Tumgik
#it isn’t just calling black gays slurs and pushing them out of our communities
theprideful · 2 years
Text
hope y’all know that when you say shit like “aro/ace is a white people thing” and “white people made up being nonbinary” you’re erasing queer people of color who ID with those labels and who have fought to be acknowledged and respected because of how white-centered queerness is. it’s especially ahistorical to ignore that the gender binary is a tool of white supremacy and that many african, indigenous, native american, etc communities were what we call nonbinary (two-spirit for native americans) long before white people came along (colonization). stop acting like queer people of color who ID with lesser known identities don’t exist because that only serves to keep white people at the forefront of queerness and lgbt politics.
check out #nonbinaryisntwhite on twitter (or this post), and yasmin benoit’s “this is what asexual looks like” (link 2) (link 3)
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
2K notes · View notes
succubusfuccubus · 4 years
Note
Queer being a slur any worse than any other name used for us thru history is a terf/exclu fabrication
no it isn’t
terf is an acronym meaning Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminism--it means nothing more or less.  It was coined specifically to describe rhetoric focused on denying Trans women space and making the world more hostile, and unsafe for them.  Terfs didn’t “make” it a slur, they don’t give a damn about the word q*eer.  They’re focused on spreading misinformation through fiction and “non” fiction and related campaigns (x)(x), pushing for anti-trans legislation, and donating to conversion therapy.  Using “terf” to mean anything else besides denying space and violent anti-trans rhetoric dilutes the term.  Many trans women have expressed their frustration over this. Please please please listen to trans women, I’m begging you.
As for being an “exclu” fabrication?...no?  Q*eer has always been a slur--an expression of violence and hate--and is nothing like cishets sneering lesbian/bisexual/gay/transgender, they say it like it’s a dirty word because of L/G/B/T-phobia, when in fact--they were terms we chose for ourselves to describe our own experiences.  Q*eer wasn’t chosen by us--it was chosen by cishets.   The term was “taken up” (not the same thing as reclamation) in the 80s as a response to the Reagan administration’s blatant refusal to do anything about AIDs because it primarily affected black/brown and LGBT communities, and to them, we were “just” q*eers. Throwing the word back in cishets’ faces was for shock value and to make them uncomfortable.
It never stopped being a violent slur.  I have friends and comrades who have trauma associated with the term, whether it was from bullying, abuse, or physical violence.  In fact--my best fucking friend is currently receiving sui bait, death threats, and is being doxxed endangering her because her household is homophobic--why?  All because she didn’t want to be called q*eer.  Kinda fucked up that everybody is gleefully rushing to dox a lesbian who didn’t want to be called q*eer because of past bullying...seems...idk....lesbophobic...and this isn’t just a one-time thing--it’s fucking consistent.
While some find empowerment in it, for others it evokes a history and continuity of disenfranchisement and systematic violence against us.  All the argument is is that it can only be reclaimed on an individual basis, and using it as an umbrella term dubbing the LGBT community the q*eer community forces those mentioned above under a term they associate with trauma. I censor the word q*eer out of respect and empathy for my friends and comrades. It is so uncomfortable to be in an academic setting and to hear your professors and other students throw around the word q*eer as though it had no weight--now we got cishets using it.  
Q*eer is an ambiguous term that erases specific identities--for many, terms like lesbian/bisexual/gay/transgender are empowering.  They describe specific experiences regarding our own relations to sexuality and gender.  I used to call myself q*eer out of internalized lesbophobia.  I grew up hearing the word lesbian said in hushed/scandalized tones.  I saw lesbian as a reductive term and associated it with terfdom and biphobia...which is...lesbophobic.  Lesbian describes my own experience in a way q*eer never could as it was too vague.  The safety I found in the word q*eer wasn’t the same thing as security, and calling myself lesbian means to me that I overcame comphet and internalized lesbophobia, and is a demonstration of pride and respect for lesbian history.  
39 notes · View notes
incarnateirony · 4 years
Note
Hey dude! Do you have any recommendations for LGBTQ+ movies in the romance genre that have like a happy ending. I really don't care how old they are. I'm feeling the Gay™ hence I need the Gay™. You feel me?
HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII NONNIE
Tumblr media
First sorry for taking so long, not only did I have to timeline this :) but :) my computer :) froze :) after writing like :) 2 pages :) and I had to do it again :)
So anyway let it be said, the LGBT dialogue is one of osmosis and shared growth and awareness. Some of these films will be very poorly dated, but as you (thankfully) mentioned that them being old wasn’t a *problem*, expect a lot of old stuff. Because one of the most important things to have under your belt when talking about the LGBT media representation battle is the actual journey from A to B – be that incrementalization, subtextual inclusion, text-breeching features, outright evocative and groundbreaking films at the time (which is what MOST of this list will be) and an improvement in our dialogue; let us never forget that while tr*nss*xual is considered a slur and transgender is proper, tr*nss*xual was at one point the politically correct way to speak it – things like that breach in our growing understanding of the spectrum of human sexuality. 
I *WILL* disclaimer these aren’t all romance, so if you explicitly want romance, google them and take a look if it sounds to appeal, but I’m taking this as a general cinema history plug considering what a confused mess fandom conversation about LGBT history in film or modern text as applicable, accepted or not.
Wonder Bar (1936) (I wouldn’t really call this queer cinema, but if you have the time to watch it too, I think it was the first explicit mention of homosexual engagement even if it was fleetingly brief. You might even call it Last Call style. A blink and you’ll miss it plug that was still decades ahead of its time)
Sylvia Scarlet (1936) (Again, I wouldn’t call this queer cinema, but a lot of the community takes it as the first potential trans representation on TV due to the lead literally swapping gender presentation, even if the presentation is… not what we would modernly call representation IMO)
Un Chant d'Amour (1950) (Worth it for the sheer fact that it pissed off fundies so bad they took it all the way to the US supreme court to get it declared obscene.)
The Children’s Hour (1961) (also known as the 1961 lesson to “don’t be a gossipy, outting bitch”)
Victim (1961) (The first english film to use the word “homosexual” and to focus explicitly on gay sexuality. People might look on it disdainfully from modern lenses, but it really helped progress british understanding of homosexuality)
Scorpio Rising (1964) (Lmao this one deadass got taken to court when it pissed people off and California had to rule that it didn’t count as obscene bc it had social value, worth it for the history if nothing else)
Theorem (1968) (Because who doesn’t wanna watch a 60s flick about a bisexual angel, modern issues and associations be damned)
The Killing of Sister George (1968) (by the makers of What Ever Happened To Baby Jane)
Midnight Cowboy (1969) (…have I had sassy contagonists in RP make a Dean joke off of this more than once, maybe)
Fellini-Satyricon (1969) (AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA THIS)
The Boys in the Band (1970) (This… this… this made a lot of fuss. Just remember leather)
Pink Narcissus (1971) (a labor of love shot on someone’s personal camera)
Death in Venice (1971) (This is basically a T&S prequel but whatever, based on a much older book)
Cabaret (1972) 
Pink Flamingos (1972) (SHIT’S WILD)
The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant (1972) (The title doesn’t lie, be warned)
The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) [god I hope you’ve at least seen this]
Fox and His Friends (1975) (some really hard lessons that are still viable today, that just because someone acknowledges your sexuality doesn’t mean they give a shit about you as a person, and that some will even abuse the knowledge for gain)
The Terence Davies Trilogy (1983) (REALLY interesting history look it up, it’s sort of one of those “drawn from own experience” story short sets)
The Times of Harvey Milk (1984) (Documentary)
Desert Hearts (1985) (Pretty much the first film to put lesbianism into a good light as a true focus based on a novel from the sixties)
Parting Glances (1986) (the only film its creator got out before his death from the aids epidemic)
Law of Desire (1987) (two men and a trans woman in a love triangle, kinda ahead of its time)
Maurice (1987) (This one’s really interesting, cuz it was based on a book made about 15 years before it, but the book itself had been written half a century earlier and wasn’t published until after the guy died, he just thought it’d never get published Cuz Gay, so basically it’s based on a story written in like, the 20s finally getting screen time. It has a bittersweet but positive-leaning-ish ending without disregarding the cost that can come with it and even addresses class issues at the same time 100% DO RECOMMEND)
Tongues Untied (1989) (a documentary to give voices to LGBT black men) 
Longtime Companion (1990) (This one’s title alone is history, based on a NYT phrasing for how they talked about people’s partners dying, eg longtime companion, during the AIDS epidemic)
Paris Is Burning (1990) (Drag culture and related sexual and gender identity exploration as it intersected with class issues and other privileges explored in a documentary)
The Crying Game (1992)( I should correct this that I guess it’s more, 1992 considered, “SURPRISE, DIL HAS A DILL!” – I guess I really didn’t do that summary justice by modern language and dialogue as much as how people in the 90s were talking about that and that’s a my bad. LIKE. SEE, EVEN I CAN FUCK UP MY LANGUAGE I’M SORRY CAN I BLAME THE STRAIGHTS T_T) #90skidproblems – I guess I should call it a trans film. And this alone tells me I should go watch it again to recode it in my brain modernly rather than like circa de la 2000 understanding.
