#which are a HUGE part of generalized tumblr culture

[gillianthecat]

sometimes i see a post going around that makes me think, wow my taste is really different from the general consensus "tumblr taste"

[gender-trash]

I would be very interested in hearing the museum design rant

by popular demand: Guy That Took One (1) Museum Studies Class Focused On Science Museums Rants About Art Museums. thank u for coming please have a seat

so. background. the concept of the "science museum" grew out of 1) the wunderkammer (cabinet of curiosities), also known as "hey check out all this weird cool shit i have", and 2) academic collections of natural history specimens (usually taxidermied) -- pre-photography these were super important for biological research (see also). early science museums usually grew out of university collections or bequests of some guy's Weird Shit Collection or both, and were focused on utility to researchers rather than educational value to the layperson (picture a room just, full of taxidermy birds with little labels on them and not a lot of curation outside that). eventually i guess they figured they could make more on admission by aiming for a mass audience? or maybe it was the cultural influence of all the world's fairs and shit (many of which also caused science museums to exist), which were aimed at a mass audience. or maybe it was because the research function became much more divorced from the museum function over time. i dunno. ANYWAY, science and technology museums nowadays have basically zero research function; the exhibits are designed more or less solely for educating the layperson (and very frequently the layperson is assumed to be a child, which does honestly irritate me, as an adult who likes to go to science museums). the collections are still there in case someone does need some DNA from one of the preserved bird skins, but items from the collections that are exhibited typically exist in service of the exhibit's conceptual message, rather than the other way around.

meanwhile at art museums they kind of haven't moved on from the "here is my pile of weird shit" paradigm, except it's "here is my pile of Fine Art". as far as i can tell, the thing that curators (and donors!) care about above all is The Collection. what artists are represented in The Collection? rich fucks derive personal prestige from donating their shit to The Collection. in big art museums usually something like 3-5% of the collection is ever on exhibit -- and sometimes they rotate stuff from the vault in and out, but let's be real, only a fraction of an art museum's square footage is temporary exhibits. they're not going to take the scream off display when it's like the only reason anyone who's not a giant nerd ever visits the norwegian national museum of art. most of the stuff in the vault just sits in the vault forever. like -- art museum curators, my dudes, do you think the general public gives a SINGLE FUCK what's in The Collection that isn't on display? no!! but i guarantee you it will never occur, ever, to an art museum curator that they could print-to-scale high-res images of artworks that are NOT in The Collection in order to contextualize the art in an exhibit, because items that are not in The Collection functionally do not exist to them. (and of course there's the deaccessioning discourse -- tumblr collectively has some level of awareness that repatriation is A Whole Kettle of Worms but even just garden-variety selling off parts of The Collection is a huge hairy fucking deal. check out deaccessioning and its discontents; it's a banger read if you're into This Kind Of Thing.)

with the contents of The Collection foregrounded like this, what you wind up with is art museum exhibits where the exhibit's message is kind of downstream of what shit you've got in the collection. often the message is just "here is some art from [century] [location]", or, if someone felt like doing a little exhibit design one fine morning, "here is some art from [century] [location] which is interesting for [reason]". the displays are SOOOOO bad by science museum standards -- if you're lucky you get a little explanatory placard in tiny font relating the art to an art movement or to its historical context or to the artist's career. if you're unlucky you get artist name, date, and medium. fucker most of the people who visit your museum know Jack Shit about art history why are you doing them dirty like this

(if you don't get it you're just not Cultured enough. fuck you, we're the art museum!)

i think i've talked about this before on this blog but the best-exhibited art exhibit i've ever been to was actually at the boston museum of science, in this traveling leonardo da vinci exhibit where they'd done a bunch of historical reconstructions of inventions out of his notebooks, and that was the main Thing, but also they had a whole little exhibit devoted to the mona lisa. obviously they didn't even have the real fucking mona lisa, but they went into a lot of detail on like -- here's some X-ray and UV photos of it, and here's how art experts interpret them. here's a (photo of a) contemporary study of the finished painting, which we've cleaned the yellowed varnish off of, so you can see what the colors looked like before the varnish yellowed. here's why we can't clean the varnish off the actual painting (da vinci used multiple varnish layers and thinned paints to translucency with varnish to create the illusion of depth, which means we now can't remove the yellowed varnish without stripping paint).

even if you don't go into that level of depth about every painting (and how could you? there absolutely wouldn't be space), you could at least talk a little about, like, pigment availability -- pigment availability is an INCREDIBLY useful lens for looking at historical paintings and, unbelievably, never once have i seen an art museum exhibit discuss it (and i've been to a lot of art museums). you know how medieval european religious paintings often have funky skin tones? THEY HADN'T INVENTED CADMIUM PIGMENTS YET. for red pigments you had like... red ochre (a muted earth-based pigment, like all ochres and umbers), vermilion (ESPENSIVE), alizarin crimson (aka madder -- this is one of my favorite reds, but it's cool-toned and NOT good for mixing most skintones), carmine/cochineal (ALSO ESPENSIVE, and purple-ish so you wouldn't want to use it for skintones anyway), red lead/minium (cheaper than vermilion), indian red/various other iron oxide reds, and apparently fucking realgar? sure. whatever. what the hell was i talking about.

oh yeah -- anyway, i'd kill for an art exhibit that's just, like, one or two oil paintings from each century for six centuries, with sample palettes of the pigments they used. but no! if an art museum curator has to put in any level of effort beyond writing up a little placard and maybe a room-level text block, they'll literally keel over and die. dude, every piece of art was made in a material context for a social purpose! it's completely deranged to divorce it from its material context and only mention the social purpose insofar as it matters to art history the field. for god's sake half the time the placard doesn't even tell you if the thing was a commission or not. there's a lot to be said about edo period woodblock prints and mass culture driven by the growing merchant class! the met has a fuckton of edo period prints; they could get a hell of an exhibit out of that!

or, tying back to an earlier thread -- the detroit institute of arts has got a solid like eight picasso paintings. when i went, they were kind of just... hanging out in a room. fuck it, let's make this an exhibit! picasso's an artist who pretty famously had Periods, right? why don't you group the paintings by period, and if you've only got one or two (or even zero!) from a particular period, pad it out with some decent life-size prints so i can compare them and get a better sense for the overarching similarities? and then arrange them all in a timeline, with little summaries of what each Period was ~about~? that'd teach me a hell of a lot more about picasso -- but you'd have to admit you don't have Every Cool Painting Ever in The Collection, which is illegalé.

also thinking about the mit museum temporary exhibit i saw briefly (sorry, i was only there for like 10 minutes because i arrived early for a meeting and didn't get a chance to go through it super thoroughly) of a bunch of ship technical drawings from the Hart nautical collection. if you handed this shit to an art museum curator they'd just stick it on the wall and tell you to stand around and look at it until you Understood. so anyway the mit museum had this enormous room-sized diorama of various hull shapes and how they sat in the water and their benefits and drawbacks, placed below the relevant technical drawings.

tbh i think the main problem is that art museum people and science museum people are completely different sets of people, trained in completely different curatorial traditions. it would not occur to an art museum curator to do anything like this because they're probably from the ~art world~ -- maybe they have experience working at an art gallery, or working as an art buyer for a rich collector, neither of which is in any way pedagogical. nobody thinks an exhibit of historical clothing should work like a clothing store but it's fine when it's art, i guess?

also the experience of going to an art museum is pretty user-hostile, i have to say. there's never enough benches, and if you want a backrest, fuck you. fuck you if going up stairs is painful; use our shitty elevator in the corner that we begrudgingly have for wheelchair accessibility, if you can find it. fuck you if you can't see very well, and need to be closer to the art. fuck you if you need to hydrate or eat food regularly; go to our stupid little overpriced cafeteria, and fuck you if we don't actually sell any food you can eat. (obviously you don't want someone accidentally spilling a smoothie on the art, but there's no reason you couldn't provide little Safe For Eating Rooms where people could just duck in and monch a protein bar, except that then you couldn't sell them a $30 salad at the cafe.) fuck you if you're overwhelmed by noise in echoing rooms with hard surfaces and a lot of people in them. fuck you if you are TOO SHORT and so our overhead illumination generates BRIGHT REFLECTIONS ON THE SHINY VARNISH. we're the art museum! we don't give a shit!!!

[becausegoodheroesdeservekidneys]

Clownfall: Endgame

I am calling it that in the full knowledge that batshit things may yet happen, but listen. Listen. We have a year left before the general election. I am hedging my bets and assuming all that comes in that year will be Tory manoeuvring ahead of that. Let's all hope for a nice quiet year in which everything can fall neatly under that banner, that won't ruin this naming convention.

Previous Reading

Important Terminology - Required Reading

What is a Whip?

How do Whips work?

Shadow Cabinet

Front Benchers, Back Benchers and the Cabinet

What do we need to call an early General Election?

The Adventures of Big Dog the Clown - Suggested Reading

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

Part Four

Elanor’s Guide to Liz Truss - Suggested Reading

Character-based prequel

The Premiership of Liz Truss

The Next Steps - Suggested Reading

The post-Truss contenders

Bye Matt

BoJo Resigns as MP

Alright, that's probably everything. Just nice to have it all in one place, innit? If you would like a nice soothing soundtrack to your reading, here's my recommendation. On with the show!

Clownfall: Endgame

Wednesday

So, let's start with charismatic and charming Home Secretary Suella Braverman! You may remember her from such hits as "Quitting before she could be fired after breaking the law only to be rehired by Sunak almost immediately and without consequence to appease the right wing nutjobs in the party", and "Claiming Pakistani men have a culture that makes them work in abuse rings to target vulnerable white English girls" (I should add that, if you are unfamiliar with Suella Braverman, regardless of what that quote implies, she is not, in fact, white); recently she made the news because she announced that being homeless is a "lifestyle choice". So true, Suella! They could give it up any time they wanted. They could, for example, get together and break in and steal your fucking house.

But in particular, here we're focussing on her recent stance towards the multiple huge pro-Palestine marches that have been taking place in London. So far she has indicated that she wants people who wave Palestinian flags to be arrested, so that's very measured and rational of her; but, last Wednesday (Nov 8th), she decided to write a lil opinion piece in the Times all about how mean and biased and liberal the police are. This is an absolutely fascinating assertion to I suspect literally anyone who has ever been involved with the police. But no! Quoth Suella, aggressive right-wing protesters are "rightly met with a stern response", while "pro-Palestinian mobs" are "largely ignored".

And, she claims, the march on Saturday isn’t simply a cry for help for Gaza, but an "assertion of primacy by certain groups - particularly Islamists - of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland".

Imagine how well all that went down.

