#working class hero who dreams of an ideal world of equality

[batsplat]

there is that adorable pic of a 13 year old pecco and marc, hugging him by the shoulders. pecco hadn’t become a rossi protege yet, marc recently won his title in 125, they are both so so young. like, of course pecco is going to think a senior (albeit as famous as marc was at the time) is cool and worthy of “celebrity” picture! of course marc is going to take photos with kids that ask him to!

and then they meet at the rossi ranch years later, pecco after an abysmal rookie moto3 season, but part of vr46 academy, marc as a multiple world champion in different categories. like, i’m sure they’ve crossed paths in the paddock, but it looks like the ranch was their first outside of work get-together?

i do wonder at what point did pecco stop seeing marc as this admirable motogp giant? they are co-workers/competitors now, supposedly equals. does the childish wonderment and idealization ever go away, when you are put head-to-head? yes, pecco has said that he doesn’t consider himself on marc’s level, but it does really answer the question, when marc achieves something awesome, like a fucking pole on a honda, does it fill pecco only with the sense of falling short, jealousy, frustration, or is there that tiny 13 year old pecco somewhere inside going “wow, this guy is awesome”

anon... first of all this ask is right up my street. second of all, yeah no the thirteen year old never entirely went away

to some extent obviously all riders kinda do this when they end up competing with the guys they grew up admiring. (or well in modern motogp, that's how it worked out - the competitive windows do have to be big enough, yeah? I'm not sure about the nineties premier class riders, but starting from valentino who had the biaggi poster, was a capirossi fan, an norick fan... but then also didn't get to compete directly with doohan for instance and was instead just mentored by him. valentino sticking around for so long basically Breaks this.) like I was talking in this ask about the dani/marc relationship and how when we talk about dani being marc's 'reference', it does mean something slightly different than the valentino hero idealisation. basically, it's the question of whether you think you're gonna fight that guy one day, if all goes well... because if you're little pecco, right, you're looking up to marc and want to be him, but you also want to beat him (if little pecco is feeling very brave). so marc fills the role of 'reference', the bloke who is basically always a few steps ahead of pecco - exaggerated by how precocious marc was. the role of 'hero' is of course again filled by valentino, though in this case pecco didn't actually have to meaningfully compete against his idol. the separation is a bit cleaner

and look, I doubt this ever really went as far as marc's admiration for dani. but yeah as you say: at the end of the day it's this cool superstar who is tearing up the lower categories and then is tearing up the premier class... like that's this prodigy... and then you get to be part of your actual hero's academy AND you're there when the prodigy gets invited to your hero's home!! not only is marc cool, not only is he winning everything, but also valentino clearly thinks he's fantastic... you kinda want valentino to think you are fantastic in the same way he talks about marc and looks at him... and pecco is like. seventeen at this point. great age. super impressionable. he's having a marginally better season than his absolute flop moto3 campaign but it's still!! rough! you know, so far away from this world that valentino and marc inhabit. obviously young athletes dream, obviously they have to be a bit delusional, obviously they have to believe they'll make it, but those are the kinds of harrowing years that really dent your actual belief. like god, the world of valentino and marc must have felt kinda unattainable back then...

anyway, obviously a year later marc became public enemy number one. personally, if I had to guess, I don't really think valentino has ever spoken much to his proteges about the details of the marc feud. it's the kind of thing where you maybe occasionally badmouth a guy you all hate when the kids are in the room, some dismissive comment or some slightly ugly sideswipe... but valentino did probably prefer to keep his mentees out of the whole thing and isn't giving them particularly detailed hot takes on sepang 2015. I mean, look at what luca said last year

hey, he could be lying, but is he really the type? "I'm sure he's still angry" - even that doesn't sound like he knows anything particularly specific about where his brother's at these days. if valentino hasn't spoken much about sepang 2015 with his own flesh and blood, then is he really giving long debriefs to marco bezzecchi? are you sure? of course, unlike luca, pecco does have the dubious distinction of actually being at sepang 2015, so there's always the chance he was in the room when some nasty things were being said about marc... but my sense is that all the academy riders have kind of been left to their own devices when making up their minds about the marc/valentino relationship. just probably a bit of a no-go topic on most days. and while pecco may have initially been completely on board with the marc hate, over the years his stance has mellowed to the brave and bold position of 'actually, I have other stuff to worry about'. like, this is why you don't get this weird bez-style all-over-the-place behaviour from pecco - fundamentally, he is far too sensible and far too interested in his own career to be going around seeking revenge on the behalf of his mentor. it's not like valentino really seems to expect him to either. sometimes the best thing you can do is simply try not to care that much

soooooo fundamentally you get to this place where for quite a few years, pecco really isn't thinking about marc too often I reckon... it's very much background noise - even when he's gotten to motogp, he's obviously not exactly fighting with marc from the word go. he has other stuff to worry about! then marc is gone for a bit! 2021 is kinda weird because pecco never really felt in that championship fight (I mean, maybe he thought he was idk) because he only really got going late in the season, and marc definitely wasn't in that title fight... BUT pecco got his first ever motogp win as a result of a proper great defensive ride against marc at aragon! seven overtakes and re-overtakes in the last few laps! truly some proper smart riding, anticipating where marc was going to attack and figuring out how to get him back every time. and of course, that's like... got to be one of the coolest ways possible you can get your first win? beating one of the all time greats (even if a physically impaired one) in a direct extensive duel? genuinely looking at the current grid, I'd struggle to come up with a cooler maiden win... oh I suppose zarco last year would actually be a decent shout. one of those two imo! anyway what an ego boost that must be

typed out the response to this ask on wednesday and let it *vaguely gestures* simmer a bit, but actually thursday they had pecco on that motogp podcast thingy and talked him through basically his whole career. which is one of those cases of 'not necessarily anything new, but always interesting to hear how the bloke himself puts it', and anyway it does also cover a lot of the stuff referenced in this post, would recommend. I did want to quickly bring it up because pecco does talk about aragon 2021 in that (at around 23 mins in):

Q: And the amount of pressure, for everyone who doesn't remember - it was Aragon '21, vs Marc Marquez, anti-clockwise track, everyone's expecting a certain person to win. [...] Seven times, he passes you in the last three laps, and every time you have to find something, for your first win - A: Not bad, yeah? Q: How was that feeling crossing the line, because it's your first win but it's also the last three laps of craziness that you've come through? A: Yeah, I remember that... we were prepared to fight for this victory because we work at it a lot and we were finally prepared and as soon as started the weekend I was feeling great. Marc was very strong, Fabio was very strong also... We started to race and I did the pole position and then we started to race and Marc was like always super super fast in Aragon because it's a left hander track, he's very strong in Aragon, it's his home grand prix, so... I was trying the maximum and I was there fighting with him and for me was fantastic because I was very strong in a very complicated track for me. The first - was not the first possibility to win but was one of the first and we were fighting with the maximum with the top [player?] so defeating him in Aragon was fantastic and I never could have asked more for my first victory for sure. Because some win their first victory with gap or with some luck, we fight. [...] Yeah, was fantastic.

like I said. it's a really cool win! pecco knows it's a cool win! he knows it's a cool win because it's marc! even two premier class title pecco still feels deeply aware of how special that was

*reaches up to scratch at ear in slightly self-conscious manner when saying "not bad" about beating the eight times world champion*

because it does mean something extra to beat marc, right? and that's also what this represents to pecco, as an opportunity... obviously on balance he'd very much want marc to not be in his team, because he's not an idiot and he's aware it's going to be a bit of a nightmare. that being said! of course, would there be anything cooler than for him than actually beating marc in the same team... I don't want to sound like a broken record on this topic but just to reiterate, none of the titles won post-2019 are in any way diminished by marc's absence - and fundamentally pecco must know he's a deserving champion, even if he still considers himself on a different level from valentino and marc. but of course it would mean something special to beat him! it's already meant something special to beat him in individual races! it'd mean something special if he beats him this year, older bike be damned! and it'd mean something special next year. pecco is deeply wary of marc, and rightly so, but don't take that to mean he isn't up for the fight. he always has been

weirdly enough, I do actually think being valentino's protege might help him be sensible about marc. because the thing is pecco has clearly put some thought into all of this at some point and had to decide for himself... or well, to make peace with the fact that he is not going to be the next valentino rossi - and that he doesn't really want to be. it's kinda the casey versus jorge distinction: you can be a valentino fan and admire everything he's done on-track but still very much know that valentino the persona isn't something you really want to attempt to emulate because it just isn't you, or you can hunger after attaining that kind of 'character' and popularity for yourself and find yourself disillusioned when things turn out differently. pecco's in the casey camp, minus the desire to shove valentino off the nearest cliff edge. like he says:

man wants a quiet life when he's not doing the death sport. and, y'know, marc might not have quite those stratospheric levels of popularity as valentino does... but it's fairly obvious pecco links them in his mind, which is not just about talent. they're both Characters, they're both figureheads in the sport, they're both larger than life. and maybe sometimes, deep down, someone like pecco might wish that kind of thing did come naturally to him... but if he has felt that way, then he's already kinda had to work through all that. he's valentino's successor! he's the next big italian motogp star! but he's never going to be valentino. and he wouldn't want that life, it wouldn't make him happy - and probably he looks at marc with all his drama and controversy and thinks he wouldn't really want all that either. pecco's given all of this a lot of thought, and he's still probably a bit too self-conscious and a bit too aware of all of this stuff for his own good, but that does also mean he knows his own head and where he's at when it comes to his own status in the sport. both when it comes to the character and when it comes to the talent. sure, having marc's fuck you talent would be nice, everyone would want that... but also if you're a two time premier champion, at a certain point you need a certain cockiness about your own abilities. he's spoken about how he needs a more well-settled bike than casey or marc, how he can't out-perform the bike like they can - there clearly is a lot of admiration there, still the sense of respect and awe you probably can't ever quite shake. pecco won't ever be one of those aliens. but he's had enough time to establish himself in the sport before he's had to deal with the marc threat in a more active way, has had the chance to find his place without worrying too much about marc - has been able to build up his own confidence. at the same time, pecco is still very obviously aware of just who marc is and the weight of that legacy and it shapes how he approaches fighting marc. it's pecco's admiration vying with his arrogance - and he has to hope the latter wins out. you can't be fearful of the legacy of those you're trying to beat. you have to kill your heroes, even if it's a strange flavour of hero

anyhow - one big way in which valentino does loom large here is that everyone else is aware of his rivalry with marc and how it is crucial Historical Context for the pecco/marc stuff. because pecco does have that dog in him, he's fundamentally disinterested in fighting his idol's battles and is mainly just looking out for himself. a big part of the general wariness towards marc isn't even valentino-related antipathy or just respect for his abilities, but also this kind of sense of... god, this marc thing is always going to have extra implications, will there be discourse, can there please not be discourse... he doesn't want to get into this stuff, he doesn't want to be part of the sepang 2015 reenactment society. he's pretty determined to stay clear of marc-related controversy at every turn, and generally does do a good job of not letting the undoubtedly extremely annoying marc annoy him... the only time pecco had proper marc-induced head loss was mugello last year - y'know, that whole thing when he felt impeded by marc and then slowed down long enough to give marc the chance to warm up his tyres and catch a pecco tow to the front row. like that was just head gone, the kind of thing that happens when you already find someone deeply annoying and then you kinda choose the wrong moment to get mad at them. with a bit of distance pecco may well have regretted reacting that way, like you don't really want to give marc that kind of opening. he's been way more disciplined since then, but it still opened the door

fundamentally, the less time pecco spends obsessing over marc, the better for him. pecco obviously has to be very aware of marc and wary of him, but he also can't spent too much energy on admiring him or being irritated by him or anything else. (given that valentino's descriptions of the marc/pecco rivalry do seem to frame marc as a competitor who sounds an awful lot like valentino himself, ironically valentino is quite well-placed to offer the 'try to avoid letting the guy who gets off on annoying his rivals annoy you' advice.) it's always going to be tough, isn't it, competing against your heroes, figuring out how to disentangle those past emotions from how you actually approach fighting them, how to feel comfortable enough in your own skin to not be cowed by that status... you can't get to a place where you're so admiring or respectful or intimidated that you're already beaten before the competition even starts - and to his credit pecco has shown he is both willing to stand up to the famous marc marquez as well as capable of doing so. my guess is that for him, the childhood idolisation isn't primarily expressed in a 'wow he dragged the honda to pole!!' (not least when he was using pecco's teammate to directly deny pecco). sure, perhaps you do get those knee jerk reactions of admiring the sheer craft of your rival's riding, just have to do your best not to let it affect you. but for the most part it's... really wanting to beat marc. and sometimes feeling a teensy bit insecure about just how good marc is. and really wanting to beat him. he kinda has to be sensible and talk down in his brain how special this one guy is so he doesn't do anything silly, tell himself it's just any other guy... but it's still always going to be there, hovering in the background. and god does pecco really want to beat him

[slyvieselkie]

Since the Beginning - Midoriya Izuku

Warning: body shaming, insecurity about looks, family issues, suggestive

Check out my masterlist for more!

Having a prohero boyfriend is really a double edged sword, especially when he's the successor of the Symbol of Peace. Deku, the greatest hero, Midoriya Izuku, is a man larger than life. And to stand next to him, to be loved by him, is an honour and a stain in itself.

You're known as 'His Girlfriend'. The luckiest girl on Earth, a position that many covert for you sit on a pile of riches that he so graciously gifted you. Not only that, Izuku is the ideal man. Compassionate, brave, powerful, smart, a little goofy and nerdy, he's the man every parent wants their daughter to bring home. And that honour belongs to you.

But having Deku as your boyfriend, means that you must also meet the world's standard. A girl that's equally as friendly, sweet, beautiful, successful, an ideal woman for the best man out there. And every day you look in the mirror with the thought, 'Gosh, why does he even like me?', so does everyone else.

Every time the two of you are out in public and get photographed, there'll always be a comment about your weight, your pimples, how it's always Izuku pulling his card out, how you don't treat his fans with respect. And your boyfriend does his best to fight back in the ways he can. In the rare interviews he'll always mention the love of his life, the woman supporting him from behind, who puts up with the 24/7 limelight and harsh critics of those who know nothing. He even enlists the help of his old classmates who try their best to change society's mind. But it only makes you feel more pathetic, that Izuku does so much for you and you can't even present yourself better.

It takes a long, burning, tearful shower for you to finally resolve to change. With a bright smile, you talk to Izuku about wanting to be more healthy and start volunteering.

He cups your cheeks, "Sweetheart, if it's about-", "Izuku, please...just let me have this", and your eyes swirl with so much desperation he can only say yes.

But the green haired man makes a strict schedule for you to follow, he refuses to watch you please the world and drop dead. He asks Ochako to exercise with you, where you start on light cardio and Pilates. Bakugo reluctantly sends you a few tips on healthier eating and even spends a day at your house meal prepping. Izuku doesn't know about this because the villain-like hero would burn your house down. He even asks his old teacher, Thirteen, to help you find volunteer work.

The world's opinion of you change when photos of you helping out at homeless shelters and after villain attacks. You also change as well, he notices. You've become more social, going out more and posing for the cameras rather than hiding from it. He sees your regular posts and stories at the gym, making healthy snacks, promoting charities, going out for brunch with the U.A. Class 1 girls. Izuku couldn't be more relieved. So many nights he has had nightmares of you taking dieting too far or working until you end up in the hospital, trying to become the perfect woman and breaking yourself in the process.

But change takes a long time and no matter what you do, the world will always bring up your past. And you've learnt to live with it, to understand that what you're doing is more than enough. However, that doesn't mean those comments don't hurt. Especially when it comes from the people whose words mean the most.

....

