- Joined
- Feb 15, 2019
At least she washed it. Progress!
Lily: "Yes but what about Joe?"
Lily: "Yes but what about Joe?"
Grace Lavery / Joseph Lavery & Daniel M. Lavery / Mallory Ortberg - "Straight with extra steps" couple trooning out to avoid "dwindling into mere heterosexuality"
- Thread starter CobraPlissken
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2016
Lol, even the neighbor noticed Mallory bothered to wash her hair and tried to encourage it. Fumbling for a compliment she went with Kurt Russell.
I’m trying to figure on what planet Grace’s hair looks anything like Goldie Hawn’s ever has and can only think of Private Benjamin when she is muddy and soaking wet. But even then Joe looks far closer to a fatter Eileen Brennan playing the drill sgt in Private Benjamin than he does a soaking wet Goldie Hawn.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2019
You’re forgetting one of Goldie’s more cult hits:
Attachments
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2021
Lily's comment truly makes it sound like she's a live-in marriage counselor. "So you think of yourself as Kurt Russell. How can you not see your wife as your very own Goldie Hawn? I'm an impartial observer. *I* think your wife looks like Goldie Hawn. Why can't you love her like I do?"
This whole throuple business is whack.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2016
Oh god. I missed that the insane Goldie Hawn comment was from Lily. “But whadda bout Joe?? Where is the empty compliment validating his beauty Mallory???”
Lily certainly knows where her bread is buttered. I wonder if Mallory has wised up or she’s now forced to adore Joe and Lily as a revolutionary lesbian couple that’s she’s honored to subsidize.
I can’t imagine how uncomfortable it gets when Joe and Lily try to include Mallory in their bed in some fashion. Obviously she has to bring her two emotional support dogs when she visits their bedroom.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2018
Paging @CobraPlissken.
LOLdie Hawn:
Whenever I see Joe doing his fish eyes routine, I think of Edith in Downton Sixbey:
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2021
His eyebags are mad. And easily fixable with some concealer or a good eye serum! But he knows not of such things.
Joe has a new Substack post up, which as far as I can tell is a tortured word association game about whether you can really "appropriate" "femininity." I am archiving it, but I am not reading it. Cookies to anyone who can get through the first paragraph without upping their blood pressure.
Archive | Somebody Else's Beauty and My Beauty
Prescription Bugs
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 3, 2021
Kantian blah blah blah kantian blah blah blah that’s as far as I got.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2016
I’ve just got to laugh at substack giving him money. Holy shit, if this was typical Wordpress blog he’d be luck to get ten reads. Boring and pedantic af is the only to describe this narcissistic tranny navel gazing slop. He’s so desperate to sound smart and “hyperliterate” it’s painful to read.
(I always hated the word hyperliterate btw. It was used to describe Mallory far too often. Well-read is sufficient.)
I do feel sorry for his students who pay tuition to listen to this turd bloviate all semester. I can almost hear Mallory and Lilly telling Joe how amazing and insightful this turgid mess is.
Prescription Bugs
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 3, 2021
Thank goodness I’m too dumb to be their friend and too at peace with my natural genitalia and how it relates to my voice, taste, persona and clothing.
It’s good to be simple.
If this is what hyperliterate means then make mine “hypoliterate” with a side of Lifetime Movie Network followed by weirdo watching for dessert.
What a waste of an education. (And yes about the poor zoomer students who hoped to actually get an education.)
It’s good to be simple.
If this is what hyperliterate means then make mine “hypoliterate” with a side of Lifetime Movie Network followed by weirdo watching for dessert.
What a waste of an education. (And yes about the poor zoomer students who hoped to actually get an education.)
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2020
LOL, these lunatics WISH they were anything like Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn.
Compare and contrast Kurt and Goldie in their late sixties/early seventies, looking lovely for their ages and very dignified...
...to the Laverys in their fucking thirties, not even forties, looking like a couple of hobos despite their ridiculously expensive outfits:
Not to mention neither of them will know what's like to be in a loving relationship for forty years or so (fun fact: Goldie and Kurt never got married and they both already were successful by the time they started dating, so it's not like they're together because divorce's going to be expensive or because either one is leeching off the other's fame and fortune, which we can't really say about the Laverys).