Thursday

You are underestimating how that went down, because it emerges that Suella deVille did not, in fact, get any form of validated sign-off or permission from Number 10 before squirting her ill-informed liquid horseshit all over the front desk of the Times news room, and that, Tumblrs, you'll be surprised to learn, is actually quite an important and compulsory part of criticising the police when you are the Home Secretary. Like, there is a Ministerial Code about this. It is very clear. It is in Article 8.2, Tumblrs. Thou Shalt Have Permission From Number 10 Before Making Media Interventions.

“The content was not agreed with Number 10,” a spokesperson for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak told reporters, referring to the prime minister’s Downing Street office. The ministerial code is clear that any ministerial media interventions need approval from No 10.

-AlJazeera

And the Tories are furious! The bloodbath forms quickly and loudly and the hounds start baying! Clown noses are flying everywhere! The factions are drawn! Because even now, there are Tories too stupid to understand that whether you agree with someone or not they still have to follow the rules! Also the other parties realise they can offer some actual opposition here, given that Suella has essentially dragged a barrel into the middle of the House of Commons dressed in a fish costume, handed around a set of loaded rifles, and then crawled inside to wait. The result is that the calls for her resignation are both deafening and pleasingly cross-party.

"(This is a) dangerous attempt to undermine respect for police", says Labour's shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper. "(It's) irresponsible," says London mayor Sadiq Khan. "The PM's weakness when it comes to standing up to Suella is the most shocking thing in all this," claims a senior Labour source.

They're wrong, of course. The most shocking thing is Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey realising he can actually appear in the paper if he plays this right and so surfaces to attempt some politics. "(Sunak) must finally act with integrity by sacking his out-of-control home secretary!" he declares, frightening many MPs who had forgotten he was even in the room with them.

Meanwhile, several Tories approach the BBC anonymously.

"The home secretary's awfulness is now a reflection on the prime minister. Keeping her in post is damaging him," says one. Another straight-up describes her as "unhinged". Another claims the comparison with Northern Ireland is "wholly offensive and ignorant", and really, all of this is permanently triggering that "Heartbreaking: the worst person you know just made a great point" reaction image.

Saturday

Hey, speaking of reaction images, look, Labour has a go:

Well. They tried.

BUT! Do you want to know the INTERESTING bit??!

Enter: Nadine Dorries! Mad shrieking pink harpy who spends her days maintaining a BoJo shrine in her bedroom! Always the most hinged of politicians, let's see what she has to say.

Former cabinet minister Nadine Dorries claimed Ms Braverman was trying to get sacked to give her a platform of martyrdom in service of the right-wing. "The competition is on now for who is going to be the leader of the opposition," Ms Dorries told the BBC.

???!??!?

PERTINENT POLITICAL OBSERVATION FROM DORRIES?!?!?? The most shocking part of this whole affair. Remember that time she yelled at a journalist during an interview about Boris Johnson's latest scandal when he asked her how Johnson was feeling about the whole thing and inadvertently implied they were having an affair when No One Asked? God, wonders never cease. She's even acknowledging the Tories can't win the next GE, look. I'd say this is growth, except I am 100% positive she's just being catty about BlowJo being fired again.

Anyway, the real Saturday issue: it's Armistice Day, and there's a pro-Palestine march planned.

Now, to give context, Armistice Day has a creepy level of patriotic state-worship attached to it in the UK. Some time in October everyone on telly suddenly starts wearing a poppy, and if you don't you get hanged, drawn and quartered by (a) the British press, and then (b) a baying mob outside your living room. You most be performatively sad. You must perform reverence and hero worship and say things like "Never again" all while whole-heartedly supporting current wars. You must talk about "our brave boys", and share the works of dead poets from the trenches, and then completely fail to absorb any of their lessons. If anyone tries to wear the white poppy to distance themselves from the current political appropriation while still commemorating the millions of conscripted casualties, you accuse them of being "woke" and pissing on the worthy dead of WW1. It's a whole thing, and politicians love using it as an excuse to point fingers and mock each other for being insufficiently patriotic if they wear the wrong tie to the ceremonies, or choose to walk with actual veterans rather than a head of the current army, or any number of other things. And then on November the 12th they'll order a drone strike or something.

So, off the bat, you can see how a pro-Palestine rally on the same day was likely to be seen as provocative to some.

"Some" included Sunak! He didn’t (publicly at least) ask the police to ban the protest, but did call on organisers to call it off, claiming the choice of date was “provocative and disrespectful”, because as I say, a march calling for the ceasefire of a genocide is super disrespectful to every sad dead poet in a trench who dreamed of a ceasefire so they could live, or something.

But the inevitable therefore happens, which is that far-right activists agree that it's disrespectful, and so decide to violently target the march to show their respect for the idea of peace on Armistice Day, or something.

Here's the planned route by the organisers:

Note, though, that the Armistice ceremony happens at the Cenotaph - visibly nowhere near the march. These two events actually wouldn't have overlapped, if it weren't for far-right protestors deliberately linking them to stop them being disrespectfully linked, or something.

And that's exactly what happened. From the Guardian:

Perhaps the most striking incident, though, was when far-right protesters charged past police who sought to hold them back from the Cenotaph. In this video, a man shouts “this is fucking our country” in celebration. Whereas the pro-Palestine march had been excluded from the area as a precaution, the far right was not; by overwhelming the police, they supposedly sought to defend the site from an enemy that simply wasn’t there.

(that's quite a good article of the whole thing, actually, I recommend giving it a read.)

Crucially to the clown show, though, several politicians and others accused Suella deVille of emboldening the far-right, which... well, several of the far-right protestors straight up said was the case on the day, so hard to disagree, really.

Rumours of a reshuffle in Whitehall circumnavigate the land so fast the truth gets sucked into a tornado and is declared MIA.  Here's the thing! I've covered a few Cabinet reshuffles by now, Tumblrs, you know the drill. Reshuffles are always deniable until they actually happen – so if, say, a reshuffle was going to happen on Monday 13 November 2023, there’d be no need to publicise it in advance. That way, if things change and politics happen, you don't need to retract anything :)

Because, remember: reshuffles are always controversial.  Yes, some people get demoted, and those people will often kick off, and some people who don't deserve it get promoted, and lots of people kick off.  But the big thing is that a lot more people get overlooked for promotion.

His most ardent supporters would say that Rishi Sunak is a cautious man (if you'll allow me a moment to express my own view on the matter, Tumblrs, if you'll forgive this crumb of personal opinion amongst my otherwise impeccable journalling of greatest integrity, I once did a teambuilding task with my students where they had to build the best possible bridge out of uncooked spaghetti and pieces of marshmallow, and I personally would liken the structural integrity of his spine to the losing team's entry), and reshuffles will spread a lot of disappointment to Tory MPs who lose – or fail to gain – a cabinet position.

So, all in all... regardless of Suella's idiocy...

There's no guarantee of a reshuffle. Rumours are just that - whether they prove to be true or not remains to be seen.

Week Commencing Monday 13th November, 2023

New week, new challenges! And it's going to be a big week this week. On Wednesday (tomorrow, at time of writing), three big things are going to be announced, and these announcements will colour everything else this week:

One.  The Supreme Court decide whether the government will be allowed to enact their plan to send some migrants claiming asylum in the UK to Rwanda, a signature Braverman plan that human rights campaigners (including many in Rwanda) have been trying to block for ages.

It’s a massive deal anyway – a flagship government idea that’s been bogged down in the court, and we’ll finally have an answer one way or another.  For what it’s worth, the Tories aren’t confident about winning it, either.  The optimists among them reckon it’s a 50/50 chance, the pessimists reckon it’s 70/30 against, so it's iffy at best.

But here's the thing!

Plenty of Tories have always disliked Suella.  Others could handle the odd outburst she has, but can’t stomach the sheer number of them lately - the Lib Dem non-entity man was absolutely right that she is rapidly growing out of control and just does not know when to shut the entire fuck up.

Which means! If the Supreme Court allows the Rwanda plan, Braverman could become emboldened, like a far-right protest injuring police officers to defend the cenotaph from people who are nowhere near it and have no interest in it.  Do we want an emboldened Braverman?? Well; no, obviously. I also don't want dysentery, or rotten meat, or a serial killer in my neighbourhood. But it's a question even Tories are asking themselves, which is notable.

Plus, even if the court allows it, there will still be months of planning, and lawyers might still prevent the plans in the long run...  But psychologically, the issue is this: the government wants this win, but probably doesn’t benefit from Braverman feeling victorious.

Two.  We’ll get inflation figures.  The government promised to halve inflation, and it seems likely they’ve managed this.  Expect them to massively celebrate this, to distract from the promises they haven’t kept e.g. waiting lists in England, competent governance, etc.

Three.  Voting on a ceasefire in Israel seems likely for Wednesday.  It’s the SNP’s idea, and it won’t affect government policy (they won’t support a ceasefire – they claim it’ll empower Hamas).

But it’s a big deal for Labour, even more so than the Tories.  A Shadow minister has already resigned over the war.  A bunch of frontbenchers want a ceasefire, but that isn’t Keir Starmer’s policy, a man who is calling for the colours of the Israel flag to be shown at sports matches to show that "we stand in solidarity with Israel", because you can really count on Starmer to fuck up everything he touches.  So what do they do?  Abstain?  Claim they had a prior commitment??  We might see more resignations, basically.  Big day for Starmer.

So! With all that in mind...

Monday

8.43am

Oh look. Timestamps are back. I wonder if that suggests anything?

Suella Braverman is sacked as Home Secretary.

But! Sunak is accused of waiting too long! Which he demonstrably did!

He should have made the decision after the illegal article that she shouldn't have written and triggered a far-right rally on fucking Armistice Day.  Instead, remember that 'cautious' descriptor I talked about?? He waited until the tide had turned against her completely, and now looks like he (a) was too much of a useless wimp to fire her until he was sure people would still like him and pat his dick and tell him he's a Good PM, and (b) only fired her because he caved in to that appalling lefty liberal cabal that somehow these days includes the Metropolitan Police of all fucking people, and she'd have been able to stay otherwise.

Shout out to the best comment from Reddit:

u/nowonmai666: Doesn't she normally get sacked on a Friday so she can have the weekend off before being reappointed?

Anyway, that's the big risk now: Braverman’s supporters can claim she was only fired because Sunak caved in to the left.

8.56am

Tory MP Andrea Jenkyns claims Sunak only sacked Braverman because he caved in to the left.

9.00am

Neil O'Brian, Pharmacy Minister, quits to live out his stated dream of being a back-bencher with less power.

*sus*

9.09am

Nick Gibb, Schools Minister, quits to live out his stated dream of being more diplomatic, or something.

