lauri's writing

10 Signs You’re an Introvert

1. You find small talk incredibly cumbersome.

Introverts are notoriously small talk-phobic, as they find idle chatter to be a source of anxiety, or at least annoyance. For many quiet types, chitchat can feel disingenuous.

“Let’s clear one thing up: Introverts do not hate small talk because we dislike people,” Laurie Helgoe writes in “Introvert Power: Why Your Inner Life Is Your Hidden Strength.” “We hate small talk because we hate the barrier it creates between people.”

2. You go to parties -– but not to meet people.

If you’re an introvert, you may sometimes enjoy going to parties, but chances are, you’re not going because you’re excited to meet new people. At a party, most introverts would rather spend time with people they already know and feel comfortable around. If you happen to meet a new person that you connect with, great — but meeting people is rarely the goal.

Keep reading

PSA to the kiddos!

If you haven’t already, you must read the Seeds of America trilogy (Chains, Forge, and Ashes) by Laurie Halse Anderson. They are beautifully written and SO IMPORTANT and will forever change the way you see the American Revolution. I just finished Ashes and it made me cry in an amazing way. 

Go forth and read, kiddos!! <333

anonymous asked:

Maybe you're only used to talk about newsies headcanons here, but do you think Jo is a trans man, a lesbian or just a straight "tomboy" girl who just finds femininity boring, unfair and makes women weak? I mean something between tomboy and feminine

You wanted an essay in response to this, right? Anyway, I’m going to break it down into pieces and overanalyze everything to death, because that’s how I do things.

Is Jo March a lesbian?

Maybe! Jo March as a butch lesbian is very appealing, and there’s textual support. At one point in the book she talks about wishing she could marry Meg, to keep her in the family. People who use that as an excuse to ship Jo with Meg or any of her sisters gross me out, so let’s not go there. Jo’s a character who, for all her dash and dare, hates change an upheaval. Jo talks about marrying Meg because the idea of her running off with John Brook and changing the entire family dynamic is upsetting to her. Still, it could say something that marrying another girl is the first solution that jumps into Jo’s mind.

There’s also a ton of pop culture support for lesbian Jo March. I’ve seen her pop up many a time on lists of literary lesbians. A lot of this hinges on the idea that Jo is Louisa May Alcott’s author insert. Louisa May Alcott is quoted as saying, “ I have fallen in love in my life with so many pretty girls and never once the least bit with any man.” In so many ways, Jo is Louisa and Louisa is Jo. It stands to reason that if Louisa was prone to falling in love with pretty girls and not men, then Jo was the same.


Is Jo March a trans man?

Maybe! There’s actually more textual support for this than for lesbian Jo. Also, it doesn’t hinge on a throwaway quote about him wanting to marry his own sister, thank goodness. Without taking out my copy of the book, I’m pretty sure that Jo refers to himself as the man of the house in the very first chapter of the book. He talks about wishing he was a boy more than once. After he cuts off his hair, he mentions how he can now run away with Laurie, and anybody who wants to find them will have to advertise for two missing boys. He writes volumes of plays in which he mainly gets to stomp around in men’s boots and play men’s roles. He chooses to be called a masculine version of his given name. He takes on a male persona for the Pickwick Papers (as do all the March sisters, but you’ll never convince me that Jo wasn’t the ringleader). Jo has a certain speech pattern that was recognized as male in the Victorian era, namely that he tends to leave the first word off sentences (“I never take advice. I don’t have to.” would sound more feminine in Victorian lit than “Never take advice. Don’t have to.” Jo says a lot more of the second kind of sentence. Also, he curses.).

