wNov 23, 2009


Beyond Anger (?)

A little while ago, I read the book Beyond Anger: On Being a Feminist in the Church, by Carolyn Osiek, R.S.C.J.

The book is about identifying as a feminist while also identifying as a member of the Catholic Church, which, as one might imagine, can cause feelings of anger. It's been a while since I read it, but I at least marked a few favorite passages. I think I'm just going to post them with brief commentary, and leave it at that. Hopefully you all find them as interesting as I did.

After giving examples of why a feminist might be angry in church (only males wear distinctive clothing that sets them off as officially belonging in the sanctuary, language of worship does not seem to include women, etc.), the author says of these moments of realization:
Such an event is a true turning point because it evokes a crisis. Life is not as it was before, and can never be so again. It cannot return to the comfort of denial. One's self image of loyalty and one's experience of oppression come to a screeching collision with one another and seem henceforth incompatible. How can I remain loyal to a person, institution, or tradition that has done this to me? But without that commitment, what do I have left? Who am I? This intense experience of dissonance provokes a predictable reaction.
She goes on to validate anger as an emotion, and then analyzes the destructive power of sexism, and its inherently sinful nature.
Sexism and patriarchalism have worked against both women and men in three ways. The first is to dehumanize women institutionally by disqualifying them on the basis of sex from access to the sacred and to leadership. The second way is to attempt theological justification of the oppression of patriarchalism, so that it would seem to be perpetrated in the name of God. The third way that sexism works against all of us is by promoting a "false consciousness" which permits both oppressor and oppressed to blindly accept and internalize their roles.

The dehumanizing of women is the dehumanizing of men as well, for if women are demoted to second-class citizenship, men are allowed the illusion that they alone are first class, that what is done is God's will, and that it therefore cannot be changed. In this way the Church participates in the structural violence of society against women, a structural violence which implicitly condones and even promotes personal violence against them by casting women as victims of male aggression.

Because we are properly speaking here of sin, "social and ecclesial structural sin," there is a moral conversion that is called for. Patriarchalism is a form of classism, the subjection of one social group to another. It is a hierarchiacal view of human society which makes dominance and submission the operant models of human relationship and renders true mutual presence to one another impossible. Religious patriarchalism further renders a true perception of equality before God just as impossible because social conditioning and the impact of culture are inescapable factors in the formation of religious persons and communities. It puts the ideal of "equal discipleship," which is all women are really asking for, beyond reach. It is a sin against persons as well as against God.

...

Beyond intellectual conversion there is yet spiritual conversion. Are we as Church being called to a deeper living of the way of Christ by the prophetic voices of women? It is not only a human sense of fairness that calls us to justice, but Christ himself. It is not only our experience and ideals of democracy that calll us to affirm the full human dignity of every person, but the demands of the Gospel as well. Women today are calling the Church to live what it says in this regard. The voice has become part of the ongoing revelation of God to us, as the mystery of that revelation unfolds in history.

She analyzes the power of Bonaventure's quote, "It is for man to act, for woman to suffer."
This belief, or, better, excuse, has provided religious justification for reinforcing the passivity of women by encouraging them not to follow the inspirations of grace but to become more fixated in their inculturated tendencies to self-hatred and self-doubt by seeking out suffering, self-abasement, humiliation, and self-denial as signs of God's favor.
Hence it is not easy to speak of a theology of the cross to women who have experienced this kind of oppression and have rejected it as illegitimate and unhealthy. A consistent position taken in this book is that our religious tradition is redeemable for women, and that its riches are worth recovering. An important and powerful symbol within that tradition is the cross. To abandon the symbol because it has been misused would be once again to turn over the power of interpretation to those who have misused it. Anger at the abuse is justified, but capitulation to the abusers is not. Rather, the symbol needs to be recovered, reclaimed, and reappropriated into a new context where it will no longer aid the cause of oppression and passivity, but the cause of free response to the claims of the Gospel. The cross can become for women a symbol not of victimization and self-hatred, but of creative suffering, actively embraced, which transforms and redeems.

She does describe three phases of the transformation of suffering in three changes; I'd rate myself at #2: mute, pasive acceptance / awareness and articulation of one's suffering, no longer hidden / organization for change.

Osiek most bluntly calls for action thusly:
The role to which women are called today in the Church holds many of the characteristics of the prophetic vocation: to speak and act publicly in the name of God to recall members of the community to their destiny and identity before God; to interpret the signs of the times; to condemn injustice; to keep before the eyes of all the vision of the reign of God in its full purity in the midst of historical compromises.
This book does a great job of validating and giving voice to the same feelings of anger that I have. However, the title lead me to believe that this book would go further into explaining what can be done to be a feminist while still going to Church, how to make the Church a more feminist place to be, etc., and I don't think that I really got that. I'm not sure what I expect from a book in terms of how to move beyond anger to productivity, but I guess I was expecting more than the 13-point list at the end, which included things like "have healthy outlets" and "be realistic." I mean, those are find things to take as advice, but not great for action, in my mind. I'm angry, a book was spent validating my anger, and then it just kind of flickered out.

Although written the year I was born (1986), this book still resonating with me really well. It's starting to creep me out, though, the non-fiction about the oppression of women written at the time of my birth (or before, as mentioned when I blogged about bell hooks not that long ago) says things that validate what I'm feeling right now so well. It's like history's spinning its wheels in a rut, never moving forward, but repeating itself forever. Creepy, and disheartening.

Labels: , , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 9:03 PM
0 comments



wOct 11, 2009


Signal Boost

I spent all weekend thinking that the Feministing Fail linkspam at access_fandom is only one post, but it is in fact multiple posts. Head there to read posts on this important discussion.


Unrelated, but related to feminism, is a link I found through , to an explanation of 'cis,' and why it should be used.
So, here’s the thing, cis people who have a problem with “cis.” I am going to politely request that you get over it.

Because we do need a label to describe people who are cis gendered, and “cis” is a really good label to use because it is value neutral. “Not trans” carries a whiff of a suggestion that there’s something wrong with being trans, just as “not disabled,” again, suggests that there is something wrong with being a person with disabilities. “Normal,” “real,” “regular,” biological,” “natural,” and so on also carry negative connotations, because that means that trans people are “abnormal,” “not real,” “irregular,” “not biological,” and “not natural.” I would hope that people can see that being called “not real” would be offensive to someone who is trans.

Cis is not being used to divide or separate people. It’s being used as an adjective, to distinguish people with a particular type of gender, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. We have a whole family of words to describe people through various characteristics. Just as I have no problem with being called a “white person” because, uhm, I’m racially white and a person, cis folks shouldn’t be upset by being called “cis people.”

Labels: , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 10:35 PM
0 comments



wJun 22, 2009


Maybe I'd make a good homicidal maniac, motherfucker!