Izuku has met your parents many times. For the three years you two have been together, the hero has always made an effort to know your parents and get along with them. Your family also loves him, your mother is dreaming about the day she sees you in a wedding dress to him. The atmosphere is always warm, comforting, peaceful.

Until the small comments start to sneak in.

"Oh look at how skinny and pretty you are now!"

"Now my son in law will have no problem picking you up!"

"You should've seen her in high school, she would've weighed more than you right now!"

"If only she started dieting earlier! I kept telling her to, but she never listened and now look at her!"

Dieting, exercise, skinnier, prettier, smaller.

Of course you fire back at her. It's all jokes, but Izuku can see how much those words hurt. And every time, the ride back home is silent and you deep in thoughts. And every time after you come out of the shower, he sees you observe yourself in the mirror. Your eyes scan like society once did, looking for the imperfections. Wondering how you can erase the past, so that the world only remembers the pretty and perfect version of you.

His heart breaks, because why are your efforts never enough? He walks in and makes himself known, you jump before giving a soft smile. Izuku tries to return it and quickly digs his face into the crook of your neck. His large and scarred hands quickly hoist you up while you squeak.

As he carries you to the bed, Izuku has so many thoughts going through his head. You've always been pretty, ever since the moment he met you. He's always been able to pick you up, a hero like him should have no problem picking up boulder let alone a person. And he has seen you in high school pictures where you look so cute, he wished he met you earlier. And no, you shouldn't have started dieting earlier. Knowing the situation you were in, you would've only gained an eating disorder.

Dieting, exercise, skinnier, prettier, smaller. He didn't do any of this just to hear that from the people who should've supported you. As he laid you down, Izuku takes you in with trembling eyes. You give a smile back and beckon him closer.

Izuku has always been careful with you. His rough hands ghost your body knowing the damage they could cause, his lips only leave light hickies because he never wants to see you in bruises even if they're from love, he's always wary about the weight he puts on you and your stamina compared to his. But the nights you return from your parents are gentle as a feather. Your body becomes his temple, and he'll never stop worshipping. He oozes love and forces you to soak it up, the love that they should've had for you.

It's ironic when Izuku wants to be so gentle and loving, because it sometimes leads to him become more rough. He has so much to give that he can't see that you're overstimulated. He wants you to see that he loves you unconditionally, resulting in deep hand marks and love bites. Izuku wants you to understand that he's always on your side, so he'll hold you down and do his best to leave you quivering and blank.

....

But regardless of how he feels about your parents, Izuku knows he can't do anything about them. Because he knows that blocking your family isn't easy as it sounds.

"They're...it's just when it comes to this, they can become...off", you whisper trying to calm Izuku down, "Other than that, they're really good."

He knows, he can see it. How you're always sticking to your mother and how she always has your favourite food and snacks at home. How you melt in your father's arms and the way he monitored Izuku when they first met. Izuku sees the photographs hanging on the walls filled with parental love, the injury stories where it sounds like they were just in as much pain as you, the fights when they became a pair of bears.

Izuku also knows that in its own fucked up sense, they say that for your own good. Because he's heard you and your mother on the phone, how hateful she sounds of the media that talked about your weight and looks. Your father used to hate him for bringing you into a world that you never suited, until he finally saw Izuku as a man who loved you.

So Izuku will respect them and be civil. Because they raised you into the person you are today, the most loveliest person that he is honoured to be with forever. Because in their own ways, they also poured love and care into the soul to form it this way.

But that doesn't mean he'll take it lying down. You're his woman, and he'll protect you the way he did when society attacked you. He'll make sure they understand that their words have weight to them, and crush those words until they disintegrate to dust.

He'll do anything to show that you've always been beautiful since the beginning.

Hi Lovelies, meet Izuku the greenest flag ever~!

I hope you guys felt all of the emotions poured into this fic and how much Izuku loves you! I really wanted to portray the struggle of loving your parents and understanding how much they love you, but just having that one issue that always breaks the peace. For the girlies out there living with body shaming, hold your head up high because you have been beautiful since the beginning!

I'll see you another time ♡(˃͈ દ ˂͈ ༶ )♡

[shigarakissme]

You know what I think a lot of people don't really take into consideration when they talk about how much they dislike Aizawa for being 'so mean to Izuku'?

At least at that point in the story when he's introduced, Aizawa is the first character with a pessimistic outlook on hero society. Yes, Izuku realizes that 'not everyone is made equal' and the sorts of discrimination those without quirks face, but he still has an idealized vision of hero-work itself. For him, it's presented as a perfect, elite life he craves. Even though we don't know Aizawa's past, we can see in retrospect how it has shaped him and his interactions with the rest of the characters and the world. He comes from a place where he's lost his best friend before he even graduated, so his mindset is not "omg I'm going to help these kids achieve their dreams", it's "I need to make sure these children don't die trying to enter the most dangerous job in the world and I need to be confident when they leave that I don't have to constantly worry about them being killed". His reasoning for doubting Izuku's ability to be a hero was seeing how careless he was with his body and life and how that would not only put Izuku himself in danger, but also the other heroes around him.

Once he saw that Izuku was capable of restraint, of actually trying to preserve his body, then he agreed to keep Izuku in the class. None of the other teachers had to convince him; he didn't have some sort of grudge against Izuku. He just wanted a kid who wasn't going to kill himself for his dream.

Conversely, All Might was the optimistic force driving Izuku. Once Izuku put himself in danger to save someone, All Might realized he had the heart of a hero and started encouraging him to pursue his dreams. There's nothing wrong with this, I'm not bashing on AM.

It feels like All Might represents the desire and confidence of wanting the dream whereas Aizawa represents the practicality of what it would actually mean for a bunch of 14-15 years olds to start training to become fighters.

And ironically, they kind of swap roles in season 6. Even though Aizawa loses his foot and eye, at this point, he's seen his class' progression to still have confidence in them and believe in their abilities, whereas All Might starts losing hope in the impact of heroes by seeing how grim and dark the world has become (until he gets a reminder from Stain). It's just something cool.

Whenever people talk about how Aizawa's teaching style would be so discouraging... that's kind of the point. It's not an easy job. It's deadly and draining and has been propagandized as *the* job to have. Enough so that a kid's willing to break all of his bones just to be considered to become one. Telling this man "this is my dream" means nothing because this is every child's dream in this world. When every celebrity is a hero and has been shown as this glamorous larger-than-life individual, kids seeking to enter this profession need to see behind the propaganda and glamor society has pressed if they want to survive.

[layzeal]

a lot of people that talk about wwx are actually talking about gu mang, and they don't even know it

[streets-in-paradise]

Let’s talk about the amazingly on spot social commentary on The Boys

Warning: This post contains spoilers from Season 1 and the first three episodes of season 2 of The Boys 

Tags: @nehoymenyoy asked to be tagged. I don’t know if my tags are working well but if they don’t i will send you the link of the post. 

I decided to make this post because i finished all the avaliable episodes of the series two days ago and, having a long talk with my sister about this topic, i tought this is too awesome to not discuss it here. We are both studying in careers of the social field, i'm in sociology and she is in social work. We watched the show together and talking with her inspired my own ideas i would like to share here.

This show was a wonderfull surprise in terms of social commentary. I haven't watched one with such a great commentary since American Gods. In that case i was expecting some degree of progressive commentary because i had read the book previously and i was aware the source material had some, the one added for the series is even better and it was great, but it wasn't a shock to find it. For The Boys i haven't read the comics first and , even when i loved the show for lots of reasons, the amazing on spot social commentary was a hell of a surprise. I have been frustrated lately in terms of the messages in entertaiment products because, even when there is a lot of intention for part of the makers to make more progressive points in their stuff, everything becomes bland marketing to me most of the time. I remember that some years ago media used to came out unintentionally with some really cool progressive messages ( like, for example, " a bug's life" and its anti capitalist message). That stuff seemed soo genuine and today i feel that everytime a product targets my demographic in that sense what they deliver it's soo bland and fake that the progressive intention of the message gets lost in the absolutely obvious intention of selling something to me using my ideals as catch. Precisely this is an important point of critic in this show. I didn't expected at all to get a genuine feeling in the social commentary of a superhero show. I'm not saying that this means i think the makers believe in this (after all, it's amazon), what i praise here is how good they did it. In a time when most productions claim to have a social commentary behind to come out as cool but result in shallow fake bullshit this series has provided me with something that feels autentic. Like American Gods, what i feel the show is trying to tell me actually gets me.

Before starting with the proper talk i want to dedicate a few línes to recommend a few scenes of the show i just mentioned. I was super dissapointed after finding out they will probably end up turning it into more bland fake bullshit for season 3 but, to anyone who likes well delivered social commentary, check on Orlando Jones's scenes as Anansi. He is my favourite character from the show and all his scenes are a blessing. 

I would also want to clarify that this post and the opinions displayed on it are from an anti capitalist, intersectional feminist and latin american perspective. I know the show is very american, the issues it discusses are most of the time worlwide but it has particularities of the american context so i will try to talk only of what i feel i know enough to have a word. I'm argentinian and we have our local versions of some of this problems but i will stay in the series territory trying to be as faithfull as i can to the american reality it gets inspiration from. Also, forgive me for any mistakes on my writing and expresions. English is not my native language. 

Superheros are modern mythology. How would this work in real life?

This is the basic premise of the show’s worldbuilding. The great thing is that this concept is not developed in an edgy, pretentious way. It is serious and painfully real because it’s not only a subversion of tropes, it says a lot of what superheros are to us as a modern times myth. In a superficial view, the world of The Boys feels like what the MCU could have become after the Sokovia accords if they would have been efficiently followed on a worldwide scale.

In that particular universe i use as reference, our superheros are noble and morally heroic individuals.State intervention is the factor threatening to corrupt their actions making them follow the interests of the system. The risk there, along with some very shady violations of human rights to powered people, is having superheros tied to something as unstable as political power. You can fear, for example, what a Trump-like president could do if he had power over the Avengers because, again, the heros are not corrupt, their line of command is. Now, if we strip away all the idealization we had putted on this bunch of powered persons and see them as what they truly are at the end of the day, people like everyone else. Why are we supposed to believe they are immune to corruption? If we also consider the phenomenon of strong privatization of security that has been growing worldwide . Wouldn’t they be more like security workers working for a private contractor? Less like heros and more like private military / security officers?  Now, this is what we are talking about. 

What feels so different from this show is that it assumes a surprisingly realistic point of view on a modern fantasy we are very used to consuming and still constructs a new power fantasy that empowers the viewer. I’ m saying this as an MCU fan, I had grown too comfortable with this optimistic fantasy and this twist from it is brilliant. To put some context on what i want to say here i will try to explain myself first on why i think that superhero fiction have this enormous popularity today and it has become such a huge thing in entertainment. Besides of the obvious reason of big companies producing big exciting action blockbusters for the genre, it’s curious to think on how much these stories gathered a lot of progressive audiences. In past decades action blockbusters didn’t felt progressive, today’s superhero blockbusters were embraced by progressive audiences and this was the start of a twist in general for the media. I think that there is a contextual social reason for this, not the only factor but one i feel is considerable. 

Late Stage Capitalism crushed us, we are so used to injustice and the control the system has over us is so big that we have slowly stopped dreaming of changing it ourselves. Instead, the fantasy of a superhuman who has the power we don’t have saving us from oppression feels really comforting. Captain America becoming such a huge icon in the middle of a time where extreme facism is rising again all over the world, for example. I don’t know much about his comic counterpart but, at least from what i see in the movies, Steve’s ideals feel to me like all those aspects from French Revolution’s  Enlightenment that capitalism dropped away once bourgeois defeated their feudal rivals and capitalism got consolidated, the freedom and equality that feudal lower classes fought for. Today, we feel too small to make a difference so we enjoy the fantasy of powerful persons leading the fight for us. Capitalism feels more unstoppable than ever, it is the only thing who seems strong to remain in a terribly chaotic world. The suffering this cruel system brings to this world is overwhelming, we feel only a miracle can save us now. This is what feeds the narrative of the superhero as modern myth and saviour of humanity.

The Boys tosses aside all our hopes and dreams, presenting us with the most realistic escenario. Superheros are not the miracle we are waiting for, they are humans like everyone else. They are not sacred entities existing beyond our societies, they are part of the system and they insert on it as part of the security industries. They can be corrupted and they work in corrupt institutions in benefit of the ruling class like every other security provider in capitalist societies. They become a new face of the security forces in constant tension with police and military because the myth of the superhero provides them with the public trust those other two forces lost. People lost their trust in cops but they trust sups because they are supposed to be this noble individuals mobilized by their personal feelings of injustice trying to make the world a better place … right? Police are the forces of the ruling class but superheros are supposed to be with us, or at least this is what common sense and propaganda claim, having our hopes as a base to work on. 

For someone so used to the typical superhero fantasy this felt like a slap on my face back to reality. It soo accurate , the system tends to capture any revolutionary input and turn it into profit. Even if the sups could had been a revolutionary factor at the beginning, the most likely thing to happen is for them to become a profitable industry. If we add to this what we already know of the actions of police and military in our real world we have a combo for disaster. The realistic twist is so fresh and painfully real, i can totally see this happening in real life if superheros were a thing. 

We have already introduced ourselves in the world of this story, let’s check on the first main character this series introduces to us. Hughie Campbell, a college age guy who works in an electronics store, lives with his dad and has the most boring average life you can imagine. This guy who is too afraid to ask his boss for a pay raise changes overnight when a superhero kills his girlfriend in front of him and the big corporation the asshole works for covers up the whole thing. The “average guy becomes a hero” trope is not new at all, but the use it has here feels fresh because it is not there only to feed the male geek power fantasy. Hughie is not a geeky average guy only so geeky average guys can identify with him in an action series full of geeky references,he is not there to be the nerdy guy from Robot Chicken. Hughie’s characterization makes a point for everyone. The smallest most unimportant person, the one who can't even stand up for themselves in everyday situations, can make a change. Remember Samwise Gamgee fighting Shelob in Lord of the Rings? Hughie killing Translucent gives me that vibe. If we consider the point i already stated about superheroes being there when we feel too small to fight back injustice, this is the exact opposite. This is a fantasy that gives us the power, makes us think in our own strengths. Hughie is standing up for himself for the first time in his life and he inspires us to fight for our rights. 

Pharmaceutical,Security and Entertainment industries and their business system : Superheros as lab rats,elite security forces and celebrities. 

This part of the post is the hardest to write and the most exquisite. There is so much to talk about about this system Vought shaped tying these three billionaire industries together. The first thing i want to mention, as a point to start, is Butcher’s ramble over the teddy bear with a camera inside in his meeting with Hughie. Perfect introduction for the character with a delightful moment of commentary. In our current societies people live in constant fear for hundreds of reasons. Fears over street crime had skyrocketed all over the world even when crime is not growing uniformly in every country and that accelerated the privatization of security, fears of parents over the strangers they leave they kids with when they are not home inspired products like the one mentioned in the series’s moment, fears on the effects of processed foods are an impulse for the diet industry and i could keep naming lots of other examples. Fears, and the emotional response they trigger , are the base of profitable businesses. 

I had been reading some authors that describe this stage of capitalism as an emotional one. Capitalism preached science and rationality during the past century but today its base of support is an emotional one. To excite the sensations of the people as consumers, to eliminate rational criticism, to push anti popular agendas through emotional excitement and mass hysteria. To cite another example that you can consider bounded to the series, Right Realism in Criminology is now almost common sense and there are people who keep asking for harsher punitive systems. This ideology, with the help of media panic, goes straight after their feelings and fears of being victims of violent crimes. Rational thinking is not the area of discussion, the base of the argument is on fear and pain. Fear of being potential victims, pain shared with the victims thinking in solutions that sound more like revenge than justice. 

