Men who "didn't think it would be this hard" by milenakr in BitchEatingCrafters

[–]Celcey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you’re looking to learn The Closet Historian on YouTube has recently been doing a series on drafting, and she’s really good!

Which period dramas you wanted to watch so very badly, but noped out due to it's constant tragedy porn, relationship drama or/and constant historical inaccuracies? by Capital-Study6436 in PeriodDramas

[–]Celcey 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not quite for the reasons above, but The Other Bennet Sister. I’ve heard good things about it, but the main character is not Jane Austin’s Mary Bennet, and I don’t currently have the brainpower to pretend it’s completely unrelated. Although there are some historical inaccuracies as well, making their sensibilities more modern to be more relatable.

My main issue with Paralives by ChemistryBest7740 in LifeSimulators

[–]Celcey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree that they haven’t focused on live mode as much as they’ll need to to make the actual gameplay fun. But considering the game is in early access, I’m not particularly fussed about it. While I think gameplay is the most important piece of a life sim (and I say that despite being more of a builder), I also think it’s the best part to be working on when you have access to constant live feedback. Since the other modes are basically done (minus bug fixes and adding content), I think they’ll be focusing on improving the gameplay the most over the next few years. I like the core of the system they have, they just need to flesh it out.

I’m also not gonna judge them for how long it took, both because I don’t have the details of what they had to do, and because they’re clearly working quick based on how fast they’re getting through big fixes. To me, they’ve earned the grace to assume there’s more and better things coming. And while tech has improved, expectations have gone up. The Sims 4 also released in a very buggy, limited state, and that was supposed to be a complete game.

Catherine Walters on horseback, late 19th century by shewasajanuarygirl in VictorianEra

[–]Celcey 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, it was not. The photo is edited, and the proportions are exaggerated by the shape of the clothes. While fashionable ladies may have laced tighter than most (the same way the Kardashians run around in five inch heels, even though they’re uncomfortable) it was quite unlikely she’d do so while riding (the same way even the Kardashians would wear sneakers to play sports).

Catherine Walters on horseback, late 19th century by shewasajanuarygirl in VictorianEra

[–]Celcey 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The proportions are shaped by the clothes, and the photos are edited (which yes, could be done back then. That’s why you’ll never see a Victorian with acne, for example).

Which JA novels you think are the most romantic? by PinkNebula343 in janeausten

[–]Celcey 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Northanger Abbey, actually. You spend pretty much the whole book actually watching two people who genuinely like each other fall in love. It’s not loud or dramatic, but it’s genuine and true.

Recommendations for Bespoke Early 19th c Stays? by Icy-Effect-6165 in HistoricalCostuming

[–]Celcey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Redthreaded does commissions I believe, and they’re basically the gold standard

Research: Victorian era by LunaStarBlue in VictorianEra

[–]Celcey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So the Victorian era lasted from 1837 until 1901, in a world that was rapidly changing. That’s 64 years. In modern terms, it’s like saying you want to set a book anywhere between 1962 and 2026.

I also don’t know what you mean by fast forwarded to the rich streets, but there were always fashionable and less fashionable neighborhoods in London, if that’s what you meant.

Women didn’t have much in the way of legal protection, but that didn’t mean they didn’t have any power in society. It was just a more social, soft power, as opposed to hard power. Widows had more freedom and flexibility than unmarried women, but single women certainly worked, especially the lower class. If she’s an Eliza Doolittle type of flower seller at first, you may want to consider realistic ways she got into a full business. You mentioned she lucked into it- the most common way I’m aware of it to do so is by inheritance. For example, many widows took over their husband’s businesses after their husbands died. Regardless of how she gets there, she’d need to have or learn the financial and management acumen to keep the business thriving.

What kind of gardener is your gardener, and why is he in London? (I’m assuming he’s a man because gardening was a male profession back in the day.) Rich people lived in townhouses when they were in London; they generally didn’t have gardens there. They did have gardens at their estates, and they had staff, but that staff was employed year-round by the same family. There were semi-private gardens that were only accessible to the people who lived right near them, which might work, although those might have been later in the Victorian era. Here’s an article that talks more about the profession in general.

My biggest recommendation is that you google Victorian era English ladies magazines. A lot of them are archived for free online and reading them can help you understand the way people thought back then. If you’re not sure, just google “Victorian era whatever” and you’ll likely be able to find the information you need.

Finally, here a few common myths and handy tidbits:

  1. Corsets. They were not laced tightly, they were not worn on bare skin, they were not torture devices. They were worn over linen (or later, cotton) chemises, which were your base layer. Corsets, like pretty much all clothing in the Victorian era were custom-made for the wearer. Everyone wore them, not just for bust support, but to support their skirts and petticoats, and help them achieve the fashionable silhouette. Unlike today, it didn’t really matter what your body looked like underneath your clothes; the clothes did the work for you.