The Bird Cage (1996) (So you mix drag culture, otherwise heterosexually connected lovebirds, and then realize the girl comes from an alt-rightish house and the guy comes from a Two Dads Home and does cabaret, how to deal with the issues OF this conflict when it’s between you and your happiness, even if the fight isn’t even your own as much as it is that of the person you love. The answer is PROBABLY NOT to dress in drag and pretend to be straight, but what are you going to do? – while played for laughs we’d consider modernly crude, the fact that they even dared to approach this narrative was pretty loud)
The Celluloid Closet (1996) (Ever heard of the Vito Russo test for LGBT representation? This is based on a book by Vito Russo.)
Happy Together (1997) (Ain’t this shit an ironic name; a mutual narrative, via chinese flick, of hong kong ceding to china and an irrevocably tangled MLM pairing as a giant mirrored metaphor)
Boys Don’t Cry (1999) (one of the most groundbreaking films about trans identity at the time)
Stranger Inside (2001) (As easy as it is to recoil to the idea of “black gays in jail”, the film makers actually went and consulted prisoners and put a great deal of focus into intersectional african american issues that really weren’t around even in straight films at the time)
Transamerica (2005) (While it made a bit of a fuss for not casting an actual trans actor, it was one of the first times a big budget studio really tried to tackle it which really pushed us forward)
Call Me by Your Name (2017) (since I’ve apparently leaned really heavy old cinema throw in a modern one lmaooooo)
Also honorable The Kids Are All Right (2010) mention for the sake of the fucking title alone. 
And to any incarnation of “On the Road” by Kerouac, which
Was originally a book
Released a sanitized de-gayed edition because of the times
Later released the full homo manuscript
had a few film adaptations
Was one of Kripke’s founding inspirations for Supernatural once he left behind “Some reporter guy chases stories” and took the formula of Sal and Dean (and tbh later, Carlo) in a beat generation vibe gone modern as we know it today.
Reading both versions of this can actually help some folks currently understand that when you get confused over some shit (WHY IS CARLO SO UPSET? WHY IS HE ACTING LIKE AN UPSET GIRLFRIEND??? WHY IS HE SO JEALOUS AND SAD WHEN DEAN IS AROUND GIRLS???? WE JUST DONT KNOWWWWWWWWWWWWW) it’s because some big money asshat bleached the content, and sometimes, it takes a while for the full script to come out and again, surprise, it’s been GAY, they just didn’t want to OFFEND anybody. *jazz hands*
Now if you wanna go WAY WAY BACK, during 191X years, a bunch of gender role flicks came out like Charley’s Aunt, Mabel’s Blunder and the Florida Enchantment.
Also where is @thecoffeebrain-blog to yell about the necessity of watching Oz, for the next few hours? But no, seriously, just look into the entire LGBT *HISTORY* of Oz.
Beyond that though I’m gonna stop here cuz hi that’s a lot. I really don’t know how much counts as “happy ending” but if I had to give an LGBT cinema rec list, that’s it as a sum. I don’t really have like, a big portfolio of UWU HAPPY ENDING GAYS because 1. there aren’t a lot of those but 2. to me, it’s not about the ending, it’s about the journey. Be that in flick or through culture and history itself.
If you want more happy ending stuff, you definitely have to look at 2010+, but it’s not like we’re in a rich and fertile landscape yet so honestly just googling that would probably serve you better since I don’t explicitly explore romance genre or happy endings to really have a collection. LGBT life is hard and film often reflects that if we’re making genuine statements about it and really representing it, and we’re just now getting to a point of reliably having the chance at a happy ending. That or maybe someone can add like “Explicit happy endings” lists after this that has more experience in that subgenre.
Also, I can’t emphasize ENOUGH to remember what was progressive then is not what is progressive now, and frankly, what some people think is progressive now they’ll probably look back on what they said and feel really fuckin’ embarrassed. See: “It’s not text because by alt right homophobic dialogue, M/M sex isn’t gay if you do the secret handshake” MGTOW kinda crazy ass dialogue or parallel narratives they inspire that encourage self-closeting and denial based on the pure idea that being gay makes you somehow lesser, so It’s Not That. Like. I am. 99% sure. At least half of the people talking in this fandom. Are going to regret that the internet is forever. And maybe hope hosting servers end in the inevitable nuclear war that will annihilate this planet.
Also, edit: Speaking of mistaken dialogues and words aging poorly, I’d like to apologize from the poor description I rendered “The Crying Game” with, but that really goes to show how deep-seated the issue is we can so casually fuck up identifying a trans narrative as SURPRISE DICK IS GAY when we were all absorbing the content like 20+ years ago and HOW HARD it can be to de-code yourself from that kind of programming because here I am, writing a giant assed rep post and fucking it up because my brain hadn’t soaked that movie since Y2K. Guess what, time for me to go watch the Crying Game again.
99 notes · View notes
Text
Alright folks, pull up a chair because Mod Rowlf is gonna teach y’all the history behind the word ‘Queer’.
In the 1500s, it was used to mean ‘peculiar’ and technically still does because it is actually still used in this context; ‘I feel a bit queer’, ‘snow in September? How queer’. It wasn’t used to mean ‘homosexual’ until 1894 and that first usage of it was by The Marquess of Queensbury. But it still didn’t catch on as a word to mean ‘homosexual’ until twenty years later, and even then that was by the homosexuals themselves. It wouldn’t be until forty one years after that that the dictionaries noted that ‘queer’ was slang for ‘homosexual’ and even then it didn’t note usage as derogatory.
But then it started being used in a derogatory way. Just like gay. Just like lesbian. And just like gay and lesbian, it got reclaimed. Well, partially reclaimed. So just like gay* and just like lesbian then.
How did this happen then?
Well, in the late 1980s, a group of gay people got super angry at the AIDS crisis and the homophobia it was causing (thanks Reagan!) and they called themselves Queer Nation. They handed out leafets at Pride called ‘Queers Read This’ that detailed that they were going to reclaim the word queer. And I’ll admit I had to Google this bit, but their exact words in this leaflet were;
‘Do we really have to use that word? It’s trouble. Every gay person has his or her own take on it. For some it means strange and eccentric and kind of mysterious. That’s okay, we like that. But some girls and boys don’t. They think they’re more normal than Strange. And for others ‘queer’ conjures up these awful memories of adolescent suffering. Queer. It’s forcibly bittersweet and quaint at best. Weakening and painful at worst. Couldn’t we just use ‘gay’ instead? It’s a much brighter word and isn’t it synonymous with ‘happy’? When will you militants grow up and get over the novelty of being different?
Why Queer?
Well yes, ‘gay’ is great. It has its place. But when lots of lesbians and gay men wake up in the morning, they feel angry and disgusted, not gay. So we’ve chosen to call ourselves queer. Using ‘queer’ is a way of reminding us how we are perceived by the rest of the world. It’s a way of telling ourselves we don’t have to be witty and charming people who keep our lives discreet and marginalised in the straight world. We use queer as gay men loving lesbians and lesbians loving being queer. Queer, unlike GAY doesn’t mean MALE. And when spoken to other gays and lesbians it’s a way of suggesting we close ranks and forget (temporarily) our individual differences because we face a more insidious common enemy. Yes QUEER can be a rough word, but it is also a sly and ironic weapon we can steal from the homophobe’s hands and use against him.’
(Here’s the source)
This is the same group that chanted ‘We’re here! We’re Queer! Get used to it!’ and ‘Two! Four! Six! Eight! Do you know your kids are straight?’
That was back in 1990. But reclaimation actually started in the 1980s by queer people of colour. So the word queer was actually being used to describe the LGBT community before the letters LGBT were given to the community. Oh and incidentally the letter Q stands for ‘queer’.
The word ‘queer’ has been used in academia, in such subjects as ‘queer arts’, ‘queer studies’, ‘queer history’, ‘queer theory’ and others. It appeared in titles of mainstream TV shows in the 00s, Queer as Folk, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and its Netflix reboot, Queer Eye.