Going back to my point, in the world of The Boys this type of punitivism seems to have succeeded even in a greater way than in our current world because it has superheros as backup. If real life harsh punitivism feeds on fear and a wish for social revenge, in this world it has the positive emotions supes inspire on people as a trust certificate for the persons who may not feel that way. They are loved and worshipped celebrities, their faces are everywhere, they have thousands of fans… who would see flaws in what they do? Can you imagine a world in which we worshipped cops and soldiers like we worship celebrities? This is it, people put their blind faith in them because most of them seem to be their fans. Even the people who are against brutality in the actions of security forces would end up trusting them because they are famous people. Our culture has taught us to make ourselves blind to the bullshit we see on the celebrities we love. Fans have a strong emotional attachment to their favourite celebs and this can turn into emotional manipulation in this context. If actors or singers in real life can have a fanbase that forgets to see them as human people how would these actual superhumans not end up being worshipped as gods? 

There has always been military propaganda in entertainment but this marriage between the industries through superheros is far more sinister than that. It makes you think about the unfair amount of credibility we put in celebrities. The plane crash scene of Homelander and Maeve it’s even more devastating looking at it from that perspective. Those persons had their full trust in them and they were safer with the terrorists. Can you imagine being a Homelander fan and dying there?  That’s horrible, the last thing you get in your life is the biggest disappointment ever from someone you trusted and stanned. 

 Speaking of Homelander, he is a right wing wet dream and one of the best villians i had ever seen, he makes me feel sick with how fucking despicable he is. His character is an excellent point to start the ramble on the third wheel of this corporate nightmare. Superheros are products of the pharmaceutical industry, injected with a drug since they were babies. In his particular case, he was raised like a lab rat and the series is realistic even in this detail. The lab rat kid with superpowers is another common trope that we see pretty often and here it also gets twisted. I’m thinking for example on Eleven from Stranger Things, she has been raised by abusive scientists who treated her as an experiment, yet she is this sweet kiddo who has a hard time socializing. Instead, Homelander is a monster without conscience or mercy and seems to be severely affected by his abnormal childhood. Brilliant, he is the ultimate product of this corporative triangle and depicts everything that's wrong with it. 

The cycle is pretty clear: drugs create them, they play their role in security and their media notoriety justifies their actions. As it is shown in season one,  the security aspect of the corporate complex represented mostly in Homelander’s actions craves to grow bigger and get supes into the military since, in the startpoint of the series, they only work with cops. Since the industry feeds on fear and Vought seems to have a monopoly in the production of powered persons there were no threats big enough to justify the intervention of superhumans in wars. Dismissing the importance of this monopoly for the company, Homelander suministrates the drug to terrorist groups in an attempt to create the first super villains. This is a perfect analogy of how the american war machine works. There is no way for terrorist groups from Third World countries to get access to sophisticated war technology without help from the ones who wield that power better than anyone. The first mentions of the supe terrorists reminded me of when i was in my course of worldwide history in college and i learned there how most of those famous names in middle eastern terrorism were actually friends with the CIA before at some point. Here in South America we have other history regarding the style of USA intervention, the Plan Condor dictatorships in the 70’s and early 80’s. I was just starting my career when I had a month of history classes about the Middle East and, being pretty ignorant on the matter, it shocked me the way in which the US villainized people they used to work with. I think the series makes a great point with this part of the plot because it hints something of this war mechanics. 

Gender politics of the series: a surprisingly complex approach on the topic of sexual assault ,a realistic critic to bland white feminism and the empty cashgrabbing ways in which mainstream media adapts feminist discourse.

This topic was even a bigger surprise for me. I wasn't expecting such an interesting approach of gender issues, mostly because this is the area in which media wannabe woke messages had become more dissapointing to me lately. Specially in a show about superheros, i wasn't expecting to get very interesting points.

I will start talking of the portrayals of sexual assault. We have two sexually assaulted characters in the series, Starlight and Becca. First, i think it is great that they didn't used the "rape as character development" trope. Actually, it's cool how they mock this conceptions. When Starlight saves a woman from being raped on the streets or when she makes a public statement about her sexual assault it's the people behind her, building her public image as a character, the ones who push that trope. In the first time their great character development idea is to sexualize her outfit, after the second event mentioned they literally push her sexual assault as development. I love how the public relationships team acts oftenly in a men writing women way, serving as mirror for the most common mistakes of writers on pop culture products when they write female characters.

Going back to my point, i like the effort they putted into portraying differences in both cases. Homelander is the typical portrayal of a rapist, a narcisistic monster without remorse, a deranged son of a bitch. The Deep is also a piece of shit, but of a different kind. There is a phrase that feminists of my country had popularized " los violadores son hijos sanos del patriarcado" ( it means, the rapists are healthy sons of the patriarchy. It tries to explain they are not crazy individuals who act outside societal circunstancies), the Deep reminded me of that.

He is not crazy, he is an insecure guy with a super fragile ego who abuses women for power. Insecurity on men under patriarchy tends to become bashing of women. This is not a black and white portrayal of a sex criminal, it is surprisingly complex. Of course,his actions were unexcusable. He will never repay what he did to Starlight and other women before her but he has chances of working on his issues and, eventually if he trully wants to get better, stop being the scumbag he is. He is not a deranged criminal whose only fate is to be neutralized for the safety of others.

I think this is important because, at least in my country, i had seen people using sex offenders as an example of why countries without death penalty should implement it. I don't support extreme autoritarian security measures and it makes me sick to hear that there are people claiming those as solutions in the name of women's safety. I like the approach they took to portray The Deep as the piece of shit he is but still showing the complexity of this issue instead of going for a more traditional dichotomic way.

Back to the mocking of mainstream media's attempts of adopting a feminist approach i mentioned, the season two got even better at this commentary on the "Strong Female Character" trope with the introduction of Stormfront. She is the literal embodiment of what shitty marketing says an empowered female character must be and has the biggest "I'm not like other girls" complex ever. That interaction she had with Starlight in "pink = bad, pants = cool" mood was super annoying and blaming her for the assault?? Freaking disgusting.

Honestly, i hated her soo much even before she showed her true colours completely. Stormfront represents everything i hate in Hollywood's feminism and the crappy meaningless messages it's pushing lately. She reminds me to all the fake "woke" advertisements i had seen on tv, like a Carefree (pads brand) advertisement that pissed me off last week because with the slogan " self trust is beauty" it portrayed girls who wear make up as fake and insecure.

Now, speaking of that particular scene of her killing Kimiko's brother. I felt literally sick, even sicker than in every Homelander scene. This bitch is worst than Homelander because at least he gathers a public that serves to his views. If you ever need to provide someone with a proof of why intersectionality in feminism matters use this racist bitch. Horryfying racism hidden behind the progressive mask of a bullshit privileged version of feminism, the thing i hate the most. She has a strong nazi terf vibe. I think she absolutely applies as mirror of critic to stuff like Rowling's terf nonsense. 

The introspective look this series has regarding the multiple issues on today’s attempts of gender approach on media entertainment surprised me. It’s everything i would had wished something to point out but nobody seemed to have the guts to make it happen because, as i already said, the current trend is what it’s being focus of critic here. 

I will end this now, i feel there is plenty of more stuff to talk about but this post is getting very long and, if i get more ideas i want to discuss, i can always make a second post. As i said before, this expresses my humble opinions and i’m open to hear different interpretations that can enrich my views. 

Thanks for reading this extra long ramble. 

[mermaidsirennikita]

My personal enjoyment in HR (as a poc, but I’m not south Asian), kind of demands ignoring where all the $$ for the balls and stately homes etc is coming from…so Bridgerton bringing India to the forefront and constantly reminding you where the nobility got the money to fund their lifestyles is so dumb?? It’s no longer escapism and it is potentially very distracting from the romance. It could have a particular unfortunate coloring of Anthony/Kate since he’s literally in parliament!

Right, I think that HR is in the midst of attempting to reconcile where all that money comes from... And yes, you can have self-made and lower class heroes and heroines, who are not connected to the aristocracy. But it's almost impossible for them to become self-made without crossing paths with the aristocracy. For example, Derek Craven in Dreaming of You came from nothing but made his money running a gambling house, which was most definitely frequented by aristocrats, so like... Yeah, he benefited from the system still.

Then you have the aristocrats who get into business, like Sebastian St. Vincent. Most of them still have some element of family money, or land, or whatever.

As a white woman who wants to write historical romance, the only conclusion I can come to is that white writers need to stick to what they know, and focus more on promoting diversity by uplifting and promoting writers of color. There are historical settings in which people of color can have a more dominant role--see Jeannie Lin's Tang Dynasty series, Beverly Jenkins's books, Alyssa Cole's novels. But like... Beverly and Alyssa still have to confront racism in their books. And I think they're a fuckton more qualified to handle that, and every other aspect of writing people of color, than we as white writers are.

This doesn't mean that white authors can't or shouldn't have people of color in their books... I just think that it needs to be done with much more deftness than it typically is. Even authors who write supporting characters who are poc in historical romance usually do so with like a vague allusion ("the darkskinned man who works at the club the hero owns", "the black woman who's friends with the white heroine") and there's like... Idk, to me there's this vibe that you can tell that they're scared of it and they don't know what to do. And it's like, if you're so fucking worried that you're going to fuck it up with every sentence you write, you probably are going to fuck it up. If you're going to do it, you need to really, really fucking educate yourself beforehand and accept that you may very well get called out later, rightfully.

And ultimately, I do think a lot of readers of color want to see themselves in historical romance, but a lot of them are also okay with reading pure escapism about white people who would probably be horrible if they existed irl. (And y'all should be allowed to have both, ffs.) The ideal world would make both equally available--historical romances written by white people about white people, and historical romances written by poc about poc. To me, the biggest, most pressing issure right now is that historical romance does not have enough marginalized people writing in the subgenre. Not just poc, but disabled authors, queer authors... That's where the diversity is needed--not so much in people who aren't marginalized writing characters that are, and fucking up horrendously.

The reality is that historical romance is pretty much a fantasy in every way. The idea of love matches, of people of similar ages getting married often, the hot sex, the good hygiene, the lack of death in childbirth--it's a fucking fantasy. It's not representative of the real world, but it does model itself after a real history. I think writers are usually better off working with the fantasy. Let the fucking "wallflower historical" stigma go away, because nobody wants to read the more "accurate" Georgette Heyer books anymore and get bashed over the head with racism, antisemitism, etc.

I think you CAN tackle serious issues like racism, sexism, pregnancy loss, homophobia, ableism, mental illness in historical romance. I think it can be done, and it is done, and it's done well by some. But when you're someone like the people in the Bridgerton writers' room, who are largely people who have nothing to do with the Indian experience writing about the Indian experience... Dude, it's just not great. Like. I've gotta think that if those writers' room was less dominated by white writers, someone would've been like "isn't Anthony in parliament?" So easy to avoid.

[dwellordream]

“...We can dispense with the first question fairly quickly: is violence the supreme authority from which all other authority derives in actual societies? After all, we keep encountering historical models predicated on that premise and they keep being pretty bad, inaccurate history. But even shifting from those specific examples to a more general appraisal, the answer is pretty clearly no. Reading almost any social history of actual historical societies reveal complex webs of authority, some of which rely on violence and most of which don’t. Trying to reduce all forms of authority in a society to violence or the threat of violence is a ‘boy’s sociology,’ unfit for serious adults.

This is true even in historical societies that glorified war! Taking, for instance, medieval mounted warrior-aristocrats (read: knights), we find a far more complex set of values and social bonds. Military excellence was a key value among the medieval knightly aristocracy, but so was Christian religious belief and observance, so were expectations about courtly conduct, and so were bonds between family and oath-bound aristocrats. In short there were many forms of authority beyond violence even among military aristocrats. Consequently individuals could be – and often were! – lionized for exceptional success in these other domains, often even when their military performance was at best lackluster.

Roman political speech, meanwhile, is full of words to express authority without violence. Most obviously is the word auctoritas, from which we get authority. J.E. Lendon (in Empire of Honor: The Art of Government in the Roman World (1997)), expresses the complex interaction whereby the past performance of virtus (‘strength, worth, bravery, excellence, skill, capacity,’ which might be military, but it might also by virtus demonstrated in civilian fields like speaking, writing, court-room excellence, etc) produced honor which in turn invested an individual with dignitas (‘worth, merit’), a legitimate claim to certain forms of deferential behavior from others (including peers; two individuals both with dignitas might owe mutual deference to each other).

Such an individual, when acting or especially speaking was said to have gravitas (‘weight’), an effort by the Romans to describe the feeling of emotional pressure that the dignitas of such a person demanded; a person speaking who had dignitas must be listened to seriously and respected, even if disagreed with in the end. An individual with tremendous honor might be described as having a super-charged dignitas such that not merely was some polite but serious deference, but active compliance, such was the force of their considerable honor; this was called auctoritas. As documented by Carlin Barton (in Roman Honor: Fire in the Bones (2001)), the Romans felt these weights keenly and have a robust language describing the emotional impact such feelings had.

Note that there is no necessary violence here. These things cannot be enforced through violence, they are emotional responses that the Romans report having (because their culture has conditioned them to have them) in the presence of individuals with dignitas. And such dignitas might also not be connected to violence. Cicero clearly at points in his career commanded such deference and he was at best an indifferent soldier. Instead, it was his excellence in speaking and his clear service to the Republic that commanded such respect. Other individuals might command particular auctoritas because of their role as priests, their reputation for piety or wisdom, or their history of service to the community. And of course beyond that were bonds of family, religion, social group, and so on.

...So while it is true that the state derives its power from violence (as in Mao’s famous quip that “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun”), the state is not the only center of authority within a society. And indeed, even the state cannot run entirely on violence; this is the point that Hannah Arendt makes in the famous dichotomy of violence and power. In many cases, what Heinlein’s premise does is mistake violence for power, assuming that the ability to violently compel action is the same as the power to coordinate or encourage action without violence. But in fact, successful organizations (including, but not limited to, states) are possessed not of lots of violence but of lots of power, with much of that power rooted in norms, social assumptions, unstated social contracts and personal relationships that exist entirely outside of the realm of violence.

And so in both theory and practice, Heinlein’s premise fails to actually describe human societies of any complexity. There are no doubt gangs and robber-bands that have functioned entirely according to Heinlein’s premise (and presumably some very committed anarchists who might want such a society), but the very march of complex social institutions suggests that such organizations were quite routinely out-competed by societies with complex centers of authority that existed beyond violence, which enabled specialization (notably something Heinlein disapproves of generally, ‘specialization is for insects’) and thus superior performance both in war and in peace. Kings and empires that try to rule purely with force, without any attention paid to legitimacy or other forms of power (instead of violence) fail, and typically fail rapidly. As with almost any simple statement about complex societies, Heinlein’s premise is not merely simple but simplistic and so fails.

...The Cult of the Badass, as expressed here, lives in what we might call the “cult of tradition,” “dreaming of a revelation received at the dawn of human history” about a certain set of warrior values which were both expressed by famous historical warriors and which now provide a blueprint for life. This point of explicit in Pressfield’s set of videos, and implicit in the Fremen Mirage’s strong men/hard times model of history. This “cult of tradition” is quite selective, of course; Pressfield makes functionally no effort to engage with actual ancient value systems in a sustained way, limiting himself mostly to ‘badass’ aphorisms from Plutarch (himself hardly the most intellectually sophisticated or morally challenging author in the classical canon). It is tradition as imagined dimly in the present, not tradition as uncovered by careful historical research.

