”

“Oh goodie,” muttered Agatha, pushing her glasses up her nose again before setting the menu down and joining the conversation. “Nick likes this one, then?”

Linden snorted. “Simon’s not that exceptional,” she said dismissively. “Nick thinks he’s too flaky.”

Agatha glanced at her watch conspicuously. “I wonderwhy.”

Linden gave her a sharp curve of a smile, darkly amused. “Look, that might be a dealbreaker for Nick, but he’s not the one dating him. I can handle a little flakiness, and besides, he’s working on it.”

“Is he working on anything else?”

“Yes,” said Linden, looking Agatha right in the eye. “Nick told me—I promise he won’t call you that ever again, I even slapped him around a little to make it stick.”

“Right,” said Agatha, unimpressed in the face of Linden’s humour. “Because if he does then I’m just going to leave. Why does he even talk like that in the first place?”

Linden wrinkled her nose. “It’s his masters, I swear, he spends his entire time with his nose up the ass of these old school poets, and then he like, forgets that language has changed in the last eighty years? It’s really annoying, he literally called me the ‘whore of Babylon’ the other day and then got offended when I told him to fuck off because I ‘didn’t get the compliment’.”

Nairi snorted.

“Oh! Such a catch! I suddenly understand why you’re so determined to make this relationship work,” drawled Agatha.

“It’s a better basis for a relationship than some I could name,” said Linden snidely, narrowing her eyes across the table.

Damn, Agatha’s last boyfriend must have been a real piece of work. “There’s always going to be worse relationships out there,” said Nairi diplomatically. “And I mean, people are even meeting and dating on the internet these days, everything starts somewhere.”

“Exactly,” said Linden, relaxing a little with a grin. “That’s a bad basis, we all know the internet’s for porn and arguing with strangers.”

“And LOLcats, don’t forget those,” said Agatha, nodding at her.

“How could I?” said Linden, her grin widening.

Nairi was saved from having to ask what the fuck a ‘LOLcat’ was by Simon’s arrival. “Hello ladies,” he said breezily, draping his coat over the back of the free chair with a waft of eau-de-cigarette over the table. He leaned in and kissed Linden’s cheek from behind before sitting. “Hello babe, sorry I’m late, transport was a bit of an issue.”

“You’re fine,” said Linden, smiling indulgently at him as he sat. “Just gave us time to work up an appetite.”

Thankfully, the process of deciding on pizzas and drinks, and then the conveying all of that information to the waitress meant that Nairi didn’t have to speak directly to Simon. It also meant that he didn’t try to speak with Agatha, who was coolly ignoring him from across the table with a total lack of eye contact that veered dangerously close to the border between ‘civility’ and ‘rudeness’.

Once the food actually arrived however, she was out of luck.

Pretty much every pizza on the menu that wasn’t explicitly vegetarian had some kind of bacon or ham or pork-based sausage in its toppings, so there wasn’t any quibbling or half-and-halfing on the one Nairi was sharing with Agatha. Simon, however, had ordered without asking Linden, which she’d ignored, much the same way she’d ignored Agatha’s quiet snort at him doing so. Nairi was about ninety percent certain Linden didn’t even like green peppers.

“So,” said Simon brightly, gesturing across the table with his wine glass. “How have you two been this week? Anything exciting?”

Agatha took an enormous bite of pizza and chewed loudly, glancing at Nairi. Nairi sighed internally and lowered her own slice to answer him. “Not terribly exciting. Work, mostly.”

“That’s right,” he said, chewing obnoxiously and giving Nairi a chance to start eating. Next to him, Linden was carefully tugging peppers off the surface of her pizza. “Lindy said you did some kind of fighting thing, right? MMA? Kickboxing? Sweaty punch ups in sports bras?”

“…I teach judo,” said Nairi eventually. “Early days at my dojo, I don’t have a lot of students yet, I’m afraid. Uh, Agatha’s working on a paper at the moment though, that’s a bit more interesting.”

“Really? What’s it about?” asked Simon, turning both his attention and his chewing maw towards Agatha.

“Diatomic elements,” said Agatha shortly. “It’s just about nucleics, I’m not reinventing the wheel or anything.”

Simon stared at her blankly. “Oh, of course. Uh, I’m afraid I’m not familiar, is your field—?”

“Chemistry,” supplied Agatha, turning her attention back to her dinner. “My PhD was on inorganic, but I’m still in the process of post-doc applications so I’m mostly twiddling my thumbs and writing contributions in the meanwhile.”

