Have any of these antis considered that maybe it’s a good thing to show relationships where one half wields a considerable amount of power and influence over the other as coercive and unhealthy? Especially if the first half is a literal slaveowner who has bought the other half’s brother? Like if you want to write a soft version you go and do that, but why is this interpretation so under fire?

loxxxlay:

foundlingmother replied to your post “ahhhhh they deleted it, niiiiiceeee”

soft!frostmaster shippers who are antis are so weird to me. Like, one of your favs is a despotic slave master who happily executes their family and threatened Loki’s, if not Loki himself. That ship is canonically a dumpster fire, and it’s far more concerning that some people can’t recognize that and think it’s weird that people get dubcon or noncon vibes.

Adding @foundlingmother‘s response too because it’s the similar topic and now I can respond to both at once.

(Also behind a cut because my anxiety med makes me ramble lol T_T)

Keep reading

“Ship and let ship” doesn’t have to mean you like or approve of all ships; it just means you don’t harass people for shipping things you don’t like and you don’t go around making unsupported claims about the real-life sexual morality of the shippers. Some ships are nOTPs just because I don’t think they make sense (*cough*ThorxBruce*cough*), but there are also some I side-eye real hard because of the in-canon dynamics of the characters. Killgrave x Jessica Jones is one of those (only shipped by fans of the Tenth Doctor because they can’t see David Tennant any other way, I’m pretty sure). Tony Stark x Peter Parker is another (though I can’t say I have the moral high ground on this one, given some of the Thorki AUs I read). And soft!Frostmaster also falls into this category for me. I’m not going to go crashing their party because I’m not that kind of asshole, but yeah, I’m giving it some serious side-eye.

ragnasok:

veliseraptor:

1) nope

2) “devious consent” is now my new favorite typo and I’m going to spend a little while trying to figure out what it would look like

Sure! But while we’re purifying fandom we should probably also stop romanticising a slaveowner. You guys first.

Also, this deserves to be a whole new genre of creepy fic.

There is actually a philosophical literature about what might be called “devious consent.” Basically, it would be securing consent by means of a deception without which the consent would not have been given – saying you’re someone you’re not (the old claiming to be a woman’s husband in the dark is a somewhat outdated version of this), saying you’re STD-free or on birth control when you’re not, etc. There’s disagreement about when it constitutes rape. This kind of thing could get creative when there’s magic involved. Though I think people already write this and it’s just a subset of dubious consent.

iamhisgloriouspurpose:

malicemanaged:

iamhisgloriouspurpose:

star-anise:

hamartiacosm:

deanplease:

magpiescholar:

gothiccharmschool:

prismatic-bell:

marzipanandminutiae:

it’s hilarious to me when people call historical fashions that men hated oppressive

like in BuzzFeed’s Women Wear Hoop Skirts For A Day While Being Exaggeratedly Bad At Doing Everything In Them video, one woman comments that she’s being “oppressed by the patriarchy.” if you’ve read anything Victorian man ever said about hoop skirts, you know that’s pretty much the exact opposite of the truth

thing is, hoop skirts evolved as liberating garment for women. before them, to achieve roughly conical skirt fullness, they had to wear many layers of petticoats (some stiffened with horsehair braid or other kinds of cord). the cage crinoline made their outfits instantly lighter and easier to move in

it also enabled skirts to get waaaaay bigger. and, as you see in the late 1860s, 1870s, and mid-late 1880s, to take on even less natural shapes. we jokingly call bustles fake butts, but trust me- nobody saw them that way. it was just skirts doing weird, exciting Skirt Things that women had tons of fun with

men, obviously, loathed the whole affair

(1864)

(1850s. gods, if only crinolines were huge enough to keep men from getting too close)

(no date given, but also, this is 100% impossible)

(also undated, but the ruffles make me think 1850s)

it was also something that women of all social classes- maids and society ladies, enslaved women and free women of color -all wore at one point or another. interesting bit of unexpected equalization there

and when bustles came in, guess what? men hated those, too

(1880s)

(probably also 1880s? the ladies are being compared to beetles and snails. in case that was unclear)

(1870s, I think? the bustle itself looks early 1870s but the tight fit of the actual gown looks later)

hoops and bustles weren’t tools of the patriarchy. they were items 1 and 2 on the 19th century’s “Fashion Trends Women Love That Men Hate” lists, with bonus built-in personal space enforcement

Gonna add something as someone who’s worn a lot of period stuff for theatre:

The reason you suck at doing things in a hoop skirt is because you’re not used to doing things in a hoop skirt.