I should maybe preface this by noting that throughout my life, people have told me that my default expression is not a smile. This may have something to do with constantly being told to SMILE for no reason just because I was a girl (really, have you ever heard a stranger tell a man, "SMILE!"?); it may be because something is usually pissing me off.


No matter what the reason, I tend to make a conscious choice to look this way when I'm walking alone in my neighborhood. I don't live in a particularly rough area of town, but I do live downtown, by myself, in an efficiency apartment.

I came to this apartment after an uncomfortable living situation. So when I moved into my own apartment, I was elated. I felt safe, I felt comfortable, everything was MINE, and nobody would be in my space unless I invited them and they went out of their way to come over.

I don't know any of my neighbors other than a few by sight, but I don't really care to; I'd prefer not to, in fact. My apartment is where I come to be alone, and I kind of love it.


Back to my neighborhood, it's not very bad but it's not ideal. In the fall, there were multiple reports of rapes within three blocks of my apartment. I always carry pepper spray, but I just tend to lean toward anonymity when I can.

So tonight I'm walking home from book club. It's almost 9pm, but it's June 22nd so it's really light outside. A man from my building exits the building, leading a tiny dog on a leash. I smile at the dog and happen to glance up, where my eyes meet with the dude.

"It's good to see you smile," the man says, "You're always frowning."
"Yeah, that's what people say."
"You always look so....MEAN." I'm not really sure how to reply to that, so I don't say anything.
"You'd make a good librarian!" He laughs and walks away.

I probably would make a good librarian, but I was not a huge fan of this exchange.



There's been a lot of discussion about rape on the LiveJournal the last week or so (if you've missed it, there's a summary with links here), and it just makes me think about the gendered difference of how people view things.

When I'm walking alone at night, I'm not thinking about how badly I want to go to bed or how much I want to read some manga; even if I'm talking on my phone to my boyfriend (which I make him do so someone will know exactly where I am), I'm thinking about whether or not someone could hide behind the bush I'm walking by, or how close the people on the sidewalk are to me and whether they look like they might help me if I was in trouble or if they might turn on me.

So yeah, buddy, I'm not going to smile at you or ask you how your night is going or ask you details about your personal life; I'm going to get the fuck inside my own apartment and double-bolt the door.


My friend has suggested that the next time I see this man, I should smile at his dog, and then look at the man and draw my finger across my throat while glaring. BWAHAHA.

Labels: ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 8:50 PM
0 comments



wJun 14, 2009


Manifesta: Young Women, Feminism, and the Future

We read this book for my non-genre book club.

In general, this book about Third Wave Feminism promises to analyze what's up with Second vs. Third Waves, criticize popular culture, set an agenda of goals, and essentially do what its title suggests: write a feminist manifesto.

While I found most of the book at least relatively interesting, our book club in general (myself included) disliked it because its structure was so disorganized and we felt that it was too broad to really address issues that we wanted it to address. It was also irritating that the authors continuously name-dropped their close friends/acquaintances/former jobs. For a book that's trying to grab people who might not yet refer to themselves as feminists, it seems to almost go out of its way to make it so that readers cannot identify with the authors.

On the positive side, reading this book got me to buy my first copies of the magazines Bitch and Bust.

I was annoyed because the book constantly made references to (apparently common) feminist texts and people and events who I have never read/heard of. Yeah, it sucks that I was never taught about them in school, but it makes this supposedly introductory text inaccessible to me.

The book did an okay job at addressing issues that affect people of color and people who identify as LGBT. The book made a lot of good points, like Gerda Lerner's note that repeatedly throughout history, women keep learning a feminist history, and then losing it - we keep cycling through the same practices over and over, and must learn our own history to propel our progression.


What pissed me off the most about this book was that every time the authors discussed a feminist who had said anything even remotely positively pro-life, they wrote the woman off as not being a real feminist at all. This is troubling to me for obvious reasons - I am Catholic and pro-life, and I am also a feminist.

To disagree with someone and then tell them that because of their thought process, you have the power to take away their ability to identify as a feminist? Firstly, it's not your power to begin with; secondly, what the hell kind of a feminist are you?

I'd like to reference RaceFail here, because it was a huge, sprawling discussion that took place in public. Constantly throughout RaceFail, people were told, "Dude, you said something racist." The accused would freak out, saying, "I'm not racist! I'm not racist!" and the accuser would say, "I'm not calling you racist; I'm not saying you're not anti-racist; I'm saying that you said/did something racist."

In that example, people doing the calling out were not trying to steal parts of people's identities, not even labeling them as racist people. They were zeroing in on what was said, dissecting it, and trying to teach.

If you want to teach and try to change my mind, go ahead and do that. But slapping me in the face and telling me that I can't be a feminist at all is not going to change my mind: in fact, it'll probably make me hate you just a bit.

On the thread of changing minds, what's up with this strategy, anyway? Don't feminists want allies who get it to be infiltrating everywhere? We should want feminists in government, in churches, occupying spaces and making connections with people in places that most feminists don't want to be in/bother with.

So for someone to try and rob me of part of my identity because we disagree on one issue? I really don't know what to say, except for, "Well, fuck you, too."


I know I had a problem with this in Jessica Valenti's Full Front Feminism, too. One day I'll find current feminist books just for me! :O


Sometimes Necessary Abortion Disclaimer
This post is not actually about the ethics of abortion! If you would like to participate in such a discussion, please host one in your own blog. This post is about identities and the naming of groups and a book I read. Thanks.

Labels: , , , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 11:32 PM
0 comments



wMar 27, 2009


La!

I have updated my 101 Primer since its original posting two months ago. Nothing has been deleted, but more links have been added (mostly to communities), as well as a new section on "Race and Fandom."

The links to RaceFail posts are by no means even remotely exhaustive, but I tried to pick the ones I thought most appropriate for a 101 primer.


I purchased the following today, for $.50 a piece!

A Free Man of Color by Barbara Hambly
Fever Season by Barbara Hambly
A Hunger for Home: Louisa May Alcott's Place in American Culture by Sarah Elbert
Toward a Recognition of Androgyny by Carolyn G. Heilbrun
The Female Man by Joanna Russ
Writing and Sexual Difference edited by Elizabeth Abel
The Wounded Woman by Linda Schierse Leonard
Beyond Anger: On Being a Feminist in the Church by Carolyn Osiek, R.S.C.J.

Doesn't that last one sound amazing?! From the back cover:
What happens to a woman who has a deep faith and ardent commitment to her Church, and yet who because of her honesty and openness to truth becomes more and more convinced of the validity of the feminist critique of insitutional religion?

