Romance isn’t a social construct lmao it’s human, the same as being aroace is.

Buddy... I got bad news on two fronts.

WHAT IS THE LOONAVERSE? PART 2 – THE NARRATIVE DEVICES

LOONA is special among K-pop for its immersive storyline. These girls are not just k-pop idols performing a song, they also perform a story and that story is what we call the Loonaverse.

So, what is the Loonaverse? In a few words: The world and story that LOONA inhabits.

Yeah. Duh. But what is it?

Well… it’s complicated.

The Loonaverse is a fictitious story that borrows elements from real science and fantasy to build its world but also uses allegories, metaphors, allusions and other literary devices to tell its story. Our job as spectators (and specifically us theorizers) is to look beyond those devices to understand the message they are trying to send. In this post I’ll attempt to explain the numerous literary devices used to narrate the story of the Loonaverse.

So, these 2 things are LAW:

Each girl has two conflicts: an external one and an internal one.

The LOONAVERSE story is one of fantasy and mystery.

INTERNAL CONFLICT VS EXTRNAL CONFLICT

Or as I like to call it: UNIT vs SOLO

I’ve explained how the girls are trapped in a time loop and how escaping it was their overarching goal. This is the external conflict of the Loonaverse. The progression of this storyline is seen mainly in the Sub-Unit MVs and LOONA MVs but also in some teasers and other videos like Cinema Theory. The conflict is external because: 1) It comes from the outside. 2) The characters not have power against it, at least not at the beginning. 3) The conflict has effect over multiple people.

Also…

Every character has an internal conflict. A personal story. Each girl perceives the world differently and that changes the way they act and interact with each other. It is internal because: 1) It comes from within the person. 2) They themselves may be the cause for the conflict. 3) The conflict has effect on only one person: themselves. This Internal conflict is presented to us in the Solo MVs. Every solo MV is a window to the character’s mind. While the solo MVs are tangentially related to the main external conflict, they mostly focus on the internal conflict of the character.

External and Internal conflicts often mix and interlace each other to create a wider story. We will see how the external conflict fuels the internal conflicts of the girls and how their internal conflicts will shape the way they act towards solving the external conflict.

FANTASY AND MYSTERY

What is fantasy? The genre of fantasy is described as a story based in a world completely separate from our own. It usually features elements or magical/supernatural forces that do not exist on our own world. It is not tied to reality of science.

Wait a minute. You just spent an entire post explaining the science of the Loonaverse. You can’t call it fantasy now. Well yes, yes I can. Since most of the scientific elements I explained are theoretical, unproved in our world but in the world of LOONA they are a reality, a scientific reality. A reality that differs from our own, and thus a fantasy to us. But regardless of that the reason I call the Loonaverse a fantasy is because of the themes it explores.

Fantasy is a broad genre, it is one of the oldest literary genres, being found in old myths. Some of the themes often found in fantasy stories include: tradition vs. change, the individual vs. society, man vs. nature, coming of age, betrayal, epic journeys, etc. All of these themes are very present in the Loonaverse. But I’ll delve into each one as we encounter them.

What is Mystery? The mystery genre is a type of fiction in which a person (usually a detective) solves a crime. The purpose is to solve a puzzle and to create a feeling of resolution with the audience. Some elements of a mystery include: the Crime that needs solving, the use of suspense, use of figures of speech, the detective having inference gaps, the suspects motives are examined in the story, the characters usually get in danger while investigating, plus these:

Red herring. something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question and leads the audience to a false answer.

Suspense. Intense feeling that an audience goes through while waiting for the outcome of certain events.

Foreshadowing. A literary device that hints at information that will become relevant later on.

I just though you should know these definitions.

In the Loonaverse, the “crime” is the time loop itself, and the mystery is finding a way to break it. Or so we think. In reality, the “How do we break the loop?” question is solved rather easily. But can we really call this a mystery if the main question is already answered? Yes! It may no be a mystery story for the characters themselves but because BlockBerry uses various mystery genre tropes while telling the story, it is a mystery TO THE AUDIENCE.

That’s right! WE are the detectives!

In a classical mystery, the detective examines all clues, motives, and possible alibis, for each suspect, or in our case, each character. The same way we analyze every MV, every interaction, every possible clue to where and when everything is happening.

The Loonaverse differs from a classic ‘Who done it?’ by establishing that no suspect is actually guilty. The crime IS the loop, but no girl is responsible for it (or so we think). Our job as detectives is not to figure out who is doing this but to explain how and establish an timeline of events that shed a light to what really happened. In that sense, our job resembles more closely a real crime investigation than a mystery novel.

LITERARY DEVICES

There are many literary devices an author can use to tell its story. Too many to cover them all in here, so I’ll focus on the most recurrent ones in the Loonaverse:

Allusion. Referring to a subject matter such as a place, event, or literary work by way of a passing reference.

Archetype. Reference to a concept, a person or an object that has served as a prototype of its kind and is the original idea that has come to be used over and over again.

Faulty Parallelism. the practice placing together similarly structure related phrases, words or clauses but where one fails to follow this parallel structure.

Juxtaposition. The author places a person, concept, place, idea or theme parallel to another

Metaphor. A meaning or identity ascribed to one subject by way of another. One subject is implied to be another so as to draw a comparison between their similarities and shared traits.

Motif. Any element, subject, idea or concept that is constantly present through the entire body of literature.

Symbol. Using an object or action that means something more than its literal meaning, they contain several layers of meaning, often concealed at first sight.

Genre. Classification of a literary work by its form, content, and style.

Some other literary devices worthy of your private investigation are: Negative Capability, Point of View, Doppelgänger, Flashback, Caesura, Stream of Consciousness, Periodic Structure, THEME, Analogy.

About Genre:

Genres are important because they give a story structure. They help an author tell the story in a way that makes it simple for the audience to understand what kind of story is being told. The classic genres of literature are Poetry, Drama and Prose. Some scholars include Fiction and Non-fiction. 

In film there are a variety of accepted genres: Comedy, Tragedy, Horror, Action, Fantasy, Drama, Historical, etc. Plus a bunch of subgenres like Contemporary Fantasy, Spy Film, Slapstick Comedy, Psychological Thriller, etc. What defines a genre is the use of similar techniques and tropes like color, editing, themes, character archetypes, etc. 

I point this out because the Loonaverse uses many genres to tell its story. Sure, the main story is a fantasy/mystery but every MV or Teaser has its own genre (especially the solo MVs). So, when I point out later that Kiss Later is a romantic comedy or that One & Only is a gothic melodrama, this is what I mean.

TLDR:

The Loonaverse is the world and story that LOONA inhabits. It borrows form real life science and fantasy elements to better tell its story. Each girl has an external conflict (escaping the loop) and an internal conflict (portrayed in the solo MVs). Both conflicts interlace to tell the story. The Loonaverse is a story of Fantasy because it takes place in a different world from ours and it is a Mystery because it is told using various mystery tropes. The story uses multiple literary and visual devices to tell it’s story and fuel the mystery.

REMEMBER: This is all my interpretation. My way of comprehending and analyzing the story. You don’t have to agree with everything. I encourage you to form your own theories. Remember: every theory is correct.

After all that you may be wondering what the story even is. And we’ll finally be getting to that. While I have my own interpretation of the timeline, themes and who did what. I think it’s more fun to slowly explore every brick instead of just summarizing it in one (incredibly long) post. I’ll do that much, much, much later. The journey will be just as interesting as the destination. I hope you’re in for the ride.

Let’s get to the real deal: The MVs. I’m going in chronological order so let’s start with girl No. 1!

Next: The bright pink bunny of LOONA: HeeJin’s ViViD.

WHAT WE ARE ABOUT – An Introductory Overview

You may have found us and equally found yourself at a loss to understand what exactly Black Rose Society is, what we are about, and where you might stand within all this. The purpose of the following texts is to give you a brief introductory overview of the central topics and avenues of exploration Black Rose Society focuses on. This way, we aim to provide you with a good idea of what you can expect to find in our community.

WHAT WE ARE

Black Rose Society is – first and foremost – a community of Vampyres, dedicated to Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture.

Black Rose Society is a place for serious exploration. We do not claim to possess all the answers, and we certainly do not speak for all vampire-identified people everywhere. Rather, we do our best to provide our membership with a conducive atmosphere to explore an extensive range of topics from within the perspective of Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture. We discuss how various groups of vampire-identified people arrive at expressing their varied experiences through self-identification with the vampire as a distinct category of person or archetype. We discuss how various groups of vampire-identified people have originated and shaped an authentic alternative subculture in the form of modern Vampyre Culture. We discuss the relationship between Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture – how one inspires the other, and how we in turn may be inspired as Vampyres.

Black Rose Society is also a social place of meeting. We provide our membership with a safe haven to gather, to mingle, to exchange news and information, to enjoy hospitality, to befriend, to learn on a basis of personal knowing. In this, Black Rose Society is explicitly open to all interested parties who might be sympathetic to us, both Vampyres and Black Swans, whether they seek closer affiliation with our sponsor in House Sauromatos or not, and indeed, whether they are familiar with the customs of Vampyre Society or still seek to learn more.

Lastly, we are about the celebration of being different, and we welcome all to have a good time in our spaces, as long as it is within the boundaries of our rules, guidelines and policies.

WHAT WE ARE NOT

Black Rose Society is decidedly not…

A roleplaying community Black Rose Society is a community of ‘Real Living Vampires’. This is not a game for us. While role players are indeed welcome to join Black Rose Society, we generally do not allow actual roleplaying in our regular community spaces. A dating community Approaching our community or any of our members with the sole intention of seeking a sexual or romantic relationship of any kind is firmly discouraged. Making another member feel unsafe or uncomfortable due to unwanted sexual advances or unwanted sexual comments may be considered harassment, and we will remove any offender from our community as soon as we become aware of any inappropriate behaviour. A provider of professional medical or legal advice Any information offered through Black Rose Society is considered to be for informational or educational purposes only, and is not intended as a substitute for, nor does it replace, professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Similarly, any information offered through Black Rose Society should not be in any way construed as professional legal advice on any subject matter. Should you decide to act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information offered through Black Rose Society, you do so at your own risk.

WHETHER WE ARE THE RIGHT COMMUNITY FOR YOU

Our community may not be the right fit for you, or it may indeed be the place you gladly call a haven.

You may have found the right place if you are at least one of the following:

– A Vampyre, someone who self-identifies as a Vampyre, or as Vampyric, or in any way identifies with the vampire as a category of person or archetype. – A Black Swan, someone who is a trusted friend to Vampyres and fully participates in the community, but does not or is not ready to identify as a Vampyre or Vampyric. – A Seeker, someone seriously questioning whether they are Vampyric, or whether they want to participate in Vampyre Culture in general. – Someone involved in consensual human blood-drinking between risk-aware adults, either as an active participant, blood drinker or blood donor, or as a close friend or family member of one, wishing to be supportive of them. – Someone engaging in advanced energy work, or Energy Vampirism, within the boundaries of Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture. – Someone pursuing Vampirism from the perspective of the Occult, open and sympathetic to Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture. – Someone with a genuine and enduring interest in all things ‘Vampire’, open and sympathetic to Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture.

We especially want to welcome you if you are at least one of the above and also:

– Someone passionate about furthering Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture, and ready to make meaningful contributions. – Someone intrigued by the aesthetic and mystique of Vampyre Culture, who wishes to actively explore its lifestyle aspects. – Someone with good questions.

You may want to look elsewhere if you are one of the following:

– A journalist or media worker seeking interviews. – Lacking the necessary maturity to deal with our topics. – Solely interested in hooking up. – Just curious for no particular reason. – Seeking to become a vampire in the hopes of gaining supernatural powers, lasting youth, increased lifespan, or things similarly fantastic. – Unwilling or unable to respect Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture, for whatever reason. – Unwilling or unable to comply with Black Rose Society’s rules, guidelines and policies, for whatever reason. – Scared of reading.

If you are unsure, you are most welcome to talk to our members on our Discord Community Server and have your questions answered in our #support channel or have a friendly chat in our #lobby, both of which are open to non-members.

BLACK ROSE SOCIETY ON VAMPYRE IDENTITY – There are no vampires in the Vampire Community

We begin with the Vampire Mythos. Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture are inevitably tied to the Vampire Mythos. We, Vampyres, are a people of the Vampire Mythos, in that our self-identification and our cultural self-expression as Vampyres will in some capacity reference the figure of the vampire from popular culture.

A vampire in the most common understanding of the word appears as a creature which drains the life (often in the form of blood) of humans to sate their own needs, enrich or prolong their own existence.

Vampyres do not believe that they are literal vampires as they appear in popular fiction or folklore. While some Vampyres might believe there to be some hidden truth to vampire stories, namely historical ‘Living Vampires’ who have passed into myth, Vampyres generally do not make any fantastic claims of possessing qualities commonly associated with the vampires of popular fiction or folklore. Vampyres are perfectly able to distinguish fact from fiction.

Indeed, the reality of Vampyres as a modern cultural phenomenon is a fact that is beyond any doubt. Since at least the latter half of the last century there are people like us – people who name themselves Vampyres for a wide variety of reasons.

What is commonly known as the ‘Vampire Community’ is in fact not a unified community but a collection of networks, groups and individuals who are associated with each other by virtue of their shared self-identification with the vampire as a category of person or as an archetype.

For our own purposes, we define Vampyres as individuals who are part of the Vampyre Subculture, or Vampyre Culture, and who identify as ‘Real Living Vampires’ specifically.

Note that we are observing the anachronistic spelling with a ‘y’ when referring to our kind, emphasizing and affirming our belonging to Vampyre Culture, with the benefit of helping to distinguish our kind from the vampires of fiction and folklore, spelt with an ‘i’ in the conventional way. (While not all vampire-identified people participate in Vampyre Culture, many are familiar with or adopt certain cultural ideas, customs, symbols and terminologies of Vampyre Culture.)

THEORIES ON VAMPYRE IDENTITY

Both outside of as well as within the ‘Vampire Community’ one will likely encounter arguments that Vampyrism may be a health condition or disorder, a sexual fetish, an escape fantasy, or a religious belief. We believe that Vampyrism understood as the phenomenon of modern ‘Real Living Vampires’ is severely misrepresented by completely reducing the whole diversity of Vampyre Identity to any one of the aforementioned explanations or rationalizations.

Despite unfortunately sounding like one, Vampyrism – as we understand it – is NOT a medical condition or psychological syndrome in the sense that Vampyrism cannot be sufficiently represented by completely reducing it as such, although attempts have been made to link certain facets of Vampyrism to various physical or psychological conditions, suggesting that there may be an empirical condition underlying some cases of Vampyrism.

Likewise, Vampyrism – as we understand it – is NOT a sexual fetish in the sense that Vampyrism cannot be sufficiently represented by completely reducing it as such, although there can be sensual, erotic aspects to Vampyrism, and individuals may experience excitement or receive gratification from or during certain Vampyric acts or complement their practice of Vampyrism with participation in fetish, kink or BDSM activities.

Further, Vampyrism – as we understand it – is NOT an escape fantasy, in the sense that Vampyrism cannot be sufficiently represented by completely reducing it as such, although Vampyrism has been proposed to be a reaction to trauma, abuse or feelings of isolation, and some individuals who regard themselves as outsiders or outcasts might be attracted to Vampyre groups, which in some cases can take on the role of surrogate pseudo-families.

Lastly, Vampyrism – as we understand it – is NOT a cult, religion, religious belief or religious practice in the sense that Vampyrism cannot be sufficiently represented by completely reducing it as such, although Vampyrism can have religious or spiritual facets, which can be studied in the context of alternative spirituality or new religious movements.

In Black Rose Society we prefer to regard the phenomenon of modern ‘Real Living Vampires’, or Vampyrism, to be primarily a matter of identity – personal, social and cultural. Approaching Vampyrism this way – as a social phenomenon and culture – allows us to appreciate a wider range of complexity and diversity of perspectives found within the different strata and subsects of Vampyric communities without confining us to a too narrow definition of the nature of Vampyrism, or – more precisely – of Vampyre Identity.

What makes one a Vampyre is – to the best of our understanding – ultimately tied to the very individual reasoning leading one to name oneself a Vampyre, to adopt the Vampyre Identity, and to participate in Vampyre Culture. Put more simply, a Vampyre is potentially anyone who chooses to name oneself a Vampyre for one reason or another. The individual reasons for why a person might identify as, or express themselves as a Vampyre, or as being Vampyric, are many and varied.

VARIETIES OF VAMPYRE IDENTITY

In Black Rose Society, you will encounter very different and sometimes seemingly conflicting perspectives being discussed – why one Vampyre might drink human blood, why one Vampyre might feed on human life-forces or subtle energies, why one Vampyre might do both or neither, ranging the more traditionalist to the more modernist, from the more materialist to the more spiritualist – as well as be offered some insights into the cultural development of the presented ideas and perspectives.

Black Rose Society is a community dedicated to the whole complexity and diversity of Vampyre Identity, and Vampyre Culture. In principle, Black Rose Society does not discriminate against and welcomes any individual expression of Vampyre Identity, so long as it does not conflict with Black Rose Society’s rules, guidelines and policies.