The first time I got in a Colonial-aristocracy dress I felt like I couldn’t breathe. The construction didn’t actually allow me to raise my arms all the way over my head (yes, that’s period-accurate). We had one dresser to every two women, because the only things we could put on ourselves were our tights, shifts, and first crinoline. Someone else had to lace our corsets, slip on our extra crinolines, hold our arms to balance us while a second person actually put the dresses on us like we were dolls, and do up our shoes–which we could not put on ourselves because we needed to be able to balance when the dress went on. My entire costume was almost 40 pounds (I should mention here that many of the dresses were made entirely of upholstery fabric), and I actually did not have the biggest dress in the show.

We wore our costumes for two weeks of rehearsal, which is quite a lot in university theatre. The first night we were all in dress, most of the ladies went propless because we were holding up our skirts to try and get a feel for both balance and where our feet were in comparison to where it looked like they should be. I actually fell off the stage.

By opening night? We were square-dancing in the damn things. We had one scene where our leading man needed to whistle, but he didn’t know how and I was the only one in the cast loud enough to be heard whistling from under the stage, so I was also commando-crawling underneath him at full speed trying to match his stage position–while still in the dress. And petticoats. And corset. Someone took my shoes off for that scene so I could use my toes to propel myself and I laid on a sheet so I wouldn’t get the dress dirty, but that was it–I was going full Solid Snake in a space about 18″ high, wearing a dress that covered me from collarbones to floor and weighed as much as a five-year-old child. And it worked beautifully.

These women knew how to wear these clothes. It’s a lot less “restrictive” when it’s old hat.

I have worn hoop skirts a lot, especially in summer. I still wear hoop skirts if I’m going to be at an event where I will probably be under stage lights. (For example, Vampire Ball.)

I can ride public transportation while wearing them. I can take a taxi while wearing them. I can go on rides at Disneyland while wearing them. Because I’ve practiced wearing them and twisting the rigid-but-flexible skirt bones so I can sit on them and not buffet other people with my skirts. 

Hoop skirts are awesome.

Hoop skirts are also air conditioning.  If you ever go to reenactments in the South, particularly in summer, you’ll notice a lot of ladies gently swaying in their big 1860s skirts – because it fans all the sweaty bits.  You’ll be much cooler in a polished cotton gown with full sleeves, ruffles, and hoopskirt than in a riding jacket and trousers, let me promise you!  (This is part of the reason many enslaved women also enthusiastically preferred larger skirts – they had more to do than sit in the shade, but they’d get a bit of a breeze from the hoops’ movement as they were walking.)  

They’re also – and I can’t emphasize enough how important this is – really easy to pee in.  If you’re in split-crotch drawers (which, until at least the 1890s, you were), you can take an easy promenade a few feet away from the gents and then squat down and pee in pretty much total privacy.  It gives so much freedom in travel when it’s not a problem to pee most anywhere.

People also don’t realize that corsets themselves were a HUGE HUGE IMPROVEMENT over previous support-garment styles – and if you have large breasts that don’t naturally float freely above your ribcage (which some people’s do! but it’s not that common), corsets are often an improvement over modern bras.

They hold up the breasts from underneath, taking the weight of them off your back.  Most historical corset styles don’t have shoulder straps, so you’re not bearing the weight of your breast there, either, and you can raise your arms as far as your dress’s shoulder line allows (which is the actually restrictive bit – in my 1830s dress, literally all I can do is work in my lap, but in my 1890s dress I can paddle a kayak or draw a longbow with no trouble.  Both in a full corset).  They support your back and reduce the physical effort it takes to not slouch, helping avoid back pain.  They’re rigid enough that you don’t usually have to adjust your clothing to keep it where it belongs.  They’re flexible – if you’re having a bloaty PMS day you just … don’t lace it as tightly, and if your back muscles are sore you can lace it a little tighter.  And you can undo a cup (or, y’know, not have breast cups) to nurse a baby without losing any of the structural integrity of the garment.

I do educational/historical dressing and people are really insistent, like, “The corset was invented by a man, wasn’t it?”  “Actually, women were at the forefront of changing undergarment styles throughout the 19th century!” “But it’s true that it was invented by a man.”  