They must undergo a conversion which will transform them. It consists in embracing the cross, not as passive victims, but as free agents capable of sustaining the liberating and redemptive suffering that is necessary in order that their continuing presence in the Church can effect needed changes according to the pattern of the Gospel.

Labels: , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 1:34 PM
1 comments



wJan 24, 2009


101 Primer

So. My blog is operating under the assumption that everyone who comments in it is beyond the 101 level when it comes to differences in gender, race, hetero-normativity, differently abled people, etc. I assume that you understand that some people benefit from privilege due to the way our society is structured.

"But, Mystickeeper!" you say. "I don't believe you!"
"Well, Jimmy," I say. "Sit your ass down, and read these posts. NO REALLY. Read them."

Please read the rest of the post at the LiveJournal, as some them link to LJ people.

Labels: , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 10:47 AM
2 comments



wJan 9, 2009


That middle section turned out longer than I expected....

There is supposed to be steady snowfall throughout the day, and there's already a healthy coating on the streets and sidewalks.

My throat was mildly sore yesterday, but this morning I woke up because it was so painful to swallow. I've brought cayenne pepper, ginger powder, and honey to work, and plan to mix them all with some orange spiced tea and get rid of it! We'll see how that goes.


My LJ friend meganbmoore has posted an appalling link to a post made by a dude named Josh Tyler, who thinks that chicks only like Julia Roberts movies. Her post is here. Of note:
Even Wonder Womanwas only a success because men supported her. The old Wonder Woman television show was a hit because men tuned in. Men tuned in because Wonder Woman was hot and watching her rope bad guys with her golden lasso fulfilled some sort of hot chick, dominatrix fetish fantasy. Wonder Woman may be a girl, but her audience was never really comprised of women. Sure women may tune in from time to time, just as women go see movies like Spider-Man and The Dark Knight. But they are not and never will be the primary audience for those films. Catching bad guys is not a common female fantasy. Ask most women which movies they’re most looking forward to in 2009 and odds are that it’ll be something starring Julia Roberts. Ask men what they’re most looking forward to, and I guarantee Julia’s name will not be uttered.

There’s nothing wrong with that. Men and women simply have different interests. Men are interested in action movies with heroes blowing things up and saving the girl. Men are interested in imagining themselves as ass-kicking heroes. Women are interested in movies about relationships and romance and love. Women are interested in imagining themselves finding the right guy and dancing till dawn. Little boys play with guns, little girls play with dolls. Neither version of play is superior to the other, it’s just different. Nobody is out there trying to force men to get interested in movies about romantic weekends in Paris, so why are we so dead set on forcing women to get interested in movies about beating people up? There’s something unintentionally sexist about it, it’s as if we’re saying women’s interests are somehow inherently inferior, and to be validated they must instead find ways to be more like men.

WHAT THE FUCK. There is so much that is wrong with his post. Firstly, WTF about gendered childhoods?! I'm pretty sure that I did my best to let boys let me play football at recess when I was 8. I played with GI Joes and I loved Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. I also learned how to cross-stitch and made elaborate rooms for my American Girl dolls, going so far as to make them their own food by molding and baking clay. And then I would run into the backyard and make my own knives by scraping sticks against concrete. According to this guy, I must be some freak of nature with no gender! NOT TO MENTION MY MEDIA TASTES, and I think any readers of this blog know that I'm a huge fan of cinematic and/or animated violence.

You know what, though? In a way, he's right. I do dislike superhero comics about men (I have not read Wonder Women). I hate how they're mysognistic, and I hate how women exist only as a way to give the male protagonist angst (Spider-Man's Mary Jane), and someone to save. I hate how people's bodies are drawn in superhero comics, both me and women: Muscles are grossly exaggerated in men, while women have impossibly tiny waists with enormous breasts. I tire easily with superheroes who catch the same bad guys all the time, and superhero writers who try and stir up drama by dropping in another female character for a few issues, only to kill her off. I'd vastly prefer to read Strangers in Paradise, Y: The Last Man, Ex Machina, DMZ, Runaways, or hey - how about Japanese manga with women kicking ass? Claymore, Fullmetal Alchemist, Sailor Moon, Chun Hyang, etc. How does he think that Buffy: The Vampire Slayer was so popular? Anyone who gives any consideration to their media consumption knows that a good story is one with believable emotions and characters we like watching. Do I like watching women getting tied up and whining until they get saved? No! Is that solely because I'm a woman? I don't think so. I certainly believe that men exist in the world who also tire of women being used as a plot device instead of characters.

And for the record, I am highly interested in imagining myself as an ass-kicking, gun-shooting, sword-fighting, ninja-star-throwing bad-ass. Imaginging myself twirling forever in the clouds the arms of a dude (even my boyfriend) sounds pretty damn boring.

Also, I know sometimes you guys get confused about original authors when I link to other places....meganbmoore is not the jerk....she is posting ABOUT the jerk. :)

Labels: , , , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 6:42 AM
0 comments



wDec 3, 2008


More Angry Blogging!

Abortion Disclaimer!!
If you decide to comment on this post, please focus your thoughts on the topic at hand. The subject of the post is about HOW abortion is discussed, not on the morality of abortion itself. Please keep your personal feelings about whether abortion is right/wrong to your own blog.


I picked up Jessica Valenti's Full Frontal Feminism from the library, and wasn't a huge fan. Rants are sometimes cool in blogs, but I guess I expected a higher caliber of analysis, and didn't get it. Of course, there were a couple of quotes in particular that sent me into a fiery rage.

Don't have sex with someone who is anti-choice - They have no respect for your body or your ability to make decisions for yourself.
Where is this "no respect" for a woman's body coming from? Desecration of a body is a serious wrong, and it's exactly what concerns many pro-life people about abortion - this discarding of one body in favor of another. The issue of abortion is weighty and important. I don't think anybody denies this. People who decide to have abortions are not flippant about it, even though they are deeply concerned for their bodies. Likewise, people who decide not to have abortions do not think "Well, I have to have this baby and that's that." Maybe their lives will suck more. It's a serious decision that women grapple with; I think that both the pro-life crowd and the pro-choice crowd can agree on that. Neither choice is easy.

I guess my point is that being pro-life is not about a lack of respect for the female body. Maybe it is for some pro-lifers - we are obviously not all the same. But I would seriously hope that none of you would dare to think that the female body is something I have no respect for, seeing as I occupy one myself. I view pregnant women and the babies they carry like Russian nesting dolls. There isn't just one body to be valued and respected: there are two.

Does this mean that I am not worthwhile enough to have sex with simply because I am pro-life? What a simplistic and awful thing to say!


Remember that anti-choicers, at the heart of it, are just folks who are horrified at the idea of pre-marital sex. They're not the arbiters of morality, just a bunch of folks who think girls should be forever virgins.