‘Real Vampires’

Some Vampyres practice consensual human blood-drinking between adults. Also known as ‘Sanguine Vampires’ or ‘Sanguinarians’, they often, but not always, claim to have an affinity or need to feed on human blood and that this practice is of some benefit to their physical, emotional or spiritual well-being, or that they experience some other form of relief due to this practice. Please note: In Vampye Culture the practice of consensual human blood-drinking often, but not always, happens within the bounds of a committed intimate relationship, but always strictly consensually between risk-aware adults. Black Rose Society explicitly distances itself from any acts of blood-drinking or bloodletting that involve and/or in any way abuse unconsenting persons, minors or animals.

Some Vampyres who are better known as ‘Psychic Vampires’, ‘Energy Vampires’, ‘Psi Vampires’, or ‘Pranic Vampires’ believe they have an affinity or need to feed on subtle life-forces which they believe they are able to draw or gather from another person or a group of persons by means of their innate nature or learned abilities. Similarly, they claim that this practice is of some benefit to their physical, emotional or spiritual well-being, or that they experience some other form of relief due to this practice.

‘Sanguine Vampires’ along with ‘Psychic Vampires’ are often categorized as ‘Real Vampires’.

‘Living Vampires’

Other Vampyres embody the archetype of the vampire by expressing it through facets such as Lifestyle, Aesthetics, Philosophy or the Occult, often, but not always, complementing the practices previously mentioned.

These individuals are known by many different terms and distinctions, but are sometimes categorized as ‘Living Vampires’.

‘Real Living Vampires’ or Vampyres

Be advised that any such categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Vampyres who – by virtue of their individual identity – may find themselves in both categories, and would be considered ‘Real Vampires’ as well as ‘Living Vampires’, we call ‘Real Living Vampires’, or just Vampyres.

Black Rose Society Vampyres are Sanguines and ‘Real Living Vampires’ in the majority – but we welcome all vampire-identified people and all those who may be sympathetic to Vampyre Identity and Vampyre Culture, provided they comply with our rules, guidelines and policies.

BLACK ROSE SOCIETY ON VAMPYRE CULTURE – What it means to be a Vampyre

Vampyre Culture, also called the Vampyre Lifestyle or the Vampyre Subculture, is an alternative subculture, meaning it exists as an alternative to – and apart from, yet within – larger society. Vampyre Culture in its current modern form originated with and is influenced by other alternative subcultures, alternative lifestyles or alternative spiritualities, and is often more closely associated with the Gothic Subculture, as well as with elements of BDSM, Paganism or Satanism respectively.

Although not all vampire-identified groups and not all vampire-identified individuals necessarily consider themselves part of Vampyre Culture, many groups of Vampyres or individual Vampyres follow their own authentic expression of Vampyre Culture. Vampyre Culture is often that which connects the various communities of vampire-identified people.

Vampyre Culture has its own complex heritage, with its own traditions and authentic lines of transmission. Prior to the advent of the internet, communities of Vampyres and groups of the Vampyric Heritage were – compared to today’s standards – relatively isolated from each other. This resulted in several more or less distinct traditions of vampire-identified people arriving to exist side by side in the current modern ‘Vampire Community’ with the turn of the century, each possessing an authentic history, each having an equally legitimate claim to what it means to be a ‘Vampire’, sometimes complementing each other, sometimes contradicting each other. Today there are multitudes of different Vampyre Houses, Covens and Clan-Families preserving, refining and transmitting their own piece of the Vampyric Heritage. Black Rose Society itself was founded as a Protectorate-Partner and functions as an Outer Court for House Sauromatos, a traditional Vampyric Household based in Germany.

MAKINGS OF VAMPYRE CULTURE

In Black Rose Society we are dedicated to the study and the discussion of Vampyre Culture from within the perspective of active participation in Vampyre Culture. We see Vampyre Culture expressed in our own ideas of social organization, in customs, in codes of behaviour, in etiquette, in philosophy, in spirituality, in our symbols, language and terminologies, as well as – to a limited degree – in our aesthetics, style, fashion, music, art, etc.

What makes up Vampyre Culture, and what Vampyre Culture means for us as Vampyres are among the most important questions Black Rose Society is exploring. According to our patron and sponsor in House Sauromatos there are certain traditions, fundamental ideas and concepts that one might consider to be essential to Vampyre Culture – its character, its values as well as its aesthetics and mystique: Feeding, Naming, Speaking the Language, Wearing Black, Secrecy, Education and Family

Feeding

For most outsiders and indeed for many Vampyres their interest in Vampyre Society begins and ends with Feeding. Although our words for and our ideas surrounding the practice of Vampyric Feeding may certainly differ, Vampyres as a category of person are nearly universally defined by the fact that we engage in certain Vampyric acts, or Vampyric behaviour, generally understood as a Vampyric person actively feeding on another person’s life-forces, often in the form of blood. The varied practices of consensual human blood-drinking between risk-aware adults, or the arts of feeding on life by certain subtle means are the most commonly expressed forms of practised Vampyrism. This is what we call Feeding. Our ideas of what it is Vampyres feed on, how and when Vampyres feed, why Vampyres feed, if there is a need for Vampyres to feed, of which nature this need might be and what it means for us as Vampyres will differ from place to place, group to group, individual to individual. Regardless of the variety of ideas present and expressed in Vampyre Culture, the concept and practice of Vampyric Feeding is central to Vampyre Culture anywhere. This is part of Vampyre Culture.

Naming

Names have power. At the beginning of one’s journey, one often chooses a dedicated name to be used for any coming interactions within Vampyre Society. Taking on a new name – a Vampyre name – can be considered an individual rite of passage in Vampyre Culture. It signifies a dedication or desire to be known and recognized by that name as a part of Vampyre Society. A Vampyre’s chosen name is often highly meaningful and should reflect one’s personal identity and journey as a Vampyre. Therefore, care should be taken when choosing a name for oneself. Under certain circumstances, a Vampyre may accept a name chosen by one’s mentor or a person of similar standing. It is commonly permissible to change one’s chosen name when one has outgrown it. For some, taking on a new name can mean the freedom of leaving the past behind to begin anew, discovering or re-inventing yourself, to seek out new experiences, to forge new bonds, to choose a new family. Indeed, when joining a traditional group of Vampyres, one might, in addition, take on the name of the House, Clan, Coven or Family in question, or a name honouring one’s mentor, signifying individual belonging and lineage. Among traditional groups, one’s naming is often accompanied by certain rites and ceremonies. While naming customs may differ from place to place, a Vampyre’s chosen name is generally an important expression of one’s Identity as a Vampyre. This is part of Vampyre Culture.

Speaking the Language

Belonging to Vampyre Culture is distinctly marked by the correct usage of specialized terminologies. While a complete Vampyric language never reached widespread use in Vampyre Culture, its specialized terminologies are similar to an argot, or cant, a type of secret language which can be employed to protect a group’s spoken or written communication from outsiders, establishing a subculture existing separate but within a larger society. To learn this secret language present in Vampyre Culture one would commonly access and study word lists, or learn directly from other Vampyres within an established group. This is part of Vampyre Culture.

Wearing Black

Subtle and elegant, black is the preferred colour of Vampyres according to tradition and suitable for any social occasion or function of Vampyre Society. To complement a classic black attire, silver jewellery is often preferred by Vampyres, as is the wearing of certain signets and symbols associated with Vampyre Culture. Traditional groups are known to recommend stricter dress codes depending on various factors – yet, the colour black enjoys almost universal acceptance in Vampyre Culture anywhere. This is part of Vampyre Culture.

Secrecy

Secrecy and confidentiality are paramount for Vampyres. From the earliest beginnings of what would become Vampyre Culture, our communities have relied on secrecy and mutual discretion. It comes with the territory, the deviant nature of our interests and activities, which are largely – and perhaps rightfully – considered to be taboo in larger society. Originating in traditional codes of silence, the importance of secrecy is near-universally recognized in Vampyre Culture, and it often is among the first lessons to someone introduced to Vampyre Society. Vampyres must ever take care not to disclose any information that could be in any way construed to threaten other Vampyres, their families, their friends, or themselves. The same applies to our trusted Black Swans, who know of us and keep our secrets. Do not seek the attention of the mundane. Especially avoid the sensationalist media like the plague. Do not misrepresent yourself as speaking for all Vampyres, or for any Vampyre groups you are not sanctioned to represent. When possible, entrust any outside public relations to those with more experience. Protect each other’s personal information. Keep your Vampyre life and mundane life separate. Do not reveal a person’s mundane name or any other aspects of a person’s mundane identity to anyone without explicit permission. Indeed, it is good etiquette not to inquire about a person’s mundane identity at all within Vampyre Society. Always keep the secrets entrusted to you personally. This is part of Vampyre Culture.

Education

With knowledge comes responsibility. In Vampyre Culture knowledge is traditionally passed on personally – from person to person, from mentor to protégé – forming traceable lines of transmission. Being of the Vampyric Heritage, it is a Vampyre’s duty and responsibility to share one’s knowledge with others and impart them with the necessary skills to feed responsibly, to instruct them in the language and traditions of Vampyre Culture, and to prepare them to serve as leaders and guides for the next generation of Vampyres, passing on the legacy so that it may endure. In a traditional mentor-protégé relationship, a mentor is called to protect, to guide and to correct any missteps of their protégé – always leading by example. For the duration of a traditional mentorship period, a mentor is – to a limited degree – responsible for the behaviour of their protégé. A good mentor will provide access as well as personal insight by introducing their protégé to relevant texts and resources, teaching them protocol and proper conduct, and inviting them to attend gatherings and social functions with them. A good protégé will demonstrate an eagerness to learn by asking questions and show respect by being attentive and valuing their mentor’s time. By tradition, it is the mentor’s responsibility to assess whether their protégé has acquired the necessary level of experience, self-control and knowledge to stand on their own and be formally recognized as a member of Vampyre Society. The successful end of a mentorship period will often be marked by certain rites and celebrations, depending on ruling customs. Vampyre Culture’s distinctly personal approach to the transmission of knowledge often stems from an appreciation of the living Vampyric Heritage and the desire to keep the flame alive by passing it on from one person to another, one generation to the one following. Our Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. This is part of Vampyre Culture.

Family

Blood is thicker than water. Vampyres traditionally organize themselves into clannish, close-knit groups of like-minded, kindred spirits. Traditional Houses, Clans, Covens, or Families of Vampyres often emphasize their familial nature as part of their self-image. Indeed, traditional groups of Vampyres can at times resemble surrogate families, providing safety, stability and support – a life among your own kind, where other support systems might have failed you. Someone’s Vampyre Family is a true family of choice, often just as important to the individual as someone’s original family – if not more so. For these reasons, belonging and loyalty to one’s Vampyre Clan-Family or Vampyre House are valued highly in Vampyre Culture. Vampyre Houses, or other equivalent traditional groups, form the backbone of Vampyre Culture, and are typically, but not necessarily, headed by one or several influential matriarchal or patriarchal figures, with a close inner circle of Family members and retainers, attracting an outer circle of prospective members and hang-arounds as well as various supporters and sympathizers. While a certain level of stratification is traditionally upheld, it mainly fulfils a need for stability and security, which is ceremonially reproduced by hierarchy and ritual. In reality, there is often a striking difference between the formal stratified structure and the informal familial nature of this type of group – even in the most traditional of Vampyre Houses. Apart from providing their members with a family-like network of support, mutual loyalty and trust, Vampyre Houses, or other equivalent traditional groups, serve Vampyre Society in various other ways. Depending on the group or organization in question, Vampyre Houses, or other equivalent traditional groups, may be actively involved in the preservation and furthering of knowledge, in structured education and teaching, as well as in organizing events and social functions for their local communities. While the vast majority of individual Vampyres does not belong to a group following a more traditional model, their ideas and values of Family are deeply embedded in Vampyre Culture in general. Without the bonds of Family, we are nothing: Loyalty to each other, to Vampyre Society, to Clan and House – honouring the Ancestors, in Life and Death. All this is part of Vampyre Culture.

IDEAL OF VAMPYRE CULTURE

In Black Rose Society we customary refer to the utopian ideal of a community envisioned by Vampyre Culture as Vampyre Society.

Vampyre Society is perhaps, above all, a community of shared values. Vampyres often believe themselves to be in some way different from other people within larger society. Many Vampyres have experienced or continue to experience alienation due to their unique experiences. Vampyre Society is a place where all are valued and embraced for who they are, and where to be different is celebrated and cherished. Vampyre Society is a place where all are largely free from judgement imposed by larger society, heeding only Vampyre-specific codes of behaviour, more appropriate to their way of living. Vampyre Society is a place of belonging, which – fostered by the personal relationships found in real community, strengthened through facing shared adversity together, and heightened by the very mystique of the vampire archetype – may engender genuine feelings of pride and awaken true solidarity with other members of Vampyre Society.

To make Vampyre Society a lived reality, whenever or wherever possible, at social gatherings, or in any interaction with other Vampyres and Black Swans – this is the meaning of Vampyre Culture.

“The SAM” and its critics

I guess I won’t make it a whole thing, but here are my thoughts on the “split attraction model.” (NB: This perspective is based on my own recollections and interpretations, but I don’t know all things. Different versions of the story may exist.)

To begin with, the term “split attraction model” was coined circa May 2015 by critics who were trying to name a phenomenon they took issue with. Going forward, “critics” will refer to this group who first coined the term, but they are not the only ones who criticize the language, components, or universalism of the “split attraction model.” (Example from theacetheist with lots of links.) The particular criticisms I’m concerned with developed around the time that monosexism discourse was dying down, and a group that had been critical of “monosexism” was exploring new topics to complain about. (I was one of the complainers, to be clear; that is not a disavowal.) Here are a couple sample posts from May-July 2015: one, two, three, four. Note the anons mentioning they can’t find anything about the “split attraction model”--that’s because there was nothing else written using that language!

Grumblings were eventually arranged into the sequence of words, “split attraction model,” and that term took off among critics who used it as a vague gesture toward a set of grievances. As I remember it, one of the primary targets was the paired sexual-romantic identity format, e.g. naming one’s orientation as --sexual --romantic. Also as I remember it, criticisms were primarily concerned with its use beyond ace/aro people, focusing on what might be considered bi-range “mixed orientations” like “bisexual heteromantic” or “homosexual biromantic.” It wasn’t too uncommon to see people say that these paired identities could work for ace or aro people, but didn’t otherwise make sense.

I believe connections were also made between these identities and the creation and cataloguing of specialized identities that detailed to whom/what and how/whether one experienced attraction. The people who advanced or approved of these projects, and the approach to sexuality/gender that seemed to motivate them, were scorned as “mogai.” Although I too scorned “mogais,” I never looked too closely at any “mogai” blogs; “mogai” was a category based mostly on impressions. The use of other subtypes of attraction (e.g. sensual, aesthetic, platonic, which may have been previously popularized among ace/aro people) as the basis for orientation-like labels such as “heteroaesthetic” or “homosensual” also provoked consternation, although I couldn’t tell you if these labels were ever seriously adopted by a significant number of people. As I understand it, “romantic orientation” was also popularized among aces, although this and other concepts that took inspiration from it were being used on tumblr by a mixed and overlapping group of ace/aro/lgbtq people.

Sometimes when critics invoked the “split attraction model,” they were imagining all of this as a single model of orientation, in which (they presumed) a “complete” orientation (as they were used to thinking of it) would entail listing out --sexual --romantic --sensual --aesthetic and whatever other dimensions people created. But I think that often times critics would be thinking mainly of the paired sexual-romantic identity format, which was more commonly used.

The objections were many. A lot of these revolved around the way “sexual orientation” and --sexual terms were defined by people who also used “romantic orientation,” --romantic terms, and other parallel dimensions of orientation and identity.

Critics were used to “sexual orientation” and “sexuality” naming something that encompassed erotic/sexual, emotional/romantic (e.g. being “in love”), and social/kinship (e.g. dating, marriage) elements. Likewise, they understood terms like “bisexual,” “homosexual,” and “heterosexual,” as well as “gay” and “lesbian,” as inclusive of all these elements. And, in fact, this is the typical way in which these terms are used by gay/bi people and activists and by almost anyone writing about these subjects in a serious way. Gay/bi people have often had to demand recognition for the emotional and social aspects of their relationships and desires, or (alternately) for the sexual aspects, and so there was some significance attached to affirmation of their integration. Critics didn’t believe that all elements always occurred together, however. There's general recognition that sexual interest can occur apart from being “in love.” And while there’s more social skepticism over this possibility, many of these critics would have also agreed that you could be “in love” without sexual interest. (Some critics identified as ace and/or sex-repulsed.)

Critics sensed that when “sexual orientation” and --sexual terms were being paired/contrasted with “romantic orientation” and --romantic terms (and others), the meaning of the former were narrowed to only refer to specifically sexual and not emotional/social components. And I think you can, in fact, see that reflected in how "sexual orientation” is explained by some people who use both orientations (and others). A while back I compiled a sample of definitions of “sexual orientation” from a few college LGBTQ groups and compared them with a few definitions from AVEN and AVENwiki, and the difference is apparent. (Some of those entries have sense been edited in response to my post.)

So I think there was a real difference in how people were using “sexual orientation” and --sexual identity terms. The critics were using them in the broader, mainstream sense, while others were using them more narrowly. For record, I don’t think the narrower version is objectively “incorrect” or anything like that, and I can understand why some people would like to use it. But it is different from how the terms are usually used, and how a lot of gay/bi people and others would like to see them used. And reading “sexual orientation” in the narrower sense when it was intended to be used in the broader sense can result in a very loaded misunderstanding. The same is true for words like “bisexual” and “homosexual.” There was a lot of concern that calling oneself “bisexual” would be interpreted as exclusively sexual-related information.