By the second half of Little Women, and into the sequels, Jo presents in a more feminine way, but it’s not like he gets a lot of choice. In general, Jo is a character who really ties himself in knots trying to change himself and overcome his own personality. This is a character who destroys all of his writing because professor Bhaer suggests that it’s not moral enough, and who seems to get punished in ridiculous ways by the text every time he steps out of line (usually with his sisters nearly dying). Adult Jo performing femininity more than teenage Jo makes sense given the kind of book that Little Women is and the time when it was written, but it definitely seems like he would have been happier if things hadn’t had to go that way. Given Jo’s penchant for wanting to help and guide young men (aka his entire role in the Little Women sequels), I could definitely see modern AU as an out trans man who works as a mentor for trans youth.

Other genders and sexualities?

A bunch of them could apply! Maybe Jo is ace (notes: the whole “be kind to spinsters” bit, Nan from the sequels being a mirror of Jo and seeming really ace). Maybe Jo is bi. Maybe the thing we are interpreting here is a children’s book from 1868, and that makes it really hard to say. Jo could somehow be every letter in the LGBTQA acronym at once, except a lot of the words that made up that acronym didn’t even exist back then in the way that they do today, and even if they did, it was hardly like Jo was going to come out and say them.

What about Jo’s marriage???

The story of how Jo ended up married to Professor Bhaer is really interesting. The first and second half of Little Women were published as two separate books. After the first half, Louisa May Alcott and her publishers were inundated with letters from readers who wanted to see Jo marry Laurie. Louisa had wanted to make Jo as spinster writer, like herself, and she insisted that she would not marry Jo to Laurie to please anybody. But then her publishers insisted that Jo and Laurie get married, so she had them do just that, but not to each other. In an epic defiance of her publishers and the Jo/Laurie shippers she had Laurie marry Amy. She then created a “funny match” for Jo in the person of Professor Bhaer. Their marriage was shown to very much be a partnership rather than a torrid romance (and Louisa could write the hell out of torrid romances, so if she’d wanted that for Jo, it would have been there).

In the sequels she then created Nan (who was very pointedly similar to Jo) and Tommy (who was very pointedly similar to Laurie). She had them play out a scenario that was very similar to the whole Jo/Laurie thing, only Nan got to remain gloriously single, and this was presented as the best thing ever.

I bring this up to say that Jo’s marriage to her stalwart professor doesn’t really need to be a hurdle in how one interprets the gender/sexuality of the character. Maybe Jo is a lesbian who married one of her best guy friends and decided to run a school with him and also have his babies. Maybe Jo was bi. Maybe Jo was a gay trans man. It all works, pretty much. Or, you know, you could go with the whole straight tomboy dealing with crappy compulsory gender norms thing.

In conclusion

I think having multiple interpretations of Jo March floating around is actually more important than readers reaching a consensus on Jo’s gender and sexuality. Little Women is public domain at this point, and Jo is a very important and iconic character. There could be entire books written with a not straight Jo, and those things could be up there with Wide Sargasso Sea in terms of being meaningful and well regarded literary reinterpretations. Or imagine how important a film with an explicitly trans Jo could be. On a smaller scale, wouldn’t it be nice if there was at least as much fan work out there featuring an LGBTQA Jo as there is fanwork shipping her with Laurie? .

Seeing themselves in a favorite character can be important to a lot of people, so I don’t want to say that Jo is definitely anything, and take the character away from somebody who might really want Jo to be like them. I think there’s room for a lot of versions of Jo March, and it’s something that deserves to be played with more.

10 Signs You’re an Introvert

1. You find small talk incredibly cumbersome.

Introverts are notoriously small talk-phobic, as they find idle chatter to be a source of anxiety, or at least annoyance. For many quiet types, chitchat can feel disingenuous.

“Let’s clear one thing up: Introverts do not hate small talk because we dislike people,” Laurie Helgoe writes in “Introvert Power: Why Your Inner Life Is Your Hidden Strength.” “We hate small talk because we hate the barrier it creates between people.”

2. You go to parties -– but not to meet people.

If you’re an introvert, you may sometimes enjoy going to parties, but chances are, you’re not going because you’re excited to meet new people. At a party, most introverts would rather spend time with people they already know and feel comfortable around. If you happen to meet a new person that you connect with, great — but meeting people is rarely the goal.