Consequently, the cult of the badass must engage in “the rejection of modernism;” this is no accident because the cult of the badass is an “appeal to a frustrated […] class” – this too is explicit in that Pressfield frames his ideology was a way for individuals who are held back or stagnated to unleash their true potential and overcome their limits, through the explicit rejection of modern values and the embrace of what are at least presented as traditional, even timeless values. That sort of appeal is also explicit in a lot of the fitness marketing that trades on the cult of the badass (and it seems notable that Pressfield himself lists “anybody that is heavily into fitness” first among his people living out the ‘warrior archetype.’), calling on people to work out like the Spartans. Consequently, it is a “cult of action for action’s sake” often focused on doing rather than asking what should be done (it is striking that Pressfield, despite nearly all of his video examples coming from the Greek and Roman world, engages not at all with the extensive Greek and Roman philosophies of justice).

Instead, this ideology, because it positions the capacity for violence as the highest human value, presents the thesis that “life is lived for struggle.” Pressfield reframes all of life’s struggles, including struggles of motivation and self-discipline, in terms of violence, in terms of a war against the ‘inner enemy,’ and consequently “life is permanent warfare.” And I think this goes a long way to explaining the obsession of this philosophy on warrior elites, because there is an inherent element of “popular elitism” in the cult of the badass, an insistence that at least it should be the case that “everybody is educated to become a hero” and thus not only develop the capacity for violence but also orient themselves towards “heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life.”

Thus the outsized influence of Thermopylae, a ‘heroic’ Greek defeat over other battles; Pressfield, again, is explicit on this point that it is at Thermopylae in particular that the Spartan warrior ethic is best and most perfectly displayed. If these are held to be the highest ideals, then anyone who falls short of them or refuses to engage with them must be weak, perhaps even “so weak as to need and deserve a ruler” (a point that often emerges in the sheep/wolves/sheepdog metaphor used by many ‘warrior cops,’ an ideology Pressfield explicitly appeals to, lumping in law enforcement as exemplars of ‘warrior’ ideology).

And of course, as is I think obvious in these readings, there is an undercurrent of anxiety about masculinity here. It is, after all, strong men in the strong men/hard times trope (and that is no accident as the trope is deeply connected to concerns about masculinity throughout its history). ...While Pressfield insists in some of his videos that his life philosophy is equally applicable to men or women, it is hard not to notice that his historical examples of warriors are all men (no Molly Pitcher, no Deborah, no Hua Mulan, etc. Not even Empress “Imperial Purple is the best burial shroud” Theodora; he does discuss the legend of the Amazons with rather less historical rigor than I might like). Where actual historical women fit in to his narrative, it is mostly as the mothers and nurturers of warrior men. While Pressfield does his best to paper over this (and to be fair, I think he is sincere in trying to present his ideology as non-gender-specific, unaware of the ways in which the broader framework of that ideology is aggressively unwelcoming to women), I think it is fair to say this is an ideology created largely by and for men, which values a hypermasculine ideal – we might even say “machismo.”

And by now readers are beginning to wonder where all of these little quotations are coming from (apart from the bit from Theodora). But first I want to note that we have a name for an ideology that fits these main points – where “life is permanent warfare,” “lived for struggle”, such that “everyone is educated to become a hero” to participate in a “cult of action for action’s sake” in a “cult of tradition” seated in a “rejection of modernism.”

And it’s fascism. Because all of those little quotes are from Umberto Eco’s famous essay “Ur-Fascism” (1995) which presented one of the most compelling classifications of the foundational DNA that all of the various, disparate forms of fascism share in common. ...Now I think it is important to back up here and be fair to Steven Pressfield. I don’t think Steven Pressfield is a fascist; ...What I do think is that the ideology that Pressfield is advancing has fascist tendencies (that he is, I suspect, unaware of, having not interrogated the nature of Spartan society as carefully as he might have). The ideology he is advancing shares most of the DNA of Ur-Fascism and it is not hard to see how the remaining handful of elements might easily be bolted on to this framework.

It is also, in a way that Pressfield never really addresses (and I suspect has never really realized), an ideology which is fundamentally at odds with the democratic values he also holds. If only some people are ‘warriors’ and developing that warrior capacity towards violence it the primary or principle virtue, it follows – and literally any Spartan could have and would have told Pressfield this – that everyone else is merely fit to be ruled. Sparta’s brutal oppression was not incidental to its ideology or social structure (as we’ve discussed!) but essential to it. As Eco points out (in his 10th point), it does no good to suggest that everyone ought to be equally a warrior; this is after all a cult of violence for its own sake and in violence there must be winners and losers. No complex society is composed only of warriors; for there to be kings and knights, there must be serfs too.

...Put more bluntly, the ideology of the Cult of the Badass is so easily falsifiable that the act of disagreement itself, rather than the content of arguments, must be rejected). The rejection of disagreement in turn demands the fear of difference because the ideology requires consensus and an absence of criticism. And once the ideology fails – and it will, because it is disconnected from the real world – conspiratorialism is the natural response for true believers unwilling to reject the ideology. If your ideology tells you that you are superior, and yet you do not produce superior results, what recourse is there but to conspiracy? As Eco memorably quips, “Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy” which is also, by the by, why so many authoritarian armies, theoretically filled with supposedly highly motivated, ultra-badass super-soldiers, tend nevertheless to lose more than they win. We saw this with Sparta; the very ideology of the place made them bad strategists, in precisely the ways that Eco suggests it would.

In short, the ideology of the Cult of the Badass – which is easy to see in any number of modern films, books and TV (and occasionally read into films that explicitly reject it by their viewers; I suspect everyone of at least a certain age has known that guy who watched Fight Club and then wanted, entirely unironically, to start his own fight club) – is a gateway to authoritarian thinking which, contrary to the name, is based in violence rather than authority. The supremacy of action, of violence, of the warrior and his ‘ancient’ (but actually quite modern) values are the foundation stones on which fascist ideologies (and I’d argue, other non-fascist authoritarianisms, but that’s a debate for another day) are constructed.

And, as Eco notes, “The Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.” This is not a good ideology. As I noted in the first post in this series, a free society has no need for warriors. Not among its soldiers, not among its police, not among its civilians. At times, a free people may need to become soldiers, or police officers, but always to return to being civilians again, either at the end of the day or at the end of the war.”

- Bret Devereaux, “The Universal Warrior, Part III: The Cult of the Badass.”

[verifiedaccount]

25 more movies (and one miniseries) you can watch on youtube

I posted 11 movies that are on youtube yesterday (Part 1) but since things are really starting to get shut down here’s more worthwhile movies and a miniseries you can watch for free on youtube right now

Leave Her To Heaven (1945): Gene Tierney is Ellen, a woman whose only crime is “loving too much,” and also all the other crimes she commits to make sure there are no competitors for husband Cornel Wilde’s affections in John M. Stahl’s incredibly lurid and entertaining technicolor melodrama.

M (1931): Fritz Lang’s masterpiece is the basis for every subsequent movie about hunting a serial killer and it’s still the best one.

The Naked Kiss (1964): Here’s the jacket copy from Criterion: “The setup is pure pulp: A former prostitute (a crackerjack Constance Towers) relocates to a buttoned-down suburb, determined to fit in with mainstream society. But in the strange, hallucinatory territory of writer-director-producer Samuel Fuller, perverse secrets simmer beneath the wholesome surface. Featuring radical visual touches, full-throttle performances, brilliant cinematography by Stanley Cortez, and one bizarrely beautiful musical number, The Naked Kiss is among Fuller’s greatest, boldest entertainments.”

Underworld USA (1961): Dave Kehr on the film: “Sam Fuller's harsh, obsessional 1960 crime drama is narrated in the style of a comic book gone berserk. Cliff Robertson is the neurotic hero, bent on avenging his father's death by infiltrating and destroying a crime syndicate that operates under the redolent name “National Projects.” Corruption is all-pervasive in this vision of America, and Fuller disturbingly suggests that only a madman can make a difference. One image from Underworld—of a heavy striking straight at the camera—prompted Jean-Luc Godard to describe Fuller's films as “cinema-fist.” There is no more apt phrase.”

Pickup on South Street (1953): Another Sam Fuller. Here’s Georgia Hubley of Yo La Tengo on the film: “Richard Widmark manages to portray himself as twisted, conniving, pathological, sleazy, tragic, vulnerable, and handsome all at once in most of the movies I’ve seen him in, and never more exquisitely than in this, one of my favorite film noirs.“

Journey to Italy (1954): Richard Brody on the film: “One of the most quietly revolutionary works in the history of cinema, Roberto Rossellini’s third feature starring Ingrid Bergman (his wife at the time), from 1953, turns romantic melodrama into intellectual adventure. [...] From Rossellini’s example, the young French New Wave critics learned to fuse studio style with documentary methods, and to make high-relief drama on a low budget.” 

The Spook Who Sat By The Door (1973): A satirical thriller based on the Sam Greenlee novel about the CIA recruiting a token black agent who quickly realizes they have no intention of letting him advance to a meaningful position and decides to head back to Chicago to teach the black revolutionaries all the latest guerrilla warfare tactics. Despite playing to packed houses the film was quickly pulled from theaters with little explanation and remained out of circulation until a DVD was issued in 2004.  

The Big Combo (1955): Dave Kehr’s capsule: “This 1955 film noir borders on total abstraction for most of its length and then achieves it in an astonishing final scene—a shoot-out in the fog that suggests an armed and dangerous Michelangelo Antonioni. Where the usual noir takes place in a nightmare world, this one seems to inhabit a dream: there's no longer fear in the images, but rather a distanced, idealized beauty. With Cornel Wilde, Jean Wallace, Brian Donlevy, and Richard Conte; the director is Joseph H. Lewis (Gun Crazy).”

The Stranger (1946): Orson Welles’s film concerns an FBI agent (Edward G. Robinson) tracking Nazi war criminals whose search takes him to a small Connecticut town where the local schoolteacher (Orson Welles) is not what he seems. It’s the most conventional Welles film, reportedly intended to prove he could turn in a movie on time and on budget, but it’s still plenty entertaining.

F For Fake (1973): Orson Welles documentary/essay/whatsit about forgers and frauds, specifically Elmyr de Hory, who became famous as an art forger because instead of forging existing paintings he painted new ones in the style of famous artists, and Clifford Irving, who wrote a best-selling book on Elmyr and then was busted for a fraud of his own, the fake Howard Hughes autobiography. A wildly enjoyable, incredibly edited, one of a kind mindbender.

Citizen Kane (1941): It’s Citizen Kane. You just have to put up with hardcoded Korean subs.

Detour (1945): Roger Ebert on the film: “Detour is a movie so filled with imperfections that it would not earn the director a passing grade in film school. This movie from Hollywood's poverty row, shot in six days, filled with technical errors and ham-handed narrative, starring a man who can only pout and a woman who can only sneer, should have faded from sight soon after it was released in 1945. And yet it lives on, haunting and creepy, an embodiment of the guilty soul of film noir. No one who has seen it has easily forgotten it.”

A Woman Under The Influence (1974): Dave Kehr: “John Cassavetes's 1974 masterpiece, and one of the best films of its decade. Cassavetes stretches the limits of his narrative—it's the story of a married couple, with the wife hedging into madness—to the point where it obliterates the narrator: it's one of those extremely rare movies that seem found rather than made, in which the internal dynamics of the drama are completely allowed to dictate the shape and structure of the film. The lurching, probing camera finds the same fascination in moments of high drama and utter triviality alike—and all of those moments are suspended painfully, endlessly. Still, Cassavetes makes the viewer's frustration work as part of the film's expressiveness; it has an emotional rhythm unlike anything else I've ever seen.”

Opening Night (1977): Another Cassavetes masterpiece, again starring the great Gena Rowlands, with Gena as an actress mentally disintegrating as she tries to prepare for an upcoming play. Easier to start with this one than A Woman Under The Influence. Richard Brody on the film: “Though there isn’t a movie camera anywhere to be seen—and Cassavetes, with his tightly sculpted, uninhibitedly intimate images, is a master of the camera—Opening Night captures with astonishment and boundless admiration the uninhibited ferocity of the art that brings life onto the screen. (In fact, Cassavetes had originally planned to take the role of the play’s director.) It’s one of the greatest tributes ever paid by a director to an actress.“

Magnificent Obsession (1954): It’s not necessarily Douglas Sirk’s best technicolor melodrama but this adaptation of Lloyd C. Douglas’s ridiculous bestseller is the most melodramatic one. From Cine-File: “Produced in the wake of Henry Koster's CinemaScope adaptation of Douglas' THE ROBE, Sirk's 1954 remake of MAGNIFICENT OBSESSION is, by any standard, an absolutely batshit movie. (It's the kind of film where a lecture about the radical power of kindness compares the crucifixion of Christ to the act of turning on a light bulb.)  It's not so much an adaptation of Douglas as a third-hand amplification of his aura. "Ross Hunter gave me the book," Sirk recalled, "and I tried to read it, but I just couldn't. It is the most confused book you can imagine.” As Geoffrey O'Brien asserts in his essay for the film's Criterion release, Sirk earnestly examines that which he admits to finding absurd, forcing such questions as, "What if this weren't crazy? What if it were real? What sort of a world would that be, and how different would it be from the one we inhabit?" Therein lies the genius of Sirk's glorious melodrama, one certainly worth seeing in all its Technicolor magnificence.

All That Heaven Allows (1955): Geoff Andrew on the film: “On the surface a glossy tearjerker about the problems besetting a love affair between an attractive middle class widow and her younger, 'bohemian' gardener, Sirk's film is in fact a scathing attack on all those facets of the American Dream widely held dear. Wealth produces snobbery and intolerance; family togetherness creates xenophobia and the cult of the dead; cosy kindness can be stultifyingly patronising; and materialism results in alienation from natural feelings. Beneath the stunningly lovely visuals - all expressionist colours, reflections, and frames-within-frames, used to produce a precise symbolism - lies a kernel of terrifying despair created by lives dedicated to respectability and security, given its most harrowing expression when Wyman, having given up her affair with Hudson in order to protect her children from gossip, is presented with a television set as a replacement companion. Hardly surprising that Fassbinder chose to remake the film as Fear Eats the Soul.“

Written on the Wind (1956): Dave Kehr:  “One of the most remarkable and unaccountable films ever made in Hollywood, Douglas Sirk's 1957 masterpiece turns a lurid, melodramatic script into a screaming Brechtian essay on the shared impotence of American family and business life. Sirk's highly imaginative use of color—to accent, undermine, and sometimes even nullify the drama—remains years ahead of contemporary technique. The degree of stylization is high and impeccable: one is made to understand the characters as icons as well as psychologically complex creations.“

His Girl Friday (1940): Geoff Andrew’s capsule: “Charles Lederer’s frantic script needs to be heard at least a dozen times for all the gags to be caught; Russell’s Hildy more than equals Burns in cunning and speed; and Hawks transcends the piece’s stage origins effortlessly, framing with brilliance, conducting numerous conversations simultaneously, and even allowing the film’s political and emotional thrust to remain upfront alongside the laughs. Quite simply a masterpiece.“

Bringing Up Baby (1938): Ignatiy Vishnevetsky on the film: “Possessed by an overwhelming sense of comic energy, Howard Hawks’ screwball masterpiece heaps on misunderstandings, misadventures, perfectly timed jokes, and patter to the point that it’s easy to overlook how rich and fluid it is a piece of filmmaking, effortlessly transitioning from one thing into the next.”

Underworld (1927): Dave Kehr: “The first full-fledged gangster movie and still an effective mood piece, this 1927 milestone was directed by the master of delirious melodrama, Josef von Sternberg. George Bancroft is the hard-boiled hero, granted tragic status in his final sacrifice. Ben Hecht wrote the script, and many of the same ideas turn up, in a very different moral context, in his screenplay for Howard Hawks's 1932 masterpiece, Scarface.“

Q - The Winged Serpent (1982): In Larry Cohen’s cheapo classic, Quetzelcoatl terrorizes New York. Michael Moriarty plays a bumbling, unlucky small time crook (the robbery he participates in goes hilariously wrong; losing the keys to the getaway car is just the start) who accidentally discovers the monster’s nest and realizes he’s stumbled into the opportunity of a lifetime. He’s willing to help the authorities, including cops played by David Carradine and Richard Roundtree, but they’re gonna have to pay for it. Very goofy and very fun.