The use of “homosexual” itself was also criticized. This was (with reason) identified as a stigmatizing term that a lot of gay people didn’t want to be called. But within the “split attraction model,” this term, in its narrower re-sexualized sense, seemed to be the “correct” term for gay people.

There was also concern about who was adopting “homosexual.” Critics who were coming from anti-monosexism circles tended to value solidarity between lesbians and bisexual women and didn’t see either group as privileged over the other. But they also accepted that there was a fairly clean boundary between these groups, and that keeping this boundary unambiguous was important. The “mixed” sexual-romantic identities such as “homosexual biromantic” blurred the distinction between gay and bi, and were thus unintelligible until they were translated as “just a gay person” or “just a bi person.” This translation could go either way. When translated as “just a bi person,” “homosexual biromantic” was perceived as bi people appropriating a gay identity, and a disrespectful one at that. 

A clear division between “oppressed” gay/bi people and “privileged” straight people was also a key point in critics’ social-political worldview, and this mixed identities also blurred this divide, resulting in potential “just a (homophobic) straight person” readings. A “heteromantic bisexual” could be a straight person who just used gay/bi people for sex, and was further obscuring their privilege and homophobic by presenting themselves as non-straight.

Unprocessed internalized homophobia and biphobia were seen as explanations for the adoption of these identities (for either “just gay” or “just bi” translations). The use and promotion of these terms (among advice blogs or through LGBTQ glossaries, for example) was also seen as limiting the ability for young gay/bi people to work through internalized homophobia and biphobia. Having doubts about whether one could have a sexual or emotional relationship with someone of the same gender were seen as common uncertainties among young and newly-out gay/bi people, resulting from the suppression of same-gender possibilities by a heterosexist society. There was a perception that questioning people were being actively encouraged to accept these uncertainties at face value as natural, enduring aspects of their orientation. Even simple exposure to these identities could set people back in their self coming out process, and some people reported how adopting these identities had been a roadblock on their own journeys.

In conjunction with all this, there was a perception that these models of orientation were gaining ground and displacing the models they favored. It seemed easy for current and past broader uses of “sexual orientation” to be overwritten with the narrower version, and thus have the speaker’s meaning completely distorted. I think part of this sense of threat was due to the paired sexual-romantic identities--and other specialized identities that were being developed--following a very empirical-sounding format. It seemed easy to read these terms as a cutting-edge classification of newly observed patterns of human “attraction” and “orientation.” Models that didn’t include them could easily be read as lagging behind and incomplete, their omissions attributed to ignorance rather than an alternate vision of what was meaningful and important to name. This all seemed to lean hard on on a “scientific,” essentialist model of sexuality. And actually, critics themselves sometimes drew on a similar model of sexuality to justify the divisions they saw as important (e.g. between gay and bi). Unfortunately, although critics saw these paired and specialized identities as a clear folly of “going too far,” I think they found it difficult to explain why these terms that sounded even more “sciencey” and comprehensive (= authoritative), were actually wrong.

Anyway, I guess that’s about all I have to say on it for now. Feel free to let me know if you think this story is accurate or inaccurate.

Not to be that person but if someone doesn't want to date anyone, for whatever reason, they don't have to, you're not discriminating against anyone because they happen to not be part of your dating pool as far as you respect their rights and identities

Bluuuuuuuuh okay so this may or may not be a longass post depending on how coherently I can translate the concept in my brain into English words, so apologies in advance.

Okay, so if a dude comes up to me and asks me out, I can say 'no thank you'. That's a thing I am 100% within my rights to do. It doesn't matter if I'm attracted to him or if I'm not attracted to him or if I think he smells bad and it turns me off, it's not important. I am allowed to say no to the king of France, I can say no to Joe Shmoe at the liquor store.

A step further is HOW I say no. Do I say, "no thank-you", or do I say, "ew, no, your face is gross"? One of these answers is polite and concise; the other, no matter how true to me, is something they're going to have to live with. 

For the rest of their life, every romantic interest they pursue, they're going think of that person who told them they were too ugly, and they're going to be ashamed or insecure or embarrassed. Maybe they'll shrug it off eventually, but maybe they won't. Either way, is that the impression of yourself you want to leave on people?

Now the fun question: what if he's a trans guy?

Once again, you can say no. For any reason at all, you can say no. Maybe you aren't attracted to him, maybe he has bad breath, maybe you're new to the concept of gender identity and your fear of somehow fucking up and hurting him is getting in the way right now. For any of these reasons you can say no! But you DON'T GET TO MAKE IT THEIR PROBLEM. 

Saying no-thanks to a trans woman because you aren't attracted to her? Totally fine. 

Telling her "NO, I DON'T LIKE DICK"- that's real sweet. That's something she has to walk away with, now- every time she meets someone she likes and wants to get to know, that person's first thought is going to be about her genitals. She'll never be good enough for anyone because all anyone cares about is her junk.

You're not interested in a trans person? Cool, you don't have to be.

You're not interested in a trans person because you haven't made peace with the reality of trans identities? Obviously not great, but sure, take the time to figure things out.

You've never been interested in someone you knew to be trans, and announce "I NEVER WANT TO DATE A TRANS PERSON"? That's a different statement. That's saying, "There is one defining characteristic that makes all trans people the same, and it's something I find repulsive!" And- Surprise!- THAT is Transphobic. Which is, at it's barest bones- say it with me now- MAKING IT SOMEONE ELSE'S PROBLEM.

And imagine, if you will, dating a lady for a few weeks. She's clever, funny, beautiful, kind- you're head over heels for her, until the very first time you have sex, and you see her vagina. And you think to yourself, "that's an ugly vagina", and break up with her.

If that was a deal breaker for you? Who gives a shit. Some would say it's a bit shallow, but so.long as things break off amicably, life will move on without anybody getting hurt.

Same situation, but you tell her "I can't be with someone who has an ugly vagina!"... Jesus fucking Christ, my guy. What the Fuck. Why the fuck would you tell her that? What on earth made you think your personal aesthetic preferences were more important than her sense of self worth? You entitled jackass. Who died and made you Empirical Minister Of Visually Pleasing Hoo-Has? Why would you SAY that to someone??

Same situation, but she's trans. "This isn't working out for me"? Sure. "I don't know anything about this subject, I don't want to move forwards until I know more"? Hard, but not cruel. "Bye honey, shlongs gross me out"??? WHAT KIND DICKBAG ARE YOU????

And that's kind of what gets me on "Can I say I'm not attracted to genderfluid people?". Because, like... I'd never tell a lesbian, "oh, you aren't attracted to men? Have you met every man on the planet? Sure, sweetie" because, like... Cis men are men all the time. You're attracted to women, whatever. Cool.

But someone who DOES experience attraction to men tells me, "Oh, I'd never DATE one!"- Then I'm sketched out. Because, like.... Why? What do you think all men have in common? You didn't say you weren't attracted to them, just that you'd never date one.

"Oh, I could NEVER date a trans man!"... Why...? The only thing I can conclude is that you're boiling down everything they are to a set of genitals, at which point, fuck, they're probably happier without you.

And by the way, how often do you hear, "UGH, I could NEVER date a CIS woman"? Think about that one for a sec. How does that one feel to a cis lady? Probably pretty shitty. Imagine hearing that from someone you have a crush on. Do you feel outraged? Embarrassed? Maybe you feel disgusting, like someone you admire is repulsed by your body.

Fucking *Ouch,* huh?

SO. Easy rules for not being a dick:

1. If you want to turn someone down, you can, no matter what your reasons are. BUT YOU DO BOT HAVE TO SHARE THOSE REASONS.

2. Their hang-ups are not your responsibility, but YOURS AREN'T THEIRS, EITHER. DO NOT tell someone you can't date them because they look like your mom, just say no and move on! DO NOT tell someone you don't want to have sex because you think their feet are gross, just say no! DO NOT bring up someone's voice or hair or eyes or genitalia, JUST SAY NO! TELLING SOMEONE YOU LIKE THEM IS HARD. BE POLITE, MOTHER FUCKERS.

3. Maybe you're already dating someone you like, and you discover new information that you weren't expecting. Maybe they're trans, maybe they had a hysterectomy, maybe they have a tattoo or a kid or a criminal record, maybe they wear a wig or have a disability or have a rubber duck fetish. Whatever it is, it's an emotional topic and you need space to process. Good! Think things out! If that ends it for you, okay, but none of these things makes someone a bad person or an ugly person or unworthy of love! Don't make them feel that way. Again, your hangups are on you, not them.

4. The next time you go to say something like, "I'd never date a trans guy", or, "I'd never date a black girl", or, "I'd never date a disabled person"- Stop, and think about why you feel that way. What is it about this group of people that you don't like? Is it a real reason, or a stereotype? Is it an aesthetic reason, and if so, don't try to dismiss is as "that's just how I feel". There's a reason. Keep digging for that reason, and once you find it, figure out if it's a belief you want to hold onto. Always ask yourself "why?". Never let yourself fall into the belief that any group is worthy of wholesale dismissal.

5. Breathe. Stay calm. You're not a bad person. Society has programmed us with a lot of biases- it's not your fault you have them, but it isn't a free pass to remain ignorant and hurt others. Be gentle with yourself, but be willing to reflect on your feelings and behaviors and rein in the ones that are harmful. No matter your feelings, at least be kind. We're all trying our best, and we all just want to be loved. Keep that in mind.

Anyhow, that's just my two cents. I hope this wasn't too winding or rambly, I'm still working out my thoughts on the matter myself. Being genderfluid doesn't make me an expert on trans issues, and I certainly don't have the experience to speak further.

If there are any corrections to be made, please let me know. Always learning!

Please take care.

“Much of Victorian girlhood can be explained in the context of a lowering age of menarche among daughters of the urban bourgeoisie. Adults often denied the earlier maturing of their daughters, or worried about it and attempted to fend it off obliquely with a prolonged campaign against precociousness, leaving girls ignorant and alarmed at the arrival of menarche.

The pioneer woman physician Elizabeth Blackwell in 1852 was an early and unusually outspoken observer of the trend toward the earlier maturing of girls. In the middle of a long tract advocating more vigorous physical education for girls, Blackwell buried an empirical observation about the different ages at which menarche was occurring: ‘‘The growth of the generative organs is greatly influenced by the place of residence, whether town or country, and by the habits of different classes of society.’’

She noted the earliest arrival of menarche ‘‘in the wealthy classes,’’ followed by those ‘‘amongst the laboring population of towns,’’ with the lowest rate of all to be found ‘‘amongst the inhabitants of the mountain districts.’’ Blackwell’s demographic observation came to a point: ‘‘It was observed in the same city, that in the children of the wealthy classes, this period was more than a year in advance of the lower classes.’’ Blackwell’s impressionistic observation that wealthy girls were menstruating as much as a year before the working class remained just that for much of the rest of the century. Her insight was reflected in oblique debates about precociousness as a defining and disturbing trait of the modern girl.

Nearly a half-century later, Helen P. Kennedy interviewed 125 high school girls as part of a study of the effects of education on reproductive health, providing some data to substantiate Blackwell’s hunch. In asking her sample about their menstrual histories, she discovered a discrepancy between her findings and medical wisdom. She noted that among her population of high school girls (then seventeen years old) the average age of first menstruation was 13.72 years of age. She observed, ‘‘This is nearly a year younger than the age given by Playfair, Lusk and other obstetricians,’’ which was closer to fifteen.

Late-century physicians did not have the empirical evidence to keep up with the declining age of menarche resulting from improved standards of living. When they did offer advice they were off by at least a year. Historians have estimated that age at menarche declined at the rapid rate of one year every thirty years over the late nineteenth century, a trend which would accord with Blackwell’s observation and Kennedy’s findings. Extrapolating back from trends in the United States, one might conjecture that just past the age of fifteen was normative for 1850, fourteen for 1880, and thirteen for 1910.

(Despite recent attention in the press, the trend has virtually stopped over the past few decades as prosperity is distributed more broadly through all socio- economic groups.) Some parents maintained an ideal of sixteen for the age of puberty through the late nineteenth century, however, while physicians announced a mean of fifteen. In fact, the daughters of the bourgeoisie were likely to reach menarche at the age of fourteen and younger—and to confront that fact with little preparation.

This scientific confusion about the age of menarche both reflected and fed an anxiety about what it might mean that girls were maturing earlier, and especially that urban girls with advantages were growing up fastest of all. Elizabeth Blackwell decried the declining age of menarche, arguing that it was a ‘‘premature development’’ resulting from ‘‘rich food, luxurious habits, mental stimulus, novel reading, late hours, and over-heated apartments.’’ She urged families to throw their influence against the tide of precociousness, a phenomenon that Blackwell felt was reversible.

Her proposed solution was exercise, in which she early elaborated an insight known today to athletes around the world: ‘‘The physical education of the body, its perfectly healthy development, delays the period of puberty, and . . . a true education in which all the bodily powers were strengthened as well as the mental and moral ones, would be the most effectual means of outrooting this evil.’’ She argued that the evil of early menarche resulted from ‘‘a diseased mind in a diseased body.’’ When Helen Kennedy discovered that girls were maturing a year earlier than the doctors were predicting, she too knew just what had to be responsible: city life. She noted that ‘‘the mode of life’’ brought about early menstruation ‘‘appearing earlier in girls living in cities than those living in the country.’’ Commentators observed that modernity was responsible for the moral crisis represented by early menstruation.

Fears of precocious sexuality in girls often made parents and advisers reluctant to broach the subject of menarche until it was too late. When they did get around to discussing reproductive physiology, they presented the subject in the rhetoric of romantic mystification. As scientific moderns, we blame Victorian mothers and advice givers for their failure to provide straight talk to girls. Yet the Victorian romanticization of the female body conveyed significantly more respect, if not more information, than often misogynist premodern visions of the female body. Especially in contrast to earlier notions of the differences between women and men, which saw women as inferior and imperfectly developed men, the nineteenth-century’s romantic explanations of female physiology had much to recommend them.

Enlightenment, scientific and popular thought in western Europe agreed that men and women represented different stages in development along a similar trajectory. Female reproductive anatomy, with organs inside the pelvic area, were simply less advanced than male reproductive organs, which had descended outside. The difference between the two sexes was a difference not in kind but in evolution. (Indeed, medical drawings of the different sexes virtually mirror each other.) In this ‘‘one-sex’’ model, women and men shared sexual appetite, and the sexual climax of both was necessary for conception to take place. As befit the more primitive sex, women lacked reason, strength, and self-control. In this premodern vision, women’s sexual anatomy and reproductive function marked their incompleteness. Menstruation was a shameful marker of that imperfection.

The empiricism of the Enlightenment broke down cosmic and scientific typologies of all kinds, including the notion of men and women’s reproductive similarity. Revolutionary thinking of the late eighteenth century introduced a new model of sex difference which argued ‘‘incommensurability’’— that men and women were fundamentally different, that there were not only two sexes but two different orders of being. Women’s greater attendance at church and special responsibility for family life allowed for a new understanding of sex differences which celebrated not only differences of physiology but differences of temperament and morality. Women’s moral superiority came coupled with new ideas about female sexuality. Women were no longer defined by their carnality, their inability to control their passions, but rather by their relative ‘‘passionlessness.’’

The discovery that female orgasm was not necessary for conception meant that women might be different beings than men, less subject to impulse and desire rather than more so. Under this new two-sex model, women were men’s equals but occupied a separate sphere, defined by their moral and spiritual superiority, though not their intellectual preeminence. The language with which advisers attempted to explain puberty to American girls adopted a reverence deriving from this relatively new notion of the sacredness of female reproduction.

…In a maternalist culture, which raised daughters to be wives and mothers, there seems to have been considerable silence and indirection between mothers and daughters on the central facts of puberty. Such anecdotal and social science evidence as we have documents that ignorance. The British physician Edward Tilt, writing of the late nineteenth century, noted that a quarter of his female patients had been left totally ignorant of the menstrual cycle so that ‘‘when their first menstruation occurred, many were frightened, screamed, or even went into fits. Some thought themselves wounded and frantically tried to wash the blood away.’’

The statistics of Kennedy’s interviews suggest that a similar percentage of American girls confronted menstruation with no preparation. Kennedy was shocked at the ignorance which she discovered, a finding she expressed in the language of Victorianism. Thirty-six of her population she said ‘‘had passed into womanhood with no knowledge whatever, from a proper source, of all that makes them women.’’ This group had received no instruction from their mothers at all, and another thirty-nine indicated they had not ‘‘talked fully.’’ Fewer than half of her sample had talked ‘‘freely,’’ a finding which Kennedy described as ‘‘criminal ignorance.’’ (About a half had fully discussed the issue, and another quarter had ‘‘talked in a constrained way.’’) Looking at this same period, the historian Joan Jacobs Brumberg has concluded that girls’ knowledge about menstruation declined in the late nineteenth century before going up again in the twentieth century in response to new mandates to scientific mothering.

This is not to say that girls were well instructed in less-privileged circumstances with less domestic privacy. There’s evidence that in rural America and on the frontier, too, in the nineteenth century, parents went to some lengths to conceal the details of childbirth, for one, from daughters. Robert Clark’s depiction of farm girl Ada Harris’s 1873 diary when she was thirteen records her responses to her mother’s morning sickness before the birth of her last child. ‘‘We were all scart,’’ Ada’s diary reported. Clark observes: ‘‘The part of her that was still a child did not know, and none of the grown-ups told her, that her mother was pregnant with the last of her babies, who would be born in July.’’

