Last updated: 1/9/2012

Like most fandom journals, this one has quite a bit of meta in it. Some of it consists of me babbling about various topics. Sometimes an interesting discussion happens in the comments without my expecting it. It can be difficult to wade through all the other entries full of...other stuff (*coughrandomcrapcough*), so here's a list of links to the meta in this LJ for your convenience.

These are just highlights. I write an awful lot on BtVS. Feel free to browse the tags, too, for other meta and polls.

All my meta is also archived on delicious: Gabs' Buffy Meta. Same links as here, just in delicious format if that's your thing.

My stance on the S8 comics is outlined here.

( Meta Master List )

The fics are divided into chaptered stories, one-shots, and drabbles. They are then subdivided by pairing. I've provided links to the various archives on which the fics appear.

LJ = my Livejournal
AO3 = Archive of Our Own
TSR = The Spuffy Realm
BSV = Bloodshedverse
EF = Elysian Fields
FFN = Fanfiction.net


Use whichever site you prefer.

( Under the cut )

ON HIATUS

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/372840.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

Have fun with it, guys! Remember to make your comments relevant to gender! :)

Mission Statement:

This series is intended to outline the feminist text of each episode so as to provoke and encourage open discussion. It's not so much about making value judgments about events and/or characters but about analyzing the series from a feminist framework so as to see what patterns and themes emerge.

Rules:

1. If you do not consider yourself a feminist or do not see the point of dissecting a TV show from a feminist perspective, this is not the meta series for you. I don't mean this in a hostile way, however the intended audience of this series is feminists who want to turn a critical eye to the show.

2. This meta series is written well beyond a 101 level of feminism. If you are new to feminism, I ask that you please take a look at this blog for an introduction to concepts that will be discussed heavily here.

3. If you begin to feel yourself getting defensive on behalf of a character (or the show), take a break from commenting. The outlines as posted are not meant to condemn either the characters or the show, but to contextualize the dialogue and events within the patriarchal cultural in which they reside.

4. BtVS is a constructed media. The characters are not actual people but are written, dressed, and directed by a team of outsiders. Criticizing a character for, say, having sex could be a sexist insult or it could be a legitimate criticism of the writers who chose to go that route with the storyline. There are nuances here when discussing a television show, and I ask that everybody be careful about exactly what's being discussed. A couple helpful terms are Watsonian and Doylist. "Watsonian" indicates that the discussion is taking place within the Buffy universe as if the characters are real people. "Doylist" indicates that the discussion is focused on the construction of the narrative and, as such, deals with the decisions of the writers and/or producers.

5. The key goal here is open discussion. I'm not presenting you guys with any brilliant insights; I'm just laying out what's in the episode. Feel free to discuss or disagree with me and others. Also feel free to answer other commenter's questions. The comment section is an open floor.

( 3.03 Faith, Hope, and Trick )

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/372719.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

I'm done with my final and, thus, done with my undergrad! *dances*

I'm celebrating by having a beer and slapping up the feminist filter post for Dead Man's Party. What? My way of celebrating is UNIQUE!

Mission Statement:

This series is intended to outline the feminist text of each episode so as to provoke and encourage open discussion. It's not so much about making value judgments about events and/or characters but about analyzing the series from a feminist framework so as to see what patterns and themes emerge.

Rules:

1. If you do not consider yourself a feminist or do not see the point of dissecting a TV show from a feminist perspective, this is not the meta series for you. I don't mean this in a hostile way, however the intended audience of this series is feminists who want to turn a critical eye to the show.

2. This meta series is written well beyond a 101 level of feminism. If you are new to feminism, I ask that you please take a look at this blog for an introduction to concepts that will be discussed heavily here.

3. If you begin to feel yourself getting defensive on behalf of a character (or the show), take a break from commenting. The outlines as posted are not meant to condemn either the characters or the show, but to contextualize the dialogue and events within the patriarchal cultural in which they reside.

4. BtVS is a constructed media. The characters are not actual people but are written, dressed, and directed by a team of outsiders. Criticizing a character for, say, having sex could be a sexist insult or it could be a legitimate criticism of the writers who chose to go that route with the storyline. There are nuances here when discussing a television show, and I ask that everybody be careful about exactly what's being discussed. A couple helpful terms are Watsonian and Doylist. "Watsonian" indicates that the discussion is taking place within the Buffy universe as if the characters are real people. "Doylist" indicates that the discussion is focused on the construction of the narrative and, as such, deals with the decisions of the writers and/or producers.

5. The key goal here is open discussion. I'm not presenting you guys with any brilliant insights; I'm just laying out what's in the episode. Feel free to discuss or disagree with me and others. Also feel free to answer other commenter's questions. The comment section is an open floor.

( 3.02 Dead Man's Party )

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/372134.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

And from The Body to Forever. We're kinda zooming through S5, aren't we? *enjoys*



( This one also makes me cry )

So I ran into this blog post a while ago.

Basic upshot: Cheerleading originated as a masculine sport and women only started to get involve during WWI (and controversy over their involvement raged for a few decades).