I see this all the time, and I find its placement in this book shocking, considering that Valenti spends most of the book deconstructing common straw arguments that people use against feminists, like "All feminists are ugly" and double standards and the like.

Where is her critical thinking here?! At the heart of it, pro-lifers are a bunch of haters who are disgusted by the idea of pre-marital sex, who think that women must always remain virgins?

I just....GAH. Not all of us are blindly shaking our moralistic fingers, okay? I guess I'm just disappointed in the author because she spends the entire book deconstructing statements that are easy to say, but pass your opponent off as a straw person by shaming them. But then she gos and pulls the same bullshit. Supposedly, the book should convince women to be feminists, but if I wasn't already a feminist, I would be so insulted that it wouldn't get me very far.

I am sick of feeling insulted wherever I go. In church, I feel like I'm walking on glass because someone might say something anti-gay that pisses me off, but I feel the exact same way when I'm at Room of One's Own or Wiscon or with feminist friends and people start talking about "those religious people."

Labels: , , , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 9:22 AM
0 comments



wOct 15, 2008


Life: It's Pretty Okay

Still watching Veronica Mars. Still in love with my same character (now with a GUN and sarcastic quip!).

Still reading Bleach manga, now on volume 18. It took a few volumes, but Bleach had now devolved into the same main issue I had with Naruto: There are too many damn characters for me to keep track of, or care about. Seriously, in the last "Who won the most popular character award?!" there were over 60 characters! How can that be?!

I don't know. I miss Ichigo's sisters, his father, and Tatsuki. I like Tatsuki being with Orihime. I like it better when everybody's in school than when they're in this Soul Society, meeting three new characters every single chapter (which are pretty damn short, I might say!). But I'll keep reading anyway. Still, Fullmetal Alchemist taunts me. I can only take so much action manga at once, though!


Caught up on Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles last night. Is everyone watching this show?! You should be! Totally awesome. Bridget made meatballs and marinara sauce and put them in subs, homemade fries, and tiramisu. I think I professed my love for her at least ten times. While admiring the candles on her tables, she said, "I'm domestic as fuck, man." IT IS SO TRUE. Good times with Bridget and Sandy.


Wisconsin Book Festival starts today! Excitement abounds.

Lastly, I have all kinds of love for this article about Fandom and Male Privilege, found by

Labels: , , , , , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 8:47 AM
0 comments



wAug 16, 2008


After School Nightmare, volume 1

I never know how to mark spoilers for the first volume of a manga series. Because, obviously it spoils the first volume, but it's impossible to talk about the series at all without "giving away" the premise of the series! I choose to un-cut because I think a lot of people on my friendslist will find this interesting, even those who don't normally read manga.

Ichijo Mashiro is a popular boy who plays on his school's kendo team. But the very first pages of this manga show him standing in the shower, staring at the blood from his first period on the ground. "No way," he breathes, but as we read on, we learn that it is way: Ichijo is a boy from the waist up, and a girl from the waist down. He has spent his life behaving as a boy, and kept this secret from everyone he knows.

Until now, anyway. Ichijo is forced by a mysterious teacher to stay after school for a class needed to graduate. In this class, a handful of students interact in a dream world where each of them struggles against their biggest fear, and competes for a key. The students appear to each other as manifestations of their fear. One student has two giant holes in her body: one in her face, and one in her chest; one student has turned into a long, sentient hand. Another walks around in a suit of armor, challenging his classmates for the key. Ichijo appears as he normally would....except that he is wearing a skirt. To his horror, he realizes that this dream world is not just a dream....everyone remembers everything afterward, and because his classmates can see his face, they all now know his secret.

Manga will often use ambiguous gender as a trope, but this is one of the few I've seen that actually shows the protagonist grappling with with different gender identities, and what they mean to him (or her; Ichijo is certainly a "he" in volume 1, but it remains to be seen where his heart will take him). It is clear that right now, Ichijo's view of gender is very warped.

Ichijo says, Guys are stronger. Guys are sturdier. Guys have more freedom. Guys have fewer weaknesses. That's why I want to be a guy. I focused on being like a guy so I would become one. But....when I lost to Sou...I knew it was because I'm a girl. Even though I trained so hard to become strong....I lost to a slacker...because of my body. It's really amazing how distorted everyone can get. ... This body I walk around in is the most distorted thing of all. That's why I didn't turn into anything else in that dream. Because this body is uglier than anything I know.

Of course, this is Ichijo's view of men. In the dream world, he learns that his classmate Kureha was raped on her way home from school at the age of 5. Why is it that men do nothing but hurt? she asks. If only they'd all just die....

Still, despite watching Kureha's nightmare, Ichijo still longs to be a man: I want to become a man with a steady heart. Beautiful and unwavering...I want to be a dignified man.

It will be interesting to see how Ichijo develops throughout the series. To defeat his nightmare, I'm assuming that he will choose one gender over the other. In the first volume, he seeks an open heterosexual relationship with Kureha, but it's clear (from their passionate kiss) that he and Sou have homosexual feelings for one another....or, at least, the feelings will be homosexual if Ichijo remains male.

I enjoyed this volume thoroughly, but unfortunately, it's wildly popular. I think I had this on hold at the library for a month before I got a hold of it. Oh well; future volumes will be something to look forward to.

Look, an online preview!

Questions I have right now: What does it mean to "graduate"? Will Ichijo become accepting of his body, and of what it means to be a strong woman, or will his view of gender remain warped? How come he thinks he has to be a woman to be with Sou, or a man to be with Kureha (who ironically hates men, and considers Ichijo the "only man she can be with," because he's not really a man)?

My all-time anime favorite Revolutionary Girl Utena makes me feel a lot safer. She would have a lot to say to Ichijo's "I wish I could be dignified and strong like a man." Women can be like that, too!

I try to keep track of what manga I consider "safe for kids" because I get a lot of people asking me "What series are okay for my 7-year-old daughter?" It's probably not something I would hand to my 9-year-old niece.

Labels: , , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 11:58 AM
0 comments



wJun 19, 2008


Are you kidding me?

Thanks to Maevele and Rachel Manija Brown for alerting me to recent developments via my LiveJournal friends list.

Okay. So, this one time, Nightshade Press published an anthology of short stories, titled Eclipse One. The mix of authors contained within the anthology was evenly split between men and women. Despite having a number of good (and good-selling) female authors, every name that was on the cover was male. In addition, the marketing package of the cover art was masculine.

Taken from the Wiscon panel description from this year:
The ensuing argument centered around two main points--the publishers felt that, of the authors in the anthology, the names they'd put on the cover were likely to attract the attention of more casual buyers. And because they were in the business of making money, they could not afford to put an "agenda" ahead of anything else. Readers felt that, because no women were given a slot on the cover, the publishers were reinforcing patriarchal assumptions about who sells books, and who doesn't. Some expressed the opinion that the lack of women on the cover was actually likely to deter them from buying the book.


