when-rapinoe-met-lovelace

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

The Side Job: an episode where we come full circle, and full circle has always meant Parker

So so so full of spoilers - read at your own risk.

"I don't feel things the way other people do, so I was using their feelings to look at mine. Everyone kept asking me why I was doing this, but they wouldn't let me answer. They just kept guessing why I was doing it. Always my feelings, through them. And then I thought, 'Do I even know what I want?' So I had to get away. Because I do have feelings. One a lot...anger...Because when I was younger...Anyway, now I'm strong and you're weak. So what am I going to do and why am I going to do it?"

People likely have been doing this to Parker her whole life. But let's focus on this episode. Everyone in this episode tries to understand Parker, but their understanding is informed by who they are as people (and, for those who have known Parker longer, it's informed specifically by common touchstones in their history).

With one notable exception. But before we get there, let's talk about everyone else first. The show sets this up in order of decreasing permeability of boundaries.

Sophie comes first, and while Sophie and Parker's relationship is allowed several lenses in the Leverageverse (I've written about this here), maybe more than anyone else's, I think it's significant that right before their major interaction of the episode, we are presented with Harry's struggle with boundaries with his mother. Sophie's come a long way from last season's "Everything I do is from them" line of thinking, but she's always going to feel a little responsible for Parker, Hardison, and Eliot.

And so Sophie guesses it's because Parker doesn't want to deal with well thought-out plans every once in a while and wants the adrenaline of not having everything planned out. This makes sense because this is Sophie's style of masterminding. The entire first episode of Redemption season 2 deals with this. This is not to say that Sophie has bad boundaries with Parker. Just the boundaries in their relationship are more permeable than anyone else's. This is made clear by the way that Parker ropes Sophie in (or the way that Sophie presents herself to be roped in, intutitively).

Breanna guesses it's because Parker wants to change up the way that they do cons, which is a reflection of how she has new ideas and, like her brother, is drawn towards a slightly different style of work than the rest of the crew. Breanna does bring a new energy to the crew, and it's actually that energy that helps Parker out of her rut in s1. It also challenges her.

Harry guesses it's because Parker wants to use this experience to see if it's possible to change, if change is possible in general. And like, that's Harry's entire arc on the show (he doesn't have as much material to draw from...but like yes if you were to sum it up in a sentence, that'd be it).

I think it's important to note that no one here is completely wrong. They all have pieces of the truth. That's why Parker replies, "Something like that." to each of them. Parker is in fact taking a risk (how calculated the risk is left up for our interpretation, but on Leverage, the best cons are based in truth, and we are told that over and over again), trying something new, and testing herself.

Sophie and Parker have always been able to bond over the adrenaline rush of a job and a plan made up on the fly. Parker's risks tend to be more physical, and Sophie's tend to be more emotional. But their most significant beats involve this concept. (Sophie using a rig to get Parker off the roof in exchange for the David, "Maybe that's why they call it falling in love," Parker willingly stepping back into pure theft on this specific team and letting Sophie call the shots).

The new energy Breanna brings to the team does help Parker rediscover her passion and get in touch with a different side of herself.

The parallel in Harry wondering if change is possible and Parker, Hardison, and Eliot's "we change together" is directly referenced in Harry and Parker's scene.

So who's the exception? It's Eliot. Eliot doesn't offer up anything, even a piece, of what's going on with Parker. He just holds up a mirror and affirms her choice, referencing their shared history but never once deviating from that affirmation. It's not that he isn't worried about her - he clearly is, almost as much as Sophie. He just knows what she needs.

Speaking of Sophie, let's go back to a moment with her, because it speaks volumes, especially on a rewatch.

Harry: You don't trust Parker? Sophie: With my life? Always. With her life? Usually.

