Tumbling Like Alice

michigrim

Japan’s complete lack of understanding of declining birth rates in relation to its work culture reminds me a lot of how America has an assumption that millennials are killing industries when the truth is they are more frugal because of a lack of funds.

Both come from a conservative mindset that neglects the impact that a toxic work culture can have on society.

michigrim

A 80+ hour work week in order to maintain financial stability isn’t exactly a solid ground to date people and eventually build a family from a healthy relationship.

A workforce comprised of 20 somethings that make between 20-40k a year in entry positions isn’t a good ground to build a reliable consumer base when a huge chunk of that is going to rent, utilities, car payments, and student loans.

the-bluuuuest

This is a fascinating connection, you should write a paper on this

diseonfire

I am convinced that, in general, people want to have families. Many, if not most, would be happy to raise children. But in order to have children and raise them, especially to do so well, people need happy, stable relationships, financial security and time to devote to - you know - actually raising the child. You need both money and time to do that.

If people are not given the time and means to be able to create social connections and strong relationships, to devote to parenthood and family, then they are not going to do it. How can they?

rowantheexplorer

If anything Millennials are out there trying to prove that we’re better potential parents than our parents were, because we’re practicing safe sex, using contraception and abortion to make sure we’re not bringing a child into a life that’s a financial mess where we’re working too many hours to even raise the kid. Prior generations complain that we were raised by TV and video games, and that may be true, but the thing is, we know that the reason we had to be raised by TV and video games is that their workaholic butts were never home to do it themselves, and we’re not going to do that to the next kids. And that may mean not having kids until conditions are right.

trans-aziraphale:

trans-aziraphale:
I’m reading about performative masculinity in the bible so naturally now I’m thinking about the very specific and subversive trans masculinity that Aziraphale and Crowley embody and perform.
We have Crowley, very well dressed, very luxurious in the decade that coined the term metrosexual. He drives a really old, really nice car. He has a bunch of houseplants and has had them since at least the 70s, years and years before the present day houseplant craze. These aren’t “traditionally masculine” traits. Shadwell might be slightly afraid of Crowley but he still groups him under the same umbrella when he calls both Aziraphale and Crowley nancy boys, a type of terminology he doesn’t use to insult RP Tyler. And Anathema has no difficulty seeing Crowley as queer.
His masculinity is not in line with traditional masculinity, it’s not, for lack of a better word, masculine, esp the masculine of 1990. It’s neat and a bit anxious with a lot of big green plants and an openness in his physical interactions with another man (Aziraphale) and no one else.
And then we have Aziraphale. I could write 10000 words on Aziraphale as a character and queerness and still not be over how incredible he is. Aziraphale is a total subversion of traditional masculinity. Everything about him, his hands, his voice, his clothing, all read as queer masculinity to everyone around him.
The above texts talks about how weapons (and a chariot) are key elements to Jehu’s masculine performance and even today violence is so tied up in traditional masculinity. And what does Aziraphale do with his sword? He gives it away to protect someone else. He doesn’t use it to keep Adam and Eve out of the garden, he doesn’t use it to protect them from animals, he gives it to them and says ‘protect yourselves’ bc violence and aggressive defense are not part of his masculinity. And it’s significant that his one violent plan of killing the antichrist is very much tied up in his old identity as an angel, not his human masculinity. Indeed upon seeing the antichrist is a child he trails off into uncertainty about telling Shadwell to kill him and suggests maybe they should wait.
Aziraphale’s masculinity, like Crowley’s, is not in line with traditional masculinity, it’s not aggressive or violent. It’s an old fashioned bookshop owner, with a precise voice and soft hands, and public physical intimacy with another man.
These two watched 6000 years of masculinity being made, of war and killing and oppression and violence* and decided that their masculinity would not be that. Their masculinity is friendship between those who are supposed to be enemies, and working together, and physical comfort and affection, and softness, and wanting to be left alone together and not messing people about. Their masculinity is theirs, they made it and they perform it individually and with each other, and it’s queer.
*this is obviously not to say that that is what masculinity is, merely that that is the way that masculinity is frequently and repeatedly performed as throughout history, bc as the above passage states, when we don’t problematize it, the connection between masculinity and violence becomes more and more intertwined. It’s not a natural connection but it becomes naturalized and accepted.
Another point about Crowley and his car. We’re told that Crowley has “looked after” the Bentley, but later the text places Crowley and his relationship with his car in direct opposition to Mr. Young’s relationship with his car. While Crowley just wishes away damage and doesn’t actually put petrol in, the cis-heteronormative Mr. Young checks his car every weekend, he’s read the manual, he works on his car and understands it.
If an affection for your car and working on your car is a traditionally masculine performance (and we should consider the above point of Jehu using his chariot as a crucial part of his performance of masculinity), Mr. Young embodies it and performs it according to cultural norms while Crowley takes it and subverts it when he performs it and restructures it around his own identity of masculinity.

On Aziraphale’s side of things, when it comes to material possessions and the subversion of masculinity, just take a look at how he handles the bookshop. Most antiquarian booksellers are in the trade to make a profit, I can tell you this beyond the shadow of a doubt; I once interviewed with a hard-hitting antiquarian outfit near Philadelphia as a finalist candidate for their then-advertised Medieval and Early English manuscript specialist, and I got the distinct feeling during my interview that they felt I wasn’t going to be an effective enough salesperson for items worth sometimes upwards of $20,000. These guys in the trade (and, yes, most of them are definitely cis white guys) are everything Aziraphale is not when it comes to running their businesses: profit-driven and outgoing out of necessity.

What does Aziraphale do? Hoards his books. Collects them, curates them, adores them. The shop’s merely a front for survival, out of necessity, to blend in and be left the hell alone. Making a profit is the least of his concerns, and there is nothing more conventional to accepted Western masculine norms than making a profit and flaunting your success. Aziraphale’s core collection of prized Bibles is a side-step from what most collectors would consider desirable; misprints are usually valuable, especially in first editions, but he’s collecting a class of misprints that’s relatively yawn-worthy in comparison to more conventional literature. Nothing about Aziraphale, his business, or his collecting practices demonstrates typical masculinity. He subverts it as thoroughly as Crowley.

Tumbling Like Alice

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

https://discord.gg/A4xrhJ