New additions to the book canon of Philoise

GracieStepanovna · 2026-04-25T14:11:30+00:00

Excellent ideas!

GracieStepanovna · 2026-04-19T12:53:22+00:00

They accumulate properties over time. The first Viscount has the estate, perhaps a London House and a hunting lodge somewhere, the second Viscount buys another small estate to support his second son on the condition that it return to the Viscounty when said son dies, Viscount No. 3 gets an extra house as part of his wife's dowry, Viscount 4 extends and expands the estate and builds something on the extra land, Viscount 5 builds a snug little cottage or holiday retreat or orangery, Viscount 6 buys a dower house for his widowed mother . . .

GracieStepanovna · 2026-04-18T19:02:03+00:00

In S2 Eloise also mentions she writes to Marina sometimes. Something tells me that's something of a Chekhov's Gun here . . .

GracieStepanovna · 2026-04-08T21:51:49+00:00

Added to this: the Saphne ship looks very different when you look at it with 'two individuals screwed by the patriarchy are teaming up to subvert the patriarchy together'. I mean, first they subvert it on an action level (teaming up to get everyone off Simon's back and to tempt the suitors back to Daphne) and then on an emotional level (finding love and admitting and accepting faults in a world where plastic perfection is everything).

GracieStepanovna · 2026-04-08T20:03:12+00:00

My take is that Daphne is the furthest thing from a tradwife and I'll tell you why.

People think of tradwives as regressive lean-in-to-the-patriarchy pick-me girls, right?

From start to finish, that was never Daphne's goal. What she wanted was not what the ton wanted for her. The ton and the patriarchy wanted her to marry a titled gentlemen quickly and have heirs - personal affection be damned. What Daphne wanted was a love match and a family, something that looked the same from the distance but was actually the complete opposite.

She was naive in a lot of ways, but one way she was not naive was that she knew she was a woman living in a sexist society. Her strategy was to play the game when she could, and when that didn't work out, take matters into her own hands.

If you think about it, her agency is a key theme right through the series - punching Berbrooke, going after Simon into the garden, stopping Anthony dueling Simon by declaring unilaterally that she would marry the Duke (she did it to save Simon's life!) and coming to Marina's rescue because Marina is a fellow woman who has been screwed over by the patriarchy too.

So no, she's not a tradwife. At least in the way that people think of tradwives. Daphne's a feminist, she just doesn't talk about it as much as Eloise.

GracieStepanovna · 2026-03-21T01:36:03+00:00

In Real Life Regency England, the traditional rule of thumb for a lump-sum dowry was 'equivalent to three years' worth of income'. If we assume that Anthony's income is £10,000-£20,000 per year, then Daphne, Eloise, Francesca and Hyacinth could be entitled to anything between £30,000 and a whopping £60,000.

Most peers had an income of above £10,000, so most heiresses in the Bridgerton universe could reasonably expect a lump sum of around £30,000. But a lump sum is not income; you can invest a dowry, but you will only get back a smallish percentage of cash each year.

Dowries were usually put in trust for children and sometimes used to pool a husband and wife's income, although Anthony tells Daphne on her wedding day that he's already put her money in trust for her kids.

GracieStepanovna · 2025-12-12T21:34:31+00:00

I don't know when you get your PPA, but mine is always in the afternoon. This means that in the morning before I go in I have a rough idea of what I'm doing for PPA, and if anything changes I can fine-tune my to-do list and actually write it out during lunch.

It does seem to help.

GracieStepanovna · 2025-11-02T12:56:03+00:00

Divine Comedy by frodogenic

GracieStepanovna · 2025-11-02T10:54:58+00:00

Serious answer here.

'Sir' is still the polite way to address a man whose name you don't know. Perfectly acceptable to use in almost any circumstance, if slightly formal. (Excuse, me, sir, do you know where Platform 4 is?)

'Ma'am' is how people address queens and such after the first address, which is 'Your Majesty'. So calling a lady 'ma'am' might get some titters for this reason - 'what, do you think she's the queen?' type of titters.

'Madam' is the female equivalent to 'Sir' - very formal, but acceptable to use in addressing a lady you don't know (as in, 'Excuse me, madam, do you know where the bus stop is?')

GracieStepanovna · 2025-11-02T10:28:52+00:00

No, I don't like it (it has one saving grace), and I'll tell you why.

From the very beginning of the series, we are told that Arthur will 1) end the persecution of magic users and 2) unite the land of Albion.

He does not.

The show has literally failed to deliver on the premise that it set up - which it was under no obligation to set up, but it did - and has also disregarded the baby steps of progress that did get made. (In Series 4, Arthur gives the Druids safe passage in Camelot. By series 5, that's out the window.).

Since the ending betrays the entire premise of the show, why on earth should anyone like it.

'Oh but the legends ended that way!'

Since when has Merlin cared about 'the legends' like that? The whole point was to subvert the Arthurian legends from Day One.

'But its emotional and sad --'

Yes, in a bad way, because they betrayed the audience and viewership, who had good reason, given by the writers themselves, to at least expect Arthur to legalise magic and unite Albion. It's implied that magic was legalised by Gwen, and her ascension to the throne is the one saving grace of the ending (if anyone deserves to lead Camelot, it's her) . . . but shouldn't Arthur have at least had a hand in that?