Similarly, Mabel Barbee Lee’s account of growing up on the frontier includes a wrenching banishment from home upon her mother’s mysterious ‘‘sickness’’; only after the fact did she discover that her departure had allowed for the birth of her brother. Farm life likely did not make parents more com- municative and direct with children. Yet it may well have allowed for the kind of informal education by observation that over the centuries has inculcated children into ‘‘the way things are.’’

In the bourgeois home of the city, animal functions moved behind doors in conjunction with a new imperative to communicate within the Enlightenment family. The need to talk in an uplifting manner about a shameful subject produced a rhetoric of excruciating indirection on the ‘‘facts of life.’’ Elias notes the increasing intensity of familial relations themselves as both incentive and impediment to open communication. Increasing social constraints on discussions of sexuality in the public world (as represented by the passage in 1873 of the Comstock laws barring ‘‘obscenity’’ in the U.S. mails) made it the parents’ responsibility to provide sex education; yet in Elias’s words, ‘‘the manifold love relationships between mother, father and child tend to increase resistance to speaking about these questions.’’

The indirection began with the advice writers. Marion Harland (aka Mary Virginia Terhune) endorsed the reverential language which contributed to the mystification of the subject. She sensibly urged mothers to teach their daughters not to hate their sex, ‘‘but to reverence ‘The Temple of the Body,’’’ and offered her book as a remedy for all women, whom she described as ‘‘a mighty class of human beings.’’ She urged them not to consider ‘‘the holiest mysteries of their natures an unclean thing,’’ nor to hold ‘‘carelessly the sublimest possibilities of their kind.’’ Yet when it came right down to it, she could do scarcely better than anyone else. ‘‘When Mamie approaches you with the inevitable—and, I submit, perfectly natural and proper—questionings about the Unknown Country peopled by unborn infants, tell her that God sends them to the earth in charge of His holy angels; that since babies must have fathers to work for them abroad, and mothers to tend them at home, He waits until after marriage before He gives them.’’

Perhaps realizing how unsatisfactory an explanation this might seem, she suggested a posture of finality so as to discourage further questions: ‘‘Say it so simply and solemnly as to calm curiosity.’’ A few pages on, she returned to the ‘‘facts of life,’’ this time providing a more biological accounting with medical terminology. She suggested that parents literally begin with a treatise on botany—‘‘I know of none better than Gray’s ‘How Plants Grow,’—and read with her of the beautiful laws of fructification and reproduction.’’ She then recommended a fairly straightforward accounting of ovarian function, with reference to ‘‘periodical flow,’’ and so on.

Even Mary Virginia Terhune balked at the next step, though. After urging her pupils not to be afraid to thus label ova or eggs, she proceeded to reveal her own sticking point. How did this explain life? ‘‘From these, by some mysterious law of the loving oneness of the married state, are evolved the germs of living human beings.’’ After this brave foray, she proceeded to congratu- late herself—and her class of maternal tutees. ‘‘That is the plain truth—and all of it! What a thing of purity is it beside the trickeries of ribald-mongers, the meretricious maunderings of sensational fiction; the phantoms created in the imaginations of timid school-children by hints and double-entendre, and midnight confabulation upon themes which any girl who cherishes a spark of moral decency would blush to speak of by daylight!’’ This bravest of declarations left ‘‘mysterious law’’ and ‘‘loving oneness’’ at the heart of the matter.

…If Victorians were loath to anticipate and educate girls about the particulars of sexuality and reproduction, they were not so hesitant to spell out the appropriate conduct for a girl once her ‘‘monthlies’’ had begun. Good health demanded regular exercise before and after—though not during—menstrual periods. It was Annie Winsor’s father, a country physician, to whom she addressed her questions about menstrual health in writing when she was away from home. (Presumably her father represented ‘‘the age of science’’ she would refer to in contrast to her mystifying mother.) Earlier, such knowledge would undoubtedly have been the province of women rather than doctors.

Frederick Winsor’s instructions to ‘‘My Nannie girl’’ included reassurance about sleeping posture (‘‘suit yourself’’) and washing. (In suggesting sponging during the menses itself, he was modifying—slightly—a myth that girls should not bathe during their periods.) Following the concerns of the time about prolapsed uterus, he instructed his daughter that if she jumped from a fence with knees bent ‘‘so that they may ‘give’ a little and not [inflict] a shock stiffly to the trunk, [it] will do the pelvic organs no harm,’’ while cautioning, ‘‘Of course at the time of monthly illness . . . you will not be climbing fences etc.’’

Annie wrote to her father again, perhaps the next year, about mountain climbing (protecting her letter from her home family’s reading with the heading ‘‘Professional private’’). She had hiked up ‘‘Mt. Willard on the fifth day of my monthly turn when I generally do as I like.’’ She noted that the flow picked up a bit but assured him, ‘‘I felt all the better for my walk.’’ She then asked for advice on her plan to climb the more demanding Mount Lafayette. This seemed extreme to her father, who advised against the climb ‘‘unless you are assured that it is not severe for a woman.’’ Frederick Winsor, like the other physicians of the era, assumed authority over the subject of girls’ menstruation, and counseled in particular against jarring, sudden motion as threatening to the organs’ delicate maturation.

Thus Sally Dana reported having been told by a doctor that ‘‘I must not run up stairs fast because . . . it was bad for girls of my age but that I might run down stairs as fast as I wanted to.’’ Ohio school boards too worried about sending high school girls up and down stairs ‘‘as a menace to normal functional development’’ and proposed installing elevators or building schools no more than two stories high. Girls were warned off tennis but encouraged to play ‘‘baddledore’’ (akin to badminton), ‘‘a very nice game for girls.’’ The protective sentiments of Victorian experts were perhaps best embodied in the publication in 1904 of G. Stanley Hall’s magnum opus Adolescence, in which this important psychologist and theorist extended Victorian thinking about the needs of the maturing girl.

Hall imagined an ideal calendar in which maturing girls would follow their own biological clock, ideally ‘‘lying fallow’’ for about a quarter of the time. In urging girls to regard their fecundity with reverence, he commended the practice of isolation during menarche, as practiced by other cultures in the tepee or the grot. His corollary for Western society was the Sabbath. ‘‘The time may come when we must even change the divisions of Sabbaths per year for woman, leaving to man his week and giving to her the same number of Sabbaths per year, but in groups of four successive days per month.’’ This plan he promoted as a strategy for helping menstrual cycles to be ‘‘well established and normal.’’

…When Helen Kennedy interviewed students in 1896, there seemed to be less ‘‘lying fallow,’’ at least among eighteen-year-olds. About two-thirds of the students she interviewed ‘‘made no change in their habits,’’ with the remain- ing third keeping ‘‘quieter, avoiding all violent exercise, and taking rest the first day or two if it were possible.’’ Going to high school sometimes made such rest impossible, but Kennedy was pleased to report the general health of her cohort. Kennedy did raise one cause for concern. She observed disapprovingly that one-half of her sample recklessly took ‘‘violent exercise’’ during menstruation—dancing, riding horseback, or skating, ‘‘as if nothing unusual were the matter.’’”

- Jane H. Hunter, “Interiors: Bodies, Souls, Moods.” in How Young Ladies Became Girls: The Victorian Origins of American Girlhood

Love Me As I Am

1/?

Beliefs of love vary, from person to person, societies own definitions of love never seem to stay consistent. Luke (and the gang) are in for a surprise when their English teacher decides to make them define what love is to them and pairs them off to read Romeo and Juliet to show just how important it is to understand what love really means.

Current ships: Julie/Luke, Flynn/Carrie, Alex/Willie and Bobby/Reggie. Ships are subject to change.

(Bobby and Trevor are also different people in this.)

To say that Luke hated school would be an exaggeration.

He only disliked school.

Well, specifically he disliked math. And History. And Chemistry.

He only really liked English and Music, if he was being honest.

So yeah, he disliked school, but his two favorite classes and his friends definitely improved his time there, especially when they helped him with any subject besides Music and English. He supposed each of his best friends having a different specialty in school struck out here. Reggie with his numbers and algorithms, Bobby with his dates and time periods and Alex with his chemical properties and decaying equations.

He will admit though, he wasn’t a fan of the assignment that Dr Lessa set down in front of them today.

“The next thing we’ll be reading is Romeo and Juliet, so I want you all to write down what you think love means, and I will pair you up with either someone who’s opinion seems similar to yours or directly opposite. Then, in the pairs I put you into, you’ll be reading the play together. Once you finish reading it, I want you all to reflect on your original answer, what you read, and tell me if, and how your opinion changed.” They had announced to the class, their dark brown eyes scanning over each kid individually. “I will say now, love can mean many things, so don’t get too in your heads about it. Love can be platonic, romantic, familial. Some people carry so much love in their hearts, they leave a bit of it with everyone they meet, some people keep it rationed off to give with their trust, there’s no one way to love. No one here will be right or wrong with what they think, this is just to help you guys see from other people's perspectives and try to understand where other people may come from.”

Don’t misunderstand, Luke knows his way around words. He didn’t get first place in their schools slam poetry contest to not be bad with words. The blank piece of paper in front of him, however, says otherwise.

After minutes of thinking, a thought enters his brain and he feels the usual creative adrenaline kick in. He can practically smell the burnt lead and rubber as he writes (not actually, but sometimes the idea of that makes him grin) and words flood the page. He’s writing his final thought as the bell rings.

“Set your papers on my desk, tomorrow you’ll be assigned your partner.” Dr Lessa informs them, a grin on their face. “Have a good day, young ones.”

“Bye Dr Lessa.” He calls as he slams his paper on the desk, rocketing out after his friends.

“Goodbye Mr Patterson!” He hears their voice call after him, a joyful laugh following.

“Who do you think you guys will get paired up with?” Reggie was asking Bobby and Alex as Luke launched and clung onto Alex’s back.

“Ah, fuck! Luke!” Alex whined, adjusting the other boy on his back with a roll of his eyes. “Honestly, I hope it’s one of you guys. Do you know how awkward and embarrassing it’d be to talk about love with anyone else?”

