for my own curiosity, because my tragedy enjoying boggles the minds of a bunch of my irl social circle.

when someone gives you a life it ain't truly your own. when someone gives you a life it ain't truly your own

last night I went to a showing of En los márgenes (the English title is "On The Fringe"). it's a film mainly focused on the eviction problem in Spain, although it also touches other issues -immigration, social services, job insecurity, etc. I liked it a lot; it was very real and gutting (especially when you know other than the main characters the people in the Stop Desahucios organisation shown are actually part of it irl and those are their stories), but that's beside the point. mainly it's one of those films I leave wanting to have a long talk with the director lol.

(spoilers ahead, obviously. I do recommend watching the film and I'm of the opinion spoilers don't ruin good things, but YMMV)

said director, btw, is Juan Diego Botto. some of you in Tumblr might know him from Good Behavior? it wasn't too popular around here, I don't think, but I have seen people talk about it at least. he played a killer for hire next to Michelle Dockery's con artist thief xD

anyway. as I said. I wanna talk to him about it. after we spent probably a good hour or two expanding on the most important parts of the film, like the housing problem and social welfare and community outreach, and then a brief detour where I tell him I like him in Good Behavior but I like Dockery better xD, I REALLY want to pick his brain about what are his thoughts on husbands and fathers (and men in families in general) because I gotta say, I felt VERY in-sync with this film on that regard LMAO.

first of all, I'm very amused by the role he gave himself. I get why he wouldn't play the salt of the earth activist lawyer since that might've been too big a part to do while directing (plus like, if you have Luis Tosar as an actor that was clearly HIS part. now, why isn't he one of the ugly old balding celebrity man I find on the streets. he's a TALENTED ugly old balding celebrity man at least). but he could've just as easily played that poor woman's son, whose story was more tragic and a tad more sympathetic, and who at least ended the movie desperately trying to right his wrongs.

but nope! he played the part of a husband whose wounded pride was completely screwing his wife and son, instead of actually supporting them. he didn't even get to kiss Penelope Cruz about it xD. I kinda expected the character to get a redeeming moment at the end, like joining his wife and Stop Desahucios when they're fighting the cops to stop his family's eviction, but we just have a moment with him looking at them from afar with an :O expression. we don't know if he's still ashamed they need their help and that he still thinks what his wife is doing is "an embarrassment", or if he's finally touched by the show of support, or what.

now I want to discuss the lawyer because his character really hammered home one of the principles I firmly believe in, which is that even arguably good men make for shitty husband's and disappointing father figures in our society xDD. like I said he was played by Luis Tosar, which automatically makes me a little more lenient, I can't deny that (OTOH boy, did the character remind me of my own father aldjskk. that balanced it a little!). and yes, he tries to help people in need, and helps that immigrant mother whose daughter the cops took away. and looking at the bigger picture, which IS my default position, that's more important than the stepson's trip and MAYBE even than the wife having company in that medical procedure, although that part was really shitty... but maybe in that case you shouldn't try to be a Family Man if you aren't wired that way, or make promises you can't fucking keep as the stepson accuses him of (when the wife told him at the beginning that he should've warned her she was going to have to deal with the pregnancy alone... fuck him etc.).

I also feel more lenient about him than about Botto's character because the story ends with the wife kicking him out lmao. she doesn't even discuss it with him or gives him a chance to talk it out, she just leaves a suitcase on the street next to the apartment. it was glorious xD. he and the stepson have a nice progression and end on a good note, with the son telling him to be around (and hey, maybe he'll actually keep that promise...), but the wife said "enough" and it took, which I love. and I appreciate how the film made the point a couple of times to say SHE was the one bringing home more money, and that's why she COULD kick him out and be fine. something that subtly contrasts with the marriage between Cruz and Botto's characters, which ends on a bad note but doesn't definitely end, because that's not an option for her.

there's also the other story, with the old woman whose son is too ashamed to have screwed up once to be there for his widowed mother until it's probably too late. that one was absolutely gutting too, and gendered in a different, less usual way.

I'm just rambling at this point but TL;DR: even married women are single mothers. motherhood is a thankless tragedy. men's pride has a body count. very in-sync, as I said lol. Juan Diego Botto let's discuss this. I want to know how much of this is conscious thought or whether you'd feel defensive about it xD

I honestly always find the term ‘spinster’ as referring to an elderly, never-married woman as funny because you know what?

Wool was a huge industry in Europe in the middle ages. It was hugely in demand, particularly broadcloth, and was a valuable trade good. A great deal of wool was owned by monasteries and landed gentry who owned the land. 

And, well, the only way to spin wool into yarn to make broadcloth was by hand. 

This was viewed as a feminine occupation, and below the dignity of the monks and male gentry that largely ran the trade. 

So what did they do?