Coffeeandink had a nice write-up of this panel posted in her LiveJournal, here. Of particular note is the concluding thoughts, which mirror my memory of the panel:
The book's sales history: Jeremy said it "sold to expectation," that he's already contracted for Volumes 2 and 3, and that based on the authors already accepted for Volume 2, there will be multiple women on the cover (I forget how many).


The table of contents for Volume Two has been released, and you can see it here, or with more comments accompanying it, here. Every name on that list except for one is a man's name.

So, as spelled out in the Wiscon panel description, there are two sides to the debate. Either it is okay for marketing people to shape their marketing strategy of fiction to reinforce a patriarchy, or it is a good idea for them to acknowledge the diversity in fiction that already exists.

Whatever side of the debate you lie on, there is no excuse for sending a representative (an editor responsible for the decision, no less!) to a feminist convention and have him fucking lie to the entire panel and everyone in the room about what they can expect in the future.

Seriously. WTF.

I now regret not typing up my notes on this panel yet. Perhaps I'll have time to do so tomorrow.

Rachel Manija Brown is actually productive in her post, and has started compiling a list of women writers and/or writers of color.
Let's make it easy for them, shall we?

Here is a convenient post listing current authors of gender and/or color who have been known to write sf and/or fantasy and/or magic realism short stories. Editors, should be uncertain whom to solicit to get fantastic stories that are not by white guys (sorry, white guys!), just check the post and comments here, and then feed the names into google. I am certain that many of the authors will be pleased to hear from you.

One could also email the list to any editors whom one happens to know are putting together anthologies. Just a thought.


Personally, I don't think the problem is simply that the white male editors have absolutely no idea where to look. I mean, it's the Internet age,right? One of the editors was at Wiscon. I don't really know what else we could do, short of a color-by-number instruction guide.


To be clear: What upsets me the most is that an editor for the publishing company came to Wiscon, sat on a panel, and lied. Who does that?

Labels: , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 11:35 PM
0 comments



wMay 28, 2008


The Positive Posts

I'm kind of astounded by how many hits both my blog and LJ have received in the last two days. People of the world, pay attention to this post, too. It is really important to look at how a feminist community responds to such a horrific event.

Pictures of me have now been posted, and excerpts of my blog entry describing the situation have been quoted by the asshats on the SASS forums. I think the most amusing part of reading that thread is their posts of "How long do you think it will take them to find this?" or "Do you think they've figured out we found their Flickr pool yet?" I mean, I know that Internet geek boys love to congratulate themselves for their ability to navigate the Internet, but don't they think that feminist sci-fi geeks might also spend their fair share of time on the Internet? WE ALSO NAVIGATE THE SERIES OF TUBES.



The Angry Black Woman posts: What Rachel Moss Did. If you're confused about WTF is going on, I suggest you begin here. TABW lays it all out for you.



Lesley at Fatshionista posts: A Modest Invitation
Take my picture.

Take it without asking. Take my picture while I’m doing something I love, something that makes me happy. In a place where I can forget that my life often feels like one long activist battle, where I can not feel constantly on my guard, not feel always vulnerable to attack, not feel as though my body is up for debate.

Take my picture, and post it online, in as many high-traffic spaces as you can muster. Identify me if you want. By name, by location, by employer. Surround that picture with vitriolic commentary about my body, my femininity or lack thereof, my perceived sexual habits, my self esteem. Laugh, and laugh, and laugh, that gut-rattling laughter of unmitigated cruelty, that laughter that comes from laughing at people who don’t know you’re laughing at them, who were going about their lives and made a target simply for not falling, unseen, unremarkably, into culturally acceptable slots - people who are targets simply for failing to be invisible.

Take my picture every fucking day for a year. Post it online, and tear me apart. Point out the innumerable imperfections in my shape, my body, my face, my fashion choices, my eating habits, my health. Keep doing it. Do it again, and again, and again. Do it as loud as you can. Do it as often as you can bear it. Be as mean and as ugly and as unabashed as your nature allows.

Do it. Take it. Take my picture and eviscerate me online. It’s just a public, out-loud, communal version of what people do to me inside their heads every single day. It’s happened to me before, online and off. It’ll happen again. It’ll happen every day I leave the house, for the rest of my life.

I am still fat, and I am still not sorry. And nothing you can say, nothing you can post, nothing you can do will change that. No matter how many times you try to humiliate me. No matter how much you want me to hate myself. Because it’s my fucking body. And I don’t owe you a damn thing.




Ppurplefrog26 was the subject of one of the pictures, and replies quite eloquently in her LJ.
This incident, unfortunately, is not unusual. Fat people hear negative comments, see the disgusted looks, and feel the drawing back of people around them. It’s not a safe world to live in if you are a fat person. We lose our right to privacy. Pictures are taken for amusement. Our shopping carts are examined with the intent to judge our eating habits. Our health status is questioned. We are not treated with respect and dignity by employers, service people, or health care workers. This happens every time we step out of our homes. Unfortunately, these messages can be internalized. So not only do you face the challenges of dealing with society but you tell yourself that you are ugly, worthless and disgusting. So it becomes a radical act when you choose to live your life and love yourself despite the negativity that we swim thorough every day.

I’m not sure what this person’s objective was in posting these pathetic attempts at humor. But I know that they did not change my commitment to living my life joyfully and abundantly. And I prefer pictures to include my face.

Labels: , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 11:23 PM
14 comments



wApr 22, 2008


I find it highly amusing that his username is "ferret."

This post is so heavy on LiveJournal usernames that I'm just going to direct you to the post in my LiveJournal.



For those who have missed it, in addition to blogging here in this blogspot page that I've always had, I also copy and paste my posts to my LiveJournal. LiveJournal is more community-centric than Blogspot is. Each post that I make has one of fifteen user icons (selected by me) attached to it, and my LiveJournal friends leave a lot more comments than you guys do. Just sayin'.

Labels: , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 5:07 PM
1 comments



wFeb 18, 2008


Please, watch me wallow

So yeah, I guess I went from Best Weekend Ever to Crappiest Day Ever. THIS IS NOT OKAY.

--I've lost my car keys. I have looked everywhere, including the coat I wasn't wearing Saturday night and my sock drawer. I raked the snow under my car. It is nowhere. My car is plowed in and was on the wrong side of the street all day. They don't normally give tickets for violating alternate-side parking out where I live, but knowing my luck, I'll get a ticket. I will have to go to the dealership to get a new one. Too bad I can't get to a dealership in order to do this because....

--Chad has gone home to our parents' town because his grandpa is really, really sick and will likely die within the next day. Prayers and good-thoughts for Chad and his family are awesome.