It's a lovely statement, right? It speaks to the depth of their relationship and how Sophie really cares for Parker. And it's also not really what Parker needs right now.*

*It's also not something that makes Parker upset. Parker has a very good understanding of the people around her and the way that they relate to each other. As Sophie points out, she doesn't shut them out and actually makes use of this in her plan! And she also knows that this is part of the reason why not everyone can be around when everything comes down to the wire. After a long time with our families, we get used to the way they do things. It's never completely good but it's also never completely bad. It's the way it is.

Eliot, who ran red lights to stop Parker from maybe killing a guy rolling Nanas, knows what Parker needs right now. And that's someone who has her back. And also has some distance between them.

(Hardison isn't in this episode much, but it's significant that Parker's entire self-examination is prompted by him.)

And finally (because I've gone on way too long, but you all indulge me sometimes, so I'm going to keep going until I'm finished), let's talk about Parker's only other significant relationship, which is present in this episode even though the character is no longer on this mortal plane.

Like, it's Nate, right?

Nate, who also had one emotion a lot: anger. Same as Parker! Nate, whose decision to make Parker his heir was made with input from the whole team (whether or not they were aware). Nate, who trusted Parker's judgment but also backed that reasoning up by saying that she didn't get emotional. Nate, who never fully understood Parker but like so many others close to her, understood pieces of her. And that was enough.

In many ways but not all, Parker was raised by and informed by Nate. She is not Nate. She doesn't have his upbringing or his baggage. Eliot makes that crystal clear.

I feel like a broken record, but it bears repeating. Leverage is a story about Nate. It is also a story about Parker.

And Leverage: Redemption is a story about Sophie. It is also a story about Parker.

One common thread: Parker.

What Parker decides to become and do is the most important question of the Leverageverse. Always has been!

Actually, in their respective stories, Nate and Sophie both address this in episodes that are EXTREMELY THEMATICALLY SIMILAR.

Archie: I made her unique. What is she now? Nate: I have no idea what Parker is now. I doubt she knows. (Leverage, The Inside Job, 3x03)

In both episodes, the answer involves them having no idea. However, the vibe is that they're both supportive of her figuring that out for herself.

Sophie: She's been three steps ahead of you the entire time. And you gave her 30 minutes to set it up. Alexandra Bligh: To set what up? Sophie: I honestly don't know.* But it's going to be fun. (Leverage Redemption, The Grand Complication Job, 3x05)

*Okay, Sophie is a professional liar. She sort of kind of knew what Parker was doing in this situation because she was stalling so Parker would have time. It is however on theme. We know Sophie loves a theme.

Leverage ends with Parker repeating Nate's speech from the pilot, which is basically the thesis statement for the show, the explanation for what they do.

The Side Job ends with Parker answering why she does what she does. (It's also why the team does what they do, but for Parker, this is deeply, deeply tied into who she is as a person.) Redemption means being the best version of herself and helping other people, and for Parker, that's intimately linked to her doing crime. And she expresses that - in word and action - in a very Parker way.

This show is famous for treating every season finale like it's the end of the show. I deeply crave more Leverage, but if this was the last episode we ever get, it's a pretty damn good place to end.

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

y'all ever reach the end of google

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

Supergirl screencap study

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

Finished my portrait of Thirteen!

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

A super and A Luthor. Destined to hate each other but fell in love.

(This is a redraw from a drawing I did back in 2020) 

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

I can’t express the horror I felt when my receptionist at the doctor yesterday told me I should use chatgpt for a list of name change stuff.

I didn’t want to get into a whole thing about how wretched it is for the environment so I just said, “I don’t trust robots.”

She just laughed and said it could just make a list for me.

I’m wary of aging into the type of older person who fears technology but that fucking thing is full of sin and lies.

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

My boss suggested I use chatgpt for edits on a scientific paper last week! Has the whole world gone insane?

I can’t express the horror I felt when my receptionist at the doctor yesterday told me I should use chatgpt for a list of name change stuff.

I didn’t want to get into a whole thing about how wretched it is for the environment so I just said, “I don’t trust robots.”

