the twilight of equality

9

Make Me Choose: Carlisle Cullen or Charlie Swan - for @edwardclln

“What I enjoy the very most is when my… enhanced abilities let me save someone who would otherwise have been lost. It’s pleasant knowing that, thanks to what I can do, some people’s lives are better because I exist.”

2

I couldn’t come up with what they’re talking about, but it ain’t good. Probably something about crushing dissenters and what to have for brunch. 

I started this drawing and halfway through started questioning it. Nightmare Moon is still evil, power-hungry and arrogant and would have to fight constantly to secure her reign after deposing Celestia. She is a tyrant in every way. I have a hard time thinking Twilight would forgive NMM, much less join her. I’ve read a few fics like that, but it usually had a heavy dose of “Celestia was really a tyrant all along!” and I’ve never been a fan of that idea. The one exception was pretty damn dark and basically Twilight had a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome. So yeah, in the Starlight-altered timeline, Twilight would either just break and be a recluse, be imprisoned, or be leading the resistance. Maybe… Maybe if Twi tried to get close to NMM to sabotage her, free Celestia, etc…

However, I could totally see the above image happening if NMM had won that initial fight against Celestia 1000 years ago. I don’t think it would exactly be a loving relationship of equals though. 

LISTEN HERES THE THING ABOUT CARLISLE JOINING THE VOLTURI THAT FUCKS ME UP THO: 

Caius is insecure in himself and his place in his coven, and Aro knows that, but out of the blue and after literally three-thousand years of being a coven that rules by Aro/Caius/Marcus/Sulpicia/Athenodora and only ever them, Aro just casually invites Carlisle, a vampire with no power or significant talent what so ever and just?? invites him to become this high-ranking coven member, that surpasses the role of a ‘guard’ entirely, and essentially places him on equal levels with the rest of the leaders. 

And then there’s Caius, who’s been fretting over something like this since day one, Caius who has no talent and powers that would otherwise give him a secure position in a coven that puts supernatural abilities over everything else, and the very same Caius that was probably absolutely convinced he was being replaced by Carlisle, and given all the circumstances why would he have reason to believe otherwise?

Let’s talk about Silver.

This post is partly a response to this brilliant post by @squid-inspiration and to this equally brilliant one by @twilight-sparx, but also summarizes some of my personal thoughts upon the subject of John Silver. 

Here is the thing: Silver has never really changed as a person, he has grown some, he’s discovered unknown qualities in himself, but ultimately, he is still the exact man we see in season one. The interesting thing is that he has everyone - including Flint, Madi, and probably even himself - convinced that he is a good man when in truth, he absolutely isn’t. 

Silver starts the show as a drifter, committed to one selfish goal - his independence and financial security.  He’s a liar, a thief, and operates under no illusion of grandeur. He’s not necessarily cruel or interested in getting his hands dirty, but he’s unscrupulous. He has no moral principles, he actively refrains from passing moral judgment, he avoids attachment. 

When he allies with Flint, he does so knowing what Flint is capable of. He doesn’t blink an eye when he finds Flint cradling Gates’ dead body. Where Du Fresne has trouble grasping the extent of Flint’s amibition, Silver admires him for it - not because he thinks Flint has a noble goal, simply because he recognizes Flint’s singular dedication. 

Mid-season two, Silver’s priorities start to change. He’s been accepted into the ranks of the crew, he realizes that he has found a grateful audience for his antics, he realizes that he can gain influence, he makes the addictive experience of what it feels like to belong. That’s when his goal changes, and instead of being focused only on his own prosperity, his goal becomes belonging - because he has seen the appeal of it. His loyalty toward the crew - his unability to abandon them - comes as a surprise to himself. 

However, this newfound sense of belonging does not change who he is. It doesn’t change his moral ompass. He remains with the crew not because he’s committed to the cause or lifestlye of the pirates, he remains because he has formed an attachment which is strongly tied to what the crew means to him - what the crew can do for him. Silver is blinded by the new sense of importance he finds in being a quartermaster. He likes the power, the admiration. Acknowledgment and validation. The men like him. The men take his orders. The men listen to him.

Then season three wraps up, and Silver finds something even more alluring. True power. We see him get closer to Flint and grow more confident. Things are going well for him: Long John Silver is born, he finds Madi, he’s starting to be perceived as a leader in his own right. But what he still doesn’t have is any kind of principle that goes beyond what is good for him and his loved ones. His conversation with Flint at the end of season three - it states quite clearly that the most important thing to Silver is his own survival, and the best possible outcome that ensures his continued wellbeing. 