Queer migration is the term used for LGBT people escaping persecution and discrimination due to their orientation or gender.
So why might someone identify as queer? Well...
Reclaimation. They want to reclaim the word that was used to hurt them or they want to use it as it has largely been reclaimed.
They don’t want to tell someone they’re bisexual or lesbian or genderfluid, but they want to say they’re part of the LGBT community so it’s just easier to say they’re queer. Or it’s nobody’s business how they identify.
They might fall under more than one identity. It’s a lot easier to say ‘I’m queer’ than it is to say ‘I’m a nonbinary transgender homoromantic asexual who presents as female’.
Queer is literally easier to say and write than LGBTTQQIAPP2SCNBAGNC and all the other letters that get added on all the time. I’m still not sure of all the letters tbh. Granted, it’s usually just LGBT, LGBT+ or LGBTQIA at a push, but still. I’m not sure how to feel about QUILTBAG or MOGAI. But Queer is inclusive.
They just want to identify as queer because literally why not?
So why is Mod Rowlf writing this, which has nothing to do with autism or Autism Speaks? Well, because we’ve had some recent hate on our Pride Month posts and our use of ‘Queerphobe’ and a suggestion to call it ‘homophobia’ instead of ‘queerphobia’.
Why did we use the term ‘queerphobia?’
Because we used 30 different Pride Flags and biphobia is different to aphobia which is different to transphobia which is different to panphobia which is different to enbyphobia which are all different to homophobia. Nobody within the LGBT community faces the same challenges. An abled rich black gay man would face different challenges to an autistic working class Asian lesbian and they would face different challenges than a straight white homeless transgender amputee. Sure classism, racism and ableism come into play, but that’s the idea. Everyone’s different and you can’t label all these people’s struggles as ‘homophobia’. It’s disingenuous and harmful.
Nobody’s saying that anyone has to be okay with ‘queer’, but seriously just accept that people use ‘queer’ as an identity to describe themselves and respect their identity rather than policing it because ‘I don’t like’. You don’t think we get enough of that from outside the community, we don’t need it happening from within either.
*if you think gay still isn’t used as a slur, then you’re ignoring all the uses of ‘oh that’s so gay!’ and if you don’t see it, then go into any popular YouTube video and look in the comments section.
138 notes · View notes
Part 2: Here we go again
So Jeansaaa wrote another message and I don't feel like putting too much effort in my answer, because I actually shouldn't give him/her any more attention, but I think I can make things even a bit more clear this time for all other people out here on Tumblr. Also, I blocked him/her now instead, because she/he seems to be incapable of keeping me blocked... I'm gonna talk to him/her, so I'll use "you", because that's more easy and direct then him/her or they.
----------
You first started of by saying (in the title) that you made a response post becasue responding to a re-blog in mobile is hard (smiley included), which is not very important... Then you followed with "for context look at my re-blog below" and thereafter, your message actually started.
Before I copy-paste the first part I'm responding to, I wanna say: use punctuation, dude! Your whole message is like one long sentence with commas.
----------
Okay, that being said, let’s begin:
I just wanna be done with This,  the reason why I texted this 🙃 (the “smiley face”) after I said “don’t worry i’ll block you” is because it was supposed to be passive aggressive, I un-blocked you by accident (because I’m a clumsy mess, and I didn’t even know I un-blocked you until after you private messaged me about it), and I told people to block you, because this kind of stuff can make people incredibly uncomfortable,(and you’re being blatantly homophobic which I’m sure nobody within the lgbtq+ Community would like to see that)
Yeah, I'm glad I decided on blocking you myself! I'm not someone who blocks others. I'm not gonna hide from someone that doesn't share my opinion. Just acting like a little child and press that block button. I'd rather have normal conversations or even discussions like not-little-kids, teens and adults do (that's why I take so much time to explain myself as much as possible), but that blocking-unblocking-blocking-unblocking started to become quite annoying.
Also, I think people can decide for themselves whether they wanna block me or not. We're not all imbeciles, you know? And probably the only reason why people would even go to your blog and see you telling them to block me, is because of me. Right now, you literally got seven posts and almost all of them have to do with me (exceptions: 2). Kinda feel honored, really, but I actually pretty much regret bringing you in the spotlight now. If I hadn't reblogged your post, I doubt it if anyone would've ever seen your blog...
no matter how much you sugar coat it, supporting straight pride is under the umbrella of homophobia,
It's not, though. Don't make up your own definitions. Homophobia is showing dislike of or prejudice against gay people.
you’re basically saying that putting up lgbtq+ posters, making lgbtq+ safe-spaces won’t work, and you’re wrong, I live in Florida, a very anti-lgbtq+ State, I’ve been a victim of homophobia / transphobia ,
Posters won't stop homophobia / transphobia. Neither people who don't like your behaviour nor people who already accept your behaviour will change their behaviour because of a poster. Or at the very least, it will only anger those "very-dangerous-straights-that-hunt-you-guys" that you're talking about, more. But I know why you like those posters. You want those posters to be hanged up because you want to be the "star of the show". And that, I have to admit, IS working.
and when I see a poster, or even just a small sticker saying, lgbtq+ safe space, it just makes me feel better about myself ,
Honestly, that you need POSTERS and STICKERS to make you feel better about yourself, already tells me more than enough about your self confidence. WOW.
and yes you’re not “victimized”or “oppressed” if you Truly think you are
Dude, I literally said I know I'm not (in real life, because online, the story is a lot different these days).
answer this , have you’re parents ever kicked you out for being straight?, have you ever been bullied for being straight?, have you been called slurs for being straight?, have you ever hated yourself for being straight?,
No, why would I get kicked out / bullied / called a slur? WHY would I hate myself? I seriously don't know how to respond to this. Just an example: if a alcohol addicted person would ask me "have YOU ever felt bad for NOT feeling the need to drink?" I'd also be like... "Err. NO."
and about the gay friends, what you said is basically the same as, “I’m not racist because I have black Friends”, it doesn’t matter what friends you have your still homophobic. (Sorry if the formatting is weird, i’m not the best at writing, but I hope I got the point across)
I hate that nasty habit of you all to make comparisons with racism in discussions with lgbt+ topics. It's not the same! I know it's a filthy trick of yours to pretend like it IS all the same, but I'm not falling for that! I'm NOT a racist! Besides, I didn't say "I'm not homophobic, because I have gay friends". It was just something I added. I did give enough actual reasons for why I'm not homophobic, though.
This time, to even clearify that point MORE (when will I ever be done clearifying myself, hahaha), I'm gonna take that alcohol addicted person (shortening it to: AAP) as an example again. I don't support people to be alcohol addicted. It's their own choice. Imagine if that AAP wants to campaign for allowing drunk people to drive. I'm very much against that. The AAP gives alcohol to his/her children (and might pass the addiction to them). I'm most definitely against that too (because it has impact on the next generation). When he's/she's in the mood, the AAP drinks him-/herself half to death. I find that disgusting. I find it inhuman. I find that this person should work on some self-control over his/her desires! Having all these thoughts about the AAP, still doesn't make me AAP-phobic, though. Because if this person encounters me (in a not drunk state, of course), I will act normally towards him/her. I might tell him/her what I think about the addiction, but I'm not being a hateful person by doing so. I don't show dislike / prejustice against people that are addicted to alcohol (I also don't know why I should have to know about someone's alcohol addiction in the first place). And if the whole world starts to campaign for all AAP's due to an agenda that's been executed and they push it all in my and everyone’s face and I'm against THAT, it STILL doesn't make me AAP-phobic. That would make me AAP-agenda-phobic. Or that would make me changing-the-world-wrongly-phobic. Or altering-general-morality-phobic. Because YES. That IS what I am. I'm not lgbtqabcxyz-phobic, but I'm most certainly against all this brainwashing and mindcontrolling that's happening nowadays. This is what I told someone recently in a similar discussion (it’s “ABC”, the person I still intend to respond to on my blog and I wrote this in our private chat too):
“Look, you just can't expect everyone to just accept everything. You can't expect everyone to alter the vision of reality. You can't expect everyone to just be a leaf in the wind. To go with the flow. I know lots of people are like that, but I'm not. If they would suddenly tell me eating through your ears is just as normal as through your mouth, no matter how many people would agree with that, no matter how many people would tell me I'm crazy for thinking otherwise, my opinion would remain unchanged. That's just me. I don't wanna be a leaf. I'd rather be a tree. Only I'd try to stay in my grounds even during thunderstorms or in a hurricane... Hopefully, you can understand that.”