Stalag 17 (1953): Billy Wilder’s classic mixes POW drama with comedy as a group of prisoners in a German POW camp try to figure out who in their barracks is a rat while they plan their escape.

Hellzapoppin (1941): Ignatiy Vishnevetsky:  “The opening reel may be the most manic stretch of go-for-broke gonzo comedy to come out of studio-era Hollywood, with the zoot-suited duo of Olsen and Johnson introduced tumbling out of a New York taxi into the bowels of hell (“That’s the first taxi driver that ever went straight where I told him to!”) in the midst of a musical number about how “Anything can happen / And it probably will.” Dozens of throwaway gags—including the first Citizen Kane reference in film history—and an argument with the projectionist (once and future Stooge Shemp Howard) follow, before the movie snaps into something vaguely resembling sanity. From there, Hellzapoppin’ finds Olsen and Johnson wandering in and out of a musical comedy that’s seems to be on the verge of falling apart and tussling with such comedy ringers as Martha Raye and Mischa Auer, the latter cast as a real Russian nobleman who’s trying to pass as a fake Russian nobleman. It’s like a Marx Brothers movie playing at triple speed; it eludes easy summary—it’s a real “you have to see it to believe it” kind of movie—and often stretches the limits of the Production Code. True to its absurdist sensibility, Hellzapoppin’ ended up getting nominated for an Oscar by mistake, for a song that doesn’t appear in the movie.” 

Outrage (1950): Directed and cowritten by Ida Lupino, this was one of the first Hollywood movies after the implementation of the production code to deal with rape and one of the first to tackle its psychological aftermath (the censor office actually made them take the word “rape” out of the script so it’s never uttered in the film). Richard Broday on the film: “Outrage is a special artistic achievement. Lupino approaches the subject of rape with a wide view of the societal tributaries that it involves. She integrates an inward, deeply compassionate depiction of a woman who is the victim of rape with an incisive view of the many societal failures that contribute to the crime, including legal failure to face the prevalence of rape, and the over-all prudishness and sexual censoriousness that make the crime unspeakable in the literal sense and end up shaming the victim. Above all, she reveals a profound understanding of the widespread and unquestioned male aggression that women face in ordinary and ostensibly non-violent and consensual courtship.“

The Hitch-Hiker (1953): Another Ida Lupino joint, this one a lean and mean film noir. J. Hoberman on the film: “The “Hitch-Hiker” script, written (uncredited) by the socially conscious journalist Daniel Mainwaring, was inspired by an actual case: Two buddies (Frank Lovejoy and Edmond O’Brien) pick up a murderous psychopath (William Talman) who forces them to drive him to Mexico. It’s a brutal story handled by Ms. Lupino, one of Hollywood’s very few female directors, with the same steely determination and emotional sensitivity found in her strongest performances.”

And the miniseries:

The Singing Detective (1986): Here’s the entry from the BBC’s list of the top 100 British television programs, where it placed number 20: “For many Potter's masterpiece, this extended six-part filmed drama series mixes flashback and fantasy to create a psychological profile of a writer of detective fiction hospitalised by a crippling skin disease. Though not, the writer stressed, autobiographical, the drama features many elements from both Potter's own life (the disease, the childhood setting) and his body of work (particularly the use of popular music from the war years). As usual with Potter, it also caused controversy at the time for the frankness of its sex scenes, though its position as one of the most challenging and inventive of all TV dramas is secure.“

[gov-info]

President Joe Biden Delivers Inaugural Address

Chief Justice Roberts, Vice President Harris. Speaker Pelosi, Leader Schumer, McConnell, Vice President Pence, my distinguished guests and my fellow Americans, this is America's day.

This is democracy's day. A day of history and hope of renewal and resolve through a crucible for the ages. America has been tested anew and America has risen to the challenge. Today, we celebrate the triumph not of a candidate, but of a cause, the cause of democracy. The people, the will of the people, has been heard and the will of the people has been heeded.

We've learned again that democracy is precious. Democracy is fragile. At this hour, my friends, democracy has prevailed.

From now, on this hallowed ground, where just a few days ago, violence sought to shake the Capitol's very foundation, we come together as one nation, under God, indivisible to carry out the peaceful transfer of power, as we have for more than two centuries.

As we look ahead in our uniquely American way: restless, bold, optimistic, and set our sights on the nation we can be and we must be.

I thank my predecessors of both parties for their presence here today. I thank them from the bottom of my heart. And I know, I know the resilience of our Constitution and the strength, the strength of our nation. As does President Carter, who I spoke with last night, who cannot be with us today, but whom we salute for his lifetime of service.

I've just taken the sacred oath. Each of those patriots have taken. The oath, first sworn by George Washington. But the American story depends not on any one of us, not on some of us, but on all of us, on we the people who seek a more perfect union.

This is a great nation. We are good people. And over the centuries, through storm and strife, in peace and in war, we've come so far. But we still have far to go. We'll press forward with speed and urgency, for we have much to do in this winter of peril and significant possibilities, much to repair, much to restore, much to heal, much to build, and much to gain.

Few people in our nation's history have been more challenged or found a time more challenging or difficult than the time we're in now. Once-in-a-century virus that silently stalks the country. It's taken as many lives in one year as America lost in all of World War II. Millions of jobs have been lost. Hundreds of thousands of businesses closed. A cry for racial justice, some four hundred years in the making moves us. The dream of justice for all will be deferred no longer.

The cry for survival comes from planet itself, a cry that can’t be any more desperate or any more clear. And now a rise of political extremism, white supremacy, domestic terrorism that we must confront and we will defeat.

To overcome these challenges, to restore the soul and secure the future of America requires so much more than words. It requires the most elusive of all things in a democracy: unity, unity.

In another January, on New Year's Day in 1863, Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. When he put pen to paper, the president said, and I quote, “if my name ever goes down into history, it'll be for this act. And my whole soul is in it.”

My whole soul was in it today. On this January day, my whole soul is in this: Bringing America together, uniting our people, uniting our nation. And I ask every American to join me in this cause.

Uniting to fight the foes we face: anger, resentment, hatred, extremism, lawlessness, violence, disease, joblessness and hopelessness. With unity, we can do great things, important things. We can right wrongs. We can put people to work in good jobs. We can teach our children in safe schools. We can overcome the deadly virus. We can reward, reward work and rebuild the middle class and make health care secure for all. We can deliver racial justice and we can make America once again the leading force for good in the world.

I know speaking of unity can sound to some like a foolish fantasy these days. I know the forces that divide us are deep and they are real, but I also know they are not new. Our history has been a constant struggle between the American ideal that we're all created equal and the harsh, ugly reality that racism, nativism, fear, demonization have long torn us apart. The battle is perennial and victory is never assured.

Through civil war, the Great Depression, world war, 9/11, through struggle, sacrifice and setbacks, our better angels have always prevailed. In each of these moments, enough of us, enough of us have come together to carry all of us forward. And we can do that now. History, faith and reason show the way, the way of unity. We can see each other not as adversaries, but as neighbors. We can treat each other with dignity and respect. We can join forces, stop the shouting and lower the temperature. For without unity, there is no peace, only bitterness and fury. No progress, only exhausting outrage. No nation, only a state of chaos.

This is our historic moment of crisis and challenge. And unity is the path forward. And we must meet this moment as the United States of America. If we do that, I guarantee you we will not fail. We have never, ever, ever, ever failed in America when we've acted together.

And so today at this time in this place, let's start afresh, all of us. Let's begin to listen to one another again. Hear one another see one another, show respect to one another. Politics doesn't have to be a raging fire, destroying everything in its path. Every disagreement doesn't have to be a cause for total war. And we must reject the culture in which facts themselves are manipulated and even manufactured.

My fellow Americans. We have to be different than this. America has to be better than this. And I believe America is so much better than this. Just look around. Here we stand in the shadow of the Capitol dome, as was mentioned earlier, completed amid the Civil War, when the union itself was literally hanging in the balance. Yet we endured, we prevailed.

Here we stand looking out in the great mall where Dr. King spoke of his dream. Here we stand, where 108 years ago, at another inaugural, thousands of protesters tried to block brave women marching for the right to vote. And today we marked the swearing in of the first woman in American history elected to national office: Vice President Kamala Harris. Don't tell me things can't change.

Here we stand across the Potomac from Arlington Cemetery, where heroes who gave the last full measure of devotion rest in eternal peace. And here we stand just days after a riotous mob thought they could use violence to silence the will of the people, to stop the work of our democracy, to drive us from this sacred ground.

It did not happen. It will never happen. Not today, not tomorrow, not ever. Not ever.

To all those who supported our campaign, I'm humbled by the faith you've placed in us. To all those who did not support us, let me say this. Hear me out as we move forward. Take a measure of me and my heart. If you still disagree so be it. That's democracy. That's America. The right to dissent, peaceably, the guardrails of our republic is perhaps this nation's greatest strength.

Yet hear me clearly: disagreement must not lead to disunion. And I pledge this to you, I will be a president for all Americans. All Americans. And I promise you I will fight as hard for those who did not support me as for those who did.

Many centuries ago. Saint Augustine, a saint in my church, wrote to the people was a multitude defined by the common objects of their love. Defined by the common objects of their love. What are the common objects we as Americans love, that define us as Americans? I think we know. Opportunity, security, liberty, dignity, respect, honor and yes, the truth.

Recent weeks and months have taught us a painful lesson. There is truth and there are lies, lies told for power and for profit. And each of us has a duty and responsibility, as citizens, as Americans, and especially as leaders, leaders who have pledged to honor our Constitution and protect our nation, to defend the truth and defeat the lies.

Look, I understand that many of my fellow Americans view the future with fear and trepidation. I understand they worry about their jobs. I understand, like my dad, they lay in bed at night, staring at the ceiling, wondering, can I keep my health care? Can I pay my mortgage? Thinking about their families, about what comes next. I promise you, I get it.

But the answer is not to turn inward, to retreat into competing factions, distrusting those who don't look like look like you or worship the way you do, or don't get their news from the same sources you do. We must end this uncivil war that pits red against blue, rural versus urban, rural versus urban, conservative versus liberal. We can do this if we open our souls instead of hardening our hearts. If we show a little tolerance and humility, and if we're willing to stand in the other person's shoes, as my mom would say, just for a moment, stand in their shoes. Because here's the thing about life. There's no accounting for what fate will deal you. Some days, when you need a hand. There are other days when we're called to lend a hand. That's how it has to be. That's what we do for one another. And if we are this way, our country will be stronger, more prosperous, more ready for the future. And we can still disagree.

My fellow Americans, in the work ahead of us, we're going to need each other. We need all our strength to to persevere through this dark winter. We're entering what may be the toughest and deadliest period of the virus. We must set aside politics and finally face this pandemic as One Nation. One Nation.

And I promise you this, as the Bible says, “Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.” We will get through this together. Together.

Look, folks, all my colleagues I served with in the House of the Senate up there, we all understand the world is watching, watching all of us today. So here's my message to those beyond our borders. America has been tested and we've come out stronger for it. We will repair our alliances and engage with the world once again. Not to meet yesterday's challenges, but today's and tomorrow's challenges. And we’ll lead, not merely by the example of our power, but by the power of our example.

We'll be a strong and trusted partner for peace, progress and security. Look, you all know, we've been through so much in this nation. And my first act as president, I’d like to ask you to join me in a moment of silent prayer to remember all those who we lost this past year to the pandemic. Those four hundred thousand fellow Americans, moms, dads, husbands, wives, sons, daughters, friends, neighbors and coworkers. We will honor them by becoming the people and the nation we know we can and should be. So I ask you, let's say a silent prayer for those who've lost their lives, those left behind and for our country.

Amen.

Folks, this is a time of testing. We face an attack on our democracy and on truth, a raging virus, growing inequity, the sting of systemic racism, a climate in crisis, America's role in the world. Any one of these will be enough to challenge us in profound ways. But the fact is, we face them all at once, presenting this nation with one of the gravest responsibilities we've had. Now we're going to be tested. Are we going to step up? All of us? It’s time for boldness, for there is so much to do. And this is certain, I promise you, we will be judged, you and I, by how we resolve these cascading crises of our era.

Will we rise to the occasion, is the question. Will we master this rare and difficult hour? Will we meet our obligations and pass along a new and better world to our children? I believe we must. I'm sure you do as well. I believe we will. And when we do, we'll write the next great chapter in the history of the United States of America. The American story. A story that might sound something like a song that means a lot to me. It's called American Anthem. There's one verse that stands out, at least for me, and it goes like this:

The work and prayers of a century have brought us to this day.

What shall be our legacy? What will our children say?

Let me know in my heart when my days are through.

America, America, I gave my best to you.

Let's add. Let us add our own work and prayers to the unfolding story of our great nation. If we do this, then when our days are through, our children and our children's children will say of us: They gave their best, they did their duty, they healed a broken land.

My fellow Americans, I close the day where I began, with a sacred oath before God and all of you. I give you my word, I will always level with you. I will defend the Constitution. I'll defend our democracy. I'll defend America and I will give all, all of you. Keep everything I do in your service, thinking not of power, but of possibilities, not of personal interest, but the public good. And together we shall write an American story of hope, not fear. Of unity, not division. Of light, not darkness. A story of decency and dignity, love and healing, greatness and goodness. May this be the story that guides us. The story that inspires us and the story that tells ages yet to come that we answered the call of history. We met the moment. Democracy and hope, truth and justice did not die on our watch, but thrived. That America secured liberty at home and stood once again as a beacon to the world. That is what we owe our forbearers, one another and generations to follow.

So, with purpose and resolve, we turn to those tasks of our time. Sustained by faith, driven by conviction, devoted to one another and the country we love with all our hearts. May God bless America and may God protect our troops. Thank you, America.

[chaoswillfallrpg]

DORCAS MEADOWES is TWENTY-TWO YEARS OLD and a AUROR in THE DEPARTMENT OF MAGICAL LAW ENFORCEMENT at THE MINISTRY OF MAGIC. She looks remarkably like ALISHA BOE and considers herself aligned with THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX. She is currently TAKEN.

→ OVERVIEW:

tw: death

Determined and strong minded, Dorcas Meadowes became her own hero when she needed one most. Raised to know the power of her own self and mind, Doe was taught not to wait for a knight in shining armor to save her, but rather pick up the sword and rescue herself. Born to MATHEW MEADOWES a Muggle professor in linguistics and CHARLOTTE MEADOWES an auror in the Ministry of Magic, having longed for a child of their own for so long Dorcas was their shining star in the night. Growing up in their family home in Oxford, Doe was taught that power came in knowledge and a strong sense of self.  Adored by her parents, they were keen to embark the wisdom of their years onto her with affection, grace and kindness. Drawing pride in the fact that Dorcas encapsulated the best parts of them both. Holding her father’s keen thirst for knowledge, the written word and education and her mother’s bravery, drive and persistence, it became clear to her peers that Doe could easily stand her own. Believing in the idea that it was up to a soul person to craft their own path rather than wait for life to happen and pass ideally by. Fate and destiny are mere fairytales in the young witch’s mind, knowing even then that it was up to her to forge her own path. Writing her own story that she hoped one day they could all be proud of.