“Right,” said Simon, his face showing a total lack of comprehension. “Academia’s a lot like that, terribly stiff in the paperwork and appropriateness departments. The right body of work and all that—I know exactly how it feels, I was going to do my thesis on the erotic underpinnings of Virginia Woolf’s work and the reflection of her relationship with her husband, but my advisor was really very pushy about playing it safe and sticking to Eliot’s body of work in the immediate post-war era.”

“Oh yes, much safer,” said Agatha with no inflection in her tone.

Simon laughed loudly, leaning back in his chair and taking another long drink of his wine. “You know, Lindy said you had a sense of humour, and I must confess I didn’t quite believe her at first! Mistakes all around.”

He punctuated this with a conspiratorial wink across the table at her, though Nairi didn’t quite understand what was so funny about it. At a glance, neither did Agatha or Linden. Linden actually looked… embarrassed? It was only for a second, the expression gone almost as soon as Nairi noticed it, Linden covering the bottom half of her face with her glass as she took a sip.

“So how long have you two lovebirds been dating anyway?” Simon continued, not even glancing at Linden next to him with her small pile of peppers or his ignored slice of pizza on the plate in front of him.

“A few months,” said Nairi, her own dinner looking more unappetising by the second. “Since September, I think?”

“That’s about right,” said Agatha, the lines around the corners of her eyes easing as she glanced at Nairi. “Five or six months now.”

“Charming,” said Simon, polishing off his wine, smile bright and enthusiastic as he gestured. “You know I’ve always greatly enjoyed the figure of the lesbian, in real life as well as literature. Excising the men from the bed and the home—it’s always so representative of the purest form of womanhood, really illuminates the truth of femininity. And the politics of it! The ultimate commitment to the feminist ideal, the usurpation of the patriarchy from its most foundational stronghold in the home at the head of the family. Really brilliant stuff!”

Agatha’s eyebrows were somewhere around her hairline.

Linden laughed awkwardly, nudging Simon as she leaned in a little over her plate. “Well, I mean, it’s always gonna be a bit different from books, hun. People are people, real life is always more, uh—”

“Oh yes, yes, of course,” said Simon dismissively, nodding at her. “And writers have a tendency to exaggerate and eroticise that type of relationship as well.”

“And what exactly do you mean by that kind of relationship?” asked Agatha, tone sharp.

Nairi tensed as Simon opened his mouth and started bloviating again. Linden swallowed whatever she was going to say, giving up and quietly eating instead, leaning on one elbow.

Simon’s phone buzzed loudly, and he took a second to check it while Agatha sucked down on the straw in her water glass through her furious, pinched expression.

“Oh, I’m so sorry ladies,” he said, standing up as he punched a few buttons on his phone. “I have to run. I have thoroughlyenjoyed this discussion though, especially with you Miss Davids, we’ll have to do this again sometime—”

“Doctor,” corrected Agatha.

“Oh, that’s right, very good, attagirl!” said Simon breezily as he tugged his coat on, and a muscle in Agatha’s jaw visibly twitched.

“Oh, Si, really?” said Linden, frowning at him anxiously as he kissed her cheek. “But we were gonna go get ice cream af—”

“Really?” said Simon, with a piss-poor attempt at a surprised look. “I didn’t think so, babe, I had plans. There’s no need to end the night just because I’m leaving though! You should all have some fun, I’ll see you later, and I promise I’ll catch the next cheque!”

He was already walking away as he spoke, hand raised in farewell even as Linden opened her mouth in dismay. “Wait, Si, I can’t—and he’s out. Great.” She slumped in her seat as the door swung shut across the room and gave them a glum sort of smile. “Sorry guys, I kind of thought that would go better.”

“Really?” said Agatha under her breath, covering it with the movement of setting her glass down.

Nairi ignored it. “I mean, it’s not exactly your fault—” Agatha snorted “—do you want me to grab you a pizza you actually like?”

Linden gestured at Simon’s largely untouched pizza with an eyeroll. “No, I’ll live. Already gonna have to pay for this one.”

“I’ve got it,” said Nairi, tugging her wallet out. “May as well just pay for everything while I’m up. Do you want something a bit cheesier?”

Linden looked at her for a moment, expression unreadable, and then something in her relaxed and her mouth twitched into a wry smile. “Yeah. Thanks.”