She just laughed and said it could just make a list for me.

I’m wary of aging into the type of older person who fears technology but that fucking thing is full of sin and lies.

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

I had an interview with a local paper this week about this rock snake I started on the longest street of a nearby city (where I work) because it's bringing people so much joy:

I said something during the interview that the interviewer seemed really shocked by, so in case it's important for anyone else to hear: When asked about the rock snake and some scavenger hunts that I've hosted for adults, I said -

"We don't stop enjoying the things we liked as kids; they just stop being offered to us. And when you're a kid, fun things like art projects and scavenger hunts are always brought to you, so you're not taught to make a habit of seeking them out as and adult."

She said "Wow yeah... life is so stressful... and you don't think to... wow."

So if anyone else needs direct permission to be a whimsical adult child today, I hereby grant it to everyone. ❤️

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

you! the person reading this! please tell me one good thing that happened to you today

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

I think the thing about it for me is that transmascs have the fundamental right to tell you what our experiences with misogyny and male privilege are, not the other way around.

You don't know what we go through unless we tell you. I don't know what other transmascs go through unless they tell me. Cis women, other trans people, even people with the exact same identities, the exact same life trajectories- none of us know what another person is experiencing or has experienced, let alone how they have interpreted and internalized those experiences, unless they tell us. Even then, we will only ever have access to an imperfect version of that true experience filtered through several layers of language and our own perception & biases.

Does this clash with what feminism says about men's experiences? Yes, absolutely! A lot of (generally mainstream) feminism believes that women Know what men experience better than they themselves do, colored as those experiences are by bias and privilege. And this is a fundamentally isolating, egotistical belief. It cuts us off from each other, it prevents us from connecting, and it shuts down meaningful conversation before it can happen. It says women are pure and perfect, and men are sullied by privilege; that anyone touched by privilege cannot be trusted, and should not trust themselves.

When cis men say they've never experienced privilege, the answer should not be, "you don't know that," it should be vulnerability & curiosity. Why do you think that? I find that hard to believe for these reasons, but I want to know more. I want to co-create understanding with you. Are you curious about me, too? Will you offer me this same kindness? (And if not, they're probably not worth your energy!)

And y'know what, maybe they haven't actually experienced the things you think they have! Maybe the framework you are using is imperfect- maybe it works on a systems analysis level, but it doesn't apply universally. Particularly when we're talking about marginalized men!

This idea that experiencing privilege means you cannot be trusted, ever, to understand that privilege or to know when you have or haven't experienced it? It's so fucking dangerous. Case in point: transfems should be able to talk about the ways in which they might have experienced male privilege without it immediately discrediting everything else they have to say, up to and including about their own identities.

We cannot operate like this. A framework that denies people's self-knowledge will never be capable of liberating anyone.

So yes, actually, some transmascs may experience conditional male privilege at times. But will you, do you believe transmascs when we tell you that we don't?

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

this is for all the gay trans men: there are gay/bi/pan/queer men who will be attracted to you. there are probably queer men who are attracted to you right now. i know the gay community might feel hostile towards us, but there are those who will see you as a real man and find you attractive. trans AND cis. and those who are kind of in between. you are wonderful, you are beautiful, you are attractive and you're infinitely worthy of love. don't give up on yourself.

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

I saw a post mentioning the retconning RTD has been doing this season, which then led me to wonder if retcon was a shortened version of a longer term, which then led me to google retcon, which then led me to discover that the definition of retcon literally has an example from Doctor Who. You cannot make this stuff up.

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

i wanted to do a biker kara danvers, not sure if lena is a biker too, open to ideas there

[when-rapinoe-met-lovelace]

Some assholes have been putting nails in cheese and treats in dog parks in Chicago and Massachusetts. Also adding antifreeze to water bowls.

Please watch out for your dogs. And if you find out the address of someone doing this, give me the address and tell no one. I will disembowel them.