Growing up within both the Muggle and the Wizarding World, it gave Doe dear appreciation for them both. Cherishing how her parents had found one another and held a love despite the odds. As a Half-Blood, it was particularly important to her mother that Doe understood what it meant in the Wizarding community to have a Muggle father. The last thing she wanted for her daughter was to be lacking the knowledge she needed to make informative decisions and above all else to know her own worth. While they recognized as a witch her life would be heavily magic based, they wanted to instill in her the marvels of both. Teaching that despite the prejudice that many carry in the Wizarding community, she was not worth less value than those deemed ‘higher’ merely because of blood. Being a part of both worlds was a gift and something she should cherish and that she did. Despite her love for the Muggle World, coming to Hogwarts was like a dream come true. Dorcas craved the knowledge that she could gain while among the ancient walls. Following in the footsteps of her mother and grandparents, Doe longed for lectures on Transfiguration and Ancient Runes; unable to contain her excitement at the opportunity to learn about every area of magic she could. Though what she hadn’t expected was to make such dear and close friends. 

Sorted into Gryffindor, it wasn’t long before Dorcas found kinship with fellow first years and dorm mates: LILY EVANS, and MARY MACDONALD. All unique and brilliant in their own right, each brought their own personality and marvel to the group. Marlene was the rebel, challenging and brave with her keen need to prove herself; Marlene could easily file her nails while simultaneously beating you in Quidditch. Mary was the party goer, holding a wishful sense of wonder to them and a romantic at heart, they were the day dreamer of the group. Fantasizing about their newest crush, doodling hearts on parchment and filling the group in on the latest gossip. Lily was the angel, as intelligent as she was kind, she noticed you even in the quietest of moments when no one was watching. Holding your hand unexpectedly for comfort, she was warm and assuring. Dorcas was positive that she had never met someone as kind hearted as her. Doe herself took pride as the voice of reason and the more analytical member of the group. Logical with a strong sense of morals always guided her true, blunt sarcastic words pulled her friends back to reality and out of their antics. Though, it never meant that she was less fun. Marlene and Doe gladly answered any question their two Muggle-Born dormmates held, thrilling Doe to share her deep knowledge as if she were a library book. The group were inseparable. Spending late nights gossiping with one another, to painting their nails with the polish Mary harbored, to following Marlene as she led them to The Black Lake. Only to meet there the famous Marauders, JAMES POTTER, SIRIUS BLACK, REMUS LUPIN and PETER PETTIGREW. 

At first Doe was skeptical about Lily’s choice to befriend the male group. Of course knowing them from class and the common room, Doe often found the arrogance that both James and Sirius carried baffling. Their charms always fell short and missed the mark on her, unlike the rest of the close friendship group. Though Mary pointed out rightly, that her dislike for both of the males could be held in jealousy. With Doe’s suppressed feelings for Marlene, the relationship Marlene shared with James and her close friendship with Sirius left Doe feeling disheartened and forgotten. Remus became Doe’s confidant through it all. While she was closest with Mary out of her dorm mates, Remus became an unexpected best friend. Doe expressed her frustration at the situation and how she was unable to do anything out of fear of losing Marlene. Between shared chocolate squares, he listened to her rant and watched her make the occasional rock explode with a quick and easy flick of her wand. Matters of unrequited love never held well in hearts, though the burden was lessened with Remus by her side. Love and the arrogance of men were soon to be the least of her worries with the end of her fifth year bringing heart retching tragedy. Pulled out of her Transfiguration class, Dorcas was brought to the Head Master’s office to be delivered the news that while on their research trip to Norway, her parents had been ambushed. A group of radicalized wizards attacked, killing her father instantly. While her mother had fought tactfully to ward off the invaders, she was exposed to Dragon Pox and died merely a few days later. 

Heart broken and consumed with grief, a piece of Doe was stolen that day. Turning colder and blunt, the young witch found comfort in more dangerous activities. Following the lead on the more reckless shenanigans that Marlene, James and Sirius took part in, her new found wave of carelessness did bring concern to some of her close friends. Namely, Mary and Remus. But if the burn of fire whiskey down the back of her throat, the smoke of a cigarette and flying over the Black Lake gave her the adrenaline she needed to distract her from her pain, then that is what she would do. True she knew that maybe her parents wouldn’t approve of how she was handling their passing, but they weren’t here to say otherwise. Someone that seemed to find calm in Doe again was GWENOG JONES. After a passing challenge to join her in flight, the pair quickly found a connection with one another. For the first time Doe’s affection was equally reciprocated. Their love was a whirlwind. Wound up in their last years of Hogwarts, it was filled with each other’s firsts. Gwen holding Doe up when she needed it the most, together they pieced back the broken shards of their hearts. Tender kisses trailed over shoulders, clasped hands and the brisk breeze of air on their faces as they chased the sunset like nothing could ever tear them apart. Unfortunately, change came when Gwen was scouted to join the Holyhead Harpies. Though they held deep affection for one another with a job lined up at the Ministry the two parted ways so they could both fulfill their dreams with heavy hearts. Though never loosing the love they both held for one another. 

For safe measure, when moving out of her Aunt’s home after graduation, Doe uttered a memory charm to erase her Aunt’s recollection of her existence. A Muggle and the last living relative she had, the witch hoped the eradication of her presence would keep her Aunt safe from befalling the same fate as her parents. Mary was quick to assure her that the friends they’d made at Hogwarts would be her family now. Holding and lifting each other just as they always had. Following in her mother’s footsteps, Dorcas joined the ranks of Aurors at the Ministry of Magic. Working alongside forces such as HESTIA JONES, ALICE YEN and EMMELINE VANCE, all three dominating leaders, inspirational women and three trailblazers that she couldn’t help but look up to. Though Hestia seemed more hesitant at embracing Doe into the ranks, Alice welcomed her with open arms. Recognizing the great passion and drive for equal rights within Doe, she scouted and informed her of a new group forming under the rank of PROFESSOR ALBUS DUMBLEDORE. An elusive group called The Order of The Phoenix, set on helping to protect those who are unable to protect themselves. Hoping to safeguard the Wizarding World from radical wizards set on burning society as they knew it to the ground. Doe accepted without a blink of hesitation. For so long she’d been craving a purpose, a way that she could honor her parents' memory. Now with the chance to fight for the equal world they brought her up to dream on, to loudly advocating for charge and hold bravery in even the darkest of moments; finally she hoped she could make them proud.  

→ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Blood Status →  Half-Blood

Pronouns → She/Her

Identification → Cis Female 

Sexuality  → Homosexual 

Relationship Status → Single

Previous Education →  Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry

Family → Mathew Meadowes (deceased father), Charlotte Meadowes (deceased mother) 

Connections  → Lily Evans (best friend), Mary MacDonald (best friend/room mate), Marlene McKinnon (best friend/object of affection), Remus Lupin (best friend), James Potter (close friend/adversary), Sirius Black (close friend/adversary), Peter Pettigrew (close friend), Gwenog Jones (friend/ex-girlfriend/potential love interest), Maren Linwood (friend), Emilia Grey (friend), Cassiopeia Kim (friend), Cressida Abercrombie (friend), Gilfred Abbott (friend), Caradoc Dearborn (friend), Poppy Hookum (friend), Aurora Sinistra (friend), Alice Yen (colleague/mentor), Emmeline Vance (colleague), Hestia Jones (colleague)

Future Information → N/A

DORCAS MEADOWES IS A LEVEL 7 WITCH.

[tainted-sentimientos]

Barack Obama’s DNC Speech

“Good evening, everybody. As you've seen by now, this isn't a normal convention. It's not a normal time. So tonight, I want to talk as plainly as I can about the stakes in this election. Because what we do these next 76 days will echo through generations to come.

I'm in Philadelphia, where our Constitution was drafted and signed. It wasn't a perfect document. It allowed for the inhumanity of slavery and failed to guarantee women -- and even men who didn't own property -- the right to participate in the political process. But embedded in this document was a North Star that would guide future generations; a system of representative government -- a democracy -- through which we could better realize our highest ideals. Through civil war and bitter struggles, we improved this Constitution to include the voices of those who'd once been left out. And gradually, we made this country more just, more equal, and more free.

The one Constitutional office elected by all of the people is the presidency. So at minimum, we should expect a president to feel a sense of responsibility for the safety and welfare of all 330 million of us -- regardless of what we look like, how we worship, who we love, how much money we have -- or who we voted for.

But we should also expect a president to be the custodian of this democracy. We should expect that regardless of ego, ambition, or political beliefs, the president will preserve, protect, and defend the freedoms and ideals that so many Americans marched for and went to jail for; fought for and died for.

I have sat in the Oval Office with both of the men who are running for president. I never expected that my successor would embrace my vision or continue my policies. I did hope, for the sake of our country, that Donald Trump might show some interest in taking the job seriously; that he might come to feel the weight of the office and discover some reverence for the democracy that had been placed in his care.

But he never did. For close to four years now, he's shown no interest in putting in the work; no interest in finding common ground; no interest in using the awesome power of his office to help anyone but himself and his friends; no interest in treating the presidency as anything but one more reality show that he can use to get the attention he craves.

Donald Trump hasn't grown into the job because he can't. And the consequences of that failure are severe. 170,000 Americans dead. Millions of jobs gone while those at the top take in more than ever. Our worst impulses unleashed, our proud reputation around the world badly diminished, and our democratic institutions threatened like never before.

Now, I know that in times as polarized as these, most of you have already made up your mind. But maybe you're still not sure which candidate you'll vote for -- or whether you'll vote at all. Maybe you're tired of the direction we're headed, but you can't see a better path yet, or you just don't know enough about the person who wants to lead us there.

So let me tell you about my friend Joe Biden.

Twelve years ago, when I began my search for a vice president, I didn't know I'd end up finding a brother. Joe and I came from different places and different generations. But what I quickly came to admire about him is his resilience, born of too much struggle; his empathy, born of too much grief. Joe's a man who learned -- early on -- to treat every person he meets with respect and dignity, living by the words his parents taught him: "No one's better than you, Joe, but you're better than nobody."

That empathy, that decency, the belief that everybody counts -- that's who Joe is.

When he talks with someone who's lost her job, Joe remembers the night his father sat him down to say that he'd lost his.

When Joe listens to a parent who's trying to hold it all together right now, he does it as the single dad who took the train back to Wilmington each and every night so he could tuck his kids into bed.

When he meets with military families who've lost their hero, he does it as a kindred spirit; the parent of an American soldier; somebody whose faith has endured the hardest loss there is.

For eight years, Joe was the last one in the room whenever I faced a big decision. He made me a better president -- and he's got the character and the experience to make us a better country.

And in my friend Kamala Harris, he's chosen an ideal partner who's more than prepared for the job; someone who knows what it's like to overcome barriers and who's made a career fighting to help others live out their own American dream.

Along with the experience needed to get things done, Joe and Kamala have concrete policies that will turn their vision of a better, fairer, stronger country into reality.

They'll get this pandemic under control, like Joe did when he helped me manage H1N1 and prevent an Ebola outbreak from reaching our shores.

They'll expand health care to more Americans, like Joe and I did ten years ago when he helped craft the Affordable Care Act and nail down the votes to make it the law.

They'll rescue the economy, like Joe helped me do after the Great Recession. I asked him to manage the Recovery Act, which jumpstarted the longest stretch of job growth in history. And he sees this moment now not as a chance to get back to where we were, but to make long-overdue changes so that our economy actually makes life a little easier for everybody -- whether it's the waitress trying to raise a kid on her own, or the shift worker always on the edge of getting laid off, or the student figuring out how to pay for next semester's classes.

Joe and Kamala will restore our standing in the world -- and as we've learned from this pandemic, that matters. Joe knows the world, and the world knows him. He knows that our true strength comes from setting an example the world wants to follow. A nation that stands with democracy, not dictators. A nation that can inspire and mobilize others to overcome threats like climate change, terrorism, poverty, and disease.

But more than anything, what I know about Joe and Kamala is that they actually care about every American. And they care deeply about this democracy.

They believe that in a democracy, the right to vote is sacred, and we should be making it easier for people to cast their ballot, not harder.

They believe that no one -- including the president -- is above the law, and that no public official -- including the president -- should use their office to enrich themselves or their supporters.

They understand that in this democracy, the Commander-in-Chief doesn't use the men and women of our military, who are willing to risk everything to protect our nation, as political props to deploy against peaceful protesters on our own soil. They understand that political opponents aren't "un-American" just because they disagree with you; that a free press isn't the "enemy" but the way we hold officials accountable; that our ability to work together to solve big problems like a pandemic depends on a fidelity to facts and science and logic and not just making stuff up.

None of this should be controversial. These shouldn't be Republican principles or Democratic principles. They're American principles. But at this moment, this president and those who enable him, have shown they don't believe in these things.

Tonight, I am asking you to believe in Joe and Kamala's ability to lead this country out of these dark times and build it back better. But here's the thing: no single American can fix this country alone. Not even a president. Democracy was never meant to be transactional -- you give me your vote; I make everything better. It requires an active and informed citizenry. So I am also asking you to believe in your own ability -- to embrace your own responsibility as citizens -- to make sure that the basic tenets of our democracy endure.

Because that's what at stake right now. Our democracy.

Look, I understand why many Americans are down on government. The way the rules have been set up and abused in Congress make it easy for special interests to stop progress. Believe me, I know. I understand why a white factory worker who's seen his wages cut or his job shipped overseas might feel like the government no longer looks out for him, and why a Black mother might feel like it never looked out for her at all. I understand why a new immigrant might look around this country and wonder whether there's still a place for him here; why a young person might look at politics right now, the circus of it all, the meanness and the lies and crazy conspiracy theories and think, what's the point?

Well, here's the point: this president and those in power -- those who benefit from keeping things the way they are -- they are counting on your cynicism. They know they can't win you over with their policies. So they're hoping to make it as hard as possible for you to vote, and to convince you that your vote doesn't matter. That's how they win. That's how they get to keep making decisions that affect your life, and the lives of the people you love. That's how the economy will keep getting skewed to the wealthy and well-connected, how our health systems will let more people fall through the cracks. That's how a democracy withers, until it's no democracy at all.

We can't let that happen. Do not let them take away your power. Don't let them take away your democracy. Make a plan right now for how you're going to get involved and vote. Do it as early as you can and tell your family and friends how they can vote too. Do what Americans have done for over two centuries when faced with even tougher times than this -- all those quiet heroes who found the courage to keep marching, keep pushing in the face of hardship and injustice.

Last month, we lost a giant of American democracy in John Lewis. Some years ago, I sat down with John and the few remaining leaders of the early Civil Rights Movement. One of them told me he never imagined he'd walk into the White House and see a president who looked like his grandson. Then he told me that he'd looked it up, and it turned out that on the very day that I was born, he was marching into a jail cell, trying to end Jim Crow segregation in the South.

What we do echoes through the generations.

Whatever our backgrounds, we're all the children of Americans who fought the good fight. Great grandparents working in firetraps and sweatshops without rights or representation. Farmers losing their dreams to dust. Irish and Italians and Asians and Latinos told to go back where they came from. Jews and Catholics, Muslims and Sikhs, made to feel suspect for the way they worshipped. Black Americans chained and whipped and hanged. Spit on for trying to sit at lunch counters. Beaten for trying to vote.

If anyone had a right to believe that this democracy did not work, and could not work, it was those Americans. Our ancestors. They were on the receiving end of a democracy that had fallen short all their lives. They knew how far the daily reality of America strayed from the myth. And yet, instead of giving up, they joined together and said somehow, some way, we are going to make this work. We are going to bring those words, in our founding documents, to life.

I've seen that same spirit rising these past few years. Folks of every age and background who packed city centers and airports and rural roads so that families wouldn't be separated. So that another classroom wouldn't get shot up. So that our kids won't grow up on an uninhabitable planet. Americans of all races joining together to declare, in the face of injustice and brutality at the hands of the state, that Black Lives Matter, no more, but no less, so that no child in this country feels the continuing sting of racism.

To the young people who led us this summer, telling us we need to be better -- in so many ways, you are this country's dreams fulfilled. Earlier generations had to be persuaded that everyone has equal worth. For you, it's a given -- a conviction. And what I want you to know is that for all its messiness and frustrations, your system of self-government can be harnessed to help you realize those convictions.