----------
Jeansaaa’s message ended here initially, but then:
Edit: holy fucking shit, I re-read  you’re response, it’s even worse then I remember, so I will add a bit more to this,
All right first of all you said being lgbtq+ was ABNORMAL,  (wow that is really not helping your case) it’s not at all, it’s just as “normal” as being straight, people have been lgbtq+  for fucking CENTURIES,
Even now, lgbt+ still ISN’T the NORM in the world (I know some would love to see that differently, but I’m (not) afraid that won’t ever be the case). So that’s a FACT. And yes, a lot of people have been a lot of things for centuries, but what kind of argument is that?! That people are or do something, doesn’t make it normal. Some people are in jail. Some people are in mad houses. Some psychopaths walk around freely, but does that mean all that is normal too? No, it doesn’t. Your argument is bad. VERY bad.
even animals can be gay, if you do even the slightest bit of research you’ll see
And you know when? When they’re in ABNORMAL situations!
( but Seeing how your skull is as thick as concrete, you probably won’t ),
Thanks! I’m taking that as a compliment! I’m very happy if my skull really is as thick as concrete instead of as thin as paper (or even thinner)! Or else everyone (such as (social) media) would be able to just fill my head with whatever they want! Mold and knead me however they please! That would be one of the last things I’d want to happen. I got a brain for a reason. I got a brain to use it. To think for myself, using logic and not other people’s opinions.
now let’s move onto the second homophobic thing you said, you don’t support the lgbtq+ movement because of a so-called “ agenda”, why are you so mad?, Is it because straight relationships aren’t pushed in your face as much as it was back then?, ( magazines, Books, TV shows, billboards,  straight relationships are literally everywhere and you’re COMPLAINING) you probably saw like one poster one day with a gay couple and freaked out,
Firstly, I’m not the “mad” one here. I’m angry about various things, but not “mad”. Secondly, straight relationships indeed aren’t pushed in my face as much as it was in back in the old days, but I don’t care about that. It’s lgbt+ that’s been forcefully pushed in my face CONSTANTLY (and it is) that bothers me so much!
Because NO. I didn’t “saw like one poster one day with a gay couple and freaked out”. That’s what I’ve been telling / explaining since pretty much my very first post about this! Saying this, makes me wonder if you can even read? Or else, you’ve obviously not read the parts of my posts in which I spoke about the hundreds of lgbt+ flags, many lgbt+ zebra crossings and lgbt+ wall paintings, lgbt+ public transport vehicles and to that list I can add the lgbt+ posters and stickers you spoke about, all lgbt+ promoting articles, shows and programms on the news everywhere (news papers and online) and on television, initiatives and activities of schools because of lgbt+, the countless lgbt+ campaigns that are being held, all other kinds of lgbt+ support of millions of people that just follow the herd AND the entire internet, including - of course - our most favorite straightphobic place, Tumblr (and I believe Twitter is pretty much like that (or even worse) as well). And who knows what else I’m not even aware of?! Ah, yes. And NOT to forget: the entire PRIDE MONTH. Because your kind of people are better than us straights, aren’t you?!
Really “like one poster one day with a gay couple”. REALLY.
please just stop,
I stop whenever I want...
nothing is gonna convince me that you’re not homophobic, because you’re clearly are
Nothing is gonna convince ME that you’re not STUPID, because you (not “you’re”) clearly are, stupid.
----------
I’m not even gonna respond extensively to the tags. They’re the stupidest things ever. I’ve never tagged my lgbt+ posts with the Arch-Illager OR Minecraft Dungeons tag, so Jeansaaa is just being a jerk for doing that anyway.
----------
That’s all. It turned out to be a very long response. Once I start typing, the words just flow from my head to and out of my fingers on the keyboard to the screen. And that. That was indeed a strange sentence. But... poetic... right? (No? Oh.)
0 notes
azkaabanter · 7 years
Text
We are Animals
5k of SMUT AND ACTUAL PLOT… but mostly smut. I upload from my phone so I can’t italicize anything. If you want to see the version with italics, I’ll send you a link to where I posted the story. ANYWAAAAAYYYYY … I also apologize, but I don't know how to enable the 'read more' feature on my phone. I know it's annoying but unfortunately I can't do anything about it.
AU STORY!!
-
This is a Drarry fic based on a video on YouTube of the same title. Kind of post apocolyose/ homophobe universe. Hardcore smut so… yeah
-
“Men. The only animals in the world to fear” - D.H. Lawrence
-
“Findings from the National Center of Disease control released the results of a study which shows that the lifestyle of some homosexuals has triggered an epidemic…” The garbled voice of a newscaster comes out of the radio, along with small blasts of static. I walk down a dirt road in the middle of nowhere, my shoes covered in red dust and the sun beating down on my shoulders, heating my brown leather jacket. I keep my hands in the pockets to keep them from shaking as the small radio I keep in the lining spits out more information.
“The ‘Gay Plague’ is the center of a political storm- the Moral Majority claiming that AIDS is God’s punishment for the gay lifestyle.” I close my eyes hard and use my shoulder to wipe the sweat out of them, and my messy black hair sticks to my forehead. In a hidden part of the thick jacket I can just hear the minute clinking of small pink pills that I live on in a small prescription jar. The pills in that jar, though, are anything but legal. The announcer continues.
“This isn’t just a disease we’re talking about here! These people are capable of murdering other humans when they-” The voice becomes inaudible from all of the static emitting from the cheap radio, so I take it out and hit it against my jean-clad leg until the voice is understandable again.
“C'mon…” I huff to myself, hitting the small box once again when it continues to cut out, until it finally continues.
“-and 50% of U.K citizens are favoring quarantine. We’re putting them in a nice, comfortable place-” The voice of the announcer is cut off suddenly by another person shouting into the microphone.
“Just isolate them!” The newcomer says, and I continue to listen, though it hurts. Looking up, I see the outline of a tall brick enclosure in the distance as my radio spouts more slurs. I would switch to another station, but these news reports are all that are broadcasted anymore. The second voice continues, though in a calmer tone than the one previously used. “We have received proof that the free world is, once again, in danger.
The radical group of homosexuals, known otherwise as the Death Eaters, have rallied together, more determined than ever to destroy the means put in place by our scientific and medical communities that keep us all safe, and healthy. Although we have created a protective quarantine, no one is truly safe.” I turn off the radio, no longer able to listen.
I can hear my mother’s voice in my head, pressing the bottle of pink pills into my hand. ‘Hide, Harry. Hide in plain sight, be a nurse, do whatever you can. Just don’t let anyone know who you really are.’ So here I am, in the middle of a field on a dirt road in August.
Eventually reaching the gate of an eight foot tall barbed wire fence, I look up and sigh, pushing it open and walking inside the quarantine zone.
The road is deserted, with various posters blowing about in the street, and the rusted shells of forgotten cars lining the outsides of empty buildings. My green eyes scan the chain link, looking at the various posters tacked up.
Seeing some of them closer, they look to all have some extent of coverage from green or black paint. I can even see a poster of the Queen with a large green skull with a serpent tongue covering her face. I reach out to touch the poster, but in pulling my hand back, the tips of my fingers come away glistening with green liquid. I then take a step back, look around, and continue on my way, eyes trained on the ground in front of me, and hands stuffed in my pockets, with the muffled sound of men’s screams permeating my ears.
I continue walking through the desolate streets until I reach a heavy metal door with the words “Caution: Quarantine inside. Enter at your own risk.” I don’t think twice before pressing my shoulder against the door to open it.
Inside, the sounds of suffering are clearer, but I continue on my way. Close by, I can hear someone with a hacking cough, a side effect of the numbing agent.
“Hey-” A hoarse voice calls out, and I look up in surprise. “you’ll help me…” An unkempt man sitting in a pile of trash lunges at me, trying to grab my ankle, though I manage to jump out of the way. “Help me!” He screams at my back as I walk away. “You selfish pig! You’re just like the rest of us!”
“L-leave me alone.” I say quietly, continuing, albeit at a quicker pace, towards my destination while the man screams behind me.
“You’ll get yours one day kid! You just… you fucking wait…” Is what I hear before he breaks down crying, and I keep going out of fear.
I turn a corner a small ways from the man to the front of an unassuming building, manned by two armed guards wearing respirators over their mouths and noses. The man on the left looks me up and down, before stiffly asking- “Identification?” I take out my security pass and he runs it under a machine, which beeps to signal my clearance. “Put out your arms.” He says, taking out a metal detector and waving it over my whole body.
As it runs over my side, I pray with every ounce of my sinning soul that the pills won’t be detected, even though they never have been before.