*sus*

9.42am

The Lib Dems decide to build on the success of their leader getting to be on telly for his one comment on Thursday and call for a general election.  Says Ed Davey: “It was the Prime Minister’s sheer cowardice that kept her in the job even for this long. We are witnessing a broken party and a broken government, both of which are breaking this country.”

Good job! They're having such a good few days.

Anyway remember the Tories don’t have to have a general election until December 2024, though, thanks to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act (2011), which was passed by the coalition government of Tories and, um, Lib Dems.  In which Ed Davey served for three years.

Hmm.

9.43am 

James Cleverly (remember him?) returns to the Cabinet and is appointed Home Secretary. The party attempts to appear trendy by experimenting with emojis:

This appointment is probably because Tory strategists wanted him in a domestic role to help the party’s chances in the next election; as Surprising Political Pundit Nadine Dorries told us, of all fucking people, the race is now on to lead the opposition.

But hey, this is not likely to lead to any more changes -

10.03am

FORMER PRIME MINISTER, BREXIT-TRIGGERER AND PIG-FUCKER DAVID CAMERON BECOMES FOREIGN SECRETARY

!!!!!!!!!!!!

And look! Another emoji! They're so hip!

(Side note... the balls on this one are astounding, actually. The UK political system has been in chaos ever since Cameron, and he was the first domino. This is not a well-loved former hero that will be greeted warmly by the unwashed masses.)

Awkward though, since just last month Sunak claimed that we’d lived through “30 years of a political system that incentivizes the easy decision, not the right one.”  It would be a terrible shame if a journalist was to ask David Cameron whether he agreed with the Prime Minister on that, given that Cameron’s job is to support the Prime Minister now.

Especially since Cameron took to Twitter last month to explicitly criticise Sunak for breaking the Tory promise to deliver High Speed 2.

(Cameron tweeted this criticism last month.  Labour MP Angela Rayner however promptly retweets it now lol suck a dick Dave, but try a human one this time)

Also, fun fact, Cameron has just come out of a large-scale lobbying and corruption scandal. Given the state of Sunak, though, that's actually probably what got him the job.

BUT!!! Here's an even funner fact: the man is not an MP. He left politics after he accidentally triggered Brexit and then it came out he'd once face fucked a dead pig's head while it was held on the lap of another Tory; he's been living it up in the lucrative world of after-dinner speaking, as these people do.

So can you do that?? Can you hold a Cabinet position if no one at all has voted for you??

Yes, turns out.

Don't be alarmed by that, though:

But, convention holds that anyone who becomes a Cabinet member while not being an MP needs to be a Peer - that way, if they do bad and naughty things, they can't be held accountable by the House of Commons but they can be held accountable by the House of Lords. Only problem is, Hameron is not a lord...

10.13am

The reshuffle, bafflingly, continues. Jeremy Hunt will remain as chancellor.

For the first time since 2010, the top four positions in government – Prime Minister (Sunak), Chancellor of the Exchequer (Hunt), Home Secretary (Cleverly) and Foreign Secretary (Cameron) – are all held by men.

10.18am

Lots of people tweeting about the historic context of Cameron’s appointment.  Here’s my favourite:

10.48am

David Cameron is given a life peerage, so his proper name now is Lord Piggledick.

10.52am

Health secretary Will Quince quits.  He wasn’t planning to stand for re-election anyway though, so this one is probably not a shock. But it's important that no one else resi-

11.04am

Decarbonisation minister Jesse Norman resigns.

...

...

...

Time for a

✨Conspiracy Theory✨

Between Quince and Norman – as well as Neil O’Brien and Nick Gibb – we’re seeing several mid-ranking ministers resign, despite being generally regarded as fairly competent.

It’s possible they were fired in private, and they’re publicly resigning to save face.  But here’s another theory.

MPs aren’t allowed to seek commercial employment for six months after resigning from the government.

So hypothetically, if you were going to lose your seat in a general election, you’d want to have resigned six months earlier so you can still get a job.

If that’s what these guys are doing, it suggests we’re on track for a May 2024 election...?

11.05am

11.12am

Remember Cameron's financial scandal? Quick background here: David Cameron was specifically vice-chair of a £1bn China-UK investment fund.

So let’s see what throwback former leader Iain Duncan Smith thinks of Cameron’s return:

“I am astonished at this appointment. It seems to send a signal to China that we are pursuing business with them at all costs and any costs. Those who have been sanctioned now feel more abandoned than at any time. Those facing genocide and persecution will feel more abandoned than at any time.”

I cannot believe I am about to say this.

But.

I agree with Iain Duncan Smith *spits on floor*

11.50am

Former Tory deputy prime minister Lord Heseltine is asked to sum up the return of Cameron, and says it’s the “clearest signal that the sort of right wing lurch that we’ve seen and the anti-European movement that we’ve seen has been put to bed, and that will get a message across to people”.

12.13pm

A Tory MP is worried that Cameron’s return will turn back the clock on Brexit and Johnson’s election.

“It is very alarming. I am predicting a softening on small boats, a softening on legal migration. I would not be surprised if the ban on conversion therapy returns.”

... Don’t threaten me with a good time.

Anyway, let’s see how the public actually sees Cameron compared with other PMs!

Yeah, not sure people will mind if Cameron’s not Boris Johnson.

12.43pm

ITV political editor Robert Peston walks past a minister of state.  The minister’s on the phone, but takes a moment to heatedly shout at Peston, “The PM just sacked me!”

I guess some days are easier than others as a journalist

12.47pm

Therese Coffey resigns as environment secretary!!!!

*choirs of heavenly angels sing*

You'll remember her of course, Tumblrs - she was one of the thugs manhandling people into the 'right' voting lobbies to force their vote on the day of Liz Truss' fracking law. Rumour has it she still has the Whip handle in her ass.

A lot of people seem to be resigning today! But don't be fooled. In almost every case, it’ll be because they were told to resign.  They’ve been sacked, but they resign to save face. A last mercy from their benevolent leader.

My guess: Tessie here is terrible at media skills, so – get rid of her before she hurts general election chances. This, too, is a pattern.

12.52pm

Rachel Maclean sacked as Housing Minister! Fun fact, numbers fans: it took Doctor Who 33 years to make it to eight Doctors, but since the 2019 election, the Tories managed eight Housing Ministers in just under 4 years

trololol

1.15pm

Jeremy Quin quits as Minister for the Cabinet Office.

1.37pm

Times Political Editor Steven Swinford reports that No 10 is struggling to find a new housing minister (owing to rumours the job is cursed). Several people have turned it down, including Jeremy Quin. It is incredible to me that they didn't line someone up before sacking the last guy.

Kemi Badenoch and Michael Gove are apparently unhappy that Rachel Maclean was removed from the role. I for one do not care about the opinions of Kemi Badenoch or Michael Gove.

2.04pm

Health Secretary Steve Barclay becomes Environment Secretary.  This is effectively a demotion for him. It is our 5th Environment Secretary in four years. Chasing that Housing Minister record! It took 19 years for Doctor Who to have five Doctors

2.15pm

Richard Holden appointed new Conservative Party chairman.

A 2019-intake Tory MP, he led the charge against Sir Keir Starmer over Beergate, which did damage Starmer a bit (albeit not much, given that it turned out Starmer had complied with lockdown regs, and the accusation was nakedly to try and distract from Partygate).  So this appointment looks like more strategy to win the next election - someone not known enough to be hated, with what passes in the modern Tory party for a proven track record.

This could be a sign that the Tories intend to at least try to shore up the Red Wall votes? As unlikely as the Tories are to keep those seats.

That said, Holden’s seat disappears in a boundary change next election, sooooo … we'll see what they do there.

2.24pm

Victoria Atkins appointed Health Secretary, replacing Steve Barclay who’s moved to Environment Secretary. She's a relative unknown but also considered actually competent. Massive middle finger to Steve Barclay

2.37pm

Laura Trott (formerly in pensions) promoted to Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

2.42pm

Science minister George Freeman resigns.

3.18pm

YouGov conducts a snap poll: is the appointment of David Cameron as Foreign Secretary a good decision or a bad decision?

Good decision: 24%

Bad decision: 38%

Don't know: 38%

So that's going well

3.24pm

Greg Hands is made a business minister after losing the Tory chairman role.

John Glen moves from chief secretary to the Treasury to become the Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General.

3.39pm

With Cameron being a Lord now, he’ll be based in the House of Lords rather than the Commons.  The most recent Cabinet Minister to be based in the Lords was former Brexit minister Lord Frost, who did weigh in on the matter:

“[T]hough I was not running a whole Department too. I don’t think it works well to have a lead Cabinet Minister answering questions and defending their Department solely in the Lords. The Lords is not a fully party political environment - nor should it be - and voters are owed proper political scrutiny. In our system, that can only happen in the Commons.”

I cannot believe I am about to say this.

But.

I agree with Lord Frost *spits on floor*

The SNP had already called this out, with MP Stephen Flynn claiming, “The UK is not a serious country.”

4.21pm

Conservative MP Lee Rowley appointed the 16th housing minister in the past 13 years. Even counting David Tennant twice, that's more than all the Doctors Who we've ever had, and that took almost 60 years.

5.16pm

Sky News’s Tamara Cohen reports that Sunak sacked Braverman by phone this morning!  Downing Street says there won’t be any exchange of letters between them - this is almost unheard of. Politics runs on paper trails! Everything happens through formal letters! By phone!

It means we’re denied insight into their differences.  But Cohen reckons we’re likely to hear from Braverman on Wednesday, as the Supreme Court rules on the Rwanda scheme.

6.03pm

Tory MP Andrea Jenkyns, former Education Minister, submits no-confidence letter in Rishi Sunak.

It's almost like, in the absence of Dorries, she's decided that someone needs to step up and have a tantrum and that someone might as well be her. It is, actually, an extremely funny letter, as these letters go. Normally they're written with a sort of furious earnestness wrapped in formal language. I presume that Andrea Jenkyns MP, former Education Minister, was aiming for something similar, and the first paragraph manages it. But by the end you sort of start to wonder if this was supposed to be a letter she wrote with her therapist to get her feelings out:

My favourite line, when pulled in isolation, is "Yes Boris Johnson, the man who won the Conservative Party a massive majority, was unforgivable enough."

Yeah, Andrea babes. You're bang on there.

6.05pm

Esther McVey is appointed as Cabinet Office minister.  Not a full cabinet member, but she will attend cabinet meetings.

This is notable: unlike a lot of today’s appointments, she’s on the right of the party.  Her role will be to represent the government on TV and radio as much as possible, talking about gender/culture/British colonial history issues (i.e. she’s anti-woke and a screaming bigot).

In other words, with Braverman gone, McVey is an offering for the populist right of the party to try to appease them.