3. You often feel alone in a crowd.

Ever feel like an outsider in the middle of social gatherings and group activities, even with people you know?

“If you tend to find yourself feeling alone in a crowd, you might be an introvert,” says Dembling. “We might let friends or activities pick us, rather than extending our own invitations.”

4. Networking makes you feel like a phony.

Networking (read: small-talk with the end goal of advancing your career) can feel particularly disingenuous for introverts, who crave authenticity in their interactions.

“Networking is stressful if we do it in the ways that are stressful to us,” Dembling says, advising introverts to network in small, intimate groups rather than at large mixers.

5. You’ve been called “too intense.”

Do you have a penchant for philosophical conversations and a love of thought-provoking books and movies? If so, you’re a textbook introvert.

“Introverts like to jump into the deep end,” says Dembling.

6. You’re easily distracted.

While extroverts tend to get bored easily when they don’t have enough to do, introverts have the opposite problem — they get easily distracted and overwhelmed in environments with an excess of stimulation.

“Extroverts are commonly found to be more easily bored than introverts on monotonous tasks, probably because they require and thrive on high levels of stimulation,” Clark University researchers wrote in a paper published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. “In contrast, introverts are more easily distracted than extroverts and, hence, prefer relatively unstimulating environments.”

7. Downtime doesn’t feel unproductive to you.

One of the most fundamental characteristics of introverts is that they need time alone to recharge their batteries. Whereas an extrovert might get bored or antsy spending a day at home alone with tea and a stack of magazines, this sort of down time feels necessary and satisfying to an introvert.

8. Giving a talk in front of 500 people is less stressful than having to mingle with those people afterwards.

Introverts can be excellent leaders and public speakers — and although they’re stereotyped as being the shrinking violet, they don’t necessarily shy away from the spotlight. Performers like Lady Gaga, Christina Aguilera and Emma Watson all identify as introverts, and an estimated 40 percent of CEOs have introverted personalities. Instead, an introvert might struggle more with meeting and greeting large groups of people on an individual basis.

9. When you get on the subway, you sit at the end of the bench -– not in the middle.

Whenever possible, introverts tend to avoid being surrounded by people on all sides.

“We’re likely to sit in places where we can get away when we’re ready to — easily,” says Dembling. “When I go to the theater, I want the aisle seat or the back seat.”

10. You start to shut down after you’ve been active for too long.

Do you start to get tired and unresponsive after you’ve been out and about for too long? It’s likely because you’re trying to conserve energy. Everything introverts do in the outside world causes them to expend energy, after which they’ll need to go back and replenish their stores in a quiet environment, says Dembling. Short of a quiet place to go, many introverts will resort to zoning out.

source - Huffington Post

You know what pisses me off?? The fact that the rape is all about Monde. They just used that as an opportunity to separate Frary and to start this disgusting love triangle.

I really think that the writers were in the writing room, someone said “Okay guys, it’s been a long time - it’s time to involve another person in Frary’s relationship! We NEED to hook her up with Conde somehow” Then some sick ass minded person (i guess Laurie) suggested: “Oh, oh guys i know - LET’S GET HER RAPED” and the other writers were like “OH MY GOD LAURIE, BRAVO, YOUR WRITING SKILLS ARE OUTSTANDING!!1!1” 

You know what was the right thing to do? (well they shouldn’t have raped her in the first place) Francis should have been there with her while she was healing, her ladies should have been there to support her, or even Bash bc although they no longer have romantic feelings towards each other, she is still someone important to him ? But no, some fucking arrogant Bourbon guy that came from literally nowhere, named Louis, had to take advantage of her emotional state and pursue her while Mary was blaming Francis, the-guy-that-literally-has-done-the-impossible-so-she-can-be-happy, for every damn thing.
  
They basically raped their main “independent” female lead so they can promote adultery. Good job, Reign. *slow clapping*