yeah :)

Why. Why are we doing this. Why is the bar for "gender nonconformity" on the floor.

Like.

Caracalla.

Whose portraiture and presentation is aggressively masculine and soldierly. Who is one of the most recognizable emperors in sculpture because of the grumpy-ass scowl that he always has making an X clear across his face.

Like there's NO reason to make this fucking guy

look fucking femmed up unless you want to use effeminancy as a visual shorthand (and excuse? I haven't seen the movie) for his tyrannical cruelty. But he was extremely masculine, it was his whole THING. If anything, they should have gone in the opposite direction, a commentary on the excesses of masculinity, if they were going to bring gender presentation into at all.

Basically trying to make a sequel based on real Roman history while keeping any thematic coherence with the OG Gladiator is pretty much impossible, because the emphasis on the Emperor-as-humble-masculine-soldier-man-of-action is what led to the 3rd century crisis.

I also loved the part where he deconstructs the scene where the main guy goes all, "It's time to give Rome back to YOU people", supposedly meaning the people of Rome but spoken to an audience of only soldiers.

'goon' -linguistic drift gave her a new meaning. i hope her new life is good for her. i miss her.

'henchman' -too gendered. can be shortened to 'hench' in a pinch, but lacks punch.

'servant' -too domestic to apply to all those who serve evil.

'underling, subordinate' -this one only works if they get off on being beneath you and/or you don't properly pay your workers.

'associate' -this one's good for grizzled mercenaries or lone agents but doesn't work good for broad swathes of an organization.

'slave' -same as underling but more intense. really fun for some of the group. unsavory for others in a way that limits the scope of the thing.

'thrall' -only really applies if you're brainwashing them and that's not something i've learned how to do en masse yet

'flunky, toady, stooge, lackey' -these are just insulting, and that isn't conducive to a healthy work environment. imagine going to work and your job title is 'stooge'.

'acolyte' -works for those that worship you, but again. lacks the scope.

'supporter, follower' -unspecific and vague

'assistant, helper, aide' -not sinister at all. just means you're doing things for me. swagless in this manner. could be good if used to describe someone who's so clearly more that as a way to emphasize their obedience via understatement, but that's only useful for a few members of the organization. and even then, 'associate' works better.