“Think that’s just your anxiety talkin’ ‘Lex.” Bobby offered a small smile, gently elbowing Alex. “But yeah, I’d rather it be one of you guys too.” Reggie and Luke echoed the same sentiments, before they parted ways, Alex and Luke heading to Chemistry, Bobby and Reggie to History.

~~~~~

When Luke enters English the next day, arm slung around Reggie’s shoulder and giving him a friendly noogie, he watches as Dr Lessa is making their way around the room, humming faintly under their breath as students make their way to their seats. Luke isn’t sure if he’s hallucinating, but he almost thinks he sees Dr Lessa smirk faintly, before covering their face with their clipboard.

The bell rings as Luke sets his bag beside his chair, gently sitting down as he watches Dr Lessa make their way to the front of the room.

“I bet you’re all excited,” Their eyes trail over to Alex for a split second. “And nervous to find out who you’ll be paired with, so I’ll just get right to it for you guys.”

A hushed chatter falls over the room, friends whispering to each other about hoping to get paired up, Luke stares at Alex, waiting for his friend to turn to him. Alex does, after a few moments and Luke offers him a confident smile.

Dr Lessa lists off the pairs, receiving either huffs of disagreement or giggles in excitement in return.

“Reggie and Bobby, you two will be together.” Luke watches out of the corner of his eye as both boys high five, smiling confidently towards Alex. From across the room, he can practically feel the anxiety melt off of Alex, the two of them just waiting for their names to be called.

“Alex, you’ll be with Willie.” Dr Lessa continued to shoot off names, Luke whirling around to stare at Alex with wide, panicked eyes.

“Julie, Luke, you’ll be together.” This time, Luke’s eyes snapped over to Reggie and Bobby, watching as their looks of worry about Alex shifted to smug and giggling as they turned to Luke.

Whatever, Luke thinks, assholes.

“And finally, Carrie, you’ll be with Flynn.” Luke winces slightly, his eyes darting to Bobby’s cousin, just to see her nostrils flare slightly before she composes herself, sitting up straighter and turning a blank gaze to Flynn.

After Dr Lessa passes their papers back, everyone begins to maneuver their desks so they’re sitting next to their new partners.

“Today and tomorrow we’ll be going over what you have written, and then we’ll spend all next week reading the play and from there we can determine how many days you all will need to go back over what you’ve written now, so try to not lose these papers.”

Luke and Julie sat there for a few moments, both processing their papers and the other person across from them.

“Alright then, Julie,” Luke started, clearing his throat slightly, letting a small smile fall onto his face. “Let’s talk about love.”

Luke wasn’t too sure about what the next few weeks would bring him, but he at least knew that the next two days would be pretty fun.

RE: Feedback for the Redux.

(I wanted to give you really in-depth feedback. Unfortunately, it ended up being way longer than I anticipated. I figured it would be easier to send this as a submission rather than breaking it up into a million smaller asks. I hope that’s all right!)

Note: I put this under a readmore to save space, but I have read it all and thoroughly agree with it. Thank you so much for the feedback, man!

Before I get into the nitty-gritty, I want to briefly talk about my personal relationship with Warriors - not because I want to talk about myself necessarily, but because I want to provide some relevant context. You see, I was first introduced to these books in 2004, about when I was nine years old. You could argue, in some ways, that these books defined a large part of my childhood, and were extremely influential into my teenage years and early adulthood. When I wasn’t fantasizing about colonies of talking feral cats, I was gleefully writing fanfics and roleplaying online. Those were my first tentative forays into writing, and would ultimately set me on the path to refine and hone those skills in the years to come. I was obsessed with the mythology and lore of this world, with the sprawling cast of characters, with the steady publication of new entries into the series.

Now, kids tend to not have the best critical thinking skills. Which is why it took until my late teenage years to realize that my cherished books were really, really not that great. The mythology and lore that I’d praised were starved of any creativity, steeped in the cliches of the fantasy genre, and prone to collapsing under their own weight when subjected to even the smallest amount of scrutiny. The characters that I adored? They were blighted with similar cliches, lacking in any sort of growth or development or depth; sustained only by archetypes and whatever retcons the authors thought would sell the most books, either through hype, drama, or fanservice. Exacerbating all of this was the publisher’s insistence on milking the franchise for whatever profit nostalgia could still yield. They weren’t writing more books because they had new, interesting ideas they wanted to explore - they did it because this series was (and still is) fucking lucrative. As I thought about these things more critically, and became more informed on social issues, it became impossible to unsee the uglier aspects of the franchise - the ableism, the queerbaiting and lack of representation, the depiction of minors and adults (Dustpelt and Ferncloud, Thistleclaw and Spottedleaf) having romantic or sexual relationships, the blind nationalism and eugenics/persecution of minorities (non-Clanborn cats) and characters of mixed descent (half-Clan cats). People far more informed and far more eloquent than myself have discussed those issues in-depth elsewhere, but suffice to say, I was understandably upset by these things. No amount of nostalgia could blind me to those flaws.

And yet, for some reason, I never really stopped loving Warriors. Or put more accurately - I never stopped loving the potential of Warriors. That was the thing that I kept coming back to. The wasted potential of a series depicting the lives of feral cats, and their brutal struggle to survive in the wilderness, all the while deeply immersed in their own complex societies and cultures. It became painfully clear to me that the thing I loved about Warriors was the sandbox nature of the franchise, and all the ways fans were able to explore that untapped potential. With that realization now achieved, Warriors slipped into the back of my mind, accruing cobwebs as the years passed. Occasionally those dormant thoughts stirred whenever I saw a piece of fanart on my dashboard, or I passed a new release while browsing the local Barnes & Noble. Sometimes I even entertained the fleeting thought of writing AU fics again. But by and large, Warriors had been retired from my thoughts.

And then, in 2017, I found the Redux.

While writing this segment I had several false starts, in no small part because I didn’t know what to talk about first. It was like someone had gone through my thoughts with a steel-toothed comb, and took every disappointment, every what if, and turned it into a reality. Holy shit, look at this blog! Look at the meta commentary! Look at all of the worldbuilding! I could clearly see just how much passion and attention to detail was put into developing the plot and the characters. How many hundreds of hours went into correcting the broken genetics of the canon characters. Suddenly, the Clans had culture - real, living, breathing culture! There was a pantheon of deities and demigods. A deliberate intention behind the naming tradition beyond slapping two words together because they sounded pretty or made for a trite pun. This. This was the story Warriors should have been. This lone blog managed to conceive an original lore for the Clans, while further developing the canon plots beyond their base elements. What three authors failed to do, one person achieved on their own.

You made forgettable characters interesting. And you made interesting characters unforgettable.

I lived for every scrap of content you created - the asks, the deconstructions, the amendment posts, the art, even the fucking shitposts (because they were just genuinely wholesome and funny). The Redux wasn’t just a source of entertainment, either - it introduced me to the idea of writing an AU that was sustained by meta-analysis, and grounded in critical reception of the series’ flaws (both technical and social). Your work eventually inspired me to create my own Redux-style worldbuilding/AU blog for a series that has similar issues to canon Warriors.

The Redux deserves all the praise it gets, and you should be extremely proud of what you’ve accomplished. Even if the Third Arc wasn’t finished or the Fourth started, it was still a helluva ride, one that I’m so glad I got to participate in.

But, of course, you asked for feedback, so I can’t spend the entirety of this post throwing roses at your feet. So, onto the constructive feedback.

I think a lot of my thoughts are going to echo what other people have previously said, but for me, the biggest setbacks in the Redux were the following:

[1] Pacing. This is going to sound weird, but this isn’t a criticism of the Redux’s length. Rather, it’s more about how that time was spent. While I really like how you adjusted aspects of the Redux’s plot in order to still tangentially align with the books’, it sometimes felt like the chapters were there just to connect points A and B. I knew this was a retelling of the original series, so I already had a vague idea of what the general storybeats would be. What appealed to me was how the story would get to those points. Let me give you an example: in Arc 1, we’re told in chapter 10 that Murkpelt is roaming the territories, and poses a threat to the Clans. Immediately in chapter 11 we’re taken to the scene where Firepaw finds her while escorting Spottedleaf. We’re told about ThunderClan’s efforts to track her prior, and about the looming tension in the wake of this invisible threat. But that’s the thing - we’re told that by the narration in just a paragraph or two. We’re not shown what that looks like. The setup is supposed to be everyone being on edge, but Bluestar’s lounging by the stump when the scene begins. It’s a little dissonant, and it has the unfortunate problem of contradicting the narration. It would’ve been so cool to see a chapter or two where Firepaw’s still trying to immerse himself into Clan life, and his questions are met with terse answers or impatience. Undercut his (and the reader’s) learning with other characters being brusque with him, or short-tempered, or something. And then that could lead into Greypaw or Ravenpaw consoling him and explaining why the situation is so serious. Then Firepaw could ask something like, “Have there ever been instances like this before with rogues?” Which could organically lead to a conversation where Greypaw or Ravenpaw bring up relevant lore/worldbuilding. It’s little stuff like that which would’ve helped with immersion and pacing. I think it would have balanced the two out, by providing pseudo-downtime where the audience experiences the world as the characters do. (If that makes sense.) Or, to provide another example: we never get to see Tres Idiots mentoring Snowpaw. In chapters 5 and 6 of Arc 3, we see Raventhroat struggling to develop a signing system he can use with his apprentice; and then, after a few chapters he’s perfectly narrating the Bright-Eyed Crow to Snowpaw. I think that showing us scenes where the two were actually working out the kinks would have done more to develop Raventhroat’s character arc. He went from being a meek, timid apprentice to an eloquent warrior, and him becoming a mentor is supposed to be a definite part of that journey. It would’ve have been so cool to have plot-relevant scenes broken up by smaller ones where we watch Raventhroat gain confidence through each small success he makes with his apprentice. I’m not sure if I’m conveying exactly what I want to say, but I guess the TL;DR would be something like - I would’ve gladly welcomed either more chapters, or longer ones, if it meant we got more scenes like this.

[2] Utilization of the worldbuilding. You mentioned this already in response to another ask, but if you could go back and change anything, it would be incorporating more lore/adhering the Redux to its lore more strongly. Your worldbuilding is perhaps the strongest part of the Redux by far. You gave us a conlang, traditions, folk stories, Clan stereotypes - so much fascinating material - but it feels like its integration was based solely on whether or not it was relevant to the plot at hand. Unless there was a reason why it was brought up, then we’d never get to see a ThunderClan cat freaking out near a ShadowClan seer and refusing to approach them at a Gathering. Or listen to Mistfoot share a poem with Greystripe and Fireheart (after being goaded into it by Silverstream). Or watch as Redtail politely interrupts the elders and asks for their opinion on an important matter. Or listen to the Clan getting together after a loved one dies and share stories about their life. Or watch as Sandpaw/Dustpaw use their age and seniority over Firepaw to terrorize him with stories of Yrrun and Terror. On one hand, I absolutely understand why a lot of lore was relegated exclusively to the Amendment section - it’s important to strike a balance between what’s interesting versus what’s relevant. You don’t wanna just throw worldbuilding trivia at the audience apropos of nothing. On the other hand, I really wish I’d seen a much larger integration of your worldbuilding into the story, because it’s so fascinating and so god damn good.

[3] Utilization of the characters. One of the things you tweaked, that I absolutely loved, was choosing to introduce Silverpaw in Arc 1 at a Gathering. Not only does it create a realistic basis for her friendship with Tres Idiots, but it fixes the canon’s issue of her saving Greystripe out of nowhere and then developing a relationship on that alone. That was fucking great! Same thing with Rainpath - it was so awesome for Fireheart to get a friend in another Clan (ShadowClan, of all Clans). It broke the mold, and their interactions were just delightful. But outside of those examples, sometimes it kinda felt like the side characters didn’t really exist? I remember an old piece of writing advice, but I can’t recall who it’s attributed to: “Treat your side characters like they think they’re the main characters.” Because they absolutely are. I might be some passing stranger in another person’s life, barely a blip on their radar, but I have my own vibrant story. Everyone does. In the Redux, it sometimes felt like minor or side characters weren’t living their own lives outside of their interactions with Fireheart and his friends. Mousefur’s the most fluent speaker of Fang in ThunderClan? Cool. How did she learn that skill? Who taught her? Does she have a friend in WindClan who’s been teaching her new words at Gatherings, or whenever they happen to cross paths while on border patrols near Four Trees? Not only is that character trivia interesting, but it could provide foreshadowing/become relevant later on. When the Clans meet to discuss how to deal with the dogs in Arc 3, perhaps someone suggests having their most fluent Fang speakers act as interpreters/diplomats, and try to broker some sort of peace/understanding with the dogs. Things like that. Basically, it would’ve been nice if Fireheart’s life intersected more with the goings-on of his Clanmates, or if his own goals/agenda were sometimes inconvenienced by the goals/agenda of others.

I think those are my major criticisms. More integration of lore, a slower/steadier pace that accommodates showing over telling, and finding ways to have the personal lives of minor characters interact with the story. Maybe adding in some additional subplots that are congruent with the main plots, and occur simultaneously, in order to keep chapters busy. That sort of thing. I hope what I provided wasn’t overwhelming in any way, and ends up being useful for either the Redux or any of your other writing projects.

As an aside, thank you. For creating this humble niche community within an even larger fandom. For asking for feedback from your readers. For being someone who makes mistakes, but eventually endeavors to learn from them, and ultimately, become a better person. I know this sounds kinda sappy, but I really do mean it. <3

(For the record I wrote this at like five in the morning, so if there are any grammatical errors I’ll be kicking myself in the ass for those.)

MY Thoughts this Aromantic Awareness Week 1/?

Aromantic Awareness 2021 February 21st to February 27th

This will probably make no sense to anyone, but since I’ve got no prompts to fill or questions to answer this is what I’m doing.

“Some” people say you shouldn’t talk about these things, and should keep them behind closed doors, I say. Education and acceptance is more important than some stuck up tarts archaic idea of modesty...

but I do agree with moderation of information of course.

I‘ve a few talking points, I’m not going to say how many because it may be more than I originally start out with. , and as you all know I can go off on tangents.

__________________________ First I guess I should Explain the flag and what it means, because, like other LGBT pride flags the colours have meaning

>Green & light green: represent the aromantic spectrum,aromanticism (represented by green); covers all arospec identities (aro, gray aro, lith/akoi, cupio, quoiro, idem, demi, fray, caed, requis, arovague, and others)

>White: for all the nonromantic forms of love and attraction; friendship/platonic, aesthetic, sexual, sensual, emotional, mental, QP relationships, family, you name it [Alternatively some designs include yellow for this, though personally I avoid yellow for visibility sensitivity]

>Gray & black: for the sexuality spectrum, covering arospec acespecs (asexual spectrum ppl) as well as arospec allosexuals __________________________________________________________

1b of this blog deals with an important subject Discovery - basically its a ramble of an attempt to explain how I know I’m Aromantic Asexual   Rather than being specifically dedicated to the Aromantic side of my Identity this one’s a mixed answer because it covers both Asexuality and Aromanticism as it regards to me: So - I see and hear a lot of people ask “how did you discover you were “<Insert sexual identity here>” and I‘ve listened to a lot of AroAce people give their answers which always seem to sound deep.. Well, make my own seem rather pedestrian; decide for yourself, this here’s my answer:

The truth with me is frankly... I didn’t “discover” anything apart from the term itself; I’ve always been this way. Oh yeah, I went through phases trying to make sense of why I didn’t fit the social norm of being a sex mad teen or even slightly interested and not repulsed by the whole thing I asked the questions “am I gay?” “ Am I wired wrong?” Etc. But it’s all the same because it was just... me.

Of course ‘society’ has had its opinions, for years people called me frigid, told me ‘god’ wouldn’t let a creature like me be ‘happy’, because I was... i don’t know, Pagan/fat/geeky/ somewhere in the LGBT rainbow take your pick as to what “creature” referred to, i don’t delve into the small minds of backwards northerners anymore, its a bog of stench. Another thing I was frequently told was that I pretended not to want something because I knew I was too ugly/fat/repulsive to get “it”. Which given what happened to me on my 18th makes me laugh ironically. But anyway...

I formed my own explanation, either just to wave a geek flag or because it was one of their insults -   I’d get called alien (originality was not something that was encouraged at my school as you can tell), so I came up with calling myself Vulcan, with the lack of emotional response and distaste for social norms it ft me

I’ve never “wanted” romance, and the idea of physical contact makes my skin crawl (literally and figuratively) Sometimes I’d stop and ask myself if I’d felt  ‘feelings’ for someone.. Like the books described or like my favourite characters on TV?  That... butterfly ‘love at first sight’ heart racing at the sight of another person, but th answer was always no. I even asked the few people in my life I looked up to, to describe “love” (still do sometimes, but that’s more fic research stuff) and it never registered with me which has never bothered me more than a passing itch would.

I was/ am me and there was nothing I could do about it, and as that was the only way I’d ever known it was/is natural to me. back to the ‘discovery’ part of this rant/blog: I can’t really separate discovering Aromantic or Asexual as terms, and tbf I can’t really say for certain when either clicked into place. As with most important things I discovered I wasn’t alone or an ‘abnormality of nature’ through a hell of a lot of research.

I was in university, going to my first few (good) conventions, and I felt surer, of myself I guess, as cheesy as that sounds. this was when I was around 25 Ironically for me this was not that long after after I’d met Ally Dark fairy goth sister lady that she is and started actually finding reasons to like and trust .. anyone really, and shortly after this we met Heather and I discovered among the other things we shared, she was Asexual too, but she’s... i think the term is actually allo-Romantic, she’s interested in that sort of stuff, loves a good romance story, and all the mush attached  

I’m still defining the parameters of me, as we all do, people change throughout their lives no one stays precisely the same but. I AM Aromantic Asexual and that is one thing that I am quite happy to say will never change.

The Uk as far as I’m concerned doesn’t recognise Aromantic or Asexual people enough, not that the rest of the world does either, because we don’t stand out as far as their concerned, (well. Most don’t ;) ) but we exist, we are valid and despite what some would have you believe we do count in the LGBTQIA and that is my “discovery” rant/blog/ ASAW day 1 post

“LesBiGay and Transgender Glossary” from Usenet, 21 Dec 1992

Newsgroups: soc.bi,soc.motss From: [email protected] (Alan Hamilton) Subject: LesBiGay and Transgender Glossary (long) Message-ID: [email protected] Sender: [email protected] (USENET News System) Organization: Open Software Foundation Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 23:33:42 GMT Lines: 411

[Sent to soc.bi, soc.motss, BiAct-L, Bisexu-l, BiFem-l.]

If you have the time and inclination, suggestions for improving this are most welcome. Please send them to [email protected].

LesBiGay and Transgender Glossary ---------------------------------

This brochure is intended for people who want to think more clearly about issues of gender identity and sexual identity. It attempts to provide basic information and vocabulary to enable you to interact with members of these communities as a respectful and somewhat informed individual, rather than an offensive person who knows nothing (and by inference probably does not care) about their community, the oppression they deal with, and their personal experience.

The definitions of these words are not standardized, and are used differently by different individuals and in different regions. The definitions in (this early version of) this pamphlet were put together mostly by Alan Hamilton, a bisexual-identified white male from the Midwest and Northeast of the US.