You can give our democracy new meaning. You can take it to a better place. You're the missing ingredient -- the ones who will decide whether or not America becomes the country that fully lives up to its creed.

That work will continue long after this election. But any chance of success depends entirely on the outcome of this election. This administration has shown it will tear our democracy down if that's what it takes to win. So we have to get busy building it up -- by pouring all our effort into these 76 days, and by voting like never before -- for Joe and Kamala, and candidates up and down the ticket, so that we leave no doubt about what this country we love stands for -- today and for all our days to come.

Stay safe. God bless.”

- Former President Barack Obama

To the decided:

To the undecided:

To the opposed:

[bartletforamerica]

When Maggie Met Donna

The West Wing-The Newsroom Crossover Post both Season Finales, in a world where somehow all of the show that takes place under Obama actually takes place under Santos. 

Canon Ships, mainly MaggiexJim, JoshxDonna, 

Normally I wouldn’t write fanfiction for either of these, but the plot bunny kicked me hard on the Metro this morning and wouldn’t shut up until I wrote my way through class and knocked it out. It’s not perfect, but it needs to get out of my brain and away where I can’t fuss over it anymore. 

Oh, also, Happy Birthday Janel Moloney!

Maggie Jordan fights to be the one to cover the primary race for the Maryland 5th. Normally someone at her level wouldn’t be assigned to a single non-presidential campaign, but this one is going to be intense, with eyes across the nation on the district.

The incumbent, Congresswoman Andrea Wyatt, is running for the U.S. Senate. That too is going to be an amazing race. Congresswoman Wyatt is, after all, a badass.

The seat is heavily democratic. The congresswoman repeatedly won reelection with 80-85% of the vote. Her constituents loved her. Even if Republicans would do better than average, they weren’t going to make up 35% in one election.

So the focus is on the democratic primary. There’s a moderate democrat, the son of a former congressman, middle-aged and bland, but well-funded. There’s a so-far-left-as-to-practically-be-green democrat, who has broad sweeping plans, very little funding, and very little solid understanding of politics or how to pay for any of their ideas. And then there’s the reason Maggie wants to cover this race.

Then there’s Donna Lyman.

Donna Lyman is one of Maggie’s personal heroes. The woman is just about to hit middle age and has been more involved in politics over the last almost two decades than anyone at that age has a right to have been. She’d been part of the Bartlet administration dating back to the campaign, spent years as Josh Lyman’s assistant, been injured on a trip to Gaza, come back, recovered, and then jumped onto the Russell campaign. When Josh Lyman had led Matt Santos to victory at a contested convention, she’d been brought on and done some wonders with media strategy.  She’d then spent the next eight years as chief of staff to the first lady, a first lady who hadn’t been content to let her husband run all of the legislative policy, who had fought hard to have her own policy goals legitimized and legislated. Donna Moss (who’d become Lyman after the first midterms) had been at the head of that push.

She and her husband had been THE D.C. Power Couple for eight years. When the Santos Administration had come to an end, they’d bowed out to take a break after 16 years of service and plan for what was next.

Apparently, it had been decided that they weren’t ready to be done with politics.

Joshua Lyman was white haired, with a full beard and glasses. No longer the suave swashbuckler of his youth, he’d gained an air of gravitas—so long as he wasn’t speaking. But he was, undeniably, seen as a kingmaker and the top political mind of his generation. But he’d never shown aspirations of being the one running for office, preferring to work behind the scenes. He’d helped countless democrats get elected at all levels, including his deputy, Sam Seaborn, who had rerun for the California 47th and won in the last election.

Democrats had done surprisingly well in the house and senate considering they’d lost the White House.

A right-wing old white Republican had won, a seemingly reactionary step after 16 years of democratic rule. The man was considered a joke and the potential democratic slate to take him on in the next election was longer than Maggie’s forearm. But covering his administration—covering the White House—had lost a bit of the shine it had once had.

Donna Lyman had announced her candidacy with a year until the midterm elections and a list of endorsements. She had the backing of the Santos family and the Bartlets. President Bartlet didn’t get around much anymore, but he and Abbey hosted house parties at the farm in New Hampshire. Emily’s List had backed her, as had N.O.W., and Planned Parenthood. Amy Gardner was on board as Fundraising Director in an instant. Josh Lyman was Campaign Director, though a muzzle had to be placed on him. C.J. Cregg-Concannon had given her backing, though being married to a journalist made it too difficult for her to be Media Director. And Andrea Wyatt had given her seal of approval as well.

It’s not a lock in for her, however. Donna’s political stances put her firmly in a ‘progressive’ column.

The main question of the campaign, the reason that this is the campaign that’s going to attract attention, is that of the voters’ desires. What does the democratic base want in a candidate? Do they want a moderate to bring them back to center? Or are they ready for another progressive to push the country onward? The challengers are all watching, trying to see if they are what the democratic base is looking for. With the strength of the democratic party in the district, it makes it an ideal test case. A democrat is guaranteed to win, but what kind?

Maggie’s practically bouncing out of her seat when she finds out she has an interview with Ms. Lyman. This is a woman who has gone from working for powerful men, to working with them as an equal, to now having them working for her (including her husband, which is a lovely bit of symmetry). She’d come from the Midwest and built herself up out of nothing, taking whatever opportunities had be offered to her and she’d succeeded. Donna Lyman gives Maggie hope. Hope for herself, and for her future, that one day she and Jim will figure out how to be in the same place at the same time and not just keep carrying on long distance. Hope that she’ll make it as a producer and maybe get to do more segments. And maybe, maybe, one day she’ll even be an anchor in her own right (though that dream is kept in the deepest corners of her soul, a dream of her at the desk and Jim in her ear, Mac watching like Charlie used to, backing them up as they take on the world).

Maggie sits down across from the older blonde, whose energy is palpable. There’s doing to be done and the gleam in her eyes makes it clear that she’s eager to be doing it.

Maggie knocks her water over within the first thirty seconds and spends the next minute apologizing. Thank god this is a print article she’ll be writing and not a tv interview. Donna smiles and helps her clean up and retells the story (printed once in a book, otherwise Maggie’s sure this wouldn’t have been said) of the time she left her underwear at an art gallery. By the time the table’s clean they’re laughing together.

Maggie leaves the interview an hour later with a full sound recording and pages of notes on policy positions and various anecdotes and fun facts. She’s smiling broadly as she rushes back to the D.C. bureau to write before the impressions fade from her mind.

Before she starts, however, she pulls a little reporter’s pad from her desk and flips it open. She shifts through a few pages and comes to number 34. With a black pen she strikes out ’34: Meet Donna Lyman’ from her bucket list.

With a grin, Maggie puts it back in the desk and opens her laptop. Time to tell the public about the time Donna pulled a fast one on her husband to ensure the First Lady’s child poverty program made it into the budget. She’s sure she can come to a reason the voters need to know about this in the voting booth.

[spidersmiceandeverythingnice]

I’m starting a new job soon and have a lot of free time on my hands so you bet your ass I made an entire Servant profile for a Saber Lafayette concept. 

Name: Lafayette

Alignment: Lawful Good 

Attribute: Star

Rank: 4*

Class: Saber

Class Skills: Riding (A) 

Traits: Human / Servant / Brynhildr’s Beloved 

Active Skills: Charisma (B) - Increase the attack of all allies for three turns. / Golden Rule (A) - Greatly increase NP gain for three turns. / Unshakable Ideals (A+) Apply invincible and self-heal for three turns.

Character Information: 

Gilbert du Moutier, Marquis de Lafayette - young revolutionary of the enlightenment era, a French nobleman who became a hero for the United States when he was just nineteen years old. His Noble Phantasm recreates the Battle of Yorktown, when the British finally surrendered to the Continental Army.

Bond 1: “Lafayette is normally a member of the Rider class. However, due to the strength of his ideals, he is also capable of this manifestation.”

Bond 2: “Volunteered to fight in the American War for Independence when he was a teenager. Due to his nobility in France, he was quickly given a high rank and distinguished himself in battle. The sword he wields is a gift commissioned by the Continental Congress to thank him for his services after the war.”

Bond 3: “CHARISMA - He seemed to the Americans ‘a knight in shining armor,’ proof that the ideals enshrined in the revolution were possible and supported by European allies. He was able to successfully rally and command troops even when he had been injured.

GOLDEN RULE - One of the richest nobles in France, at a time when French nobles were among the richest people on Earth. However, he famously endured the hardships of winter at Valley Forge along with the American troops.”

Bond 4: “UNSHAKABLE IDEALS - Lafayette’s personal skill, which affects his manifestation in a way similar to Marie Antoinette’s Beautiful Princess. A student of the liberal enlightenment era, an opponent of bigotry and oppression in all forms. When the War for Independence ended, Lafayette declared, ‘Humanity’s battle is won - liberty now has a country!’ because he genuinely believed that the United States would become a nation exemplifying the best of human freedom and equality.”

Bond 5: “It’s possible that his idealism is not simply naivety. He was given great responsibilities at a young age due to his family situation, and endured hardships during and after in the war. He greatly missed his wife and children while fighting. However, he simply believed that fighting in the revolution was the right thing to do, for the sake of all humankind. For his contributions to the fight for freedom, he was made an honorary citizen of the United States and is known as ‘the Hero of Two Worlds.’” 

EXTRA: “After returning to France, Lafayette took a leadership position and continued to practice politics, hoping to bring democracy and human rights to his country. When the revolution came to France, his ideals were shaken and challenged in many more complex ways due to the different circumstances, and as a result of his actions there, his reputation at home is very different from his reputation in the United States. In the Saber class, he becomes the ‘heroic’ Lafayette, who represents the founding dream of the American nation, a dream where all humans are created as equals and are able to freely express their rights. It is not possible to summon this Lafayette in France.”

BONUS CHARACTER INTERACTION IDEAS!

Marie Antoinette: “Your Majesty! I don’t know if you would remember me... Oh, so you do remember? Ahaha, well, in that case, if you’ll excuse me...”

Thomas Edison: “Presi-King? What does that even mean!? It doesn’t make any sense! Pick one or the other!”

Napoleon: “Listen, it’s fine now since we’re all here, working together for the benefit of all mankind. But please don’t ask me to try and get along with him. It’s not that I hate him. It’s just the principle of the thing.”

Billy the Kid: “You know what’s funny? Many of my old friends said that the revolution began as an act of treason against the British Empire. So it seems to me that maybe being an outlaw is an American tradition!”

Jeanne d’Arc: “The patron saint of my country! You’re just as I imagined you!” 

MY NOTES: 

So, I feel like the profile is pretty self-explanatory... He’s deliberately designed in a way that I’m sure would’ve gotten him ripped to shreds in the first five minutes of Fate/Zero because we ALL remember how that one turned out. But I think, looking at the members of the Saber class, qualifying requires a bit of idealism or perfectionism. Think Saber!Diarmuid personifying chivalry and the purity of honorable battle; Nero becoming uncomplicated and charismatic due to her own narcissistic belief that she was a superb and generous leader; even Lancelot, who openly believes that his natural class is Berserker due to his flawed personality, represents “King Arthur’s ideal knight” as a Saber. Personally, I really like the symbolism in parts of what I imagine Lafayette’s character kit to be like - a Noble Phantasm that acts as a sort of Reality Marble that recreates the final great battle of the Revolution, an act which Lafayette believed would seal the deal on the first step to a more enlightened and free world; his Star attribute, his third skill that explicitly compares him to FGO’s idealized Marie Antoinette; he uses a sword that was meant to be ornamental as a weapon; etc. 

Basically I think that FGO isn’t going to add a lot of American revolutionary heroes because a) that doesn’t suit their primary target audience, which is not made up of Americans or even nerds who like the Enlightenment or learning about the ideas in the French Revolution; b) they basically opted out of it already by giving “the power of American presidents” to Thomas Edison as a “Mystic Code that represents America.” But I also L O V E Lafayette and think he’d make an excellent Heroic Spirit/addition to the game just in general, so I want them to find an excuse for him to be added.

However, I would also argue that BECAUSE Thomas Edison’s character is being used to represent “American leadership,” or even “the American Dream (of hard work and success paying off)”, then Saber!Lafayette should be added because he represents “American idealism.” He’d play that role a LOT better than anyone else in the pantheon of “potential American heroic spirits,” and especially when you consider the other major figures of the Revolutionary War; and he also fits in with the 18th Century French gang that Chaldea’s already got going on; AND they added Napoleon as a Star-attribute Heroic Spirit when Napoleon was like, objectively a worse person than Lafayette even when Lafayette was making the most problematic and complex decisions of his life. (Not to mention, like, everything about Marie Antoinette - who to be fair, I really like as a character in FGO! But we can’t pretend that she counts among Least Historically Accurate personalities.)

Anywho, I just really like Lafayette. He was good and I love him.

[fingersinhisass]

hi yeah can i get uhhhhh two number nines, a number nine large, a number six with extra dip, a number seven, two number 45s, one with cheese, and all the odd numbers on that post for my best boy alphonse?

yes absolutely carly i love you

1. Which should be saved – a bus full of innocent lives or a loved one?

in principle, alphonse would say a bus full of innocent lives. but if he were ever actually given the choice, there’s no way he wouldn’t save someone he loves. he’d be real fucked up about it though.

3. If you could jump back through time to save a loved one’s life, would you? Despite what it might do to the timeline? To everyone else? Do you believe it is their fate to die regardless?

he’s never had anyone super close to him die, but he’s done a lot of killing. and i think he would definitely jump back in time to stop himself from killing his targets, so really one of the demons should’ve offered him that. because he would’ve been. so tempted. and might’ve even gone through with it (if i could ever roleplay him accurately)

5. Is it better to hurt others before they hurt you or let yourself be walked all over and hurt by others?

al’s the kind of person who would let someone he loves walk all over him for sure, which. isn’t really healthy. he’s been bitten way more times than he’s bitten back when it comes to friendships and romantic relationships. 

7. You have the key to immortality in your hands. But not for free. If you want it, as a price, your worst enemy also gains immortality. Is it worth it?

absolutely not. al has no interest in being immortal. like, none whatsoever. eternity to think over his mistakes and flaws? no thanks.

9. Can people be held accountable for things people close or related to them did or are they innocent?

even though he carries his own prejudices, i think al is a firm believer in giving people the benefit of the doubt. therefore no, they are not accountable for those things. it’s not like he blames shaelle for having a shitbag rich asshole for a dad.

11. Imagine there is a beast that craves attention. If you ignore it, despite being deadly, it will leave you alone. Could you live like that? Even if it possibly attacked others? Would you try and challenge something that unknown?

al would sacrifice himself to something like that and challenge the beast in a heartbeat. he’s altruistic to a potentially fatal degree, y’all.

13. Could you sacrifice yourself for the good of everyone else?

oops. see number 11.

15. Is lying to others to gain their approval more important than being genuine and hated?

al’s whole life and identity is kind of one massive lie in a lot of different ways – that being said, in a lot of ways he’s also very genuine about certain aspects of his personality and is a very open person. but the pool is a lot deeper than it looks, and the stuff he’s open about is very shallow. the deeper stuff is a lot more heavily guarded. that’s not even the question being asked here. anyway. he hates a kiss-ass and only butters people up if he has a legitimate investigative reason to, not just personal gain. 

17. Have you ever gotten sheer joy out of hurting someone else, either physically or mentally? To whom and why? Did it scare you?

haha yes. he offed a very high up government official once who was super corrupt and basically personified all of the things al hates about the upper class. and yes, it scared him.

19. What is more likely a thought to you – that this world is wrong or that you are wrong?

both? al is both astounded by the cruelty people are incapable of inflicting on others and astounded by the cruelty he’s inflicted on others. he’s working very hard to change it, so these days it’s a lot more often that the world is wrong. he just reminds himself very frequently that he’s a part of the world he’s working to change.