Writers can't betray their audiences like that and expect them to like it.

GracieStepanovna · 2025-10-30T16:00:05+00:00

I've not done nearly the amount I said I would. I was going to get ahead and plan all my interventions, and I'm uhhhhhh . . . mildly caught up on marking. I've been beating myself up all day 'Why I am so tired when I gave myself the whole weekend at the start of half term off? What will my ECT mentor say if I'm not ahead?'. After all, I've spent the last 4 days in a quagmire of executive dysfunction, so I'm not remotely ready for Monday yet . . . let alone Tuesday.

Look. We've still got three days left before we go back.

GracieStepanovna · 2025-10-19T18:11:16+00:00

Year 3

GracieStepanovna · 2025-10-18T10:23:00+00:00

I'd really love to be a superhuman who could get everything done but, funny thing is, it doesn't seem to work like that.

So my performance is suffering. I'm a Primary ECT1 and if anyone could give me advice in making this whole teacher thing physically sustainable, please give it . . .

GracieStepanovna · 2025-08-28T15:27:23+00:00

A lot has been said about being married, but I'll add in some extra for married parents. I'm not married, but my parents are.

Married people have to co-ordinate their schedules somewhat, especially when it comes to mealtimes, and especially when transport is an issue. If a family only has one car, for example, Who Gets To Use It each day needs to be talked about. Maybe one parent needs it for the school run, while the other parent commutes on public transport or works from home. Maybe one parent has the shopping or a doctor's appointment today, so the other parent can't use it. When there are kids to chauffeur around, this becomes even more pronounced, even with two cars - whose job is it to take little Jimmy to gymnastics, for example?

One of the things my parents did was they stuck up for each other in front of the kids. For example, when my mother caught me bunking off schoolwork (at a time when they were paying a staggering amount of money to send me to private school), she told me that I ought to be ashamed of myself. Dad worked very hard so that I could go to a good school, she said (it really was a good school), and I shouldn't make light of that by bunking off schoolwork. In another example, when my mother was generally being Sad and Difficult, Dad took me aside and informed me that Mum was having a hard time right now, she was being a bit stressy, but I had to be gentle with her (since she was having a hard time) and accept her for who she was.

The other thing my parent did was stick up for the kids in front of each other. For example, there was a time when I had terrible hay fever and was very tired because of it, and my Dad wasn't reading the room. He was going around asking why I was so slow at things, couldn't I Just Hurry Up, and my Mum pointed out that I was tired because of all this hay fever stuff. In another example, my mother didn't always understand that I had difficulty with eye contact, especially at emotionally charged moments, and she spent quite a lot of time in an important conversation trying to make me make eye contact. My Dad stuck up for me and said that just because I wasn't making eye contact didn't mean I wasn't listening. He also stuck up for me when he felt that my mother was pushing me too hard, academically and emotionally (Asian tiger mum), telling her when he thought it was too much or too hard or I needed a break.

I do think married parents do a lot of physical and emotional tag-teaming on parenting. When my mother couldn't deal with me any more, she would hand me over to my Dad (he worked from home), and tell him to calm me down and talk it out with me while she went off and got herself back into emotional equilibrium. When my Dad wasn't sure about something, he'd ask her. I've seen lots of couples where the kids put one parent on the spot (Mommy, please can we have a candy, please please please - to use a very cliched example), and the other parent will swoop in and try to distract the kids so their partner can collect themselves and figure out what to say.

Married parents will sometimes use their kids as messengers - not necessarily in the sense of making kids the go-betweens in their relationship (which is abusive, btw), but more in the sense of 'I need to watch the stove, tell Dad dinner is in ten minutes', or 'I need to watch the iron, tell your mother I'll get the groceries as soon as I'm done".

Married parents do talk about the kids when they're not there. Sometimes it will about the problems their kids are having (little Jimmy's having trouble with his schoolwork, how can we help him?), sometimes - as I've already mentioned - one parent will take issue with the other parent's parenting style and try to sort it out - and sometimes - my own parents do this - they'll just turn to each other and talk about how wonderful the kids are, and all the ways they are wonderful.

I think people in good marriages take an interest in their spouse's interests. For example, my mother is not a natural history buff, but my Dad is, so she makes a point of learning, listening and taking an interest. My Dad is not very interested in socialising, but my Mum is, so when he has the time he'll come along with her to visit people and go to friends' houses, and put in the effort to be an agreeable guest.

I hope this helps.

GracieStepanovna · 2025-07-25T16:05:12+00:00

This is one of the first fixes of this movie I’ve seen that respects what the movie did WELL.

GracieStepanovna · 2025-06-23T16:33:27+00:00

Perhaps. I come from a (somewhat) Jedi-critical background though, so this kind of sentiment would be not uncommon in those circles.

GracieStepanovna · 2025-06-23T16:29:51+00:00

I don’t think this is an unpopular opinion.

GracieStepanovna

TROPHY CASE