The meanings of words change over time, especially as the concepts they represent change. Concepts and attitudes toward gender identity and sexual identity are changing in society as a whole and within the LesBiGay and Transgender communities. Therefore, the meanings of these words will continue to change as well. See the (updated date) at the end of this brochure.

These definitions assume the existence of two and only two each of sexes, genders, and sex/gender roles, which are separate and distinct from one another. Many people see them instead as overlapping, closely related, or as a limited view or model of a much richer reality.

Despite these caveats, many people find the terms listed here useful in varying degrees, either for describing their experience or as a starting point for describing how their view of the world differs from that represented here.

Sexual Identity and Gender Identity are similar in some ways and very different in others. Both refer to how one thinks of oneself. The existence and perpetuation of gender identities and sexual identities is based at least in part in the historic and continuing oppression of people who do not conform to certain aspects of society's gender roles.

However, sex, gender identity, and sexual identity refer to \fBdifferent\fP aspects of oneself. Therefore, one may be any combination of sex (male/female), gender (masculine/feminine), and sexual identity (straight, bisexual, lesbian/gay.) In recent history, bisexuals, lesbians, gay men and transgendered people have formed communities which are mostly separate but partly overlap with one another. Because of this historic separation, someone who is a member of one of these communities does not necessarily understand and prioritize the issues of others of these communities. One who belongs to more than one of these communities may feel welcome in each, but usually neither addresses all one's needs or the way that one's needs from different communities overlap or interact.

Corrections and additions to this glossary (from the US and elsewhere) are welcome. Please send them to ECBN at the address at the end of this pamphlet.

Androgynous/androgyny: Simultaneously exhibiting masculine and feminine characteristics.

Biphobia: The oppression or mistreatment of bisexuals, either by heterosexuals (sometimes also called homophobia) or by lesbians and gay men.

Bisexual (community): One who has significant sexual or romantic attractions to members of both the same gender and the other gender, or who identify as members of the bisexual community. Derogatory terms from homophobes are the same as those for lesbians and gay men. Derogatory terms used by lesbians, gay men, and some heterosexuals include: fence sitter, AC/DC, double-gaited, confused.

Boy: 1. A young male. 2. Colloquial term for masculine. Often used to specify the gender of clothes. [I changed into my boy clothes.] Boy has often been used as a condescending term for a man (especially a man of color), and is therefore distasteful to many people. (See girl.)

Butch: 1. Masculine or macho dress and behavior, regardless of sex or gender identity. 2. A sub-identity of lesbian, gay male, or bisexual, based on masculine or macho dress and behavior. (See femme.) 3. (butch it up) To exaggerate masculine behaviors, usually for others' entertainment. (See camp it up.)

Camp: To exaggerate feminine behaviors, usually for others' entertainment. Also, to camp it up. (See butch it up.)

Come out: 1. To deal with one's own and others' reactions to the discovery or disclosure of one's sexual identity. 2. To disclose one's own sexual identity to another. [I came out to my mother over Thanksgiving vacation.] 3. (- to oneself) To discover that one's own sexual identity is different than previously assumed. [I came out to myself three months ago.] 4. (- for) To disclose another's sexual identity with their permission or at their request. [I asked my mother to come out to my grandparents for me.] (See out (someone).) 5. May be applied to disclosure of any information about oneself, not just sexual identity.

Cross Dresser (CD): One who, regardless of the motivation, wears clothes, makeup, etc. which are considered (by the culture) appropriate for the other gender but not one's own.

Drag (In Drag): 1. Clothes, often unusual or dramatic, especially those considered appropriate to the other gender. 2. In drag: Wearing clothes considered appropriate to the other gender. [I went to the halloween party in drag.] [She was wearing butch drag.]

Can be applied to any recognizable clothes "look."

Drag Queen: A M->F transvestite who employs dramatic clothes, makeup, and mannerisms, often for other people's appreciation or for its shock value.

Dyke: Reclaimed derogatory slang. Refers to lesbians, or to lesbians and bisexual females.

Electrolysis: Process of killing hair follicles, especially of facial and neck hair, usually with an electric needle. (See secondary sex characteristics.)

F->M: Female to male. Used to specify the direction of a change of sex or gender role.

Femme: 1. Feminine or effeminate dress and behavior, regardless of sex or gender identity. 2. A sub-identity of lesbian, gay, or bisexual, based on feminine or effeminate dress and behavior. (See butch.)

Female: One who has a vagina. (See primary sex characteristics.)

Female Impersonator (FI): A male who, on specific occasions, cross dresses and employs stereotypical feminine dialog, voice, and mannerisms for the entertainment of other people. (See camp.)

Feminine: The gender role assigned to females.

Fetishistic Transvestite: A transvestite who consistently eroticizes cross dressing. May also eroticize fantasies of gender or sex change.

Gay (community): One who has significant sexual or romantic attractions primarily to members of the same gender, or who identifies as a member of the gay community. Sometimes used as a synonym for lesgay (community) or gay male (community). Lesbians and bisexuals often do not feel included by this term.

Gay man/male (community: A man who has significant sexual and romantic attractions primarily to men, or who identifies as a member of the gay male community. Derogatory slang includes: queer, faggot, swish.

Gender (identity): How one thinks of oneself in terms of one's gender role. Masculine or feminine. (See butch, femme.)

Gender (identity) community: Colloquial for transgender community. People who identify as transvestite, transsexual, or transgendered; or as members of the (gender community. Members of the gender community often do not identify as members of the sexual minority community.

Gender dysphoria (GD): Unhappiness or discomfort experienced by one whose primary sex characteristics do not match one's gender identity.

Gender neutral: Clothing, behaviors, thoughts, feelings, relationships, etc. which are considered appropriate to both genders/sexes.

Gender role: Arbitrary rules, assigned by society, that define what clothing, behaviors, thoughts, feelings, relationships, etc. are considered appropriate and inappropriate for members of each gender. Which things are considered masculine, feminine, or gender neutral varies according to location, class, occasion, and numerous other factors.

Genetic: Having to do with the XX (female) or XY (male) chromosome pair, which most heavily influence primary and secondary sex characteristics. Terms like genetic male/female actually refer to gender, not genes.

Genetic male/man/boy (GM/GB): One classed as male from birth, regardless of one's present sex or gender identity. (See boy.)

Genetic female/woman/girl (GF/GM/GG): One classed as female from birth, regardless of one's present sex or gender identity. (See girl.)

Girl: 1. A young female. 2. Colloquial term for feminine. Often used to specify gender of clothes. ["My girl clothes."] Girl has often been used as a condescending term for a woman, and is therefore distasteful to many people. (See boy.)

Hermaphrodite: One who has both a penis and a vagina. (See primary sex characteristics.)

Heterosexual (het): One who has significant sexual or romantic attractions primarily to members of the other gender. Derogatory terms include: breeder. (See straight.)

Heterosexism: A particular subset of the oppression of LesBiGays. The assumption that identifying as heterosexual and having sexual or romantic attractions only to members of the other gender is good and desirable, and that other sexual identities and attractions are bad and unacceptable, and that anyone is straight whose sexual identity is not known, usually coupled with a "blindness" to the existence and concerns of LesBiGays. (See homophobia, biphobia.) A heterosexist is one who practices heterosexism.

Homophile (community): Obsolete term for gay male (community).

Homophobia: Originally, an irrational fear of sexual attraction to the same gender. Developed into a term for all aspects of the oppression of LesGays, sometimes including all LesBiGays. (See heterosexism, biphobia.)

Homophobe: One who is afraid of or oppresses people because one perceives them to have sexual or romantic attractions to the same gender.

Homosexual: Formal or clinical term for gay, usually meaning gay male, sometimes meaning LesGay, and occasionally meaning LesBiGay. Homosexual and homosexuality are often associated with the proposition that same gender attractions are a mental disorder, and are therefore distasteful to some people.

Hormone therapy: Used to change secondary sex characteristics, including breast size, weight distribution, and facial hair growth. (See electolysis.)

Identify/ied (as): To hold a particular identity. [I identify as a transvestite.] [I am a bisexual identified person.]

Identity: How one thinks of oneself, as opposed to what others observe or think about one. (See label, self-identity.)

Internalized homophobia/biphobia: The internalized oppression of LesBiGays and bisexuals. This often includes feeling that we are bad at the core; that the entire world is unsafe; that we can only trust other members of our own group; that members of our group are untrustworthy; that for safety we must stay in hiding; that for safety we must come out everywhere, all the time; that our love is bad, or is not the same as other people's love.

Internalized oppression: Negative messages and feelings about oneself, one's group, and how members of the group (including oneself) deserve to be treated, which are taken in as true at some level. Internalized oppression often includes messages which contradict one another, as well as messages which reinforce one another.

Label: How someone thinks of one, as opposed to how one sees oneself. (See identity.)

Lesbian: A woman who has significant sexual or romantic attractions to the same gender, or who identifies as a member of the lesbian community. Bisexual women often do not feel included by this term. Derogatory slang: dyke, lesbo.

LesBiGay (community): Contraction of "lesbian, bisexual, and gay." Colloquial term for the sexual identity (community). Often spelled with capital "B" and "G" to prevent misinterpretation as "lesbian and gay." Does not include the gender community.

LesGay: Contraction of "lesbian and gay." Sometimes used to mean LesBiGay, but bisexuals often do not feel included by this term.

M->F: Male to female. Used to specify the direction of a change in sex or gender role.

Male: One who has a penis. (See primary sex characteristics.)

Male Impersonator: A female who, on specific occasions, cross dresses and employs stereotypical masculine dialog, voice, and mannerisms for the entertainment of other people.

Man: 1. An adult male. 2. One who identifies with the masculine gender role, regardless of present sex or sexual identity. Plural: men.

Masculine: The gender role assigned to males.

Monosexual: One who has significant sexual or romantic attractions only to members of one sex. Straight, gay, lesbian. Not bisexual. Related terms: monosexism, monosexist. (See heterosexist.)

Neuter: 1. One who has neither a penis nor a vagina. (see primary sex characteristics.) 2. Occasionally used to mean androgenous.

Oppression: Systematic mistreatment of and misinformation about people who are (believed to be) members of a particular group or class. Mistreatment ranges from not including members of the group in one's circle of friends, media reports on, and representations of society; through the cold shoulder; not consulting with or accepting input from them on decisions which concern them; snide comments; verbal harassment; assault; rape; and murder based on the target person's (perceived) membership in the group. (See internalized oppression, homophobia, biphobia.) Oppress: to participate in oppression.

Other sex/gender: The other sex or gender than the reference person's own. [She has an other sex partner (than her own sex).] [Are you currently in a relationship with a member of the other gender (than your own)?]

(to be) Out: To be open about one's sexual identity with someone or in a situation. [I am out to my mother.] [I am out at work.] (See come out.)

Out [someone]: 1. To disclose a second person's sexual identity to a third person, especially without the second person's permission. 2. To disclose one's own sexual identity, sometimes without choosing to do so. [I outed myself by leaving a political letter on my desk, which my boss saw when he was looking for me.] (See come out.)

Pre-operative transsexual (Pre-op TS): One who is actively planning to switch physical sexes, mostly to relieve gender dysphoria. Probably, but not necessarily, cross dresses, takes hormone therapy, and gets electrolysis.

Primary sex characteristics: Penis (male) or vagina (female.) (See female, male, hermaphrodite, neuter.)

Same sex/gender: The same sex or gender as the reference person's own. [He has a same sex partner (as his own sex).] [Are you currently in a relationship with a member of the same gender (as yourself)?]

Secondary sex characteristics: facial and body hair, vocal timbre and range, breast size, weight distribution.

Self-identify/identity as: Formal for identity/identify. Emphasizes one's internal reality (identity), as opposed to external factors and others' interpretations of them (labels.)

Sex: Male, female, hermaphrodite, or neuter, depending on one's primary sex characteristics.

Sex role: Gender role.

Sexism: The oppression of females, regardless of sexual identity.

Sexual identity: How one thinks of oneself, in terms of being significantly attracted to members of the same gender or the other gender. Based on one's internal experience, as opposed to the gender of one's actual sexual partners. (See sexual orientation/preference.) People whose sex does not match their gender identity may base the definition of their sexual identity on either their sex or their gender, or may think of themselves as having two sexual identities, one based on each, either simultaneously or one before SRS and the other after.

Sexual identity/orientation/preference community: LesBiGay people.

Sexual minority (community): A formal term which includes LesBiGay and sometimes transgender people.

Sexual orientation/preference: 1. A constellation of personal factors, including sexual identity. (See the brochure Using the Klein Scale to Teach about Sexual Orientation, from ECBN.) 2. Sexual identity. Sexual orientation emphasizes that some people feel that one has no control or influence over the development of one's sexual identity. Sexual preference emphasizes that some people feel that one does or should have some control or influence over the development of one's sexual identity.

Sexual Reassignment Surgery (SRS): A surgical procedure which changes one's primary sexual characteristics from those of one sex to those of another (penis to vagina, or vagina to penis.)

Straight: Colloquial for heterosexual. Straight has connotations of "unadulterated," "pure," and "honest," and some members of the sexual identity community find distateful the implication that one who is not straight is "bent," "adulterated," "impure," or "dishonest." Straight also has connotations of "narrow," "straight-laced" or "conservative," and some heterosexual people find it distasteful.

Transgender community: Formal term for gender community.

Transgendered (TG): One who switches gender roles, whether just once, or many times at will. Inclusive term for transsexuals and transvestites.

Transsexual (TS): One who switches physical sexes (usually just once, but there are exceptions.) Primary sex change is accomplished by surgery. (See Sexual Reassignment Surgery.) Hormone therapy, electrolysis, additional surgery, and other treatments can change secondary sex characteristics. (See Pre-op TS.)

Transvestite (TV): One who mainly cross dresses for pleasure in the appearance and sensation. The pleasure may not be erotic (see fetishistic transvestite.) It may be empowering, rebellious, or something else. May feel comfortable in a focused gender role while cross dressed. May occasionally experience gender dysphoria.

Queer: 1. Reclaimed derogatory slang for the sexual minority community (eg. Queer Nation.) Not accepted by all the sexual minority community, especially older members. 2. Sometimes used for an even wider spectrum of marginalized or radicalized groups and individuals.

Woman, womyn, womin: 1. A female adult. 2. One who identifies with the feminine gender role, regardless of present sex or sexual identity. Plurals: women, wymyn, wimmin.

We have a new citizen in Mount Phoenix:

                          Kong Xueer, who is also known as Snow,                                   a 25 year old daughter of Brigit.          She is a physician and immunologist at Asclepius General.

FC NAME/GROUP: Kong Xueer ( Snow Kong ) The9 CHARACTER NAME: - AGE/DATE OF BIRTH:  january 3 1995. 25 PLACE OF BIRTH: hong kong OCCUPATION: physician, immunologist HEIGHT: 168 cm (5’5″) WEIGHT: 48 kg (105 lbs) DEFINING FEATURES: pale white skin, ruby lips.

PERSONALITY: She is irritable and confident in her abilities, though also acknowledges her deficiencies and the need to hone her skills further. Her confidence in her skills and intellect often comes off as arrogance to others. Sarcastic to others, creating barrier from herself to others so emotions won’t cloud her judgement and never remembering other names instead nicknames which she use as insults. Snow takes her job seriously, she is definition of all work no play as doesn’t want to risk losing any patients. Respectful to her superiors due to being trained how to be refined member of society from young age making her very well-spoken.

HISTORY: For being daughter of Celtic goddess Brigit who’s known for her warmth, Snow is literally known as ice queen throughout her entire life. From young age she learned she could only rely on herself as father only left her alone with nanny & tutors to teach her the way of being refine young bright woman never seeing her father around as he was always working or at some business meetings. The child became well-versed in various subjects becoming piano prodigy due to creativity mind. Constantly asking questions about the world always thirsting for more knowledge, the nanny found it sweet how she always find young snow with her nose in a book or with the said book laying on her face as she fallen asleep reading.

Despite Snow constantly thriving even in her teen years competing in martial arts competitions, her father shunned her like she was nothing until he needed his prized bird to the potential investors for the company. The demi-god learned not care about what her father thought of her or anyone else. She wanted to improve constantly challenging herself in various subjects. Snow grew arrogant along with the knowledge she stored in her genius mind only caring for one self until one fateful evening. The nanny who practically fallen gravely ill, she tended to her like she always did ever since was little sprout. Somehow she knew immediately on what medicine to give her to help stabilize her deterring health yet that only slow down the inevitable passing of her mother figure in her life.

That moment is when her passion for medicine sparked as focus her studies in biology & medicine gaining the degree knowing that she naturally skilled in that area not ever questioning her abilities. Snow only cares about results and solving mysteries not caring about the actual human beings themselves. The hospital is no playground so there is never room for error, since human life on the line. Other interns who worked alongside her called her ice queen for cold nature yet she would only use her charm on the patients to make them feel comfortable enough to give the information she needed to cure them. These people will only meet her in fleeting moment so she will help them in their time of distress then never see them again, that’s her system she loves so much.

The only love she had in her life has passed away, protecting herself from feeling such heartache, she made it unnecessary emotion, all she needs is to work hard to succeed. Not even any pretty human being can stir any emotions even oblivious to the ones who clearly have romantic intentions towards her, those romances are mere distractions. The only feeling that Snow likes is having that feeling knowing that she saved as many lives she could do today while feeling no remorse when people die due that being the way the world works. The demi-god knew she was better than most mortals natural skill in medicine along with the natural ability in martial arts knowing which part of bodies would be most effective during an attack, making it easy to win those trophies back in the day.

It wasn’t until she got job position to join their diagnostics team at Asclepius General Hospital as physician immunologist along with telling about her goddess lineage which she didn’t care about, why should she? Saying that she’s grateful for the gift her goddess mother given her but she learned everything on her own merit and will. At first she debated whenever to move to this Mount Phoenix yet the pay was almost too tempting not to accept besides the hospital needed doctors like her and secretly curious about what other demi-gods are like.

PANTHEON: Celtic CHILD OF: Brigit POWERS: Naturally gifted in martial arts & medicine knowing where exactly to hit to make it hurt tenfold. Creative prodigy who is skilled with her hands making it easy to think of creativity ways to solve cases. STRENGTHS: strong-willed, efficient, curious, rational & informed WEAKNESSES: arrogant, stubborn, manipulative, cold & ruthless

an essay i wrote for class that im posting to link to it later

Ingrown: Compulsory Feminine Hairlessness, Perpetuation of the Gender Binary, and Patriarchal Control of the Feminine-Coded Body

This essay discusses gendered perceptions of body hair, the feminine hairlessness norm as perpetuating the gender binary, and the expectation of feminine hairlessness as a form of patriarchal control over feminine-coded people. ‘Feminine-coded’ is the term I am using to describe people which are normatively placed in the category of ‘woman’, which has no singular definition (Bettcher, 403). 

The topic of feminine body hair is often shunned, classified as too trivial to discuss, yet, the pervasiveness of ‘mundane’ feminine hair removal suggests cultural significance. Socially mandated maintenance rituals that concern the feminine-coded body can be inspected as a microcosm reflecting a larger patriarchal system; patriarchy being the sociopolitical system that privileges masculinity over femininity. While I acknowledge there are many forms of appearance modification normatively expected of feminine-coded bodies, (such as dieting, makeup, hair styling, nail care, and skincare (Bartky, 99) and varying degrees of expectations defined by specific cultural norms and individual history, I wish to focus on feminine-coded body hair removal norms of the West (which I refer to as “the hairlessness norm” (Toerien and Wilkinson, 333)) and their implications.