Agatha turned her head as Nairi left the table, saying something she couldn’t quite hear. Her tone sounded dry rather than snappish, so Nairi didn’t think too hard about it. She got them another round of drinks while she was sorting out the extra pizza as well—it would probably go a ways to easing Agatha’s temper and cheering Linden up.

From the looks of things when she returned to the table though, they’d managed to have an argument in the few minutes she’d been gone.

“Better food and new drinks on the way,” she said, sliding into her seat and pretending she couldn’t see the angry twist in Linden’s lips, or the clenched tension in Agatha’s hands.

“Awesome,” said Linden, flashing her a sunny, fake smile as Agatha scoffed. “You know, I was just saying to Aggy that since this turned out to be such a bust that maybe we should try having a girl’s night instead, you know? Just us, maybe with Flo too.”

“Oh yeah,” said Nairi mildly, gently pressing the back of her hand against Agatha’s on the tabletop. “What did you have in mind?”

[panharmonium]

some meandering bbc merlin thoughts that got too long for tags on this gifset.

normal disclaimers apply, which, given that i’m evaluating media, means that these are just my own thoughts and nobody else need agree with them; i don’t expect all of us to have the exact same impressions of tv shows. :) 

now, without further ado:

i started to type a novel in the tags of that gifset, but it got too long, so i’m moving it over to an actual post.  and what i wanted to say there is this: my thing about arthur isn’t that his story was badly written.  it’s that it was incomplete.

it’s probably more common for folks to assign responsibility to the writing, and that’s totally fine; i definitely get it - there are places in this show where i think things could have been handled better as well.  (i did write sixteen pages about how poorly executed the finale was, after all.)  but for my own part, i personally don’t think most of the story was badly written.  i think it was unfinished.

and what i mean by that is that i sincerely think that almost everything bbc merlin did could have been pulled together in a meaningful way after 5.11, and that if this had happened, then we would be evaluating the previous seasons differently, because things that seemed to not fit or be nonsensical or not be given enough attention would have been pursued all the way through to their natural conclusions.  

i’m not sure if it’s because i watched the show so late, or because i watched it in a spoiler-phobic bubble isolated from fandom input, but my own assessment of this show seems to exist in kind of a weird limbo-place on the spectrum of fandom opinions, because i don’t like how it ended, but i also don’t dislike the writing, up to the point of the finale.  are there things that could have been improved, or quibbles i have?  definitely.  i can list them for you.  but overall?  i still believed in the story at the 5.11 mark.  there were things i sometimes thought ‘oh, i’m not sure about this,’ but i always gave the show the benefit of the doubt, because i truly did feel that things were going somewhere.  anything the show did that gave me pause wasn’t something that couldn’t eventually have been made meaningful, if the show had actually...been finished.* 

(*elyan’s death excepted.  that’s one of the things on my list, and i think it might be the only thing besides the finale that doesn’t fall under the criteria i’ll discuss below.  it was a bad decision, flat-out, and could not have been improved by finishing the story.)

so for example, morgana.  if i were going to critique her development, yeah, i’d say that we don’t get enough of her internal conflict; she goes from the voice of moral authority to (apparently) delighting in wickedness very quickly, offscreen, and the constant smirking doesn’t show us what we know must be true - that she hasn’t become like this because she enjoys it; that she is wounded and her rage at arthur, gwen, merlin et al comes from a very real place of pain.  

but, as i said above - even though her development was something i recognized as questionable while i was watching, it didn’t make me too nervous, because i really trusted that the story was eventually and slowly taking us to the place it needed to go.  you could see her conflict, sometimes, in her confrontations with arthur, and that conflict finally took center stage in 5.09, when mordred confronted her and appealed to her humanity.  they were getting there.

and evaluating her development solely from what we ended up getting, i agree: now the writing just looks Bad.  but it wouldn’t have been bad, if it had been finished.  i would have completely believed morgana closing herself off from regret/sadness/compassion/any feelings at all for her former friends; it would have been okay for her to be so smirky, cold, etc; because it wouldn’t have been the endpoint for her arc, but rather a front to protect herself from the true conflict she felt.  we would have gotten more than that.  the story would have taken her farther than that.  but the story was incomplete, and so everything that came before it just looks like a mess that ran off a cliff.

this is how i feel about almost all of the “questionable” writing things on this show.  it’s not that they were ‘bad’ decisions in and of themselves, but they look that way in the rearview mirror because they never had the chance to develop into what they were supposed to be. 