“He’s clean.” The guard says once the detector has run over me multiple times. He gives me a look of sadness, and motions to his partner to open the door. “Good luck in there, Potter.” I nod in response and walk through the door into the cool, dark building.
My whole body shakes as I walk to the bathroom, the intercom of the building playing more messages like the one I heard on my way to work. “Several members of the Death Eaters have been arrested for vandalizing property, writing messages that spread their hate and lies…” I listen intently at the door to the restroom to make sure that it’s deserted, before entering and locking the door behind me. “The authorities have transferred the detainees to a nearby clinic for immediate neutralization.”
I walk to the sink, not bothering to look in the mirror because I know what I would see; the tired eyes of a liar, and the messy hair and smile-less lips of a sinner. I take the plastic container out of my pocket and crack it open, depositing the pills into my hands, looking at them with distain and distaste, before I hear a creak behind me. I look up and turn to the side, the sudden appearance of a heavily freckled red-haired man taking me by surprise, causing me to drop the container of pills and drop to my knees, scrambling to pick them all up.
“I-it’s not what it looks like-” I stutter, fear taking over my whole being, because if he knows what these pills do-
I look back at him after all the pills are put away, and I see a sad smile on his face.
“I should have known you were on Celibron-” he says, his accent thick. I narrow my eyes at him before looking away, my heart beating a million miles and hour. “I know exactly what you’re going through. You’re doing a really good thing-” I look back up at the man, who looks hardly older than I. How could he possibly know what I'n going through?
I narrow my eyes again, and stand up straight, slipping the bottle into my pocket. “I can’t eat… I can’t sleep… these- these things are fucking poisoning me-”
“These things saved my life.” The other man says calmly, resting his hand on my arm, which I immediately pull away. I turn my back, and put my hand on the doorknob, figuring I can just take the pills somewhere else. “Do you want to get better?” He asks, and my grip falters, before steadying again.
“There’s nothing wrong with me.” I say. “It’s just a precaution.” And I walk out of the room, leaving the red haired man alone, once again.
About an hour later, I’ve nearly forgotten the experience. My mind is numbed by the Celibron coursing through my system, and my shoes loudly hit the ground in the quiet hallway leading up to my patient’s room.
I’ve traded my leather jacket and jeans for dark red scrubs, and my hands are unable to stop fidgeting as I walk up to the one-way glass that shows me my patient.
I look in and see him sitting on a table, wearing nothing but white shorts, and I swallow thickly, before mentally berating myself for it. He has neat bleach blonde hair and wears a look that would seem horrible on anyone except for him. His lean arms are pale and his stomach is toned and blemishless. When he looks up I can see stormy grey eyes and a strong chin. I open the door and walk into the room, trying to avoid eye contact with the beautiful man.
I go to the cart positioned directly next to the man, whose feet are bound to his padded medical chair. I pick up his file and graze my eyes over it, before having them rest on his name. 'Draco Malfoy’ I glance at him and look back at the chart blankly when I find that he’s looking back at me.
I walk around the back of him, glancing at his forearm and seeing a tattoo of a green skull and serpent right beneath the hinge of his elbow. His voice takes me out of my stupor.
“So… what’s it like?” I return to his side and look him in the eyes, before glancing away again. “When they cut it off?” Draco asks me morbidly.
“You’ll be anesthetized-” I reply quickly.
“Mm-mm. No, I want to feel everything-” my neck heats as I feel him look me up and down. “even pain.” He says everything with a confidence that I don’t understand. I don’t understand how he could be confident and level headed in the situation that he is in.
“We can’t do that. That’s… inhumane.” I tell him, still keeping my eyes on the tools that I’m fiddling with for no reason other than to distract myself from the strength of his gaze. He thinks for a moment before replying.
“Since when did that stop anyone?” I pause for a moment before continuing my distraction.
“I-I’m sorry. The government requires that every patient be numb from the waist down for this procedure…” His eyes burn into the back of my neck and I can feel the pills working against the feelings rising up inside of me. He smirks.
“What do you feel down there, nurse boy? I could smell you a mile away. Your body’s strong… it’s resisting those pills-” I turn to face him, an easygoing smile decorating his features, and anger boils up inside of me.
“How did you know that?” I ask with a mixture of anger, fear, and curiosity. His blonde hair flops into his eyes and he brushes the strands away with gentle fingers.
“Did you ever break sodomy law?” I stop again, the heat from my neck spreading to my cheeks.
“T-the what?” I stutter, trying to play innocent as I lean back against the wall. He just smiles and shakes his head, as if he can’t believe my ineducation on the subject.
“Sodomy, sweetie. Mmm, sodomy.” The blonde nearly hums the words, before turning back to me with an amused expression. “C'mon, everyone knows that the clinic staff are all a bunch of gays…” He looks me up and down hungrily, and says more quietly, “my nose never fails.” And my anger boils over. I slam the supplies on the cart, push off the wall, and walk right up to Malfoy. “Look, I don’t know what shit you heard, but it’s wrong. I’m straight.” I tell him matter-of-factly, walking to the other side of the room to pick up the sphygmomanometer. He clicks his tongue.
“Yeah, so is spaghetti 'till you get it wet…” He pauses before continuing at a whisper. “and hot…” His eyes are filled with lust, and it’s getting harder and harder to keep my composure under his grey gaze.
“I-I need to t-take your blood pressure-” I keep my eyes trained on the ground as I walk the few steps over to him, my fingers brushing his warm skin while I strap the contraption to his right bicep. He breathes in deeply,the muscles in his chest rising and falling as he chuckles and softly says
“You’re strapping it to the wrong limb-” I cut him off.
“You’re about to be castrated. Doesn’t that bother you?” I ask him irritably, giving in to my want for just a moment to rake my eyes up his body. He still acts indifferent, and I can’t tell if he’s really courageous or really stupid.
“Hell no.” He says, and I begin pumping up the pressure in the arm band of the sphygmomanometer. He throws his head back and then looks at me with a grin. “Turns me on, what can I say?” I rip the Velcro and take the band off of him, throwing it to the side in anger.
“This isn’t a game! People are dying because of this!” I exclaim, running my hand through my already disastrous black locks, and he suddenly turns serious.
“I live out there…” He looks down at his bound feet for a moment, before bringing his eyes up to mine once again. “I know what it’s like.”
“You’re a freak.” I say, going around to the other side of the chair back to the cart, my anger boiling over. I look at him again and his sarcastic smile is back.
“Might be hard- er, difficult- to do the procedure, if I’m… y'know.” He says, and I look up. He flicks his eyes downward, and I notice the bulge in the thin cotton pants.
“Oh… yeah…” I say.
Suddenly, Draco’s lunged out and grabbed my hand, pulling me to the side of his chair on my knees, putting my hand over his growing hard on, pressing it down, and moving it so that I’m cupping him. He’s strong; even as I’m struggling against him, I can’t get my hand away from it’s place against his cock.
“How does that feel?” I can hear the smirk in his voice. “Yeah, just squeeze right there-” he exclaims to me when I inadvertently clench my fist around him. I can’t say that I’m not enjoying feeling what must be a rather large cock through those thin pants, though I know it’s so fucking wrong.
I stop struggling, and look away guiltily as I squeeze down his cock, though not bare I can feel its’ heat, and I have Draco writhing in his chair. I can tell that his moans are hardly contained and I have to thank god for these scrubs hiding the bit of hardness that I’ve acquired despite the pills.
“Fuck-” he moans quietly, more like a gasp when I flick my wrist hard. His hand is gripping my wrist as I go faster and faster; my panting becoming audible. It’s so…
wrong.
But…
It’s also… so
right.
“Fuckfuckfuck…” Curses spill from his lips as I take my hand off of him just to put it down the waistband of his pants and actually touch him. He’s heavy and throbbing and I have the sudden urge to put my mouth on him, but banish it from my head immediately.
'This is plenty wrong enough…’ The thought crosses my brain when I swipe my thumb over the head of his dripping cock, lubricating my hand in his precum as I continue to jack him off.
His other hand is pulling on my hair as moans continue to fall from his mouth.
“Tell me your name. Tell me your name so I can shout it when I come.” He gasps to words, and his cock twitches in my hand.
“Potter.” I say, and he’s already started his orgasm.
His hand grips my hair roughly and he arches his back. I bring my eyes to his face; grey eyes closed, and biting his lip in ecstasy.
“Fuck Potter!” He gasps and I can feel his come on my hand as he pants and moans and curses, finally collapsing in the chair, his chest rising and falling quickly. “You… you’re good at that-” he says as I stand up not a moment before the door opens behind me, causing me to run into the cart in surprise.
