We were grabbing a bite of lunch at a small cafe, in a mall, right across from a booth that sold jewelry and where ears could be pierced for a fee. A mother approaches with a little girl of six or seven years old. The little girl is clearly stating that she doesn’t want her ears pierced, that’s she’s afraid of how much it will hurt, that she doesn’t like earrings much in the first place. Her protests, her clear ‘no’ is simply not heard. The mother and two other women, who work the booth, begin chatting and trying to engage the little girl in picking out a pair of earrings. She has to wear a particular kind when the piercing is first done but she could pick out a fun pair for later.
"I don’t want my ears pierced."
"I don’t want any earrings."
The three adults glance at each other conspiratorially and now the pressure really begins. She will look so nice, all the other girls she knows wear earrings, the pain isn’t bad.
She, the child, sees what’s coming and starts crying. As the adults up the volume so does she, she’s crying and emitting a low wail at the same time. “I DON’T WANT MY EARS PIERCED.”
Her mother leans down and speaks to her, quietly but strongly, the only words we could hear were ‘… embarrassing me.’
We heard, then, two small screams, when the ears were pierced.
Little children learn early and often that ‘no doesn’t mean no.’
Little children learn early that no one will stand with them, even the two old men looking horrified at the events from the cafeteria.
Little girls learn early and often that their will is not their own.
No means no, yeah, right.
Most often, for kids and others without power, ”no means force.”
from "No Means Force" at Dave Hingsburger’s blog.
This is important. It doesn’t just apply to little girls and other children, though it often begins there.
For the marginalized, our “no’s” are discounted as frivolous protests, rebelliousness, or anger issues, or we don’t know what we’re talking about, or we don’t understand what’s happening.
When “no means force” we become afraid to say no.
well aside from her questionable taste and petty dismissal, not much to comment on.
My thoughts about the upcoming show are parts excitement (seeing all the actors together again will be great), disappointment at the premise (this was the best RT could do as a tie in series? the best idea he/his writers had? really?) but I’m mostly trying to keep my expectations level, not trying to expect anything. My initial reaction was a lot more bitterly disappointed, I remember way back when this thing was rumored, because it seemed like another instance of Dick/Ryan Hansen being prioritized over more interesting characters (who actually acted like characters and displayed character growth and faced the consequences of their actions) just like he was in season 3. But it might not be exactly that, and Ryan is a talented guy so I’m just trying to keep an open mind about where this goes.
wait, is that the person who said it wasn’t fair for Veronica to have trust issues with Logan for the terrible things he did and said to Veronica during their time at high school because Veronica implicitly forgave him for all of it when she started dating him, or the one who said we as an audience was supposed to feel greater sympathy for Logan than Veronica when Veronica was told Logan might have been the one to date rape her? Or was that the same person
shit, this fandom.
ETA: So i took a quick look and I didn’t see anything really terrible? there’s this reference to “SJ wankers” they write that indicates that they’re nothing great, but other than that I didn’t see anything other than them being excited for this show that is (most likely) going to have a lot of flaws? IDK maybe i missed the meat of it but whatever