take arthur, for another example.  i honestly don’t have a problem with his arc in S4 and S5.  i completely believe what a horrible and unadmirable mess he is for most of S4.  i believe that he would absolutely revert to thinking about “what would my father do” as soon as the realities of kingship are thrust upon him.  and i love how in S5 he’s moved past that and IS admirable in so many other ways, but then we start once again addressing the central conflict, which is that he’s still oppressing part of his population, and he starts to hit roadblocks again.  5.05 and 5.11 are the crisis points there, and honestly, i didn’t have a problem with how they unfolded (i mean, i did, but not in the sense of ‘this is bad writing and i hate it.’  rather in the sense of ‘this is fucking painful but i believe it’).  

the problem for me was never that it took arthur too long to accept magic or that he backslid or anything like that, because quite frankly i found all of that to be believable, given the circumstances.  the problem was that the show ended before he was ever allowed to progress past that.  he never atoned for anything he did.  he, like morgana, was never allowed to go where he was meant to go, because the show stopped before it was over.  if he had, all of his previous missteps wouldn’t have felt so much like ‘bad writing,’ they would have just been natural steps on his long journey.

same thing goes for gwen.  do i have a problem with her being sidelined towards the end of the show?  abso-fucking-LUTELY.  that’s on my list.  did her relationship with morgana deserve a resolution?  YES.  but it still could have happened!  if there had been more time, the show could have dealt with that.  gwen’s enchantment by morgana could have meant something, could have prompted something bigger; gwen could have taken the reins and started pushing arthur, who has entrenched himself into old ways, to start thinking from a place of compassion, even though it’s risky and it scares her.  or she could have broken with arthur’s decisions completely and made a move of her own.  if they had been given the time, nothing that happened to gwen prior to 5.11 precluded her character from going somewhere important.

and merlin - merlin could have gotten what he deserved, which is a resolution to the question he’s been struggling with since literally day one: how do i justify serving a regime that oppresses me?  how do i reconcile my responsibility to my people (and MYSELF) with an externally-imposed responsibility to protect arthur?  

merlin never settles on an answer to that question.  or rather, the answer he’s given is that he doesn’t need to be conflicted in the first place; protecting arthur was the right thing to do (even though it ultimately achieves nothing).

merlin deserved to have a chance to work out the answer to that question for himself, rather than having his core dilemma wiped aside.  and, much like my opinion on everyone else’s arcs, i don’t think the writing on this show ever took merlin to a place where this problem couldn’t be addressed.  i don’t find merlin’s arc questionable; i am fully convinced by the hole he’s dug for himself by 5.11.  merlin’s descent into single-minded preservation of arthur’s life at the expense of his own welfare/moral compass is absolutely tragic, yet also absolutely believable, to me - merlin’s been told all along that saving arthur is the only way to save his people, and now he’s been presented with so much evidence to the contrary - and yet he doesn’t want to admit that it’s all been for nothing - it’s honestly…i honestly actually think it’s spectacularly crafted.  that scene with finna in 5.10 is absolutely the most devastating thing i think i’ve ever witnessed on this show - when merlin’s on the verge of passing out and he murmurs, ‘it won’t always be like this.  things will be better.’  and you can see he’s just telling himself a lie, over and over again, trying to believe.  and then when he says ‘running…from arthur?’ because he knows, he knows it’s true that arthur is the real threat, arthur is the one with the sword at all their throats, but merlin has come to care about him so much - 

truly, they hit a point there that was just - fucking amazing.  that was the moment.  that, leading into 5.11, was the axis point for merlin’s unavoidable moral crisis, and there was so much potential there and so many places for it to go, but then the show just ended.  conflicts wiped away.  no wrongs ever righted.  merlin never comes into his own.  he never finds his feet.

but he could have.

so again.  what i’m saying here is that for me, for my particular experience with this show, i actually don’t dislike the writing, up until the very finale.  i think the writing actually brought us to a place that was fairly exploding with possibility.  but then the show just stopped, and that’s why it’s so easy to find places to critique the previous seasons, because of course it all looks poorly constructed now.  it isn’t finished.