6.15pm

Sunak tweets about the new cabinet, claiming they’ll make “the right decisions for our great country, not the easy ones.”  So it looks like that’s the new slogan, and we're pressing on with austerity

6.27pm

Tim Loughton, a Tory MP on the “One Nation” wing (i.e the David Cameron side) responds to Andrea Jenkyns’s letter of no-confidence by tweeting:

“Where can we submit a letter of no confidence in the Pantomime Dame?”

(It’s Andrea he’s publicly referring to as a pantomime dame there. A lil joke from the Tories for you)

6.31pm

Paul Scully sacked as minister for London. Didn't know that one was a position.

9.43pm

Sunak says that only a two-state solution will allow a new future for Israel/Palestine.  This is, um, not what the Prime Minister of Israel wants.  Who knows whether the Prime Minister of Israel will survive this crisis anyway – but these are big words from Sunak.  Cameron’s influence? Maybe? Interesting either way

10.03pm

And then - PLOT TWIST!!!

According to ITV political editor Robert Peston, a senior government source reveals that Cameron was approached on TUESDAY. 

Which means plans were underway to get rid of Braverman not only before the far-right violence on Saturday, but before her anti-police article on Wednesday.  It seems she lost her job not because of what she said about police after all; but because she claimed homelessness was a lifestyle choice.

Well well.

11.05pm

And the day finishes with Andrea Leadsom back in government (as Under Secretary of State for Health and Social Care) which nobody saw coming!  Pretty demeaning to the other 300 Tory MPs who could have been given this.

The final response from numerous Tories: they are feeling jilted and insulted because David Cameron being brought back when he's NOT EVEN AN MP, RISHI suggests that they themselves are not good enough to be in government.

No one tell them

[whencyclopedia]

Slavery in the Roman World

Slavery was an ever-present feature of the Roman world. Slaves served in households, agriculture, mines, the military, workshops, construction and many services. As many as 1 in 3 of the population in Italy or 1 in 5 across the empire were slaves and upon this foundation of forced labour was built the entire edifice of the Roman state.

Slavery as An Accepted Reality

Slavery, that is complete mastery (dominium) of one individual over another, was so imbedded in Roman culture that slaves became almost invisible and there was certainly no feeling of injustice in this situation on the part of the rulers. Inequality in power, freedom and the control of resources was an accepted part of life and went right back to the mythology of Jupiter overthrowing Saturn. As K.Bradley eloquently puts it, 'freedom...was not a general right but a select privilege' (Potter, 627). Further, it was believed that the freedom of some was only possible because others were enslaved. Slavery, was, therefore, not considered an evil but a necessity by Roman citizens. The fact that slaves were taken from the losers in battle (and their subsequent offspring) was also a helpful justification and confirmation of Rome's (perceived) cultural superiority and divine right to rule over others and exploit those persons for absolutely any purpose whatsoever.

Aside from the huge numbers of slaves taken as war captives (e.g. 75,000 from the First Punic War alone) slaves were also acquired via piracy, trade, brigandage and, of course, as the offspring of slaves as a child born to a slave mother (vernae) automatically became a slave irrespective of who the father was. Slave markets proliferated, perhaps one of the most notorious being the market on Delos, which was continuously supplied by the Cilician pirates. Slave markets existed in most large towns, though, and here, in a public square, slaves were paraded with signs around their necks advertising their virtues for prospective buyers. Traders specialised in the commodity, for example, one A. Kapreilius Timotheus traded throughout the Mediterranean.

Continue reading...

[wawawawawawawawawawawawawa]

the amount of times i Do This must be a joke at this point but here i am. doing it once more. izaya's highschool videogame SCREAMS "i just found out i have aspd and i am NOT taking it well." and i shall explain how

a preface: wrt "how did he know in high school, don't you have to be 18?" you do.... with the dsm guidelines. japan, iirc, uses a conbination of the dsm and icd to diagnose mental illnesses, and the age stipulation isn't in the icd. also, shinra could have told him, and lbr shinra wouldnt care about strictly adhering to the age thing

anyway i went thru and highlighted different parts of the videogame's text, so i can easier explain which part means what. i'll primarily be focusing on the chronic boredom associated with aspd- since izaya's game deals with patience, most musings in it will be related to that boredom. but the boredom, especially izaya's, IS important, as its the boredom that drives him to do what he does. to be what he is.

(shoutout to miyukiwinter for the scan)

so... the red bit. this relates to izaya's worldview of the need to keep evolving to escape the mundane, and it not mattering if you aim high or low. now at this point, izaya was solidly in some shady shit and clearly on the path of the low aim. but the thing is, about aspd... the boredom is all consuming. you'll do ANYTHING to not be bored. i've seen people say they developed substance abuse problems to escape the boredom, and i confess... i've done it too. it truly is THAT bad

i say all this because... izaya will never be able to stop going lower, and lower, and lower. he's fated to fall forever. maybe he wouldve been able to brush his behavior off as teenage craziness, but with a diagnosis like aspd it becomes increadingly obvious that there is no "oh, i'll mellow out once i reach my 20s." it's not going to happen, at least, not without great effort. and lets be real, nobody has any faith in aspd's recovery rates, less so in the early 2010s, so izaya upon diagnosis would see NO FUTURE for himself. no escape from the cycle. he's trapped.

the blue bits are a bit more vauge, but the undertainty turning to loss evokes the next stage after the initial shock of diagnosis: grief. and make no mistake, there IS a grieving process with mental health diagnoses. you go from being shocked and scared, to being depressed and numb.

but there's... another layer to this, with aspd. you see it with cluster b disorders in general, but aspd is HUGE in the pop culture zeitgeist

the layer is, the idea that People Like That don't feel emotions. that any emotional display is false and an explicit ploy to mainpulate someone

and when this inevitably ends up untrue, you might start to feel... odd... about feeling those emotions people say you can't feel. and one of the biggest emotions aspd gets that with, is fear and by extension, anxiety.

some aspd people genuinely do feel reduced fear! but it's far from being a diagnostic criteria, and aspd can actually be comorbid with anxiety disorders. but scientific facts and wider culture rarely match up, so the idea persists

so izaya might have started to think.... was he ever truly anxious? or worried? was he really more rotten than people thought; was he just mainpulating people the whole time? does he really not feel anxiety? was his nervousness over things like shinra leaving him or hell, this diagnosis, rendered null and void?

and then we reach the teal portion.... despair

(just a sidenote, tumblr has no teal color option so it'll just be blue)

in this sense, "the hole" refers to the endless downward spiral, and his diagnosis- but not just having it. no, "the hole" most likely refers to the moment izaya developed it in the first place.

who are you, if you thought you were in control your whole life, but you found out that the reason you do the things you do were because of foeces beyond your control? who are you now, having a label you know will cause everyone to see you as nothing but a stereotype?

why was he still alive, suffering like this? what point is it to be alive, controlled by something you can't fight, forced to make your life worse and worse and worse, until you die young?

so now what? who did this to him?

in the game, the hatred is towards "the player." and honestly this could have multiple different meanings when applied to izaya's own life

does he hate god? was he raised religious, his father being a christian, and was this what made him lose faith? what loving god would condemn someone to suffer like this?

does he hate his parents? after all, it was their genetics that passed this down, their upbringing that nurtured it, their neglect that made him the way he was. is it their fault?

or... does he hate himself, for being the way that he is? for having it in the first place, for not being able to overcome it, for having such a bad reaction to it?

for being too cowardly to kill himself?

which brings us to the final segment. awareness.

he says outright, the game is depicting the player's life. in the game itself, this ties into his mockery of players, but in a meta sense, it could be a hidden admission that it's depicting his life

especially the talk of meaningless games- fooling around with nakura creating small gangs, betting pools, and his eventual adult pastimes of messing with people. is his life enriched? no, it's merely occupied, and he knows it. he might have repressed it as an adult, but here, in high school, at this moment, he knows.

and if he can never truly alleviate his boredom, never truly be fufilled, then he can act like he's in control all he wants, but he's no better than a man falling in a hole.

[daughter-of-sapph0]

I think a lot of transfemme culture is formed and cultivated by how we were rejected and desperately tried to fit it.

like, take transfemme memes. a lot of memes are about how broad generalizations such as "trans women do this thing", the thing being computer programming or enjoying a particular video game. and while I won't deny that a lot of trans women do those things, the vast majority don't. so why are things like programmer socks and fallout new vegas and bionicals and gundam so popular with trans women despite them not being universally applicable?

I think it might have to do with our being rejected as kids and how we would do everything we could to try and be accepted by others.

maybe this only applies to me. I'm definitely not trying to make a broad generalization to explain other broad generalizations. I'm basing this primarily on my experiences.

but when I was in middle school and high school, I used to lie about watching certain movies or playing certain games even when I didn't. I could have been because my parents wouldn't let me, I couldn't afford them, or I just wasn't actually interested. but most of what I was interested was very niche nerdy things like anime and computers and math and art. but in a desperate attempt to join in conversations and make friends, I would lie and say I was interested in the popular things so other people would accept me.

now, years later, the internet connects us and helps us explore our nerdy interests much more. I remember I was the only person at high school who cared at all about undertale, but then I found tumblr and whole communities online who would talk about the game I played. they also got me interested in things I never would have been into otherwise. transgender people online got me into star wars (which I regret) and evangelion (which I also regret but not as much). and there are some things that I've never experienced, but still know about due to cultural osmosis. I know a lot about fallout new vegas and magic the gathering and ultrakill despite never playing them. I would consider myself part of those fandoms despite never really interacting with the content, just because I have so many online trans friends who are into those things.

I think that the most popular things just happened to become transfemme memes due to how many nerdy trans people unapologetically love them online, and people who have never experienced them but are friends with the people who do love them agree with them to fit in.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing. it's perfectly fine to be part of a fandom or community even if you don't have a huge interest in it just to be with your friends. I'm not super interested in ttrpgs, but I still play just because I like hanging out with my friends.

computer programming is popular in trans women circles not because all trans women are computer programmers. it's popular because it's a booming industry and the small percentage of trans women who are computer programmers really enjoy it and talk about it online, and their online friends support them and agree with them even if they aren't computer programmers themselves.

idk. I forget where I was going with this. I just think it's really nice how trans women, and honestly the entire queer community as a whole, tends to support each other's niche interests and uplift each other.

[qtubbo]

Andromeda Academy / THE BIG SCHOOL

Yeah we made a giant school, it took literal ages there was so many people involved in its construction so crediting is going to be a bit awkward. But know everyone designed and built their own classroom, the building team had nothing to do with the design on the classrooms so give love to the "Teachers" of the classes you love the most. Well let's get into this!