Choice quote from The Nation in 1911:

…the reputation of having been a valiant “cheer-leader” is one of the most valuable things a boy can take away from college. As a title to promotion in professional or public life, it ranks hardly second to that of having been a quarterback.

Another choice quote about the inappropriateness of women cheerleading in 1938:

[Women cheerleaders] frequently became too masculine for their own good… we find the development of loud, raucous voices… and the consequent development of slang and profanity by their necessary association with [male] squad members…

Anyway, interesting find. It made me ponder.

The blog post notes that FDR and Eisenhower were cheerleaders during their schooldays.

Well, I was recently reading a mediocre book on US history trivia. It had a section on sports and presidents and went on at length about which sports each prez enjoyed. Somehow, it left out cheerleading entirely, which I found odd, all things considered.

But then, it was a mediocre book.

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/371507.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

Screencap Paradise...gone???

*le sigh*

*switches to Disparue*

Edit: I've been informed! They're not quite dead yet! *blows kazoo*

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/371191.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

This feels like an awkward episode to poll over for some reason. Ah well. Let's do The Body.



( Tissues at ready? )

Let's start off S3, shall we?

*waits for norwie2010*

Mission Statement:

This series is intended to outline the feminist text of each episode so as to provoke and encourage open discussion. It's not so much about making value judgments about events and/or characters but about analyzing the series from a feminist framework so as to see what patterns and themes emerge.

Rules:

1. If you do not consider yourself a feminist or do not see the point of dissecting a TV show from a feminist perspective, this is not the meta series for you. I don't mean this in a hostile way, however the intended audience of this series is feminists who want to turn a critical eye to the show.

2. This meta series is written well beyond a 101 level of feminism. If you are new to feminism, I ask that you please take a look at this blog for an introduction to concepts that will be discussed heavily here.

3. If you begin to feel yourself getting defensive on behalf of a character (or the show), take a break from commenting. The outlines as posted are not meant to condemn either the characters or the show, but to contextualize the dialogue and events within the patriarchal cultural in which they reside.

4. BtVS is a constructed media. The characters are not actual people but are written, dressed, and directed by a team of outsiders. Criticizing a character for, say, having sex could be a sexist insult or it could be a legitimate criticism of the writers who chose to go that route with the storyline. There are nuances here when discussing a television show, and I ask that everybody be careful about exactly what's being discussed. A couple helpful terms are Watsonian and Doylist. "Watsonian" indicates that the discussion is taking place within the Buffy universe as if the characters are real people. "Doylist" indicates that the discussion is focused on the construction of the narrative and, as such, deals with the decisions of the writers and/or producers.

5. The key goal here is open discussion. I'm not presenting you guys with any brilliant insights; I'm just laying out what's in the episode. Feel free to discuss or disagree with me and others. Also feel free to answer other commenter's questions. The comment section is an open floor.

( 3.01 Anne )

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/370924.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

Heads up. LJ's been doing this thing the past month or so where it won't email me comment notifications for top-level comments on poll posts. That means that, usually, after the first day or so of posting the poll, I'm not likely to see your comment cause it requires me remembering to go in and check manually. *cringe*

It's annoying, and I'm sorry for not replying to any comments you guys have made. I'm gonna try to keep an eye on the posts longer. *promises*

But now, I Was Made to Love You, a surprisingly fruitful episode as far as polling goes...



( It's a cut. Click it! )

I wanted to post this last week, but the whole "studying for the GRE" thing got in the way. So let's post it now!

This is an overview of S2 for the Feminist Filter. There's some final numbers, some big-picture stuff, and a recap of some of the interesting discussions that were had through the season.

We'll start S3 approximately whenever-I-post-it. :)

Mission Statement:

This series is intended to outline the feminist text of each episode so as to provoke and encourage open discussion. It's not so much about making value judgments about events and/or characters but about analyzing the series from a feminist framework so as to see what patterns and themes emerge.

Rules:

1. If you do not consider yourself a feminist or do not see the point of dissecting a TV show from a feminist perspective, this is not the meta series for you. I don't mean this in a hostile way, however the intended audience of this series is feminists who want to turn a critical eye to the show.

2. This meta series is written well beyond a 101 level of feminism. If you are new to feminism, I ask that you please take a look at this blog for an introduction to concepts that will be discussed heavily here.

3. If you begin to feel yourself getting defensive on behalf of a character (or the show), take a break from commenting. The outlines as posted are not meant to condemn either the characters or the show, but to contextualize the dialogue and events within the patriarchal cultural in which they reside.

4. BtVS is a constructed media. The characters are not actual people but are written, dressed, and directed by a team of outsiders. Criticizing a character for, say, having sex could be a sexist insult or it could be a legitimate criticism of the writers who chose to go that route with the storyline. There are nuances here when discussing a television show, and I ask that everybody be careful about exactly what's being discussed. A couple helpful terms are Watsonian and Doylist. "Watsonian" indicates that the discussion is taking place within the Buffy universe as if the characters are real people. "Doylist" indicates that the discussion is focused on the construction of the narrative and, as such, deals with the decisions of the writers and/or producers.