[vampireqrow-moved]

hey so I agree with a lot of the stuff in your post about the transphobia involved in the origin of the pansexual label, but I just have one question: what are the actual impacts of people with good intentions calling themselves pan? If you don't hate pansexuals and consider them bi, why type up a paragraphs long manifesto on the harms of the origin of the label if it means the same thing in the way that most non transphobic people (your audience) use it? a lot of identities can be used in transphobic ways (like bi and lesbian and anything really) and plenty of valid identities from problematic roots and evolve over time as people use them differently (queer, transsexual). so how is a person with good intentions using a not-perfect label in a way you don't like a threat to the community? if someone is using the label pan transphobically, wouldn't their bigotry exist independently? if pan people do not act in transphobic ways besides using the label pansexual, realistically what is changing if they call themselves bi beyond holier-than-thou aesthetic activism? plus, a blog on the internet isn't going to get everyone to stop identifying as pansexual, especially considering multiple prominent celebrities ID as pan. so why spend all that energy quibbling on semantics because some bi people use a slightly different word when you could be worrying about Literally anything else? just feels like you want to find something to argue about lol. extremely disappointed that I had to break a mutual

im going to respond to each thing you bring up chronologically- im not trying to nitpick or prioritize certain things you say ill just forget things if i go out of order and i dont want to miss something important. ALSO! i will be typing less formally (like keysmashes and shortening words n stuff) in this response than my og post bc its 1am as im starting to type this so im tired but i want to be clear that i am like. taking this seriously and im not like. mocking u in anyway if it could read that way?? i hope not but just in case anyways here it goes!

in terms of actual impact people with good intentions identifying as pan: honestly im not  sure the full scope of the impact this has, so ill only be speaking to what ive personally seen which might not be all. but like... id argue my younger self has good intentionals iding as pan. i wanted to support trans people, even if i didnt understand a lot of the nuance involved. as a result of this, i developed a sense of superiority over other bisexuals and a mentality that bisexuality was a primitive and lesser sexuality. that mentality is harmful, and although im not sure if it affected bisexuals around me (of which there are many most of my friends are bi ajfjfjf) its still a harmful mentality and can easily hurt people even if i specifically didnt. also using it even with good intentions, which i know many people have, still spreads and further normalizes a label that imo can not be separated from its transphobic origins. this effect is not as extreme as other forms of transphobia and biphobia by A LONG SHOT. the bi community faces a lot of other issues but that doesnt mean this one isnt worth addressing if that makes sense?

if i dont hate pansexuals: ik this is part of a larger point which i will adress but i specified this in my post bc i see a lot of other posts that are negative towards pansexuality have "i hate pan ppl" somewhere in it or a close equivalent. i do not shame these ppl for their anger, i just wanted to be clear i think a lot of pan ppl are bi ppl with good intentions choosing a label they dont fully understand based on a misunderstanding of bisexuality.

why write a paragraphs long manifesto on the harms of pansexuals origin: ok 😭😭 the real reason here is that im literally just bad at summarizing. like thats literally it. i also like talking, its a bad combination. plus ive been thinking abt this for like. over a year im not even kidding and just like i have a lot of thoughts and figured if i was going to bother making my own post instead of rbing someone elses that i might as well get everything i wanted to say off my chest. ALSO BTW i literally got an ask like a week ago that was several paragraphs long asking me to explain my thoughts on why pan was harmful and some other stuff so like. this is partially responding to that and partially just me wanting to air my grievances ? idk if thats the right expression 😔😔

why write the post if my audience of people who identify as pan arent doing it in a transphobic way ? again sorry i didnt really understand the phrasing so i hope this is a vaguely correct summary!! um but like... again imo i think pan cant be separated from its transphobia and like. again imo iding as pan is like. a transphobic action/choice? obviously one transphobic thing does mean someone necessarily is like officially a Transphobe (it CAN be depending on the action but i dont think that applies here) but that doesnt mean there arent problems with what they did. this is like very complicated, but like. someone doing something harmful without the knowlege that its harmful doesnt make that person a bigot by any means it just means they didnt know. and i feel thats the case here? a lot of ppl (myself included until recently) know next to nothing abt pansexualitys origins so a trans inclusve sexuality might seem like a safe and good bet just because they dont know too much abt it, and like? i cant hate those people cause that was me for 5+ years and djgjfjdj you just dont know what you dont know!

basically i think iding with a transphobic label is inherently a singular transphobic action that doesnt make the person transphobic by itself, but is still a transphobic instance.

a lot of identities can be used in transphobic ways like bi, lesbian, etc.: this is true and a point i attempted to make on my original post, but i might not have clear enough. my issue with pan is specifically that it is a transphobic response to a preexisting identity. lesbian isnt an attempted trans inclusive indentity that replaced an identity that already existed (which have many trans ppl identifying with the og label). transphobes can use whatever labels they want, but transphobes using a label vs a label having a transphobic origin is very different. bigots use inclusive and supporting language for their bigotry all the time but language that originated with that bigotry is worse.