The surgeon walks in, completely indifferent to my reaction, and walks over to the cart, turning to me. My white covered hand is hidden behind my back.
“Where’s the scalpel?” He asks me, and I look over at Draco with wide eyes, who smirks, winks, and lunges at the surgeon, putting the blade in his neck and pulling it back out when the man has fallen to the floor.
He then takes my wrist in an iron grip and pulls me out the door and through several hallways.
“C'mon c'mon!” He says back at me, before throwing me against the wall near a guarded door. He attacks the guard, taking him down by brute force, punching him several times, then coming over to me, hauling me up, and dragging me over to the door.
“Open the door.” He says into my ear, raising hairs over my entire body, but I still struggle against him, until I feel cool metal against my throat. “Open. the door.” He repeats, pressing the scalpel in more, until I relent and put the code into the door.
Once unlocked, people come rushing out of the armored room in hysterics. All homosexuals. All people like Harry. I turn to run, but he’s come up behind me.
“Where do you think you’re going?” He asks me, picking me up.
A sudden hit on the the back of the head has me out cold, and I can vaguely feel myself being thrown over a shoulder and carried…
-t.s-
“Ow…” I say when I awaken with a pounding headache, rubbing my forehead. I look around, and my heart rate rises when I see that I am no longer in the clinic.
I’m in a cloth tent, alone.
I scramble to the door, ignoring my headache and climb out into the light of a setting sun. Music, laughter and yelling reach my ears from somewhere nearby, and I decide to investigate. I know that I’m getting close, as I can hear Draco’s voice:
“Yes! My fellow Death Eaters! I promise you that we will stab at the opposition! We will be treated as people in this cruel world! We. Will. Be. Victorious!” He screams, the voice of the man permeating my ears. An excited scream rises from the other people in the group. “Stripped of our dignity, under the guise of a disease, an epidemic, that has nearly wiped us out. And now we appear! Without out meds! Because we won’t hide anymore. This is OUR freedom!” His speech hits a crescendo when I round the corner of the rocky path, and crouch behind some bushes.
In the clearing I can see Draco, standing on a rock next to a blazing fire, and a rather large group of cheering followers who are dancing and talking. Among them I swear I can see the red haired man from the bathroom.
I crouch lower behind the bush when I see Draco looking around the edges of the clearing, praying that he won’t see me. But he does. His eyes lock onto mine and I swear I see him lick his lips, before I back up, trip a bit, and then run as fast as I can in the other direction, thoughts racing through my mind.
'I’m not one of them. I’m straight, I’m normal. I won’t be killed and there’s nothing wrong with me.’ Desperate thoughts fill my head as I run, and I can hear him perusing me.
“You can’t go back! You have nowhere to go-” he yells after me, but I just keep going, my chest heaving and my legs burning, yet I still run with tears in my eyes.
I run until I trip, falling to the ground on my back, and within thirty seconds Draco’s reached me.
He kneels behind me and pulls me up onto my knees, one hand on my throat and holding my ear to his mouth, and his other arm around my stomach holding me in place as I struggle against him.
“You can’t go back. The government’s declared you a renegade-” He says into my ear, his fingers and thumb digging into my cheeks and squishing my mouth.
“I-I can’t be a part of this-” I say, and he stretches my head back so that my neck is completely exposed, and puts his lips next to my ear.
“You’re here, just do it.” He says, and pushes me down so that I’m flat on my back, his knees on either side of my hips and his hands on either side of my head. I stare into his eyes, which have a softness that I didn’t see in the clinic.
“You felt something didn’t you?” He asks with a smile, stony eyes gleaming. I swallow thickly and try to ignore the pangs of want throbbing in my chest. “That’s the pills wearing off.”
Our breathing heavy and deep, it’s my turn to talk. “Was that your plan? To hold me hostage until the pills wore off?” I challenge him, and he smirks at me, his lips now mere inches above mine.
“A man’s not a man until his pills wear off…” He looks at me thoughtfully. “I’m doing you a favor.” He licks his lips, and takes the hem of my shirt in his fist, ripping it over my head, leaving my tanned chest gleaming in the darkening sky. His eyes look at me hungrily.
“What are you doing?” I ask, though all logical thought is being clouded with lust.
“Freeing the dragon.” He smirks, and all thought goes out the window. With a surge of strength, I push Draco off of me onto his back, and reassume his old position on top. The man beneath me looks vaguely surprised, but he doesn’t have long to retain the face because I’ve started attacking his lips.
I kiss him with a passion I’ve never felt before. His lips are soft and supple, and when his tongue snakes into my mouth it feels like it was made to be there. I bite his bottom lip hard in ecstasy, and when I grind my hips down into his for a split second, he groans into my mouth.
I rip his shirt off of him, running my hands over ever inch of uncovered pale skin all the way up his arms to his wrists, which I pin over his head while I start attacking his neck with hard bites and kisses, all the way to his collar bone. We’re both panting like animals at this point, but I couldn’t possibly care less.
“Shit-” he gasps, pressing his hips into mine, presenting me his already throbbing cock through yet another pair of thin pants. I take my hands off his wrists and he immediately puts one in my hair, and the other is running down my back, pushing me onto him.
He grabs me by the sides, hauling me into a sitting position without ever taking his lips off of mine.
Draco licks all the way down my neck and onto my collar bone, his cock pressing into me and mine prodding him in the stomach. I grind into him and he throws his head back in a loud moan, thrusting his hips up against me.
“Fuck…” I sigh, because it seems to be the only word in my vocabulary right now.
Within seconds of my moan he has his fingers in the waistband of my pants and is almost ripping them off, leaving me bare in his lap. I immediately climb off of him and pull his pants off of him, but the second they’re off he’s got me back on top of him, assaulting my lips and squeezing my ass.
My thighs are wrapped around his waist and every time I move my cock rubs against his stomach until I can’t take it anymore.
“I-I need you-” I gasp in his ear, and his mouth is immediately off of mine.
“If you want me, you’re going to need some preparation.” He whispers in my ear, not taking any more time and putting me down on my stomach, spreading me, and putting his tongue in my hole.
“Goddamn, Draco!” I gasp as he puts it as deep as it can go, working me loose. My hands pull at his once neat blonde hair, and he works his tongue in me until he has me writhing. But he doesn’t stop there. He puts two fingers in his mouth, covering them with saliva, and puts them in in place of his tongue. I moan, and he starts to talk.
“You’re going to look so fucking gorgeous with my cock inside you.” He pumps his fingers faster, earning himself a strangled gasp. He takes my head and turns it so that my eyes are on him while he finger fucks me. “You’ll be taking all eight inches whether you like it or not, baby.” I throw my head back in reply because he’s started curling his fingers and I can’t comprehend anything but the feeling. He smirks, grey eyes crinkling. “Good.” He says, taking his fingers out and leaving me with an empty feeling. “I need you to lube me.” I quirk an eyebrow, and he chuckles. “Suck me a bit. Just a little. I don’t know how long I would last in that mouth.” I blush but bring my mouth down to meet his glistening head all the same.
His cock is warm and full in my mouth and I try to take it as deep as it can go, getting it as wet as possible. All too soon he’s pulling it out.
“I-I can’t…” He pulls me on top of him again, but doesn’t have me sit. He looks me dead in the eye. “After I’m done with you, you’re not going to be able to sit comfortably for a week.” He growls the words into my ear and I moan. He takes that as the signal to start lowering me onto him.
Inch by inch he fills me, and it burns and hurts but it hurts so good that I don’t know whether to scream or moan. His girth is stretching me and I wrap my legs around his waist. After a bit of adjusting, Draco is in me all the way to the hilt, his tip brushing lightly against my prostate every time he moves. He puts his forehead against mine and kisses me when he starts thrusting; slowly at first. In the beginning it hurts, and he swallows my cries. But then it starts feeling good… suddenly, he isn’t going fast enough.
“Faster.” I gasp into his ear, and he has no problem fulfilling my request. My cock rubs against Draco’s stomach with every thrust, giving me more pleasure than I know what to do with. My nails scratch at his back roughy, surely leaving dozens of marks.
“Faster.” I say again, because I want more. So much more. “Harder.” And he goes harder, but still not hard enough. I pull his face down to meet mine, and look into his darkened stormy eyes. “Fuck me ask hard and fast as you can.” I say to him, and he grins.
“As you wish, Mr. Potter.” He says, before pulling out, putting me on my hands and knees, going back in, and fucking me so hard that he hits my prostate with every thrust.