The war has never been Silver’s war. Flint is sorely mistaken if he believes, only for a second, that Silver is doing more than tagging along because it’s the most beneficial life for him at that particular moment. Silver’s personality has not changed, it’s only that he’s found a part to play which holds a different allure - the shiny, new pirate persona is a reward all on its own.

Silver loves Madi. Absolutely. He loves her a lot more than he loves his crew, and the inherent selfishnesss of a love that prioritizes a beloved’s life over those of everyone else becomes most obvious now, in season four. 

That is not to say that Flint, in his own way, is any less selfish than Silver. His selfishness, however, is less centered around his personal needs - emotional fulfillment, other people’s esteem and admiration - it’s focused more on abstract principles that he sacrifices everyone and everything to, even his own happiness.

Whereas Silver sacrifices everyone and everything for the things that bring him joy and gratification. 

For Silver, the question of whether it’s the right thing to exchange the cache for Madi is never even worthy of consideration. The cause has never been important to him, the cause, for Silver, is completely random. The crew no longer matters, loyalty toward Flint or their allies no longer matters. All that is left is Madi and what she means to him

His priorities may change, but Silver is still first and foremost an opportunist. Flint, on the other hand, is an idealist, or at least someone who is willing to deny himself when it means fighting for a goal that he forces himself to believe in. No less selfish, but certainly not more so, and as opposed to Silver, Flint actually has a working moral compass. That’s why Flint hates himself so much. 

All of that doesn’t mean that Silver isn’t capable of being compassionate, surprisingly brave, even loyal as long as there’s nothing at stake. Silver is not a good man, but he’s certainly no worse than any of the other characters in the show. Ultimately, Silver is playing a role, just as Flint does, but I think he’s a litle too convinced that he actually is Long John Silver, feared and respected pirate captain. I think he’s in denial about a lot of things, first and foremost his own responsibility. Just as he’s trying to blame Flint in 4.08 for the things he has done willingly and for his own, personal gain, he has been trying to re-frame his conflict with Billy as something that Billy presumaby made him do. 

For some reason, everyone else (apart from Billy) is buying into this narrative as well. Especially Flint, who has become so attached to Silver that he falsely attributes some of the virtues of James McGraw and Thomas Hamilton to him. 

I really think that Flint is in love with Silver - not necessarily in a romantic or sexual way, there’s very little for me to indicate that kind of attraction. But Flint’s assessment of Silver in 4.08? It’s his infatuation speaking. He’s been conned, same way as everyone else, into believing that Silver is a good person. If Flint has burrowed himself in Silver’s head, as Hands says, the opposite is also true: Silver has wormed his way into Flint’s heart, and he’s what Flint, who has pretty much given up on his own happiness, sees as his legacy. Flint, who wanted Thomas and Miranda as Nassau’s governors, now wants Silver and Madi as Nassau’s pirate king and queen. And while he may be right about Madi, I think he’s sorely mistaken about Silver. 

If we assume that both Flint and Silver survive the show, and end up as they do in Treasure Island, I think that ultimately, Silver will suffer the greater loss. His own sense of self-worth and purpose is now tied so strongly to how other people perceive him, to his new, shiny, position of power, the glory, that I think it will be difficult for him to accept that that he no longer has it. Silver will give up the war, but he will always mourn his own loss of relevance. He will become the Long John Silver of Treasure Island, the old man who was a part of something exciting and important, who can’t get over the loss of something that was bigger than him. A veteran in peace, talking about the good old times. Exaggerating his own importance, his own greatness, and incapable of letting go of the treasure and everything it stands for. 

anonymous asked:

Hello! I was wondering if you could recommend articles or books for someone who is not an anthropologist but would love to be one. It could be of any topic, but friendly towards someone who doesn't have an advance knowledge in this study field. Maybe you could recommend your favorite first articles/books that made you fall in love more with anthropology when you were just starting to study it. Thank you! P.s. I LOVE your blog; I have learned so much and it's really entertaining 😊

Thank you!! This is a tough question, and I hope others comment some other sources. 

Geertz, Clifford. 1973. “Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture.” In The interpretation of cultures. 

