Read on Twitter
Okay, so I want to talk about some stuff with power dynamics, expectations, and audience in #Bridgerton 
without being ready to blow a fuse over people's racism.
Some of this will be about That Scene. Some of it won't.
Feel free to mute this thread.
without being ready to blow a fuse over people's racism.Some of this will be about That Scene. Some of it won't.
Feel free to mute this thread.
One thing I've been thinking about a lot is who #Bridgerton is *for.*
That question comes up because Bridgerton is a Regency piece.
And we have seen awesome WOC authors like Alyssa Cole and Courtney Milan and the inimitable Ms. Bev writing inclusive historical, but...
But.
is *for.* That question comes up because Bridgerton is a Regency piece.
And we have seen awesome WOC authors like Alyssa Cole and Courtney Milan and the inimitable Ms. Bev writing inclusive historical, but...
But.
There is an expectation that Regency stories, regardless of medium, are by and large For White Women.
Specifically for white cishet women, but there is a baked-in expectation of who the primary audience is.
The book the #Bridgerton series is based on is really no different.
Specifically for white cishet women, but there is a baked-in expectation of who the primary audience is.
The book the #Bridgerton
series is based on is really no different.
That means that when a Regency piece is presented, it's given like a buffet full of delicacies and sweets made specifically for white women.
They can look at everything spread out before them and say with pleasure, "Ah, yes. This. This is for me. This is for *my* consumption."
They can look at everything spread out before them and say with pleasure, "Ah, yes. This. This is for me. This is for *my* consumption."
That gets infinitely more complicated when you're looking at a Regency piece that features a Black hero and many prominent Black and POC characters standing alongside the white cast.
Because application of the white consumptive gaze here is *dangerous.*
Because application of the white consumptive gaze here is *dangerous.*
As many white women still go into this with the expected assumption of "Ah, yes. This is for me, for my consumption" and yet now they're talking about an attractive Black man.
And it reduces him significantly. He's now an exotic dish on a smorgasbord still made for white women.
And it reduces him significantly. He's now an exotic dish on a smorgasbord still made for white women.
And I think that mindset is behind a lot of people defending the more problematic racial and gender dynamics in the #Bridgerton show, because when seen as something created specifically *for* white women, from that perspective, where's the problem in fantasy fulfilled?
show, because when seen as something created specifically *for* white women, from that perspective, where's the problem in fantasy fulfilled?
The problem is in the assumption that this lavish period piece was made for their consumption in the first place.
The #Bridgerton Netflix series was made by one of the most well-known WOC/Black woman showrunners in Hollywood.
Did she make this for white women?
Did she?
The #Bridgerton
Netflix series was made by one of the most well-known WOC/Black woman showrunners in Hollywood.Did she make this for white women?
Did she?
Or is it just expected by default that a Regency period piece belongs to the white gaze, and so it's taken up that way without question?
What if it's for Black folk who want to experience the (entirely problematic, colonialist) lushness of seeing themselves in Regency romance?
What if it's for Black folk who want to experience the (entirely problematic, colonialist) lushness of seeing themselves in Regency romance?
I'm not saying there aren't things to be deconstructed about desiring to be part of the wealthy class that benefits from the colonization and erasure of our own people. That's another discussion.
But I think we need to challenge the presumption that it belongs to the white gaze.
But I think we need to challenge the presumption that it belongs to the white gaze.
And now...That Scene.
And reproductive entitlement.
Before you come at me for talking about women's reproduction:
I am a trans man. I have a goddamned vagina. I can get pregnant (maybe not at my age), and AFAB reproductive discussions affect me.
Now. On to the subject.
And reproductive entitlement.
Before you come at me for talking about women's reproduction:
I am a trans man. I have a goddamned vagina. I can get pregnant (maybe not at my age), and AFAB reproductive discussions affect me.
Now. On to the subject.
//cw the rest of this thread deals with reproductive coercion, lack of consent, rape.
I've seen the argument that Daphne was the actual victim of rape/uninformed consent because in her ignorance she didn't know that Simon's stance on children was a choice, not infertility.
No.
I've seen the argument that Daphne was the actual victim of rape/uninformed consent because in her ignorance she didn't know that Simon's stance on children was a choice, not infertility.
No.
Because the simple fact of it is that Daphne was not entitled to Simon's body in any way, shape, or form that he didn't desire, the same as no man is entitled to any woman's body in any way they don't desire.