“Draco!” I scream, his hips slapping my ass where they meet, and his hands pulling me by the hips to meet his frantic thrusts. I take myself in hand and jack myself off harder and faster than ever before because I’m so painfully hard that I don’t know what to do with myself. Soon, I can feel the coil tightening inside of me. “I-I’m going to-” is all I get out before I come the hardest I ever have, and he’s still fucking me as hard as ever.
Draco pulls me up so my back is against his chest and he takes my now soft cock in hand, moving his hand in time with his thrusts until I’m amazingly hard again, and he himself is grunting. But his orgasm comes with dirty talk.
“I’m so glad I got to fuck you open. I want to split you down the middle with my cock, and never stop fucking you. I got you hard again so I could suck you, feel all 7 inches of you, Harry. Fuck… Fuck!” He screams, riding out his orgasm inside me. The second he stops coming, he pulls out, moves down and gives me the most aggressive blowjob ever, which ends with my come all over his face.
“Scared, Potter?” He asks me, panting.
I give him a wry grin.
“You wish.”
-
“And so, in response to this new aggression, we are launching a new effort…”
365 notes · View notes
theslightestwords · 7 years
Photo
Tumblr media Tumblr media
@allthecanadianpolitics
!!! trigger warning: Q slur is present multiple times in the text
No Police in Pride - A Black Lives Matter Vancouver Workshop:
“Here's a handy FAQ from our No Police in Pride workshop. We've answered these questions a thousand times but somehow people keep asking the same ones. Here is a cheat-sheet for all the "devil's advocates" or for if you just legitimately have questions :) If you're looking for something to do now that you understand the issues please come to The March on Pride and use this resource to talk to your white/PoC friends who still don't understand. No liberation for some of us without liberation for all of us! #NoPoliceInPride #RememberStonewall***
And big ups to YouthCO HIV & Hep C Society for providing community space for this discussion! HIV and Hep C disproportionately affect marginalized populations, including Black and Indigenous folks (especially if we are queer/trans, homeless, sex workers, using drugs, or have additional marginalized identities). Canada's overly broad use of HIV non-disclosure criminalization negatively affects Black and Indigenous folks, and creates an additional barrier to public health. This is a form of systemic oppression that perpetuates stigma and contributes to the criminalization of Black people, Indigenous people and people of colour.
From YouthCO's statement in support of BLM: "Anti-Blackness results in disproportionate rates of HIV among African, Caribbean, and Black communities, and the excessive use of the criminal law in cases of HIV non-disclosure involving Black people. In our broader experience, we notice that many local institutions, including public schools and the police, consistently ignore requests to acknowledge and resolve racism experienced and described by Black youth. Further, police institutions too often over-police and under-protect many people in our communities, including Indigenous people and sex workers" 
Black. Lives. Matter.“
transcription of both images below:
“Why are you being divisive? Calling attention to an issue is not the same as creating an issue. If you were not aware of these divisions in our communities, it is because you have been ignoring the experiences of the most marginalized among us. This is not new. Isn’t it hypocritical to exclude the police when Pride is about inclusion? Pride is about the liberation of queer and trans people. It is about intentionally including people who have been disenfranchised and pushed to the margins of society. Prioritizing the inclusion and safety of the most marginalized queer and trans people over the “inclusion” of one of the most powerful institutions in our society is not hypocritical. Why is BLM hijacking the Pride parade? Why don’t they have their own parade? Black people are part of the queer and trans communities. Black queer and trans people have always been leaders in the Pride movement. You cannot kick us out of our own movements because you don’t like what we have to say. Vancouver Pride Society already decided to let the police participate. Why is this still an issue? Because police brutality continues to be an issue in Vancouver and across the country. Because many queer and trans people still will not feel safe at an event that is supposed to be for us. VPS made a political choice, and we are exercising our right to protest that choice. Why do you expect the police to protect you if you protest them? The police are a uniquely powerful institution that have sworn to serve and protect the public. We have not only the right but the responsibility to protest when they fail to do so, and when they actively cause harm. This does not abdicate our right to be treated impartially by all agents of the state. It is their job to protect us regardless of any critique. This is freedom of expression- the ability to criticize the state without government retaliation.
Why do you want to exclude the police from a celebration for everyone? Pride is much more than a celebration. Pride began as a protest, led by trans women of colour, against the police violence that enforced the state oppression of queer and trans people. While some queer and/or trans people may no longer feel oppressed and some straight cis people may enjoy the party, too many queer and trans people still face brutal oppression particularly Black and Indigenous folks. We need Pride to remain a protest. What about gay cops? We have never objected to any individual queer and/or trans person participating in the parade, regardless of their profession. We protest police officers participating as representatives of the police force. Why can’t the police show their support by participating in the parade? True allies know when to make space for those who are more marginalized. Many queer and trans people experience police violence and harassment and do not feel safe attending or participating in an event in which the police are celebrated. If the police really want to show support, they will find a way to do so that doesn’t harm the people they claim to care about. Hiding violence behind a veneer of "gay-friendliness" is called pinkwashing.”
223 notes · View notes
kelvintimeline · 7 years
Photo
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
@preussisch-blau-und-kadmium-auch
OP blocked me but you’re on a high enough horse that I wanna push you off.
Read more for length.
The split attraction model was invented in the last 5 years to imply that “sexual orientation” and “romantic orientations are two separate things. They are not. Sexual orientation BY DEFINITION is about non-platonic feelings in general which includes both romantic and sexual feelings. You can define non-platonic however you wish. It can be just sexual for you, just romantic, or, for most pole, it is a confusing blending of the two with a sprinkling of je ne sais quoi. Neurodivergent people especially struggle to separate the two and forcing them to define their sexual vs romantic feelings can be harmful. Especially for minors who don’t have the emotional maturity to parse between the two. They shouldn’t have to. They shouldn’t have to scrape parts of themselves out to plop into boxes so they can be taxonomized for shitty MOGAI politics.
The SAM is harmful, especially when it is normalized and applied to non-ace/aro people. There are over ONE THOUSAND stories about how the SAM and MOGAI attitudes let trans/LGBP people bury their internalized homophobia and dysphoria in labels like “homoromantic asexual” and shit like that. Here are the stories. It’s biphobic because there are are “orientations” like heterosexual homoromantic which is LITERALLY bisexual. Bisexuals can have preferences and experience sexual attraction to different genders differently!! All this does is erase nonbinary people.
Similarly, if the SAM is used regularly (which is what hte ace community is wanted), this is dangerous to survivors who often have complex feelings baout sexual romantic attraction. A cishet woman who was sexually assaulted by men might choose to identity as a lesbian later on, dating women. It is NO ONE’S business to ask her if she’s still sexually/romantically attracted to men. It’s no one business if she’s ~ACTUALLY a bisexual homoromantic. She’s a lesbian. That’s it. Because sexual orientations are about personal identity, who you want to be with, as well as attraction.
I can go ON and ON about what’s wrong with the SAM but here’s a few posts you should read. Here. Here. But like another basic point is--it relies on the term “homosexual” which is really fucking offensive.
You know what isn’t offensive? The term “SGA.” SGA is derived from the VERY common phrase “same gender attraction” which stems from the EVEN MORE COMMON phrase “attracted to the same gender.” Yes, “same sex attraction” has been used in conversion therapy. As has gay, lesbian, qu**r, insert slur, insert slur, insert slur here. That doesn’t mean it was derived from it. It has closer roots to the AAVE phrase “Same Gender Loving” but non-black people are being respectful by NOT using a term not made for them. SGA is more appropriate. Thanks.
Also, fuck you for saying NB people can’t be SGA. I’m a sapphic agender person, thanks. SGA doesn’t have to include all nonbinary people, just like lesbian and gay don’t have to include all of them. It’s still relevant to the point that LGBP people formed a bond over our SGA and the homophobia we suffered over it. Which transfered to a bond with trans folk because SGA and transness were seen as the same thing, historically. (Please look up “sexual inversion” if you do not believe me.)
Like, Katkee absolutely said I’m not actually bisexual. When she said cishet aces aren’t heterosexual, she is saying I am not bisexual. Because sometimes I’m completely ace. And I spent years without sexual attraction because I was so fucking depressed feelings like that were beyond my reach. Bisexuals are bisexual not because of who they want to fuck, which is a biphobic stereotype, but because of who we like and want to be with. GEnerally. Maybe that is sexual, maybe it’s not. It’s no one fucking business. Same for heterosexuals.