First the building team for the main team was well huge...but it was mainly ran by Gaymers! The faction I'm in on the qblrsmp, I'll be listing the main builders first. Thank you @admin-almos @itsgwencayyye @sebbs12 @elcucurucho @tu-es-gegg and me smile

Thank you for resource/lighting/minor building help @gempuff11 @skullhalo @villagerspawnegg @what-if-a-stranger @extinctfowl @starry-bugs @propheticscrewup @godtierjune @disfrutalakia @born-in-hell @snaziestbean

Let's get started with some general inside builds (everything is photographed by Almos!) A little Cafeteria under the stairs, cubbies to choose from, and of course the front desk!

Then "Plant Class" room 101 with Professor Sebs bell (Sebbs12) outside and inside view

Next Foreign Languages room 102 a seminar class with Professor Alex Godtierjune

After which we got Necromancy class room 103 with Professor Clem Bell

Lastly on the first floor we have Photography class room 104 by the build team (me actually on this one)

Onto the second floor we first got our amenities the Cafeteria!

First up we have Art class in room 201 with Professor Gwen so colorful what a fun look!

Then we go onto the Create class in room 202 with Dr.Kafka (Seraph1m) what an interesting classroom style!

Next up is Natural Sciences in room 203 with Mx.LPSKatie what a friendly atmosphere

Lastly we have Class de Español con Profesora Bombón in room 204 only class to have a live bird in it!

Onto the third floor amenities such as the Computer Lab, Library, and Study corner

Staring off with Astronomy class in room 301 by the build team!

Then we go onto Fish cultures in room 302 with Professor Fishy (ChaseTheTrader)

Sadly Tumblr does not let me add more images so the rest of the rooms will have to continue in the next post

Part 1/Part 2/Part 3

[sophieinwonderland]

Episode 4 of Responding to the "Sophie is Dangerous Doc": On Genders and Slurs

If you haven't seen my other posts on this:

Episode 1 (Block Evasion Allegations) Episode 2 (All Tibetan Buddhists are Monks) Episode 3 (Survivor's Network) Episode 3.5 (Hate Groups)

Let's just get right into this!

First, just noting that I absolutely H*TE the culture online around censoring sl*rs where this is a t*rrible word nobody should say, BUT it's totally okay if you replace ONE vowel with an asterisk. Mostly because, when reading it in their heads, I'm certain most everyone is going to instantly read the slur as the slur, and it should be just as triggering to those who would be triggered by it. This isn't specifically an issue with the author but more collective st*pidity of the internet.

Here I went through the trouble of, after realizing I had messed up, to at least replace the whole word with "the T-slur" when all I needed to do was write "tr*nny." Silly me. (This is the only time I'll be writing it that way in this post. I just really need to illustrate how stupid I find this whole thing.)

This bare-minimum censorship while being outraged over saying a slur is just a tad too ridiculous to me to take seriously.

Context...

This came about during an argument with someone over the word endogenic. They were arguing, in essence, that because the word "endogenous" may have had vague ties to Freud fakeclaiming trauma, the word "endogenic" was bad because it's the same word.

My point was to illustrate how even if this was true and endogenous was offensive, two words can sound similar and have the same roots with similar literal meanings with one still being offensive and the other not. The example I gave was how trans/transgender are perfectly fine terms while the t-slur is bad despite both having the same roots and literal meanings. Connotations of specific words matter. Not just their roots.

I apologized after seeing how that affected people because I wasn't aware of the severity of the term.

Derogatory terms aren't all equal, and while there are certain pejoratives that you never should say, ever... others are generally acceptable in neutral contexts when not using them as an insult.

My mistake here was not being educated in which category this particular pejorative fell under.

On our gender...

A huge part of this narrative is the idea that I just suddenly for the first time ever decided to identify as genderfluid because I was under fire.

This is, like much of what is said in this document, completely false.

I had previously posted about how being a system with multiple genders makes our system's body more accurately described as genderfluid.

This post was back in August of 2022. Well before the slur discourse in May of 2023.

I believe there were other posts but they're hard to find because Tumblr searches are bad. (I used google to find this one.)

The idea that the body/system is technically genderfluid isn't something I invented out of thin air for that one discussion, but is something that had been on my mind for a long time, and something I had talked about before.

While I won't blame the author for not having an encyclopedic knowledge of every post I ever made. This is yet another instance of accusations and assertions without ever even bothering to confirm if they were true.

This lack of due diligence is a massive theme in the "Sophie is dangerous" document.

If anyone had asked me if I had made public statements referring to our body being genderfluid, I could have answered and provided a source.

In fact, the author quotes me saying that I've always considered the body genderfluid, even highlighting it...

But didn't once think, as any reasonable person would have in this situation, that there may be evidence of this out there.

Instead, the author lazily repeats the lie that this was something new I just suddenly decided for the sake of this one argument.

Transness...

There are a couple problems.

First, let's start with the point near the end about being queer. Because my point was more than that.

It was that genderfluidity is not merely queer, but specifically on the transgender spectrum as seen below:

My position is actually that any system with fronting headmates of a different gender than their AGAB is genderfluid to an extent. And because of this, is on the transgender spectrum. (Regardless of whether they identify as transgender or not.)

Slipper Slopes and Bad Precedents.

This is a ridiculous take meant to try to villainize me. And is a bit of revisionist history at that.

I initially apologized and did explain that the intent was not to reclaim the term, and that I didn't feel comfortable reclaiming it. I stand by that.

I didn't cast myself as a victim over people being upset by it.

After my apology, I listened to numerous transgender systems who were uncomfortable with the topic that arose from that, and uncomfortable with the people taking issue with a girl in an AMAB body using the T-slur.

There is a lot of underlying complexity here that I believe needed to be addressed.

Because simply apologizing without addressing these other issues sets a precedent that I didn't want to be setting.

I wasn't going to let the takeaway from that conversation be "individual headmates can't reclaim slurs, even ones they could be called, unless they directly identify by the specific term for the experiences they have."

I've never been called the T-slur. But as more systems are out publicly and headmates of different genders are expressing their gender, it's likely that they'll be victims of transphobia.

Systems with multiple genders are, as a whole, genderfluid.

Genderfluidity is on the transgender spectrum. Regardless of whether they identify as transgender or not.

And it's pretty weird to try to police the language people on the transgender spectrum use based on whether they specifically call themselves transgender or not.

My biggest problem with the whole discourse around that topic is that it ultimately presents an intrusive ideology that is super concerned with policing the specific terms GNC people use and identify by. And worse, it presents the gender of systems as less important than those who have varying genders for other reasons.

The precedents you set don't exist in a vacuum. The fact is that you are arguing this at the same time that sysmeds have resorted to maliciously misgendering endogenic systems, justifying it under the basis that it's not actual misgendering because the headmate with those genders aren't real.

Something which, if you remember from the previous episode, the OP of the "Sophie is dangerous document" doesn't believes counts as real misgendering.

In the end, it's a very slippery slope from "female headmates in AMAB bodies with gender dysphoria can't reclaim transgender slurs" to "gender discrimination against headmates is totally separate to that faced by trans people and misgendering headmates isn't as bad as misgendering real transgender people."

And this is a slippery slope the author of the document appears to have fallen straight down and crashed face-first on.

[katyagrayce]

If I had the time, and the resources, I would write an entire PhD about how Taylor Swift’s relationship with her fans has been variably represented through her songs, and how that representation has in turn shaped that relationship. And I have neither of those two things, but I do have the next-best options – a free evening and a Tumblr account. So here we go. As far as I can remember, there are only six songs where Taylor directly addresses her fans: Long Live, mirrorball, Dear Reader, and now But Daddy I Love Him, Who’s Afraid of Little Old Me? and I Can Do It With a Broken Heart. I could be missing a few, because the woman does have a 20-year career. But even so, I think it’s telling that those are the six songs that come to mind: one huge feel-good ballad released when she first made it really big; then nothing for 10 years; then two quiet songs buried in their respective albums; and then, out of the blue, three loud, unforgettable bops released at the same time. From that alone, it’s pretty clear that Taylor has something that she wants to tell her fans – whether consciously or not, something about her relationship with them is increasingly weighing on her mind. And it doesn’t take much to figure out that said relationship is changing.

In Long Live, the fans are addressed mostly as a ‘we’ – a part of a collective that also includes Taylor, her band and her team, all of them with equal status and common goals. ‘Long live the mountains we moved / I had the time of my life fighting dragons with you.’ Later, those dragons are further described, are established as factions of the general public whom the fans stand separate from, in opposition to – ‘The cynics were outraged / Saying “this is absurd”.’ Basically, Taylor’s fans are shown to be fighting for her like an army ‘on the history book page’, which is not an uncommon metaphor in pop culture. But this is where things get interesting. Because, although Taylor creates that image of the army, she doesn’t structure it in the traditional way. Her fans are not footsoldiers defending her throne – they too are ‘the kings and the queens’, the ‘heroes’, hearing their names read out and holding up trophies. And because of that – because they stand equal with Taylor – they don’t look up to her even in victory, and she doesn’t claim to be anything more than a member of their bedraggled mob. Even at her pinnacle, she’s simply part of ‘a band of thieves in ripped-up jeans [who] got to rule the world.’

There’s only one point in Long Live where this total equality fractures – where the ‘we’ splits into a ‘me’ and a ‘you.’ And it’s in the bridge, where, for just a moment, Taylor steps outside of the present – she imagines herself and her fans growing up in the future. ‘Promise me this / That you’ll stand by me forever / But if, God forbid, fate should step in / And force us into a goodbye / If you have children someday / When they point to the pictures / Please tell them my name.’ This is usually the part of the song where you see audiences crying, and it’s easy to understand why – because even when Taylor separates herself from the fans, even when she doesn’t explicitly share her title of ‘queen’ with them, she still portrays them as the ones with the power. She asks them to stand by her, then to remember her. Scratch that, she pleads for them to do it. She’s expressing that she needs her fans, deeply. They’re not looking to her for guidance – it’s the other way around.

Fast forward 12 years, to Dear Reader, and you wonder how the hell did we get here?

Dear Reader is the exact opposite of Long Live. The fans are never part of a ‘we’ – in fact, they don’t play an active role in the song at all. All that they are is an omnipresent but silent entity, the titular ‘readers’, who hover offscreen as Taylor sings verse after verse of advice, then spends the chorus telling them not to follow it. This is Taylor as the long-crowned queen in the history book – the ex-thief, the grown-up revolutionary, who realised at some point that no matter how equally you fought alongside your people, no matter how young and inexperienced you all were, at some point they will need a ruler and then they will all look to you. Inch by inch, you will find yourself climbing up onto the throne, and you will be alone up there. The words you speak will fall down on the subjects sitting by your feet, and their power will be absolute, even when you didn’t mean them that way – even when they don’t have any conscious meaning, are just ‘desperate prayers of a cursed man / spilling out to you for free.’ And in the end – just like before – all you can do to rebalance the power is plead. ‘Darling, darling, please / You wouldn’t take my word for it / If you knew who was talking.’