many valid identities stem from problemstic origins (like transsexual and queer) but the words evolve: ok my paraphrasing is a little weird there. anyways. the thing here is that. those are slurs. reclaimed slurs that can be empowering to many people, yes, but slurs nonetheless. reclaiming a slur is taking a harmful word and wearing it as a badge of pride. first off, pansexual is not a slur (ur not implying that in anyway just. saying) and it isnt being reclaimed when people dont treat it as having harmful origins. transsexual is the way some people identify but ppl acknowlege its a slur and originates from transphobia. ppl love to act like queer isnt a slur, which is an issue in and of itself, but just. factually it has historically and is currently being used against ppl with the intent to hurt them. pansexual isnt on the same level as these and other words like the f slur, d slur, etc. pansexual originates from trans and biphobia WITHIN the community and not outside of it, and most pansexuals dont see themselves as reclaiming the title because they dont think anythings wrong with it in the first place. and reclaiming it just seems unnecessary considering its history? theres no empowerment from using pan as a label as opposed to queer or transsexual, and it just divides the bisexual community for no reason.

how is a person using a not-perfect label a threat to the community? ok i dont think its a threat but still an issue if that difference makes sense? id like to reiterate a few things ive said before, but for me personally, it made me look down on bisexuals and see them as lesser, and it made people around me see pan as the "trans inclusive" sexuality as opposed to bisexuality, and basically its usage just leads to further biphobia. is this the worst of biphobia? no!!! but its still biphobia and why not attempt to target and minimize that? i have no way to singlehandedly stop biphobia, but my post might get through to my friends who id as pan and that small thing is better than nothing.

if someone used the pan label in a transphobic way, wouldnt that bigotry be different from people using it not transphobically?: someone claiming all bi ppl are transphobic and only pan is the acceptable label is obviously a lot worse than someone iding as pan and saying bi/pan solidarity but again, the second isnt not an issue because the first one is a bigger issue, its just a smaller issue in comparison. i wouldnt say the bigotry is different, one is just worse than the other, but it still has the same problems.

if pan people dont do anything transphobic other than id as pan then what changes with iding as bi over pan other holier-than-thou activism: its just one less person using a transphobic label? which isnt that big but it might lead to their friends stopping iding as pan and cause fewer people around them to see bi as a transphobic identity. which is small scale stuff, i wont try to blow it out of proportion, but thats still a step in the right direction and hopefully more people follow with it. its not terribly huge or lifechanging but something small that may only affect the people close to you is still something rather than nothing.

a blog the internet isnt going to get people to stop iding as pan: oh absolutely not. honestly i expected to get unfollowed/blocked more than change peoples minds regarding the pan label (im surprised i only lost two followers so far honestly) but again, someone literally asked me to do this and i wanted to be clear on my stance on the label, since in the past ive been supportive of it. im not expecting the post to get more than five likes, its more directed to my followers rather than the internet as a whole. im not expecting a large impact, im hoping to change the minds of my followers and friends who id as and support the pan label. thats it. if something bigger comes from it- great! but thats not what im aiming to do.

prev point + many prominent celebrities id as pan: the first name that comes to mind is someone im not a fan of for separate reasons but thats irrelevant. i mean im repeating myself a bit but some celebrities in the past validated and made me feel excited abt my identity as a pan person when they came out, and it justified the label to me, even when i had doubts. i have never interacted with a celebrity and do not plan to change their minds abt their identity. again, my post was for my friends and followers and maybe who ever was scrolling through the biphobia tag and decided to read my post.

why spend that much energy worrying abt the pan label instead of something else: ive spent waaaaay more energy thinking abt a singular meme i didnt like regarding my favourite rwby character so like. maybe i just overreact to things lol. maybe i have a lot of energy and since i cant talk my friends ears off abt my favourite fruits or the different voting methods i learned in my math class or what would dreams taste like, then i gotta put my energy into something. idk. i have a lot of energy and honestly? this didnt take that much. but i felt it weighing on me as my friends talked positively abt the pan label, when i felt guilty for the superiority i felt over my bi friends INCLUDING my best friend and favourite person in the world so like. i spent enough energy worrying abt it, and like. in hindsight since its been over 12 hours since posting it, im thinking abt it less. i was more worried abt feeling dishonest with my friends than actually worrying abt pansexuality, but i figured i owed them an explanation for why my feelings around it had changed.