They hired women to spin it. And, turns out, this was a stable job that paid very well. Well enough that it was one of the few viable economic options considered ‘respectable’ outside of marriage for a woman. A spinster could earn quite a tidy salary for her art, and maintain full control over her own money, no husband required. 

So, naturally, women who had little interest in marriage or men? Grabbed this opportunity with both hands and ran with it. Of course, most people didn’t get this, because All Women Want Is Husbands, Right?

So when people say ‘spinster’ as in ‘spinster aunt’, they are TRYING to conjure up an image of a little old lady who is lonely and bitter. 

But what I HEAR are the smiles and laughter of a million women as they earned their own money in their own homes and controlled their own fortunes and lived life on their own terms, and damn what society expected of them. 

Just wanted to add that the suffix -ster was originally specifically feminine, a means of denoting a lady known by her profession. Spinster = female spinner, baxter = female baker, webster = female weaver (webber), brewster = female brewer. If one of the ladies named Alys in your village was known for selling her excellent weaving, you might call her Alys Webster (to differentiate her from, say, Alys Littel who was rather short, and Alys Bywater who lived near the pond).

This fascinates me for many reasons, but especially in the case of modern families with last names like Baxter or Webster or Brewster. What formidable and well-known ancestresses managed to pass on those very gendered names to all their descendants, when last names were changing from personal “nicknames” into indicators of lineage among the middle and lower classes? There’s a forgotten story of a fascinating woman behind every one of those family lines.

Resource for the history of the -ster suffix here.

Webster’s Dictionary, the woman that you are…

Oh no, is this one still going around? Spinning was a terribly paid job (when it was even done as a job-job rather than as part of the family’s cottage industry or as a servant making yarn or thread for her employer’s family) and women who did it as a means of self-support were in the lower working classes. They were not laughing their way to the bank while the rest of the world ignorantly turned up their noses, it was deemed women’s work and priced accordingly.

A History of European Women’s Work, 1700 to the Present, Deborah Simonton, pp 41-43

The thing is, there’s a lot that can be said about the importance of never-married single women to their families. Most of them weren’t the mocked and derided old maid stereotypes, they were active parts of their social networks, but they did face difficulties. Never Married: Singlewomen in Early Modern England by Amy M. Froide is a really good book on the topic!

— Ursula K. Le Guin, The Farthest Shore

sometimes I randomly think about the time a girl posted in this girls only Facebook group I’m in telling everyone how she broke up with her boyfriend and he lied saying that he lost the spare key she gave him, only to then break into her apartment when she wasn’t home and steal the cat they’d adopted while they were together, but then he denied having done this and she didn’t really have proof that he took the cat since he wouldn’t let her come into his place and look for it. And then another girl saw this post and knew her ex-boyfriend, and she was like “girl. I used to hook up with your mans back in xxxx and I still have his number. If you want, I’ll hit him up and get him to invite me back to his place and see if your cat’s there.” And the OP was like “bet.”

So this woman hit up homie dog, asked him out for drinks, went home with him, slept with him, and then woke up in the middle of the night and TOOK THE CAT. Like she had only said that she would confirm if the cat was there but then she took it upon herself to steal this woman’s cat back. Like she full on Trojan horsed this man and then hit up homegirl like “I got the goods. Where you wanna meet.” And then the two of them posted a photo of them together with the cat to the group.

And I just think women supporting women is so beautiful.

a single movie can come out where the female lead doesnt have unambiguously wholesome motives and every single person on social media has to be like okay women? i'm not sure if you get this but murder is BAD? the character who killed someone... that was a BAD THING, you shouldn't kill people, murder and cults aren't good? okay thanks, my feeble mind was confusing fiction and reality again so this really helped

I'm not going to lie.

The heat has melted my brain so much at the time I'm typing this I'm not confident I can come up with anything coherent. In any case, I chose this particular date for a reason (16 June 2023) to release WTSA and it's because it's the in-world birthday I've had for Laila as a character since I created her 18 years ago.

I've carried her with me for a long time and she and I have grown together. It pains me, in some ways, to have a version of her story I've "set in stone" and released out into the world for public consumption, because it feels like I've relinquished a piece of my soul and that eventually I'll have to say goodbye to her once this series is finished, and move onto newer pastures.

I'm not someone who is able to let go of things easily. That's been both a blessing and a curse. It means I can hold a grudge like nobody's business but it also means I'm resilient. And when I care about something. Really, truly care. Nothing will stand in my way. That's the reason why I'm here today with a published book backed by my own funding, my blood, sweat and tears (not to discount the hard work of those who've contributed to this book and also supported me and its development) but just to say... I made it. Against all odds. I made it here.

If I can say nothing else for this book I can at least say my stubbornness paid off.

Happy Birthday, Laila!

Books2Read | The Great British Bookshop