And of course, this plea is interesting in itself, because it’s also the exact opposite of the plea in Long Live. In Long Live, Taylor is asking her fans to immortalise her in the future, to pass on her memory – the underlying assumption is that they can do this because they were there with her, they know her. But here, Taylor says that her fans wouldn’t listen ‘if they knew who was talking’, which implies – well, they don’t know. They don’t know the person behind the words. Despite all the mountains they moved – all the magic they made. Despite all the games they played together, the secret sessions, the Easter eggs, the friendship bracelets. Despite the songs spilled out like confessions. Despite it, or because of it. They don’t know her. They don’t know Taylor Swift.

In Dear Reader, this concept is portrayed as tragic. There is a lot of sadness in that image of Taylor alone above the crowd, a perceived ‘guiding light’ that is actually so lonely and broken in the way it shines – which is a good segue back to an earlier song on our list, mirrorball. The metaphor there was very similar to in Dear Reader, but the plea Taylor made was more in tune with Long Live – she begged for her fans to keep standing by her, keep listening to her. ‘When they called off the circus, burnt the disco down / When they sent home the horses and the rodeo clowns / I’m still on that tightrope, I’m still trying everything / To keep you looking at me.’ Basically, in mirrorball, she begs her fans to stay with her despite the new gap growing between them; in Dear Reader, she begs them to take a step back, to acknowledge that the situation is becoming toxic. And then, we get to the songs of The Tortured Poets Department. And Taylor isn’t begging anymore. If anything, she is screaming.

TTPD was marketed as Taylor’s saddest album, but to me, it’s more obviously her angriest. Rage is not a new concept in her songs, but it’s previously always been directed at very specific people – Kanye West in Look What You Made Me Do, the online haters in You Need to Calm Down, Jake Gyllenhaal in We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together and I Bet You Think About Me and All Too Well (10 Minute Version). Alternatively, it’s been couched in fiction, like how the story of Rebekah Harkness couches mad woman. But in TTPD, there is no couching – the very marketing leans into how personal each song is for Taylor – and nobody is safe. For the first time, Taylor’s fans are not represented as a separate entity protecting her against the rest of the world – they themselves are a part of that roiling mass whom she needs protection from. That message becomes very pointed in the third line of But Daddy I Love Him, ‘I just learnt these people only raise you / To cage you.’ That line flags the entire song as directed not towards strangers, but towards the people who have surrounded Taylor since she was 16, who have shaped her career, who claim to care about her – the army of Long Live, the audience of mirrorball, the listeners of Dear Reader. Those people are the ‘Sarahs and Hannahs in their Sunday best / Clutching their pearls, sighing “what a mess.”’ And that makes sense when you remember that it was Taylor’s fans who were most critical of her relationship with Matty Healy, and even with Travis Kelce. But it doesn’t make the song any less uncomfortable to listen to. For the first time, the ‘you’ Taylor is yelling at is actually you, and maybe that’s why she’s so unguarded and vicious in her choice of words – ‘I’ll tell you something right now / I’d rather burn my whole life down / Than listen to one more second of all this bitching and moaning.’ It also brings a new dimension to the lyrics ‘Time, doesn’t it give some perspective? / And no, you can’t come to the wedding’. Because of course, when things are going well in Taylor’s relationships, it’s her fans who want to share in that – her fans who want to hear updates from her, like her social media posts, listen out for wedding bells. And with those lyrics, Taylor’s taking that away from them. No, you don’t get to be there for the good parts. You haven’t earnt it. You weren’t there for me when I needed you. You don’t know me that well.

And that leads, of course, to the ultimate song about Taylor’s fans not knowing her – I Can Do It With a Broken Heart. Arguably, the song doesn’t quite belong on this list, because Taylor never directly addresses her fans either as a ‘you’ or as a ‘we’. But that’s telling in itself, because it’s a song where the fans play an active role in the narrative, and yet where they only appear as a foreign, menacing entity – the crowd that sees Taylor’s ‘broken pieces shattered’ and responds by ‘chanting “more.”’ There’s been a lot of debate online about whether this song will ever be performed live, and personally, I think that it’ll be just too uncomfortable an experience. Because this song is mirrorball without the plea in it. This song is so self-reflexive, its light burns your eyes. Every single syllable of this song is designed to say what you see is not who I am, and you don’t know me, and what you think is love is killing me. And how can a crowd cheer during a performance when that’s what their cheering means? I love you, you’re falling apart for me. I love you, it’s ruining your life.

Of course, the song was written about a very specific time in Taylor’s life, and I think that’s worth emphasising for every song on this list – they all capture a specific moment, immortalise a specific emotion like fixing a bug in amber, whereas in the real world, emotions come and go. The fact that Taylor felt like this about her fans at one stage doesn’t mean she always feels Iike this about them. The fact that she was hurt and furious doesn’t mean she can’t also be grateful and warm. But what angry songs do is disrupt the assumption that everything’s okay, form a crack in the glass, introduce doubt behind every smile. You only need to see through someone once to never take them at face value again. And when that experience is immortalised in a song, it’s even harder to forget it. What angry songs do is become self-fulfilling prophecies, echoing in the fans’ heads every time they see Taylor until, eventually, some distrust is inevitable. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing – to be more aware of how the mirrorball turns, the illusion of light, the real person underneath. But it’s a change. It’s a change, and even by singing about it, Taylor is ironically making it happen.

Which brings us, finally, to possibly the angriest song Taylor’s ever written – the last song I’m going to be talking about, Who’s Afraid of Little Old Me? At first glance, this song isn’t necessarily directed at Taylor’s fans. It reuses a lot of imagery from my tears ricochet and mad woman, and it’s easy to write it off as also being about Big Machine Records or her detractors in the general public. But some of the lyrics in the bridge are very, very telling. The most obvious is ‘Put narcotics into all of my songs / And that’s why you’re still singing along.’ Then there are all the veiled references to obsessive people trying to get closer than they should be, closer than any stranger is allowed – ‘So all you kids can sneak into my house with all the cobwebs,’ ‘I’ll sue you if you step on my lawn.’ Elsewhere in the song, we also see the circus imagery of mirrorball turned threatening – ‘I was tame, I was gentle till the circus life made me mean’ – and the opening lines of But Daddy I Love Him come back, ‘You caged me and then you called me crazy / I am what I am because you trained me.’ This song has all the evolving messages about Taylor’s fans rolled into one – you don’t know me, you don’t own me, you’re ruining my life, you have no right to criticise. And then, for the first time, she says it in black-and-white – ‘You hurt me.’ No metaphors. No frills. It’s only three words, but it says volumes – You hurt me. You were meant to be on my side. We were meant to be fighting together. But, somehow, we’ve been split apart. You broke the promise I asked of you when I was 19 years old. You turned on me. And it hurts.

