#answers2

[artemiseum]

Do you have an altar?

Yes.

[blairhappiness-blog]

Do u mind what sig scarf called ''rants''do u mind those type of msgs where 1 person is sharing hw they are feeling about the show and their opinions and r interested to hear ur side and how u feel abt the same thing.

no i never mind it when people want to hear my side on anything. I think it's flattering to see so many people interested in my opinion.

I started out on forums so i always liked the exchange of ideas. I think the gossip girl fandom has gotten to the point where you can't even civilly exchange ideas anymore. I don't know if i'm a perpetrator of that that kind of behavior, but i hope not. I have never turned away people asking me question or refuse to answer questions. If i haven't answered a certain question is because maybe i didn't have the energy for it at that time, but it's nothing against the question itself.

I like rants. I rant all the time. Sometimes, i'm very incoherent with my rants but it's just a way to get my feelings out. So i welcome everybody who feels the same way. I even welcome the people who feel the opposite way because i take a certain interest into their P.O.V. Rants are my thing, so i understand the necessity for it. I have many rants in my ask. 

I don't usually rant in people's ask. I just rant to myself and post it on my blog. Sometimes people comment, sometimes they don't. I think it's very important for people to share their feelings with others, because a lot of people feel the same way. But this fandom has gotten to the point where every rant is like a ship war cannonball. Nobody can express their feelings anymore without someone else claiming they have the intent to antagonize, offend, ect etc...

Sometimes rants are out of frustrations, not the intent to cause drama with people. I express my frustrations because i want to understand certain things better, because i want new P.O.V and i'm the kind of person that's open to that. my rants are usually filled with questions to specify exactly what it is i don't understand. 

When people rant to me, it's fine. I usually try to understand where they're coming from. And people who ship differently than me, ask me questions all the time, rant, so i find it ridiculous that they're all up in arms and sending me so much hate when i ask them a question with due respect to their ships. But i think i should be able to ask questions about certain things if i don't particularly understand that kind of P.O.V. I've had some of these people in my ask and i've engaged them and as long as they approach me respectfully and don't make it personal, i'm always open to that.

lol to answer your question about rant, maybe that was a mini rant

[blairhappiness-blog]

katharienne said: Re: C putting B first, IMO it wasn’t an attempted retcon. It was about Bart influencing C’s world view and twisting his choices and actions in his head, so that everything was upside down (loving was bad, being unfeeling was good) Bart’s the key!

i didn't say it was retcon though. I said it was inaccurate. Yes there are instances of Chuck putting Blair first. A lot of them, actually. But he doesn't always put her first and it's defective to his characterization for him to say something like that, cause he's supposed to have grown and be reasoned about these things.

i don't particularly like that he said that. And because he wasn't even  completely level headed in that speech, i'm not gonna take it as something we're supposed to believe. It was just words in the moments. There was a lot of truth to what he was saying, but a lot of projection as well because of what happened earlier with his father. 

So i don't take it as Chuck really believe that he always puts Blair first, or that Blair truly accepts that Chuck was right to say that. I think she understands where Chuck was coming from. where his head was at. So i don't think she weighed it up as much.. she understood a lot of it was projection. But she already recognized the parts they were truth.

Plus i do believe Chuck had a right to be upset with her, after the year she put him through. But he doesn't have blame her for things that aren't necessarily true. But like i said, i understand Chuck's position and i also understand Blair position.  And i don't accept that statement as true but rather a projection of what his father was causing him to feel towards himself in regards to Blair. But i don't think as much of his resentment was towards Blair as it was towards himself.

[blairhappiness-blog]

@berlagak

it didn’t remind him, but it rather proves more and more that Blair is doing the wrong thing by marrying Louis.

i don't understand why he didn't make it so that only Louis saw the video in private, because the bulk of what happened was Blair getting humiliated. it didn't successfully stop the wedding. Maybe if he had schemed in some way to make Louis see the vid before the proceedings, Louis would have been the one to call the wedding off and everything would have been successfully terminated. i guess, i don't get why he had to make it this big public thing on gossip girl. If somehow Louis had seen the video in private and still decided to go on with the wedding to Blair, i would have understood why his last recourse was to go public. But it wouldn't have been his place anyway. And no such thing happened.

Blair getting humiliated shoud have been something he considered heavily. seeing has he claimed he was doing this for her happiness and so on. Like you said he clearly wasn't thinking about Blair.Then idk who he could have been thinking about, it sure wasn't Chuck or Louis.