Also, Mallory will never grow a respectable beard like Kurt's, and if she ever lives to her old age, she will be balding due to testosterone, so she won't even have a luscious mane to be proud of like Kurt has.
Compare and contrast Kurt and Goldie in their late sixties/early seventies, looking lovely for their ages and very dignified...
...to the Laverys in their fucking thirties, not even forties, looking like a couple of hobos despite their ridiculously expensive outfits:
Not to mention neither of them will know what's like to be in a loving relationship for forty years or so (fun fact: Goldie and Kurt never got married and they both already were successful by the time they started dating, so it's not like they're together because divorce's going to be expensive or because either one is leeching off the other's fame and fortune, which we can't really say about the Laverys).
Also, Mallory will never grow a respectable beard like Kurt's, and if she ever lives to her old age, she will be balding due to testosterone, so she won't even have a luscious mane to be proud of like Kurt has.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2016
Even better lets compare the Lavery's in their 30's to Kurt and Goldie in their 30's
View attachment 2178521
Fat, gross, cross-hormonal blobs vs beautiful and hot af.
If Mallory or Joe had even 5% the hotness of Kurt and Goldie they wouldn't have to be trolling twitter for sad, confused lesbian, art history professor pussy from Michigan. Half of NYC would be knocking on their door.
mrae
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
God, I mentally recoil everytime I see that particular photo of Mallory and Joe. Did either of them bring it up after it got published? Joe needs to get his thyroid checked out or something. I wouldn't be surprised if fucking around with hormones makes a complete mess of your entire endocrine system.
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2019
I'm not reading this dreck either, but if Joe wrote it exclusively for Substack, I will eat my hat. It's definitely a repurposed academic paper or one of his patented "talks."
From the first paragraph:
Indeed.
Though I'd argue that, in addition to beauty, elegance also eluded our bourgeois capitalist when he purchased his painting.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2016
Joe looks like a patient from Creedmoor that finally got a day pass after five years of being in a padded room. (The striped bathrobe outfit really completes the effect) His pasty whiteness and sheer bloat is epic to behold.
Vincent Gigante could have taken some lessons from Joe in the psychiatric patient style department.
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2019
I just want to say it's so fascinating to watch a blatantly abusive relationship play out so publicly. Rate me optimistic but maybe the noteriety they want so badly will be people looking back on them in a few decades and going "Wow Joe clearly took advantage of Mallory and destroyed her life". Here's hoping that one day the tranny apologism will die and people will actually see abusers for who they are. 
- Joined
- May 14, 2021
Side note it's still funny to me that Lavery wrote an entire weeb academic book without knowing any Japanese. He admits to it in his acceptance speech for an award. Tweet. (archive.md) I've uploaded all three pages but the key comment is here:
Translations can be good, but really aren't the same as the source especially for someone doing literary analysis, so it's absolutely wild to me that he wrote an entire academic book that cites Japanese literature without reading a drop of Japanese. To be fair, according to the blurb it mostly focuses on Victorian era weaboos, but way to entirely embody the actual thesis of Said's Orientalism. After reading the synopsis, I genuinely feel that this wouldn't pass muster if he was a historian, but then that's why people do English literature one supposes. He can act like he's made some sort of historical cultural discovery, while saying Kant six times to distract from the lack of actual substance.
Translations can be good, but really aren't the same as the source especially for someone doing literary analysis, so it's absolutely wild to me that he wrote an entire academic book that cites Japanese literature without reading a drop of Japanese. To be fair, according to the blurb it mostly focuses on Victorian era weaboos, but way to entirely embody the actual thesis of Said's Orientalism. After reading the synopsis, I genuinely feel that this wouldn't pass muster if he was a historian, but then that's why people do English literature one supposes. He can act like he's made some sort of historical cultural discovery, while saying Kant six times to distract from the lack of actual substance.
How Japan captured the Victorian imagination and transformed Western aesthetics
From the opening of trade with Britain in the 1850s, Japan occupied a unique and contradictory place in the Victorian imagination, regarded as both a rival empire and a cradle of exquisite beauty. Quaint, Exquisite explores the enduring impact of this dramatic encounter, showing how the rise of Japan led to a major transformation of Western aesthetics at the dawn of globalization.