Geertz, Clifford. 1974. “‘From the native’s point of view’: On the nature of anthropological understanding.” Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 28 (1): 26-45. 

Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1922. “Introduction.” In Argonauts of the Western Pacific. 

Farmer, Paul. 1996. “On suffering and structural violence: A view from below.” Daedalus 125 (1): 261-283. 

Abu-Lughod, Lila. 2002. “Do Muslim women really need saving? Anthropological reflections on cultural relativism and its Others.” American Anthropologist 104 (3): 783-790. 

Foucault, Michel. 1976. The history of sexuality

Chomsky, Noam and Edward S. Herman. 1998. Manufacturing consent. 

Chomsky, Noam. 2016. Who rules the world? 

Mead, Margaret. 1928. Coming of age in Samoa. 

Bohannan, Laura. 1961. “Shakespeare in the bush.” Natural History. 

Said, Edward. 1978. “Introduction.” In Orientalism. 

The Combahee River Collective. 1977. “A Black feminist statement.” 

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1992. “Price formation and the anticipation of profits.” In Language and symbolic power. 

Duggan, Lisa. 2003. “Introduction” and “Equality, Inc.” In The twilight of equality? 

Harris, Marvin. 1976. “History and significance of the emic/etic distinction.” Annual Review of Anthropology 5: 329-350. 

Benedict, Ruth. 1934. Patterns of culture. 

These are in no particular order. Just the order I remembered them. 

Any article you can look at that’s from a major anthro journal like American Anthropologist or American Ethnologist or things like that is also good. A lot of the ones I want to recommend are actually from queer theory, not anthropology. I tried limiting it to that field specifically. Actually I lied some are queer theory good luck figuring out which. 

Anything by any of these authors is also worthy. 

You may be able to find a lot of these as PDFs online but you didn’t hear it from me. 

Edit: you can also find films or short videos featuring a lot of these people, especially Chomsky

One day, people will stop writing ‘Falling In Love With My Bully’ stories or ones in the lieu of 50sog...

One day, they will realise that abuse isn’t cute or sweet, that it is a serious issue whether that’d be emotional or physical abuse or even sexual abuse.  One day they will realise the ‘plucky woman must fix broken man and/or lose herself to the darkness’ stereotype is incredibly sexist and unfair.

One day they will realise that people shouldn’t really be looking for a Christian Grey, or an Edward, or a Joker, or a Kylo, or a Damon, and they should look for somebody who isn’t a danger to them or treats them like a child.

One day, they will realise abuse does not equal love.

flickr

Seattle from Atop the Space Needle 2 by billrock54
Via Flickr:
Seattle is a celebration of all the wondrous things life has to offer.Free spirits,free thinker,innovators,freaks,artists abound here.Great,food,history,culture,health,fitness,art are all here for the visitor to enjoy.To steal a phase,Seattle has it all. Seattle doesn’t march to a different beat,it is the beat,I hear it calling me now.

anonymous asked:

What are some good cultural and physical anthropology books that I should read as an anthropology major?

I’m copying some cultural ones I’ve posted from another ask (check FAQ) 

Geertz, Clifford. 1973. “Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture.” In The interpretation of cultures.

Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1922. “Introduction.” In Argonauts of the Western Pacific.

Foucault, Michel. 1976. The history of sexuality.

Chomsky, Noam and Edward S. Herman. 1998. Manufacturing consent.

Chomsky, Noam. 2016. Who rules the world?

Mead, Margaret. 1928. Coming of age in Samoa.

Said, Edward. 1978. “Introduction.” In Orientalism.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1992. “Price formation and the anticipation of profits.” In Language and symbolic power.

Duggan, Lisa. 2003. “Introduction” and “Equality, Inc.” In The twilight of equality?

Benedict, Ruth. 1934. Patterns of culture.


Physical anthropology is not something I can help you with, besides textbooks. I hope some other followers who do work in physical comment! 

2

>>Smoke Show<<

“I feel like some girls around my age are less inclined to say, "Of course I’m a feminist, and of course I believe in equal rights for men and women,” because there are implications that go along with the word feminist that they feel are too in-your-face or aggressive. A lot of girls nowadays are like, “Eww, I’m not like that.” They don’t get that there’s no one particular way you have to be in order to stand for all of the things feminism stands for.“ ~Kristen Stewart for Wonderland Magazine