just feels like you want to find something to argue about: okay i DO love arguing but im not pulling this out of my ass for fun. its in response to posts ive seen on my dash, asks i recieved abt pansexuality, and my way of letting people know my views have changed and why since i know at least some people are curious.

i am sorry to lose a mutual as well, and i genuinely hope things go well for you, but uh yeah thats that.

again, if people have further questions im willing to answer them i just might take a while bc i have school and other stuff 2 do but uhhh yea sorry if im clogging ur dash sjfjfkkf

[littleeyesofpallas]

I started doing this rambling Bleach posts before the Bloodwar Arc adaptation was announced, and I kind of don’t have a whole lot to say about the final arc, as I don’t think it was nearly as interesting or ever showed nearly as much promise as the early Arrancar arc did.  But if there was anything I was going to really tweeze out of it for my particular brand of meta commentary, it’s these little details floating around at the start of the Blood War arc about the ambiguous nature of the new Quincy...  but unlike the Arrancar arc, Kubo didn’t really lay any of them out with any clear direction, just a vague sense that things were off that he never really came back to in any meaningful way...

It started with Asguiaro Ebern’s appearance and his very distinct banter about not wanting to be identified as an Arrancar, but (implicitly) as a Quincy.  We’d seen from Uryuu’s various spotlight moments over the series that “Quincy Pride” was a pillar of the Quincy idea so this had a lot of interesting implications about Quincy cultural identity and the kind of implicit brainwashing and indoctrination it would take for an Arrancar to want to be a part of that sense of identity.

(Not going to quibble over Viz’s translations as much (for once) Asguiro’s bit here at least was pretty straight forward.)

And this was built upon with Yhwach’s callous discarding of the only two Arrancar recruits we’d ever actually see, as well as Qulige Opie and his Jagdarmee troop being shown actively hunting/recruiting try Arrancar in Hueco Mundo.

Another weird detail is that while Asguiaro and Quilge’s troops are all shown to summon up fairly conventional bow shaped projectile weapons with their 5 pointed Quincy crosses, Quilge’s personal Quincy weapon is something that looks more like a cavalry saber. (albeit sans the curve in the blade)  We do see that he can fire projectiles from it as well, but Uryuu made a pretty explicit point of it during his fight with Cirucci back in Los Noches, that Quincy only ever use a bow and that it’s tied to their factional identity.  So it’s also particularly strange because he draws his sword on Ichigo as “proof” that they are Quincy, which the sword would normally contradict.

But Kubo really took the time to very deliberately build the scene to show in detail how Quilge wasn’t just swinging around any old sword, but that he summoned it up the same way a Quincy like Uryuu would his bow.

I think this wasn’t so much inconsistency in how the Quincy work where Kubo just felt like doing something different for the sake of aesthetic (the way he gave up on the Arrancar uniforms being “uniform” partway into the arc just for the sake of making the new ones look more interesting) as it was a very deliberate attempt to make the new enemies a kind of confusing change up of the Quincy identity --right along side the thing with the Arrancar, even if that detail would also be ditched in the long run...  And as we know from a lot of how Kubo (tried) to handle the set up of the Arrancar arc, he’s always been very into blurring the line between otherwise strict factional identities.

This also came as one of the first major new details about this mysterious new enemy faction following Sasakibe’s dying words,

This line was never especially well translated because of the differences in Japanese and English grammar and syntax: The Japanese particles  は and  を designate subject and direct object, so there is no actual verb in this line, because he dies before he can finish he sentence.  Because of how English is differently structured, there’s not really a way an English speaker would form a sentence that would give both a subject and object but fail to give the relation between them.

Viz, with the benefit of having plenty of ground covered by the time they got around to translating just looked ahead in the plot to retroactively make the line, “Th... They... Our Bankai... They can make it—”  Although some fan translations back during the actual weekly publication had tried to make sense of the line in English as, “...The... They can... ...Bankai...!!”  But honestly it could have just been translated as, “...They... Bankai...”  It would be accurate word for word, it just wouldn’t sound like a coherent sentence, but I think that would’ve been the more reasonable trade off.