--Apparently, some non-student n00b at Anime Club is making Alt.Room suck for everyone else, and I'm probably going to do some ass-pwning to make him stop, judging by everyone's comments. This is unfortunate - I haven't had to talk to anyone about their behavior at Club in the last two years, and I'm not very excited to do it now.

--I completely and utterly forgot about the Liturgy Training I was supposed to attend tonight. I am on the Liturgy Team. My role was to train people to lector. I VOLUNTEERED FOR THIS NIGHT. And I didn't even realize it until about 5 minutes ago, upon which there was much swearing. I am a terrible person, and I am going to hell. I especially feel terrible because I was supposed to lector (read during mass) Sunday night, and had to cancel because I was snowed in. I feel like everyone on this team thinks of me as such a flake because I never have much to say at the meetings and often can't make extra meetings due to work or school work (OR SUCKING AT LIFE, like today!), and I hate when people have negative opinions of me.

--I am about 3 weeks behind on my Con Law homework.

--Random dude on the way up the steps to the Capitol this morning: Gee, they don't shovel well here.
Me: No, it's not very good. Better than my street, though, my car's plowed in.
Dude: Oh! Well I guess you'll have to get a guy with a strong back to help you!
Me: *weak smile* Yeah.

I HATE SHIT LIKE THIS. I always feel pissed all day afterward, when I decide to be polite and not start an argument when someone I don't know very well says something sexist to me. A strong back?! Who the hell does this guy think has been shoveling and ice-scraping our sidewalks nigh on every fucking day all winter, not to mention shoveling out my own damn car, often by myself, thank-you-very-much?!

--I couldn't go to the post office today because it's President's Day. Which is actually not that terrible at all - just irritating.

--Haven't yet started the presentation I have due Friday. Yes, it's about manga and American comics but I still have to, you know, do it. Also, I don't have a scanner. That should make things a lot more interesting (and difficult).

--I still don't have a job, and it's scaring the shit out of me. Also, due to not knowing where I'll be living, I don't have an apartment yet, either.

--It's also looking like I'm going to have to walk to my polling place tomorrow, which is a bit of a hike. Not to mention, I need to find a bill addressed to me somewhere, because I'm paranoid that I won't still be registered from last spring.

Labels: , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 10:00 PM
2 comments



wJan 25, 2008


What a week.

I guess I could blog before I get so tired that I fall asleep on my laptop. However, I woke up at 5:30am this morning, and that might happen anyway.

I really just feel run-down today. I lost my student ID and bus pass yesterday, which is obviously crappy. I live far enough away from campus that it takes about 45-60 minutes to walk home from where my classes are. It is cold as fuck outside, but I still walked home from my last class yesterday. Let me say: BAD CALL. I had to hug my thighs for a long time before I could feel them again.

Antoine and I went out for dinner, though, and had Mexican. So that was good. I also picked up some needed things from Office Depot, AND we went to Half-Price books. I picked up the Runaways v. Young Avengers comics (I've been following Runaways since it started), and The Beggar Queen, the last volume in Lloyd Alexander's Westmark trilogy. I look forward to reading it. Standing in bookstores makes me feel guilty somehow, though. There are so many books I want to read, and even though I'm reading all the time, it never seems like enough.

At dinner , the waiter set the bill in front of Antoine, and not in the middle of the table.

Glaring and snatching it, I mutter to Antoine, "That was a little presumptuous of him."
"Well, we didn't tell them we were going to split the bill, so they put it all on one."
"I don't mean how they made the bill, I meant where he put it."
"Oh. Well....I do have a penis."

Today at work, I was making a list of homework for the weekend, things I should do for Anime Club, when I should work, how I should get my student ID/bus pass, etc. And I started to freak out a bit. Also because I have intense girl-pain, and because of this mostly uninhibiting diet I have to be on until the doctor figures out what's wrong with me, I cannot take Tylonel. DO YOU KNOW HOW HORRIBLE THIS PAIN IS? The only analogy I've ever come up with is that it's like a wolf came and chewed out my abdomen. Not in a very abstract-metaphor way, but in a very literal "sharp teeth very rapidly separated my innards' cells from one another, and there was a lot of pain as I crumpled into a ball and died."

BUT, in the end I decided to ask off of work on Monday. I would have had to leave an hour early for the Student Org Fair anyway, and I really do need a bus pass and student ID, but felt too horrible physically to do it today.

Is there good news? There must be. For the most part, I like my classes. Although I'm still not sure what ballroom dancing will be like, because we haven't actually danced yet. I kept almost laughing in class, though. Because it is like Princess Tutu! Only real life.

I have a habit of laughing at inappropriate times, really. I always have to stop myself from laughing when I'm in church.

Anyway, I feel crappy, so I'm staying home tonight. Hopefully, my room will become cleaner, I will watch more Angel/Buffy, get some homework done, and possibly see Antoine.

Labels: , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 5:49 PM
0 comments



wOct 18, 2007


Today was very strange.

My English midterm sucked. I felt like I coped with it as best I could, spending lots of time on the essays that were worth more points, and spending the last 10 minutes or so trying to figure out what poems the passage IDs were from. I know some of them were wrong. But, I can't change it now so I'll try not to worry (too much).

Chad locked himself out of his car at Woodman's, so I had to go and pick him up. On the way back, a saw a curl running in the street but couldn't swerve at all due to other traffic, and felt a small bump. I made the very, very bad decision of looking in my rear-view mirror. Twitching. Chad made an effort to console me that it wasn't my fault, but I'm still pretty horrified about the entire thing. I like squirrels. :(

I went to a liturgy planning group at church, and it's the first time I've been a part of a small group that's church-related since high school. It will take some getting used to. Especially because now they're going to meet at 7am on Fridays! Who does that! Apparently me. I'm not too concerned, as I'm at work by 8:00 anyway. Also, James is bringing us doughnuts, and was careful to have me describe my absolute favorite (chocolate doughnut, chocolate frosting, white cream filling). It could be worth it!

I feel like most of today was me reflecting on life instead of paper-writing, but I guess that's okay to do once in a while, and probably good for mental health during midterm time. Also, Megan has mercilessly rekindled my interest in the JET program, so now I have something to think about for post-college plans.

An interesting read from a Wiscon friend of mine!
Busting stereotypes that peg feminists as ugly lesbians, a new study shows that having a feminist partner is linked with healthier, more romantic heterosexual relationships. Because equality is always healthy! You should do it!

Labels: , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 7:33 PM
0 comments



wSep 6, 2007


Yes, I consulted Chad before writing this post.

So. I've been complaining to Chad lately about how some people suck at feminism, and I feel the need to explain some things to the world (which is clearly best done by writing in my blog).