Uh, well, it’s hard to say who “invented” the style but it’s very likely that women’s dressmakers mostly innovated women’s corsets and men’s tailors mostly innovated men’s corsets, honey.  Because those exist too.

Everything about all of this is accurate.

@star-anise

Yeees.

Also? These fashions are about taking up space. They’re about being loud and visible and saying HERE I AM. About saying “I’m so rich, I need someone to help me dress every morning.” And about saying, “I am not solely here for male consumption”–there’s a reason so many cartoons lampooning women’s fashion are about how hard those ladies are to kiss, and how impossible it’d be to have a quick fuck in them. (Which it actually isn’t, but that’s beside the point)

Historical women’s fashions aren’t 100% unproblematic and absolutely wonderful. They make stark class distinctions incredibly visible, because you simply cannot wear some of these dresses and keep them maintained without a private staff to do a ton of work for you. They upheld a standard of femininity a lot of women were excluded from. They limited women’s and girls’ participation in sports and athletics. 

But damn, women wore them for a reason.

I can do anything in my ballgowns that I can do in modern dress. You just have to remember to put on your shoes before you put on your corset. I also love my corsets because they are so much more comfortable than a bra—I broke my back early in life, the and the backstrap of a bra goes right over the breakpoint, and on rainy days, it aches like mad. I don’t have that problem with the corset—it takes all the weight off my spine and shoulders, and this makes for a much happier day.

I live for this kind of info.

Also: “You just have to remember to put on your shoes before you put on your corset.” – I cannot stress that enough. Seriously. XD

Happy to help, @malicemanaged! *hugs*

philosopherking1887:

philosopherking1887:

philosopherking1887:

philosopherking1887:

I’ve gone back to watching season 4 of “Angel” because it takes place concurrently with season 7 of “Buffy” and I don’t want to get too far ahead.

I think I’m falling in love with Wesley. This is so weird because he gave me such secondhand embarrassment/cringe when he first showed up.

I don’t know how I feel about Wesley’s relationship with Lilah. The initial impulsive hate sex was hot, but now I’m ambivalent about the Romeo and Juliet – or James Carville and Mary Matalin – situation.

I do know that the scar on Wesley’s neck is unbelievably hot.

What is going on with Cordelia and Connor? I know the age difference is less than with Angel and Cordelia or Buffy… but there’s something deeply weird about it when he’s not only a teenage boy but the son of her other potential love interest.

It’s also really hot that Wesley has become the morally gray freelance badass who occasionally drops in to help out the crew when they’re flailing and then fucks off again.

librarycompany:

The incredible decoration on our copy of C.W. Webber’s Wild Scenes and Song-Birds (New York, 1854) is a perfect example of the tendency toward rich elaboration on publishers’ bindings in the 1850s. The combination of faux-marble printed pattern book cloth and intense gilt-stamping make for a memorable binding that would have looked impressive on a coffee table. 

Check out of database of 19th-Century Cloth Bindings to see more!

#Feathursday #PublishersBindingsThursday

Webber, C. W.

Wild Scenes and Song – Birds.

New York : George P. Putnam. 

1854

 

philosopherking1887:

philosopherking1887:

philosopherking1887:

I’ve gone back to watching season 4 of “Angel” because it takes place concurrently with season 7 of “Buffy” and I don’t want to get too far ahead.

I think I’m falling in love with Wesley. This is so weird because he gave me such secondhand embarrassment/cringe when he first showed up.

I don’t know how I feel about Wesley’s relationship with Lilah. The initial impulsive hate sex was hot, but now I’m ambivalent about the Romeo and Juliet – or James Carville and Mary Matalin – situation.

I do know that the scar on Wesley’s neck is unbelievably hot.

What is going on with Cordelia and Connor? I know the age difference is less than with Angel and Cordelia or Buffy… but there’s something deeply weird about it when he’s not only a teenage boy but the son of her other potential love interest.

philosopherking1887:

philosopherking1887:

I’ve gone back to watching season 4 of “Angel” because it takes place concurrently with season 7 of “Buffy” and I don’t want to get too far ahead.

I think I’m falling in love with Wesley. This is so weird because he gave me such secondhand embarrassment/cringe when he first showed up.

I don’t know how I feel about Wesley’s relationship with Lilah. The initial impulsive hate sex was hot, but now I’m ambivalent about the Romeo and Juliet – or James Carville and Mary Matalin – situation.

I do know that the scar on Wesley’s neck is unbelievably hot.