TTPD is an incredibly, incredibly angry album. Who’s Afraid of Little Old Me? is an incredibly, incredibly angry song. But they are also both incredibly, incredibly sad. Taylor sings ‘Who’s afraid of little old me? / You should be’, when, 15 years earlier, she was singing ‘I’m not afraid / We will be remembered.’ And yes, a song is just a moment in time, but a series of songs – that’s a story. It’s a life. You can play through Taylor Swift’s discography, and you’ll hear the story of a 16-year-old girl whose trust was slowly destroyed. Sure, that might be the story of most 16-year-old girls. But most of them don’t go through it in the public eye. Most of them don’t have to balance being honest against perpetuating the cycle. And most of them listen to sad songs to get them through, instead of being the one putting those sad songs out into the world. ‘You don’t get to tell me about sad,’ Taylor sings, because of course she does. We don’t have to tell her about sad. For our generation, she is one of the people who defined what it means.

~~~

(Disclaimer: This essay is not intended to deal with the actual content of any criticism Taylor received from her fans, or the question of whether that criticism was justified. I’m leaving that discourse to other people. My aim was just to explore how Taylor’s writing about her fans has changed over time, and what that tells us about their relationship and her career as a whole).

[emilykaldwen]

I don’t understand what anon means by making people pariahs. This is a huge, massive fandom. If people block you, just go find others to talk to. There is no shortage of people discussing this show and its source material. You can find the ones you vibe with! Someone choosing not to engage with you isn’t a real problem.

This absolutely might be a generational thing. My understanding of those who are currently in their early/mid-20s is that Blocking is a huge thing? Like I remember my youngest cousin being really upset in school about girls blocking her on IG, and I was so confused because these girls at school were mean to my cousin.

And I don't quite remember what she said but basically blocking was seen as ostracizing. Equivalent to me walking into my 8th grade classroom and the whole class going 'ewwww' for... some bizarre reason I had no idea about (I only knew like two people in that school like what the hell?)

Additionally, it might be twitter thing too. I genuinely don't know and Tumblr has always had a culture of 'don't like, just block', which might be confusing for users that aren't used to that.

Point being, I encourage people to block if they're upset. Like genuinely, no one knows if they've been blocked unless you go directly to their blog. I don't have to know you, or anything about you to block. It's something very simple as seeing a post, going 'oh those do not vibe with me' and just removing it from my feed. It's like being at a really big party and choosing not to go to that part of the room.

Blocking is, genuinely, nothing personal for most people.

I will also say when my anons increased last year, I got very mercenary with my blocking, which I think is a normal response for people coming into your inbox when you're literally sitting here with minimal interaction all because I started posting Aegon x OC fic.

[justalilguyoops]

What made you think about writing LAWS in the reverse perspective? Felix being obsessive and Ollie being....less

omg.....this is such a good question!!!! hello anon and thank you for this hehehe

okay so I'm pretty sure i had a eureka, light bulb over the head moment but I don't remember what or when exactly it was

BUT! there were a few things that led up to it! I wasn't originally planning on doing another fic and definitely not a long fic, but idk i think i was possessed probably

one of the things that made me go "huh. interesting idea" was reading a post on tumblr about how Felix probably thinks he's in a romcom, how his party outfit is reminiscent of Baz Luhrmann's Juliet in R&J. So that got me thinking about the film from Felix's perspective.

Another thing that also caught my attention is how much this fandom (and me) eats up an obsessive/possessive/jealous lil bitch Felix. I also think there's proof in the film that Felix IS possessive over Oliver.

Barry Keoghan's rizz was also another factor. I can't remember what video or what really triggered it, but I thinkkkk maybe his Hot Ones interview? But I think there was another video way before that too that gave me the initial idea, since I think LAWS originally sprouted in my brain like....20 chapters before WIPIP ended.

I was just like "wow....his power...." and I do think Oliver had like a bit of his charisma, but...what if....i dialed it up to Barry Keoghan's innate level? what if oliver had that goin awn?

I also came up with the line in chapter 7, where Oliver asks if Vee is pretty and when Felix gets defensive and asks why, oliver just responds with "Figured. Y’know, because you are."

i wanted....to use that....so badly once my brain produced it

Oxford days of the film also particularly captivated me, mainly the moments of the montage. The guitar scene was a HUGE contributing factor for me wanting to write LAWS in Oxford days.

why did I do LAWS in modern day?

Primarily because I wanted Felix to vape. truly. that was like the main reason.

Along with just a generally more accepting culture of LGBTQIA+, cellphones, and social media. I wanted to make all of them even worse by giving them access to tiktok <3

So, more or less, I did want to write LAWS as a college romcom, something much lighter and totally different from WIPIP.

I wanted to do it from Felix's POV because WIPIP was more predominantly Oliver (despite switching POV each chapter; it was still very much Oliver's story and we all tended to view the story as a whole from his POV).

The reversal of role was motivated by Felix being the possessive one first!!! This was a SUPER long answer and I'm going to include a bit more beneath this, but warning: It contains spoilers for PART ONE of LAWS!

DON'T READ BELOW IF YOU HAVEN'T FINISHED LAWS PART ONE!

------

I was also just really interested in exploring the Quick family. In the film, we view them as kind people who care about their son, which y'know, makes oliver look terrible for his lies.

HOWEVER! There has to be a reason that Oliver is what he is. Obviously, people develop individuality on their own and not everything is a product of nurture vs. nature, but I do believe that there's something to that. Parts of us can be a product of our environment.

Also, if you've read my past writing, you know I really enjoy religious themes, specifically Christianity.

Fun fact, but I am and have been atheist my whole life, my whole family is. I've never attended a church service.

BUT i am extremely fascinated by it (which def reflects in my writing lol) and enjoy exploring all the ideas, stories, and culture. I did notice in the film that Paula wears a cross necklace, which kinda indicates that they are religious in some variation.

What if the Quicks always knew that Oliver was bisexual? What if they never spoke of it? Oliver, always on his own at school. Never had any friends. Why were his parents OKAY with that?

Personally, if my parents noticed something like that they'd want to have a conversation with me or my school: was I being bullied? were there any issues on the playground? why did I not have any friends?

Instead, Paula uses excuses of him being "so clever", kind of brushing off her son's loneliness? idk, they very clearly love their son, but there are some little indications that Oliver struggled in his youth and his parents never really addressed it? (obviously all of this is just a theory and think i've kinda come up with)

SOOOOO i wanted to investigate that in modern day. The kind of outdated and conservative ideals of a religious family and their bisexual son. (of course still happens all over the world, but in my personal life I feel like I don't hear about this experience as often. I live on the west coast of the USA which I think is a contributing factor)

AND I WANT TO SAY I hope that my stories and references to religion are never harmful to those that are religious. I try hard to be respectful and honest with information.

I find religions to be super interesting and never intend to be insensitive! I try to do a lot of research, but obviously as someone kinda standing outside and looking in, I may get things wrong.

I don't intend for LAWS to be disrespectful towards Christianity; I'm merely trying to write a story about what has and is happening to many LGBTQIA+ youths in strict religious households. I know of many religious families that unequivocally love their queer children, but there's always the other side of the coin.

anyways!!! longest answer ever!!! sorry for this word vomit!!! and thank you again for such a wonderful question hehe

[wen-kexing-apologist]

Shipper Tag Game

I was tagged in this game by @twig-tea, appreciate the tag but also bestie this is so many questions.

1. What ship were you completely obsessed with when you were a teenager, but now you don't care anymore?

Is this the part where I have to confess to being a superwholockian in my past? I no longer care about JohnLock or DeanCas, the evil is defeated!

2. Which ship would you consider your first one?

Oh it was almost certainly Beast Boy and Raven from Teen Titans

3. Your first fanfic belonged to which couple?

Magnus Bane x Alec Lightwood from Shadowhunters, I wrote a bunch of fanfics for them when I was younger. I did not anticipate how many views I would get on a couple of them, so that was cool! (shameless plug to check out my AO3 account, Sent2TheBeast. Unfortunately most of my fics are now locked due to how people feed content to AI software)

4. Do you remember the first couple you saw a fanart over?

Do I actually remember? No. Was it most likely something from Harry Potter or Supernatural? Yeah.

5. Did you ever get into ship discourse?

Baby, I write BL essays on tumblr, I think the minute I posted my first analysis I was signing up to ride the discourse wave.

6. Did you used to have any no-otp or have it currently?

Honestly any incestuous plot lines I am typically very against: Wincest, Brallie, etc.

7. Who were the couple in the last fanfic you read?

I read a beautifully written VegasPete fic by the wonderful @ginnymoonbeam

8. Currently, do you have any OTPs?

How much time do you have? Kurosawa x Adachi/Karan x Achi; Togawa x Nozue; Minoru x Yutaka; PatPran; MorkTawan; Han Baram x Im Hantae; Shin Ki Tae x Lee Wan; Kenji x Shiro; etc etc etc

9. Is there any couple that, to this day, you are extremely mad about not getting together?

Not that I can think of, but I will just give a generic shout out to all the queer baiting of old. BUT I DO HAVE COUPLES I AM EXTREMELY MAD ABOUT GETTING TOGETHER. AkkTheo and SandRay I am looking at you!!!

10. Is there any ship you used to dislike but now you think they are kind of interesting?

I will give this one to @bengiyo. I was not a fan of Korn and Intouch from Until We Meet Again because of how one-sided the relationship seemed to me. But conversations with Ben gave me deeper insights in to Korn and have had me reconsidering my impression of that relationship.

11. Do you have any ship that, in the past, was considered normal but now you would be cancelled over?

Tony DiNozzo and Ziva David would almost certainly get me cancelled considering Ziva's service history in Israel. Glad I was able to free myself of the cop/military propaganda that is NCIS when I entered high school.

12. What was your favorite crack ship?

I don't really embrace the crack culture, I am not a huge fan of crack vids, crack fics, crack ships

13. Who is the couple you read more fanfics of?

Of all the couples I read fanfics for, I think Malec from Shadowhunters was probably my most frequently read.

14. What most of your ships usually have in common?

I feel like 99% of the ships that have wormed their way in to my brain to the point of obsession (aka me making fan art, writing fics, etc) lies in the complexity and opposition of character's to one another. For example:

In Shadowhunters, the tension between Magnus being a warlock and Alec being a Shadowhunter and how they navigate the fact that The Institute and his own family have caused and continue to cause active harm to Magnus and the other Downworlders.

In Six of Crows and Crooked Kingdom, the extremely contradictory nature of Kaz Brekker's existence and how that impacts his relationship with and to Inej. I wrote a number of Kanej fics because I could not stop thinking about the fact that Kaz and Inej want to touch each other, want to be intimate with each other, and their extensive trauma makes that damn near impossible.

In Pushing Daises, the inability to touch, the tension between loving someone so much and knowing that to touch them would be to kill them is just so fascinating.

In The Old Guard, Joe and Nicky having been together for 900 years when we meet them so you wouldn't think there is a complex tension there per say, but they were on opposite sides of The Crusades and had to work through that to cultivate a literally eternal love. And not just that (honestly less so that) but the tension between their line of work as mercenaries, their immortality, and knowing that one day, completely unannounced that immortality will stop. I could not stop thinking about how many times those two have had to watch each other die, waiting and wondering if their lover would come back to life this time around.

In Bad Buddy, Pat and Pran not only having to navigate their relationship with the incredibly antagonistic relationship between their parents but Pat having to parse through all these years of competition, hatred, fighting, to understand that all this time he's loved Pran.

gif by @barrowsteeth 15. What do you absolutely hate in a ship?

Lack of reciprocity. This is not to say the relationship has to be completely balanced. I don't think that it is a realistic possibility that every aspect of a romantic relationship exists in perfect harmony. But I've written about this before, my theory as to why so many BL boys get sick, in order to allow the person who has received more of the support throughout the show to care for their partner. I am a very outspoken Enchante anti because I hate Theo so fucking much. Theo's incompetency and Akk's incessant need to help him got Akk fired from his job, Theo lied about Enchante, and Theo moved back to France and made Akk work on his own to earn enough money for a motherfucking plane ticket to France. None of that being marketed as romantic is okay with me.

tagging: @emotionallychargedtowel, @neuroticbookworm, @telomeke, @negrowhat, and @solitaryandwandering

[tavina-writes]

i find it extremely funny that we (mxtx fandoms in general but mdzs especially) will get into huge shouting matches about timelines and research and accuracy and meanwhile she was like "the death of the nie bros' dad, an event extremely important to explaining the buildup to the war that affected literally every single member of the cast, could have happened anywhere in these five whole-ass years" and "yeah they totally had potatoes don't worry about it lol". truly airplane was an autobiographical character.