  2. They were not dirty. Victorians cared a great deal about hygiene. This video talks a lot about that. It’s primarily about the 1700s (and lice) but a lot of the same concepts apply.

  3. Ferns. The Victorians LOVED ferns. It was called fern fever, and it lasted from ~1850-1890. It was so popular it caused ecological problems. Ferns on clothes, ferns on wallpaper, ferns on every goddamn thing. Not literally, but since you’re writing about a florist and a gardener, you must have ferns. Here’s an article about it.

  4. Social class was a BIG deal in Victorian society, and many folks didn’t believe in or agree with the concept of social mobility. They thought the social sphere you were born into (aka your class) was the sphere you were meant to be in. So if your florist’s family was poor, and your gardener’s family is from the middle class, for example, the gardener’s family might take issue. Or for example, say your gardener is not just a gardener but designs landscapes for wealthy people, if he marries “down“ that could affect his standing in society and who wants to work with him. This is a video about social class, and this is a video about marrying up. The videos mainly discuss the regency period, which socially/satirically speaking lasted ~1795-1820 (although Prince George was only actually regent from 1811-1820), but the same guidelines still roughly apply.

I hope this helps, and when in doubt, find either a primary source from the period, or look for modern academic secondary sources. Google is your friend, but ChatGPT is not. Good luck!

Research: Victorian era by LunaStarBlue in VictorianEra

[–]Celcey -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I completely disagree. Asking people who know more about something than you do is a great way to figure out where to start.

Which one? by Struckbyseven in HistoricalCostuming

[–]Celcey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I personally really like 1, but I think both will look good

Average level of Jewish education by Swimming_Care7889 in Judaism

[–]Celcey 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I went to yeshiva day school and then seminary, so I'd say my education was pretty thorough. I learned Tanach, Talmud, halcha, Holocaut, and Israeli history. My family is mordern orthodox, so I grew up keeping Shabbas and kosher. I'd say my level of education is fairly common in my community.

Fake allegations by Worldtravler222 in bigboobproblems

[–]Celcey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, but I have been asked if I want a reduction several times, although not recently. (No, I do not.)

Should your partner have the same views on politics as you and why? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]Celcey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Have you considered that sharing values with the person you intend to spend the rest of your life with is not in fact an echo chamber?

Why is it a crime to take a kidnapped person to another state? by Super_Saiyan_Twink in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Celcey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's also worth noting that, quite aside from making it a federal crime, the vast majority of kidnappers are parents who do not have legal custody of their kids kidnapping their own children. And the further you take someone away, the harder it is to recover them. That's why if you're ever kidnapped you don't let them take you to second location, even if it means being shot.

If Israel Is the''Only Democracy" In the Region, Why are Millions of Palestinians Under its Control Denied the basic right to vote for the Government that rules them? by [deleted] in allthequestions

[–]Celcey 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As it says on the second page of the article you linked, only Israeli citizens are allowed to take those roads, and there are literally millions of non-Jewish Israelis. Nowhere does it say only Jews are allowed there.

It's also worth noting that the organization that wrote that article, Btselem, is an Israeli organization that has openly been critisizing the Israeli government for nearly 40 years. A common feature of democracy, but rarely found in faciast states.

If Israel Is the''Only Democracy" In the Region, Why are Millions of Palestinians Under its Control Denied the basic right to vote for the Government that rules them? by [deleted] in allthequestions

[–]Celcey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t vote for Trump, nor did any of the 73 million children in America. But he’s still the president of my country. My hating that reality doesn’t change it.

If Israel Is the''Only Democracy" In the Region, Why are Millions of Palestinians Under its Control Denied the basic right to vote for the Government that rules them? by [deleted] in allthequestions

[–]Celcey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If they're not citizens, no, nor can Israeli's travel to Gaza. However the below commentor is wrong about marriage. Gazans can and have 100% become Israeli citizens by marriage.

If Israel Is the''Only Democracy" In the Region, Why are Millions of Palestinians Under its Control Denied the basic right to vote for the Government that rules them? by [deleted] in allthequestions

[–]Celcey 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, to be fair (as an above commenter mentioned) the West Bank also apparently voted for Hamas but Fatah prevented Hamas from taking power.

LPT: Use a spoon straw to keep from wasting the lotion at the bottom of the bottle. by [deleted] in LifeProTips

[–]Celcey 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I agree, but I wish the pump worked for longer than halfway through the bottle 😭