Drawing on philosophy, psychoanalysis, queer theory, textual criticism, and a wealth of in-depth archival research, Grace Lavery provides a radical new genealogy of aesthetic experience in modernity. She argues that the global popularity of Japanese art in the late nineteenth century reflected an imagined universal standard of taste that Kant described as the “subjective universal” condition of aesthetic judgment. The book features illuminating cultural histories of Gilbert and Sullivan’s Mikado, English derivations of the haiku, and retellings of the Madame Butterfly story, and sheds critical light on lesser-known figures such as Winnifred Eaton, an Anglo-Chinese novelist who wrote under the Japanese pseudonym Onoto Watanna, and Mikimoto Ryuzo, a Japanese enthusiast of the Victorian art critic John Ruskin. Lavery also explains the importance and symbolic power of such material objects as W. B. Yeats’s prized katana sword and the “Japanese vellum” luxury editions of Oscar Wilde.
Quaint, Exquisite provides essential insights into the modern understanding of beauty as a vehicle for both intimacy and violence, and the lasting influence of Japanese forms today on writers and artists such as Quentin Tarantino.
From the opening of trade with Britain in the 1850s, Japan occupied a unique and contradictory place in the Victorian imagination, regarded as both a rival empire and a cradle of exquisite beauty. Quaint, Exquisite explores the enduring impact of this dramatic encounter, showing how the rise of Japan led to a major transformation of Western aesthetics at the dawn of globalization.
Drawing on philosophy, psychoanalysis, queer theory, textual criticism, and a wealth of in-depth archival research, Grace Lavery provides a radical new genealogy of aesthetic experience in modernity. She argues that the global popularity of Japanese art in the late nineteenth century reflected an imagined universal standard of taste that Kant described as the “subjective universal” condition of aesthetic judgment. The book features illuminating cultural histories of Gilbert and Sullivan’s Mikado, English derivations of the haiku, and retellings of the Madame Butterfly story, and sheds critical light on lesser-known figures such as Winnifred Eaton, an Anglo-Chinese novelist who wrote under the Japanese pseudonym Onoto Watanna, and Mikimoto Ryuzo, a Japanese enthusiast of the Victorian art critic John Ruskin. Lavery also explains the importance and symbolic power of such material objects as W. B. Yeats’s prized katana sword and the “Japanese vellum” luxury editions of Oscar Wilde.
Quaint, Exquisite provides essential insights into the modern understanding of beauty as a vehicle for both intimacy and violence, and the lasting influence of Japanese forms today on writers and artists such as Quentin Tarantino.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
I read "Kurt Russell" as "Russell Greer" at first, causing a truly disturbing image to cross my mind.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2021
By the way, Mallory was on NPR talking about Substack. It's short, about 30 minutes, but split between three guests, so she didn't say a whole lot. She basically just rehashes Joe's initial Substack crusade to get Graham Linehan off there. Some details about the money situation. Here are some relevant notes:
- Dear Prudence was a contract, part-time position. Mallory took the Substack deal to get health care and focus on writing full time. (Like Katelyn Burns, you schedule major troon surgery the second you're hired.)
- Mallory's newsletter is not edited, but the new deal will allow for that option. I guess Substack offers some way to connect to editors. She talks about how there are no editors anymore because those jobs got cut in online media.
- The Toast lost a lot of ad revenue during the "pivot to video" and became financially untenable.
- The podcast host quotes at length from Sady Doyle to introduce the Substack controversy, lol.
- When asked about whether Substack is anti-trans: "I think there's a pretty clear distinction between, for example, Graham Linehan, who has been writing at Substack now for, I think, close to a year, and who was previously banned from Twitter for libelous personal attacks primarily against trans women. He uses his Substack to repeat such claims now. I think he's a pretty obvious example of somebody who's violating the terms of use against libelous and harassing use of the service. I, to this day, don't understand why Substack doesn't simply remove him from the platform. I realize their whole business model has depended upon the claim that 'we are not a publisher, we don't make editorial decisions,' and so, you know, that is the money-making line. It also seems incredibly straightforward based on what he has written."
- "Around the time Graham Linehan joined the platform, I noticed a huge spike in transphobic and harassing email responses, in comments, getting spammed with comments from years-old posts." Now only lets paid subscribers comment. She says people sign up "trans conversion therapists" to her newsletter.
- Says Substack is not her employer, they have an infinite number of potential writers, she doesn't see the point in striking but sees why others would.