book grace: rocky would you still love me if i were a worm

carrie is almost explicitly about the cycles of abuse. it is almost explicitly about how women and girls are taught to reproduce the patriarchy. it cannot be isolated from either message.

it shows cruel teenagers not as a random whacky plot point but instead to highlight that we are taught to mock other girls for not being fuckable; lest we ourselves be considered not-fuckable. we will eat our own kind to survive. nobody helps her because to help carrie would be to turn against the patriarchy.

carrie's mother has experienced abuse at the hands of her husband and religion not as a "sad backstory" but instead because it lampshades her behavior when she then turns and abuses her daughter while citing that same religion. we are forced to ask the question: what is the difference between the patriarchy and religion? aren't they both systems of control? we often see mothers as being the "ultimate" in innocence and kindness - but this book challenges that narrative. abusive mothers exist, and and always have. abusive women exist and always have. white women, after all, love voting for donald trump.

men are almost absent from the book, but their presence lingers. it feels almost like the red mark made after a slap - the men do not have to be there; the women will continue to abide by the rules without question. it is a devastating, haunting condemnation of the notion of feminine fragility. it accurately asserts that women are cruel, are capable, are power-hungry - and often are hiding behind perceived innocence to mask that cruelty. the abuse carrie experiences rests in a doubled betrayal: it is because of another woman. the supposed "sisterhood" is revealed to be thin, a guise of equanimity that is only offered to the "right" type of girl/woman.

many of us were not the right type of girl.

to go back on these main and obvious themes of the book - to rewrite the mother as some caring and sad creature is... a curious choice. i can't explain it, but it feels almost like censorship to me. it refuses a deeper meaning of the book (and one that questions the patriarchy) in favor of the incredibly thin plot of "what if scary girl had scary powers." i literally don't even know what level of misogyny it is that we have to defang everyone around her in order to tell her story. i'm baffled by it.

in the era of trad wives endlessly posting abusive content of their children online - the adaptation had plenty of meat to modernize her mother. in the era of AI and revenge porn and social media - there's a huge amount of space for a competent writer to play around in. after all, if the abuse is recorded and posted to media - and as the audience we're watching it without interfering - the story is now about us. it asks us who we are comfortable bullying.

it's okay if you feel like you don't have the writing chops to talk about how many religions are abusive and tacitly enable domestic violence. it's okay if you feel like you couldn't write a believable teenage bully. it's okay if you're just interested in "scary girl has scary powers."

If a mother murdered her child to save them from the horrors of the world and make sure they went to heaven, that would also fall under the description of “a woman who fiercely loves her daughter and wants to protect her from this world and the dangers” but hopefully you’d realize it’s still horrific and evil. The path to hell is paved in good intentions.

I was visibly uncomfortable and scared, he wanted to know everything about me and then suggested I should marry one of the guys from his village. I was disgusted and clarified I'm not interested.

I had a fun meet-up with a lady who called me over upon seeing me on the street, twice, which I thought was funny. She chatted to me about trees and vegetables, which I enjoyed, and then her voice went all hushed up and secretive, and she told me there was a man who noticed me and asked about me, saying he wants to take me into his house, so I shouldn't be surprised if I get an offer. I was already wincing in horror, and then she added that he's 75. That pissed me off. Fucking nerve.

I saw other m*n try to get my attention by commenting from their yards or tractors and ignored them. It seems because the area is so rural, they think we live a 100 years in the past, and if they see a woman they can just argue it amongst themselves who can have her.

My first neighbour, albeit extremely nice (for now) is acting kind of odd. His behaviour to me is always 4 levels nicer and happier than what his wife is saying he's like, and you know who I believe. I asked her in private if he's good to her, and she says he's alright now, but used to drink and during that time he was awful.

When I say odd, I mean, the wife will tell me he had a hard day and he's all pissed off. Then later he joins us and I'll politely ask 'how are you' and he says 'I'm excellent, I'm having a great day'. The other day when I discovered pears I brought them a bunch. She clarified she won't be able to eat much of those, due to high blood sugar, but her husband likes them. I said okay, he can eat them, and brought less sugary apples for her. Later she told me he refuses to have any, and I should just take them back, but half an hour after that apparently he was eating them and he cheerfully thanked me for bringing them over.

See how it's always different from what she says? I think he's trying to appear as a more easy-going, cheerful person than he is, when in reality he's just a grumpy old m*n like the rest. I'm not sure what his intent is, because I will always only want to talk to his wife, no fake niceties can change we're in deeper understanding of life than he could ever be.

i HATE self-censorship for a lot of reasons, but being in crisis work makes it even more frustrating. who are you censoring for? like i am being so fr, WHO are you censoring for? have you even thought it through? people who have been raped know that they have been raped. if someone attempts suicide or is grieving someone who did, saying "sewer slide" isn't going to protect them from any of the feelings. a murder victim's family isn't going to feel better bc you said "unalived" instead of murdered. if anything, it's just extremely invalidating and othering. it's saying "what happened to you is so bad that i won't even say the word," which is NOT trauma-informed care. you are not protecting survivors/victims when you self-censor. the ONLY things you protect when you self-censor are the puritanical ideologies that are being encouraged by rich fascists who want your money and obedience

No one ever asks you if you’re sure you were killed.

You don’t have to look your killer in the eyes after you’re killed.

You don’t have to act like they never killed you.

They don't have to hit you, choke you, or put their hands on you for it to be domestic violence. They can degrade you, humiliate you, criticize you, scream at you, lie to you, cheat on you, withhold finances, or try to control you, and it IS still domestic violence.