I will start with a hypothetical situation. We'll start with Chad - Chad has lived across the street from my house since birth, and is now a roommate of mine. I went through all of my schooling with Chad, and I am really hard-pressed to think of a single person who disliked him. He is a quintessential nice guy - the popular people liked him, the band kids liked him, the choir kids liked him, those marginalized for various reasons liked him. It is why Chad's/my plan for world domination mean Chad will run for political office, and eventually president, and I will be his chief of staff. He is well on his way, having now entered his first year of law school.

I digress. So, Chad, our quintessential nice guy (he is an eagle scout), when encountering a person of the opposite sex performing some act of manual labor will offer to complete the task for them. In Chad's mind, he is doing it because he is nice. When describing such mentalities, he uses the word "chivalrous." In his mind, it is honorable and right tell a girl, "You don't have to do that. I can do it instead."

I know that I can't speak for every woman, so I will speak only for myself. When a task involving manual labor needs to be completed, and it is sensible for me to be the one to complete the task - either because it is part of my job description, or because I would benefit from the task being completed - I see no reason why I should not do it. When I am told by a man, "I can do that instead of you doing it," I feel like I am being told, I can do this job better than you can or You are incapable of performing this job adequately. I feel this way even when people such as Chad are the ones to make the suggestion. Even when I know that people such as Chad have the best of intentions. Because what is behind that intention? A socialized mentality that men are "built for" physical labor, while women are not. It is not Chad's fault that he has been socialized in such a way, but the socialization process he went through does effect how he interacts with and treats other people. This is true of all people, especially men. It is possible to be sexist - to say sexist things - without being a mean person.

In fact, when having the conversation about whether or not I could blog about it, he tried to justify his position as righteous by saying, "I would help an elderly person cross the street." He quickly recanted, saying that that was a bad analogy, but it's still what came to mind first - and it really is a telling analogy. Comparing an elderly person, who is feeble and frail, to a woman who is striving to, say, cut the lawn. Making a comparison implies that it is beyond her limits for the woman to complete a task that requires muscular strength to perform.

None of this is to say that Chad is a bad person - verily, Chad is one of my best friends, and I think he is a very good person. The intention of this blog post is to show that sometimes, even without meaning to, a person (and it is not always a man - women do it all the time, too) can be sexist. This also applies to racism: Without trying to, a well-meaning person can say something racist. It doesn't mean you are now an enemy of all people of color, or of all women. All it means is that you should try to pay more attention to what you're saying, and why you're saying it. Similarly, if you benefit from privilege - if you are male, or if you are white, you need to do a really good job of listening. It can be really hard for a woman, or a person of color, to bring it up when they encounter sexism or racism with their friends, in class, in the workplace, or at the store. They are afraid of not being taken seriously, of angering people they care about and/or respect, and afraid of their words having no effectiveness.

So, listen - listen for subtle cues. Listen for when people hesitate, look for when people have fleeting looks of anger. Listen for where someone goes into a defensive mode by using a sarcastic quip or silence, and ask yourself why they're doing it, and if it might be something you did or said.

It's difficult to shift your mind into thinking in such a way if you're not used to doing it, but once you do, you'll be surprised at what you see and hear. Why is the default pronoun always "he"? Why is every class that I have contain a sea of white faces? Why do people of a certain color tend to ride on certain bus line, while people of another color tend to ride other certain bus lines? What areas of town do these bus lines go to - upscale or down? Why?

Most of all: if someone accuses you of being sexist or racist, the first thing you need to tell yourself is: "CALM DOWN." Chill out. Ask them why. Apologize. Tell them you did not intend to be offensive. But most of all, take their explanation seriously, and think about it for a while, even after the conversation is over. And try not to do it again.

It really is that simple!

Current Music: Hooker With a Penis - Tool

Labels: , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 10:26 PM
7 comments



wAug 20, 2007


What not to do

I was excessively lonely tonight. It sucked. I called Antoine at Creighton's, and he later told me I sounded like a puppy someone left in the rain. Buuuut, by using my phone and chatting online, I pulled through. Yay for technology, I guess. Also, my room got cleaner! It was a win.

Apparently, today was Sexist Day, and nobody told me. I got to open all the mail today at Bleak House (the book publishing company at which I intern), and several of our letters were addressed, "Dear Sir," or "Dear Sirs." When we reply to people's query letters, we always write right on top of the query letter. So, I took the opportunity to circle "Sir," and write, That's a little presumptuous, isn't it?

The real kicker was one person who submitted a story in which the protagonist was related to sports. The query letter said, and I shit you not, If there is a man on your staff he should read it first. There is a lot of swearing in it and this is the way coaches and players talk. Hey, buddy? It's the way I fucking talk. I couldn't believe the audacity of that person. Who does that?! Way to make a first impression. Ass.

So, here's my first tip on trying to get your stuff published:
Don't be sexist.

I guess I could go ahead and post the rest of my advice, after a summer of interning there:

  • Follow directions. We ask for everyone to submit a 1-page query letter and a self-addressed stamped envelope. If you don't include the envelope, we won't reply, unless your submission is dripping with gold. Also, sending chapters/entire manuscripts we didn't ask for is usually a waste of time. Especially if you sign your submission as Satan (yes, that happened).
  • Know who you're submitting to. If the publishing house specializes in mysteries and crime fiction, don't send your multi-volume epic on the life of a pirate, your religious propaganda on Susie Housewife, or your revision of the story of Beowulf. It's a waste of time for the publisher, and it's a waste of money for you in terms of postage, printing, and envelopes.
  • Nobody cares what your major is or where you went to college. Personally, I don't care if your profession is relevant to the plot of your book, either. All we care about is how good your writing is. Trying to jack-up your query letter (which is supposed to be about your story) just makes you sound pompous.
  • If there's going to be sex in your story, fine. Just make sure there's a point.
That's it, really. The rest is up to you. Avoid cliches, because they are teh lame.

Current Music: Elevator Music - Beck

Labels: , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 11:32 PM
5 comments



wJun 18, 2007


...and I've never been so alive.

What the hell, I'm already up late, so I might as well write in my blog, right?

Today was all right. Despite this weekend's weak stomach, and I guess overall weakness, I had a better disposition. This is due in part to the fact that I had my internship today, which is always a lot of fun. I am so lucky this summer, especially compared to last summer. I love both my job and my internship, every single day. Last summer, once in a while, I liked my internship, and I liked the few afternoons when I got to watch Danny, and that was it (aside from time spent with friends/family, of courses). I do miss my family a lot. I miss stopping by Olivia's soccer games, and now this summer Dylan is playing, too. I miss renting Studio Ghibli movies and cackling because they like them so much. I miss relying on Mom's cooking, and watching the news with Dad and arguing about politics. It's weird to think that I'll only live with them again during Christmas break. Or, who knows, maybe life will fall apart after I graduate and I'll move back in with them. It's my goal not to do so, but you never really know with life, do you?