And other people writing the vows in weddings? Trust me honey it happened a lot more than you think. Dan didn’t think of Louis, he thinks of Blair. Blair insisted in marrying Louis and lets say Louis loves her at the time but really sucked in writing it down, Dan helping Louis isn’t really condoning a deceitful marriage between them. Because really, I’ve seen husbands who can’t write their vows because words are not their forte, and after awhile, their wives knows it but they don’t blame them if the marriage works

I guess i'm still young and i don't know a lot of things about vows and wedding. But as a girl, i think vows are the most important things you exchange between you and the person you marry, so i think they should come from that person's heart. No man can do another man's heart justice in words. I just don't see why Louis picked Dan to do that for him or why Dan would even agree to this. The thing is, i don't think Louis had anything to do with those vows. I don't think he had a draft for Dan to polish. i think he left everything completely up to Dan. And the vows meant nothing to him like he told Blair. I don't understand why Dan took that responsibility for Louis and Blair, seeing as close as he was with Blair.

i personally feel like i wouldn't want to marry somebody who can't write thier own vows. When somebody speaks from the heart, it should be natural. So i'm not looking for someone to impress me with their literary skills. I'd be looking for someone to express to me their true feelings, which shouldn't take much effort if they are ready to marry me. I wonder how many of those marriages where people don't write their own vows tend to last. I guess i'm different from those women who are okay with it.

On sending the video, I thought of it as Dan’s last chance to stop the wedding. I mean really if that video dropped in Serena or Eleanor’s hands, they would do the same. I’m not saying what he did was right, I’m saying he’s a desperate guy at his last straw.

I don't think either Eleanor or Serena would have sent that video. I know they would have confronted Blair with it but they would not have humiliated her publicly. Serena might show it to Louis or something and Blair would have been upset with her for it, but you wouldn't have been able to argue that Serena didn't have good intentions. Chuck wouldn't have sent that video because Blair made it clear to him that it was her choice to marry Louis even at the last minute when she shook her head from the altar. Chuck turned around to walk away, to let her choice be. Serena and Eleanor gave in earlier, so neither of them would send that video to gossip girl.

Why would Blair run directly into the arm of the person who just humiliated her?

Exactly, which is why he didn’t exactly have an ulterior motive for himself by sending that video. He just wants to desperately stop the wedding.

lol. i meant, why would Blair run into Chuck's arms after the video blast. she would automatically assume Chuck was the one to send it. So i was saying there is no way Dan intended for that video to work in Chuck's favor. He knew that after Blair got humiliated for it, she would only hate Chuck more. I was surprised she even had a conversation with Chuck after the blast. I'm not saying his ulterior motif was calculated or anything, but anything to take the ball out of Chuck or Louis court is a good thing for him --two birds, one stone. And if he thought what he did was justified and understandable, why didn't he tell Blair he was the one to send the video instead of randomly accusing Chuck, even though Blair hadn't brought him up in the conversation. I guess my main problem with this whole thing was the fact that he didn't tell Blair, even though he had a lot of opportunities to do so. Instead he chose to make deals with Georgina to protect him from it ever coming out. He never intended to tell Blair and that seemed to be okay with him. If it was anybody else who did it, he would have been the first one to tell Blair claiming that he couldn't keep it from her because she deserved to know the truth. honesty and integrity are supposed to be a two way street.

(actually, he’s the Prince so why aren’t the wedding in Monaco?)

this is my guess, but i figured that after the miscarriage maybe the royal family wanted to be accommodating to Blair. the original save the date was supposed to happen in Monaco on November 26th as opposed to January 28th of the next year.

About the vows, put away all the dramatic GG scenes, put away all the characters, just think about the words itself like a letter from a boy to a girl, that is what dairshippers liked about it so much, they wanted those kind of letter to be for them. Which is why the reactions were all, “OMG, the vows is so romantic!!!” The words filling inside the vows, that is what make the dairshippers heart flutters so much. It really is that simple.

this is the part that i get. i get that completely.And i applaud people who are able to extract it for just the piece of literature it is. But i have to look at the vows in the full context. Why Dan was writing those vows? what he aimed to accomplished with those vows for Blair? What he aimed to accomplish with those vows for himself? because it begs the question of why he even agreed to write them in the first place. Like what pushed him to say, Yes Louis, i'll write your vows.. How he was ok with writing those vows and hand them to Louis? those have been my main questions. And somehow they override the romance of the whole thing from your standpoint. I was just wondering how people are able to overlook those things. But as for what was written. I think Dan did beautifully, though i don't agree with what he said. I mean, i can't tell a character how to feel but i don't understand how Blair taught him how to live as opposed to Serena. It seemed like the story all along was that Serena took this sheltered ,aspiring boy and brought him into a world where he learned how to flourish because of her. He was actually becoming confident into the man he could because Serena's world offered him that validation and the confidence to believe in himself. It just shook me a little how all that credit went to Blair.