21. Are there people in this world you simply thing the world would be better without? If you could erase them out of existence without physically murdering them, would you?

uhhhh, the upper class? yes. funny because he marries a super rich girl. but no, he wouldn’t erase them from existence. mainly because it would mean erasing his wife, but also because he’s done with killing people. even if he does think the world would be better without them.

23. Could you ever become your own hero? Is that a role you can fulfill or is it something you look to others for?

nope. alphonse is his own villain. he definitely finds heroes in other people, particularly those he loves: his mother, borem (which is partially why he reacted so poorly to borem’s betrayal), shaelle. not to totally derail and gush about how much he adores shaelle on main but like. he admires her so much. he thinks she’s so, so strong and powerful and good.

25. What is more important to you? An idea of yours being used and appreciated or the credit for that idea being yours and yours alone?

definitely the idea being used and appreciated. credit is nice, but he really doesn’t think he deserves it, so.

27. How far would you go to achieve a dream or ideal? Does it matter who suffers? Does it matter if you suffer?

he would tear himself apart for a cause he believes in (which he kind of does). if someone else is getting hurt? hell no. if he’s getting hurt? who gives a shit. he has like no self-preservation instinct anymore lmao someone help him please

29. Is genius equal to hard work? Does a genius deserve praise for doing well without effort? Are they above us?

alphonse probably values hard work just a little bit more than genius simply because very little has come easily to him in life and he’s more than used to working his ass off for things. he doesn’t think geniuses are above normal people, absolutely not, but he does think they deserve praise, even if what they accomplish wasn’t as hard for them as it might be for others. they still accomplished something.

31. What is more important to you? Being respected and praised by your elders or being looked up to and championed by those younger or of the same age?

he’s not keen on being praised so ideally neither, but he absolutely adores kids and to be loved and looked up to by a child makes him happy, even if it also makes him feel a little bit guilty.

33. If you could wipe certain memories from your head, would you? Why would you? What memories?

he wouldn’t wipe his memories, even the terrible murder ones, because he believes he needs them to serve as a reminder of what he’s capable of, what he will never, ever do again, and why he’s trying to make the world a better place.

35. Is every person in this world wholly unique or can they be categorized? Can they be grouped and mentally dissected? Are you just another sheep in another flock or are you the sole unique soul?

upper class people can be categorized, says alphonse, because they fucking suck. again, he marries a rich girl. he rethinks some of his biases. in terms of whether or not he’s unique, he’d probably tend to think so, but not because he’s super cool and special or whatever, but because he’s a fucking terrible person and a menace to society. at least, like, that’s what he believes. 

[truthbeetoldmedia]

10 Best Moments from Season 1 of “Anne with an E”

Lucy Maud Montgomery’s Canadian children’s series, Anne of Green Gables, has been adapted many times in the more than a century since it was first published. When recreating a story that has been part of the childhoods of Canadians and other children around the world for generations, there are certain elements that must remain the same and others that can be invented or updated to keep the story fresh and captivating.

Anne with an E (or just Anne, in Canada) is the CBC’s most recent adaptation of the classic, in partnership with Netflix U.S. It stays true to the essentials of the original work with pristine casting, beautiful cinematography, plotlines and dialogue that are lifted right from the novel. But it also took the chance to modernize the story in a way that makes it relatable and necessary in today’s world, by including a “Progressive Mothers Sewing Circle” and multiple conversations and conflicts around feminism, choice, and education.

Here are 10 of the best moments from Season 1 of Anne with an E:

Anne’s journey to Green Gables - 1x01 “Your Will Shall Decide Your Destiny”

Anne Shirley’s (Amybeth McNulty) romantic descriptions of Prince Edward Island throughout the series made it an ideal place in the hearts and minds of many young readers, and the sweeping shots and attention given to Anne’s enrapturement as she travels with Matthew Cuthbert (R.H. Thomson) from Bright River to Green Gables capture this sense of wonder beautifully.

This journey also introduces us to Anne, through the eyes of Matthew: she’s talkative, full of big words and bigger ideas, and in possession of an imagination of the likes Matthew — nor anyone in Avonlea — has ever seen before.

All of this is perhaps best captured as Anne and Matthew ride down the Avenue, a lane shaded by drooping cherry trees blooming with white blossoms, which Anne promptly renames “The White Way of Delight.”

Of course, Anne’s overwhelming happiness at finding a home in the most beautiful place in the world is overshadowed by the viewer’s knowledge that Matthew and his sister Marilla (Geraldine James) had expected a boy instead, something Anne has not yet realized and is sure to ruin her dreams of feeling wanted and loved.

“She’s my daughter!” - 1x02 “I Am No Bird, and No Net Ensnares Me”

If this moment didn’t melt your heart, you’re made of stone.

After Marilla sends Anne away for theft — which they soon learn was a wrongful accusation — Matthew chases her to Bright River, then to Charlottetown, then across the strait to Nova Scotia; he sustains an injury to the head upon almost spotting her in Charlottetown and he fruitlessly looks for her at the orphanage, before finally finding her at a train station where she’s collecting money by selling stories for a ticket to Halifax.

Anne is unforgiving when she first sees Matthew again, understandably hurt and unwilling to give him a second chance. A well-meaning stranger gets between them, worried that Matthew means her harm, but Matthew quickly dissipates the situation with a single sentence: “She’s my daughter.”

They’re words that Anne has been longing to hear and believe her entire life and she forgives Matthew immediately, wrapping her arms around him in a hug, and together they return to Avonlea.

Marilla talks to Anne - 1x02 “I Am No Bird, and No Net Ensnares Me”

Marilla is not one to wear even a sliver of her heart on her sleeve, and talking openly to Anne — who is so different from Marilla that she doesn’t even know where to begin — doesn’t come easily to her. Anne has no idea how her brief absence affected Marilla and instead assumes that Marilla doesn’t want or even like her, and it’s only because of Matthew that she concedes to keeping the child around.

Marilla does her best to smooth over her rocky beginning with Anne, in a speech made even more sweet by how obviously difficult Marilla finds it. “Anne, will you forgive me? I am very sorry, Anne. [...] You’re a truthful girl, Anne, even now, and that is an admirable quality. This was my fault. And all that you went through because of it. It’s a wonder you came back to Green Gables at all.”

An adult admitting their wrongs and asking a child for forgiveness is refreshing to see, especially given the time period. Proving that she does have a heart, and a heavy sense of remorse, does much to repair Marilla’s relationship with Anne, and although Anne will never feel the same sense of kinship with her as she does with Matthew, they grow to love each other deeply.

The PMSC (Progressive Mothers Sewing Circle) - 1x03 “But What is So Headstrong as Youth?”

Now that she’s adopted Anne, Marilla is invited to join the PMSC by several other mothers of young girls, a society that discusses and believes in progressive matters, such as girls’ education and equality between women and men.

It’s a clever opportunity for the show to discuss modern ideas in a 19th century setting, and Marilla, an older woman with a conservative bent, is a good viewpoint to see it from. At Marilla’s first meeting, the women discuss books and feminism and being a modern women in a modern world. Marilla is quite out of her depth, but is more than willing to listen and learn and even change her own ways of thinking.

Later, Marilla has a lively debate with her neighbour and friend Rachel Lynde (Corrine Koslo) about the PMSC, of which Rachel is no big proponent of, asking if the women “took turns shouting atop a soapbox” (a common misconception of feminism, even today).

“There was a lot of civilized talk about women’s education and social reforms,” Marilla replies.

Even Matthew chimes in on the discussion when he comes in to tea: “I reckon every new idea was modern once, until it wasn’t.”

Gilbert’s introduction - 1x03 “But What is So Headstrong as Youth?”

In almost any iteration of the Anne of Green Gables series, Gilbert Blythe (Lucas Jade Zumann) is nearly as essential to the story as Anne herself is. For generations, his character has been the object of countless fictional crushes and Anne’s relationship with him is a main driving force of the plot; such a character deserves a hero’s introduction.

And a hero’s introduction he receives. Anne’s on her way to school when she’s confronted by Billy Andrews, who threatens her for unintentionally spreading rumours about his sister. That’s when Gilbert appears, who immediately diffuses the situation by greeting Billy as a friend and suggesting they get to school, while Anne looks on in (surprisingly) wordless shock.

Anne runs from Gilbert and they’re not properly introduced until they reach the school, where she finally finds her tongue, tells him her name, and realizes that he’s the famous Gilbert Blythe as he’s immediately swarmed by his admiring classmates.

Gilbert has always seen Anne differently than everyone else, and feels a pull to her from the start. Where everyone else — including Anne — believes her to be homely and judges her harshly for coming from an orphan’s asylum, Gilbert says, “Why do I care where she’s from? A cute girl is a cute girl.”

(Later, when the class laughs at Anne for her dramatic reading of a poem, Gilbert only sees it as admirable: “She’s good. Invested.”)

Anne and Marilla discuss Anne’s future - 1x04 “An Inward Treasure Born”

After several weeks off, Anne is ready to go to school again. But she’s still concerned about what the minister told her earlier in the episode, about her not needing to go to school and becoming a wife instead. Ever since she heard that, Anne has been contemplating what it is she would like to be when she grows up.

Marilla is progressive enough and loves Anne enough to view the minister’s thinking as old-fashioned, and tells Anne that she should decide for herself what she would like to be and set her mind to it.

Gentle moments like this one between Marilla and Anne are rare, which makes them all the more touching when they come along. Marilla is new to parenthood, and while she certainly struggles with some aspects of it (and Anne is no easy child to raise, either), this is something that comes surprisingly natural to her. She always seems to know just what to say to ease Anne’s mind, and her unwavering faith in Anne’s intelligence and goodness is raw and honest, when she chooses to express it.

“You’ve got a good and nimble mind, Anne. I don’t see why you should limit it. In my day, we didn’t get to choose. I think you should make your own decision.” This statement means a lot, especially coming from Marilla, who wasn’t given the opportunity to choose her own path due to her family situation.

Anne saves Minnie May’s life - 1x06 “Remorse is the Poison of Life”

Anne’s experiences as an orphan prior to coming to Green Gables have her poorly adjusted for many things, but have taught her many things no child should be expected to know — including how to deal with croup.

When her dearest friend Diana’s little sister, Minnie May, falls ill on a night when both her parents and half the town are in Charlottetown to see the premier, Diana (Dalila Bela) goes to Anne for help. Anne immediately sends Matthew into town to fetch the doctor, while she accompanies Diana back to the house.

What follows is an extremely tense scene in which Anne does everything in her power to save Minnie May’s life — including employing remedies from old wives’ tales — while Diana and her Aunt Josephine (Deborah Grover) look on in shock.

The moment Minnie May coughs and breathes again after several minutes of choking silently on phlegm is an exceedingly powerful one. Anne’s role in saving the little girl’s life — when the doctor arrives, he confirms that Minnie May would have died otherwise — causes Diana’s mother to forgive her after the unfortunate currant wine incident of a month before and allow the two to be friends again, and raises her esteem greatly in the eyes of Aunt Josephine.

Anne and Gilbert talk about grief - 1x06 “Remorse is the Poison of Life”

For several months after the incident in which Gilbert called Anne “Carrots” and she responded by smashing her slate over his head, Anne holds to her promise not to have anything to do with him unless absolutely necessary. It’s not until Gilbert’s father dies and Anne feels that this is something she can relate to him about — after all, now they’re both orphans — that she makes any effort to actually talk to him.

Unfortunately, Anne isn’t a natural when it comes to sympathizing and not only does she not pick up on the fact that the last thing Gilbert wants is to talk to someone, but she manages to say exactly the wrong thing.

“Being an orphan has its challenges but you already have so many advantages, you’ll be much better off than I was. And...I didn’t know my parents. They died when I was a baby, so I couldn’t fend for myself the way that you can. And I don’t remember my parents at all, but you’ll always be able to remember your father. You know, when you think about it, you’re really very lucky.”

Later, Anne realizes that Gilbert has lost someone in a way she never has since she never knew her parents and thus never mourned them; however, when she arrives at Gilbert’s house to tell him this, he has already gone.

“I choose myself. That way I’ll never be disappointed.” - 1x06 “Remorse is the Poison of Life”

While out on a walk to “take advantage of the winter air,” Aunt Josephine comes upon Anne in her clubhouse, yelling aggrievedly to no one about Gilbert Blythe.

“What you heard just now had nothing to do with romance,” Anne assures the old woman, which leads into a discussion about Anne’s future and how all the other girls at school dream only of becoming a wife, and Anne herself has so many other ambitions.

Aunt Josephine is perhaps uniquely situated to give Anne advice, having never gotten married herself but spent her life living with the woman she loved (a relationship Anne hasn’t yet realized extended far past the realms of friendship).

“I have the following thoughts to offer,” Aunt Josephine says. “First, you can get married any time in your life, if you choose to do so. And two: if you choose a career, you can buy a white dress yourself, have it made to order, and wear it whenever you want.”

Aunt Josephine’s words do much to improve Anne’s mood, and she promptly exclaims, “I’m going to be my own woman.”

Gilbert and Anne meet in Charlottetown - 1x07 “Wherever You Are is My Home”

While in Charlottetown pawning goods in the hopes of saving Green Gables, Anne runs into Gilbert, who’s there to work on the docks. Anne is inexplicably happy to see him again, and the two go for coffee together.

Anne finally gets the chance to apologize to Gilbert for what she said after his father’s death, even if it’s an apology he doesn’t need to hear. The two strike up a truce and at last seem to form the beginnings of a friendship — with Anne even admitting that she’s missed him (although, supposedly, only in school).

Neither of them seem quite prepared to leave the other without knowing when they’ll see each other again (even Jerry notices the long looks that pass between them) and when they do eventually meet again, it’s easy to assume that a fundamental aspect of their relationship will have changed.

Season 2 of Anne With An E premieres September 23 on CBC in Canada, and is already available on Netflix in the U.S.

[tlnsupportteam]

Kids Online Classes - Why are they a good idea? Benefits of online classes for kids

Why online language courses for Kids are a companion to be sure? Online classes for youngsters - for tutoring or for ability building are ending up being a surprisingly beneficial turn of events.

In occasions such as these where the danger of COVID 19 disease is approaching all over, online classes have acted the hero of everybody!

Be it schools, guardians or understudies the manner in which everybody adjusted to online classes has been striking.

As it's been said, need is the mother, everything being equal.

Had instructors and schools not moved to web based showing stages, it would have been a bad dream for youngsters.

online classes for youngsters Online classes benefit every last one ! Schools, yet customized training accessibility in various subjects is additionally helping the two guardians and children to learn better.

Advantages of online classes for youngsters Online classes help kids in more than one way:

No driving required: It saves time, exertion, and energy, in this way decreasing pressure for the two guardians and children.

Assortment of choices: With online classes, a parent can pick the most ideal choice accessible in any field from India or abroad.

Greater quality control: As the classes are going on inside the house, the parent can direct the exercises. They can undoubtedly give input and have better quality results.

Can participate in numerous exercises: As there is additional time at the removal of the child, he/she can pick different extra-curricular as well as school-related exercises. Doesn't it settle the endless tussle among guardians and children?

Better Networking: Online classes improve organizing choices as they have understudies from various areas of the planet who can team up and work effectively with one another without any problem. Shifted Perspective: Usually, you will observe kids from a similar everyday schedule taking a specific disconnected class. In any case, in web-based classes, the coach and student can be from any piece of India or the world that delivers various considerations and thoughts. This additionally makes kids mindful of social subtleties at a beginning phase of life.

Powerful documentation: All the learning material is shared and put away on the web so it is more straightforward to get to whenever and from anyplace. That further saves the child's time and energy.