Carol Hanisch’s 1969 memo, now referred to as “The Personal is Political” illuminated how problems that afflict women are commonly disregarded as “personal issues”, ignoring the fact that feminine-coded people experience patriarchal violence because of the system they are located in (Hanisch, 1969). From personal experience, the way my facial and body hair has been policed (by peers, employers, teachers, family, romantic partners, and strangers) has led me to develop trichotillomania (or “trich”, an obsessive hair pulling disorder). Exploring trich has led me to discover that the shame, guilt, and disgust I feel at my own body (hair) is socially produced through patriarchal systems. I can’t be the only one, and through this essay I wish to explore how the cultural production of feminine hairlessness enforces forms of violence and control to feminine-coded bodies. I wish to echo Hanisch’s sentiment that personal problems are political problems (Hanisch, 1969), the norm of feminine hairlessness is one of the many “mundane” ways patriarchal economic and social system exert control over feminine bodies and seek to define them as “unacceptable if unaltered” (Toerien and Wilkinson, 333). 

I would like to define a few terms for this paper, ‘body hair’ will refer to facial and body hair that is normatively deemed inappropriate on feminine-coded bodies, including ‘ungroomed’ brows and unibrows, moustaches, beard/chin/cheek hair, breast, belly, and back hair, ‘ungroomed’ pubic hair, leg, toe, foot, hand, knuckle and other (non-scalp or eyelash) hair. 

The ‘gender binary’ is a system in Western culture wherein individuals are expected to participate in socially produced gendered behaviour, where gender is classified as two distinct, opposite forms of masculinity and femininity. Upon birth (sometimes before), individuals are classified as either boys or girls according to their external genitalia (Bettcher, 393). During childhood, individuals learn through socialization and education what it means to “do” (perform) gender as a boy or a girl (Bettcher, 393). The gender binary system fits into Foucault’s notion of “discipline” and exists within a patriarchal power relationship, as feminine-coded bodies are expected to be altered in ways masculine-coded bodies are not. “Discipline” describes the way types of power are exercised: they are systems enforced to define and order populations, increasing the docility and utility of individuals to control them (Foucault, 136-137). Control of individuals is achieved partially through normative definitions of the body (highly subjective, but defined as “objective” by medical, governmental, popular, or social forces of their time) and what is appropriate for the body (Foucault, 140-141). Performing gender is expected in mainstream Western society, but the effort and cost for producing an ‘appropriate body’ for feminine-coded people is socially policed and informed by patriarchal institutions. For feminine-coded people, smooth, hairless, (preferably white and young) skin is expected, (especially on the face), and (in mainstream contexts,) those who ‘fail’ to meet this norm are often mocked, shamed and policed into conformity. For trans women, and feminine-coded people with darkly pigmented hair, the expectations of hairlessness are often enforced more violently and aggressively.

Hair growth patterns on different individuals vary substantially depending on factors such as age, genes and ‘race’, and the balance of testosterone and estrogen, both of which are present in most human bodies and are hormonal factors in hair growth (Toerien and Wilkinson, 335). Despite this, there is a widespread assumption that ‘men’ are ‘naturally’ hairier than ‘women’ (Toerien and Wilkinson, 335). This perspective is simplistic, binary, and discounts many relevant factors to hair growth distribution patterns. Feminine-coded people have an “equivalent potential for hair growth to men...women have hair follicles for moustache, beard, and body hair” (335 Toerien and Wilkinson), yet, popular assumptions expect the feminine body to be depilated to be viewed as “appropriately feminine”. The myth of ‘men’ as ‘naturally hairier’ is perpetuated by cultural assumptions of binary gender norms, how femininity is presented (in media and culture), and by medical definitions of what ‘counts’ as ‘normally’ or ‘abnormally’ hairy. Several scales to ‘rate’ hair growth have been proposed, but there exists no firm biological boundary to establish between the “normally” and “abnormally” hairy woman (Toerien and Wilkinson, 336). Frustratingly, within mainstream Western culture, virtually any hair on the feminine body outside the lashes, brows and scalp is considered ‘excess’, and the psychological and social consequences for feminine-coded people with ‘excess’ body hair can be profound, including depression, anxiety, stress, shame, and isolation. A study by Kitzinger & Willmott (2002) found that female-identifying participants with excessive body hair characterized their hair negatively, describing it as “‘upsetting’, ‘distressing’, ‘embarrassing’, ‘unsightly’, ‘dirty’ and ‘distasteful’” (para. 2). 

Invoking a feminist curioisty (Enloe), one must ask, that if all genders may grow body hair (excluding individuals with autoimmune disorders such as alopecia), why is it that feminine hairiness is considered abnormal? The cultural context is significant. Feminine hairiness has historically been associated with negative assumptions about innapropriate conduct: masculine attitudes/aggression, deviant, repressed or queer sexuality, uncleanliness, mental illness, and witchcraft (Toerien and Wilkinson, 338). Masculine hairiness has been historically associated with virility, strength, and maturity (Toerien and Wilkinson, 337). The removal of feminine body hair is not a new or purely Western phenomena, (Toerien and Wilkinson, 333), but the current Western norm for large surfaces of hair to be removed is relatively recent, the act of removing hair from underarms and legs was “not widely practiced by most U.S. women until 1915”, when the first “womens razor” was marketed by Gillette (the “Milady Decolletée”), and as restrictions on feminine-coded bodies as needing to be completely covered were diminishing. (Toerien and Wilkinson, 333). Still, however, during the 1800’s in the West, any visible hair on feminine-coded faces was pathologized and defined as needing treatment (Toerien and Wilkinson, 333). Feminine hairlessness can be perceived as a binary-enforcing social demarcation tool to differentiate between ‘women’ and ‘men’ (Toerien and Wilkinson, 335). 

Feminine hairlessness has been theorized to to suggest a child-like status afforded to feminine-coded people, unlike the adult status afforded to masculine-coded people. This relates to historical and cultural patriarchal patterns of viewing the “feminine” as lacking, incomplete, and passive (Toerien and Wilkinson 338). The term “baby smooth” often applied to freshly depilated feminine skin could be evidence of the childlike/feminine association. 

For many people, body hair begins developing during puberty. During this time, individuals are often exposed to new expectations as to how to appropriately performing gender. For many feminine-coded individuals, this involves pressure from peers, parents, partners, teachers, and media, to remove hair from the face, legs, underarms, stomach, and/or pubic area. In many cases, pubescent feminine-coded people will be reliant on a caregiver for permission to depilate the body, adding a sense of lack of control or shame for many who do not have the resources or permission to depilate their bodies. 

Feminine body hair is conceived of as unsanitary and often treated with the same disgust of other body products (like blood, odor and sweat) in a way that male-coded body hair is not (Toerien and Wilkinson, 338). This is perpetuated by standards of what is considered ‘good grooming’ for feminine-coded people (Toerien and Wilkinson, 338), where body hair is associated with dirtiness, and a lack of body hair with ‘cleanliness’. The association of feminine body hair with ‘dirtiness’ is tied up with racism, where more visible, pigmented hair is conceptualized as ‘dirtier’ than blond hair (Toerien and Wilkinson, 339). The “dirtiness” of feminine body hair is linked to its socially produced shamefulness, where unwanted hair is both embarrasing to develop and to remove; most cis women in hetrosexual relationships are expected to hide their depilitory “tools of transformation” (Bartky, 104) from men, to maintain the illusion of natural hairlessness. Feminine coded people who spend money to professionally remove body hair are often ridiculed for their “self indulgence” and “vanity”; this perception fails to critically examine the context within which choices to grow or remove body hair are made (Gill, 75). Adherence to “prevailing standards of bodily acceptability is a known factor in economic mobility” (Toerien and Wilkinson, 338), yet resources are required to maintain the ‘norms of bodily acceptability’, which for poor feminine-coded people, (and anyone who does not wish to depilate constantly), may be inaccessible, contributing to their exclusion from mainstream social, and professional environments. 

The media plays a significant role in constructing and defining what ‘counts’ as appropriate femininity. Feminine-coded people who have hairy bodies or faces are generally absent in popular media, or used for comedic, insulting, or tokenizing purposes. The vast majority of commercials and advertisements for depilation products don’t show body hair (the first one to show body hair in 100 years came out in 2018); already-hairless legs are lathered and ‘shaved’ in commercials: perpetuating the myth that hair is unnatural, unsanitary and too taboo to even witness. The advertisement industry exploits feelings of inadequacy, shame, embarrassment, and a desire to fit in and appear ‘sexy’, ‘feminine’, and ‘confident’ in order to sell shaving creams, balms, after shaves, hair bleaches, hot and cold wax, depilatory creams, tweezers, buffing tools, electrolysis and laser treatments. The necessity for feminine bodies to absorb a ‘specialized knowledge’ in order to appropriately construct their hairless bodies is time and resource consuming (Bartkey, 99). Feminine coded people are expected to learn how to prevent and treat ingrown hairs, razor burn, how to not cut oneself shaving, burn oneself waxing, or otherwise injure oneself in an attempt to depilate. They must learn how and how often to depilate, and the proper exfoliation and after care treatments to ensure smooth and ‘properly’ hairless skin. The feminine body is transformed into a “docile body”, a body which is highly modified, policed, disciplined, and practiced, it is constantly surveilled in a panoptical sense of constant self surveillance (Bartky, 95). Everyone it seems, yet no one in particular, is enforcing the hairlessness norm; there are no public sanctions against body hair, but propagandistic norms that defines feminine hairlessness as ‘the way things are’ contribute to an invasion of the feminine-coded body by patriarchal ideologies (Bartky, 107). 

The normative expectation for feminine-coded bodies to be hairless, and the disciplining by media and social systems which reward feminine-coded people who adhere to normative beauty standards, punish or mock those who don’t, and frame hairlessness as a natural, easily achievable, enjoyable, and fundamentally feminine, function to produce a disciplined, feminized, subject who devotes capital and time to a patriarchal system. The mainstream norm for feminine hairlessness is beneficial to corporate interests of keeping feminine-coded people ashamed of their bodies, burdened with expectations to alter their body, and incentives to purchase products to maintain a constant facade of natural hairlessness. It serves patriarchal interests of upholding a gender binary and maintaining norms of the feminine as passive, decorative, ‘not fully adult’, and in constant need of modification (Toerien and Wilkinson, 339). 

Bibliography:

Bartky, Sandra Lee. “Foucault, Femininity and the Modernization of Patriarchal Power’  - 

Chapter 5” Feminism & Foucault: Reflections on Resistance, edited by Irene Diamond and Lee Quinby, Northeastern University Press, 1988.

Bettcher, Talia Mae. “Trapped in the Wrong Theory: Re-Thinking Trans Oppression and 

Resistance.” Signs, vol. 39, no. 2, 2014, pp. 383–406

Enloe, Cynthia. The Curious Feminist. University of California Press, 2004. Open WorldCat, 

http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=223994.

Foucault, Michel. “The Subject and Power.” Critical Inquiry, vol. 8, no. 4, 1982, pp. 777–95. 

JSTOR.

Gill, Rosalind C. “Critical Respect: The Difficulties and Dilemmas of Agency and ‘Choice’ for 

Feminism: A Reply to Duits and van Zoonen.” European Journal of Women’s Studies, vol. 14, no. 1, Feb. 2007, pp. 69–80. DOI.org (Crossref), doi:10.1177/1350506807072318.

Hanisch, Carol. “The Personal Is Political: The Original Feminist Theory Paper at the Author’s 

Web Site.” Carol Hanisch, 2009, http://www.carolhanisch.org/CHwritings/PIP.html.

Kitzinger, Celia, and Jo Willmott. “‘The Thief of Womanhood’: Women's Experience of 

Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome.” Social Science & Medicine, vol. 54, no. 3, 2002, pp. 349–61.

Toerien, Merran, and Sue Wilkinson. “Gender and Body Hair: Constructing the Feminine 

What would you say is the difference between pansexuality and bisexuality? If you already answered something like this, sorry, I couldn’t find it xx

Hey there lovely person!

This is something a lot of people are curious about and it is good you ask, I am happy to share it again! If you missed anything from this explanation, please have a look at my FAQs.

 What is the difference between bisexuality and pansexuality?

Haha the never ending question and dangerous territory at times.

A lot of people reason from the original meaning of the word ‘bi’ and the word ‘pan’. I understand why someone reasons from this perspective if you do not have any knowledge on the subject and anyone to inform you. People tend to reason from what they know.

Which may be the way some explain it, however, this is the dangerous/tricky territory. As we are aware, just the term “bi” on its own denotes two and then quickly you have the conclusion that it means men and women, but that is not the definition within the LGBT+ community.

Indeed, bisexuality and pansexuality can mean the same, but do not always mean the same. They are rather alike and I believe majority of bisexuals also discard the gender binary in regards to sexual attraction.

Bisexuality is a sexual orientation where one is attracted to the same gender and/or other gender(s).

The term pansexuality is used interchangeably with bisexuality, and, similarly, people who identify as bisexual may “feel that gender, biological sex, and sexual orientation should not be a focal point in potential [romantic/sexual] relationships”.

So then of course one asks, what is the difference at all? How are you helping make this any clearer? If anything, you made it more confusing!

Pansexuality: “not limited or inhibited in sexual choice with regards to gender or activity” or as I would say “Pansexuality means you have the ability to be with anybody,
 but it doesn’t mean you will be with anyone.”

Are these meanings mutually exclusive? No, not really. There are many overlapping aspects for these two non-monosexual sexualities. It depends on your definition of each, but it comes down to the fact that both are able to be attracted to more than one gender. That is the simple version.

I don’t have anything against bisexuality at all, I do notice that a lot of genderism occurs when explaining sexualities which include attraction to more than one gender, especially bisexuality due to the bi prefix. I try to correct this to others whenever I can, but there are a large variety of ways the world defines bisexuality.

Like the figure above shows, it overlaps. In my own story, I just felt immediately drawn to the term pansexuality myself because I wanted to completely remove physical gender from the equation all together.

There are more similarities than differences between bisexuality and pansexuality. I don’t really see it as a mess as I definitely support anyone with whatever sexuality or sexual preference, I merely want to educate people of the sexualities commonly used nowadays.

I think many people do try and define bisexuality in a binary method in order to establish the difference between the two when explaining pansexuality, but they are more like fraternal twins; incredibly similar with (sometimes) slight differences - also depending on how you see both. In my case, I was feeling the pansexuality one more than the other.

I hope that explains it to you from my view point. In regards to the fact that there are labels, a lot of people who do not feel within the society’s norm will choose a label they connect the most to which allows them to find a like minded community of peers. It is a primal programmed activity of our minds in order to protect ourselves ~ like safety in numbers.

If you feel you are attracted to more than one gender and want to know which label you are, this is a great way to do it. Ask around, get informed and see if there is a label you identify with. If you do not want a label, do not feel the need to label yourself. Your sexuality and label and whatever are exactly that - yours. Nobody else should be defining that part of you - that is just yours.

Love,

Lisa

Book Review

In Search of Scandal. By Susanne Lord. Sourcebooks, 2015.

Rating: 2/5 stars

Genre: historical romance

Part of a Series? Yes, London Explorers #1

Summary: All of London is abuzz with the tale of Will Repton. The lone survivor of a massacre in Tibet has returned to England a hero, but the traumatized explorer has no time for glory. Another dangerous expedition awaits. Nothing will deter him from his quest, and no one will unearth his secret—until Will meets Charlotte Baker. Vivacious Charlotte Baker also has a mission—to find a man whose bold spirit matches her own. When she meets Will Repton, she immediately recognizes him as her soul mate, and she’s naively willing to turn her back on the rules of propriety to ensnare him. Will is torn between his fascination with Charlotte and his vow to finish his quest. He knows what it is to risk life and limb—but what if his most perilous adventure doesn’t lie across an ocean, but within his own lost heart?

***Full review under the cut.***

Content Warnings: graphic sexual content, poisoning, physical assault (not sexual), near miscarriage; mentions of: disemboweling, blood, violence, corpses, murder (including the murder of children)

Overview: I will admit that I felt a little uneasy going into this book. Seeing “a massacre in Tibet” in the summary gave me the impression that there could be some Orientalism (or, if not, some straight up depictions of racism), but since my favorite romance author blurbed and recommended it, I decided to give it a try anyway. I can’t speak to the book’s treatment of China and Tibet, though given the history of Victorian imperialism, it felt somewhat “accurate” here; I didn’t get the impression that the region was over-exoticized, though it was treated as a subject of curiosity and characters bring back “artifacts.” I suppose it wasn’t too bad, given the book’s setting, but I still don’t know how I feel about the whole massacre subplot. That aside, the author’s prose was well-crafted, which was impressive for a debut novel. My main reason for giving this book a middling rating, therefore, had less to do with the premise or writing craft and more to do with the characters and the romance itself. I had a hard time rooting for the main couple, and I wish Lord had spent less time forcing them into awkward situations that made for a tumultuous love story and more time exploring characterization and meaningful connection. As it stands, this book receives an average rating from me, but I would be interested to see if (and how) Lord improves in her future books.

Writing: Lord’s prose is surprisingly well-crafted for a debut novel, achieving a nice balance between description and exposition using a straight-forward style that is characteristic of many romances. While Lord’s prose is easy to read, it doesn’t lack fun flourishes, vivid imagery, and compelling figurative language, when appropriate.

I do wish, however, that Lord had been more attentive to how she crafted the scenes in her book. Many individual scenes felt like they were drawn out for no reason other than to provide Charlotte and Will with a chance to encounter one another, which is fine, except that they didn’t really build on one another to create a meaningful progression in the protagonists’ relationship. They seemed rather like a series of awkward moments, following a pattern in which they would awkwardly try to make conversation, get to a point where they were feeling comfortable around one another, do something like kiss or have a sexual encounter, and then Will would push Charlotte away, usually by insisting that he’s not good for her, that he is going on his expedition no matter what, etc. which would upset Charlotte. They would part, and Will would do something to try to make up for his behavior, and the process would start again in the next scene. It was somewhat cyclical and even frivolous at times - many of Will and Charlotte’s encounters didn’t quite end with the two developing as characters or as a couple, and I wish Lord had built her encounters on something more substantial.

On the flip side, this book was also missing scenes that could have helped with characterization. We’re told, for example, that Will has nightmares, but we’re never shown him having one until very late in the book. Having a scene earlier (not necessarily the beginning) might have helped establish why his expedition was so important to him, while also revealing something about his personality that informs his behavior in his encounters with Charlotte.

Plot: The plot of this novel basically follows Charlotte, a well-educated woman entering her third season, as she attempts to find a husband that will accept her family, and Will, a man attempting to raise money to go back to Tibet to make amends for a role he played in a violent encounter. Charlotte’s predicament in itself was very compelling; torn between wanting to be accepted by London’s upper class Society and her love for her family, she struggles to find a husband that will simultaneously make her happy but also raise the status (and thus, social security) of her brother and sister. I do wish Lord had put more emphasis on this aspect of the plot, and perhaps let it be a defining characteristic of Charlotte’s personal growth. Charlotte is torn between selfish desire and doing what she thinks she must for her loved ones, and I think there was a lot of room in there for an exploration of, say, women’s self-effacement in the name of “duty” or “responsibility,” or even more of an exploration of the hypocrisy of Society.