Well, that was a tangent. My cousin (cousin's daughter; whatever) Molly was driving through Madison today, on her way from Milwaukee to Iowa. We met for dinner and ice cream, and it was nice. I guess that I really do miss that about being home with my parents - seeing friends and family who I'm used to seeing this time of year. Instead, it seems like I'm endlessly catching buses, trying to get to bed on time, and trying to remember to win at life by doing necessary things like laundry and buying groceries (neither of which happened today!).

If anyone is interested, there is a showing in Madison this weekend of the movie Serenity. I intend to attend, as does Antoine. Proceeds for the showings, which are taking place in multiple cities on Saturday, Joss Whedon's birthday, benefit Equality Now, which "works to end violence and discrimination against women and girls around the world through the mobilization of public pressure." Specific information on the Madison showing can be found here. Wiscon Madison friends, are you going? Or Gretchen, Kristen? I have a car, although one seat will be taken by Antoine. Three more are open! Or we could plan to meet there and freak out. Or something.

Lastly....OMG I started rewatching Honey & Clover tonight. IT IS SO GOOD. That is all.

Current Music: Motorcycle Drive By - Third Eye Blind

Labels: , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 11:26 PM
2 comments



wApr 14, 2007


A post devoid of anything that matters

Holy shit, it's the weekend. THANK GOD. I need two days to procrastinate until my Shakespeare exam! Verily, I do. Let's see. I know I have things to talk about.

I still haven't watched the season finale of Battlestar Galactica. I know the two major reveals that occur, and I guess I have absolutely no faith in the show in that they pulled it off well. Why can't this show be consistently good, instead of alternating between awesome and crappy? :/
On a similar vein, a discussion was started in a BSG fan community about why the genre of science fiction has such a stigma, and isn't well-respected. You can find it here. It really is a strange phenomenon, though. Most movie plots, especially say, romantic comedies, are extremely unbelievable. Why is it sci-fi and fantasy that get singled out as "too" out there? I don't know. But I do know that people who avoid it miss out on some good stories; similarly, people who restrict themselves to it miss out on good stuff, too.

If you haven't seen this yet, please do so. Alanis Morissette singing "My Humps."

I was too burnt-out to make it to "Heart of an Empire," which aired Thursday night as part of the Wisconsin Film Festival, but I did appreciate the people in Star Wars costumes who were all over campus. The Daily Cardinal caught a couple of amusing pictures: here and here.

I find this news story extremely disturbing. A preacher's wife shot and killed her husband with a shotgun, after years of being mentally, physically, and emotionally abused by her husband.
"It's just a lot of stupid stuff," she said. "I love him dearly, but gosh, he just nailed me in the ground. ... The first of our marriage, I just took it like a mouse, didn't think anything different. My mom just took it from my dad -- that stupid scenario."

But Winkler said she got a job at the post office and that experience taught her to stand up for herself. "That's the problem. I have nerve now, and I have self-esteem. My ugly came out."

Her ugly came out? Why is it ugly to have a self-esteem that forces you to stand up for yourself? I think it's sad that she calls it stupid that both she and her mother put up with abuse from their husbands. That's not stupid; it's sad. I don't understand how people can allow themselves to remain in relationships like this. I know that there are some who are adverse to divorce, but still - there comes a point when you need to recognize an unhealthy relationship for what it is and get out of it.

Romeo x Juliet
This is an anime series that just started airing in Japan. As I'm currently finishing up my second semester of two courses that basically cover Shakespeare's entire writing career (we read about 25 plays total, plus the sonnets), I was naturally intrigued.

Everyone knows the story of Romeo and Juliet, but I found the promo pictures interesting, so I'm going to give this series a shot.

Spoilers for premise of the series lie here
Luckily, Gonzo (the animation studio) has decided to spice up the plot of Romeo and Juliet by adding in touches of Robin Hood and the Anastasia story (the lost last girl of the Romanov family). In the first moments of the episode, we are first introduced to the setting: Neo-Verona (lol), a floating continent surrounded by clouds. Amidst music played by horns and strings, we see swirling snow and gothic castle peaks. Pegasi are ridden by the nobility. Here, the rivalry between the Capulets and the Montagues is not a simple feud, but is actually a power struggle over who will rule Neo-Verona. Agents of the Montagues are running in the castle, killing the members of the Capulet family in what appears to be a coup d'etat. The child Juliet witnesses the murder of her father, and then escapes with another girl a bit older than herself, whose relation to her is not explained. The actual series takes place 14 years later.

Spoilers for the first episode lie here
Soldiers prepare to kill a girl whom they accuse of being "the surviving Capulet." This girl is saved by "The Red Whirlwind," a seeming man who arrives on the scene with a feathered hat, cape, and sword, and saves the day.

Romeo is sipping tea with his friend Benvolio, and they witness the Red Whirlwind and the girl he is trying to save fleeing from soldiers. The two (Benvolio a bit reluctantly) mount their pegasi not a moment too soon, and Romeo saves the Red Whirlwind as he loses his footing on a rampart and falls. After being rescued, the Red Whirlwind stalks off. Romeo demands thanks, the Red Whirlwind says that if Romeo really wanted to be a hero, he would have saved the innocent girl from the soldiers in the first place.

The Red Whirlwind returns to his abode, which appears to be in a playhouse that performs plays written by "Willy." The Red Whirlwind's friends refer to him as "Odin." In private, with only a female friend as witness, the Red Whirlwind removes his hat and reveals himself - as Juliet Capulet.

Juliet and her friend go to a masked ball. Juliet's memories are stirred and she realizes that this is the castle in which her family was murdered. She recognizes some of the perpetrators. She runs outside to a fountain to catch her breath, where Romeo finds her. It appears to be love at first sight - just like the play. Although, Juliet should recognize Romeo - he's still wearing the same clothing he was earlier, when he rescued her while she was dressed as the Red Whirlwind. It's possible that this love affair could begin one-sided, but we'll have to wait until the next episode to find out.

The nods to Shakespeare
...were not terribly subtle, but still cute. Posters promoting "Otello" appeared on some of the walls, and Shakespeare himself is a character at the playhouse, where actors complain that they're performing scenes for a play that isn't even finished yet. Also, Juliet's cross-dressing is actually a common theme in Shakespearean plays, although it doesn't occur in Romeo and Juliet itself.

I've only sampled 3 new series, but thus far, this one is my favorite.

Current Music: Not the Doctor - Alanis Morissette

Labels: , , , ,

scribbled mystickeeper at 12:40 PM
6 comments