You know nonny, I DO find this intensely funny at times. My uh, main source of "shaking my head at this" happens when inevitably, meta goes around and we rush back and forth going "X WAS A GOOD PERSON" and "X WAS EVIL! EVIL!" etc, which happens every now and again and always makes me a bit like "ah, yes, it's difficult to convey nuance and also differing points of view that may in whole or in part also be legitimate and valuable to discuss on a place like tumblr/the internet in general because it is difficult to grapple with uncertainties and we often want to nail things down one way or another so we can figure out if we're right or not" <- but this often comes out as me writing a joke post. Or a saltier post than I intended. Sometimes because I'm tired and sometimes because I just happen to be a salty individual on main.

And I do think fandom is a place where like, multiple interpretations of an event or a statement or a character's "morality" and themes and choices are often equally valid. And fandom should be a place for that, that's what makes fandom fun. If there was a One True Interpretation of the text there'd be no need for interpreting text at all, and that's distinctly sad for me. That's no fun. Anyone who tries to use their knowledge to cudgel people into the One True Interpretation is wrong, btw.

Though I think, and here's where I feel that research and accuracy is a nuanced thing and should actually be of consideration for meta/fic/engaging with fandom in general, and why perhaps people strive for it -- the "lol, potatoes" and "poetry from whatever era I want" is fun! MXTX, however, is still writing about a fantasy version of her own culture, which offers along with it a foundational basis of knowledge that makes this...easier? And again, here's where the part of me that does enjoy these anachronisms and inaccuracies (because they're fun and since we have flying swords why not potatoes) wars with the part of me that's also like, "okay but there is a difference between 'not knowing enough to be respectful of the background surrounding the characters and why that might inform their actions' and 'I've decided that peppers, which did not exist in Eurasia prior to the Columbian Exchange are a big thing here now.'" The difference is respect. Different members of fandom will draw this line in different places and it hits different on different days.

And this is one of the struggles of engaging with foreign language media a lot of the time - we try to strike a balance between engaging with it based on our own experiences and backgrounds and not accidentally saying anything offensive or strange or 'that would totally never happen' or 'he would not fucking talk like that' and I've found, with my time in this fandom, most people who are concerned with accuracy and research are largely trying to be respectful and avoid such gaffes.

Over the two or so years I've been here, I've also reacted to people who've insisted their interpretation is the correct one when it was definitely a case of 'the version Chinese culture that I'm familiar with 200% does not work like that', and saltily wandered off to vent about how 'this is inaccurate and also rude' or try to explain why it wouldn't happen like that. Maybe this comes off as preachy at times, or overly concerned with "accuracy," but that is typically where that sort of reaction comes from for me. I expect this is probably true for other people as well!

And by no means like, do we only engage in fandom because we want to be educated or educate others, and by no means is that an obligation of any fic writer or meta writer or casual fandom goer. We engage with media because it engages us, and we engage with fandom because we love community, and sometimes its no more complex than that.

I enjoy research and art history so that's typically why this appears in my fic, and I started out on doing it to better connect with my own heritage, which I've found more important to me as I've gotten older, so that's where it comes from for me.

Apologies nonny, this was probably not the answer you were looking for and I do commiserate, I'm just chronically unable to be funny on main. 😔

TLDR: there's always nuance in everything unfortunately. Even if this is the no nuance webbed site.

[shapeshiftersvt]

The Cryptid Collection

NO, THIS IS NOT AN APRIL FOOL'S JOKE! THE TIMING JUST WORKED OUT THAT WAY BECAUSE OUR ANNIVERSARY IS TDOV, WHICH WAS MARCH 31ST THIS YEAR. (￣y▽,￣)╭

In case you missed, it, yesterday, we officially launched The Cryptid Collection!

Since it was the weekend and a major holiday, we decided to put off talking much about it outside of our website. But now it's Monday, so it's time to talk cryptids (even though we everyone is distracted by boops).

The Cryptid Collection is a collaborative design project created by co-owners Eli and Krista (hi, it's us, we're the main contributors to this Tumblr) exclusively for Shapeshifters. The collection has four main components: binders and sports bras made with fabrics of our own design, the fabrics which you can purchase for your own projects through Spoonflower, the vintage style travel posters, and the couture fashion looks which you can see in person at fashion shows across New England this year which will be listed on our Events Page as we confirm them.

While the collection was inspired by cryptids in general, we decided to spotlight six in particular: Mothman, Champ, the Jackalope, the Squonk, the Jersey Devil, and the Fresno Nightcrawler.

We'll talk more about them and why we chose those cryptids in particular later in the week. Today, we want to talk about the who, what, where, when, why, and how of The Cryptid Collection and cryptids in general.

You may be asking: Why a fashion collection?

It was originally Eli's idea. It had been something they'd been fantasizing about for a few years now, almost as long as Shapeshifters has been in business. The realization that it was something we could potentially really do didn't come until Fall of 2023, though, when we started talking about how to celebrate our 10th anniversary. We wanted to do something special, something that we'd never done before, and Eli decided it was time for both of us to finally admit that, after ten years of making and designing clothing and and graphic art, we might actually be qualified to call ourselves and present ourselves as Designers.

"It’s wild. I decided this year that I was going to commit to being the person I’ve fantasized about becoming. Terrifying." —Eli

So, a themed fashion collection.

But while it was their first and only answer when Krista asked what they wanted the theme to be, Eli didn't come up with the cryptid idea entirely on their own. Anyone who's been following Krista's artblr, @3ofpents, has probably seen the vintage travel posters she's been designing since Summer of 2023. Originally inspired by a book of color palettes from print media through the 20th century, the posters started out as a personal challenge to get Krista drawing more often.

The very first poster she designed was for the New Jersey Pine Barrens and the Jersey Devil, inspired by the state she grew up in. But the one that Eli cites as the one that really got them thinking was for our home state: Burlington, VT's own Champ.

"The tagline for that one was You’ll never swim alone. The friendly, ominous, terrible, wonderful mystery embedded in those four words is a vibe I think about a lot." —Eli

Krista's choice of cryptids as a subject for her posters, and the well of inspiration she drew from in designing her parts of this collection, stemmed from her childhood in New Jersey. While the Jersey Devil isn't as popular and well-known as some other regional cryptids like Mothman and the Loch Ness Monster, it is a huge part of New Jersey culture. Every kid in the state grows up learning some version of the Jersey Devil's origin story; and the local indie, alt, underground, punk cultures slap Jersey Devil imagery on their posters, logos, and products the way some states use their state shapes.

"In New Jersey, the story of the Jersey Devil holds a similar kind of legendary local pride as the story of George Washington crossing the Delaware River on Christmas Eve to take the British soldiers camping on the other side by surprise." —Krista

Eli's inspiration is coming in a separate post; cryptids can't be anything but queer, as far as they're concerned.

In the coming days we've got much more to say about various individual cryptids! Stay tuned.

[whencyclopedia]

Slavery in the Roman World

Slavery was an ever-present feature of the Roman world. Slaves served in households, agriculture, mines, the military, workshops, construction and many services. As many as 1 in 3 of the population in Italy or 1 in 5 across the empire were slaves and upon this foundation of forced labour was built the entire edifice of the Roman state.

Slavery as An Accepted Reality

Slavery, that is complete mastery (dominium) of one individual over another, was so imbedded in Roman culture that slaves became almost invisible and there was certainly no feeling of injustice in this situation on the part of the rulers. Inequality in power, freedom and the control of resources was an accepted part of life and went right back to the mythology of Jupiter overthrowing Saturn. As K.Bradley eloquently puts it, 'freedom...was not a general right but a select privilege' (Potter, 627). Further, it was believed that the freedom of some was only possible because others were enslaved. Slavery, was, therefore, not considered an evil but a necessity by Roman citizens. The fact that slaves were taken from the losers in battle (and their subsequent offspring) was also a helpful justification and confirmation of Rome's (perceived) cultural superiority and divine right to rule over others and exploit those persons for absolutely any purpose whatsoever.

Aside from the huge numbers of slaves taken as war captives (e.g. 75,000 from the First Punic War alone) slaves were also acquired via piracy, trade, brigandage and, of course, as the offspring of slaves as a child born to a slave mother (vernae) automatically became a slave irrespective of who the father was. Slave markets proliferated, perhaps one of the most notorious being the market on Delos, which was continuously supplied by the Cilician pirates. Slave markets existed in most large towns, though, and here, in a public square, slaves were paraded with signs around their necks advertising their virtues for prospective buyers. Traders specialised in the commodity, for example, one A. Kapreilius Timotheus traded throughout the Mediterranean.

Continue reading...

[jacob-blogs]

Okay I can give you a Kendrick and Drake beef rundown. Apologies if I’m explaining shit you already know but IDK your background on this so I’ll be thorough just to make sure.

Major Characters:

Drake. Aubrey Graham, AKA Drake, is extremely financially successful, but not very well respected in actual hip hop scenes. He’s generally seen as a culture vulture because of his privileged child actor background and white suburban upbringing putting him at odds with other people in hip hop culture. Also, in 2018, he very publicly lost his beef with another rapper named Pusha T, who revealed he had a secret newborn son named Adonis. Lastly, he has a long history of being kind of a misogynistic creep, the worst parts being a history of being sketchy around underaged girls.

Kendrick. Kendrick Lamar is an extremely respected rapper, though his songs aren’t always the most radio friendly and he doesn’t release them super frequently. He’s extremely artistically minded, though, and is one of those artists who’s just so good they can feel borderline untouchable. If I had to pick a rapper who was the consensus greatest at the moment among big hip hop heads, it would be Kendrick.

Backstory: Drake and Kendrick are arguably the two biggest rappers right now. A third rapper, J. Cole, had a lyric about the “big 3” in October naming himself, Kendrick, and Drake. The second part is that in March, Kendrick had a bar where he said “fuck the big 3, it’s just big me.” Cole tried beefing back, dipped out pretty quick.

Drake released two diss tracks against Kendrick on April 19, Push Ups and Taylor Made Freestyle. The latter was especially controversial because he used AI to replicate the voice of Tupac, which is… a huge no-no.

Last Tuesday, Kendrick finally responded with his first track, Euphoria. It was what people were expecting, for the most part: he went in on Drake in the ways a diss track normally would, just with extra finesse since he’s Kendrick. Still an excellent record on its own.

On Friday morning, he released 6:16 in LA on Instagram, which mostly got attention for implying that Kendrick had a mole from among Drake’s own crew. Also, the cover image was an image of a black glove.

On Friday evening, Drake released his response to Euphoria, Family Matters. Among other things, Drake accused Kendrick of beating his wife, though since Drake has a history of lying people are unsure how seriously to take that. Notably, though, some of Drake’s bars seem to have been preempted by Euphoria, which lends some credence to the idea that he may have a leaker.

Only thirty minutes after Family Matters dropped, Kendrick released Meet the Grahams, which directly responded to several things Drake said, which confirms he has a leaker. Not to mention, the cover image was a zoomed out version of the 6:16 image, which now includes items like literal receipts and prescription bottles of Ozempic and Ambien with Drake’s legal name on them. So this photo was taken inside Drake’s mansion. The song itself is the equivalent of bringing a switchblade to a cage fight, and among other things drops that Drake also has a secret 11 year old daughter, as well as it accuses him of being a pedophile and a sex trafficker. This song is why everybody’s talking right now. Nothing like this has happened before.

Anyways, Kendrick dropped another track tonight, but the dust hasn’t quite settled on that yet so I won’t say too much.

Thank you sooo much for the context.

Rap as a genre is always interesting to me because it's characterized so much by not only the songwriting and lyrics, but also the messiness and drama that goes on behind the scenes. I don't necessarily listen to it on the daily, but it would be insane not to recognize the cultural influence it has on American pop culture. And hell, up until recently tumblr was a huge supporter of Drake through his weird career decisions.

But like.... homie's gotta hang it up flat screen. Drake and his team of ghost writers literally ain't got shit on K. Dot. Like how can you pay folks actual money to take up in your defense over a dance beat while this other dude's dishing out bar after bar of straight fire getting after you, your career, your family, your crew, your lies, your shitty behavior...

Like okay, it's a rap battle but also this has got to be THEE cultural reset of 2024