If a woman doesn't want children, she owes no man an explanation.
If a woman doesn't want children, she owes no man an explanation.
Therefore if a man doesn't want children, he owes no one an explanation.
Daphne entered into a marriage and a consenting sexual relationship with him knowing that children were not a prospect. The *why* doesn't matter.
Unless.
Daphne entered into a marriage and a consenting sexual relationship with him knowing that children were not a prospect. The *why* doesn't matter.
Unless.
Unless you're looking at it from the perspective that Daphne is entitled above all to get what she wanted, and knowing that Simon was *capable* of having children meant he should have given her the chance to override him.
That her wants mattered more, period.
Again: no.
That her wants mattered more, period.
Again: no.
Should they have had up-front discussions about this--the reasons, who was willing to bend and who wasn't? Yes.
Is that the story we got?
No.
The story we got is of a woman who feels entitled to a man's reproductive rights, and forced them from him in the end via rape.
Is that the story we got?
No.
The story we got is of a woman who feels entitled to a man's reproductive rights, and forced them from him in the end via rape.
//cw ableism
The entire issue of Simon's trauma, his reasons, were all centered on Daphne and *her* story and elevation.
First she got to be a martyr for sacrificing her desire for children to love the infertile man.
Then she got to be aggrieved waif, victim of his lies.
The entire issue of Simon's trauma, his reasons, were all centered on Daphne and *her* story and elevation.
First she got to be a martyr for sacrificing her desire for children to love the infertile man.
Then she got to be aggrieved waif, victim of his lies.
Then she got to be the righteous avenger, taking back her reproductive rights from the man who lied to her.
Never did he get to be the man whose pain, whose choices, were overridden by force.
Never did he get to heal his own way.
Never did he get to be the man whose pain, whose choices, were overridden by force.
Never did he get to heal his own way.
And never did anything address the colonialism, the racism, the pain of a Black man having his bodily autonomy forcibly taken from him by a white woman in an egregious act of appropriation and violation.
Because it was Daphne's story, and he was just a prop in her "growth."
Because it was Daphne's story, and he was just a prop in her "growth."
And you cannot dismiss the racism in this, because even if the show claimed to have solved racism with an alternate history, the author who created the book--the writers in the writer's room--the viewers in front of their TVs and computers have not.
We do not exist in a vaccuum.
We do not exist in a vaccuum.
I clearly cannot spell vacuum.
*clears throat* Back on point.
#Bridgerton was designed to evoke a reaction from its audience. And its audience does not exist in a vacuum free of the racial and gender power dynamics inherent in a relationship between a Black man and a white woman.
So we can't escape the harm.
#Bridgerton
was designed to evoke a reaction from its audience. And its audience does not exist in a vacuum free of the racial and gender power dynamics inherent in a relationship between a Black man and a white woman.So we can't escape the harm.
The audience can only take the story in the context of our experiences. Our hurts. Because this fictional world was built in the context of real pain, real loss, real harm.
It was birthed from them.
It has not severed that umbilical.
It was birthed from them.
It has not severed that umbilical.
So when you try to take race out of the discussion of the rape of a Black man by a white woman, you do harm.
When you animalize that Black man and discuss his rape in the context of how he *could* have hurt her to stop her, you do harm.
When you say it's not rape?
You do harm.
When you animalize that Black man and discuss his rape in the context of how he *could* have hurt her to stop her, you do harm.
When you say it's not rape?
You do harm.
So to circle back around to the original topic, because these two are intertwined:
When you dismiss the pain inflicted on Black bodies in #Bridgerton because you assume the series is made for the white gaze and not ours, you are saying our harm is part of your fantasy.
When you dismiss the pain inflicted on Black bodies in #Bridgerton
because you assume the series is made for the white gaze and not ours, you are saying our harm is part of your fantasy.
And honestly, I don't think most of you intend to say that. I think the idea of saying that or thinking it would horrify you.
Right?
Please tell me I'm right. Because I need a little faith in humanity.
So just...think about the impact of what you're saying and doing.
Please.
Right?
Please tell me I'm right. Because I need a little faith in humanity.
So just...think about the impact of what you're saying and doing.
Please.
Um.
I'm bad at ending threads.
I'm done. That's all.
...how many tweets was this? It felt like a lot.
Uh, right. I should be writing. Bai!
I'm bad at ending threads.
I'm done. That's all.
...how many tweets was this? It felt like a lot.
Uh, right. I should be writing. Bai!