Will’s plot is a bit less compelling. Though we do see moments when he is meeting with potential investors to fund his second expedition into Tibet (and China, by extension), it never feels urgent. While the expedition holds a lot of personal significance for Will, so much is shrouded in mystery that it was difficult to see the stakes of going versus not going, and I personally didn’t care whether Will stayed in London or traveled abroad. I think revealing more to the reader could have helped with this, and the climax of the novel could have been less focused on revealing Will’s involvement with the massacre to the reader and more on revealing it to Charlotte.

In terms of the romantic plot, I’ll discuss that in more detail below, but I will say here that a lot of the drama felt manufactured. Every situation seemed set up to throw the main couple together, allowing them to express their physical attraction while still allowing Will to be obstinate about getting emotionally involved. I especially didn’t find the marriage of convenience compelling, nor anything that happens afterward, and I wish Lord had spent more time thinking about what the conflicts in the relationship might look like if it were built on something other than Will’s own stubbornness.

Characters: Charlotte, our heroine, is something of a social butterfly. She attracts people to her and is beloved by almost everyone, and she always has something to say to fill gaps in the conversation. While I did like that she was very agentive, pursuing her desires and doing what she wanted despite what was considered “proper,” I did think some of her more interesting characteristics were overshadowed by her obsession with Society and her single-minded pursuit of Will. Lord writes of how Charlotte reads Will’s more scientific reports by begging her brother to acquire copies from the Geographical Society, which is exclusive to men. Charlotte also meets with a group of women weekly, and Lord mentions that part of what guides their conversation is the fear of men seeing them as “too intellectual.” I honestly think Charlotte’s character could have been better served by having her thirst for exploration and knowledge denied to her by her gender competing with her desire to provide for her family by marrying well. It would have presented an interesting conflict for when Will comes along, who has traveled and seen the world, but doesn’t hold the social sway of a duke or earl.

Will, for his part, wasn’t an enjoyable character. He spends much of the book speaking gruffly to others, and when he’s not wallowing in self-loathing, he was saying things to Charlotte that were at best awkward and at worst cruel. He starts out reserved, but quickly grows possessive, and his temper could become violent. His main saving grace is that he’s attentive - he brings Charlotte the flowers she likes when all other suitors ignore her preferences, and he notices the care she puts into things like her appearance. But other than that, I did not find him likable, and my sympathy for his on account of his trauma ran out quickly.

Supporting characters were a bit more enjoyable to read. I liked the bond that Charlotte had with her brother, Wally, and wish more was done to showcase their closeness. I also liked that Charlotte’s sister, Lucy, married for love, and despite being socially shunned, their happiness seems to set the bar for what Charlotte wants in her relationship. I would have liked to see some of the main, unimportant scenes between Charlotte and Will cut and more scenes devoted to Charlotte’s relationship with her family, and perhaps even more done with Wally, whose sexuality caused the family to fall from grace in the first place. Perhaps if Wally had a subplot where he finds happiness again would have been a nice compliment to Charlotte’s arc of defying Society for the sake of her passions.

The antagonist, however, was not nearly so intriguing. Starting as one of Charlotte’s admirers, he quickly becomes over-the-top evil when rejected. I guess powerful men can be reactionary when it comes to not getting their way, especially if they’re sexist to begin with, but I just didn’t care for the conflict with the villain. I was much more intrigued by the possibilities of the protagonists’ inner conflicts.

Other: As I mentioned above, I had a hard time rooting for Charlotte and Will as a couple. Charlotte admits to imagining herself with Will before they even meet, and her reaction to him when they do come face-to-face for the first time is something like insta-love. For the majority of the book, Charlotte’s one-sided love for Will and pursuit of him despite his behavior towards her feels juvenile. It felt a lot like hero worship or a celebrity crush, and even though Charlotte says she becomes disillusioned with him and sees Will as a person, the fact that she sticks around when he’s acting like a jerk did not endear me to her or their relationship.

Will, for his part, seems to fall in love with Charlotte for no reason other than she’s pretty, and even though he’s attentive to her favorite things, I couldn’t see what Charlotte saw in him. He constantly pushes her away and says or does things to upset her, including directing his unattractive anger at her, and I was wishing that Charlotte would just cut her losses and find someone better. I think their dynamic could have worked if more focus was placed on Will’s social awkwardness rather than his self-imposed denial of romantic affection. For example, if he’s shy and awkward in Society, maybe Charlotte’s social personality draws him out of his isolation and allows him to connect with people. Maybe her influence also allows him to attract investors, and he finds himself so impressed by her abilities and support for his expedition that he finds it harder and harder to leave. Something more than the manufactured drama that makes every interaction between the two feel cyclical.

Recommendations: I would recommend this book if you’re interested in historical romance (especially set in Victorian England), 19th century exploration, botany, love triangles, and marriages of convenience.

Understanding the self

The subject itself, made me contemplate on what really Understanding the self is. Although it is already evident on the title but there is something inside me that makes me eccentric on how this subject is up to and works out. While the classes are approaching,  I kept asking to myself , why do we need to understand ourselves? how is it related and can affect our lives? However, I didn't realize how much do I know myself, there is lacking of thoughts and feelings that pushed nearly to their breaking point through my understanding the self subject. Learning the best way to manage time was a huge complication for me. I've always been a procrastinator. However, after the first day of class, I realized I would need to modify my thinking and approach to homework. I wasn't able to completely kill the procrastination habit I developed in high school, but I did learn some much-needed time management skills since I am also a student and a son.On the first week of classes, we tackled the chapters 1st and 2nd the Understanding the self-subject, was started and perceived by some philosophers. “Different eyes, have different perceptions”, they viewed it divergently on what self is all about. For me, it is different to know the truth, but aside from that, all of the philosophers had only one goal, and that is to share and know the meaning of understanding ourselves. It is beyond doubt that sociological perspective is totally built up in the sense that it is formed through building relationship with one another. Its theories help ourselves to appear as a result of social experience.  3rd chapter  Anthropological perspective explores the character that the self is embodied to define a human society and individual that journeys throughout the adulthood. Anthropology is concerned with how cultural and biological processes interact to shape human experience. 4th Chapter Psychological perspective involves the certain beliefs about how the human behavior works. It involves one’s physicality, inner character and emotional life that an individual is experiencing. 5th  Chapter  Although Philippines, belongs to the Eastern countries, there is a unique blend between the Eastern and Western side, since we are colonized, we are already adapting their cultural behaviors. The belief in one supreme being coexisting with the universe condenses the supernatural and human capabilities into qualities of existence. The 6th chapter, which is the Physical self helps me to be more knowledgeable of one’s self about the process of our physical growth and development. It is essential for us to be well-educated about our physical bodies whereas it shows the proper analyzation of the longevity of one’s individual that occurs in every stage of one’s being. 7th chapter Sexual self. Sometimes others may interpret the sexual self into an awful one, however sexual self is part of our physical self, which means we needed to comprehend and discern more the true value of our body. We need to understand more of ourselves that talks about the biological factors of our sexual behaviors, which compromises our reproductive system and sex characteristics that modifies between a man and woman.  Since nowadays, early pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections and diseases are common, we have to be knowledgeable enough whereas it influences not only how individuals contemplates themselves but also their sexuality and sexual relationships since most young people become involved in romantic relationships that sexual behaviors are at risk. The 8th chapter is Material self, having a possession is not bad. The way you think and use it will be viewed on how you were going to use it. It is a natural part of an individual that develops on being a materialistic which can help to cope up some situations that can make them anxious and sad. Nevertheless, people will always strive more in achieving the possessions for it identifies one’s status. The 9th chapter, The Spiritual self helps to guide and influence an individual whereas it links to different aspects of human’s purpose- spiritual people mostly have positive relationships, high self-confidence, buoyant and knows the meaning of one’s purpose in life. In the Political self, it is all about understanding the conceptualization of the politics, whereas the foundation that influences one’s responsibility and supposition as a citizen is the family. It is linked to one’s character as a family member related with one’s position in the family.  10th chapter the hierarchical structure of the family influences the political self through the obligations and expectations associated with one's role as a member of the family and the power and status related with one's position in the family. An important prelude to the study o political self is understanding the concept of politics. Hence, this chapter begins with defining politics. It includes concepts on political community, socialization, social interaction, and citizenship. It also defines political self and describes the influence of family, school, church, peers, and media on the development of political self. The chapter ends with descriptions of the theoretical perspectives of political self. As an essential part of the self, the political self organizes self-relevant information about politics. It constitutes knowledge about the Constitution, government, and governance.The 11th chapter, the Digital self. Nowadays, we are currently experiencing some problems that hinders us to socialize with another. Especially now, technology is momentous in our lives and it is already immersing which means it is becoming a vital piece to individual’s life. Life without technology would become nearly impossible, because technology is used for multiple purposes; work, education and pleasure all relies heavily on the current technology. Within the 6 weeks of learning, studying the whole coverage of the Understanding the self isn’t enough due to some uncertainty that is occurring around the world, but despite the fact of the happenings I can say that I’ve learned enough and a lot. I am contented and auspicious learning this kind of things, that really helps me to become a knowledgeable one, which can be applied to our daily living, if so, I would like to grab this opportunity and bring this accomplishment until the end of such days. I would also like to thank my professor for helping and nurturing us students, that really enables us to understand more of ourselves. I know teaching in this kind of situation is difficult especially that we are in the midst of pandemic such that sometimes misunderstanding occurs between the students and the teacher. I am honored to have this professor that doesn’t stop from giving us knowledge and ensures that each one of us is learning in this class 

Exampletron: The Tutorial Character!

Name: Exampletron

Age: 100 Vorns (About 8,330 Earth years)

Place of Origin: Cybertron, Pious Pools, Middle District

Alignment: Lawful Good

Religion: Agnostic (Ironically, despite teaching classes on Religion, he’s never thought about it)

Gender: Male Leaning, He/Him, 3 on a binary scale of 1 to 10, 10 being female presenting and 1 being male presenting.

Altmode: Projector

Faction: Strongly Neutral

Defining Quote: “Teaching the next generation is the greatest privilege a bot could ask for.”

Physical Description: About 5 Meters Tall, Padded Shoulders, Blue paint with green accents, blue optics, and helm fins that have a paperclip-like pattern on them. They are built Lightly, but are not frail. Small in appearance, but not a mini-bot or a mini-con.

Outstanding Physical Features: They’ve got big feet, and they’ve got small, decorational kibble wings on their back.

Favorite Thing: History, Wooden Rulers (the texture is so… interesting!)

Least Favorite Thing: Exclusionary Policies, Bad Teachers

Inventory: Caries no weapons. Has at least one ruler and one extra hand-held clock at all times. Laminated samples of things. A puzzle cube. A Personal Data Pad and a Work Data Pad.

Functionalist Class: Delta, Disposable Class

Job: An Academy Teaching Assistant and Part-Time Unofficial Tutor For The Newly Forged

Stats: Strength: 2, Dexterity: 4, Constitution: 3, Intelligence: 8, Wisdom: 5, Charisma: 8

Skills/Proficiencies: Proficient in History, Religion, Investigation, Insight, and Performance. Has a vast information base of most teachable subjects. He is a very charming person, albeit mostly unintentionally. It’s why the Academy lets him get away with stuff. Proficient in being loved. :)

Weaknesses: Low Insight, Intimidation, Deception, Athletics. Not very strong, not very hardy. Could not hold himself in a fight. He’s not a pacifist, he just couldn’t conceive the idea of getting into a physical fight with anyone, and therefore has never thought about it. In the only thing he has situational insight into is the minds and emotions of students. Sympathetic and perceptive of their needs, but his low situational awareness of everything else combined with his sheltered nature (he was raised in Pious Academy, basically), leave him vulnerable to malicious manipulation and the danger he unknowingly puts himself in when he strives for lawful change.

Personality/Character Description: A kind, jovial, knowledge-loving bot. He loves to teach students, and constantly expresses his gladness when he is able to do so, even though he is often relegated to being a board projector for others. He wants to pass on knowledge from himself to the next generation, and has a fondness for history in particular. Wants to teach so badly, he often gets himself in trouble. He has a good mind, and tries to follow the rules as best he can, but when it came to keeping himself out of social/legal trouble, he had heart where he should have had brains. He has trouble keeping his cool when assisting bad teachers who either butcher the material and/or are cruel to students. Honestly, is a bit oblivious to the corrupted state of society, and is unaware of the danger he is in by semi-unknowingly defying the norm.

Outstanding Non-Physical Traits of Character: An Incredible Memory and love of learning. Definitely more so than your average person, or even your average teacher. Very kind, and prioritizes his students' welfare above all else.

Goals: Wants to become a teacher. Wants to teach a history class. Wants to improve his students’ quality of life by improving society as a whole. Also pushed for peaceful, legal educational reform on Cybertron. He wanted to make teacher credentials available to anyone who could pass certain tests instead of building people to be teachers and throwing them into a teaching/tutoring career whether they liked it or not. He also pushed for the creation of “On The Grid” classes, which are basically online classes that can be taken anywhere, and more importantly, by anyone (which for a functionalist government trying to limit which types of people could and could not receive and education, was quite a problem).

Accomplishments: He once taught a long-running Intro To Pre-History course before being outed. Had the highest success and proficiency scores of any other teacher in the school. He is very proud of the quality of his historical evidence and analysis. He can and will name several “students of his” who became very successful researcher/educators of their own; Daybreak, Vertical Shift, Imperial, Nautical… he set up a few “Grid Classes,” but they were taken down by the government after “potential terrorist sympathizers” began to access them.

Failures: He was “barred” from his unlicensed teaching after the government put pressure on the academy to be “up to code.” He was devastated. He never got the majority of his reforms pushed through, and not many people cared about his cause; either they were uninterested in change, or his concerns were to “niche.” He's terrified of letting his students down.

Backstory: He has worked at Pious Academy since it was open. He was literally sparked for his job. Serving as a projector for other teachers to display things on by day and scouring the library by night, he listened in on so many lectures, and knew the school so well, he became the formats expert on all things going on. He was inspired by one kind professor who only taught one year at the school before leaving to follow his heart and pass on his vast array of knowledge on to the next generation. His light and charming personality endeared him to the management staff, and allowed him to do additional work, despite his Disposable Class. There was one point where he was teaching classes on his own thanks to his vast array of data and his sheer seniority, until some spoiled prick of a student found out his Frame Type and tattled (*Cough* Sentinel). The Academy is now very careful to keep Exampletron on a leash, for fear of governmental retribution.

Character’s Opinion: Exampletron believes that he needs to do what it takes to get his right to teach back by changing the education system such that knowledge and learning have the most priority in a school setting, putting aside all Classism for it’s sake. He pushed for reforms, and patiently waits for his letters, inquiries, pamphlets, and essays to be reviewed and discussed upon (they never are, but he keeps trying). He’s not a “revolutionary” per say, he thinks everything he’s trying to get done is obvious to everyone, it’s just no one’s bothered to address it yet, is all.

Philosophy: The students, their education, and their quality of life is the most important thing. Hands down. Exampletron thinks that knowledge, history, literature, and culture is all beautiful, and that everyone should have the chance to appreciate it. Teaching is the most rewarding experience there is, and watching your students become better is and should be the goal, always.

Friends With: Several of the staff, administrators, and students of Pious Academy. Doesn’t know anyone else, really.

Platonically Dislikes: One student who always purposely spills oil on his Projector Form, even after Oil consumables were banned from the classroom. What’s with that guy, anyway?

Admires/Looks Up To: Alpha Trion. He’s never seen them in person (obviously), but he is All Over historical accounts of his actions and his records. (It's like having a crush on a historical figure, but that historical figure is still very much alive and it’s awkward as hell for everyone involved.)

Mentor To: Specifically, Hardlight, and aspiring writer in the Architecture History class he assists in. He tutors her on the down-low about the Quintesseons and Age of Wrath, as that’s where her book is set.

General Enemies With: The assistant dean, Whippersnap. They’re always cruel and mocking after one of Exampletron’s attempts to get change or teach a class on the sly goes awry.

Best Friend/Amica Endure: A teacher named Inquiry. They’re not Amica or anything, but they’re still really good friends. Inquiry always asks for Exampletron’s opinion during his geography class.

Romantic Interest: Again, it’s Inquiry. He’s just not sure how to bring it up…

Hate Crush: Uh,,, no one, really? He is Black Aromantic. He doesn’t enjoy hating people, really, but understands that others find this form of romance attractive and/or cathartic.

Arch Nemesis/Mortal Enemy: Trunchable from down the hall. She is THE WORST teacher OF ALL TIME. NO knowledge of subject matter, downright CRUEL to the students AND the other staff. She enjoys cruel and unusual punishment for even the smallest of slights. She once forced another teacher to eat an entire full-sized oil-cake in a teacher’s meeting for stealing her slice of cake from the work fridge, and the teacher got so sick they had to go to the hospital to get their tanks pumped. No one can tell her off or fire her because she’s the daughter of some high ranking official, and to make matters WORSE she teaches THE NEW FORGES. UGH!!!! He doesn’t like hating people, but she forces his platonic hand!

Peacemaker For: Many, many, many student pairs (and one teacher pair). Study groups can be quite challenging when you have to play Peacemaker for not one, not two, but four intensely Black-waxing couples all at the same time. That was a trying semester for Exampletron. The teacher pair is the only one he enjoys Peacekeeping. Young bots, as a rule, are hell to Mediate, even for Exampletron.

Peacemade By: Honeytrap, an assistant dean, mediates Exampletron and Trunchable, basically whenever they’re in the same room. It is a platonic Mediation, but so what? It’s the closest thing you can get with Exampletron.

Author’s Plans/Goals For Character: Exampletron tries to set up a Grid Class at the wrong time in the wrong place, and sends one to many letters to his local senator, and he gets placed on the Government’s long, long shit list. Ironically, Exampletron’s knowledge of history didn’t allow him to realize it was repeating itself, nor save him of his corrupt overlords and the lengths they would go to keep their power. At the end of the Golden Age, during the terror and confusion of the Dreaded Rust Plague, Exampletron, among many other political dissenters of the Prime, both private citizens and public politicians, are kidnapped from their homes and forced through space bridges en-mass to random colony locations. And then, to quarantine off the planet, Sentinel makes the decision to permanently deactivate the space bridges. What timing, amiright? Exampletron lands on Caminus and not one of the infected colonies, thankfully. He didn’t achieve his goal of reforming Cybertron’s education system, but at least the Camiens let him get a job as a history teacher the way he always wanted! He still misses his old students, though (and Inquiry).