[blairhappiness-blog]

franklymydear said: bb, i totes lol’d at that diar look at your ship now back to dair thing. so funny. like, what even. blair never told dan she loved him.

yes. OMG. that post just set me off. i should have written something more elaborate and eloquent about it but it was late and my sister was asking to borrow my computer so i rushed the words together. But it seriously was a big mindfuck to me how these people think they are in any positions to be claiming such things. it was just beyond anything i've read. Like they actually think Dan and Blair was actual good love, despite knowing that Blair although it's true she cared for Dan, she was using him as her savior/comforter. And they  blocked out all the manipulative things Dan did. or the fact that  Dair did so much damage to SB that it could never actually work. . It's pretty obvious and i've been writing essays about it for months and so has everybody else.

[blairhappiness-blog]

Reading your responses to the abuse debate and really enjoying them! But could I ask you about one thing I don't understand (I think I just don't get what the words mean in that particular context, it's like a language barrier): what does it mean that in Dan and Blair's relationship one person is enabler and one is controller? Who is who and what does it entail in your opinion? Take care!

oh no it's ok. you can ask me anything

and you're the fanfic writer, right? what language barrier? i've fics of yours and i think you do beautifully.

I don't believe that DB is as black and white as i have written in my previous response. I said that for emphasis. But i do not believe their roles in the relationship are as polar as i may have made it seem. doesn't mean i'm far from the truth, because their dynamic is empirically what i described it to be. They are Hero/Damsel, Controller/Enabler and i don't feel remotely presumptuous saying that. It is in fact truth. It is in fact the core of their fix to each other.

Blair is the controller in the relationship because she is the one openly actively seeking something and maneuvering the other person provide what she needs in the way that she wants it

Dan is the enabler because he is the one who provides Blair with the thing she's seeking and follows Blair's lead, for the most part

The relationships revolves mostly around Blair and what she needs, therefore she's the controller. Dan is the enabler because he is the one putting Blair on the pedestal and feeding her what she wants

However this dynamic of controller/Enabler applies to both of them in either role. Difference is Blair seeks what she wants more openly, her intent is more candid than Dan and that's why a lot of people don't see just how manipulative Dan is. But Dan also controls his relationship with Blair in in this weird convoluted way through his psychological manipulation of her. And Blair doesn't necessarily enable it but she's vulnerable against it.. He doesn't expose his intentions as openly as Blair does and acts all holy and hypocritical. that's the big difference.

But like i said, it's not as black and white as i'm describing it but that's the curt breakdown of it.. Dan does get his fair share of reward from the relationship and he doesn't just give and give to Blair all the time. He actually gets to be with Blair, which is what he wants fundamentally. Even if he never succeeded at possessing her heart. He achieved a great proximity to her physically, emotionally and mentally. And he had happened to be in a position where he was even able to manipulate her into seeing more to him because he had achieved such great closeness with her. He took advantage of her in many ways and she wasn't always in control in all aspects. Also, she eventually came around to supporting him in some capacity like he has supported her before. She did give him encouragement for his writing. In some ways, she did give things to the relationship

However the disparity of nurturing and dedication was great. It wasn't proportional and it certainly wasn't built solidly. This was not a healthy, mutually loving relationship. Both people involved had motives that only served their selfish interests, even if they did actually care for each other underneath. Blair just wanted something safe so she can control it. It was her mechanism against dealing with her real life which was competely out of her control. It was a couple steps up from reverting to bulimia for Blair. So i understand why she clung to what Dan was offering her. And Dan was in love with Blair so he allowed her to use him because he could remain close to her. And it was certainly gratifying to be this close to the woman he loved and see her so intimately. But there was a lot of manipulation going on to propel this relationship and it wasn't an organic buildup, so it didn't hold up either. It was a Hero/Damsel buildup. The depth of love Dan has for Blair would never be reciprocated by her. She just didn't have it in her for him. And as much as they were able to force proximity between them, It was rewarding for them both in the way that they wanted, but you can't force love. And it was doomed from that point on.

 the heart wants what it wants.