Like, no offense, but your comparison saying aromantic people can’t be bisexual is dumb as fuck. For the 18th time, sexual orientation is about sexual AND/OR romantic attraction. I’ll give you another comparison. A face generally is comprised of two eyes, a mouth, and a nose. Say someone is missing an eye, right? Maybe they’re born with just one eye, maybe they lost it. Whatever. Does tht mean that face isn’t a face because it’s missing one eye? No. It’s still a face. Just like you take the sexual attraction out of an orientation, it’s still an orientation. BUT if someone held an eyeball in front of you and said “this is a face,” you’d say “no dipshit, that’s just an eye.” Similarly, saying your reaction to JUST sexual attraction is a sexual orientation is ridiculous. No dipshit, that’s jus tsexual attraction.
“Aromantic” doesn’t mean “not attracted to any gender” it is is a way to describe your ROMANTIC attraction to people. It modifies your sexual orientation. “I am attracted to multiple genders but not romantically.” You are an aromantic bisexual. Because bisexuals are bisexuals no matter how they experience non-platonic attraction to multiple genders.
And, like, fuck your transphobia? Trans straight people can’t have straight privilege because people misgender them and see their m/f relationships as same gender relationships. They do not benefit from the systemic oppression of LGBP people because most laws/lack of protections for LGBP people hut them too. If a trans woman has not legally transitioned and is not recognized by the state as a woman, her marriage to her male partner is considered a same gender partnership and is not legal in most the world. She can still be the victim of homophobic hate crimes by people who still misgender her.
That is not true for cishet aces. Cishet aces can date, have sex, and marry whomever they like. Because a lot of cishet aces DO STILL HAVE SEX and have fetishes and libidos and kinks and whatever the fuck. How is that not “heteronormative?” And y’unno what? Who the fuck DOES perform straightness properly and gets rewarded for it? Cishet non-ace women are punished for too much sex, not enough sex, weird sex, prudish sex, or just prioritizing a career over sex and procreation. HELL a cishet non-ace man is demonized if his girlfriend whips on a strap on and helps him discovered prostate stimulation. Like?? They’re still cishet. They’re still privielged for it. Heteronormativity is about how you perform gender roles and in 2017 MOST relationships deviate from heteronormativity in some capacity. If two cishets are in a relationship and the woman has a career? That’s technically non-heteronormative. But she still isn’t LGBT.
And like?? Non-ace and non-aro people don’t all prioritize romantic and sexual relationships?? ALL the fucking time. Aces and aros aren’t special in that respect. Especially when we remember that: there are aces who have sex and aros who date. So like?? Whomp whomp, your cool kids table actually seats the entire fucking planet. Congrats.
Want another congratulations? Congrats on spreading misinformation because the APA never pathologized asexuality.
Like, seriously tho, what oppression do cishet aces and cishet aros face? Like, genuinely, tell me what aces and aros face NOT for a lack of sexual and/or romantic behaviour (which is not exclusive to aces/aros and is not true for all aces/aros) but for simply lacking that attraction??
And, again, please actually study LGBT history. Transgender bisexual women founded the LGBT community. As in women who were both LGBP AND trans. Because homophobia and transphobia are often perpetuated by the same institutions via the same laws, methodology, and cultural norms. Trans and LGBP folk chose to come together because we realized we were oppressed in the same ways or at least in very similar ways. Our bars, which we shared, were raided by the same police. AIDS killed trans women and gay men and bi men just the same. Sodomy laws affected us just the same. Lack of marriage equality affected us just the same. Gender norms went after us in similar ways. Gay was an umbrella term for ALL LGBT people people for a long time for a fucking reason.
And like... again, straight trans peopel cannot and do not oppress LGBP folk because they do not benefit from homophobic oppression. So maybe study up on that before you unleash your shitty opinions on me, okay?
BTW, most cishets don’t investigate whether you are romantically attracted to the person you’re banging or if you’re banging the person you’re dating. Like... they don’t care. Unless it’s their own relationship.
Also, as for the cat thing... I wasn’t talking about lynxes so uh?? What the fuck. I’m specifically talking about lynx point siamese cats. And how if I said a lynx point siamese wasn’t a cat, people would rightfully call me a moron.
Aaaand who the fuck do you hang out with where they assume you want to marry eveyrone you bang?? Please avoid those people, they’re creeps.
Yikes.
6 notes · View notes
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
cyberpoetryballoon · 4 years
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
carolrhackett85282 · 4 years
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
melodymgill49801 · 4 years
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
latoyajkelson70506 · 4 years
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
socialattractionuk · 5 years
Text
As a black gay man, I am constantly reduced to outdated, racist stereotypes when online dating
(Picture: Ella Byworth for Metro.co.uk)
It’s hard to believe that not so long ago there was a stigma attached to using dating apps.
Now, they are completely normalised among young people and can be a great tool to use in meeting potential romantic partners.
But for many non-white people, online dating can be a a traumatic experience rather than a fun, positive one. As a black gay male, I find dating apps to be a space filled with micro-aggressions and racist sexual stereotyping.
Apps such as Grindr, although I do use others too, often result in the assassination of my personal character – because I’m seen as a sexual object and a thing, not a human being.
For instance, constant references to my gigantic penis – I don’t have one, but I’m black and so apparently it’s a given – is usually the focus of interactions.
Often the first message I get sent is: ‘BBC?’ (which stands for big black c**k, a common phrase in the porn industry) or ‘hung?’.
Other examples include: ‘I’m craving a black guy or a group of black guys’; ‘I’m in my car and fancy a big black c**k in my mouth’ or ‘is it true what they say about black guys’.
This is just a small fraction of the types of unsolicited messages I receive and if I don’t live up to this fantasy of being a hypersexual black stud with a big dick, I am immediately rendered dispensable and stop hearing from them.
There’s also this assumption that black guys are always a ‘top’ during sex (the penetrative partner) – which is just another stereotype. If you’re not top you become invisible.
It’s not just our bodies; one guy who I spoke to over the phone said he was disappointed because my voice didn’t sound as he had expected – I didn’t have a ‘Hackney’ accent.
It’s easy for people to dismiss these claims with an eye roll or a ‘here we go again’ response, but this ignores the very real truth of how black people have historically been sexually objectified and fetishised.
This is something we and other BAME people still experience today – regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity – but it’s more nuanced, which makes it harder to call out and white people are reluctant to believe our stories.
The anonymity of the internet turns these platforms into a space in which people no longer need to censor themselves, making the prejudice and racism so much worse than what you’d typically face offline.
I’ve pushed back on people several times, but realised there’s no point in wasting my time. Some will call me a racist, despite me being the person calling out the racism, brush it off or say that I’m ‘playing the race card’.
It’s soul-destroying.
Throughout history, black people have been portrayed as animalistic, lascivious and dangerous, with body parts that ‘proved’ this, and any guilt that may have arisen from selling, seeing and treating us as nothing but animals was assuaged because of it.
As such, an array of binaries were invented; civilised/uncivilised, them/us, white/black.
Today, the commodification of black people takes place through two avenues; on the one hand a desire and love for our culture and on the other, a form of hatred – portrayed in how black people are treated in society.
The ways in which black men are represented seldom offers variety.
The usual tropes of criminal, gangster rapper, absent father and womaniser belies the existence of men who are well-rounded and have a lot to offer.
Across the board, including in porn, black bodies are only seen as valuable when something can be obtained from them (such as realising a fantasy) – and this is reflected in my experiences on dating apps.
Many people will tell me to just not use them, and while I do often go on short breaks, in reality, how else can gay men interact and meet in a world where the majority of us use technology to connect?
When I meet people in real life, (not necessarily gay men, just anybody) there are other stereotypes that I have to defend myself from too. I am often asked for drugs (whether I am dressed in a suit makes no difference), sometimes people move away from me or quickly put their phones in their pockets.
When I go to clubs, which I rarely do, it’s more stares and sometimes guys try to touch my private parts.
But it’s more concentrated online.
More: Sex
Meet the man who gets turned on by women peeing on him
Teen who watched porn for four hours a day vows to never kiss before marriage
It's time for us to talk about women who have sex with women
By educating people on the legacy that slavery and colonialism has had on how we view and treat black people, it will allow others to realise why sexualising black bodies isn’t a compliment, but a harking back to an era suffused with subjugation and death.
This kind of behaviour causes silent suffering for black men and women; we underestimate the effect it can have on mental health.
So next time you want to talk about someone’s imaginary big black c**k, remember that this person is more than a body part, and that what you say could be eating away at their sense of who they are.
Black men are multifaceted, not a monolith – and it’s about time society got the memo.
MORE: Black women are constantly hypersexualised – it’s time to stop fetishising skin colour
MORE: My Label and Me: I wear my bisexuality as a badge of honour
MORE: Why is ‘We get it, you like black guys’ becoming a slur in the Asian community?
0 notes