At this point it’s also worth noting that Asguiaro had already tried to steal/seal Ichigo’s Bankai, but since it didn’t actually work we didn’t know what he was trying to do just yet.  The actual Bankai theft detail wouldn’t come until later.  So, when Quilge pulls a sword on Ichigo it’s kind of a big deal because after the whole thing with the Arrancar being defined in part by their acquiring a zanpakutou the idea that Quincy had swords and something about “bankai” was a really juicy hook for the start of the new arc.

More over, once the first attack on Seireitei starts we don’t actually see a whole lot of full fights but we do get a glimpse of some weapons, that are all very un-Quincy-like:

Although Jugram Haschwalth does cut down a shinigami we don’t actually see his sword during this attack (he swings his arm in a blur from under his cloak)

My bad, I forgot, we do get our first glimpse of his sword when he break Tensa Zangetsu at the ve~ry end of the attack.

Bambietta is seen wielding a broad bladed saber

Cang Du has his Wolverine claws

And Yhwach himself wields sword

Royd Lloyd uses the same sword while impersonating him

Yhwach does wield a conventional Quincy bow, but he only uses it to summon another sword...

On the other side of things, some of the Quincy do stick to the projectile weapon theme, but none of them are bows:

Driscoll Berci wields the same javelin/spear type weapon that was first seen as having killed Saskibe, which is clearly a spirit particle weapon like the classic Quincy bows 

We see Äs Nödt’s “thorns” (which only sort of count as projectiles(?) They aren’t really shot or projected at any sort of speed, they just seem to float around and then kind of stab and impale?) 

Robert Accutrone has a hand gun

Shaz Domino uses throwing knives

and then in a few fringe cases...

Bazz-B, NaNaNa Nahjakoop, and Mask de Masculine all appear unarmed

Bazz and Mask both fighting with hand-to-hand combat

NaNaNa doesn’t actually get shown fighting Rose and he appears unarmed when he jumps Yamamoto along with Bazz and As

Bazz-B’s kind of known for using a crossbow now, but it wouldn’t actually appear until much later

Also PePe kind of shows up in a super awkward framed shot as a shoe and he’s controlling Jidanbo and Rin as his only means of attack

And Jerome Guizbatt appeared to have attacked Zaraki by hand in ape form

And not directly related, but it’s pretty odd that Royd impersonaing Yhwach is the only time this entire arc we see any of the Quincy actually use Quincy spells and tools

At this point we don’t see the Wandenreich in action again for a prolonged period of time, and with the 4 stolen bankai in the Quincy medallions the implicit link between that mystery and the lack of bows just kind of dissipated.

But when we see Masaki, Ryuuken and Kanae during Isshin’s flashback story we see the Quincy back to using exclusively bows.  So the choice to make the Sternritter all non-bow weapons as a distinction from proper Quincy still seems super deliberate...

I remember Quilge’s sword being a big deal back when the chapter first came out in some circles of discussion, but the general idea that it was a sign of something bigger to come didn’t really carry forward into the rest of the arc, even as Bambietta and Yhwach showed up with their own swords.

But looking back on the completed arc now, what really feels odd about all this is the late arc development where Jugram’s sword is supposed to be this special thing for him because he can’t use Quincy powers properly.  And I get that is slips through the kind of gray area where because it’s revealed to be an actual physical sword and not a spirit construct like Qulige’s it still technically works in the strictest in-world logic, but it’s really awkward from a writing standpoint that he definitely highlighted that detail as if it was fixing up a plothole.  But Jugram having a sword and not a bow was never the part that felt out of place; It was the fact that everyone else didn’t have bows that was weird, and that never did get explained.

All the bows that the Sternritter did use...

the 4 girls

Bazz-B’s crossbow

Pernida’s finger bows

Askin’s bow

...came after the training break in the middle of the arc, and in general a lot of things Kubo tried to set up at the start of the arc didn’t really get addressed in round 2 of that invasion.

Further muddling things is this really odd detail that in Jugram/Bazz-B’s flashbacks to the indistinct past, Hubert wields a saber similar to Quilge’s despite ostensibly being a purebred and more orthodox Quincy.  And although he wasn’t involved in the actual plot of the arc he first appeared as a hallucination zombie/skeleton/ghost to Royd mimicking Yhwach’s form (complete with memories, supposedly) during the fight with Yamamoto.  So it’s not super clear, but its entirely possible his actual character design could have included that sword as far back as the start of the arc, rather than being a part of his reappearance in the arc’s endgame phase.  It’s not a detail that can really be pinned down or taken to mean anything on it’s own, but it does just kind of noticeably orbit this subject...