[blairhappiness-blog]

"Chuck prostituted Blair"... really? and Blair had nothing to do with that? And Blair doesn't 'prostitute' people herself?

i could write an essay. I don't have the energy to do so right now because this fandom is extremely frustrating and i just cannot expend that high level of energy in my responses at the moment. 

But one thing i want to address in the anti Chair ~ABUSE~ argument going around, is the so called 'indisputable' claim that Chair is abusive because Chuck 'prostituted' Blair and there are no way to excuse that behavior as anything other than abuse.

Well damn, is Blair abusive too? cause she sure as hell "prostituted' Chuck in 2x07 to Vanessa, 3x06 to the NYU alum, 4x14 she prostituted Nate to Epperly for a good performance review. She uses the services of prostitutes, hence supporting the immoral institution of human trade they're a part of. Not too long ago, she bragged about how she's many times entrapped people with prostitutes. Seems like she does a lot of the PIMPING  herself.

So you're wrong -- about Blair, about everything. Sure the IP was wrong on so many levels of trade and morality. And, prostitution is a form of psychological abuse and sometimes sexual abuse for the people who actually commit it. But thing is, Chuck did not commit anything to the extend of abuse towards Blair, not did Blair commit abuse to the people she's used in her schemes -- that is, if you're willing to see the IP with your Chuck!hate blinders off and take Blair off her pedestal for a second. Yes, chuck did manipulate Blair in going to Jack. There is no denying that. Sure the act implied sex. But if you are willing to be fair to the character of Chuck, you know that the manipulation was purely psychological and not sexual. Chuck didn't see the IP in the context of sex. And perhaps that is the reason why he didn't see how much of a big deal it was at the time he shook hands with Jack upon it. Chuck saw it as a scheme to defeat his opponent and certainly not pointedly the sexual implication that appeared so huge for Blair. he saw Blair as his partner, at the time, not his pawn, because he expected her to understand, until later when he realized what he did. They both see sex very differently. Chuck did not intend to sexually manipulate Blair. sex was just the bargain and for Chuck the act of sex wasn't that big of an implication like it was for Blair. I believe that Chuck honestly believes he would do the same for Blair if it was her Empire in jeopardy. He would succumb himself to save her possession, in the event that the bargain was sex. And sex with anyone other than Blair didn't mean anything to him. So, it was a much minor sacrifice for himself. And for this, he believed his relationship with Blair would withstand it because he believed his relationship with Blair could withstand anything. she had said 'anything'.

But i understand prostitution goes beyond the implication and act of sex, it's also  about objectification of a person. In which case now we can distribute the accountability more evenly between Chuck and Blair if in fact we want to categorize this as "'prostitution'.. Blair had a great part in objectifying herself -- in equating herself with an object. Chuck did manipulate her but she is the one who ultimately traded herself. She is the one who went to Jack even if Chuck had made the path for her. She was willing to become that object. And therefore, Chuck may have manipulated Blair but she is the one who 'prostituted' herself. No matter what Chuck did or how much he is responsible for, If Blair did not ultimately accept to trade her body there would have been no IP. He manipulated her into thinking she had to save him. The option was to sleep with another man. But the process and ultimate choice to reconcile her desire to save Chuck vs. compromising her body by sleeping with another man as an 'acceptable' option was completely of her own volition. She made that choice, all on her own. She made that peace. So she is responsible for choosing to do that as opposed to choosing herself. So no matter what Chuck did, you have to also consider what Blair did. Chuck alone is not responsible for the IP. He pushed Blair as far as he did, but if she did not reciprocate in her own deprecating way, the IP would not have happened. Blair made that ultimate choice to prostitute herself for Chuck (if we are to consider this as prostitution even though it was within the idea of a scheme and 'sex' was just the bargain). Blair chose to do that. She didn't have a gun to her head or anything.

And like i said before, if we're gonna delve into the idea of rendering sexual favors for schemes as 'prostitution', then let's not forget all the many times, Blair has requested sexual favors from other people for schemes.  And we actually had Nate become a prostitute in season 2, when he lost all his money. However, no one raised their eyebrows then.. No one cried injustice. Nate was selling his body, literally for cash. And it wasn't some devise bigger than that, like a scheme, like taking down an opponent. Suddenly everybody gives a fuck because it's Blair, who willingly made a decision that she shouldn't have made. But that decision happened to be hers. And i'm gonna hold her accountable for it.