5. The key goal here is open discussion. I'm not presenting you guys with any brilliant insights; I'm just laying out what's in the episode. Feel free to discuss or disagree with me and others. Also feel free to answer other commenter's questions. The comment section is an open floor.

( Season Two Wrap-Up )

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/370183.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

It's awkward writing this part when doing scheduled posts. Like now, I'm writing this one week ahead of time. By the time this posts, I'll be finished with the GRE - the big looming THING in my future. I have no clue if I'll be jubilant or dismayed.

But I guess Crush is something to look forward to, cause guys, I love this episode.



( It's about Spike! )

This poll is for Spuffy shippers only!

If you don't ship Spuffy, then carry on!

boot_the_grime did a recent post wherein she offhandedly wondered who Spuffy fans identify more with. (Fascinating post and discussion. Check it out...after taking the poll.)

Well, I'm up for polling it.

The question is simple. Choose one or the other. This is about one character in comparison to another, so even if you identify with both of them a lot or with neither of them, choose whichever one you think tops in terms of identifying.

Have fun!

Poll #1833006
Open to: All, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 139

1. SPUFFY SHIPPERS! Who do you identify with more?

So I'm taking the GRE next Monday. I'm CRAMMING. As such, I may be a mere ghostly presence in the LJ world for the next week. (Though there may be more Wordy fic soon...)

Still, have a poll!

Midpoint of S5, anyone? You know you wanna poll for Blood Ties...



( Dawn's the KEY )

Title: Closet: Lesbian
Pairing: Willow/Cordelia. That's 'Wordy' to you!
Setting: AtS S2/BtVS S5 after Family/Guise Will Be Guise
Rating: PG
Word count: 1,430
Summary: While in LA for a conference, and in the midst of a gloomy identity crisis, Willow meets up with Cordelia again.

Note: Low on the sexiness for this one. I promise, there will be sexytimes in the next installment. *swears*


Image by xlivvielockex

This fic is the sixth part in a series. Check out the series index.

( Take that, Disharmony! )

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/369364.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

Since my apartment didn't get destroyed by a tornado yesterday, I may as well celebrate by finishing up the next feminist filter outline. Let's get analyize-y with Becoming 2.

Mission Statement:

This series is intended to outline the feminist text of each episode so as to provoke and encourage open discussion. It's not so much about making value judgments about events and/or characters but about analyzing the series from a feminist framework so as to see what patterns and themes emerge.

Rules:

1. If you do not consider yourself a feminist or do not see the point of dissecting a TV show from a feminist perspective, this is not the meta series for you. I don't mean this in a hostile way, however the intended audience of this series is feminists who want to turn a critical eye to the show.

2. This meta series is written well beyond a 101 level of feminism. If you are new to feminism, I ask that you please take a look at this blog for an introduction to concepts that will be discussed heavily here.

3. If you begin to feel yourself getting defensive on behalf of a character (or the show), take a break from commenting. The outlines as posted are not meant to condemn either the characters or the show, but to contextualize the dialogue and events within the patriarchal cultural in which they reside.

4. BtVS is a constructed media. The characters are not actual people but are written, dressed, and directed by a team of outsiders. Criticizing a character for, say, having sex could be a sexist insult or it could be a legitimate criticism of the writers who chose to go that route with the storyline. There are nuances here when discussing a television show, and I ask that everybody be careful about exactly what's being discussed. A couple helpful terms are Watsonian and Doylist. "Watsonian" indicates that the discussion is taking place within the Buffy universe as if the characters are real people. "Doylist" indicates that the discussion is focused on the construction of the narrative and, as such, deals with the decisions of the writers and/or producers.

5. The key goal here is open discussion. I'm not presenting you guys with any brilliant insights; I'm just laying out what's in the episode. Feel free to discuss or disagree with me and others. Also feel free to answer other commenter's questions. The comment section is an open floor.

( Episode 2.22 Becoming 2 )

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/368890.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.

And now, a personal favorite of mine: Checkpoint, peeps!



( PREPARE YOURSELF )

re: http://eilowyn.tumblr.com/post/19878082879

( Saving your flists, one cut at a time )

- This post will likely make me look petty and wankful, but I don't really care. I'm tired allowing you to frame the narrative of what happened, and I'd like to take the opportunity to present my side, as well as the side of the other well-meaning people who have been involved.

We've (the people who initially commented to agree with aerintine) been described, publicly, as dogpiling, bullying, harassing, humiliating, etc. Thus far, I've been resigned to leaving that be the final word because any public move I make would just make me an actual bullying jerk. The latest tumblr post and response to an anon question compel to me at least air another take, rather than let the record stand that you were "attacked" and "insulted" when no such thing occurred.

---

I am turning off comments on this post because I'd rather it not become an outpouring of support from people on my flist, which inevitably ends with eilowyn being demonized and dragged through the mud. I've been trying to avoid this since the beginning. Anybody and everybody is free to PM me if they're so inclined, and people are more than welcome to respond with a public post of their own, of course. And, also of course, people are free to go, "Huh" and go on about their happy fannish business. Whatever works for you.

This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/368159.html. There are comments on the DW side. Comments are welcome on either side. Due to massive SPAM issues on LJ, anon comments are only on the DW side.